Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2009/04/06/E9-7633/sugar-program
Timestamp: 2018-07-17 17:22:59
Document Index: 517134475

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1435', 'art 1435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', 'arts 1500', 'art 799', 'art 1435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435', '§\u20091435']

Federal Register :: Sugar Program
A Rule by the Commodity Credit Corporation on 04/06/2009
74 FR 15359
15359-15367 (9 pages)
0560-AH86
E9-7633
Changes to General Provisions (Subpart A)
Changes to Sugar Loan Program (Subpart B)
Changes to Information Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements (Subpart C)
Changes to the Flexible Sugar Marketing Allotment Program (Subpart D)
Redesignation of Subpart E, “Processor Sugar Payment-in-Kind (PIK) Program”
Subpart E—[Redesignated and Reserved]
Subpart G—[Added and Reserved]
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/E9-7633 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/E9-7633
The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is amending regulations as required by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 Farm Bill) to administer the sugar loan and sugar marketing allotment program through 2012. The 2008 Farm Bill generally extends the existing sugar program with some changes, including new loan rates for raw cane sugar and beet sugar, new provisions to guarantee domestic suppliers an 85 percent market share, and revised procedures for granting new allocations for new entrants.
Barbara Fecso, Dairy and Sweeteners Analysis Group, Economic Policy and Analysis Staff, USDA, FSA, Stop 0516, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250-0516; phone: (202) 720-4146; e-mail: barbara.fecso@wdc.usda.gov; or fax: (202) 690-1480. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).
This rule implements all the changes to the sugar loan and sugar marketing allotment programs mandated by Title I of the 2008 Farm Bill (Pub. L. 110-246). The provisions of Title IX of the 2008 Farm Bill, concerning the Feedstock Flexibility Program for Bioenergy, will be implemented at a later date as a proposed rule. We are separating these regulatory provisions into two rules because the 2008 Farm Bill requires us to promulgate the regulations to implement the Title I changes and exempts the regulations from notice and comment rulemaking, while Title IX must be implemented subject to notice and comment rulemaking. Also, we need to implement the Title I changes now in order to provide sugar loans and marketing allotments for fiscal year (FY) 2009. In contrast, it is unlikely given current supply and demand conditions that we will be required to implement provisions of the Feedstock Flexibility Program in FY 2009. The Feedstock Flexibility Program is triggered by the prospect of sugar forfeitures, which are unlikely to occur in FY 2009. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) December 2008 World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimate (WASDE) report projected sugar ending stocks for FY 2009 of 60 percent of the level USDA normally considers necessary to provide for a balanced domestic sugar market, making forfeitures quite unlikely.
The sugar program is a collection of Federal programs designed to support the return from raising sugarcane and sugar beets above a threshold established by statute. The price of sugar, rather than the price of sugar beets and sugarcane, is supported, because the growers' return from the crop is proportional to the price of sugar and the crops are not storable, which makes them unsuitable loan collateral for CCC price support loans. The price level supported is determined by the sugar loan program. Regulations for this program are in subpart B in 7 CFR part 1435. Sugar beet and sugarcane processors can receive loans from CCC on their sugar production, which can be fully satisfied by giving CCC title to their loan collateral, also known as a “forfeiture” of collateral. Thus, sugar processors always have the opportunity to receive at least the loan proceeds from their crop, which becomes a floor on the market price of domestic sugar.
The sugar program has had a mandate, since the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-171, commonly known as the 2002 Farm Bill), to avoid the federal costs associated with sugar loan collateral forfeitures. The sugar program minimizes forfeiture expenditures by limiting domestic supply, resulting in higher domestic sugar prices than the floor created by the sugar loan program. Thus, the cost of the program falls upon domestic purchasers of sugar, not the federal government. USDA can control supply by limiting the quantity of sugar that domestic sugar beet and sugarcane processors can sell under the Sugar Marketing Allotment program, and by limiting the quantity of foreign sugar on the domestic market via sugar tariff-rate quotas (TRQ), subject to the minimum access levels established by international treaties.
While some price support aspects of the sugar program may not be needed in 2009 due to the predicted tight U.S. sugar market, other aspects of the Sugar Loan and Marketing Allotments for Sugar program will be implemented in FY 2009 and need this rule in order to operate. All of the changes in this rule are required by the 2008 Farm Bill, for which USDA has little or no discretion in when and how to implement. This rule makes changes to subparts A, B, C, D, and E of 7 CFR part 1435, “Sugar Program.” The Payment in Kind Program in subpart E will be moved to a new subpart F. A new subpart E on General Disposition of CCC Inventory and subpart G will be added in the subsequent Title IX rule and used to implement the Feedstock Flexibility Program.
The extension of the domestic sugar program through the 2012 crop year is reflected in the revised section 1435.1, “Applicability.” Also added to this section is the administration of a program to dispose of surplus sugar to bioenergy fuels production.
Section 1435.2, “Definitions,” is updated and modified to reflect changes required by the 2008 Farm Bill. The definition of beet sugar is revised to implement the requirement in the 2008 Farm Bill that sales of sugar processed from in-process beet sugar, such as thick juice, whether imported or domestic, used for domestic human consumption is subject to the processor's sugar marketing allocation. This change also resulted in changes to the definitions of “in-process beet sugar,” “in-process Start Printed Page 15360cane sugar,” “overall allotment quantity,” “sugar,” and “sugar beet processor.” A definition for “human consumption” is added, using the definition in the 2008 Farm Bill. A definition for “proportionate share State” is added for clarification. The definition of “marketing” is revised to reflect the 2008 Farm Bill requirement that a sale of sugar to the Feedstock Flexibility Program is a marketing subject to a processor's sugar marketing allocation. A definition of “cane sugar refiner” is modified to be consistent with Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) regulations.
Section 1435.3, “Maintenance and Inspection of Records,” is modified to reflect that CCC has no authority to inspect processor records and has instituted a data audit process, in lieu of inspection, to verify processor records. This audit process is explained in section 1435.200, “Information Reporting.”
The regulations governing the Sugar Loan Program are modified to reflect the changes required by the 2008 Farm Bill.
Section 1435.101, “Loan Rates,” sets forth the increased loan rates under the 2008 Farm Bill. The national average loan rate for raw cane sugar produced from domestically-grown sugarcane is unchanged for the 2008 crop year, at 18 cents per pound, but increases as follows for the subsequent years:
18.25 cents per pound for the 2009 crop year;
18.50 cents per pound for the 2010 crop year;
18.75 cents per pound for the 2011 crop year; and
18.75 cents per pound for the 2012 crop year.
The national average loan rate for refined beet sugar produced from domestically-grown sugar beets remains unchanged for the 2008 crop year, but increases to 128.5 percent of the loan rate per pound of raw cane sugar for each of the crop years 2009 through 2012.
The eligibility requirements in section 1435.102, “Eligibility Requirements,” are modified to exclude sugar processed from imported in-process sugars from eligibility for the loan program. The 2008 Farm Bill now treats in-process beet sugar just like sugar beets; that is, as an input into the production of sugar. Since sugar produced from imported beets is not eligible for the loan program, neither is sugar produced from imported in-process beet sugar. Section 1435.103, “Availability, Disbursement, and Maturity of Loans,” is revised to reflect the change in loan rate for supplemental loans. Instead of getting the loan rate in effect at the time the supplemental loan is made, supplemental loans will receive the loan rate that was in effect at the time the original loan was made. Section 1435.105, “Loan Settlement and Foreclosure,” is updated to reflect that premiums or discounts may result from any differences in the sugar characteristics identified on the loan certification versus at the time of actual loadout of forfeited sugar. Storage payment rates paid by CCC on forfeited sugar loan collateral have also been added to section 1435.105. The minimum rate set by the 2008 Farm Bill is 15 cents per hundredweight for refined sugar and 10 cents per hundredweight for raw sugar, significantly above the rates administratively set by USDA of 10 cents per hundredweight for refined sugar and 8 cents per hundredweight for raw sugar.
Subpart C, “Information Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements,” is revised to reflect the 2008 Farm Bill's requirement that USDA publish Mexican supply data and use estimates in its monthly WASDE report. The 2008 Farm Bill also requires the WASDE report to include publicly available data on Mexican high fructose corn syrup production, consumption, and trade data. This rule also replaces the requirement in the regulation that all processors, refiners and importers must submit an annual audit to CCC. The new regulation allows CCC to select some, but not necessarily all, for audit.
The 2008 Farm Bill significantly modified the Flexible Sugar Marketing Allotment Program. All of the changes to subpart D in this rule described below are required to implement the 2008 Farm Bill. This section discusses the overall changes in the program and the implications of those changes first, then discusses the changes to specific sections of the regulations.
The 2002 Farm Bill required USDA to set the overall allotment quantity (OAQ) by a formula that permitted domestic producers to receive a market share equal to the amount of domestic demand, less an import share of 1.532 million tons. This allotment quantity had to be reduced, if necessary, to avoid the cost of potential forfeitures of sugar loan collateral. Allotments were to be suspended if the import share exceeded the 1.532 million tons allotted to it. Suspending allotments was expected to increase the likelihood of CCC expenditures as forfeitures under the price support loan program were constrained by the program—forfeitures are marketings credited against a processor's allocation of the marketing allotment. Without an allotment program, processors could forfeit their entire sugar supply, if they so chose.
The 2008 Farm Bill added another objective to the domestic allotment program, reinforcing USDA's function to use the sugar program to provide for a balanced domestic sugar market. USDA must now set the domestic allotment quantity, subject to specific constraints, to ensure that there is an adequate supply of raw and refined sugar for the domestic market. This new objective in the domestic program complements the existing authority in chapter 17 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule maintained by the United States International Trade Commission permitting USDA to increase the sugar TRQs if supply is determined to be “inadequate to meet domestic demand at reasonable prices.” Thus, USDA must continue to use the sugar program authorities, to the extent possible, to keep supply limited enough to avoid forfeitures, but large enough to provide an adequate supply.
The Sugar Marketing Allotment program divides the domestic sugar market between sugar importers and domestic sugar beet and sugarcane processors. Importers are always expected to fill their share because the U.S. price of sugar is usually considerably above the world sugar price. If the domestic processors' supply is inadequate to fill their allotment, then CCC must fill the deficit with its inventory; if it has no inventory, then CCC must reassign the unfilled market share to importers. The maximum market share reserved for imports under the 2002 Farm Bill, 1.532 million tons, was also the allotment program suspension threshold and did not include imports needed to make up for deficit domestic production.
Under the 2002 Farm Bill, all types of imported sugar were eligible for reassignment of the deficit, including, but not limited to, TRQ raw sugar, TRQ refined sugar, Mexican imports, Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) imports, and other high-tier imports. At times, a reassignment meant new access to the U.S. sugar market, for example an increase in the TRQ. At other times, a reassignment meant acknowledging an existing import category that resulted in no new access, Start Printed Page 15361such as Mexican sugar. USDA reassigned the surplus allotment to an import source consistent with the objective of balancing the domestic market, avoiding forfeitures and providing adequate supply at reasonable prices. If USDA determined that the market was not adequately supplied, then USDA would increase access through a TRQ increase. If USDA determined that the market would be adequately supplied with the imports already expected, then USDA would reassign the surplus allotment to those imports. The following is a table of the sources of reassigned surplus allotment during administration of the Sugar Marketing Allotment program under the 2002 Farm Bill.
Reassignment History
OAQ 8,663,000 8,250,000 8,680,000 9,350,000 8,750,000 8,950,000
Beet Sugar 4,534,340 4,483,875 4,717,580 4,776,380 4,755,625 4,864,325
Cane Sugar 3,954,660 3,766,125 3,670,208 2,981,620 3,540,375 3,626,533
Reassign Cane Shortfall to CCC 174,000 0 17,120 0 0 0
Reassigned to Total Imports 0 0 275,092 1,592,000 454,000 459,142
Raw World Trade Organization (WTO) TRQ 0 0 84,447 745,000 250,000
Refined WTO TRQ 0 0 69,933 509,921 58,581 70,000
Mexico TRQ 0 0 0 276,000 86,419 0
Mexico Non TRQ 0 0 120,713 0 0 389,142
Non Program Imports 0 0 0 61,079 59,000 0
The 2008 Farm Bill changes the market sharing arrangements embodied in the Sugar Marketing Allotment program. The new objective that it must ensure adequate sugar supply means that when USDA sets the overall allotment quantity, it must be comfortable that the remaining share of domestic demand, up to 15 percent, will be satisfied. USDA cannot reassign surplus allotment to imports that would permit the non-allotment market share (15 percent) to be unfulfilled. Thus, for the new allotment program, USDA cannot reassign surplus allotment to imports that would count against the 15-percent import market share. The 2008 Farm Bill also specifically requires that surplus allotment be reassigned to raw cane sugar imports only. Thus, the raw sugar TRQ, or raw sugar portion of CAFTA or Mexican imports, are now eligible as a source for reassignment. This still permits USDA significant flexibility in balancing the domestic market as these categories are expected to range between 1 to 2 million tons per year. Any imported refined sugar must be credited against the 15-percent import market share because it is not eligible for reassignment if domestic producers cannot fill their allotment.
It should be noted that USDA's increases in access to the domestic market do not necessarily mean domestic supplies will increase and prices will fall. Sugar must be physically available to fill the access. Likewise, USDA's ability to restrict supply and raise prices is hampered by storage capacity. CCC sugar is stored in processor warehouses and storage capacity limits will cause the processors to reduce prices to avoid paying for expensive short term storage as the new crop is processed. CCC purchased sugar for considerably less than the forfeiture proceeds in 2000.
The USDA budget baseline projects substantial costs to the sugar program because USDA's ability to limit supply was curtailed by NAFTA, which deregulates sweetener trade across the U.S.-Mexican border. The U.S. advantage in high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) production was expected to result in an increased flow of U.S. HFCS into Mexico, creating a Mexican surplus in sugar that would result in increased Mexican sugar imports into the United States. The increased Mexican imports were expected to result in prices below the federal support level and forfeiture of sugar price support loan collateral. The 2008 Farm Bill addressed CCC's options to dispose of surplus sugar in the new Feedstock Flexibility Program, located in Title IX of the 2008 Farm Bill.
Section 1435.300, “Applicability,” now provides that marketings of sugar made from in-process beet sugar will be counted against a processor's sugar marketing allocation. Before this change, which is required by the 2008 Farm Bill, CCC considered in-process beet sugar as a sugar and counted marketings of in-process beet sugar against a processor's allocation. This rule considers in-process beet sugar a feedstock from which sugar can be made, just as sugar beets or sugarcane are considered feedstocks for producing sugar. This change required minor edits for consistency to many sections in this subpart, as well as changes to the definitions section.
Section 1435.302 is modified to reflect not only the 85 percent market share guarantee to domestic producers, but also CCC's policy of requiring a processor to use its marketing allotment to participate in USDA's sugar re-export, sugar containing products re-export, or polyhydric alcohol programs, and to sell sugar to CCC under the new Feedstock Flexibility Program.
Section 1435.303, “Overall Allotment Quantity,” is removed from the regulations because it is now obsolete, and subsequent sections are renumbered accordingly.
Section 1435.303, “The Adjustment of the Overall Allotment Quantity,” (formerly section 1435.304) has been modified to reflect the change in the 2008 Farm Bill which restricts CCC from reducing the OAQ below 85 percent of human consumption. The 2002 Farm Bill, as mentioned earlier, allowed CCC to reduce the domestic share in times of a demand decrease, without a lower limit.
Sections 1435.306, “Allocation of Marketing Allotments to Processors,” and 1435.307, “Transfer of Allocation,” have been reorganized for clarification and to reflect changes from the 2008 Farm Bill. The provisions in these sections were formerly in §§ 1435.307 and 1435.308.
The updated § 1435.306, “Allocation of Marketing Allotments to Processors,” includes new provisions that exempt sugar made in FY 2009 from in-process beet sugar purchased in FY 2008. The marketing of domestic in-process beet Start Printed Page 15362sugar in FY 2008 was subject to a processor's FY 2008 allocation because, under the 2002 Farm Bill, in-process sugar was considered sugar subject to a processor's allotment. After September 30, 2008, the marketings of in-process beet sugar are no longer considered sugar subject to a processor's allotment due to a change made by the 2008 Farm Bill. Section 359b(c)(1) of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended by the 2008 Farm Bill, includes the marketing of sugar processed from in-process beet sugar in the section describing the coverage of allotments. The new provision in § 1435.306 is required so that companies that purchased in-process sugar, sold under a FY 2008 allocation, are not caught in the transition to the new definition of sugar subject to allotment. Some of these companies may not have been beet processors with allotments. Without this new provision, these companies would be prevented from marketing the sugar processed from the in-process beet sugar. In the future, any company wishing to process in-process beet sugar into refined sugar must be a beet processor with an allocation of the beet sugar marketing allotment.
The updated § 1435.307, “Transfer of allocation,” provides that for proportionate share States, growers may now move allocation between facilities as they change their sugarcane deliveries. Under the previous regulation, growers needed permission from the processor they were leaving to move allocation commensurate with their cane deliveries. CCC is establishing the signup period for growers to request CCC to move allocation as the month of May for the following cane harvest season. During that signup month, CCC expects the grower to reach agreement with its original facility as to the amount of production history the grower is requesting and entitled to move. If the petitioning grower does not supply CCC during the month of May with its history for the crop years 1997 through 2003, certified by its original facility, CCC will refuse the grower's petition to transfer allocation. Since growers in proportionate share States do not need permission from the facility they are leaving to move allocation associated with their production, provisions for them are no longer included in the “Transfer of Allocation” section regarding facility closures.
In light of proceedings in a court case, Amalgamated Sugar, LLC v. Vilsack, et al., the updated § 1435.307 (formerly § 1435.308) is being amended to permit CCC wider discretion to determine that a processor has permanently terminated operations. In a decision dated February 11, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a determination made by the Department transferring the sugar marketing allocation from one sugar processor to another sugar processor. The amendment permits CCC to make a determination that a sugar processor has permanently terminated operations, and transfer the allocation on the basis of a CCC determination, in addition to the other specified circumstances.
This section also reflects an addition in the 2008 Farm Bill that allows the buyer and seller of a facility, rather than CCC, to choose the allocation amount to be transferred upon sale of the facility. Finally, § 1435.307 is modified to add a provision that was effective in the 2002 Farm Bill, but not specified in the previous regulation, that a buyer of facilities may fill a production shortfall of its purchased facilities with beet sugar produced in other beet facilities it owns, if necessary.
Section 1435.308, “New Entrants,” now specifies that in subsequent years after being assigned its initial allocation, the new entrant cane processor will be assigned an allocation that provides a fair, efficient, and equitable distribution of allocations from the allotment of the State within which the new entrant is located. In the case of cane processors in proportionate share States, the new entrant's allocation in subsequent years will include any allocation acquired through the voluntary allocation transfer provisions of § 1435.307, “Transfer of Allocation.” This “New Entrants” section also implements a change from the 2008 Farm Bill that requires CCC to assign to a new entrant constructing a new or reopening an existing facility that has no allocation an allocation that enables it to achieve a facility utilization rate similar to other sugar beet processors. The 2002 Farm Bill specified a formula to determine the new allocation that is removed in this rule. This section also now provides that a new entrant acquiring a facility with production history and the company holding its allocation must agree on the allocation to be transferred; otherwise CCC will deny the new entrant an allocation.
Section 1435.309, “Reassignment of Deficits,” is changed in this rule to restrict reassignment of production shortfall, after it has been determined that CCC cannot fill the allocation, to imports of raw cane sugar only.
Section 1435.313, “Permanent Transfer of Acreage Base Histories Under Proportionate Shares,” now incorporates a new process to restore sugarcane base acreage lost to nonagricultural uses before May 13, 2002 in proportionate share States. USDA will notify affected landowners within 90 days of USDA becoming aware of the conversion that the landowner has 90 days to transfer the base. It is not USDA's responsibility to keep a vigilant watch for sugarcane base acreage converting to a nonagricultural use. If the landowner does not exercise his transfer rights, the grower of record will have 90 days after being notified by USDA to transfer the base. If the landowner or grower does not transfer the base, then the FSA county committee will take requests for the base and randomly assign to sugarcane farms in the county that are eligible and capable of accepting the acreage base. Any base remaining will go to the State FSA committee for dispersal.
Section 1435.318, “Penalties and Assessments,” is also changed by this rule to include a provision for liquidated damages that was previously specified in section 1435.307.
The subpart on PIK is not changing with this rule. We will implement minor changes to PIK with the subsequent rule implementing Title IX to include provisions of the Feedstock Flexibility Program. This rule merely moves the PIK subpart from E to F, and reserves part E for a new subpart on “General Disposition of CCC Inventory” that will be added with the Title IX rule. It makes sense to have the General disposition subpart appear in the CFR before the PIK subpart, because PIK is a specific kind of disposition program. This rule also reserves subpart G for the Feedstock Flexibility program sections that will be added with the Title IX rule.
These regulations are exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553), as specified in section 1601(c) of the 2008 Farm Bill, which requires that the regulations be promulgated and administered without regard to the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of title 5 of the United States Code or the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture effective July 24, 1971 (36 FR 13804) relating to notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in rulemaking.
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated this rule as economically significant under Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, OMB reviewed this final rule. A cost-Start Printed Page 15363benefit assessment of this rule is summarized below and is available from the contact information above.
This rule implements two major changes in the sugar program resulting from the 2008 Farm Bill: Higher loan rates and a guaranteed market share. These are expected to have zero impact on federal costs for FY 2009 and FY 2010. This is because baseline assumptions project FY 2011 to be the first year of surplus sugar in the marketplace. However, over the course of FY 2009 through FY 2018, federal net expenditures are expected to be $1.055 billion more than if the 2002 Farm Bill provisions were still in place. This result is mostly driven by the increase in loan rates that increases the NAFTA floor price. While higher sugar prices in Mexico cause its manufacturers and consumers to substitute high fructose corn syrup for sugar, they also increase the grower incentive to plant more acreage to sugarcane. As a result, Mexican sugar exports to the U.S. are likely to increase over time, on average by 33 percent between 2009 and 2018. At the same time, U.S. production is likely to increase in response to high support levels. The loan rate increase is expected to increase sugar costs to consumers and sugar users by $1.4 billion from 2009 to 2018. This cost is the increase in the loan rate multiplied by sugar use; the demand for sugar is assumed to be perfectly inelastic.
FSA has determined that these changes would not constitute a major Federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA, specifically 7 CFR part 799.10(b)(2)(vii), no environmental assessment or environmental impact statement will be prepared.
Section 1601(c)(3) of the 2008 Farm Bill requires that the Secretary use the authority in section 808 of title 5, United States Code, which allows an agency to forgo SBREFA's usual 60-day Congressional Review delay of the effective date of a major regulation if the agency finds that there is a good cause to do so. Accordingly, this rule is effective upon publication in the Federal Register.
For the reasons discussed above, this rule amends
1. Revise the authority for part 1435 to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1359aa-1359jj and 7272; 15 U.S.C. 714b and 714c.
2. Amend § 1435.1 as follows:
a. Amend the introductory text by removing the years “2002-2007” and adding in their place the years “2008 through 2012,” and
b. Revise paragraph (d) to read as set forth below.
§ 1435.1
(d) Administer an inventory disposition program to sell CCC inventory to bioenergy producers and exchange CCC inventory for processor reductions in production or certificates of quota entry.
3. Amend § 1435.2 as follows:
a. Add new definitions, in alphabetical order, for “CCC,” “facility,” “human consumption,” “in-process beet sugar,” “in-process cane sugar,” and “proportionate share State,” to read as set forth below,
b. Remove the definition for “in-process sugar,” and
c. Revise the definitions of “beet sugar,” “cane sugar refiner,” “market or marketing,” “overall allotment quantity,” “sugar,” and “sugar beet processor” to read as set forth below.
Start Printed Page 15364
§ 1435.3
4. Amend § 1435.3 as follows:
a. In the heading, remove the words “and inspection,”
b. Remove paragraph (a),
c. Redesignate paragraph (b) as paragraph (a),
d. In newly redesignated paragraph (a) introductory text, remove the words “the records shall” and add the words “records required by CCC to operate the sugar program must” in their place, and
d. Reserve paragraph (b).
5. Revise the heading of Subpart B to read as set forth above.
6. Amend § 1435.101 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
§ 1435.101
(a) The national average loan rate for raw cane sugar produced from domestically grown sugarcane is: 18 cents per pound for the 2008 crop year; 18.25 cents per pound for the 2009 crop year; 18.50 cents per pound for the 2010 crop year; 18.75 cents per pound for the 2011 crop year; and 18.75 cents per pound for the 2012 crop year.
(b) The national average loan rate for refined beet sugar from domestically grown sugar beets is: 22.90 cents per pound for the 2008 crop year; and a rate equal to 128.5 percent of the loan rate per pound of raw cane sugar for each of the crop years 2009 through 2012.
§ 1435.102
7. Amend § 1435.102 in paragraph (c)(3) by adding the words “in-process sugars,” immediately after the word “beets,”.
8. Amend § 1435.103 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 1435.103
Availability, disbursement, and maturity of loans.
§ 1435.104
9. Amend § 1435.104 as follows:
a. Remove paragraph (c)(2) and
b. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) as paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3), respectively.
10. Amend § 1435.105 as follows:
a. Revise paragraph (b) to read as set forth below,
b. In paragraph (c)(2), add the word “before” immediately before the words “the processor,”
c. In paragraph (f), add the word “next business” before the word “day,” and
d. Add paragraph (j) to read as set forth below.
§ 1435.105
Loan settlement and foreclosure.
11. Amend § 1435.200 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a), second sentence, remove the words “made by” and add, in their place, the word “due,”
b. Revise paragraph (e) to read as set forth below,
c. Redesignate paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) as (h), (i), and (j), respectively,
d. Add paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as set forth below, and
e. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (i) to read as set forth below.
§ 1435.201
12. Amend § 1435.201 in paragraph (a) by removing the reference “§ 1435.200” and adding, in its place, the references “§ 1435.200(a) through (e).”
13. Amend § 1435.300 as follows:
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) to read as set forth below and
b. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the words “domestically produced.”
§ 1435.300
14. Amend § 1435.301 as follows:
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(4) to read as set forth below and
b. Amend paragraph (a)(3) by removing the words “available for consumption from” and adding in their place the words “used for human consumption in the United States from.”
§ 1435.301
Annual estimates and quarterly re-estimates.
15. Revise § 1435.302 and its heading to read as follows:
§ 1435.302
Establishment of allotments.
16. Remove § 1435.303 and redesignate §§ 1435.304 through 1435.308 as §§ 1435.303 though 1435.307, respectively.
17. Amend newly redesignated § 1435.303 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
§ 1435.303
Adjustment of the Overall Allotment Quantity.
(3) To reflect changes in estimated sugar consumption, stocks, production, or imports based on re-estimates under § 1435.301.
§ 1435.305
18. Amend newly redesignated § 1435.305, in paragraph (b), by removing the reference “§ 1435.308(f)” and adding, in its place, the reference “§ 1435.308.”
19. Amend newly redesignated § 1435.306 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, add the words “, other than a new entrant's,” before the words “of the beet allotment,”
b. Revise paragraphs (b), (e) introductory text, (e)(1), and (e)(2) to read as set forth below,
c. Revise paragraph (g) to read as set forth below, and
d. Add paragraph (h) to read as set forth below.
§ 1435.306
Allocation of marketing allotments to processors.
(2) Any sugar marketings for nonhuman consumption, except for the sale of sugar for the production of ethanol or other bioenergy under the Start Printed Page 15366Feedstock Flexibility program or the sale of sugar for the production of polyhydric alcohol under the Polyhydric Alcohol program administered by the Foreign Agricultural Service; and
20. Revise newly redesignated § 1435.307 to read as follows:
§ 1435.307
Transfer of allocation.
21. Add § 1435.308 to read as follows:
22. Amend § 1435.309, paragraphs (c)(4) and (e)(3), by adding the words “of raw cane sugar” at the end of each paragraph.
23. Amend § 1435.310 as follows:
a. In paragraph (b)(1)(i)(A), add the word “or” at the end,
b. In paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B), remove the word “or”,
c. Remove paragraph (b)(1)(i)(C) and
d. Remove paragraph (b)(2) and redesignate paragraph (b)(3) as paragraph (b)(2).
§ 1435.312
24. Amend § 1435.312, paragraph (a), first sentence, by adding the words “(meaning only those varieties dedicated to the production of sugarcane to produce sugar for human consumption)” immediately after the word “seed.”
25. Amend § 1435.313 as follows:
a. Redesignate paragraphs (b) and (c) as paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), respectively, and
b. Add paragraph (b) to read as set forth below:
§ 1435.313
Permanent transfer of acreage base histories under proportionate shares.
26. Amend § 1435.318 as follows:
a. Revise paragraph (a) to read as set forth below,
b. Redesignate paragraphs (b) through (e) as paragraphs (c) through (f), respectively, and
c. Add paragraph (b) to read as set forth below.
§ 1435.318
Penalties and assessments.
27. Redesignate subpart E, consisting of §§ 1435.400 through 1435.405, as subpart F and reserve subpart E.
§§ 1435.400 through 1435.405
28. In newly redesignated subpart F, redesignate §§ 1435.400 through 1435.405 as §§ 1435.500 through 1435.505, respectively.
29. Reserve subpart G.
Signed at Washington, DC, on March 31, 2009.
Dennis J. Taitano,
[FR Doc. E9-7633 Filed 4-3-09; 8:45 am]