[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 11, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25193-25194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-11767]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
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.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 11, 1999 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 25193]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1079
[DA-99-02]
Milk in the Iowa Marketing Area
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document revises certain sections of the Iowa Federal
milk order for the months of April, May, and June 1999 in regard to the
percentage of a supply plant's receipts that must be delivered to fluid
milk plants in order to qualify the supply plant for pooling. A pool
supply plant regulated under the Iowa order (Order 79) requested that
the percentages for the months of April through August 1999 be reduced
by 10 percentage points, from 20 percent to 10 percent. In a separate
action, the period of time for commenting on the proposed revision for
the months of June, July and August 1999 is being reopened and
extended.
EFFECTIVE DATES:
1. The amendment numbered 2 is effective April 1, 1999, through May
31, 1999.
2. The amendment numbered 3 is effective June 1, 1999, through June
30, 1999.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Constance M. Brenner, Marketing
Specialist, USDA/AMS/Dairy Programs, Order Formulation Branch, Room
2971, South Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456, (202)
720-2357, e-mail address [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior document in this proceeding:
Notice of Proposed Rule: Issued April 14, 1999; published April 19,
1999 (64 FR 19071).
The Department is issuing this final rule in conformance with
Executive Order 12866.
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This 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 Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (the ``Act''), as
amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), provides that administrative proceedings
must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section
608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler subject to an order may request
modification or exemption from such order by filing 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. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on
the petition. After a hearing, the Secretary 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
Secretary'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.
Small Business Consideration
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), the Agricultural Marketing Service has considered the economic
impact of this action on small entities and has certified that this
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. 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 $500,000, and a dairy products
manufacturer is a ``small business'' if it has fewer than 500
employees. For the purposes of determining which dairy farms are
``small businesses,'' the $500,000 per year criterion was used to
establish a production guideline of 326,000 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.
For the month of February 1999, 3,788 dairy farmers were producers
under the Iowa order. Of these, 3,714 producers (i.e., 98 percent) were
considered small businesses, having monthly milk production under
326,000 pounds. A further breakdown of the monthly milk production of
the producers on the order during February 1999 was as follows: 2,804
produced less than 100,000 pounds of milk; 776 produced between 100,000
and 200,000; 134 produced between 200,000 and 326,000; and 74 produced
over 326,000 pounds. During the same month, 11 handlers were pooled
under the order. Five were considered small businesses.
The reduction of the required supply plant shipping percentage by
10 percentage points for the months of April and May and by 5
percentage points for the month of June 1999 would allow the milk of
producers traditionally associated with the Iowa market to continue to
be pooled and priced under the order. The revision would lessen the
likelihood that more milk shipments to pool plants might be required
under the order than are actually needed to supply the fluid milk needs
of the market and would result in savings in hauling costs for handlers
and producers.
This revision is issued pursuant to the provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act and the provisions of
Sec. 1079.7(b)(1) of the Iowa Federal milk order.
Issuance of Notice of Proposed Revision
Notice of proposed rulemaking was published in the Federal Register
(64 FR 19071) concerning a proposed reduction in the percentage of a
supply plant's receipts that must be delivered to fluid milk plants to
qualify a supply plant for pooling under the Iowa order. The revisions
were proposed to be effective for the months of April through August
1999. The public was afforded the opportunity to comment on the
proposed reduction by submitting written data, views and arguments by
April 26, 1999.
One comment partly supporting the proposed revision was received.
[[Page 25194]]
Statement of Consideration
This document revises certain provisions of the Iowa Federal milk
order in regard to the percentage of a supply plant's receipts of milk
that must be delivered to fluid milk plants in order to qualify the
supply plant for pooling. A proposal to reduce the percentages by 10
percentage points from 20 percent to 10 percent for the months of April
through August 1999 was requested by Beatrice Cheese, Inc. (Beatrice),
a proprietary manufacturer of dairy products in Fredericksburg, Iowa,
regulated under Order 79 as a pool supply plant. Beatrice states that
the decrease is warranted due to the fact that raw milk supplies from
outside of Iowa's traditional procurement area result in a supply of
milk for the market that exceeds the needs of the fluid milk plants in
Federal Order 79, and that these available supplies have replaced milk
shipped to distributing plants by Beatrice. Beatrice further contends
that the reduction would allow the milk of dairymen who historically
have supplied the market to continue to be pooled under the Federal
order and would also prevent uneconomic milk movements.
Comments from Anderson-Erickson Dairy Company, a pool distributing
plant regulated under Order 79, did not oppose the proposed 10-
percentage point reduction for the months of April and May, but
proposed a reduction of no more than 5 percentage points for June and
opposed immediate action to reduce the percentage for the months of
July and August 1999. According to Anderson-Erickson, the milk supply
situation in Iowa is volatile and the summer could likely lead to a
marketing scenario different from the one posited by Beatrice.
After consideration of all relevant material, including the
proposal set forth in the aforesaid notice and other available
information, it is hereby found and determined that the supply plant
shipping percentage requirements for pool supply plants Sec. 1079.7(b)
should be decreased 10 percentage points during the months of April and
May 1999, and 5 percentage points during June 1999. The lesser
reduction for the month of June reflects historical production
patterns. The volume of milk associated with the Iowa market generally
starts to decline for the month of June and declines even further
during the months of July and August. In a separate document published
in the Federal Register, the time for filing comments regarding the
proposed revision of the shipping plant percentage under Order 79 is
being reopened and extended until June 14. This further opportunity to
submit comments should be sufficient to determine whether a further
reduction in the pool supply plant shipping percentage of 5 percent is
appropriate for June and whether any reduction is necessary for the
months of July and August 1999.
It is hereby found and determined that 30 days' notice of the
effective date hereof is impractical, unnecessary, and contrary to the
public interest in that:
(a) This revision is necessary to reflect current marketing
conditions and to maintain orderly marketing conditions in the
marketing area for the months of April 1999 through June 1999;
(b) This revision does not require of persons affected substantial
or extensive preparation prior to the effective date; and
(c) Notice of the proposed revision was given interested parties
and they were afforded opportunity to file written data, views, or
arguments concerning this temporary revision. One comment supporting
the revision was received.
Therefore, good cause exists for making this temporary revision
effective less than 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1079
Milk marketing orders.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR Part 1079 is
amended as follows:
PART 1079--MILK IN THE IOWA MARKETING AREA
1. The authority for 7 CFR Part 1079 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
Sec. 1079.7 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 1079.7, paragraph (b), the introductory text is amended
by revising the words ``20 percent'' to read ``10 percent'' effective
April 1, 1999, through May 31, 1999.
3. In Sec. 1079.7, paragraph (b), the introductory text is amended
by revising the words ``20 percent'' to read ``15 percent'' effective
June 1, 1999, through June 30, 1999.
Dated: May 5, 1999.
Richard M. McKee,
Deputy Administrator, Dairy Programs.
[FR Doc. 99-11767 Filed 5-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P