[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