Amendment to Egg Research and Promotion Order and Regulations To Increase the Rate of Assessment and Referendum Order, 55292-55295 [2010-22643]
Download as PDF
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
55292
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 175 / Friday, September 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules
information could impede law enforcement
by compromising the existence of a
confidential investigation or reveal the
identity of witnesses or confidential
informants.
(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H),
and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f)
(Agency Rules), because portions of this
system are exempt from the individual access
provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons
noted above, and therefore DHS is not
required to establish requirements, rules, or
procedures with respect to such access.
Providing notice to individuals with respect
to existence of records pertaining to them in
the system of records or otherwise setting up
procedures pursuant to which individuals
may access and view records pertaining to
themselves in the system would undermine
investigative efforts and reveal the identities
of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and
confidential informants.
(g) From subsection (e)(5) (Collection of
Information) because with the collection of
information for law enforcement purposes, it
is impossible to determine in advance what
information is accurate, relevant, timely, and
complete. Compliance with subsection (e)(5)
would preclude DHS agents from using their
investigative training and exercise of good
judgment to both conduct and report on
investigations.
(h) From subsection (e)(8) (Notice on
Individuals) because compliance would
interfere with DHS’s ability to obtain, serve,
and issue subpoenas, warrants, and other law
enforcement mechanisms that may be filed
under seal and could result in disclosure of
investigative techniques, procedures, and
evidence.
(i) From subsection (e)(12) (Computer
Matching) if the agency is a recipient agency
or a source agency in a matching program
with a non-Federal agency, with respect to
any establishment or revision of a matching
program, at least 30 days prior to conducting
such program, publish in the Federal Register
notice of such establishment or revision.
(j) From subsection (g)(1) (Civil Remedies)
to the extent that the system is exempt from
other specific subsections of the Privacy Act.
(k) From subsection (h) (Legal Guardians)
the parent of any minor, or the legal guardian
of any individual who has been declared to
be incompetent due to physical or mental
incapacity or age by a court of competent
jurisdiction, may act on behalf of the
individual.
Dated: September 7, 2010.
Mary Ellen Callahan,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2010–22639 Filed 9–9–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:51 Sep 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1250
[Doc. No. AMS–PY–08–0032]
Amendment to Egg Research and
Promotion Order and Regulations To
Increase the Rate of Assessment and
Referendum Order
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of
referendum.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule would
amend the Egg Research and Promotion
Order (Order) to increase the assessment
rate on egg producers paying
assessments to the American Egg Board
(AEB) from 10 cents to 15 cents per
30-dozen case of commercial eggs,
provided the increase is approved by
egg producers voting in a referendum.
This proposal would also make a
conforming amendment to the
regulations. Notice also is hereby given
that the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) will conduct a referendum to
determine whether egg producers favor
the increase in the assessment rate.
DATES: For the purpose of determining
voter eligibility, the representative
production period is the period January
1, 2009, through December 31, 2009.
The referendum will be held during the
period October 29 through November
19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Angela C. Snyder, Research and
Promotion; Standards, Promotion &
Technology Branch; Poultry Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., Room 3932–S,
Washington, DC 20250–0256; telephone:
(202) 720–4476; fax: (202) 720–2930; or
e-mail: Angie.Snyder@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has waived the review process
required by Executive Order 12866 for
this action.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. The rule is not intended
to have a retroactive effect.
The Egg Research and Consumer
Information Act (Act) provides that
administrative proceedings must be
exhausted before parties may file suit in
court. Section 14 of the Act allows those
subject to the Order to file a written
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
petition with the Secretary of
Agriculture (Secretary) if they believe
that the Order, any provision of the
Order, or any obligation imposed in
connection with the Order, is not in
accordance with the law. In any
petition, the person may request a
modification of the Order or an
exemption from the Order. The
petitioner will have the opportunity for
a hearing on the petition. Afterwards, an
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) will
issue a decision. If the petitioner
disagrees with the ALJ’s ruling, the
petitioner has 30 days to appeal to the
Judicial Officer, who will issue a ruling
on behalf of the Secretary. If the
petitioner disagrees with the Secretary’s
ruling, the petitioner may file, within 20
days, an appeal in the U.S. District
Court for the district where the
petitioner resides or conducts business.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act
Analysis and Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) [5 U.S.C. 601–
612], AMS has considered the economic
impact of this action on the small
producers that would be affected by this
rule. The purpose of the RFA is to fit
regulatory action to scale on businesses
subject to such action so that small
businesses will not be
disproportionately burdened.
According to AEB, approximately 245
producers are subject to the provisions
of the Order, including paying
assessments. Under the current Order,
producers in the 48 contiguous United
States and the District of Columbia who
own more than 75,000 laying hens each
currently pay a mandatory assessment
of 10 cents per 30-dozen case of eggs.
Handlers are responsible for collecting
and remitting assessments to AEB.
There are approximately 160 egg
handlers who collect assessments.
Assessments under the program are
used by AEB to finance promotion,
research, and consumer information
programs designed to increase consumer
demand for eggs in domestic and
international markets. At the current
rate of 10 cents per 30-dozen case,
assessments generate about $20 million
in annual revenues. The Order is
administered by AEB under supervision
of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
In 13 CFR part 121, the Small
Business Administration (SBA) defines
small agricultural producers as those
having annual receipts of no more than
$750,000 and small agricultural service
firms as those having annual receipts of
no more than $7 million. Under this
definition, the vast majority of the egg
producers that would be affected by this
rule would not be considered small
E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM
10SEP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 175 / Friday, September 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules
entities. Producers owning 75,000 or
fewer laying hens are eligible to be
exempt from this program.
Given that a laying hen produces
approximately 22 dozen eggs per year,
production from 75,000 laying hens
would result in 1.65 million dozen eggs.
With a farm-gate price of $0.837 per
dozen, total annual receipts would be
$1.83 million, which is well above the
definition used to describe a small farm.
The wholesale price of eggs would have
to be approximately $0.45 per dozen
before a producer with 75,000 hens
could be classified as a small farm
under the SBA definition.
The present 10-cent assessment is
equivalent to approximately 0.28
percent of the wholesale price of a 30dozen case of large eggs. An assessment
rate of 15 cents per 30-dozen case would
be equivalent to approximately 0.42
percent of the wholesale price of a 30dozen case of large eggs. This wholesale
price is based on the price per dozen
Grade A large egg price reported in the
‘‘Weekly Combined Regional Shell Eggs’’
report (WA_PY001) published by
USDA’s Poultry Market News and
Analysis Branch.
According to AEB, additional revenue
is required in order to sustain and
expand its programs. This proposed
increase is consistent with sections 8
and 9 of the Act (7 U.S.C. 2701–2718)
that permit AEB to recommend an
increase in the assessment rate up to 20
cents per case and request that a
referendum be held if such an increase
is supported by a scientific study,
marketing analysis, or other similar
competent evidence.
AEB conducted a marketing analysis
the results of which support a 5-cent
increase in the assessment rate (to a
total of 15 cents) to effectively
strengthen AEB’s programs. The
marketing analysis addressed the need
for a funding increase due to the
following factors: (1) Inflation,
including the overall increases in all
costs associated with doing business
since the last increase in AEB’s
assessment rate in 1995; (2) AEB’s
advertising program, including the
increased cost of advertising
expenditures as well as new media
outlets; (3) AEB’s nutrition program,
including additional research needed to
examine both the nutritional benefits of
eggs and the relationship between eggs
and increased serum cholesterol levels
and heart disease risk; and (4) AEB’s
food safety program, specifically
expanding research to cover food safety
as the public becomes more concerned
about food safety issues.
With the proposed increased
assessment, the financial commitment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:51 Sep 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
of the U.S. egg industry for generic
research and promotion activity could
increase by 50 percent, from
approximately $20 million to an
estimated $30 million annually.
AEB considered several alternatives,
including keeping the current 10 cents
per 30-dozen case, an increase to 20
cents per 30-dozen case, and an increase
to 15 cents per 30-dozen case. AEB
ultimately concluded that not increasing
the rate would not allow AEB even to
sustain its programs effectively, and that
an increase to 15 cents was sufficient to
maintain and expand its promotion,
research, and consumer information
programs consistent with the purposes
of the Act.
This rule does not impose additional
recordkeeping requirements on egg
producers or collecting handlers. There
are no Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with this rule.
In accordance with OMB regulation 5
CFR part 1320 which implements the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44
U.S.C. Chapter 35], the information
collection and recordkeeping
requirements that are imposed by the
Order and Rules and Regulations have
been approved previously under OMB
control number 0581–0093. This rule
does not result in a change to those
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements.
We have performed this Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
regarding the impact of these proposed
amendments to the Order and Rules and
Regulations on small entities. We
previously invited comments
concerning potential effects of these
amendments on small businesses (74 FR
48568). Comments on the Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis are discussed below
under Proposed Changes.
Background
The Egg Research and Consumer
Information Act (7 U.S.C. 2701–2718)
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act’’)
established a national egg research and
promotion program—administered by
AEB—that is financed through industry
assessments and subject to oversight by
AMS. This program of promotion,
research, and consumer information is
designed to strengthen the position of
eggs in the marketplace and to establish,
maintain, and expand markets for eggs.
This program is financed by
assessments on egg producers owning
more than 75,000 laying hens. The
Order specifies that handlers are
responsible for collecting and remitting
the producer assessments to AEB,
reporting their handling of eggs, and
maintaining records necessary to verify
their reports.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55293
This rule proposes to increase the
assessment rate on egg producers from
10 cents to 15 cents per case of
commercial eggs. Only producers in the
contiguous United States and the
District of Columbia are subject to the
program, and producers owning 75,000
or fewer laying hens are eligible to
obtain an exemption from paying
assessments.
In order to sustain and expand the
promotion, research, and consumer
information programs at present levels,
AEB believes that additional revenue is
required. The proposed increase is
estimated to generate $10 million in
new revenue, depending upon
production levels. Currently, AEB
collects approximately $20 million per
year. A 5-cent increase in the
assessment rate is expected to increase
the total to about $30 million per year.
Section 8 of the Act provides for an
assessment rate up to 20 cents per case.
Section 1250.347 currently provides for
an assessment at a rate not to exceed 10
cents per 30-dozen case of eggs, or
equivalent thereof. Any increase from
the current 10-cent rate established in
the Order must be approved by egg
producers voting in a referendum.
Section 9 of the Act provides that if AEB
determines, based on a scientific study,
marketing analysis, or other similar
competent evidence, that an increase in
the assessment rate is necessary to
effectuate the declared policy of the Act,
AEB may recommend the increase to the
Secretary and request that a referendum
be held to vote on the assessment
increase.
Marketing Analysis and AEB
Recommendation
Consequently, AEB conducted a
marketing analysis the results of which
support a 5-cent increase in the
assessment rate to a total of 15 cents to
effectively strengthen AEB’s programs.
Because of inflation, AEB estimates
that an estimated $14.7 million would
be required to duplicate the same media
program in 2008 as was conducted for
$7.9 million in 1995, when the
assessment rate was last increased.
Despite the success of the advertising
program, AEB’s media budget has not
kept pace with media inflation. Over the
last 10 years, the budget has remained
relatively flat, averaging roughly $7.9
million annually. Meanwhile, the cost
of media has steadily increased at the
rate of 5 percent each year. If AEB’s
advertising budget matched inflation, it
would be more than 50 percent larger
today than it is, and it would reach $22
million in 2017. By not keeping up with
inflation, each year AEB has been
E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM
10SEP1
55294
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 175 / Friday, September 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
reaching fewer consumers and less
often.
Ten years ago, AEB expanded its
research to include studies on the
nutritional benefits of eggs, including
satiety and weight control;
bioavailability of egg nutrients; egg
protein and muscle retention in the
elderly; egg lutein and eye health; egg
choline and brain development, dietary
choline requirements, and the
relationship between choline and
reduction of heart-disease risk; and eggs
and school performance.
The expansion of the research
programs over the past decade has been
an essential component of AEB’s
mission. To continue to fund the best
and most relevant research projects,
AEB needs to increase its level of
research funding to account for the
rising cost of studies today compared to
10 years ago, the increased number of
research topics, and publicizing
research findings.
In addition to research into egg
nutrients, AEB has also funded research
and other programs related to food
safety as the public’s food security
concerns have increased. AEB has
funded research on Salmonella, avian
influenza, transportation systems,
cooking methods, and statistical
analyses. Not only do these studies deal
with current food safety issues, but they
also help the egg industry prepare for
and address potential risks.
At the March 27, 2008, board meeting,
AEB members voted unanimously to
recommend that the assessment rate be
increased from 10 cents to 15 cents per
30-dozen case of commercial eggs.
Proposed Changes
This rule would amend the Order as
well as the implementing Rules and
Regulations. Section 1250.347 of the
Order states that the assessment rate is
not to exceed 10 cents per 30-dozen case
of eggs, provided that no more than
such assessment shall be made on any
case of eggs. Section 1250.514 provides
for an assessment rate of 10 cents per
case of commercial eggs handled for the
account of each producer, with each
case being subject to assessment only
once. Accordingly, section 1250.347 of
the Order and section 1250.514 of the
Rules and Regulations would be revised
to reflect an assessment rate of 15 cents
per case. In order to better reflect the
provisions of the Act, section 1250.347
of the Order would be amended to
reflect both the maximum assessment
rate authorized under the Act as well as
the assessment rate itself.
A proposed rule to increase the
assessment rate in the Order from 10
cents to 15 cents per case was published
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:51 Sep 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
in the Federal Register on September
25, 2009 (74 FR 48568). Comments were
solicited from interested parties through
November 24, 2009. Four comments
were received: Two from egg producer
companies opposing the increase, one
from a State egg association, and one
from a member of the public.
One commenter, a large egg producer
company, stated that AEB should be
required to show the effectiveness of
current programs before seeking to
expand those programs. AEB employs a
number of mechanisms to gauge the
effectiveness of its programs, its
producer members monitor those
programs, and this information is
communicated to the entire industry.
The commenter also stated that only
one sentence in the proposal was
dedicated to the marketing analysis
conducted by AEB. Further, the
commenter stated that a new notice
should be published to include
additional details of how the analysis
was conducted. We disagree. AMS
provided a reasonable and appropriate
discussion of the key points of the
marketing analysis. The marketing
analysis was conducted by AEB under
the supervision of AEB’s Executive
Committee and is available from AEB.
Further, AMS does not believe that a
revised proposed rule is necessary or
warranted. Additionally, any changes
made as a result of amending the Order
provision will not become effective
unless favored by the egg industry in a
referendum.
The commenter further stated that the
proposed rule failed to provide
justification for what programs AEB
conducts with its current budget. We
disagree. AMS cited a number of AEB’s
current programs that are included in
the summary of the marketing analysis.
AEB informs the industry of its
activities through a variety of producer
communications, industry meetings,
and other methods.
The commenter also challenged the
figures used in the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis. AMS reviewed this
issue and used a farm-gate price per
dozen in the analysis contained herein.
Additionally, the commenter stated
that the rule did not contain an analysis
of how the proposed increase affects the
long-term profit margins of producers.
The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act
analysis discussed and compared the
equivalency of the current 10-cent
assessment and the proposed 15-cent
assessment on wholesale prices.
The commenter also stated that the
proposal gave no mention of how AEB
currently budgets and spends
assessment funds and that this must be
addressed in a proposed rule so that the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
public can make an informed decision.
We disagree. The discussion of the
marketing analysis and AEB’s
recommendation in the proposed rule
addresses this concern. Further, AEB
regularly communicates with all egg
producers about how funds are
budgeted and expended.
The same commenter stated that the
proposed rule’s mention of food safety
as partial justification for the assessment
increase was misleading because AEB
no longer maintained a food safety
function. We disagree. While certain
food safety work, primarily with the
Safe Quality Foods program, is not
conducted by AEB, there are still food
safety programs under AEB. These
programs include food safety research,
risk assessment research, consumer
education, and work with foodservice
institutions and culinary schools,
among others.
Finally, the commenter expressed
opposition to a referendum and an
increase in the assessment rate. We
disagree. A referendum will be
conducted in accordance with the
provisions of the Act.
A second commenter, an egg producer
company, requested that the assessment
increase be denied because food safety
was moved to another industry
organization and because of the
financial burden on the industry. We
disagree. As previously discussed, food
safety programs currently are conducted
by AEB. Further, the proposed rule took
into account the impact of the
assessment increase on the industry and
discussed the need for additional
revenue to sustain and expand its
programs to the benefit of the industry.
A third commenter, a member of the
public, posed a number of questions
that concerned the effectiveness of the
program in relation to egg consumption,
egg prices, program costs and benefits,
and research studies produced. In
addition, the commenter suggested an
option for the increased assessment,
stating that it should be appropriated
back to the States or an option to select
which committee can use the funds.
This rule would increase the assessment
rate from 10 cents to 15 cents per 30dozen case of commercial eggs. As
previously discussed, AEB regularly
communicates with all egg producers
about how funds are budgeted and
expended. Consistent with the Act, AEB
conducted a marketing analysis the
results of which support a 5-cent
increase in the assessment rate to
effectively strengthen AEB’s programs.
With regard to the commenter’s
suggested options, the AEB budget
process would determine where such
funds would be expended.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM
10SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 175 / Friday, September 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
A final comment was received from a
State egg association. While the
commenter declined to comment on
whether the assessment should be
increased, the commenter wrote in favor
of AEB’s programs. The commenter also
suggested increasing support funding at
the State level for promotion activities.
As previously discussed, this would be
up to producer members of the AEB to
determine.
In addition, the commenter suggested
changes concerning board membership
that are outside the scope of the
proposed rule.
The Act provides that AEB may
recommend an increased assessment
rate to the Secretary. In accordance with
the provisions of the Act, AEB has done
so, and the assessment increase
provided for herein will be subject to a
referendum vote.
The proposed rule published on
September 25, 2009, stated that
producers owning 75,000 or fewer
laying hens were exempt and ineligible
to vote, as producers owning 75,000 or
fewer laying hens are eligible to receive
an exemption. However, § 1250.530 of
the regulations provide that, to obtain
an exemption, producers must file an
exemption statement with their
collecting handler(s) and provide a copy
to AEB. Producers who would qualify
for an exemption but who are not
certified for exemption and who pay
assessments are not exempt and
therefore eligible to vote in the
referendum. The referendum order so
states.
Referendum Order
It is hereby directed that a referendum
be conducted among eligible egg
producers to determine whether such
producers favor the assessment increase.
The procedure applicable to the
referendum shall be the procedure for
the conduct of referenda in connection
with the Egg Research and Promotion
Order (7 CFR 1250.200) as published in
this issue of the Federal Register. The
referendum period shall be from
October 29 through November 19, 2010.
For the purpose of determining voter
eligibility, the representative period is
the period January 1 through December
31, 2009. Producers engaged in
commercial egg production are eligible
to vote in the referendum if they (a)
owned more than 75,000 laying hens
during that period, or (b) owned 75,000
or fewer laying hens, are not certified as
exempt producers, and paid
assessments.
For the increase to be approved, it
must be approved or favored by at least
two-thirds of the producers voting in the
referendum, or a majority of such
VerDate Mar<15>2010
12:51 Sep 09, 2010
Jkt 220001
producers if they represent at least twothirds of the commercial eggs produced
by those voting.
The agents of the Secretary to conduct
such referendum are hereby designated
to be Angela C. Snyder and Sara D.
Lutton, Research and Promotion;
Standards, Promotion & Technology
Branch; Poultry Programs, AMS, USDA;
1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room
3932–S Stop 0256; Washington, DC
20250–20549; telephone (202) 720–
4476; fax (202) 720–2930, or e-mail at
Angie.Snyder@ams.usda.gov. The agent
may appoint subagents to assist in
performing duties related to the
referendum.
Ballots, instructions, eligibility
requirements, and other information
pertinent to the referendum will be
mailed to all known eligible egg
producers.
If any eligible voter does not receive
a ballot by the beginning date of the
referendum period, such individual may
obtain a ballot from the address
provided in the information contact
section of this rule. Single copies of the
complete text of the proposed
amendments to the Egg Research and
Promotion Order and Rules and
Regulations may also be obtained from
this address.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1250
Administrative practice and
procedure, Advertising, Agricultural
research, Eggs and egg products,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble 7 CFR part 1250 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 1250—EGG RESEARCH AND
PROMOTION
1. The authority citation of 7 CFR part
1250 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2701–2718 and 7
U.S.C. 7401.
2. Section 1250.347 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 1250.347
Assessments.
Each handler designated in § 1250.349
and pursuant to regulations issued by
the Board shall collect from each
producer, except for those producers
specifically exempted in § 1250.348,
and shall pay to the Board at such times
and in such manner as prescribed by
regulations issued by the Board an
assessment at a rate of 15 cents per 30dozen case of eggs, or the equivalent
thereof, for such expenses and
expenditures, including provisions for a
reasonable reserve and those
administrative costs incurred by the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
55295
Department of Agriculture after this
subpart is effective, as the Secretary
finds are reasonable and likely to be
incurred by the Board and the Secretary
under this subpart, except that no more
than one such assessment shall be made
on any case of eggs. The assessment rate
shall not exceed 20 cents per case (or
the equivalent of a case) of commercial
eggs.
3. In section 1250.514, the first
sentence is revised to read as follows:
§ 1250.514
Levy of assessments.
An assessment rate of 15 cents per
case of commercial eggs is levied on
each case of commercial eggs handled
for the account of each producer. * * *
Dated: September 3, 2010.
David R. Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–22643 Filed 9–9–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
17 CFR Chapter II
[Release Nos. 33–9138, 34–62841, 39–2470,
IA–3078, IC–29408; File No. S7–20–10]
List of Rules To Be Reviewed Pursuant
to the Regulatory Flexibility Act
Securities and Exchange
Commission.
ACTION: Publication of list of rules
scheduled for review.
AGENCY:
The Securities and Exchange
Commission is today publishing a list of
rules to be reviewed pursuant to Section
610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The list is published to provide the
public with notice that these rules are
scheduled for review by the agency and
to invite public comment on them.
DATES: Comments should be submitted
by December 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
SUMMARY:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/other.shtml); or
• Send an e-mail to rulecomments@sec.gov. Please include File
Number S7–20–10 on the subject line;
or
• Use the Federal eRulemaking Portal
(https://www.regulations.gov). Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP1.SGM
10SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 175 (Friday, September 10, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55292-55295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22643]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1250
[Doc. No. AMS-PY-08-0032]
Amendment to Egg Research and Promotion Order and Regulations To
Increase the Rate of Assessment and Referendum Order
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of referendum.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule would amend the Egg Research and Promotion
Order (Order) to increase the assessment rate on egg producers paying
assessments to the American Egg Board (AEB) from 10 cents to 15 cents
per 30-dozen case of commercial eggs, provided the increase is approved
by egg producers voting in a referendum. This proposal would also make
a conforming amendment to the regulations. Notice also is hereby given
that the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) will conduct a referendum
to determine whether egg producers favor the increase in the assessment
rate.
DATES: For the purpose of determining voter eligibility, the
representative production period is the period January 1, 2009, through
December 31, 2009. The referendum will be held during the period
October 29 through November 19, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela C. Snyder, Research and
Promotion; Standards, Promotion & Technology Branch; Poultry Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 3932-S, Washington, DC
20250-0256; telephone: (202) 720-4476; fax: (202) 720-2930; or e-mail:
Angie.Snyder@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has waived the review
process required by Executive Order 12866 for this action.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. The rule is not intended to have a retroactive
effect.
The Egg Research and Consumer Information Act (Act) provides that
administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file
suit in court. Section 14 of the Act allows those subject to the Order
to file a written petition with the Secretary of Agriculture
(Secretary) if they believe that the Order, any provision of the Order,
or any obligation imposed in connection with the Order, is not in
accordance with the law. In any petition, the person may request a
modification of the Order or an exemption from the Order. The
petitioner will have the opportunity for a hearing on the petition.
Afterwards, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) will issue a decision. If
the petitioner disagrees with the ALJ's ruling, the petitioner has 30
days to appeal to the Judicial Officer, who will issue a ruling on
behalf of the Secretary. If the petitioner disagrees with the
Secretary's ruling, the petitioner may file, within 20 days, an appeal
in the U.S. District Court for the district where the petitioner
resides or conducts business.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis and Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) [5 U.S.C.
601-612], AMS has considered the economic impact of this action on the
small producers that would be affected by this rule. The purpose of the
RFA is to fit regulatory action to scale on businesses subject to such
action so that small businesses will not be disproportionately
burdened.
According to AEB, approximately 245 producers are subject to the
provisions of the Order, including paying assessments. Under the
current Order, producers in the 48 contiguous United States and the
District of Columbia who own more than 75,000 laying hens each
currently pay a mandatory assessment of 10 cents per 30-dozen case of
eggs. Handlers are responsible for collecting and remitting assessments
to AEB. There are approximately 160 egg handlers who collect
assessments. Assessments under the program are used by AEB to finance
promotion, research, and consumer information programs designed to
increase consumer demand for eggs in domestic and international
markets. At the current rate of 10 cents per 30-dozen case, assessments
generate about $20 million in annual revenues. The Order is
administered by AEB under supervision of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
In 13 CFR part 121, the Small Business Administration (SBA) defines
small agricultural producers as those having annual receipts of no more
than $750,000 and small agricultural service firms as those having
annual receipts of no more than $7 million. Under this definition, the
vast majority of the egg producers that would be affected by this rule
would not be considered small
[[Page 55293]]
entities. Producers owning 75,000 or fewer laying hens are eligible to
be exempt from this program.
Given that a laying hen produces approximately 22 dozen eggs per
year, production from 75,000 laying hens would result in 1.65 million
dozen eggs. With a farm-gate price of $0.837 per dozen, total annual
receipts would be $1.83 million, which is well above the definition
used to describe a small farm. The wholesale price of eggs would have
to be approximately $0.45 per dozen before a producer with 75,000 hens
could be classified as a small farm under the SBA definition.
The present 10-cent assessment is equivalent to approximately 0.28
percent of the wholesale price of a 30-dozen case of large eggs. An
assessment rate of 15 cents per 30-dozen case would be equivalent to
approximately 0.42 percent of the wholesale price of a 30-dozen case of
large eggs. This wholesale price is based on the price per dozen Grade
A large egg price reported in the ``Weekly Combined Regional Shell
Eggs'' report (WA--PY001) published by USDA's Poultry Market News and
Analysis Branch.
According to AEB, additional revenue is required in order to
sustain and expand its programs. This proposed increase is consistent
with sections 8 and 9 of the Act (7 U.S.C. 2701-2718) that permit AEB
to recommend an increase in the assessment rate up to 20 cents per case
and request that a referendum be held if such an increase is supported
by a scientific study, marketing analysis, or other similar competent
evidence.
AEB conducted a marketing analysis the results of which support a
5-cent increase in the assessment rate (to a total of 15 cents) to
effectively strengthen AEB's programs. The marketing analysis addressed
the need for a funding increase due to the following factors: (1)
Inflation, including the overall increases in all costs associated with
doing business since the last increase in AEB's assessment rate in
1995; (2) AEB's advertising program, including the increased cost of
advertising expenditures as well as new media outlets; (3) AEB's
nutrition program, including additional research needed to examine both
the nutritional benefits of eggs and the relationship between eggs and
increased serum cholesterol levels and heart disease risk; and (4)
AEB's food safety program, specifically expanding research to cover
food safety as the public becomes more concerned about food safety
issues.
With the proposed increased assessment, the financial commitment of
the U.S. egg industry for generic research and promotion activity could
increase by 50 percent, from approximately $20 million to an estimated
$30 million annually.
AEB considered several alternatives, including keeping the current
10 cents per 30-dozen case, an increase to 20 cents per 30-dozen case,
and an increase to 15 cents per 30-dozen case. AEB ultimately concluded
that not increasing the rate would not allow AEB even to sustain its
programs effectively, and that an increase to 15 cents was sufficient
to maintain and expand its promotion, research, and consumer
information programs consistent with the purposes of the Act.
This rule does not impose additional recordkeeping requirements on
egg producers or collecting handlers. There are no Federal rules that
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule.
In accordance with OMB regulation 5 CFR part 1320 which implements
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. Chapter 35], the
information collection and recordkeeping requirements that are imposed
by the Order and Rules and Regulations have been approved previously
under OMB control number 0581-0093. This rule does not result in a
change to those information collection and recordkeeping requirements.
We have performed this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
regarding the impact of these proposed amendments to the Order and
Rules and Regulations on small entities. We previously invited comments
concerning potential effects of these amendments on small businesses
(74 FR 48568). Comments on the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis are
discussed below under Proposed Changes.
Background
The Egg Research and Consumer Information Act (7 U.S.C. 2701-2718)
(hereinafter referred to as the ``Act'') established a national egg
research and promotion program--administered by AEB--that is financed
through industry assessments and subject to oversight by AMS. This
program of promotion, research, and consumer information is designed to
strengthen the position of eggs in the marketplace and to establish,
maintain, and expand markets for eggs.
This program is financed by assessments on egg producers owning
more than 75,000 laying hens. The Order specifies that handlers are
responsible for collecting and remitting the producer assessments to
AEB, reporting their handling of eggs, and maintaining records
necessary to verify their reports.
This rule proposes to increase the assessment rate on egg producers
from 10 cents to 15 cents per case of commercial eggs. Only producers
in the contiguous United States and the District of Columbia are
subject to the program, and producers owning 75,000 or fewer laying
hens are eligible to obtain an exemption from paying assessments.
In order to sustain and expand the promotion, research, and
consumer information programs at present levels, AEB believes that
additional revenue is required. The proposed increase is estimated to
generate $10 million in new revenue, depending upon production levels.
Currently, AEB collects approximately $20 million per year. A 5-cent
increase in the assessment rate is expected to increase the total to
about $30 million per year.
Section 8 of the Act provides for an assessment rate up to 20 cents
per case. Section 1250.347 currently provides for an assessment at a
rate not to exceed 10 cents per 30-dozen case of eggs, or equivalent
thereof. Any increase from the current 10-cent rate established in the
Order must be approved by egg producers voting in a referendum. Section
9 of the Act provides that if AEB determines, based on a scientific
study, marketing analysis, or other similar competent evidence, that an
increase in the assessment rate is necessary to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act, AEB may recommend the increase to the Secretary and
request that a referendum be held to vote on the assessment increase.
Marketing Analysis and AEB Recommendation
Consequently, AEB conducted a marketing analysis the results of
which support a 5-cent increase in the assessment rate to a total of 15
cents to effectively strengthen AEB's programs.
Because of inflation, AEB estimates that an estimated $14.7 million
would be required to duplicate the same media program in 2008 as was
conducted for $7.9 million in 1995, when the assessment rate was last
increased.
Despite the success of the advertising program, AEB's media budget
has not kept pace with media inflation. Over the last 10 years, the
budget has remained relatively flat, averaging roughly $7.9 million
annually. Meanwhile, the cost of media has steadily increased at the
rate of 5 percent each year. If AEB's advertising budget matched
inflation, it would be more than 50 percent larger today than it is,
and it would reach $22 million in 2017. By not keeping up with
inflation, each year AEB has been
[[Page 55294]]
reaching fewer consumers and less often.
Ten years ago, AEB expanded its research to include studies on the
nutritional benefits of eggs, including satiety and weight control;
bioavailability of egg nutrients; egg protein and muscle retention in
the elderly; egg lutein and eye health; egg choline and brain
development, dietary choline requirements, and the relationship between
choline and reduction of heart-disease risk; and eggs and school
performance.
The expansion of the research programs over the past decade has
been an essential component of AEB's mission. To continue to fund the
best and most relevant research projects, AEB needs to increase its
level of research funding to account for the rising cost of studies
today compared to 10 years ago, the increased number of research
topics, and publicizing research findings.
In addition to research into egg nutrients, AEB has also funded
research and other programs related to food safety as the public's food
security concerns have increased. AEB has funded research on
Salmonella, avian influenza, transportation systems, cooking methods,
and statistical analyses. Not only do these studies deal with current
food safety issues, but they also help the egg industry prepare for and
address potential risks.
At the March 27, 2008, board meeting, AEB members voted unanimously
to recommend that the assessment rate be increased from 10 cents to 15
cents per 30-dozen case of commercial eggs.
Proposed Changes
This rule would amend the Order as well as the implementing Rules
and Regulations. Section 1250.347 of the Order states that the
assessment rate is not to exceed 10 cents per 30-dozen case of eggs,
provided that no more than such assessment shall be made on any case of
eggs. Section 1250.514 provides for an assessment rate of 10 cents per
case of commercial eggs handled for the account of each producer, with
each case being subject to assessment only once. Accordingly, section
1250.347 of the Order and section 1250.514 of the Rules and Regulations
would be revised to reflect an assessment rate of 15 cents per case. In
order to better reflect the provisions of the Act, section 1250.347 of
the Order would be amended to reflect both the maximum assessment rate
authorized under the Act as well as the assessment rate itself.
A proposed rule to increase the assessment rate in the Order from
10 cents to 15 cents per case was published in the Federal Register on
September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48568). Comments were solicited from
interested parties through November 24, 2009. Four comments were
received: Two from egg producer companies opposing the increase, one
from a State egg association, and one from a member of the public.
One commenter, a large egg producer company, stated that AEB should
be required to show the effectiveness of current programs before
seeking to expand those programs. AEB employs a number of mechanisms to
gauge the effectiveness of its programs, its producer members monitor
those programs, and this information is communicated to the entire
industry.
The commenter also stated that only one sentence in the proposal
was dedicated to the marketing analysis conducted by AEB. Further, the
commenter stated that a new notice should be published to include
additional details of how the analysis was conducted. We disagree. AMS
provided a reasonable and appropriate discussion of the key points of
the marketing analysis. The marketing analysis was conducted by AEB
under the supervision of AEB's Executive Committee and is available
from AEB. Further, AMS does not believe that a revised proposed rule is
necessary or warranted. Additionally, any changes made as a result of
amending the Order provision will not become effective unless favored
by the egg industry in a referendum.
The commenter further stated that the proposed rule failed to
provide justification for what programs AEB conducts with its current
budget. We disagree. AMS cited a number of AEB's current programs that
are included in the summary of the marketing analysis. AEB informs the
industry of its activities through a variety of producer
communications, industry meetings, and other methods.
The commenter also challenged the figures used in the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. AMS reviewed this issue and used a
farm-gate price per dozen in the analysis contained herein.
Additionally, the commenter stated that the rule did not contain an
analysis of how the proposed increase affects the long-term profit
margins of producers. The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis
discussed and compared the equivalency of the current 10-cent
assessment and the proposed 15-cent assessment on wholesale prices.
The commenter also stated that the proposal gave no mention of how
AEB currently budgets and spends assessment funds and that this must be
addressed in a proposed rule so that the public can make an informed
decision. We disagree. The discussion of the marketing analysis and
AEB's recommendation in the proposed rule addresses this concern.
Further, AEB regularly communicates with all egg producers about how
funds are budgeted and expended.
The same commenter stated that the proposed rule's mention of food
safety as partial justification for the assessment increase was
misleading because AEB no longer maintained a food safety function. We
disagree. While certain food safety work, primarily with the Safe
Quality Foods program, is not conducted by AEB, there are still food
safety programs under AEB. These programs include food safety research,
risk assessment research, consumer education, and work with foodservice
institutions and culinary schools, among others.
Finally, the commenter expressed opposition to a referendum and an
increase in the assessment rate. We disagree. A referendum will be
conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
A second commenter, an egg producer company, requested that the
assessment increase be denied because food safety was moved to another
industry organization and because of the financial burden on the
industry. We disagree. As previously discussed, food safety programs
currently are conducted by AEB. Further, the proposed rule took into
account the impact of the assessment increase on the industry and
discussed the need for additional revenue to sustain and expand its
programs to the benefit of the industry.
A third commenter, a member of the public, posed a number of
questions that concerned the effectiveness of the program in relation
to egg consumption, egg prices, program costs and benefits, and
research studies produced. In addition, the commenter suggested an
option for the increased assessment, stating that it should be
appropriated back to the States or an option to select which committee
can use the funds. This rule would increase the assessment rate from 10
cents to 15 cents per 30-dozen case of commercial eggs. As previously
discussed, AEB regularly communicates with all egg producers about how
funds are budgeted and expended. Consistent with the Act, AEB conducted
a marketing analysis the results of which support a 5-cent increase in
the assessment rate to effectively strengthen AEB's programs. With
regard to the commenter's suggested options, the AEB budget process
would determine where such funds would be expended.
[[Page 55295]]
A final comment was received from a State egg association. While
the commenter declined to comment on whether the assessment should be
increased, the commenter wrote in favor of AEB's programs. The
commenter also suggested increasing support funding at the State level
for promotion activities. As previously discussed, this would be up to
producer members of the AEB to determine.
In addition, the commenter suggested changes concerning board
membership that are outside the scope of the proposed rule.
The Act provides that AEB may recommend an increased assessment
rate to the Secretary. In accordance with the provisions of the Act,
AEB has done so, and the assessment increase provided for herein will
be subject to a referendum vote.
The proposed rule published on September 25, 2009, stated that
producers owning 75,000 or fewer laying hens were exempt and ineligible
to vote, as producers owning 75,000 or fewer laying hens are eligible
to receive an exemption. However, Sec. 1250.530 of the regulations
provide that, to obtain an exemption, producers must file an exemption
statement with their collecting handler(s) and provide a copy to AEB.
Producers who would qualify for an exemption but who are not certified
for exemption and who pay assessments are not exempt and therefore
eligible to vote in the referendum. The referendum order so states.
Referendum Order
It is hereby directed that a referendum be conducted among eligible
egg producers to determine whether such producers favor the assessment
increase.
The procedure applicable to the referendum shall be the procedure
for the conduct of referenda in connection with the Egg Research and
Promotion Order (7 CFR 1250.200) as published in this issue of the
Federal Register. The referendum period shall be from October 29
through November 19, 2010.
For the purpose of determining voter eligibility, the
representative period is the period January 1 through December 31,
2009. Producers engaged in commercial egg production are eligible to
vote in the referendum if they (a) owned more than 75,000 laying hens
during that period, or (b) owned 75,000 or fewer laying hens, are not
certified as exempt producers, and paid assessments.
For the increase to be approved, it must be approved or favored by
at least two-thirds of the producers voting in the referendum, or a
majority of such producers if they represent at least two-thirds of the
commercial eggs produced by those voting.
The agents of the Secretary to conduct such referendum are hereby
designated to be Angela C. Snyder and Sara D. Lutton, Research and
Promotion; Standards, Promotion & Technology Branch; Poultry Programs,
AMS, USDA; 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 3932-S Stop 0256;
Washington, DC 20250-20549; telephone (202) 720-4476; fax (202) 720-
2930, or e-mail at Angie.Snyder@ams.usda.gov. The agent may appoint
subagents to assist in performing duties related to the referendum.
Ballots, instructions, eligibility requirements, and other
information pertinent to the referendum will be mailed to all known
eligible egg producers.
If any eligible voter does not receive a ballot by the beginning
date of the referendum period, such individual may obtain a ballot from
the address provided in the information contact section of this rule.
Single copies of the complete text of the proposed amendments to the
Egg Research and Promotion Order and Rules and Regulations may also be
obtained from this address.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1250
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Agricultural
research, Eggs and egg products, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble 7 CFR part 1250 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1250--EGG RESEARCH AND PROMOTION
1. The authority citation of 7 CFR part 1250 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2701-2718 and 7 U.S.C. 7401.
2. Section 1250.347 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1250.347 Assessments.
Each handler designated in Sec. 1250.349 and pursuant to
regulations issued by the Board shall collect from each producer,
except for those producers specifically exempted in Sec. 1250.348, and
shall pay to the Board at such times and in such manner as prescribed
by regulations issued by the Board an assessment at a rate of 15 cents
per 30-dozen case of eggs, or the equivalent thereof, for such expenses
and expenditures, including provisions for a reasonable reserve and
those administrative costs incurred by the Department of Agriculture
after this subpart is effective, as the Secretary finds are reasonable
and likely to be incurred by the Board and the Secretary under this
subpart, except that no more than one such assessment shall be made on
any case of eggs. The assessment rate shall not exceed 20 cents per
case (or the equivalent of a case) of commercial eggs.
3. In section 1250.514, the first sentence is revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 1250.514 Levy of assessments.
An assessment rate of 15 cents per case of commercial eggs is
levied on each case of commercial eggs handled for the account of each
producer. * * *
Dated: September 3, 2010.
David R. Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-22643 Filed 9-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P