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

13313 

Vol. 74, No. 58 

Friday, March 27, 2009 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1291 

[Document Number AMS–FV–08–0057; FV– 

08–379] 

RIN 0581–AC88 

Specialty Crop Block Grant Program— 

Farm Bill 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule finalizes regulations 

to administer the Specialty Crop Block 

Grant Program—Farm Bill (SCBGP–FB) 

to enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops. This action finalizes 

eligibility and application requirements 

and grant administration procedures for 

the SCBGP–FB consistent with the 

Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 

2008 (Farm Bill) amendments to the 

Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 

2004. This program is separate from the 

Specialty Crop Block Grant Program 

(SCBGP). 

DATES: Effective March 30, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Trista Etzig, Fruit and Vegetable 

Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., Stop 0235, 

Washington, DC 20250–0235; 

Telephone: (202) 690–4942; Fax: (202) 

720–0016; or E-mail: 

trista.etzig@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866 

This rule has been determined to be 

not significant for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866 and therefore 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

Public Law 104–4 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on state and 

local governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures by state and local 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1532). When 

such a statement is needed for a rule, 

section 205 of the UMRA generally 

requires federal agencies to identify and 

consider a reasonable number of 

regulatory alternatives and adopt the 

least costly, most cost effective, or least 

burdensome alternative that achieves 

the objectives of the rule (2 U.S.C. 

1535). 

This rule contains no Federal 

mandates (under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for 

state and local governments or the 

private sector of $100 million or more 

in any one year. Therefore, this rule is 

not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

Executive Order 12988 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This action is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. This rule will 

not preempt any state or local laws, 

regulations or policies, unless they 

present an irreconcilable conflict with 

this rule. There are no administrative 

procedures which must be exhausted 

prior to any judicial challenge to the 

provisions of this rule. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

This program is listed in the Catalog 

of Federal Domestic Assistance under 

No. 10.170, Specialty Crop Block Grant 

Program—Farm Bill. 

Executive Order 12372 

This program is subject to Executive 

Order 12372, which requires 

intergovernmental consultation with 

state and local officials (See 7 CFR part 

3015, subpart V). 

Executive Order 12612 

It has been determined that this rule 

does not have sufficient Federalism 

implications to warrant the preparation 

of a Federalism Assessment. The 

provisions contained in this rule would 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

states or their political subdivisions or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The AMS certifies that this rule will 

not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities as 

defined in the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, Pub. L. 96–534, as amended (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This rule only will 

impact state departments of agriculture 

that apply for grant funds. States, as 

defined under the SCBGP–FB, mean the 

fifty States, the District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, 

American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin 

Islands, and the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands. The States 

are not small entities under the Act. 

Authority for a Specialty Crop Block 

Grant Program 

This program is intended to 

accomplish the goal of enhancing the 

competitiveness of specialty crops. The 

SCBGP–FB is authorized under section 

101 of the Specialty Crops 

Competitiveness Act of 2004 (7 U.S.C. 

1621 note, amended under section 

10109 of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008, the Farm Bill). 

Section 10109 directs the Secretary of 

Agriculture to make grants to states to 

be used by state departments of 

agriculture solely to enhance the 

competitiveness of specialty crops. This 

program is separate from the Specialty 

Crop Block Grant Program (SCBGP) 

found in 7 CFR part 1290. 

Background 

The AMS Fruit and Vegetable 

Program intends to announce every 

fiscal year that applications may be 

submitted for participation in a 

‘‘Specialty Crop Block Grant Program— 

Farm Bill’’, which will be administered 

by personnel of AMS. 

Mandatory funding is expected to be 

made available to the Secretary of 

Agriculture to provide specialty crop 

block grants of $49 million for fiscal 

year 2009 and $55 million in each of 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
13314 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 58 / Friday, March 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

fiscal years 2010 through 2012, less 

USDA administrative costs. Each fiscal 

year, the AMS intends to publish a 

notice in the Federal Register 

announcing the program and soliciting 

grant applications. The notice will 

include the amount of grant funds 

available to each state and the 

application period. 

For each fiscal year, each state that 

submits an application that is reviewed 

and approved by AMS is to receive at 

least an amount that is equal to the 

higher of $100,000, or 1⁄3 of 1 percent of 

the total amount of funding made 

available for that fiscal year to enhance 

the competitiveness of specialty crops. 

In addition, each state will receive an 

amount that represents the proportion of 

the value of specialty crop production 

in the state in relation to the national 

value of specialty crop production using 

the latest available complete specialty 

crop production data set in all states 

whose applications are accepted. 

All 50 States, the District of Columbia, 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 

Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin 

Islands, and the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands are eligible to 

participate. SCBGP–FB applications will 

be accepted from any state department 

of agriculture, that means the agency, 

commission, or department of a state 

government responsible for agriculture 

within the state. 

‘‘Specialty crops’’ for the purpose of 

this rule, means fruits and vegetables, 

tree nuts, dried fruits, horticulture and 

nursery crops (including floriculture). 

The inclusion of horticulture means 

turfgrass sod is a covered commodity. 

Projects that support biobased 

products and bioenergy and energy 

programs, including biofuels and other 

alternative uses for agricultural and 

forestry commodities (development of 

biobased products) should see the 

USDA energy Web site at: http:// 

www.usda.gov/rus/index2/0208/ 

EnergyPrograms.htm for information on 

how to submit those projects for 

consideration to the energy programs 

supported by USDA. Also, agricultural 

cooperatives, producer networks, 

producer associations, local 

governments, nonprofit corporations, 

public health corporations, economic 

development corporations, regional 

farmers’ market authorities and Tribal 

governments that are interested in 

submitting projects that support 

farmers’ markets that do not solely 

enhance the competitiveness of eligible 

specialty crops should visit the Farmers’ 

Market Promotion Program (FMPP) Web 

site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/fmpp 

for information on how to submit those 

projects for consideration to FMPP. 

Section 1291.4 prescribes that grant 

funds shall be used solely to enhance 

the competitiveness of eligible specialty 

crops and benefit the specialty crop 

industry and/or the public. For a list of 

eligible specialty crops and ineligible 

commodities, please refer to the SCBGP 

Web site at http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv. 

Section 1291.6 prescribes application 

procedures that include a State plan to 

indicate how grant funds will be 

utilized solely to enhance the 

competitiveness of specialty crops. For 

examples on how to complete the 

application, please refer to the SCBGP– 

FB Web site at http:// 

www.ams.usda.gov/fv. 

State departments of agriculture are 

required to describe their outreach 

efforts to specialty crop producers, 

including socially disadvantaged and 

beginning farmers, and describe their 

efforts to conduct a competitive process 

to ensure maximum public input and 

benefit. 

Section 1291.9 prescribes that states 

who do not apply for or do not request 

all available funding during the 

specified grant application period will 

forfeit all or that portion of available 

funding not requested for that 

application year. Funds not obligated 

will be allocated pro rata to the 

remaining states who applied during the 

specified grant application period to be 

solely expended on projects previously 

approved in their State plan. 

A technical correction was made to 

§ 1291.10(d) to add the SCBGP–FB to 

the statement that AMS, after reasonable 

notice to a State, and opportunity to be 

heard, finds that there has been a failure 

by the State to comply substantially 

with any provision or requirement of 

the State plan, AMS may disqualify, for 

one or more years, the State from receipt 

of future grants under the SCBGP or 

SCBGP–FB. 

An interim final rule was published 

in the Federal Register on September 4, 

2008 (73 FR 51585). Interested persons 

were invited to submit written 

comments until November 3, 2008. 

During the comment period, five 

comments were received. Comments 

were received from specialty crop 

organizations, one state department of 

agriculture and a university. AMS has 

considered each comment timely 

submitted, and they are discussed 

below. 

Summary of Comments Received 

Completed Application 

One commenter suggested that the 

language in § 1291.6(d)(1), ‘‘If outreach 

was performed to specialty crop 

producers, including socially 

disadvantaged and beginning farmers of 

specialty crops regarding the SCBGP– 

FB, provide a description of the 

affirmative steps taken to perform this 

outreach to these groups’’ does not 

adequately comply with the statement 

in the Joint Explanatory Statement of 

the Committee of Conference on pages 

239–240 (Farm Bill Managers report) 

requesting USDA to ‘‘encourage each 

state making applications for funding 

under the Specialty Crop Block Grant 

Program to provide a written plan 

detailing the affirmative steps it will 

take to perform outreach to specialty 

crop producers in the development of 

the state’s overall grant plan, including 

outreach to socially disadvantaged and 

beginning farmers of specialty crops.’’ 

The commenter requests the language be 

revised to require an annual written 

plan and a demonstration of real, 

iterative progress in funding projects 

that benefit socially disadvantaged and 

beginning farmers of specialty crops. 

While AMS believes the language in the 

interim final rule adequately addresses 

the concerns raised in the Farm Bill 

Managers report, AMS has amended 

§ 1291.6(d)(1) to require the affirmative 

steps each state has made in conducting 

outreach to socially disadvantaged and 

beginning farmers including how the 

these groups were identified and the 

methods used to reach out to them. If 

steps were not taken to conduct 

outreach to these groups, provide a 

justification why not. In addition, 

definitions for both beginning farmers 

and socially disadvantaged farmers have 

been added to § 1291.2. 

One commenter suggested the 

language in § 1291.6(d)(1), ‘‘Indicate if a 

competitive process was used to solicit 

and evaluate grant proposals from all 

interested parties. If a competitive 

process was not used to solicit and 

evaluate grant proposals, explain why 

not’’ does not meet the intent of the 

statement in the Farm Bill Managers 

report requesting USDA to ‘‘encourage 

state departments of agriculture to 

develop their grant plans through a 

competitive process in order to ensure 

maximum public input and benefit.’’ 

The commenter recommends the 

language be amended to include a clear, 

positive statement of the expectation 

that grants will generally be 

competitive, and that at a minimum, a 

competitive award should be made by a 

peer review panel that includes a full 

range of interested stakeholders and 

experts and that any exceptions to this 

should be explained in full. AMS has 

evaluated this comment and while this 

comment has merit, AMS believes that 

the states should have flexibility in 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 58 / Friday, March 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 13315 

establishing processes for conducting 

fair and equitable reviews of grant 

proposals. Nonetheless, AMS is revising 

§ 1291.6(d)(1) to request a description of 

the fair and equitable grant proposal 

review process used by the state 

department of agriculture. 

One commenter requested that 

amendments be made to § 1291.6 to 

comply with the Farm Bill Managers 

Report language urging the USDA to 

‘‘encourage state departments of 

agriculture to develop their grant plans 

through a competitive process in order 

to ensure maximum public input and 

benefit. The Managers expect the 

Secretary to ensure that states conduct 

extensive outreach to interested parties 

through a transparent process of 

receiving and considering public 

comment so that grant applications are 

developed with proven and justified 

public support, particularly when 

developing applications for multistate 

projects.’’ 

The commenter recommended that 

states be required to describe the 

outreach conducted by the state to 

specialty crop stakeholders and 

specialty crop organizations to 

determine their priority needs and to 

solicit proposals; describe the criteria 

used by the state to evaluate the projects 

proposed for funding, including but not 

limited to how reviews are conducted; 

and provide a copy of the request for 

proposals issued in a competitive 

process or provide justification for not 

using a competitive process. These 

comments have merit and § 1291.6(d)(1) 

has been revised to require states to 

identify the methods used to solicit 

proposals that meet specialty crop 

stakeholders needs and to request a 

description of the fair and equitable 

grant proposal review process. The 

commenter also recommended that 

states describe how the projects funded 

will enhance productivity and 

competitiveness of specialty crop 

agriculture in their state; and describe 

any stakeholders and organizations that 

proposed and/or supported funded 

projects. The State plan criteria 

described in § 1291.6(d) requires states 

to describe how funds will be utilized 

to enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops and § 1291.6(d)(9) 

requires states to describe how all grant 

partners commit to and work towards 

supporting the goals and outcomes of 

measures of the proposed projects. 

Accordingly, no changes have been 

made as a result of this comment. 

The commenter also recommended 

states delineate whether approved 

projects received additional funding 

from state resources. The Specialty 

Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004, as 

amended, does not contain a statutory 

provision for a matching requirement 

from the state. In addition, under 

§ 1291.5(c), grant funds shall 

supplement the expenditure of state 

funds in support of specialty crops 

grown in the state, rather than replace 

state funds. AMS includes this 

provision in the terms and conditions in 

each grant agreement and expects to 

focus on compliance by the states with 

this provision. Accordingly, no changes 

have been made as a result of this 

comment. 

The same commenter also requested 

that states describe ‘‘to the extent 

possible, how the projects will leverage 

other public and private investments for 

maximum benefits.’’ This comment has 

merit. AMS is amending § 1291.6(d)(1) 

to require states to include in the 

description of the competitive grant 

process, the steps taken to receive and 

consider public comment to identify 

specialty crop stakeholders’ priority 

needs in enhancing the competiveness 

of specialty crops and the process used 

to conduct a fair and equitable grant 

proposal review process. Therefore, in 

their grant application to AMS, the 

states will be responsible for including 

projects that provide maximum benefit 

to the specialty crop stakeholders based 

upon their competitive grant process. 

One commenter requested the states 

describe how funding is being used to 

strictly promote specialty crops as 

defined under the Act for projects 

directed at state marketing programs 

and to address the Farm Bill Managers 

report which stated that, ‘‘The Managers 

expect the Secretary to carefully 

monitor the use of funds under grant 

awards to ensure that funds are 

promoting specialty crops as defined 

under the Specialty Crops 

Competitiveness Act of 2004 and are not 

being used in generically crossmarketing other commodities which fall 

under state marketing programs but are 

outside the scope of the Act’s 

definition.’’ This comment has merit 

and AMS has clarified § 1291.4(a) to 

read, ‘‘To be eligible for a grant, the 

project(s) must solely enhance the 

competitiveness of U.S. grown or U.S. 

territory grown eligible specialty crops, 

in either domestic or foreign markets’’. 

In addition, AMS clarified § 1291.6(d)(3) 

to read, ‘‘If funding is being directed at 

a state marketing program, describe how 

the state will ensure that funding is 

being used solely to enhance the 

competitiveness of specialty crops as 

defined under § 1291.2(n).’’ 

One commenter recommended states 

identify if state property is purchased 

with grant funds. Under § 1291.6(b), for 

each proposed project, states are 

required to submit form SF–424A, 

‘‘Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs’’, which requires 

a state to specify dollar amounts for 

each budget category, including 

categories for types of property. In 

addition, under § 1291.6(d)(7), states are 

required to provide for each project a 

detailed budget narrative providing 

sufficient information about the budget 

categories listed on the SF–424A to 

demonstrate that funds are being 

expended on eligible grant activities. 

Furthermore, AMS has amended 

§ 1291.5 to add that ‘‘capital 

expenditures for general purpose 

equipment, buildings, and land are 

unallowable as direct and indirect 

charges’’ and that ‘‘capital expenditures 

for specialty purpose equipment are 

allowable as direct costs, provided that 

items with a unit cost of $5000 or more 

have the prior approval of AMS’’. 

Section 1291.5 has also been amended 

to add that ‘‘rental costs of buildings 

and equipment are allowable as direct 

costs in accordance with the cost 

principles in Subpart T of 7 CFR 3015.’’ 

Sec. 1291.2 has also been amended to 

add a definition for ‘‘capital 

expenditures’’, ‘‘equipment’’, ‘‘general 

purpose equipment’’, and ‘‘specialty 

purpose equipment’’. 

One commenter recommended states 

describe how they are focusing on 

multi-state and regional projects to 

comply with the Farm Bill Managers 

Report language, ‘‘The Managers 

therefore request that the Secretary 

encourage state departments of 

agriculture to submit grant plans that 

include multi-state and regional project 

proposals.’’ AMS specifies that multistate projects are eligible projects under 

§ 1291.4(d) and in the State plan under 

§ 1291.6(d)(10). In addition, we are 

revising § 1291.6(d)(1) to reiterate that 

multi-state projects are eligible. 

Eligible Grant Projects 

One commenter suggests the language 

in § 1291.6(d)(1), ‘‘Identify if an award 

was made to either a socially 

disadvantaged or beginning farmer’’ be 

changed to, ‘‘Identify if an award was 

made to an association or organization 

to be used solely for the benefit of 

socially disadvantaged or beginning 

farmers’’ to conform with the eligible 

grant project requirements under 

§ 1291.4(c). The language under Sec. 

1291.4(c) does not restrict or limit 

awards to single individuals as 

subgrantees, but instead states they are 

eligible if they participate with a project 

partner to execute a project that benefits 

the specialty crop industry rather than 

a single individual. Accordingly, no 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
13316 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 58 / Friday, March 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

changes have been made as a result of 

this comment. 

One commenter requests further 

guidance from AMS on the eligibility of 

projects where a state department of 

agriculture proposes to make further 

awards of funding to subgrantees. AMS 

has revised § 1291.6(d)(1) to require 

state departments of agriculture to 

include in the description of the 

competitive grant process the steps 

taken to solicit proposals that meet 

specialty crops stakeholders needs. 

Purpose and Scope 

One commenter recommended the 

inclusion of the following items to the 

definition of ‘‘enhancing the 

competitiveness’’ of specialty crops: 

value-added enterprises, 

entrepreneurship, local and regional 

food systems, value chain development, 

marketing infrastructure, consumer 

labeling, beginning farmers of specialty 

crops, socially disadvantaged farmers of 

specialty crops, preservation of 

farmland dedicated to specialty crop 

production, and extension. AMS has 

amended § 1291.1 to encourage states to 

develop projects pertaining to specific 

issues affecting the specialty crop 

industry. 

Unobligated Funds 

One commenter requested the 

language stating unobligated funds will 

be allocated ‘‘pro rata to the remaining 

states who applied during the specified 

grant application period to be solely 

expended on projects previously 

approved in their State plan’’ be 

amended to take into consideration the 

Farm Bill Managers Report, which states 

that, ‘‘The Managers also request the 

Secretary to give strong consideration to 

multi-state projects when reallocating 

unobligated block grant funding.’’ The 

language in § 1291.9(b) reflects the 

statutory language that appears in Sec. 

10109(i) of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008. If a state that 

previously submitted an approved 

multi-state project receives reallocated 

block grant funding, the state could give 

consideration to reallocating funds to 

that previously approved multi-state 

project, but not to any new multi-state 

projects. Accordingly, no changes are 

made as a result of this comment. 

Review of Grant Applications 

One commenter requested further 

detail be provided in regard to what is 

expected in the grant application in 

relation to the language in § 1291.7 that 

states, ‘‘AMS may request the applicant 

provide additional information or 

clarification’’. This section states grant 

applications will be reviewed and 

approved or rejected for conformance 

with § 1291.6, a provision that contains 

details on what documentation should 

be included in the completed 

application. Accordingly, no changes 

are made as a result of this comment. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.), AMS submitted the information 

collection included in this rulemaking 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) and obtained approval of the 

information collection under OMB 

number 0581–0248. 

Comments were invited on the 

information collection in September 4, 

2008, interim final rule. The deadline 

for comments was November 3, 2008. 

No comments were received on the 

information collection. 

The estimated one-time annual cost 

for all state departments of agriculture 

in providing information to the 

Specialty Crop Block Grant ProgramFarm Bill is $37,097. This total has been 

estimated by multiplying 1,439 total 

burden hours by $25.78, an average of 

mean hourly earnings by state and local 

government white collar (excluding 

sales) employees. Data for computation 

of this hourly wage were obtained from 

the U.S. Department of Labor Statistic’s 

publication ‘‘National Compensation 

Survey: Occupational Wages in the 

United States, June 2005’’, published 

August 2006 (Bulletin 2581). This 

publication can also be found at the 

following Web site: http://www.bls.gov/ 

ncs/ocs/sp/ncbl0832.pdf. 

Effective Date 

Because the Farm Bill requires the 

Secretary of Agriculture to make 

available approximately $49 million in 

grant funds in fiscal year 2009, which 

ends September 30, 2009, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 553, it is found, and determined, 

that good cause exists for not 

postponing the effective date of this 

final rule until 30 days after publication 

in the Federal Register. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1291 

Agriculture, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Specialty 

crop block grants. 

■ Accordingly, the interim final rule 

adding 7 CFR part 1291 which was 

published at 73 FR 51585 on September 

4, 2008, is adopted as a final rule with 

the following changes: 

PART 1291—SPECIALTY CROP 

BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM—FARM 

BILL 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 1291 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621 note, as amended. 

■ 2. Revise § 1291.1 to read as follows: 

§ 1291.1 Purpose and scope. 

(a) Pursuant to the authority conferred 

by Section 101 of the Specialty Crops 

Competitiveness Act of 2004 (7 U.S.C. 

1621 note), as amended by Section 

10109 of the Food, Conservation, and 

Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110– 

246, AMS will make grants to states to 

enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops in accordance with the 

terms and conditions set forth herein 

and other applicable federal statutes and 

regulations, including, but not limited 

to, 7 CFR part 3015 and part 3016. 

(b) AMS encourages states to develop 

projects solely to enhance the 

competitiveness of specialty crops 

pertaining to the following issues 

affecting the specialty crop industry: 

increasing child and adult nutrition 

knowledge and consumption of 

specialty crops; participation of 

industry representatives at meetings of 

international standard setting bodies in 

which the U.S. government participates; 

improving efficiency and reducing costs 

of distribution systems; assisting all 

entities in the specialty crop 

distribution chain in developing ‘‘Good 

Agricultural Practices’’, ‘‘Good Handling 

Practices’’, ‘‘Good Manufacturing 

Practices’’, and in cost-share 

arrangements for funding audits of such 

systems for small farmers, packers and 

processors; investing in specialty crop 

research, including organic research to 

focus on conservation and 

environmental outcomes; enhancing 

food safety; developing new and 

improved seed varieties and specialty 

crops; pest and disease control; and 

sustainability. 

■ 3. Revise § 1291.2 to read as follows: 

§ 1291.2 Definitions. 

(a) AMS means the Agricultural 

Marketing Service of the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. 

(b) Application means the application 

for the Specialty Crop Block Grant 

Program—Farm Bill (SCBGP–FB). 

(c) Beginning farmer or rancher means 

an individual or entity who has not 

operated a farm or ranch for more than 

10 years and substantially participates 

in the operation. 

(d) Capital expenditures means 

expenditures for the acquisition cost of 

capital assets (equipment, buildings, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 58 / Friday, March 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 13317 

land), or expenditures to make 

improvements to capital assets that 

materially increase their value or useful 

life. Acquisition cost means the cost of 

the asset including the cost to put it in 

place. Acquisition cost for equipment, 

for example, means the net invoice price 

of the equipment, including the cost of 

any modifications, attachments, 

accessories, or auxiliary apparatus 

necessary to make it usable for the 

purpose for which it is acquired. 

Ancillary charges, such as taxes, duty, 

protective in transit insurance, freight, 

and installation may be included in, or 

excluded from the acquisition cost in 

accordance with the governmental 

unit’s regular accounting practices. 

(e) Equipment means an article of 

nonexpendable, tangible personal 

property having a useful life of more 

than one year and an acquisition cost 

which equals or exceeds the lesser of 

the capitalization level established by 

the governmental unit for financial 

statement purposes, or $5000. 

(f) General purpose equipment means 

equipment, which is not limited to 

research, scientific or other technical 

activities. Examples include office 

equipment and furnishings, telephone 

networks, information technology 

equipment and systems, reproduction 

and printing equipment, and motor 

vehicles. 

(g) Grant period means the period of 

time from when the grant agreement is 

signed to the completion of all SCBGPFB projects submitted in the State plan. 

(h) Grantee means the government to 

which a grant is awarded and which is 

accountable for the use of the funds 

provided. The grantee is the entire legal 

entity even if only a particular 

component of the entity is designated in 

the grant agreement. 

(i) Indirect costs means those costs 

incurred for a common or joint purpose 

benefitting more than one cost objective, 

and not readily assignable to the cost 

objectives specifically benefitted, 

without effort disproportionate to the 

results achieved. 

(j) Outcome measure means an event 

or condition that is external to the 

project and that is of direct importance 

to the intended beneficiaries and/or the 

public. 

(k) Project means all proposed 

activities to be funded by the Specialty 

Crop Block Grant Program—Farm Bill. 

(l) Socially disadvantaged farmer or 

rancher means a farmer or rancher who 

is a member of a socially disadvantaged 

group. A ‘‘Socially Disadvantaged 

Group’’ is a group whose members have 

been subject to discrimination on the 

basis of race, color, national origin, age, 

disability, and where applicable, sex, 

marital status, familial status, parental 

status, religion, sexual orientation, 

genetic information, political beliefs, 

reprisal, or because all or a part of an 

individual’s income is derived from any 

public assistance program. 

(m) Special purpose equipment means 

equipment which is used only for 

research, scientific, or other technical 

activities. 

(n) Specialty crop means fruits and 

vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, 

horticulture and nursery crops 

(including floriculture). 

(o) State means the fifty states, the 

District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, 

American Samoa, the United States 

Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth 

of the Northern Mariana Islands. 

(p) State department of agriculture 

means the agency, commission, or 

department of a state government 

responsible for agriculture within the 

state. 

(q) Subgrantee means the government 

or other legal entity to which a subgrant 

is awarded and which is accountable to 

the grantee for the use of funds 

provided. 

■ 4. Revise paragraph (a) of § 1291.4 to 

read as follows: 

§ 1291.4 Eligible grant project. 

(a) To be eligible for a grant, the 

project(s) must solely enhance the 

competitiveness of U.S. grown or U.S. 

territory grown eligible specialty crops, 

in either domestic or foreign markets. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Add new paragraphs (e), (f), and (g) 

to § 1291.5 to read as follows: 

§ 1291.5 Restrictions and limitations on 

grant funds. 

* * * * * 

(e) Capital expenditures for general 

purpose equipment, buildings, and land 

are unallowable as direct and indirect 

charges. 

(f) Capital expenditures for special 

purpose equipment are allowable as 

direct costs, provided that items with a 

unit cost of $5000 or more have the 

prior approval of AMS. 

(g) Rental costs of buildings and 

equipment are allowable as direct costs 

in accordance with the cost principles 

in subpart T of 7 CFR part 3015. 

■ 6. Revise § 1291.6 to read as follows: 

§ 1291.6 Completed application. 

Completed applications shall be clear 

and succinct and shall include the 

following documentation satisfactory to 

AMS. 

(a) One SF–424 ‘‘Application for 

Federal Assistance’’. 

(b) SF–424A ‘‘Budget Information— 

Non-Construction Programs’’ showing 

the budget for each project. 

(c) One SF–424B ‘‘Assurances—NonConstruction Program’’. 

(d) Completed applications must also 

include one State plan to show how 

grant funds will be utilized solely to 

enhance the competitiveness of 

specialty crops. The State plan shall 

include the following: 

(1) Cover page and granting processes. 

Include the point of contact and lead 

agency for administering the plan. 

Provide a description of the affirmative 

steps taken to conduct outreach to 

socially disadvantaged farmers and 

beginning farmers. Describe how these 

groups were identified and the methods 

used to reach out to them. Identify if an 

award was made to either a socially 

disadvantaged farmer or a beginning 

farmer. If steps were not taken to 

conduct outreach to these groups, 

provide a justification for why not. 

Provide a description of the affirmative 

steps taken to conduct a competitive 

grant process. Include the steps taken to 

conduct outreach to specialty crop 

stakeholders to receive and consider 

public comment to identify their 

priority needs in enhancing the 

competiveness of specialty crops. 

Identify the methods used to solicit 

proposals that meet specialty crop 

stakeholders’ needs, including any focus 

on multi-state projects. Include a 

description of the process used to 

review proposals in a fair and equitable 

manner. State departments of 

agriculture may also provide a copy of 

the issued request for proposals. If a 

competitive grant process was not used, 

provide a justification why not. 

(2) Project title and abstract. Include 

the title of the project and an abstract of 

200 or fewer words for each project. 

(3) Project purpose. For each project, 

clearly state the purpose of the project. 

Describe the specific issue, problem, 

interest, or need to be addressed. 

Explain why the project is important 

and timely. If funding is being directed 

at a state marketing program, describe 

how the state will ensure that funding 

is being used solely to enhance the 

competitiveness of specialty crops as 

defined in § 1291.2(n). If a project builds 

on a previous Specialty Crop Block 

Grant Program (SCBGP) or SCBGP–FB 

project, indicate clearly how the new 

project compliments previous work. For 

each project, indicate if the project will 

be or has been submitted to or funded 

by another Federal or State grant 

program. 

(4) Potential impact. Discuss the 

number of people or operations affected, 

the intended beneficiaries of each 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
13318 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 58 / Friday, March 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

project, and/or potential economic 

impact if such data are available and 

relevant to the project. 

(5) Expected measurable outcomes. 

For each project, describe at least one 

distinct, quantifiable, and measurable 

outcome-oriented objective that directly 

and meaningfully supports the project’s 

purpose. The measurable outcomeoriented objective must define an event 

or condition that is external to the 

project and that is of direct importance 

to the intended beneficiaries and/or the 

public. Outcome measures may be long 

term that exceed the grant period. 

Describe how performance toward 

meeting outcomes will be monitored. 

For each project, include a performancemonitoring plan to describe the process 

of collecting and analyzing data to meet 

the outcome-oriented objectives. 

(6) Work plan. For each project, 

explain briefly the activities that will be 

performed to accomplish the objectives 

of the project. Be clear about who will 

do the work. Include appropriate time 

lines. 

(7) Budget narrative. The limit on 

indirect costs, not to exceed 10 percent, 

will be published in a Federal Register 

notice each fiscal year. Provide a 

justification if indirect costs exceed 10 

percent or exceed that fiscal year’s limit 

as announced in the Federal Register. 

Provide in sufficient detail information 

about the budget categories listed on 

SF–424A for each project to 

demonstrate that grant funds are being 

expended on eligible grant activities 

that meet the purpose of the program. 

(8) Project oversight. Describe the 

oversight practices that provide 

sufficient knowledge of grant activities 

to ensure proper and efficient 

administration for each project. 

(9) Project commitment. Describe how 

all grant partners commit to and work 

toward the goals and outcome measures 

of each proposed project(s). 

(10) Multi-state projects. If the project 

is a multi-state project, describe how the 

states are going to collaborate effectively 

with related projects with one state 

assuming the coordinating role. Indicate 

the percent of the budget covered by 

each state. 

■ 7. Revise the last sentence of 

§ 1291.10(d) to read as follows: 

§ 1291.10 Reporting and oversight 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * If AMS, after reasonable 

notice to a State, and opportunity to be 

heard, finds that there has been a failure 

by the State to comply substantially 

with any provision or requirement of 

the State plan, AMS may disqualify, for 

one or more years, the State from receipt 

of future grants under the SCBGP or 

SCBGP–FB. 

* * * * * 

Dated: March 23, 2009. 

Robert C. Keeney, 

Acting Associate Administrator. 

[FR Doc. E9–6816 Filed 3–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2008–BT–TP–0004] 

RIN 1904–AB75 

Energy Conservation Program: Test 

Procedures for Battery Chargers and 

External Power Supplies (Standby 

Mode and Off Mode) 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) is amending its test procedures 

for battery chargers (BCs) and external 

power supplies (EPSs) to include 

provisions for measuring standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption, as 

directed by the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007). 

Furthermore, DOE is adding to its 

single-voltage external power supply 

test procedure specifications for testing 

switch-selectable external power 

supplies. Finally, DOE is extending the 

current certification reporting 

requirements to the Class A external 

power supplies for which Congress 

established energy efficiency standards 

in EISA 2007. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 27, 

2009. The incorporation by reference of 

certain publications listed in the rule is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register on April 27, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of 

all materials related to this rulemaking 

at the U.S. Department of Energy, 

Resource Room of the Building 

Technologies Program, 950 L’Enfant 

Plaza, SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC, 

(202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda 

Edwards at the above telephone number 

for additional information regarding 

visiting the Resource Room. Please note: 

The Department’s Freedom of 

Information Reading Room no longer 

houses rulemaking materials. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Victor Petrolati, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–4549. E-mail: 

Victor.Petrolati@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Francine Pinto, Esq., or Mr. 

Michael Kido, Esq., U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of General Counsel, GC– 

72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: 

(202) 586–7432, or (202) 586–8145. Email: Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov or 

Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule incorporates by reference, into part 

430 the following industry standard: 

• California Energy Commission 

(CEC), ‘‘Test Method for Calculating the 

Energy Efficiency of Single-Voltage 

External AC–DC and AC–AC Power 

Supplies,’’ August 11, 2004. 

You can obtain free copies of the CEC 

Test Method from the California Energy 

Commission, 1516 Ninth Street, MS–25, 

Sacramento, CA 95814, (916) 654–4091, 

or http:// 

www.efficientpowersupplies.org/ 

methods.asp. 

The following standards are referred 

to in the DOE test procedures and 

elsewhere in this part, but are not 

incorporated by reference. These 

sources are provided solely for 

information and guidance. 

• IEC 62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power,’’ First Edition, June 13, 2005. 

• IEC 60050, ‘‘International 

Electrotechnical Vocabulary.’’ 

• IEEE 1515–2000, ‘‘IEEE 

Recommended Practice for Electronic 

Power Subsystems: Parameter 

Definitions, Test Conditions, and Test 

Methods,’’ March 30, 2000. 

• IEEE 100, ‘‘Authoritative Dictionary 

of IEEE Standards Terms,’’ Seventh 

Edition, January 1, 2006. 

You can purchase copies of IEC 

Standards 62301 and 60050 from the 

American National Standards Institute, 

11 West 42nd Street, New York, New 

York 10036, (212) 642–4936, or http:// 

webstore.iec.ch. 

You can purchase copies of IEEE 

Standards 1515–2000 and 100 from the 

Institute of Electrical and Electronics 

Engineers, Inc., 3 Park Avenue, 17th 

Floor, New York, NY 10016–5997, (212) 

419–7900, or http://www.ieee.org/web/ 

publications/standards. 

You can also view copies of these 

standards at the U.S. Department of 

Energy, Resource Room of the Building 

Technologies Program, 950 L’Enfant 

Plaza, SW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 

20024, (202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES