### 51069 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

reserve need not be reduced to conform to any recomputed average. The Committee expects to carry a $60,000 reserve into the 2014–15 crop year. It expects to add $2,800 to the reserve during the year, for a carryout of approximately $62,800, which is below the limit specified in the order.

The Committee reviewed and unanimously recommended 2014–15 crop year expenditures of $56,200. Prior to arriving at this budget, the Committee
considered information from various sources, such as the Committee’s Budget Subcommittee. Alternative expenditure
levels and assessment rates were discussed by the subcommittee, based upon the relative value of various projects to the date industry and the Committee. The assessment rate of $0.20 per hundredweight of dates was then
recommended after consideration of several factors, including the anticipated 2014–15 crop size, the Committee’s estimates of the incoming reserve funds, other income, and their anticipated expenses.

A review of historical and preliminary information pertaining to the upcoming crop year indicates that the grower price for the 2014–15 crop year could range between $45.00 and $55.00 per hundredweight of dates. Utilizing these
estimates and the assessment rate of $0.20 per hundredweight, the estimated
assessment revenue for the 2014–15 crop year as a percentage of total grower revenue could range between 0.36 and 0.44 percent.

This action decreases the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. Assessments are applied uniformly on all handlers, and some of the costs may be passed on to producers. However, decreasing the assessment rate reduces the burden on handlers, and may reduce the burden on producers. In addition,
the Committee’s and subcommittee’s meetings were widely publicized throughout the California date industry, and all interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and encouraged to participate in Committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the June 25, 2014, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Industry
members also discussed the various possible assessment rates, potential crop size, and estimated expenses at the Budget Subcommittee meeting on June 4, 2014. Finally, interested persons are
invited to submit comments on this interim rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action
on small businesses.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order’s information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581–0178, ‘‘Vegetable and Specialty Crop Marketing Orders.’’ No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This action imposes no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large Riverside County, California date handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government 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.

USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this rule.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny at the previously mentioned address in
the **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**
section.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, including the
information and recommendation submitted by the Committee and other available information, it is hereby found that this 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 2014–15 crop year begins on October 1, 2014, and the marketing order requires that the rate of assessment for each crop year apply to all assessable dates handled during such crop year; (2) the action decreases the
assessment rate for assessable dates beginning with the 2014–15 crop year; (3) handlers are aware of this action which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public meeting and is similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past years; and (4) this interim rule provides a 60-day comment period. All comments timely received will be considered prior to finalization
of this rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 987

Dates, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 987 is amended as
follows:

**PART 987—DATES PRODUCED OR PACKED IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY,** 
**CALIFORNIA**

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 987 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

■ 2. Section 987.339 is revised to read
as follows:

**§ 987.339 Assessment rate.**

On and after October 1, 2014, an assessment rate of $0.20 per hundredweight is established for Riverside County, California dates.

Dated: August 22, 2014.

Rex A. Barnes, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–20413 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Agricultural Marketing Service**

**7 CFR Part 946**

**[Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0026; FV14–946–1 FIR]** 

**Irish Potatoes Grown in Washington; Modification of the Handling**  **Regulations for Yellow Fleshed and White Types of Potatoes** 

**AGENCY :**  Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

**ACTION :**  Affirmation of interim rule as
final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of Agriculture is adopting, as a final rule, without change, an interim rule that extended the temporary exemption of yellow fleshed and white skin (white types) potatoes from minimum quality, maturity, pack, marking, and inspection requirements under the Washington potato marketing order through the 2014–2015 and subsequent fiscal periods. This rule is expected to reduce overall industry expenses and increase


### 51070 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

net returns to producers and handlers while continuing to give the industry the opportunity to explore alternative marketing strategies.

**DATES :**  Effective August 28, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Teresa Hutchinson, Marketing Specialist, or Gary Olson, Regional Director, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (503) 326– 2724, Fax: (503) 326–7440, or Email: Teresa.Hutchinson@ams.usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@ams.usda.gov.

Small businesses may obtain information on complying with this and other marketing order regulations by viewing a guide at the following Web

site: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide; or by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  This rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 946, as amended (7 CFR part 946), regulating the handling of Irish potatoes grown in Washington, hereinafter
referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter
referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.

The handling of Irish potatoes grown in Washington is regulated by 7 CFR part 946. This rule continues in effect
the interim rule that extended the temporary exemption of yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes from the order’s handling regulations through the 2014–2015 and subsequent fiscal periods. This rule allows the Washington potato industry to continue to market yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes without regard to the minimum quality, maturity, pack, marking, and inspection requirements prescribed under the order.

In an interim rule published in the Federal Register on May 7, 2014, and effective on July 1, 2014 (79 FR 26109, Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0026, FV14–946– 1 IR), § 946.336 was amended to exempt yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes from minimum quality, maturity, pack, marking, and inspection requirements under the Washington potato marketing order through the 2014–2015 and subsequent fiscal periods.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of businesses subject to such actions in
order that small businesses will not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that they are brought about through group action of essentially small entities acting on their own
behalf.

There are 43 handlers of Washington potatoes subject to regulation under the order and approximately 267 producers in the regulated production area. Small agricultural service firms are defined by
the Small Business Administration as those having annual receipts of less than $7,000,000, and small agricultural producers are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201).

For the 2011–2012 marketing year, the Committee reports that 11,018,670 hundredweight of Washington potatoes were shipped into the fresh market. Based on average f.o.b. prices estimated by the USDA’s Economic Research
Service and Committee data on individual handler shipments, the Committee estimates that 42, or approximately 98 percent of the handlers, had annual receipts of less than $7,000,000.

In addition, based on information provided by the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the average producer price for Washington potatoes for 2011– 2012 was $7.90 per hundredweight. The average gross annual revenue for the 267 Washington potato producers is therefore calculated to be approximately $326,021. In view of the foregoing, the majority of Washington potato handlers and producers may be classified as
small entities.

This rule continues in effect the action that extended the temporary exemption of yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes from the handling regulations through the 2014–2015 and subsequent fiscal periods. This rule amends the provisions in § 946.336. Authority for the change in the order’s rules and regulations is provided in § 946.52. The Committee does not anticipate that this rule will negatively impact small businesses. This rule will exempt yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes from minimum quality, maturity, pack, marking, and inspection requirements. Though inspections are not mandatory for such potatoes during the exemption period, handlers may voluntarily choose to have their potatoes inspected. Handlers are thus
able to control costs based on the
demands of their customers.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order’s information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581–0178, Generic Vegetable and Specialty Crops. No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

During the exemption period, handlers will continue to be required to report fresh shipments of yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes monthly. While this rule requires a reporting requirement for shipments of yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes, their exemption from handling regulations also eliminates the more frequent reporting requirements imposed under the order’s special purpose shipment exemptions (§ 946.336(d) and (e)). Under these paragraphs, handlers are required to provide detailed reports whenever they divert regulated potatoes for livestock feed, charity, seed, prepeeling, processing, grading and storing in specified counties in Oregon, and experimentation.

Therefore, any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large handlers of yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes are expected to be offset by the elimination of the other reporting requirements currently in effect. In addition, the exemption from handling regulations and inspection requirements for yellow fleshed and white types of potatoes is expected to reduce industry expenses.

As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies. In addition, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with
this rule.

Further, the Committee’s meeting was widely publicized throughout the Washington potato industry and all


### 51071 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

interested persons were invited to participate in Committee deliberations. Like all Committee meetings, the December 10, 2013, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and small, were able to express
views on this issue.

Comments on the interim rule were required to be received on or before July 7, 2014. No comments were received. Therefore, for the reasons given in the interim rule, we are adopting the interim rule as a final rule, without change.

To view the interim rule, go to: http://www.regulations.gov/#!document Detail;D=AMS-FV-14-0026-0001.

This action also affirms information contained in the interim rule concerning Executive Orders 12866, 12988, 13175, and 13563; the Paperwork ReductionAct (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35); and the EGov Act (44 U.S.C. 101).

After consideration of all relevant material presented, it is found that finalizing the interim rule, without change as published in the Federal Register (79 FR 26109, May 7, 2014)
will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 946

Marketing agreements, Potatoes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

**PART 946—IRISH POTATOES GROWN**
**IN WASHINGTON**

■ Accordingly, the interim rule that amended 7 CFR part 946 and that was published at 79 FR 26109 on May 7, 2014, is adopted as a final rule, without change.

Dated: August 22, 2014.

Rex A. Barnes, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–20409 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2014–0176; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–066–AD; Amendment**  **39–17951; AD 2014–16–27]**

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). **ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. This AD was prompted by our determination of the need for a revision to the airplane
airworthiness limitations to introduce a corrosion prevention control program, among other changes, to the maintenance requirements and
airworthiness limitations. This AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to
include the maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations specified in
the Airworthiness Limitations section of the airplane maintenance manual. We are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity of the airplane, and prevent reduced controllability of the airplane.

**DATES :**  This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 1, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA2014-0176; or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201–440–6700;

Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1137;
fax 425–227–1149.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 31, 2014 (79 FR 17942). The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013–0052, dated March 4, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition
for certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. The MCAI

states:

The airworthiness limitations and maintenance requirements for the Falcon 900EX type design relating to Falcon 900EX Easy, Falcon 900LX and Falcon 900DX variants, are included in Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) chapter 5–40 and are approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).

EASA issued AD 2008–0221 [ http://ad. easa.europa.eu/blob/easa

_ ad

_ 2008

_ 0221

_ Corrected.pdf/AD

_ 2008–0221

_ 1 ] to require accomplishment of the maintenance tasks and implementation of the airworthiness limitations, as specified in Dassault Aviation Falcon 900EX Easy/900LX/900DX AMM chapter 5–40 referenced DGT 113875 at

revision 3.

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Dassault
Aviation issued revision 7 of Falcon 900EX Easy/900LX/900DX AMM chapter 5–40,
which contains new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness limitations and introduces, among others, the following changes: —Tasks renumbering,
—Introduction of a Corrosion Prevention

Control Program (CPCP), —Revised overhaul limits for screwjack of

flap actuators -3 version; —Revised interval for checking the screw/nut

play on screwjack of flap actuators -3 version; —Removal of service life limit for screwjack

of flap actuators; —Test of flap asymmetry protection system,

with an extended inspection interval; —Inspection procedures of fuselage and

wings; —Check of overpressure tightness on

pressurization control regulating valves. Compliance with this check is required by EASA AD 2008–0072, but AMM chapter 5–
40 DGT 113875 at revision 7 introduces an extended inspection interval; —Check of overpressure relief valve vacuum

supply lines. The maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations, as specified in the Falcon 900EX Easy/900LX/900DX AMM chapter 5–40, have been identified as mandatory actions for continued airworthiness of the Falcon EX Easy,
Falcon 900LX and Falcon 900DX variants of the F900EX type design. Failure to comply with AMM chapter 5–40 at revision 7 may result in an unsafe
condition.

For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires the implementation of
the maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations, as specified in the Dassault Aviation Falcon 900EX Easy/900LX/900DX AMM chapter 5–40 DGT 113875 at revision

7.