Beef Promotion and Research; Amendment to the Order, 52597-52599 [2012-21374]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 169 / Thursday, August 30, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
cranberry marketing order. Any
comments received will be considered
prior to finalization of this rule.
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, including the
Committee’s recommendation, and
other information, it is found that this
interim rule, as hereinafter set forth,
will tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also
found and determined upon good cause
that it is impracticable, unnecessary,
and contrary to the public interest to
give preliminary notice prior to putting
this rule into effect and that good cause
exists for not postponing the effective
date of this rule until 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register
because: (1) The handler reporting cycle
for the current fiscal period has already
begun; (2) the Committee would like
this action in place prior to the start of
the third reporting period which begins
May 1; (3) the Committee unanimously
recommended these changes at a public
meeting and interested parties had an
opportunity to provide input; and (4)
this rule provides a 60-day comment
period and any comments received will
be considered prior to finalization of
this rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 929
Cranberries, Marketing agreements,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 929 is amended as
follows:
PART 929—CRANBERRIES GROWN IN
THE STATES OF MASSACHUSETTS,
RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT, NEW
JERSEY, WISCONSIN, MICHIGAN,
MINNESOTA, OREGON,
WASHINGTON, AND LONG ISLAND IN
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 929 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Amend § 929.105 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 929.105
Reporting.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Certified reports shall be filed with
the committee, on a form provided by
the committee, by each handler not later
than January 20, May 20, and July 20 of
each fiscal period and by September 20
of the succeeding fiscal period showing:
(1) The total quantity of cranberries
the handler acquired and the total
quantity of cranberries and Vaccinium
oxycoccus cranberries the handler
handled from the beginning of the
reporting period indicated through
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:47 Aug 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
December 31, April 30, June 30, and
August 31, respectively, and
(2) The respective quantities of
cranberries and Vaccinium oxycoccus
cranberries and cranberry products and
Vaccinium oxycoccus cranberry
products held by the handler on January
1, May 1, June 30, and August 31 of
each fiscal period.
Dated: August 22, 2012.
David R. Shipman,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–21372 Filed 8–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1260
[Doc. No. AMS–LS–11–0086]
Beef Promotion and Research;
Amendment to the Order
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule expands the
contracting authority of the Beef
Promotion and Research Order (Order).
The Beef Research and Information Act
(Act) requires that the Beef Promotion
Operating Committee (BPOC) enter into
contracts with established national nonprofit industry-governed organizations
including the Federation of State Beef
Councils to implement programs of
promotion, research, consumer
information, and industry information.
The Act does not define ‘‘national nonprofit industry governed organization,’’
however, the Order states that these
organizations must be governed by a
board of directors representing the cattle
or beef industry on a national basis and
that they were active and ongoing prior
to enactment of the Act. This final rule
changes the date requirement in the
Order so that organizations otherwise
qualified could be eligible to contract
with the BPOC for the implementation
and conduct of Beef Checkoff programs
if they have been active and ongoing for
at least two years.
DATES: Effective August 31, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Shackelford, Agricultural
Marketing Specialist, Marketing
Programs Division, on 202/720–1115,
fax 202/720–1125, or by email at
craig.shackelford@ams.usda.gov.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52597
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
has waived the review process required
by Executive Order 12866 for this
action.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. It is not intended to
have a retroactive effect.
Section 11 of the Act provides that
nothing in the Act may be construed to
preempt or supersede any other program
relating to beef promotion organized
and operated under the laws of the
United States or any State. There are no
administrative proceedings that must be
exhausted prior to any judicial
challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Paperwork Reduction Act
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Administrator of
the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) has considered the economic
effect of this action on small entities and
has determined that this final rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. The purpose of RFA is to fit
regulatory actions to the scale of
businesses subject to such actions in
order that small businesses will not be
unduly burdened.
In the February 2011 publication of
‘‘Farms, Land in Farms, and Livestock
Operations,’’ the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA) National
Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
estimates that in 2010 the number of
operations in the United States with
cattle totaled approximately 935,000.
The majority of these operations that are
subject to the Order may be classified as
small entities.
The final rule imposes no new burden
on the industry. It merely expands the
contracting authority as established
under section 1260.168(b) within the
Order to permit a greater number of
organizations to perform work on behalf
of the BPOC.
Background and Final Action
The Order is authorized by the Act of
1985 [7 U.S.C. 2901–2918]. The Act was
passed as part of the 1985 Farm Bill
[Pub. L. 99–198]. The program became
effective on July 18, 1986, when the
Order was issued [51 FR 26132].
Assessments began on October 1, 1986.
Section 5(6) of the Act provides that
the BPOC, to insure coordination and
efficient use of funds, shall enter into
contracts or agreements for
implementing any activities, which it
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
52598
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 169 / Thursday, August 30, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
has approved to be carried out, with
established national nonprofit industrygoverned organizations including the
Federation of State Beef Councils. This
language has the effect of requiring the
BPOC to contract with organizations,
which qualify as established national
non-profit industry-governed
organizations. The Act does not define
‘‘national non-profit industry governed
organization.’’
Previously, section 1260.113 of the
Order defined ‘‘established national
non-profit industry-governed
organizations’’ as organizations which:
(a) Are non-profit organizations
pursuant to sections 501(c)(3), (5) or (6)
of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C.
501(c)(3), (5), and (6)); (b) are governed
by a board of directors representing the
cattle or beef industry on a national
basis; and (c) were active and ongoing
before enactment of the Act. This final
rule amends section 1260.113 of the
Order by replacing the existing language
under paragraph (c), ‘‘were active and
ongoing before the enactment of the
Act’’ with ‘‘have been active and
ongoing for at least two years.’’
In 2006, the National Cattlemen’s Beef
Association (NCBA) and the American
Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF)
initiated the Industry-Wide Beef
Checkoff Taskforce (Taskforce) to
review, study, and recommend
enhancements to the Beef Checkoff
program for the purpose of
strengthening the Beef Checkoff
Program for the common good of the
beef industry. The Taskforce included
producer and industry representatives
and representatives from national
organizations, while USDA took on an
advisory role during meetings. The
Taskforce issued a report in September
2006, which included a
recommendation to eliminate section
1260.113(c) in order to make the Beef
Checkoff more inclusive. USDA believes
that permitting a greater number of
organizations to contract with the BPOC
could bring new perspectives to the
contracting process.
In February 2008 at the Cattle
Industry Annual Convention, leaders of
the Cattlemen’s Beef Board (Board)
asked AMS officials if the Board could
conduct a program review. The industry
officials believed that it would be in the
best interest of the Beef Checkoff
Program to conduct a review of the
operations to determine if there are any
changes that need to or could be made
in program operations, the Act, or Order
that would facilitate a more effective
Beef Checkoff Program. Included in the
Board’s subsequent January 2009
recommendations to AMS was a
recommendation for a statutory
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:47 Aug 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
amendment intended to result in an
expansion of the contracting authority
to organizations created after the 1986
enactment of the Act.
Finally, a meeting was held in
Minneapolis, Minnesota on September
27, 2011, attended by many industry
stakeholders and co-hosted by the U.S.
Cattlemen’s Association and the
National Farmers Union as requested by
the Secretary. The goal of the meeting
was to bring more broad-based producer
support to the Beef Checkoff program
through a discussion of issues regarding
Beef Checkoff administration and to
provide the Secretary with
recommendations that would enhance
support for the Beef Checkoff. Many
major Beef Checkoff industry
stakeholders attended, including the
American National Cattlewomen,
American Veal Association, Livestock
Marketing Association, NCBA, National
Livestock Producers Association, and
Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund,
United Stockgrowers of America (R–
CALF). Representatives from the AMS
also attended the meeting, as did the
Chief Executive Officer and Producer
Chairman of the Board.
As a result of that meeting, the
Secretary received a joint letter signed
by most of the organizations in
attendance. The letter requested that
USDA amend Beef Checkoff regulations
to expand the contracting authority as
authorized under the Act and Order by
permitting organizations that are active
and ongoing for at least two years to
contract with the BPOC.
Conclusion
A greater number of beef industry
organizations exist now than did at the
time the Order was issued. The Beef
Checkoff Program could benefit from the
perspectives and skills of some of these
organizations that are ineligible solely
because they were formed after the
enactment of the Act. For several years,
the beef industry has been
recommending expanding the eligibility
of organizations to contract with the
BPOC in order to enhance the Beef
Checkoff Program. Amending the Order
will allow the BPOC to contract with
organizations possessing the requisite
experience, skills and information
related to the marketing of beef and beef
products, as is intended under the Act.
Comments
On March 2, 2012, USDA published
in the Federal Register (77 FR 12752)
for public comment a proposed rule
providing for the expansion of the
contracting authority as authorized
under the Order by permitting
organizations that are active and
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ongoing for at least two years to contract
with the BPOC. Comments were due to
USDA by May 1, 2012.
USDA received 20 timely comments
associated with the proposed rule for
expansion of the contracting authority.
Ten comments were submitted by
individual cattle ranchers or members of
the general public. Ten comments were
received from cattle industry
organizations. No untimely comments
were received and no new information
was obtained that was not already
provided in the timely comments that
are considered below.
Twelve commenters directly
expressed support of the expansion of
the contracting authority and for the
provision requiring that otherwise
qualified organizations must have been
active and ongoing for at least 2 years.
One commenter provided background
information on how the Order came to
have its current contracting provisions
and compared this to the current
proposal. This commenter fully
supported the expansion of the
contracting authority and the
requirement that qualifying contracting
organizations be active and ongoing for
at least 2 years.
Several commenters offered ideas and
suggestions that were pertinent to the
Program but were outside the scope of
this final rule. One commenter
suggested that farmers and ranchers
who pay into the Beef Checkoff should
be given the opportunity to vote on Beef
Checkoff promotion programs every five
years. Six commenters suggested that
AMS should reinstate the eligibility
requirement contained in its proposed
rule dated March 14, 1986 (51 FR 8984)
that such organizations must be
governed by a board of directors
composed of a majority of producers.
Eight commenters suggested that AMS
should add a new provision to the Order
that would restrict any contracting
organization from receiving more than a
specified percentage of the Beef
Checkoff annual program funding. Five
commenters suggested that the Beef
Checkoff should promote U.S. produced
beef. One commenter suggested that
AMS should reopen the comment
period and propose a plan to make
improvements to the administration and
operation of the Program. These
comments were all beyond the scope of
this rulemaking and therefore no
changes were incorporated into this
final rule based on these comments.
One commenter raised a number of
points regarding AMS and the beef
industry as a whole that are not
pertinent to the proposal and therefore
are not addressed.
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 169 / Thursday, August 30, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1260
Administrative practice and
procedure, Advertising, Agricultural
research, Imports, Marketing agreement,
Meat and meat products, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
7 CFR part 1260 is amended as follows:
PART 1260—BEEF PROMOTION AND
RESEARCH
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 1260 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2901–2911 and 7
U.S.C. 7401.
2. In § 1260.113, paragraph (c) is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 1260.113 Established national non-profit
industry-governed organizations.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Have been active and ongoing for
at least two years.
Dated: August 22, 2012.
David R. Shipman,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–21374 Filed 8–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2012–0679]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of temporary deviation
from regulations.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
regulation that governs the Tower
Drawbridge across Sacramento River,
mile 59.0, at Sacramento, CA. The
deviation is necessary to allow the
community to participate in the A.L.S.
5K walk and run event. This deviation
allows the bridge to remain in the
closed-to-navigation position during the
event.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
11 a.m. to 2 p.m., on October 6, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in
this preamble as being available in the
docket are part of the docket USCG–
2012–0679 and are available online by
going to https://www.regulations.gov,
inserting USCG–2012–0679 in the
‘‘Keyword’’ box and then clicking
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:47 Aug 29, 2012
Jkt 226001
52599
‘‘Search’’. They are also available for
inspection or copying at the Docket
Management Facility (M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
If
you have questions on this rule, call or
email David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District;
telephone 510–437–3516, email
David.H.Sulouff@uscg.mil. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call
Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–
9826.
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Elizabeth River, Eastern Branch,
Norfolk, VA
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The
California Department of Transportation
has requested a temporary change to the
operation of the Tower Drawbridge,
mile 59.0, over Sacramento River, at
Sacramento, CA. The drawbridge
navigation span provides a vertical
clearance of 30 feet above Mean High
Water in the closed-to-navigation
position. The draw opens on signal from
May 1 through October 31 from 6 a.m.
to 10 p.m. and from November 1
through April 30 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
At all other times the draw shall open
on signal if at least four hours notice is
given, as required by 33 CFR 117.189(a).
Navigation on the waterway is
commercial and recreational.
The drawspan will be secured in the
closed-to-navigation position from 11
a.m. to 2 p.m. on October 6, 2012 to
allow the community to participate in
the A.L.S. 5K walk and run event. This
temporary deviation has been
coordinated with waterway users. There
are no scheduled river boat cruises or
anticipated levee maintenance during
this deviation period. No objections to
the proposed temporary deviation were
raised. Vessels that can transit the
bridge, while in the closed-to-navigation
position, may continue to do so at any
time. In the event of an emergency the
drawspan can be opened without delay.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the designated time period. This
deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: August 21, 2012.
D.H. Sulouff,
District Bridge Chief, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2012–21383 Filed 8–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[USCG–2012–0357]
RIN 1625–AA09
Coast Guard, DHS.
Interim rule with request for
comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is modifying
the operating schedule that governs the
Berkley (I–264) Bridge, at mile 0.4,
across the Eastern Branch of the
Elizabeth River, Norfolk, VA. The
current temporary regulation for the
Berkley Bridge is scheduled to end on
October 5, 2012. This regulation will
make the provisions of the temporary
regulation permanent. This change to
the regulation is necessary to alleviate
heavy vehicular traffic delays
throughout the day and secondary
congestion during the afternoon rush
hour, while still providing for the
reasonable needs of navigation.
DATES: This interim rule is effective at
5 a.m. on October 6, 2012. Comments
and related material must reach the
Coast Guard on or before October 1,
2012.
SUMMARY:
You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2012–0357 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, 20590–0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
See the ‘‘Public Participation and
Request for Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments. To avoid duplication, please
use only one of these four methods. See
the ‘‘Public Participation and Request
for Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 169 (Thursday, August 30, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52597-52599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-21374]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1260
[Doc. No. AMS-LS-11-0086]
Beef Promotion and Research; Amendment to the Order
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule expands the contracting authority of the Beef
Promotion and Research Order (Order). The Beef Research and Information
Act (Act) requires that the Beef Promotion Operating Committee (BPOC)
enter into contracts with established national non-profit industry-
governed organizations including the Federation of State Beef Councils
to implement programs of promotion, research, consumer information, and
industry information. The Act does not define ``national non-profit
industry governed organization,'' however, the Order states that these
organizations must be governed by a board of directors representing the
cattle or beef industry on a national basis and that they were active
and ongoing prior to enactment of the Act. This final rule changes the
date requirement in the Order so that organizations otherwise qualified
could be eligible to contract with the BPOC for the implementation and
conduct of Beef Checkoff programs if they have been active and ongoing
for at least two years.
DATES: Effective August 31, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Shackelford, Agricultural
Marketing Specialist, Marketing Programs Division, on 202/720-1115, fax
202/720-1125, or by email at craig.shackelford@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has waived the review process
required by Executive Order 12866 for this action.
Executive Order 12988
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have a retroactive effect.
Section 11 of the Act provides that nothing in the Act may be
construed to preempt or supersede any other program relating to beef
promotion organized and operated under the laws of the United States or
any State. There are no administrative proceedings that must be
exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this
rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and Paperwork Reduction Act
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Administrator of the
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic effect
of this action on small entities and has determined that this final
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The purpose of RFA is to fit regulatory
actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in order
that small businesses will not be unduly burdened.
In the February 2011 publication of ``Farms, Land in Farms, and
Livestock Operations,'' the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA)
National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) estimates that in 2010
the number of operations in the United States with cattle totaled
approximately 935,000. The majority of these operations that are
subject to the Order may be classified as small entities.
The final rule imposes no new burden on the industry. It merely
expands the contracting authority as established under section
1260.168(b) within the Order to permit a greater number of
organizations to perform work on behalf of the BPOC.
Background and Final Action
The Order is authorized by the Act of 1985 [7 U.S.C. 2901-2918].
The Act was passed as part of the 1985 Farm Bill [Pub. L. 99-198]. The
program became effective on July 18, 1986, when the Order was issued
[51 FR 26132]. Assessments began on October 1, 1986.
Section 5(6) of the Act provides that the BPOC, to insure
coordination and efficient use of funds, shall enter into contracts or
agreements for implementing any activities, which it
[[Page 52598]]
has approved to be carried out, with established national nonprofit
industry-governed organizations including the Federation of State Beef
Councils. This language has the effect of requiring the BPOC to
contract with organizations, which qualify as established national non-
profit industry-governed organizations. The Act does not define
``national non-profit industry governed organization.''
Previously, section 1260.113 of the Order defined ``established
national non-profit industry-governed organizations'' as organizations
which: (a) Are non-profit organizations pursuant to sections 501(c)(3),
(5) or (6) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3), (5), and
(6)); (b) are governed by a board of directors representing the cattle
or beef industry on a national basis; and (c) were active and ongoing
before enactment of the Act. This final rule amends section 1260.113 of
the Order by replacing the existing language under paragraph (c),
``were active and ongoing before the enactment of the Act'' with ``have
been active and ongoing for at least two years.''
In 2006, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) and the
American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) initiated the Industry-Wide Beef
Checkoff Taskforce (Taskforce) to review, study, and recommend
enhancements to the Beef Checkoff program for the purpose of
strengthening the Beef Checkoff Program for the common good of the beef
industry. The Taskforce included producer and industry representatives
and representatives from national organizations, while USDA took on an
advisory role during meetings. The Taskforce issued a report in
September 2006, which included a recommendation to eliminate section
1260.113(c) in order to make the Beef Checkoff more inclusive. USDA
believes that permitting a greater number of organizations to contract
with the BPOC could bring new perspectives to the contracting process.
In February 2008 at the Cattle Industry Annual Convention, leaders
of the Cattlemen's Beef Board (Board) asked AMS officials if the Board
could conduct a program review. The industry officials believed that it
would be in the best interest of the Beef Checkoff Program to conduct a
review of the operations to determine if there are any changes that
need to or could be made in program operations, the Act, or Order that
would facilitate a more effective Beef Checkoff Program. Included in
the Board's subsequent January 2009 recommendations to AMS was a
recommendation for a statutory amendment intended to result in an
expansion of the contracting authority to organizations created after
the 1986 enactment of the Act.
Finally, a meeting was held in Minneapolis, Minnesota on September
27, 2011, attended by many industry stakeholders and co-hosted by the
U.S. Cattlemen's Association and the National Farmers Union as
requested by the Secretary. The goal of the meeting was to bring more
broad-based producer support to the Beef Checkoff program through a
discussion of issues regarding Beef Checkoff administration and to
provide the Secretary with recommendations that would enhance support
for the Beef Checkoff. Many major Beef Checkoff industry stakeholders
attended, including the American National Cattlewomen, American Veal
Association, Livestock Marketing Association, NCBA, National Livestock
Producers Association, and Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United
Stockgrowers of America (R-CALF). Representatives from the AMS also
attended the meeting, as did the Chief Executive Officer and Producer
Chairman of the Board.
As a result of that meeting, the Secretary received a joint letter
signed by most of the organizations in attendance. The letter requested
that USDA amend Beef Checkoff regulations to expand the contracting
authority as authorized under the Act and Order by permitting
organizations that are active and ongoing for at least two years to
contract with the BPOC.
Conclusion
A greater number of beef industry organizations exist now than did
at the time the Order was issued. The Beef Checkoff Program could
benefit from the perspectives and skills of some of these organizations
that are ineligible solely because they were formed after the enactment
of the Act. For several years, the beef industry has been recommending
expanding the eligibility of organizations to contract with the BPOC in
order to enhance the Beef Checkoff Program. Amending the Order will
allow the BPOC to contract with organizations possessing the requisite
experience, skills and information related to the marketing of beef and
beef products, as is intended under the Act.
Comments
On March 2, 2012, USDA published in the Federal Register (77 FR
12752) for public comment a proposed rule providing for the expansion
of the contracting authority as authorized under the Order by
permitting organizations that are active and ongoing for at least two
years to contract with the BPOC. Comments were due to USDA by May 1,
2012.
USDA received 20 timely comments associated with the proposed rule
for expansion of the contracting authority. Ten comments were submitted
by individual cattle ranchers or members of the general public. Ten
comments were received from cattle industry organizations. No untimely
comments were received and no new information was obtained that was not
already provided in the timely comments that are considered below.
Twelve commenters directly expressed support of the expansion of
the contracting authority and for the provision requiring that
otherwise qualified organizations must have been active and ongoing for
at least 2 years.
One commenter provided background information on how the Order came
to have its current contracting provisions and compared this to the
current proposal. This commenter fully supported the expansion of the
contracting authority and the requirement that qualifying contracting
organizations be active and ongoing for at least 2 years.
Several commenters offered ideas and suggestions that were
pertinent to the Program but were outside the scope of this final rule.
One commenter suggested that farmers and ranchers who pay into the Beef
Checkoff should be given the opportunity to vote on Beef Checkoff
promotion programs every five years. Six commenters suggested that AMS
should reinstate the eligibility requirement contained in its proposed
rule dated March 14, 1986 (51 FR 8984) that such organizations must be
governed by a board of directors composed of a majority of producers.
Eight commenters suggested that AMS should add a new provision to the
Order that would restrict any contracting organization from receiving
more than a specified percentage of the Beef Checkoff annual program
funding. Five commenters suggested that the Beef Checkoff should
promote U.S. produced beef. One commenter suggested that AMS should
reopen the comment period and propose a plan to make improvements to
the administration and operation of the Program. These comments were
all beyond the scope of this rulemaking and therefore no changes were
incorporated into this final rule based on these comments.
One commenter raised a number of points regarding AMS and the beef
industry as a whole that are not pertinent to the proposal and
therefore are not addressed.
[[Page 52599]]
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1260
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Agricultural
research, Imports, Marketing agreement, Meat and meat products,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 1260 is amended
as follows:
PART 1260--BEEF PROMOTION AND RESEARCH
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 1260 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2901-2911 and 7 U.S.C. 7401.
0
2. In Sec. 1260.113, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1260.113 Established national non-profit industry-governed
organizations.
* * * * *
(c) Have been active and ongoing for at least two years.
Dated: August 22, 2012.
David R. Shipman,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-21374 Filed 8-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
