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

56449 

Vol. 73, No. 189 

Monday, September 29, 2008 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1150 

[Docket No. AMS DA–08–0035; DA–08–02] 

National Dairy Promotion and 

Research Program; Final Rule on 

Amendments to the Dairy Promotion 

and Research Order 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the 

Dairy Promotion and Research Order 

(Order). The amendment modifies the 

composition of the National Dairy 

Promotion and Research Board (Dairy 

Board) by changing the number of 

members in six of the 13 geographic 

regions. The Dairy Board, which 

administers the Order, requested the 

amendment in order to better reflect the 

geographic distribution of milk 

production in the contiguous 48 States. 

DATES: Effective Date: September 30, 

2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Whitney A. Rick, Chief, Promotion and 

Research Branch, Dairy Programs, AMS, 

USDA, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., 

Room 2958–S, Stop 0233, Washington, 

DC 20250–0233. Phone: (202) 720–6909. 

E-mail: Whitney.Rick@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule is issued pursuant to the Dairy 

Production Stabilization Act (Act) of 

1983, as amended [7 U.S.C. 4501–4514]. 

Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has waived the review process required 

by Executive Order 12866 for this 

action. 

Executive Order 12988 

This final rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This final rule is not 

intended to have a retroactive effect. 

This rule will not preempt any State or 

local laws, regulations, or policies 

unless they present an irreconcilable 

conflict with this rule. 

The Dairy Act provides that 

administrative proceedings must be 

exhausted before parties may file suit in 

court. Under Section 4509 of the Dairy 

Act, any person subject to the Order 

may file with the Secretary 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 and request a 

modification of the Order or to be 

exempted from the Order. Such person 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After a hearing, the 

Secretary would rule on the petition. 

The Dairy Act provides that the district 

court of the United States in any district 

in which the person is an inhabitant, or 

has his principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s 

ruling on the petition, provided a 

complaint is filed not later than 20 days 

after the date of the entry of the ruling. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) has determined that this rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, as defined by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612). 

For the purpose of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, small businesses in the 

dairy industry have been defined as 

those employing less than 500 

employees. 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. In the 48 contiguous States, 

there are approximately 70,000 dairy 

farms subject to the provisions of this 

Order. Most of the parties subject to the 

Order are considered small entities. 

The Order is administered by a 36- 

member Board representing 13 

geographic regions within the 

contiguous 48 States. The Order 

provides that the Dairy Board shall 

review the geographic distribution of 

milk production throughout the United 

States and, if warranted, shall 

recommend to the Secretary a 

reapportionment of the regions and/or 

modification of the number of members 

from regions in order to better reflect the 

geographic distribution of milk 

production volume in the 48 contiguous 

States. 

Based on a review of the 2007 

geographic distribution of milk 

production, it has been determined that 

the number of Dairy Board members for 

six of the 13 geographic regions should 

be changed. The Dairy Board was last 

modified in 2003 based on 2002 milk 

production. 

The amendment will not have a 

significant economic impact on persons 

subject to the Order. The proposed 

changes merely allow representation of 

the Dairy Board to better reflect 

geographic milk production in the 

contiguous 48 States. Finally, no 

relevant Federal rules have been 

identified that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this rule. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

regulation [5 CFR part 1320] which 

implements the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. chapter 35], the 

information collection requirements and 

recordkeeping provisions imposed by 

the Order have been previously 

approved by OMB and assigned OMB 

Control No. 0581–0093. 

Prior Documents in This Proceeding 

Proposed Rule: Issued July 24, 2008; 

published July 30, 2008 (73 FR 44176). 

Statement of Consideration 

The Order is administered by a 36- 

member Dairy Board. This final rule 

amends the Order by modifying the 

number of members on the Board in six 

of the 13 geographic regions. The 

amendment modifies the composition of 

the Board to better reflect current milk 

production within each of the 13 

geographic regions of the contiguous 48 

States. 

The Order provides in section 

1150.131 that the Dairy Board shall 

review the geographic distribution of 

milk production volume throughout the 

contiguous 48 States and, if warranted, 

shall recommend to the Secretary a 

reapportionment of the regions and/or 

modification of the number of members 

from regions in order to best reflect the 

geographic distribution of milk 

production in the contiguous 48 States. 

The Dairy Board is required to conduct 

the review at least every five years and 

not more than every three years. The 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
56450 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 

Dairy Board was last modified in 2003 

based on 2002 milk production. 

In determining the number of Dairy 

Board seats for each of the 13 

geographic regions designated in the 

Order, the total milk production for the 

contiguous 48 states for the previous 

calendar year is divided by 36 to 

determine a factor of pounds of milk 

represented by each Dairy Board 

member. The resulting factor is then 

divided into the pounds of milk 

produced in each region to determine 

the number of Dairy Board members for 

each region. Accordingly, the following 

table summarizes by region the volume 

of milk production distribution for 

2007, the percentage of total milk 

production, the current number of Dairy 

Board seats per region, and the adopted 

number of Dairy Board seats for each 

region. 

Region and states 

Milk 

production 

(mil lbs) 

Percentage of 

total milk 

production 

Current 

number of 

board seats 

Proposed 

number of 

board seats 

1: Oregon, Washington .................................................................................. 7,764 4 .2 2 1 

2: California .................................................................................................... 40,683 21 .9 7 8 

3: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming ................. 21,212 11 .4 3 4 

4: Arkansas, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas ................................. 18,200 9 .8 3 4 

5: Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota ................................................... 10,741 5 .8 2 2 

6: Wisconsin .................................................................................................. 24,080 13 .0 5 5 

7: Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska .............................................................. 8,948 4 .8 2 2 

8: Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee ........................... 3,119 1 .7 1 1 

9: Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia ..................................................... 16,148 8 .7 3 3 

10: Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia ..................... 6,506 3 .5 1 1 

11: Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania .................................... 12,008 6 .5 3 2 

12: New York ................................................................................................. 12,103 6 .5 3 2 

13: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, 

Vermont ...................................................................................................... 4,046 2 .2 1 1 

Total: 48 Contiguous States ................................................................... 185,558 100 36 36 

* Based upon preliminary 2007 NASS milk production data, February 2008. 

Upon the basis of its review of 

geographic milk production volume, the 

Dairy Board proposed that the number 

of members in six of the 13 geographic 

regions be changed. The current review 

conducted by the Dairy Board is based 

on 2007 data. In 2007, total milk 

production was 185,558 million 

pounds, which indicates that each of the 

Dairy Board members would represent 

5,154 million pounds of milk. For 2002, 

total milk production was 169,643 

million pounds of milk and each of the 

Board members represented 4,712 

million pounds of milk. 

Based on the 2007 milk production 

data, the Dairy Board proposed that 

member representation in Region 2 

(California), Region 3 (Arizona, 

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, 

Utah, and Wyoming), and Region 4 

(Arkansas, Kansas, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, and Texas) each be increased 

by one member, and member 

representation in Region 1 (Oregon and 

Washington), Region 11 (Delaware, 

Maryland, New Jersey, and 

Pennsylvania), and Region 12 (New 

York) each be decreased by one 

member. 

Milk production in Region 2 

increased to 40,683 million pounds in 

2007, up from 34,884 million pounds in 

2002, indicating eight Dairy Board 

members (40,683 divided by 5,154 = 8) 

compared to seven Dairy Board 

members based on 2002 milk 

production data. Milk production in 

Region 3 increased to 21,212 million 

pounds in 2007, up from 16,291 million 

pounds in 2002, indicating four Dairy 

Board members (21,212 divided by 

5,154 = 4) compared to three Dairy 

Board members based on 2002 milk 

production data. Milk production in 

Region 4 increased to 18,200 million 

pounds in 2007, up from 15,313 million 

pounds in 2002, indicating four Dairy 

Board members (18,200 divided by 

5,154 = 4) compared to three Dairy 

Board members based on 2002 milk 

production data. 

Milk production in Region 1 

increased to 7,764 million pounds in 

2007, up from 7,713 million pounds in 

2002. The Dairy Board determined that 

Region 1 milk production data does not 

continue to support 2 seats. Based on 

the data, the Dairy Board recommended 

that one seat from Region 1 be assigned 

to another region, thereby reducing 

Region 1 Dairy Board members from two 

members to one member. In Region 11, 

milk production decreased to 12,008 

million pounds in 2007 down from 

12,492 million pounds in 2002, 

indicating two Dairy Board members for 

the region (12,008 divided by 5,154 = 2) 

compared to three members based on 

2002 data. Also, in Region 12, milk 

production decreased to 12,103 million 

pounds in 2007 down from 12,217 

million pounds in 2002, indicating two 

Dairy Board members for the region 

(12,103 divided by 5,154 = 2) compared 

to three members based on 2002 data. 

Interested parties were provided an 

opportunity to file comments on the 

proposed rule. No comments were 

received were received by the 

Department. 

This final rule adopts the Dairy 

Board’s proposal that member 

representation in Region 2 be increased 

from seven members to eight members, 

and Region 3 and Region 4 

representation each be increased from 

three members to four members; Region 

1 representation be decreased from two 

members to one member and Region 11 

and Region 12 representation each be 

decreased from three members to two 

members. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is found 

and determined that good cause exists 

for not postponing the effective date of 

this rule until 30 days after publication 

in the Federal Register because this rule 

should be in effect as soon as possible 

to appoint Board members for the 2008– 

2011 term. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1150 

Dairy products, Milk, Promotion, 

Research. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 1150 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 1150—DAIRY PROMOTION 

PROGRAM 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 1150 continues to read as follows: 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 56451 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 4501–4514 and 7 

U.S.C. 7401. 

■ 2. In § 1150.131, paragraphs (a)(1), 

(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(11), and (a)(12) 

are revised as follows: 

§ 1150.131 Establishment and 

membership. 

(a) * * * 

(1) One member from region number 

one comprised of the following States: 

Washington and Oregon. 

(2) Eight members from region 

number two comprised of the following 

State: California. 

(3) Four members from region number 

three comprised of the following States: 

Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, 

Nevada, Utah and Wyoming. 

(4) Four members from region number 

four comprised of the following States: 

Arkansas, Kansas, New Mexico, 

Oklahoma and Texas. 

* * * * * 

(11) Two members from region 

number eleven comprised of the 

following States: Delaware, Maryland, 

New Jersey and Pennsylvania. 

(12) Two members from region 

number twelve comprised of the 

following State: New York. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 23, 2008. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–22739 Filed 9–26–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 140 

RIN 3150–AI44 

[NRC–2008–0512] 

Inflation Adjustment to the PriceAnderson Act Financial Protection 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Atomic Energy Act of 

1954, as amended, (AEA) requires the 

NRC to adjust the maximum total and 

annual standard deferred premiums 

specified in the Price-Anderson Act for 

inflation at least once during each 5- 

year period following August 20, 2003. 

The NRC is amending its regulations to 

satisfy this requirement. 

DATES: This rule is effective on October 

29, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maxwell C. Smith, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, telephone (301) 415–1246, e-mail: 

maxwell.smith@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

II. Discussion of Final Rule 

III. Voluntary Consensus Standard 

IV. Environmental Impact: Categorical 

Exclusion 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement 

VI. Regulatory Analysis 

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification 

VIII. Backfit Analysis 

IX. Congressional Review Act 

I. Background 

Section 604 of the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005, Public Law 109–58, amended 

section 170 of the AEA (‘‘PriceAnderson Act’’) to require the NRC to 

adjust the maximum total and annual 

standard deferred premiums not less 

than once during each 5-year period 

following August 20, 2003 in 

accordance with the aggregate 

percentage change in the Consumer 

Price Index. The NRC made the initial 

changes to the Price-Anderson Act 

amounts required by section 604 of the 

Energy Policy Act on October 27, 2005 

(70 FR 61885). This final rule makes the 

required inflation adjustments to the 

maximum total and annual standard 

deferred premiums. 

This rule simply incorporates 

mandatory statutory requirements. 

Accordingly, good cause exists under 5 

U.S.C. section 553(d)(3) to publish this 

final rule without soliciting public 

comment because the Commission has 

no discretion in these matters and 

public comment would serve no useful 

purpose. The NRC is required only to 

perform ministerial computations. The 

revisions are being published as a final 

rule that will become effective 30 days 

from the date of publication in the 

Federal Register. 

II. Discussion of the Final Rule 

Section 170t. ‘‘Inflation Adjustment’’ 

of the AEA requires the NRC to ‘‘adjust 

the amount of the maximum total and 

annual standard deferred premium 

under subsection b.(1) not less than 

once during each 5-year period 

following August 20, 2003 in 

accordance with the aggregate 

percentage change in the Consumer 

Price Index.’’ The NRC’s implementing 

regulations for the Price-Anderson Act 

are found in 10 CFR part 140. 

Accordingly, the Commission is 

amending 10 CFR 140.11, ‘‘Amounts of 

financial protection for certain 

reactors’’, to adjust for the increase in 

inflation since August 20, 2003. 

Specifically, as set forth in section 170t. 

of the AEA, the Commission is adjusting 

the amount of the maximum total and 

annual standard deferred premium. 

The current maximum total deferred 

premium in 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) is 

$95,800,000 and the maximum annual 

deferred premium is $15,000,000. The 

Consumer Price Index in August 2003 

was 183.9. The most recent Consumer 

Price Index, April 2008, is 214.823. This 

represents an increase of approximately 

16.82%. When this increase is applied 

to the maximum total and annual 

standard deferred premium and 

rounded, the new maximum total 

deferred premium is $111,900,000, and 

the maximum annual deferred premium 

is $17,500,000. Section 140.11(a)(4) is 

being changed accordingly. 

III. Voluntary Consensus Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act of 1995, Public 

Law 104–113, requires that Federal 

agencies use technical standards that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies unless 

using such a standard is inconsistent 

with applicable law or is otherwise 

impractical. In this rule, the NRC is 

revising its regulations to reflect 

statutory mandates contained in the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005. This action 

does not constitute the establishment of 

a standard that contains generally 

applicable requirements. 

IV. Environmental Impact: Categorical 

Exclusion 

The Commission has determined that 

this final rule is the type of action 

described as a categorical exclusion in 

10 CFR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore, neither 

an environmental impact statement nor 

an environmental assessment has been 

prepared for this final rule. 

V. Paperwork Reduction Statement 

This final rule does not contain 

information collection requirements 

and, therefore, is not subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

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

et seq.). 

Public Protection Notification 

The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to, a request for information or an 

information collection requirement 

unless the requesting document 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

VI. Regulatory Analysis 

A regulatory analysis has not been 

prepared for this regulation. This rule 

amends NRC regulations to be 

consistent with provisions of the 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES