<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>

<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>The Federal Register</title>
    <link>http://thefederalregister.com/b.p/department/DEPARTMENT_OF_AGRICULTURE/2007-12-11/</link>
    <description>Daily Publications of Meetings and Rules Changes for the Federal Government</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, Sep 5 2008 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, Sep 5 2008 11:00:00 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <webMaster>info@thefederalregister.com</webMaster>
    <item>
  <title><![CDATA[  Tart Cherries Grown in the States of Michigan, et al.; Final Free  and Restricted Percentages for the 2007-2008 Crop]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23907</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ This proposed rule invites comments on the establishment of 
final free and restricted percentages for 200708 crop year tart 
cherries covered under the Federal marketing order regulating tart 
cherries grown in seven states (order). The percentages are 57 percent 
free and 43 percent restricted and will establish the proportion of 
cherries from the 2007 crop which may be handled in commercial outlets. 
The percentages are intended to stabilize supplies and prices, and 
strengthen market conditions. The percentages were recommended by the 
Cherry Industry Administrative Board (Board), the body that locally 
administers the order. The order regulates the handling of tart 
cherries grown in the States of Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, 
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23907</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[  Irish Potatoes Grown in Colorado; Modification of the Handling  Regulation for Area No. 2]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23839</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ This rule invites comments on a modification of the minimum 
size requirements under the Colorado potato marketing order, Area No. 
2. The marketing order regulates the handling of Irish potatoes grown 
in Colorado, and is administered locally by the Colorado Potato 
Administrative Committee, Area No. 2 (Committee). The minimum size 
requirements for Area No. 2 potatoes currently allow the handling of 
potatoes that are at least 2 inches in diameter or 4 ounces minimum 
weight, except that round potatoes may be of any weight, and Russet  Burbank, Russet Norkotah,<br/> [[Page 70245]]<br/>
and Silverton Russet varieties may be a minimum of 1\7/8\ inches in 
diameter or 4 ounces in weight. This rule would remove the exception 
that Russet Burbank, Russet Norkotah, and Silverton Russet varieties 
may be 1\7/8\ inches in diameter, thus requiring these varieties to 
also meet the minimum requirements of 2 inches in diameter or 4 ounces 
in weight. This change is intended to facilitate the handling and 
marketing of Colorado<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23839</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[Rural Business--Cooperative Service ]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-07-6009</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ The Rural Housing Service (Agency) is amending its regulations 
to be consistent with other Federal agencies. The current thermal 
standards for existing single family housing can impose an unnecessary 
financial burden on the borrower and are not always costeffective. 
Removing the thermal standards for existing single family housing will 
provide consistency with HUD. This change will not affect the thermal 
standards for new construction; such requirements are generally 
prescribed by adopted building and model energy codes. Construction 
materials and building techniques have improved tremendously during the 
last thirty years, creating many alternatives to achieve thermally 
efficient homes. Removing the Agency's imposed thermal standards for 
existing single family housing will give a borrower the opportunity to 
allocate money towards other improvements which may result in higher 
cost savings. The rule will not result in any increase in costs or 
prices to consumers; nonprofit organizations; business<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-07-6009</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request ]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23937</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ December 6, 2007.</p><p>    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 10413. Comments 
regarding (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for 
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including 
whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy 
of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are 
to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk 
Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), <A<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23937</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request ]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23938</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ December 6, 2007.</p><p>    The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 10413. Comments 
regarding (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for 
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including 
whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy 
of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, 
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are 
to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk 
Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), <A<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23938</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[  Sheppard Creek Post-Fire Project, Flathead National Forest,  Flathead and Lincoln Counties, MT]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-07-6012</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ The USDA Forest Service will prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) for a proposal to salvage merchantable timber affected 
by the Brush Creek wildland fire on the Tally Lake Ranger District of 
the Flathead National Forest. This fire burned a total of approximately 
30,000 acres on the Flathead and Kootenai National Forests from July to 
September of 2007. Approximately 25,000 acres burned on the Tally Lake 
Ranger District where this project is proposed. The Kootenai National 
Forest will be preparing a separate salvage proposal. The city of 
Whitefish, Montana is located about twenty air miles to the east of the 
central portion of the project area.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-07-6012</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[  Privacy Act of 1974; Revision of Systems of Records and Proposed  New Routine Uses]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23974</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ Pursuant to the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a), the United States 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) gives notice that it proposes to amend 
five Privacy Act Systems of Records maintained by the Risk Management 
Agency (RMA).
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23974</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[  Cold Treatment Regulations; Correction ]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23944</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ We are correcting an error in the cold treatment regulations 
that resulted from the publication of an interim rule on July 2, 2007, 
that was effective on August 31, 2007, and the publication of a 
separate final rule on July 18, 2007, that was effective on August 17, 
2007. Because the July 18 final rule reorganized the cold treatment 
regulations, changes we made in the July 2 interim rule inadvertently 
removed provisions relating to places for cold treatment and ports of 
entry from the regulations when the interim rule became effective on 
August 31, 2007. This correction amends the regulations by reinstating 
those provisions.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23944</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title><![CDATA[  Importation of Fruits and Vegetables ]]></title>
  <link>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23957</link>
  <description><![CDATA[ We are proposing to amend the regulations pertaining to the 
importation of fruits and vegetables to eliminate a treatment 
requirement for Ya pears imported from Shandong Province, China; to 
clarify the conditions that apply to the importation of sand pears from 
the Republic of Korea and Japan; and to clarify the distinction between 
plant parts that would be considered to be plant litter or debris and 
those that would not. These proposed changes would eliminate a 
treatment requirement that no longer appears to be necessary and would 
clarify some existing provisions in order to make the regulations 
easier to understand and implement.
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
google_ad_client = "pub-2051746026283201";
google_ad_width = 728;
google_ad_height = 15;
google_ad_format = "728x15_0ads_al";
//2007-08-22: federalregister-rss
google_ad_channel = "2005962856";
google_color_border = "CC0000";
google_color_bg = "FFFFFF";
google_color_link = "CC0000";
google_color_text = "000000";
google_color_url = "008000";
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
  src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script>
]]></description>
  <guid>http://thefederalregister.com/d.p/2007-12-11-E7-23957</guid>
  <pubDate>Tue, Dec 11 2007 11:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>

