Domestic Sugar Program-2011-Crop Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar Marketing Allotments and Company Allocations, 62339-62341 [2011-25945]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Notices
comments in writing. Written
submissions may contain information
other than that presented at the oral
presentation. Anyone may submit
written comments at the meeting.
Persons submitting written comments at
the meeting are asked to provide sixteen
copies.
Interested persons may visit https://
www.ams.usda.gov to view NOSB
recommendations, meeting agenda, and
submit and/or view public comments.
Dated: September 29, 2011.
David Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–25551 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0037]
Notice of Decision To Allow Interstate
Movement of Rambutan From Puerto
Rico into the Continental United States
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
We are advising the public of
our decision to begin allowing the
interstate movement into the
continental United States of fresh
rambutan fruit from Puerto Rico. Based
on the findings of a pest risk analysis,
which we made available to the public
for review and comment through a
previous notice, we believe that the
application of one or more designated
phytosanitary measures will be
sufficient to mitigate the risks of
introducing or disseminating plant pests
or noxious weeds via the interstate
movement of rambutan from Puerto
Rico.
DATES: Effective Date: October 7, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Philip Grove, Regulatory Coordinator,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 156,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734–
6280.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Background
Under the regulations in ‘‘Subpart—
Regulated Articles From Hawaii and the
Territories’’ (7 CFR 318.13–1 through
318.13–26, referred to below as the
regulations), the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of
the U.S. Department of Agriculture
prohibits or restricts the interstate
movement of fruits and vegetables into
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:33 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
the United States from Hawaii, Puerto
Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands to prevent plant pests
and noxious weeds from being
introduced into and spread within the
continental United States. (The
continental United States is defined in
318.13–2 of the regulations as the 48
contiguous States, Alaska, and the
District of Columbia.)
Section 318.13–4 contains a
performance-based process for
approving the interstate movement of
commodities that, based on the findings
of a pest risk analysis, can be safely
imported subject to one or more of the
designated phytosanitary measures
listed in paragraph (b) of that section.
Under that process, APHIS publishes a
notice in the Federal Register
announcing the availability of the pest
risk analysis that evaluates the risks
associated with the interstate movement
of a particular fruit or vegetable.
Following the close of the 60-day
comment period, APHIS may begin
allowing the interstate movement of the
fruit or vegetable subject to the
identified designated measures if: (1) No
comments were received on the pest
risk analysis; (2) the comments on the
pest risk analysis revealed that no
changes to the pest risk analysis were
necessary; or (3) changes to the pest risk
analysis were made in response to
public comments, but the changes did
not affect the overall conclusions of the
analysis and the Administrator’s
determination of risk.
In accordance with that process, we
published a notice 1 in the Federal
Register on June 16, 2011 (76 FR 35186–
35187, Docket No. APHIS–2011–0037),
in which we announced the availability,
for review and comment, of a pest risk
analysis that evaluates the risks
associated with the interstate movement
of rambutan fruit (Nephilium
lappaceum L.) from Puerto Rico into the
continental United States. We solicited
comments on the notice for 60 days
ending on August 15, 2011. We received
no comments by that date.
Therefore, in accordance with the
regulations in 318.13–4, we are
announcing our decision to begin
allowing the interstate movement of
rambutan from Puerto Rico into the
continental United States subject to the
following phytosanitary measures:
• Inspection and certification by an
inspector in Puerto Rico that the
rambutan are free of all quarantine pests
1 To view the notice and the pest risk analysis,
go to https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2011-0037.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62339
likely to follow the pathway of interstate
movement of the rambutan;
• Movement of the rambutan as
commercial consignments only; and
• Distribution of the rambutan only
within a defined area (a prohibition on
movement to Hawaii, the Virgin Islands,
or Guam) and marking of the boxes or
containers in which the rambutan is
distributed to indicate those distribution
restrictions.
These conditions will be listed in the
Puerto Rico Manual, found on the
Internet at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/
import_export/plants/manuals/ports/
downloads/puerto_rico.pdf. In addition
to those specific measures, rambutan
from Puerto Rico will be subject to the
general requirements listed in 318.13–3
that are applicable to the interstate
movement of all fruits and vegetables
from Puerto Rico.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701–7772 and 7781–
7786; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.
Dated: Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd
day of October 2011.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–26050 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Commodity Credit Corporation
Domestic Sugar Program—2011-Crop
Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar Marketing
Allotments and Company Allocations
Commodity Credit Corporation,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Commodity Credit
Corporation (CCC) is issuing this notice
to publish the fiscal year (FY) 2012 State
sugar marketing allotments and
company allocations to sugarcane and
sugar beet processors, which apply to all
domestic sugar marketed for human
consumption in the United States from
October 1, 2011, through September 30,
2012. Although CCC already has
announced most of the information in
this notice through a United States
Department of Agriculture (USDA) news
release, CCC is required to publish the
determinations establishing, adjusting,
or suspending sugar marketing
allotments in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara Fecso, Dairy and Sweeteners
Analysis Group, Economic and Policy
Analysis Staff, Farm Service Agency,
USDA, 1400 Independence Ave, SW.,
Mail Stop 0516, Washington, DC 20250–
0516; telephone (202) 720–4146; FAX
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
62340
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Notices
(202) 690–1480; e-mail:
barbara.fecso@wdc.usda.gov.
On August
18, 2011, CCC announced the initial FY
2012 overall sugar marketing allotment
quantity (OAQ) of 9,456,250 short tons,
raw value (STRV). The OAQ is equal to
85 percent of the sugar for human
consumption estimate for the crop year
of 11,125,000 STRV as forecast in the
July 2011 World Agricultural Supply
and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report.
The Agricultural Adjustment Act of
1938, as amended, requires that the
OAQ be set at not less than 85 percent
of the estimated quantity of sugar for
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
domestic human consumption for the
crop year, and that a fixed portion of the
OAQ be assigned to the beet sector and
the cane sector. CCC distributed the FY
2012 beet sugar allotment of 5,139,472
STRV (54.35 percent of the OAQ) among
the sugar beet processors and the cane
sugar allotment of 4,316,778 STRV
(45.65 percent of the OAQ) among the
sugarcane processors.
CCC determined that it was not
necessary to establish farm level
proportionate shares in Louisiana, the
only State eligible for proportionate
shares, in FY 2012. The cane sugar
sector was not expected to fill its
allotment and therefore, there was no
need to limit sugarcane acreage in that
State through proportionate shares.
Additionally, CCC determined that the
Feedstock Flexibility Program (FFP) will
not be implemented in FY 2012 based
on the forecast of limited sugar supplies
and prices significantly above the
support level. The probability of
forfeitures of sugar loan collateral under
CCC price support loans in FY 2012,
which triggers FFP, was determined to
be very low.
The initial FY 2012 sugar marketing
State allotments and processor
allocations are listed in the following
table:
FY 2012 OVERALL BEET AND CANE ALLOTMENTS AND ALLOCATIONS
Initial FY 2012
allocations
STRV
Distribution
5,139,472
4,316,778
Total OAQ .............................................................................................................................................................................
9,456,250
Beet Processors’ Marketing Allocations:
Amalgamated Sugar Co. ......................................................................................................................................................
American Crystal Sugar Co. .................................................................................................................................................
Michigan Sugar Co. ..............................................................................................................................................................
Minn-Dak Farmers Co-op .....................................................................................................................................................
So. Minn Beet Sugar Co-op. ................................................................................................................................................
Western Sugar Co. ...............................................................................................................................................................
Wyoming Sugar Growers, LLC ............................................................................................................................................
1,100,400
1,889,666
530,782
356,931
693,665
524,994
43,034
Total Beet Sugar ...........................................................................................................................................................
5,139,472
State Cane Sugar Allotments:
Florida ...................................................................................................................................................................................
Louisiana ..............................................................................................................................................................................
Texas ....................................................................................................................................................................................
Hawaii ...................................................................................................................................................................................
2,148,906
1,662,420
186,808
318,664
Total Cane Sugar ..........................................................................................................................................................
4,316,778
Cane Processors’ Marketing Allocations:
Florida:
Florida Crystals .....................................................................................................................................................................
Growers Co-op of Florida .....................................................................................................................................................
U.S. Sugar Corp ...................................................................................................................................................................
884,761
386,557
877,588
Total Florida ..................................................................................................................................................................
2,148,906
Louisiana:
Louisiana Sugar Cane Products, Inc. ..................................................................................................................................
M.A. Patout & Sons ..............................................................................................................................................................
1,154,105
508,315
Total Louisiana ..............................................................................................................................................................
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Beet Sugar ...................................................................................................................................................................................
Cane Sugar ..................................................................................................................................................................................
1,662,420
Texas:
Rio Grande Valley ................................................................................................................................................................
Hawaii:
Gay &Robinson, Inc. ............................................................................................................................................................
Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Company ............................................................................................................................
Total Hawaii ...................................................................................................................................................................
* The sums of individual entries may not match totals due to rounding.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:33 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
186,808
73,145
245,499
318,644
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 195 / Friday, October 7, 2011 / Notices
Signed on September 30, 2011.
Bruce Nelson,
Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2011–25945 Filed 10–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request—School
Foodservice Indirect Cost Study
Food and Nutrition Service
(FNS), United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA).
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice invites the general public and
other public agencies to comment on
this proposed information collection.
This collection is a new information
collection for the School Foodservice
Indirect Cost Study.
DATES: Written comments on this notice
must be received by December 6, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions that
were used; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Comments may be sent to: John
Endahl, Senior Program Analyst, Office
of Research and Analysis, Food and
Nutrition Service, USDA, 3101 Park
Center Drive, Room 1004, Alexandria,
VA 22302. Comments may also be
submitted via fax to the attention of
John Endahl at 703–305–2576 or via email to john.endahl@fns.usda.gov.
Comments will also be accepted through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to
https://www.regulations.gov, and follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments electronically.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:33 Oct 06, 2011
Jkt 226001
for Office of Management and Budget
approval. All comments will be a matter
of public record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request more information on the
proposed project or to obtain a copy of
the data collection plans, contact John
Endahl, Senior Program Analyst, Office
of Research and Analysis, Food and
Nutrition Service/USDA, 3101 Park
Center Drive, Room 1004, Alexandria,
VA 22302; Fax: 703–305–2576; E-mail:
john.endahl@fns.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: School Foodservice Indirect
Cost Study.
OMB Number: 0584–NEW.
Expiration Date of Approval: Not yet
determined.
Type of Information Collection
Request: New information collection.
Abstract: The Healthy Hunger Free
Kids Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–296)
requires USDA to conduct this study to
assess the extent to which school food
authorities (SFAs) participating in the
National School Lunch and Breakfast
Programs pay indirect costs. The
objective of the School Foodservice
Indirect Cost Study is to collect and
analyze up-to-date data on school
districts’ policies and procedures for
reporting and recovering indirect costs
attributable to their foodservice
operations.
The ultimate goal of this study is to
provide USDA and Congress the
necessary information to assess the
extent to which school districts
indentify, treat, and charge indirect
costs attributable to their foodservice
operations. Some focus will be placed
on whether school districts treat
indirect costs attributable to their food
service operations the same way that
they treat indirect costs attributable to
other grant programs. The School Lunch
and Breakfast Cost Studies conducted in
the early 1990s and again in the mid
2000s provide some evidence that as
school district budgets have become
increasingly tight, school districts have
been increasingly likely to assess and
recover indirect costs attributable to
their food service operations. While this
is permissible under USDA regulations,
the regulations also stipulate that school
districts must treat foodservice indirect
costs in the same manner as their other
grant programs. Previous research
suggests that this is often not the case.
This study will help FNS understand
the extent to which current regulations
are being followed and if there is a need
for additional regulations and/or
legislation to ensure that school districts
treat indirect costs in the same manner
across all of their grant programs.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62341
Specifically, this study will address the
following questions:
b What is the role of the State
departments of education in
establishing or approving school
districts’ indirect cost rates?
b Are the indirect costs charged or
recovered by school districts from
foodservice consistent with Federal and
State allocation requirements?
b What are the types and amounts of
indirect costs charged and recovered by
school districts from the foodservice
account?
b What are the types and amounts of
indirect costs that school districts could,
but do not, charge and recover from the
foodservice account?
b What is the impact of school
districts charging and recovering
indirect costs from the foodservice
account on the ability of SFAs to
operate on a break-even basis?
The activities to be undertaken
subject to this notice include:
b Conducting a multi-modal (e.g.
paper, Web, and telephone) survey of
approximately 1,897 SFA Directors who
will complete the survey out of 2,373
recruited.
b Conducting a multi-modal (e.g.
paper, Web, and telephone) survey of
approximately 1,897 School District
Business Managers who will complete
the survey out of 2,373 recruited.
b Conducting a telephone survey of
all 56 State Agency Child Nutrition
Directors.
b Conducting a telephone survey of
all 56 State Agency Financial Officers.
Affected Public: State and Local
Governments.
Type of Respondents: 2,373 SFA
Directors, 2,373 School District Business
Managers, 56 State Child Nutrition
Directors, and 56 State Agency
Financial Officers.
Estimated Total Number of
Respondents: 4,858.
Frequency of Response: Once
annually.
Estimated Annual Responses: 4,858.
Estimate of Time per Respondent and
Annual Burden: Public reporting burden
for this collection of information is
estimated to average thirty (30) minutes
per completed Self Administered
Survey for the SFA Directors and sixty
(60) minutes for the completed School
District Business Managers. Reporting
burden is estimated at thirty (30)
minutes per completed telephone
interview for the State Agency Child
Nutrition Directors and sixty (60)
minutes for the completed State Agency
Financial Officer (this includes 30
minutes for data gathering and 30
minutes to respond to the interview).
The initial sample in the School
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 195 (Friday, October 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62339-62341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25945]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Commodity Credit Corporation
Domestic Sugar Program--2011-Crop Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar
Marketing Allotments and Company Allocations
AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is issuing this notice
to publish the fiscal year (FY) 2012 State sugar marketing allotments
and company allocations to sugarcane and sugar beet processors, which
apply to all domestic sugar marketed for human consumption in the
United States from October 1, 2011, through September 30, 2012.
Although CCC already has announced most of the information in this
notice through a United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) news
release, CCC is required to publish the determinations establishing,
adjusting, or suspending sugar marketing allotments in the Federal
Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Fecso, Dairy and Sweeteners
Analysis Group, Economic and Policy Analysis Staff, Farm Service
Agency, USDA, 1400 Independence Ave, SW., Mail Stop 0516, Washington,
DC 20250-0516; telephone (202) 720-4146; FAX
[[Page 62340]]
(202) 690-1480; e-mail: barbara.fecso@wdc.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 18, 2011, CCC announced the
initial FY 2012 overall sugar marketing allotment quantity (OAQ) of
9,456,250 short tons, raw value (STRV). The OAQ is equal to 85 percent
of the sugar for human consumption estimate for the crop year of
11,125,000 STRV as forecast in the July 2011 World Agricultural Supply
and Demand Estimates (WASDE) report. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of
1938, as amended, requires that the OAQ be set at not less than 85
percent of the estimated quantity of sugar for domestic human
consumption for the crop year, and that a fixed portion of the OAQ be
assigned to the beet sector and the cane sector. CCC distributed the FY
2012 beet sugar allotment of 5,139,472 STRV (54.35 percent of the OAQ)
among the sugar beet processors and the cane sugar allotment of
4,316,778 STRV (45.65 percent of the OAQ) among the sugarcane
processors.
CCC determined that it was not necessary to establish farm level
proportionate shares in Louisiana, the only State eligible for
proportionate shares, in FY 2012. The cane sugar sector was not
expected to fill its allotment and therefore, there was no need to
limit sugarcane acreage in that State through proportionate shares.
Additionally, CCC determined that the Feedstock Flexibility Program
(FFP) will not be implemented in FY 2012 based on the forecast of
limited sugar supplies and prices significantly above the support
level. The probability of forfeitures of sugar loan collateral under
CCC price support loans in FY 2012, which triggers FFP, was determined
to be very low.
The initial FY 2012 sugar marketing State allotments and processor
allocations are listed in the following table:
FY 2012 Overall Beet and Cane Allotments and Allocations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial FY 2012
Distribution allocations STRV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beet Sugar.......................................... 5,139,472
Cane Sugar.......................................... 4,316,778
-------------------
Total OAQ....................................... 9,456,250
===================
Beet Processors' Marketing Allocations:
Amalgamated Sugar Co............................ 1,100,400
American Crystal Sugar Co....................... 1,889,666
Michigan Sugar Co............................... 530,782
Minn-Dak Farmers Co-op.......................... 356,931
So. Minn Beet Sugar Co-op....................... 693,665
Western Sugar Co................................ 524,994
Wyoming Sugar Growers, LLC...................... 43,034
-------------------
Total Beet Sugar............................ 5,139,472
===================
State Cane Sugar Allotments:
Florida......................................... 2,148,906
Louisiana....................................... 1,662,420
Texas........................................... 186,808
Hawaii.......................................... 318,664
-------------------
Total Cane Sugar............................ 4,316,778
===================
Cane Processors' Marketing Allocations:
Florida:
Florida Crystals................................ 884,761
Growers Co-op of Florida........................ 386,557
U.S. Sugar Corp................................. 877,588
-------------------
Total Florida............................... 2,148,906
===================
Louisiana:
Louisiana Sugar Cane Products, Inc.............. 1,154,105
M.A. Patout & Sons.............................. 508,315
-------------------
Total Louisiana............................. 1,662,420
===================
Texas:
Rio Grande Valley............................... 186,808
Hawaii:
Gay &Robinson, Inc.............................. 73,145
Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Company............. 245,499
-------------------
Total Hawaii................................ 318,644
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The sums of individual entries may not match totals due to rounding.
[[Page 62341]]
Signed on September 30, 2011.
Bruce Nelson,
Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2011-25945 Filed 10-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-05-P
