[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 226 (Friday, November 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-29090]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: November 25, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Parts 1005, 1007, 1011, and 1046
[DA-95-06]
Milk in the Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee Valley, and Louisville-
Lexington-Evansville Marketing Areas; Proposed Suspension of Certain
Provisions of the Orders
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed suspension of rules.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document invites written comments on a proposal that
would extend a suspension of certain provisions of the Carolina,
Georgia, Tennessee Valley, and Louisville-Lexington-Evansville Federal
milk orders from March 1, 1995, through February 28, 1996, or until the
conclusion of an amendatory proceeding that has been scheduled to deal
with these matters.
DATES: Comments are due no later than December 27, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Memoli, Marketing Specialist,
USDA/AMS/Dairy Division, Order Formulation Branch, Room 2968, South
Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC. 20090-6456, (202) 690-1932.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601-612) requires the Agency to examine the impact of a proposed rule
on small entities. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator of
the Agricultural Marketing Service has certified that this action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This action would lessen the regulatory burden on small
entities by removing pricing disparities that are causing or could
cause financial hardship for certain regulated plants.
The Department is issuing this proposed action in conformance with
Executive Order 12866.
This proposed suspension has been reviewed under Executive Order
12778, Civil Justice Reform. This action is not intended to have a
retroactive effect. This action will not preempt any state or local
laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable
conflict with the rule.
The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7
U.S.C. 601-674), provides that administrative proceedings must be
exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under Sec. 608c(15)(A)
of the Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary
a petition stating that the order, any provisions of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and requesting a modification of the order or to be exempted
from the order. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on
the petition. After a hearing, the Secretary would rule on the
petition. The Act provides that the district court of the United States
in any district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has its
principal place of business, has jurisdiction in equity to review the
Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided a bill in equity is filed
not later than 20 days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-
674), the suspension of the following provisions of the orders
regulating the handling of milk in the Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee
Valley, and Louisville-Lexington-Evansville marketing areas is being
considered for a 12-month period beginning March 1, 1995:
1. In Sec. 1005.7(d)(3) of the Carolina order, the words ``from'',
``there'', ``a greater quantity of route disposition, except filled
milk, during the month'', and ``than in this marketing area'';
2. In Sec. 1007.7(e)(3) of the Georgia order, the words ``, except
as provided in paragraph (e)(4) of this section,'';
3. In Sec. 1007.7 of the Georgia order, paragraph (e)(4);
4. In Sec. 1011.7(d)(3) of the Tennessee Valley order, the words
``from'', ``there'', ``a greater quantity of route disposition, except
filled milk, during the month'', and ``than in this marketing area'';
and
5. In Sec. 1046.2 of the Louisville-Lexington-Evansville order, the
word ``Pulaski''.
All persons who desire to send written data, views or arguments
about the proposed suspension should send two copies of them to the
USDA/AMS/Dairy Division, Order Formulation Branch, Room 2968, South
Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456, by the 30th day
after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
The comments that are sent will be made available for public
inspection in the Dairy Division during normal business hours (7 CFR
1.27(b)).
Statement of Consideration
This proposed suspension would extend an existing suspension that
has been in effect since March 1, 1994. This suspension allows a
distributing plant at Kingsport, Tennessee, that is located within the
Tennessee Valley marketing area and that meets all of the pooling
standards of the Tennessee Valley order to be regulated under that
order rather than the Carolina order despite the plant having greater
sales in the Carolina marketing area. It also allows a distributing
plant located at Somerset, Kentucky, that has been regulated under the
Tennessee Valley order to remain regulated there even if it has greater
sales in the Louisville-Lexington-Evansville (Order 46) marketing area.
In addition, the suspension allows a supply plant at Springfield,
Kentucky, that has been supplying the Somerset plant to remain pooled
under the Tennessee Valley order without having to make uneconomic
shipments of milk that it contends would be necessary to remain pooled
if the Southern Belle plant were regulated under Order 46.
The problems prompting the existing suspension of these provisions
were thoroughly explained in a suspension order issued on March 28,
1994 (published April 1, 1994 [59 FR 15315]). In that document, it was
noted that ``orderly marketing will be best preserved by adopting the
proposed suspension, for a 12-month period only, to allow the industry
time to develop proposals for a hearing to be held before the
suspension period expires.'' [emphasis added]
Due to significant changes that have occurred in these markets
within the past year, the Department was delayed in scheduling the
promised proceeding to hear industry proposals for resolving the
problems which lead to the suspension order. Although a hearing has now
been scheduled for January 4, 1995, to hear these proposals, this will
not allow sufficient time to evaluate the record and to extend the
suspension, if found to be warranted, by the time the current
suspension expires on February 28, 1995.
Advised of these facts, both Southern Belle Dairy Company and Land-
O-Sun Dairies, Inc., who were proponents of the existing suspension,
submitted requests to extend the current suspension until the
amendatory proceeding was concluded. This notice is in response to
those requests.
Accordingly, it may be appropriate to suspend the aforesaid
provisions from March 1, 1995, through February 28, 1996, or until such
earlier time as an order amending the aforesaid orders may be issued on
the basis of the hearing that has been scheduled for January 4, 1995.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 1005, 1007, 1011, and 1046
Milk marketing orders.
The authority citation for 7 CFR Parts 1005, 1007, 1011, and 1046
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 1-19, 48 Stat. 31, as amended; 7 U.S.C. 601-
674.
Dated: November 21, 1994.
Lon Hatamiya,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-29090 Filed 11-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P