21620 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 74 / Monday, April 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Committee unanimously recommended 

termination, and all handlers and 

producers in the industry have been 

notified and provided an opportunity to 

comment; and (4) no useful purpose 

would be served by delaying the 

effective date. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 924 

Prunes, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

PART 924—[REMOVED] 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, and under authority of 7 

U.S.C. 601–674, 7 CFR part 924 is 

removed. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9318 Filed 4–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 925 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–10–0104; FV11–925–1 

FR] 

Grapes Grown in Designated Area of 

Southeastern California; Increased 

Assessment Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule increases the 

assessment rate established for the 

California Desert Grape Administrative 

Committee (Committee) for the 2011 

and subsequent fiscal periods from 

$0.01 to $0.0125 per 18-pound lug of 

grapes handled. The Committee locally 

administers the marketing order, which 

regulates the handling of grapes grown 

in a designated area of southeastern 

California. Assessments upon grape 

handlers are used by the Committee to 

fund reasonable and necessary expenses 

of the program. The fiscal period began 

January 1 and ends December 31. The 

assessment rate will remain in effect 

indefinitely unless modified, suspended 

or terminated. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 19, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry 

L. Simmons, Marketing Specialist, or 

Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional Manager, 

California Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– 

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or E-mail: 

Jerry.Simmons@ams.usda.gov or 

Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Antoinette 

Carter, Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Ave., 

SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 

20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or E-mail: 

Antoinette.Carter@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Order No. 

925, as amended (7 CFR part 925), 

regulating the handling of grapes grown 

in a designated area of southeastern 

California, 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 Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Under the marketing order now 

in effect, grape handlers in a designated 

area of southeastern California are 

subject to assessments. Funds to 

administer the order are derived from 

such assessments. It is intended that the 

assessment rate as issued herein will be 

applicable to all assessable grapes 

beginning on January 1, 2011, and 

continue until amended, suspended, or 

terminated. 

The Act 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 file 

with USDA 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 law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. Such 

handler is afforded the opportunity for 

a hearing on the petition. After the 

hearing, USDA 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 his or her principal 

place of business, has jurisdiction to 

review USDA’s ruling on the petition, 

provided an action is filed not later than 

20 days after the date of the entry of the 

ruling. 

This rule increases the assessment 

rate established for the Committee for 

the 2011 and subsequent fiscal periods 

from $0.01 to $0.0125 per 18-pound lug 

of grapes. 

The grape order provides authority for 

the Committee, with the approval of 

USDA, to formulate an annual budget of 

expenses and collect assessments from 

handlers to administer the program. The 

members of the Committee are 

producers and handlers of grapes grown 

in a designated area of southeastern 

California. They are familiar with the 

Committee’s needs and with the costs 

for goods and services in their local area 

and are thus in a position to formulate 

an appropriate budget and assessment 

rate. The assessment rate is formulated 

and discussed in a public meeting. 

Thus, all directly affected persons have 

an opportunity to participate and 

provide input. 

For the 2009 and subsequent fiscal 

periods, the Committee recommended, 

and the USDA approved, an assessment 

rate that would continue in effect from 

fiscal period to fiscal period unless 

modified, suspended, or terminated by 

USDA upon recommendation and 

information submitted by the 

Committee or other information 

available to USDA. 

The Committee met on October 21, 

2010, and unanimously recommended 

2011 expenditures of $89,616 and an 

assessment rate of $0.0125 per 18-pound 

lug of grapes handled. In comparison, 

last year’s budgeted expenditures were 

$73,666. The assessment rate of $0.0125 

is $0.0025 higher than the rate currently 

in effect. The Committee recommended 

a higher assessment rate to offset the 

2011 budget increases in research, 

general office expenses, management 

and compliance expenses, as well as a 

decreased crop estimate. The Committee 

estimated a decreased 2011 crop of 

6,000,000 18-pound lugs of grapes 

handled, which is about 604,951 18- 

pound lugs fewer than the 6,604,951 18- 

pound lugs handled during the 2010 

fiscal period. Based on increases in 

expenses and a decreased crop estimate, 

the Committee unanimously 

recommended that the assessment rate 

of $0.01 currently in effect be increased 

by $0.0025. Income derived from 

handler assessments, along with funds 

from the Committee’s authorized 

reserve, should be adequate to cover 

budgeted expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2011 fiscal period include $10,000 for 

research, $15,616 for general office 

expenses, and $64,000 for management 

and compliance expenses. The $10,000 

research project is a for a new vine 

study proposed by the University of 

California Riverside. In comparison, 

major expenditures for the 2010 fiscal 

period included no funds for research, 

$13,666 for general office expenses, and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 74 / Monday, April 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 21621 

$60,000 management and compliance 

expenses. 

The assessment rate recommended by 

the Committee was derived by the 

following formula: Anticipated 2011 

expenses ($89,616) plus the desired 

2011 ending reserve ($88,384), minus 

the 2011 beginning reserve ($103,000), 

divided by the estimated 2011 

shipments (6,000,000 18-pound lugs) 

equals $0.0125 per lug. 

Income generated through the $0.0125 

assessment ($75,000) plus carry-in 

reserve funds ($103,000) should be 

sufficient to meet anticipated expenses 

($89,616). Reserve funds by the end of 

2011 are projected at $88,384 or about 

one fiscal period’s expenses. Section 

925.41 of the order permits the 

Committee to maintain about one fiscal 

period’s expenses in reserve. 

The assessment rate established in 

this rule will continue in effect 

indefinitely unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated by USDA 

upon recommendation and information 

submitted by the Committee or other 

available information. 

Although this assessment rate will be 

in effect for an indefinite period, the 

Committee will continue to meet prior 

to or during each fiscal period to 

recommend a budget of expenses and 

consider recommendations for 

modification of the assessment rate. The 

dates and times of Committee meetings 

are available from the Committee or 

USDA. Committee meetings are open to 

the public and interested persons may 

express their views at these meetings. 

USDA will evaluate the Committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking will be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

Committee’s 2011 budget and those for 

subsequent fiscal periods would be 

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved 

by USDA. 

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 

rule 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 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the 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 approximately 14 handlers 

of southeastern California grapes who 

are subject to regulation under the order 

and about 50 grape producers in the 

production area. Small agricultural 

service firms are defined by the Small 

Business Administration (13 CFR 

121.201) as those having annual receipts 

of less than $7,000,000, and small 

agricultural producers are defined as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $750,000. Nine of the 14 handlers 

subject to regulation have annual grape 

sales of less than $7 million. Based on 

data from the National Agricultural 

Statistics Service and the Committee, 

the crop value for the 2010 season was 

about $38,139,629. Dividing this figure 

by the number of producers (50) yields 

an average annual producer revenue 

estimate of about $762,793. However, 

according to the Committee, at least ten 

of 50 producers would be considered 

small businesses under the Small 

Business Administration threshold of 

$750,000. Based on the foregoing, it may 

be concluded that a majority of grape 

handlers and at least ten of the 

producers could be classified as small 

entities. 

This rule increases the assessment 

rate established for the Committee and 

collected from handlers for the 2011 and 

subsequent fiscal periods from $0.01 to 

$0.0125 per 18-pound lug of grapes. The 

Committee unanimously recommended 

2011 expenditures of $89,616 and an 

assessment rate of $0.0125 per 18-pound 

lug of grapes handled. The assessment 

rate of $0.0125 is $0.0025 higher than 

the 2010 rate currently in effect. The 

Committee recommended the higher 

assessment rate of $0.0125 to offset the 

2011 budget increases in research, 

general office expenses, management 

and compliance expenses, and a 

decreased crop estimate. The number of 

assessable grapes is estimated at 6 

million 18-pound lugs of grapes. Thus, 

income generated through the $0.0125 

assessment ($75,000) plus reserve funds 

($103,000) should be sufficient to meet 

anticipated expenses ($89,616). Reserve 

funds by the end of 2011 are projected 

at $88,384 or about one fiscal period’s 

expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2011 fiscal period include $10,000 for 

research, $15,616 for general office 

expenses, and $64,000 for management 

and compliance expenses. The $10,000 

research project is for a new vine study 

proposed by the University of California 

Riverside. In comparison, major 

expenditures for the 2010 fiscal period 

included no funds for research, $13,666 

for general office expenses, and $60,000 

management and compliance expenses. 

The assessment rate recommended by 

the Committee was derived based on the 

Committee’s estimates of the available 

beginning reserve ($103,000), projected 

decreased crop size (6 million 18-pound 

lugs), anticipated assessment income 

($75,000), anticipated expenses 

($89,616), and the ending 2011 reserve 

($88,384). 

The Committee reviewed and 

unanimously recommended 2011 

expenditures of $89,616, which 

included increases in research, general 

office expenses, and management and 

compliance expenses. Prior to arriving 

at this budget, the Committee 

considered alternative expenditures and 

assessment rates, to include not 

increasing the $0.01 assessment rate 

currently in effect. Based on a decreased 

2011 estimate crop of 6 million 18- 

pound lugs, the Committee ultimately 

determined that increasing the 

assessment rate to $0.0125 combined 

with funds available from the reserve 

would adequately cover increased 

expenses and provide an adequate 2011 

ending financial reserve. 

A review of historical crop and price 

information, as well as preliminary 

information pertaining to the upcoming 

fiscal period indicates that the 2011 

producer price for California grapes 

could average about $5.77 per 18-pound 

lug. With an assessment rate of $0.0125 

per 18-pound lug of grapes for the 2011 

season, the assessment revenue as a 

percentage of grower revenue would be 

0.217 percent, or well below one 

percent. 

This action increases the assessment 

obligation imposed on handlers. While 

assessments impose some additional 

costs on handlers, the costs are minimal 

and uniform on all handlers. Some of 

the additional costs may be passed on 

to producers. However, these costs are 

offset by the benefits derived by the 

operation of the order. In addition, the 

Committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the grape 

production area and all interested 

persons were invited to attend and 

participate in Committee deliberations 

on all issues. Like all Committee 

meetings, the October 21, 2010, meeting 

was a public meeting and all entities, 

both large and small, were able to 

express views on this issue. 

This rule imposes no additional 

reporting or recordkeeping requirements 

on either small or large California grape 

handlers. As with all Federal marketing 

order programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
21622 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 74 / Monday, April 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

sector agencies. As noted in the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis, USDA 

has not identified any relevant Federal 

rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with this final rule. 

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. 

A proposed rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on February 9, 2011 (76 FR 

7119). 

Copies of the proposed rule were also 

mailed or sent via facsimile to all grape 

handlers. Finally, the proposal was 

made available through the Internet by 

USDA and the Office of the Federal 

Register. A 30-day comment period 

ending March 11, 2011, was provided 

for interested persons to respond to the 

proposal. No comments were received. 

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 Antoinette 

Carter 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 also found 

and determined 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 

2011 fiscal period began on January 1, 

2011, and the marketing order requires 

that the rate of assessment for each 

fiscal period apply to all assessable 

grapes handled during the fiscal period; 

(2) the Committee needs to have 

sufficient funds to meet its expenses 

which are on a continuous basis; and (3) 

handlers are aware of this action, which 

was recommended by the Committee at 

a public meeting. Also, a 30-day 

comment period was provided for in the 

proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 925 

Grapes, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 925 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 925—GRAPES GROWN IN A 

DESIGNATED AREA OF 

SOUTHEASTERN CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 925 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 925.215 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 925.215 Assessment rate. 

On and after January 1, 2011, an 

assessment rate of $0.0125 per 18-pound 

lug is established for grapes grown in a 

designated area of southeastern 

California. 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9307 Filed 4–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 95 

[Docket No. 30778; Amdt. No. 493] 

IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts 

miscellaneous amendments to the 

required IFR (instrument flight rules) 

altitudes and changeover points for 

certain Federal airways, jet routes, or 

direct routes for which a minimum or 

maximum en route authorized IFR 

altitude is prescribed. This regulatory 

action is needed because of changes 

occurring in the National Airspace 

System. These changes are designed to 

provide for the safe and efficient use of 

the navigable airspace under instrument 

conditions in the affected areas. 

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, May 5, 

2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Harry Hodges, Flight Procedure 

Standards Branch (AMCAFS–420), 

Flight Technologies and Programs 

Division, Flight Standards Service, 

Federal Aviation Administration, Mike 

Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 

South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma City, 

OK. 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 

25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125) 

telephone: (405) 954–4164. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

amendment to part 95 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) 

amends, suspends, or revokes IFR 

altitudes governing the operation of all 

aircraft in flight over a specified route 

or any portion of that route, as well as 

the changeover points (COPs) for 

Federal airways, jet routes, or direct 

routes as prescribed in part 95. 

The Rule 

The specified IFR altitudes, when 

used in conjunction with the prescribed 

changeover points for those routes, 

ensure navigation aid coverage that is 

adequate for safe flight operations and 

free of frequency interference. The 

reasons and circumstances that create 

the need for this amendment involve 

matters of flight safety and operational 

efficiency in the National Airspace 

System, are related to published 

aeronautical charts that are essential to 

the user, and provide for the safe and 

efficient use of the navigable airspace. 

In addition, those various reasons or 

circumstances require making this 

amendment effective before the next 

scheduled charting and publication date 

of the flight information to assure its 

timely availability to the user. The 

effective date of this amendment reflects 

those considerations. In view of the 

close and immediate relationship 

between these regulatory changes and 

safety in air commerce, I find that notice 

and public procedure before adopting 

this amendment are impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest and that 

good cause exists for making the 

amendment effective in less than 30 

days. 

Conclusion 

The FAA has determined that this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. It, therefore—(1) is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 

February 26, 1979); and (3) does not 

warrant preparation of a regulatory 

evaluation as the anticipated impact is 

so minimal. For the same reason, the 

FAA certifies that this amendment will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 95 

Airspace, Navigation (air). 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES