Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51929 

It is further found that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register 

(5 U.S.C. 553) because this rule should 

be in place for the upcoming marketing 

year, which begins September 1, 2010. 

Further, handlers are aware of this rule, 

which was recommended at a public 

meeting. Also, 15 days were provided 

for comments to the proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 984 

Marketing agreements, Nuts, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Walnuts. 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 984 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 984—WALNUTS GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 984 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

§ 984.450 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 984.450 is amended by 

revising the first sentence in paragraph 

(a) and adding a new paragraph (c) to 

read as follows: 

§ 984.450 Grade and size regulations. 

(a) Minimum kernel content 

requirements for inshell walnuts for 

reserve disposition credit. For purposes 

of §§ 984.54 and 984.56, no lot of inshell 

walnuts may be held, exported, or 

disposed of for use by governmental 

agencies or charitable institutions 

unless it meets the minimum 

requirements for merchantable inshell 

walnuts effective pursuant to 

§ 984.50(a). * * * 

* * * * * 

(c) Inspection and certification of 

shelled walnuts that are manufactured 

into products. For purposes of 

§§ 984.50(d) and 984.52(c), shelled 

walnuts may be cut or diced without 

prior inspection and certification: 

Provided, That the end product, except 

for walnut meal, is inspected and 

certified. For purposes of this section, 

end product shall be defined as walnut 

pieces equal to or larger than eight sixtyfourths of an inch in diameter. Walnut 

meal shall be defined as walnut pieces 

smaller than eight sixty-fourths of an 

inch in diameter. 

(1) End product. End product must be 

sized, inspected and certified, and the 

size must be noted on the inspection 

certificate. The end product quality 

must be equal to or better than the 

minimum requirements of U.S. 

Commercial grade as defined in the 

United States Standards for Shelled 

Walnuts (Juglans regia). 

(2) Walnut meal. Walnut meal that is 

accumulated during the cutting or 

dicing of shelled walnuts to create end 

product must be presented with the 

smallest end product from that 

manufacturing run that is inspected and 

certified. If the end product meets the 

applicable U.S. Commercial grade 

requirements, the walnut meal 

accumulated during the manufacture of 

that end product shall be identified and 

referenced on a separate meal certificate 

as ‘‘meal derived from walnut pieces 

that meet U.S. Commercial grade 

requirements.’’ The certificate number of 

the smallest end product will be 

referenced on the meal certificate. 

(3) Failed lots. If the end product fails 

to meet applicable U.S. Commercial 

grade requirements, the end product 

may be reconditioned, re-sampled, 

inspected again, and certified. However, 

the walnut meal accumulated during the 

manufacture of that end product shall 

be rejected and disposed of pursuant to 

the requirements of § 984.64. 

Dated: August 17, 2010. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21010 Filed 8–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1000 

[Doc. No. AMS–DA–09–0062; AO–14–A73, et 

al.; DA–03–10] 

Milk in the Northeast and Other 

Marketing Areas; Order Amending the 

Orders 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule maintains the 

current fluid milk product definition’s 

compositional standard of 6.5 percent 

nonfat milk solids criterion and 

incorporates an equivalent 2.25 percent 

true milk protein criterion for 

determining if a product meets the 

compositional standard. This final rule 

also determines how milk and milkderived ingredients should be priced 

under all Federal milk marketing orders 

when used in products meeting the 

fluid milk product definition. It 

provides exemptions for drinkable 

yogurt products containing at least 20 

percent yogurt (by weight), kefir, and 

products intended to be meal 

replacements from the fluid milk 

product definition. A referendum was 

held and the required number of 

producers approved the issuance of the 

orders as amended. 

DATES: Effective Date: January 1, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Henry H. Schaefer, Economist, USDA/ 

AMS/Dairy Programs, Upper Midwest 

Milk Market Administrators Office, 

Suite 200, 1600 West 82nd Street, 

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431–1420, 

(952) 831–5292, e-mail address: 

hschaefer@fmma30.com; or William 

Francis, Associate Deputy 

Administrator, USDA/AMS/Dairy 

Programs, Order Formulation and 

Enforcement, Stop 0231—Room 2971–S, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–0231, (202) 720– 

6274, e-mail address: 

william.francis@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule amends the fluid milk product 

definition in all Federal milk marketing 

orders. This rulemaking action 

maintains the current fluid milk product 

definition’s compositional standard of 

6.5 percent nonfat milk solids and 

incorporates an equivalent 2.25 percent 

true milk protein criterion for 

determining if a product meets the 

compositional standard. This final rule 

also amends determining how milk and 

milk-derived ingredients should be 

priced under all Federal milk marketing 

orders when used in products meeting 

the fluid milk product definition. It 

exempts drinkable yogurt products 

containing at least 20 percent yogurt (by 

weight), kefir, infant formulas, dietary 

products (meal replacements) and other 

products that may contain milk-derived 

ingredients from the fluid milk product 

definition. 

This administrative action is governed 

by the provisions of sections 556 and 

557 of Title 5 of the United States Code 

and, therefore, is excluded from the 

requirements of Executive Order 12866. 

This final rule herein has been 

reviewed under Executive Order 12988, 

Civil Justice Reform. The final rule is 

not intended to have a retroactive effect. 

The Agricultural Marketing 

Agreement Act of 1937 (Act), as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), provides 

that administrative proceedings must be 

exhausted before parties may file suit in 

court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the 

Act, any handler subject to an order may 

request modification or exemption from 

such order by filing with the 

Department a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with the 

law. A handler is afforded the 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
51930 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

opportunity for a hearing on the 

petition. After a hearing, the Department 

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 habitant, or has its 

principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction in equity to review the 

USDA’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. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act and 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the 

Agricultural Marketing Service has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities and has certified 

that this rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. For the 

purpose of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, a dairy farm is considered a ‘‘small 

business’’ if it has an annual gross 

revenue of less than $750,000, and a 

dairy products manufacturer is a ‘‘small 

business’’ if it has fewer than 500 

employees. 

For the purposes of determining 

which dairy farms are ‘‘small 

businesses,’’ the $750,000 per year 

criterion was used to establish a 

production guideline of 500,000 pounds 

per month. Although this guideline does 

not factor in additional monies that may 

be received by dairy producers, it 

should be an inclusive standard for 

most ‘‘small’’ dairy farmers. For 

purposes of determining a handler’s 

size, if the plant is part of a larger 

company operating multiple plants that 

collectively exceed the 500-employee 

limit, the plant will be considered a 

large business even if the local plant has 

fewer than 500 employees. 

For the month of June 2005, the 

month the hearing was held, 52,425 

dairy farmers were pooled on the 

Federal order system. Of the total, 

49,160, or 94 percent were considered 

small businesses. During the same 

month, 1,530 plants were regulated by 

or reported their milk receipts to their 

respective Market Administrator. Of the 

total, 847, or 55 percent were 

considered small businesses. 

The fluid milk product definition sets 

out the criteria for determining if the 

use of producer milk and milk-derived 

ingredients in such products should be 

priced at the Class I price. The 

established criteria for the classification 

of producer milk are applied in an 

identical fashion to both large and small 

businesses and will not have any 

different impact on those businesses 

producing fluid milk products thus 

assuring that similarly situated handlers 

have the same minimum price as 

required by section 608(c)5 of the Act. 

Therefore, the amendments will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The impact of the proposed 

amendments on large and small entities 

would be negligible. In fact, the 

amendment proposing to change the 

classification of kefir and drinkable 

yogurt is estimated to affect blend prices 

by no more than $0.0026 per cwt based 

on record evidence. 

The Agricultural Marketing Service is 

committed to complying with the EGovernment Act to promote the use of 

the Internet and other information 

technologies to provide increased 

opportunities for citizen access to 

Government information and services, 

and for other purposes. 

A review of reporting requirements 

was completed under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35). It was determined that 

these amendments would have no 

impact on reporting, recordkeeping, or 

other compliance requirements because 

they would remain identical to the 

current requirements. No new forms are 

proposed and no additional reporting 

requirements are necessary. 

This notice does not require 

additional information collection that 

needs clearance by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) beyond 

currently approved information 

collection. The primary sources of data 

used to complete the forms are routinely 

used in most business transactions. The 

forms require only a minimal amount of 

information that can be supplied 

without data processing equipment or a 

trained statistical staff. Thus, the 

information collection and reporting 

burden is relatively small. Requiring the 

same reports for all handlers does not 

significantly disadvantage any handler 

that is smaller than the industry 

average. 

Prior Documents in This Proceeding 

Notice of Hearing: Issued April 6, 

2005; published April 12, 2005 (70 FR 

19012). 

Recommended Decision: Issued May 

12, 2006; published May 17, 2006 (71 

FR 28590). 

Final Decision: Issued May 21, 2010; 

published June 14, 2010 (75 FR 33534). 

Technical Correction: Issued June 18, 

2010; published June 24, 2010 (75 FR 

36015). 

Findings and Determinations 

The findings and determinations 

hereinafter set forth supplement those 

that were made when the orders were 

first issued and when they were 

amended. The previous findings and 

determinations are hereby ratified and 

confirmed, except where they may 

conflict with those set forth herein. 

The following findings are hereby 

made with respect to the Northeast and 

other marketing orders: 

(a) Findings Upon the Basis of the 

Hearing Record 

A public hearing was held with regard 

to certain proposed amendments to the 

tentative marketing agreements and to 

the orders regulating the handling of 

milk in the Northeast and other 

marketing areas. The hearing was held 

pursuant to the provisions of the AMAA 

and the applicable rules of practice and 

procedure (7 CFR part 900). 

Upon the basis of the evidence 

introduced at such hearing and the 

record thereof, it is found that: 

(1) The said orders as hereby 

amended, and all of the terms and 

conditions thereof, will tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the 

AMAA; 

(2) The parity prices of milk, as 

determined pursuant to section 2 of the 

AMAA, are not reasonable in view of 

the price of feeds, available supplies of 

feeds, and other economic conditions 

which affect market supply and demand 

for milk in the aforesaid marketing 

areas. The minimum prices specified in 

the orders as hereby amended are such 

prices as will reflect the aforesaid 

factors, insure a sufficient quantity of 

pure and wholesome milk, and be in the 

public interest; 

(3) The said orders, as hereby 

amended, regulate the handling of milk 

in the same manner as, and are 

applicable only to persons in the 

respective classes of industrial or 

commercial activity specified in, the 

marketing agreements upon which a 

hearing has been held; and 

(4) All milk and milk products 

handled by handlers, as defined in the 

tentative marketing agreements and the 

orders as hereby amended, are in the 

current of interstate commerce or 

directly burden, obstruct, or affect 

interstate commerce in milk or its 

products. 

(b) Determinations 

It is hereby determined that: 

(1) The refusal or failure of handlers 

(excluding cooperative associations 

specified in section 8c(9) of the AMAA) 

of more than 50 percent of the milk, 

which is marketed within the specified 

marketing areas, to sign a proposed 

marketing agreement, tends to prevent 

the effectuation of the declared policy of 

the AMAA; 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51931 

(2) The issuance of this order 

amending the Northeast and other 

orders is the only practical means 

pursuant to the declared policy of the 

AMAA of advancing the interests of 

producers as defined in the orders as 

hereby amended; and 

(3) The issuance of this order 

amending the Northeast and other 

orders is favored by at least two-thirds 

of the producers who were engaged in 

the production of milk for sale in the 

respective marketing areas. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1000 

Milk marketing orders. 

Order Relative to Handling 

It is therefore ordered, that on and 

after the effective date hereof, the 

handling of milk in the Northeast and 

other marketing areas shall be in 

conformity to and in compliance with 

the terms and conditions of the orders, 

as amended, and as hereby amended, as 

follows: 

■ For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

7 CFR part 1000 is amended as follows: 

PART 1000—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

OF FEDERAL MILK MARKETING 

ORDERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 1000 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674, and 7253. 

■ 2. In § 1000.15, paragraphs (a) and 

(b)(1) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 1000.15 Fluid milk product. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, fluid milk product 

shall mean any milk products in fluid 

or frozen form that are intended to be 

used as beverages containing less than 

9 percent butterfat and 6.5 percent or 

more nonfat solids or 2.25 percent or 

more true milk protein. Sources of such 

nonfat solids/protein include but are not 

limited to: Casein, whey protein 

concentrate, milk protein concentrate, 

dry whey, caseinates, lactose, and any 

similar dairy derived ingredient. Such 

products include, but are not limited to: 

Milk, fat-free milk, lowfat milk, light 

milk, reduced fat milk, milk drinks, 

eggnog and cultured buttermilk, 

including any such beverage products 

that are flavored, cultured, modified 

with added or reduced nonfat solids, 

sterilized, concentrated, or 

reconstituted. As used in this part, the 

term concentrated milk means milk that 

contains not less than 25.5 percent, and 

not more than 50 percent, total milk 

solids. 

(b) * * * 

(1) Any product that contains less 

than 6.5 percent nonfat milk solids and 

contains less than 2.25 percent true milk 

protein; whey; plain or sweetened 

evaporated milk/skim milk; sweetened 

condensed milk/skim milk; yogurt 

containing beverages with 20 or more 

percent yogurt by weight and kefir; 

products especially prepared for infant 

feeding or dietary use (meal 

replacement) that are packaged in 

hermetically sealed containers; and 

products that meet the compositional 

standards specified in paragraph (a) of 

this section but contain no fluid milk 

products included in paragraph (a) of 

this section. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 1000.40, paragraph (b)(2)(iii) 

and (b)(2)(vi) are revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 1000.40 Classes of utilization. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iii) Aerated cream, frozen cream, sour 

cream, sour half-and-half, sour cream 

mixtures containing non-milk items; 

yogurt, including yogurt containing 

beverages with 20 percent or more 

yogurt by weight and kefir, and any 

other semi-solid product resembling a 

Class II product; 

* * * * * 

(vi) Products especially prepared for 

infant feeding or dietary use (meal 

replacements) that are packaged in 

hermetically sealed containers and 

products that meet the compositional 

standards of § 1000.15(a) but contain no 

fluid milk products included in 

§ 1000.15(a). 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 1000.43, paragraph (c) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 1000.43 General classification rules. 

* * * * * 

(c) If any of the water but none of the 

nonfat solids contained in the milk from 

which a product is made is removed 

before the product is utilized or 

disposed of by the handler, the pounds 

of skim milk in such product that are to 

be considered under this part as used or 

disposed of by the handler shall be an 

amount equivalent to the nonfat milk 

solids contained in such product plus 

all of the water originally associated 

with such solids. If any of the nonfat 

solids contained in the milk from which 

a product is made are removed before 

the product is utilized or disposed of by 

the handler, the pounds of skim milk in 

such product that are to be considered 

under this part as used or disposed of 

by the handler shall be an amount 

equivalent to the nonfat milk solids 

contained in such product plus all of 

the water and nonfat solids originally 

associated with such solids determined 

on a protein equivalent basis. 

* * * * * 

Dated: August 17, 2010. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–20972 Filed 8–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0800; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–162–AD; Amendment 

39–16416; AD 2010–18–03] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; DassaultAviation Model FALCON 7X Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD results 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

Several in service events related to various 

electrical systems, have led to the discovery 

of a common root cause: A leakage failure 

mode of Transient Voltage Suppressor (TVS) 

diodes used on Power Distribution Control 

Units (PDCU) cards or Generator Control Unit 

(GCU) cards in the Primary Power 

Distribution Boxes (PPDB). Due to such TVS 

diode failure mode, operation of some 

electrical circuits is degraded and some 

control signals are set at unexpected levels. 

Further analysis indicated that combination 

of a TVS diode failure with other systems 

failures could significantly reduce flight 

safety. 

* * * * * 

The unsafe condition is a leakage 

failure mode of TVS diodes used on 

PDCU cards or GCU cards in the PPDB, 

which in combination with other system 

failures could lead to loss of 

controllability of the airplane. This AD 

requires actions that are intended to 

address the unsafe condition described 

in the MCAI. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

September 8, 2010. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1