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

7753 

Vol. 72, No. 33 

Tuesday, February 20, 2007 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 1000, 1001, 1005, 1006, 

1007, 1030, 1032, 1033, 1124, 1126, and 

1131 

[Docket No. AO–14–A77, et al.; DA–07–02] 

Milk in the Northeast and Other 

Marketing Areas; Supplemental Notice 

of Hearing on Proposed Amendments 

to Tentative Marketing Agreements 

and Orders 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; Supplemental 

notice of public hearing on proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This document contains an 

additional proposal to be considered at 

a previously scheduled hearing to 

consider proposals that would amend 

the Class III and Class IV product price 

formulas applicable to all Federal milk 

marketing orders. 

DATES: The hearing will convene at 9 

a.m., Monday, February 26, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held at 

the Holiday Inn Select—Strongsville, 

15471 Royalton Road, Strongsville, Ohio 

44136, phone (440) 238–8800. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack 

Rower, Marketing Specialist, Order 

Formulation and Enforcement, USDA/ 

AMS/Dairy Programs, Stop 0231–Room 

2971, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–0231, (202) 720– 

2357, e-mail address: 

jack.rower@usda.gov. 

Persons requiring a sign language 

interpreter or other special 

accommodations should contact Paul 

Huber, Assistant Market Administrator, 

at (330) 225–4758; e-mail: 

phuber@fmmaclev.com before the 

hearing begins. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

additional proposal, which supplements 

a proposal published on February 7, 

2007 (72 FR 6179), seeks to establish 

cost-of-production surcharges that 

manufacturers could include in the 

selling price of their products but would 

not be included in the determination of 

National Agricultural Statistics Service 

(NASS) survey prices for cheese, butter, 

nonfat dry milk and dry whey. 

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. 

Notice is hereby given of a public 

hearing to be held at the Holiday Inn 

Select, Strongsville, Ohio, beginning at 

9 a.m. on Monday, February 26, 2007, 

with respect to proposed amendments 

to the tentative marketing agreements 

and to the orders regulating the 

handling of milk in the Northeast and 

other marketing areas. 

The hearing is called 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). 

The purpose of the hearing is to 

receive evidence with respect to the 

economic and marketing conditions 

which relate to the proposed 

amendments, hereinafter set forth, and 

any appropriate modifications thereof, 

to the tentative marketing agreements 

and to the orders. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Actions under the Federal milk order 

program are subject to the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

This Act seeks to ensure that, within the 

statutory authority of a program, the 

regulatory and information collection 

requirements are tailored to the size and 

nature of small businesses. For the 

purpose of the Act, a dairy farm is 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 (13 CFR 121.201). Most 

parties subject to a milk order are 

considered as a small business. 

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. 

USDA has identified that during 2005 

approximately 51,060 of the 54,652 

dairy producers whose milk is pooled 

on Federal orders are small businesses. 

Small businesses represent about 93 

percent of the dairy farmers who 

participate in the Federal milk order 

program. 

On the processing side, during June 

2005 there were approximately 350 fully 

regulated plants (of which 149 or 43 

percent were small businesses) and 110 

partially regulated plants (of which 50 

or 45 percent were small businesses.) In 

addition, there were 48 producerhandlers, of which 29 were considered 

small businesses for the purposes of this 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis, 

who submitted reports under the 

Federal milk order program during this 

period. 

The fluid use of milk represented 

about 37.6 percent of total Federal milk 

marketing order producer deliveries 

during calendar year 2006. Almost 237 

million Americans, approximately 80 

percent of the total U.S. population 

reside within the geographical 

boundaries of the 10 Federal milk 

marketing areas. 

In order to accomplish the goal of 

imposing no additional regulatory 

burdens on the industry, a review of the 

current reporting requirements was 

completed pursuant to the Paperwork 

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

et seq.) In light of that review, it was 

determined that these proposed 

amendments would have little or no 

impact on reporting, record keeping, or 

other compliance requirements because 

these requirements would remain 

identical to those currently in effect 

under the Federal order program. No 

new or additional reporting would be 

necessary. 

This notice does not require 

additional information collection that 

requires clearance by the OMB beyond 

the currently approved information 

collection. Information currently 

collected through the use of OMBapproved forms and the primary sources 

of data used to complete the forms are 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
7754 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

routinely used in business transactions. 

The forms require only a minimal 

amount of information that can be 

provided without data processing 

equipment or trained statistical staff. 

Thus, the information collection burden 

is relatively small. Requiring the same 

reports from all handlers does not 

disadvantage any handler that is smaller 

than the industry average. 

No other burdens are expected to fall 

upon the dairy industry as a result of 

overlapping Federal rules. This 

proposed rulemaking does not 

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any 

existing Federal rules. 

To ensure that small businesses are 

not unduly or disproportionately 

burdened based on these proposed 

amendments consideration was given to 

mitigating any negative impacts. It is 

expected that small producers would 

not experience any particular 

disadvantage compared to larger 

producers as a result of the proposed 

amendments. Similarly, it is expected 

that small handlers would not 

experience any particular disadvantage 

compared to larger handlers as a result 

of the proposed amendments. Possible 

changes to the Class III and Class IV 

price formulas should not have any 

special impacts on small handler 

entities. All handlers manufacturing 

dairy products from milk classified as 

Class III or Class IV would remain 

subject to the same minimum prices 

regardless of the size of their operations. 

Minimum prices should not raise 

barriers regarding the ability of small 

handlers to compete in the marketplace. 

Interested parties are invited to 

present evidence on the probable 

regulatory and information collection 

impact of the hearing proposals on 

small businesses. Also, such parties may 

suggest modifications of the proposal for 

tailoring its applicability to small 

businesses. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform 

The amendments to the rules 

proposed herein have been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. They are not intended to 

have a retroactive effect. If adopted, the 

proposed amendments would not 

preempt any state or local laws, 

regulations, or policies, unless they 

present an irreconcilable conflict with 

this rule. 

The Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act provides that 

administrative proceedings must be 

exhausted before parties may file suit in 

court. Under Section 8c(15)(A) of the 

Act (7 U.S.C. 608c(15)(A)), any handler 

subject to an order may request 

modification or exemption from such 

order by filing with the Department of 

Agriculture (Department) a petition 

stating that the order, any provision of 

the order, or any obligation imposed in 

connection with the order is not in 

accordance with the law. A handler is 

afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After a hearing, the 

Department would rule on the petition. 

The Act provides that the district court 

of the United States in any district in 

which the handler is an inhabitant, or 

has its principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction in equity to review the 

Department’s ruling on the petition, 

provided a bill in equity is filed not 

later than 20 days after the date of the 

entry of the ruling. 

Interested parties who wish to 

introduce exhibits should provide the 

Presiding Officer at the hearing with (6) 

copies of such exhibits for the Official 

Record. Also, it would be helpful if 

additional copies are available for the 

use of other participants at the hearing. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 1000, 

1001, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1030, 1032, 

1033, 1124, 1126, and 1131. 

Milk marketing orders. 

The authority citation for 7 CFR parts 

1000, 1001, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1030, 

1032, 1033, 1124, 1126, and 1131 read 

as follows: 

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

The proposed amendment, as set forth 

below, has not received the approval of 

the Department. 

Proposed by Dairylea Cooperative, Inc. 

Proposal No. 20 

The additional proposal seeks to 

establish cost-of-production surcharges 

that manufacturers could include in the 

selling price of their products but would 

not be included in the determination of 

the NASS survey prices for cheese, 

butter, nonfat dry milk and dry whey. 

1. Amend § 1000.50 by: 

(a) Adding new paragraph (r); 

(b) Adding new paragraph (r)(1); and 

(c) Adding new paragraph (r)(2). 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 1000.50 Class prices, component prices, 

and advanced pricing factors. 

* * * * * 

(r) Manufacturing surcharges. For the 

purposes of determining the NASS 

survey prices for this section, as 

reported by the Department, cost of 

production add-on surcharges, up to a 

maximum value as contained in part (1) 

of this section, shall not be included in 

the NASS survey prices. 

(1) The maximum cost of production 

add-on surcharges shall be as follows: 

(i) Cheese: $0.0xxx per pound; 

(ii) Butter: $0.0xxx per pound; 

(iii) Whey powder: $0.0xxx per 

pound; and 

(iv) Nonfat dry milk: $0.0xxx per 

pound. 

(2) To be excluded from the NASS 

survey price, cost of production factors 

must be shown on the appropriate 

invoice as a separately negotiated 

surcharge to the normal price charged 

on the invoice, up to the maximum 

amount shown for such product 

pursuant to part (1), above. Failure to 

show the add-on as such will result in 

any such values being included in the 

NASS survey price. 

2. Amend § 1000.53 by adding new 

paragraph (a)(12), to read as follows: 

§ 1000.53 Announcement of class prices, 

component prices, and advanced pricing 

factors. 

(a) * * * 

(12) The rates as determined in 

1000.50(r)(1). 

* * * * * 

Copies of this supplemental notice of 

hearing and the orders may be procured 

from the Market Administrator of each 

of the aforesaid marketing areas, or from 

the Hearing Clerk, United States 

Department of Agriculture, STOP 

9200—Room 1031, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–

9200, or may be inspected there. 

Copies of the transcript of testimony 

taken at the hearing will not be available 

for distribution through the Hearing 

Clerk’s Office. If you wish to purchase 

a copy, arrangements may be made with 

the reporter at the hearing. 

From the time that a hearing notice is 

issued and until the issuance of a final 

decision in a proceeding, Department 

employees involved in the decisionmaking process are prohibited from 

discussing the merits of the hearing 

issues on an ex parte basis with any 

person having an interest in the 

proceeding. For this particular 

proceeding, the prohibition applies to 

employees in the following 

organizational units: 

Office of the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Office of the Administrator, 

Agricultural Marketing Service. 

Office of the General Counsel. 

Dairy Programs, Agricultural 

Marketing Service (Washington office) 

and the Offices of all Market 

Administrators. 

Procedural matters are not subject to 

the above prohibition and may be 

discussed at any time. 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules 7755 

Dated: February 14, 2007. 

Kenneth C. Clayton, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 07–746 Filed 2–14–07; 4:01 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY 

CORPORATION 

29 CFR Parts 4006 and 4007 

RIN 1212–AB10 

Premium Rates; Payment of 

Premiums; Flat Premium Rates, 

Variable-Rate Premium Cap, and 

Termination Premium; Deficit 

Reduction Act of 2005; Pension 

Protection Act of 2006 

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This is a proposed rule to 

amend PBGC’s regulations on Premium 

Rates and Payment of Premiums to 

implement certain provisions of the 

Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 

109–171) and the Pension Protection 

Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–280) that are 

effective beginning in 2006 or 2007. The 

provisions that would be implemented 

by this rule change the flat premium 

rate, cap the variable-rate premium in 

some cases, and create a new 

‘‘termination premium’’ that is payable 

in connection with certain distress and 

involuntary plan terminations. This rule 

does not address other provisions of the 

Pension Protection Act of 2006 that deal 

with PBGC premiums. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before April 23, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by 

RIN number 1212–AB10, may be 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web 

site instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: reg.comments@pbgc.gov. 

• Fax: 202–326–4224. 

• Mail or Hand Delivery: Legislative 

and Regulatory Department, Pension 

Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005–

4026. 

All submissions must include the 

Regulatory Information Number for this 

rulemaking (RIN 1212-AB10). 

Comments received, including personal 

information provided, will be posted to 

www.pbgc.gov. Copies of comments may 

also be obtained by writing to 

Disclosure Division, Office of the 

General Counsel, Pension Benefit 

Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street, 

NW., Washington DC 20005–4026, or 

calling 202–326–4040 during normal 

business hours. (TTY and TDD users 

may call the Federal relay service tollfree at 1–800–877–8339 and ask to be 

connected to 202–326–4040.) 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

H. Hanley, Director, Legislative and 

Regulatory Department; or Catherine B. 

Klion, Manager, or Deborah C. Murphy, 

Attorney, Regulatory and Policy 

Division, Legislative and Regulatory 

Department, Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation, 1200 K Street, NW., 

Washington DC 20005–4026; 202–326–

4024. (TTY/TDD users may call the 

Federal relay service toll-free at 1–800–

877–8339 and ask to be connected to 

202–326–4024.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

(PBGC) administers the pension plan 

termination insurance program under 

Title IV of the Employee Retirement 

Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). 

Pension plans covered by Title IV must 

pay premiums to PBGC. Section 4006 of 

ERISA deals with premium rates, and 

section 4007 of ERISA deals with the 

payment of premiums, including 

premium due dates, interest and 

penalties on premiums not timely paid, 

and persons liable for premiums. 

On February 8, 2006, the President 

signed into law the Deficit Reduction 

Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109–171 (DRA 

2005). Section 8101 of DRA 2005 

amends section 4006 of ERISA. Section 

8101(a) changes the per-participant flat 

premium rate for plan years beginning 

in 2006 from $19 to $30 for singleemployer plans and from $2.60 to $8 for 

multiemployer plans and provides for 

inflation adjustments to the flat rates for 

future years. Section 8101(b) creates a 

new ‘‘termination premium’’ (in 

addition to the flat-rate and variable-rate 

premiums under section 4006(a)(3)(A) 

and (E) of ERISA) that is payable for 

three years following certain distress 

and involuntary plan terminations that 

occur after 2005. 

On August 17, 2006, the President 

signed into law the Pension Protection 

Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109–280 (PPA 

2006). Sections 401(b) and 402(g)(2)(B) 

of PPA 2006 make changes to the 

termination premium rules of DRA 

2005. Section 405 of PPA 2006 amends 

section 4006 of ERISA to cap the 

variable-rate premium for plans of 

certain small employers beginning in 

2007. (PPA 2006 also makes other 

changes affecting PBGC premiums that 

are not addressed in this rule.) 

This rule would amend PBGC’s 

regulations on Premium Rates (29 CFR 

Part 4006) and Payment of Premiums 

(29 CFR Part 4007) to conform to these 

requirements of DRA 2005 and PPA 

2006 and to clarify how the 

requirements apply. 

Flat-Rate Premium 

Until the enactment of DRA 2005, the 

flat-rate premium had remained 

unchanged for single-employer plans 

since 1991 and for multiemployer plans 

since 1989. Section 8101(a) of DRA 2005 

amends section 4006(a)(3)(A) of ERISA 

and adds new subparagraphs (F) and (G) 

to the end of section 4006(a)(3) of ERISA 

to raise the flat premium rates for 2006 

for both single- and multiemployer 

plans and to provide for inflation 

indexing for future years. 

Applicability 

Before amendment by DRA 2005, 

section 4006(a)(3)(A) of ERISA provided 

(in part) that ‘‘* * * the annual 

premium rate * * * is * * * in the case 

of a single-employer plan, for plan years 

beginning after December 31, 1990, an 

amount equal to the sum of $19 plus the 

[per-participant variable-rate premium] 

under subparagraph (E) for each * * * 

participant * * *’’ Section 

8101(a)(1)(A) of DRA 2005 changes 

‘‘$19’’ to read ‘‘$30.’’ Thus, the amended 

text of ERISA, read literally, makes it 

appear that the $30 single-employer flatrate premium applies to plan years 

beginning after 1990. However, section 

8101(d)(1) of DRA 2005 (which does not 

amend ERISA) says that this change 

applies to plan years beginning after 

December 31, 2005. Accordingly, PBGC 

considers single-employer flat premium 

rates for plan years beginning before 

2006 to be unaffected by DRA 2005. 

Participant Count 

Section 8101(a)(2)(A)(ii) of DRA 2005 

adds a new clause (iv) to section 

4006(a)(3)(A) of ERISA providing that 

the flat premium rate for a 

multiemployer plan for a post-2005 plan 

year is ‘‘$8.00 for each individual who 

is a participant in such plan during the 

applicable plan year.’’ PBGC interprets 

this to mean that the participant count 

is to be taken as of the premium 

snapshot date described in the premium 

rates regulation and PBGC’s premium 

instructions (generally the last day of 

the plan year preceding the premium 

payment year). This is consistent with 

PBGC’s interpretation of the nearly 

identical language in existing section 

4006(a)(3)(A)(i) of ERISA. 


erjones on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS