Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 8, 2014 / Notices 60805 

single cheddar cheese plant or it may 

report for more than one cheddar cheese 

plant, depending upon how the 

business is structured. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

13. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 52. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 225 hours. 

(3) Dairy Products Sales, Butter 

Estimate of Burden: The public 

reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 20 

minutes per week for each report 

submitted. 

Respondents: Butter manufacturers. 

Each reporting entity may report for a 

single butter plant or it may report for 

more than one butter plant, depending 

upon how the business is structured. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

19. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 52. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 329 hours. 

(4) Dairy Products Sales, Nonfat Dry 

Milk 

Estimate of Burden: The public 

reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 20 

minutes per week for each report 

submitted. 

Respondents: Nonfat dry milk 

(NFDM) manufacturers. Each reporting 

entity may report for a single NFDM 

plant or it may report for more than one 

NFDM plant, depending upon how the 

business is structured. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

28. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 52. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 485 hours. 

(5) Dairy Products Sales, Dry Whey 

Estimate of Burden: The public 

reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 20 

minutes per week for each report 

submitted. 

Respondents: Dry whey 

manufacturers. Each reporting entity 

may report for a single dry whey plant 

or it may report for more than one dry 

whey plant, depending upon how the 

business is structured. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

19. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 52. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 329 hours. 

(6) Annual Validation Survey 

Estimate of Burden: The public 

reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 20 

minutes per year for each report 

submitted. 

Respondents: Dairy manufacturers. 

Each reporting entity may report for a 

single plant or it may report for more 

than one plant, depending upon how 

the business is structured. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

181. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 1. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 60 hours. 

(7) Survey Follow-Up, Verification 

Estimate of Burden: The public 

reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 5 

minutes for each contact from AMS. 

Respondents: Dairy manufacturers. 

Each reporting entity may report for a 

single plant or it may report for more 

than one plant, depending upon how 

the business is structured. AMS may 

contact manufacturers as necessary to 

follow up on missing or incomplete 

reports and ensure that accurate 

information is provided by 

manufacturers. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 7. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 30 hours. 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the proposed collection of the 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

through the use of appropriate 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

All responses to this notice will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for OMB approval. All comments will 

also become a matter of public record. 

Dated: October 3, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24012 Filed 10–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Farm Service Agency 

Farm Loan Pilot Projects 

AGENCY: Farm Service Agency, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The Farm Service Agency 

(FSA) will conduct pilot projects of 

limited scope and duration to evaluate 

processes and techniques that may 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness 

of the Farm Loan Programs (FLP) real 

estate loans (also referred to as ‘‘farm 

ownership loans’’), operating loans, 

emergency loans, and administrative 

provisions, as required by the 

Agricultural Act of 2014 (the 2014 Farm 

Bill). This notice provides an 

opportunity for the public to provide 

comments for FSA to consider for pilot 

projects. FSA expects to conduct at least 

two to three pilot projects. 

DATES: We will consider comments that 

we receive by November 7, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit 

comments on this notice. In your 

comment, include volume, date, and 

page number of this issue of the Federal 

Register. You may submit comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Carrie L. Novak, Senior Loan 

Officer, LMD DAFLP FSA, US 

Department of Agriculture, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0522, 

Washington, DC 20250–0522. 

Comments will be available for 

viewing online at http://

www.regulations.gov. In addition, 

comments will be available for public 

inspection at the above address during 

business hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except 

holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carrie Novak; phone: (202) 720–1643. 

Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication of 

information for this notice (Braille, large 

print, audiotape, etc.) should contact 

USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720– 

2600 (voice). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

FSA makes and services a variety of 

direct and guaranteed loans to farmers 

who are temporarily unable to obtain 

private commercial credit. FSA also 

provides direct loan customers with 

credit counseling and supervision to 

enhance their opportunity for success. 

FSA loan applicants are often beginning 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
60806 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 8, 2014 / Notices 

farmers and socially disadvantaged 

farmers who do not qualify for 

conventional loans because of 

insufficient net worth or established 

farmers who have suffered financial 

setbacks due to natural disasters or 

economic downturns. FSA loans are 

tailored to a customer’s needs and may 

be used to buy farmland and to finance 

agricultural production. 

FSA makes direct and guaranteed 

operating and farm ownership loans to 

eligible farmers and ranchers. Under its 

direct operating loan program, FSA also 

makes loans to youths to establish and 

operate income-producing projects of 

modest size in connection with their 

participation in 4–H clubs, Future 

Farmers of America, and similar 

organizations. Guaranteed loans are 

made through private lenders with a 

guarantee of up to 95 percent of the loss 

of principal and interest. Direct and 

guaranteed operating loans can be used 

to purchase livestock, equipment, feed, 

seed, and other material essential to a 

farm or ranch operation. 

Direct and guaranteed farm ownership 

loan funds may be used to purchase 

land, construct buildings, or make farm 

improvements. Guaranteed operating 

and farm ownership loans may also be 

used to refinance debt. FSA also 

provides assistance to beginning and 

socially disadvantaged farmers and 

ranchers under its Direct Farm 

Ownership Down Payment Loan 

Program, and provides retiring farmers 

the opportunity to transfer their land to 

future generations of farmers and 

ranchers. 

FSA also targets a portion of its direct 

and guaranteed operating loan and farm 

ownership loan funds to beginning 

farmers and ranchers and socially 

disadvantaged applicants. 

Emergency loans are available to 

established farmers and ranchers who 

have suffered losses as a result of a 

natural disaster or quarantine. 

FLP Pilot Projects 

Section 5302 of the 2014 Farm Bill 

amends the Consolidated Farm and 

Rural Development Act (also known as 

the CONACT) to provide the Secretary 

authority to conduct pilot projects of 

limited scope and duration to evaluate 

processes and techniques that may 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness 

of real estate loans, operating loans, 

emergency loans, and administrative 

provisions (7 U.S.C. 1983d). Processes 

and techniques can be as specific as the 

manner in which applications for 

assistance are submitted (for example, 

through electronic submissions), or as 

broad as more effective methods of 

outreach on programs for existing and 

potential customers. 

FSA is constantly identifying ways to 

improve services and is interested in 

hearing what kinds of pilots our 

customers, stakeholders, and other 

members of the public want to see. FSA 

wants to hear how we can better serve 

our customers and understand their 

needs. The following are examples of 

initiatives that FSA has already taken to 

improve efficiency and effectiveness for 

FLP. 

One way that FSA has made 

improvements is by expanding credit 

opportunities for farmers and ranchers 

with the Microloan Program. A 

Microloan is a small direct farm 

operating loan with a shortened 

application process and reduced 

paperwork. In addition, modifications 

were made to the experience 

requirement to allow for mentors and 

apprenticeships. This has already 

helped farmers. 

FSA has recently released a recent 

package of technology enhancements 

that include Web access for handheld 

and smartphone users, as well as a more 

efficient and timely option for receiving 

news and critical program information. 

The technology improvements will 

allow users of FSA information to gain 

access to easy-to-read data, including 

key features such as loan deficiency 

payment rates, posted county prices, 

FSA news releases and AskFSA, the 

agency’s online self-help knowledge 

base. 

A recently revised policy allows FSA 

to issue farm loan guarantees to 

nontraditional lenders. A nontraditional 

lender is one that does not typically 

hold deposit accounts and is not subject 

to oversight and supervision. The most 

common nontraditional lenders are 

those who are funded under the U.S. 

Department of Treasury’s Community 

Development Financial Institutions 

Fund. Nontraditional lenders can 

originate, hold and service guaranteed 

loans. The goal is to improve and 

maintain the quality of rural 

communities. This goal is accomplished 

by assisting rural communities, 

individuals, groups, and support 

organizations with viable rural 

development enterprises. FSA has 

worked with traditional lenders in the 

past, but is now expanding to work with 

both traditional and nontraditional 

lenders. 

FSA is currently operating a pilot 

project in digital signatures. The 

Electronic Signatures in Global and 

National Commerce Act (Pub. L. 106– 

229) ensures that a signature, contract, 

or other record relating to such 

transaction may not be denied legal 

effect, validity, or enforceability solely 

because it is in electronic form. It is an 

FSA policy decision whether a certain 

electronic format is practicable for a 

certain transaction. 

This digital signature pilot will allow 

FSA to evaluate the use of this available 

technology, potential cost and time 

savings, and determine whether it is 

practical for FLP and Farm Programs 

(FP) purposes. This will assist FSA to 

develop policy to not only allow the use 

of digital signatures by FSA officials, 

but by producers, FLP applicants, 

borrowers, and lenders as well. The 

pilot is to be conducted in Indiana and 

Texas; digital signatures are only 

authorized for certain FLP and FP 

documents. 

FSA is requesting comments that will 

be used to develop recommendations for 

pilot projects that will meet the 

intended goals to evaluate processes and 

techniques that may improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of real 

estate loans, operating loans, emergency 

loans, and administrative provisions. 

The pilot projects may diverge from 

program regulations at 7 CFR parts 761 

through 767, but the pilot projects must 

be consistent with the existing statutory 

provisions governing Real Estate Loans, 

Operating Loans, Emergency Loans, and 

Administrative Provisions (see 7 U.S.C. 

Chapter 50, subchapters I through IV for 

the details of these CONACT 

provisions). For example, a suggestion 

could be for projects that provide 

financial and management assistance to 

eligible family farmers for authorized 

loan purposes. Additional information 

on FLP policies and procedures is 

available in FSA handbooks 1–FLP 

through 6–FLP at http://www.fsa.

usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&

subject=lare&topic=hbk. 

The following questions provide 

examples of loan making and servicing 

concerns that may be helpful to 

consider for your comment: 

• How can FSA better reach and serve 

veterans, especially returning veterans 

who plan to start or return to farming? 

• How can FSA encourage lending for 

urban agriculture? 

• What pricing models can be 

developed or expanded to assist loan 

officers in lending to producers who sell 

traditional and specialty agricultural 

products at non-traditional markets? 

• What types of borrower training 

systems can be explored to provide long 

term economic benefits to agricultural 

producers? 

• Should FSA explore the use of 

credit scores for small, streamlined loan 

applications? 

• Are there alternative lenders and 

financers (grocery chains, implement 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 195 / Wednesday, October 8, 2014 / Notices 60807 

and feed dealers, community 

development organizations) that could 

partner and improve service to joint 

customers as well as strengthen their 

own business needs? 

• What type of consulting service 

could be developed to assist existing 

borrowers to be more productive and 

successful? 

• How can the role of a mentor be 

expanded beyond microloans? 

• What are other methods that an 

applicant can successfully prove 

experience and managerial ability? 

In your comment it will be most 

helpful to: 

• Explain the proposed pilot project 

in as much detail as possible, including 

the issue or concern to be addressed and 

the intended benefit(s); 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your points; 

• Describe whether the project is 

intended to benefit any particular 

region, type of agricultural producer 

(organic, direct market, wholesale, etc.), 

or end customer; and 

• Outline any potential costs or costs 

savings and the basis for the 

assumptions. 

At the conclusion of the comment 

period, FSA staff will review and 

consider all of the suggestions in the 

comments. 

As required by the 2014 Farm Bill, at 

least 60 days before initiating a pilot 

project, the Secretary will submit notice 

of the proposed pilot project to the 

Committee on Agriculture of the House 

of Representatives and the Committee 

on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

of the Senate. FSA will also consider 

any feedback provided to the Secretary 

in response to that notice. 

FSA expects to select at least two to 

three pilot projects. FSA will announce 

the pilot projects through news release. 

FSA expects that one of the results of 

the pilot project will help expand 

service to underserved producers. For 

example, in remote areas, such as Indian 

Country, distance and travel time make 

it extremely difficult to establish the 

network of contacts essential for 

effective outreach and to provide 

technical assistance. FSA lacks the 

necessary knowledge and staff resources 

to overcome language and cultural 

barriers for some minority communities 

and provide effective outreach and 

technical assistance. In such situations, 

partnerships with local organizations 

could use existing networks and 

expertise to provide effective outreach 

and technical assistance and expand 

participation. This is one example of 

how FSA may carry out some pilot 

projects. 

In addition to this notice, general 

information about FSA’s administration 

of FLP is also available on the FSA Web 

site at http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/

webapp?area=home&subject

=fmlp&topic=landing. 

Signed on September 30, 2014. 

Val Dolcini, 

Administrator, Farm Service Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24050 Filed 10–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[B–71–2014] 

Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 32—Miami, 

Florida; Notification of Proposed 

Production Activity; Brightstar 

Corporation (Cell Phone Kitting); 

Miami, Florida 

Greater Miami Foreign-Trade Zone, 

Inc., grantee of FTZ 32, submitted a 

notification of proposed production 

activity to the FTZ Board on behalf of 

Brightstar Corporation (Brightstar), 

located in Miami, Florida. The 

notification conforming to the 

requirements of the regulations of the 

FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.22) was 

received on October 1, 2014. 

Brightstar already has authority to 

produce cell phones and cell phone 

accessories within Site 6 of FTZ 32. The 

current request would add foreign status 

materials/components to the scope of 

authority. Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), 

additional FTZ authority would be 

limited to the specific foreign-status 

materials/components and specific 

finished products described in the 

submitted notification (as described 

below) and subsequently authorized by 

the FTZ Board. 

Production under FTZ procedures 

could exempt Brightstar from customs 

duty payments on the foreign status 

materials/components used in export 

production. On its domestic sales, 

Brightstar would be able to choose the 

duty rates during customs entry 

procedures that apply to cell phones 

(duty rate 0%) for the foreign status 

materials/components noted below and 

in the existing scope of authority. 

Customs duties also could possibly be 

deferred or reduced on foreign status 

production equipment. 

The materials/components sourced 

from abroad include: Plastic bubble 

wrap; plastic carrying cases; packaging 

trays and inserts; plastic bags and sacks; 

corrugated and non-corrugated paper 

boxes; paper packaging trays and 

inserts; paper labels; instruction 

manuals; nickel-cadmium batteries; 

nickel-iron batteries; nickel-metal 

batteries; lithium-ion batteries; lithiummetal batteries; cell phone parts; and, 

memory cards (duty rate ranges from 0 

to 6.5%). 

Public comment is invited from 

interested parties. Submissions shall be 

addressed to the Board’s Executive 

Secretary at the address below. The 

closing period for their receipt is 

November 17, 2014. 

A copy of the notification will be 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Executive Secretary, 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 

21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 

1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the 

‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s 

Web site, which is accessible via 

www.trade.gov/ftz. 

For further information, contact 

Christopher Kemp at christopher.kemp@

trade.gov (202) 482–0862. 

Dated: October 1, 2014. 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24088 Filed 10–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

In the Matter of: Ming Xie, a/k/a Michael 

Xie, 16 Nathan Drive, Towaco, New 

Jersey 07082, Respondent; Horizon RX 

Systems, 16 Nathan Drive, Towaco, 

New Jersey 07082, Related Person; 

Order Denying Export Privileges 

A. Denial of Export Privileges of Ming 

Xie a/k/a Michael Xie 

On May 22, 2013, in the U.S. District 

Court for the District of New Jersey, 

Ming Xie, a/k/a Michael Xie (‘‘Xie’’), 

was convicted of violating Section 38 of 

the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2778 (2012)) (‘‘AECA’’) and the 

International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. 

(2006 & Supp. IV 2010)) (‘‘IEEPA’’). 

Specifically, Xie knowingly and 

willfully exported and caused to be 

exported from the United States power 

amplifiers, defense articles of United 

States origin, without first obtaining 

from the U.S. Department of State a 

license or other export authorization for 

such export, in violation of the AECA. 

Xie also knowingly and willfully 

exported from the United States to the 

People’s Republic of China power 

amplifiers, items subject to the Export 

Adminstration Regulations, without first 

obtaining the required export license or 

other authorization from the U.S. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES