This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

9536 

Vol. 75, No. 41 

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 932 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–09–0089; FV10–932–1 

PR] 

Olives Grown in California; Increased 

Assessment Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

California Olive Committee (Committee) 

for the 2010 and subsequent fiscal years 

from $28.63 to $44.72 per assessable ton 

of olives handled. The Committee 

locally administers the marketing order 

which regulates the handling of olives 

grown in California. Assessments upon 

olive handlers are used by the 

Committee to fund reasonable and 

necessary expenses of the program. The 

fiscal year began January 1 and ends 

December 31. The assessment rate 

would remain in effect indefinitely 

unless modified, suspended, or 

terminated. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

April 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this rule. Comments must be 

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing 

Order Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: 

(202) 720–8938, or Internet: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Comments should 

reference the docket number and the 

date and page number of this issue of 

the Federal Register and will be 

available for public inspection in the 

Office of the Docket Clerk during regular 

business hours, or can be viewed at: 

http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments submitted in response to this 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public. 

Please be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

Internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey S. Smutny, 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: 

Jeffrey.Smutny@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 

Avenue, 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 Agreement 

No. 148 and Order No. 932, both as 

amended (7 CFR part 932), regulating 

the handling of olives grown in 

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, California olive handlers are 

subject to assessments. Funds to 

administer the order are derived from 

such assessments. It is intended that the 

assessment rate as proposed herein 

would be applicable to all assessable 

olives beginning on January 1, 2010, 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 would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

Committee for the 2010 and subsequent 

fiscal years from $28.63 to $44.72 per 

ton of olives. 

The California olive marketing 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 California olives. They are 

familiar with the Committee’s needs and 

with 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 

years, the Committee recommended, 

and USDA approved, an assessment rate 

that would continue in effect from fiscal 

year to fiscal year 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 December 15, 

2009, and unanimously recommended 

2010 fiscal year expenditures of 

$929,923 and an assessment rate of 

$44.72 per ton of olives. In comparison, 

last year’s budgeted expenditures were 

$1,482,349. The assessment rate of 

$44.72 is $16.09 higher than the rate 

currently in effect. The Committee 

recommended the higher assessment 

rate because the 2009–10 assessable 

olive receipts as reported by the 

California Agricultural Statistics Service 

(CASS) are only 22,150 tons, which 

compares to 49,067 tons in 2008–09. 

Unusual weather conditions, including 

untimely temperatures that fell below 

freezing, contributed to a substantially 

smaller crop. The Committee also plans 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules 9537 

to use available reserve funds to help 

meet its 2010 expenses. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2010 fiscal year include $300,000 for 

research, $255,000 for marketing 

activities, and $324,923 for 

administration. Budgeted expenditures 

for these items in 2009 were $495,000, 

$627,800, and $359,549, respectively. 

The assessment rate recommended by 

the Committee was derived by 

considering anticipated fiscal year 

expenses, actual olive tonnage received 

by handlers during the 2009–10 crop 

year, and additional pertinent factors. 

Actual assessable tonnage for the 2010 

fiscal year is expected to be lower than 

the 2009–10 crop receipts of 22,150 tons 

reported by the CASS because some 

olives may be diverted by handlers to 

uses that are exempt from marketing 

order requirements. Income derived 

from handler assessments, along with 

interest income and funds from the 

Committee’s authorized reserve, would 

be adequate to cover budgeted expenses. 

Funds in the reserve would be kept 

within the maximum permitted by the 

order of approximately one fiscal year’s 

expenses (§ 932.40). 

The proposed assessment rate would 

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 would 

be in effect for an indefinite period, the 

Committee would continue to meet 

prior to or during each fiscal year 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 would evaluate Committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking would be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

Committee’s 2010 budget and those for 

subsequent fiscal years would be 

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved 

by USDA. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–602), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

rule on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial 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 1000 

producers of olives in the production 

area and 2 handlers subject to regulation 

under the marketing order. Small 

agricultural producers are defined by 

the Small Business Administration (13 

CFR 121.201) as those having annual 

receipts less than $750,000, and small 

agricultural service firms are defined as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $7,000,000. 

Based upon information from the 

Committee, the majority of olive 

producers may be classified as small 

entities. Both of the handlers may be 

classified as large entities. 

This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

Committee and collected from handlers 

for the 2010 and subsequent fiscal years 

from $28.63 to $44.72 per ton of 

assessable olives. The Committee 

unanimously recommended 2010 

expenditures of $929,923 and an 

assessment rate of $44.72 per ton. The 

proposed assessment rate of $44.72 is 

$16.09 higher than the 2009 rate. The 

higher assessment rate is necessary 

because assessable olive receipts for the 

2009–10 crop year were reported by the 

CASS to be 22,150 tons, compared to 

49,067 tons for the 2008–09 crop year. 

Actual assessable tonnage for the 2010 

fiscal year is expected to be lower 

because some of the receipts may be 

diverted by handlers to exempt outlets 

on which assessments are not paid. 

Income generated from the $44.72 per 

ton assessment rate should be adequate 

to meet this year’s expenses when 

combined with funds from the 

authorized reserve and interest income. 

Funds in the reserve would be kept 

within the maximum permitted by the 

order of about one fiscal year’s expenses 

(§ 932.40). 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the Committee for the 

2010 fiscal year include $300,000 for 

research, $255,000 for marketing 

activities, and $324,923 for 

administration. Budgeted expenses for 

these items in 2009 were $495,000, 

$627,800, and $359,549 respectively. 

The Committee recommended decreases 

in all major expense categories due to 

the huge decrease in assessable crop 

volume as reported by the CASS. 

Prior to arriving at this budget, the 

Committee considered information from 

various sources, such as the 

Committee’s Executive, Market 

Development, and Research 

Subcommittees. Alternate spending 

levels were discussed by these groups, 

based upon the relative value of various 

research and marketing projects to the 

olive industry and the reduced olive 

production. The assessment rate of 

$44.72 per ton of assessable olives was 

derived by considering anticipated 

expenses, the volume of assessable 

olives and additional pertinent factors. 

A review of historical information and 

preliminary information pertaining to 

the upcoming fiscal year indicates that 

the grower price for the 2009–10 crop 

year was approximately $1,193.94 per 

ton for canning fruit and $375.01 per 

ton for limited-use sizes, leaving the 

balance as unusable cull fruit. 

Approximately 91 percent of a ton of 

olives are canning fruit sizes and 5 

percent are limited use sizes, leaving the 

balance as unusable cull fruit. Grower 

revenue on 22,150 total tons of canning 

and limited-use sizes would be 

$24,321,145 given the current grower 

prices for those sizes. Therefore, with an 

assessment rate increased from $28.63 

to $44.72, the estimated assessment 

revenue is expected to be approximately 

4 percent of grower revenue. 

This action would increase 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 would be offset by 

the benefits derived by the operation of 

the marketing order. In addition, the 

Committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the California 

olive industry and all interested persons 

were invited to attend the meeting and 

participate in Committee deliberations 

on all issues. Like all Committee 

meetings, the December 15, 2009, 

meeting was a public meeting and all 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express views on this issue. Finally, 

interested persons are invited to submit 

comments on this proposed rule, 

including the regulatory and 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California olive handlers. As with all 

Federal marketing order programs, 

reports and forms are periodically 

reviewed to reduce information 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
9538 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

requirements and duplication by 

industry and public sector agencies. 

The 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/ 

AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?

template=TemplateN&page=

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. 

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. Thirty days is 

deemed appropriate because: (1) The 

2010 fiscal year began on January 1, 

2010, and the marketing order requires 

that the rate of assessment for each 

fiscal year apply to all assessable olives 

handled during such fiscal year; (2) the 

Committee needs sufficient funds to pay 

its expenses, which are incurred on a 

continuous basis; and (3) handlers are 

aware of this action, which was 

discussed by the Committee and 

unanimously recommended at a public 

meeting, and is similar to other 

assessment rate actions issued in past 

years. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932 

Olives, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 932 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

2. Section 932.230 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 932.230 Assessment rate. 

On and after January 1, 2010, an 

assessment rate of $44.72 per ton is 

established for California olives. 

Dated: February 25, 2010. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4338 Filed 3–2–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No Docket No. FAA–2010–0049; 

Airspace Docket No. 08–AWA–1] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Proposed Modification of Class B 

Airspace; Charlotte, NC 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

modify the Charlotte, NC, Class B 

airspace area to ensure the containment 

of aircraft, accommodate the 

implementation of area navigation 

(RNAV) departure procedures, and to 

support operations of the third parallel 

runway planned for commissioning in 

early 2010. The FAA is proposing this 

action to improve the flow of air traffic, 

enhance safety, and reduce the potential 

for midair collision in the Charlotte 

terminal area. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West 

Building Ground Floor, RoomW12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; telephone: 

(202) 366–9826. You must identify FAA 

Docket No. FAA–2010–0049 and 

Airspace Docket No. 08–AWA–1, at the 

beginning of your comments. You may 

also submit comments through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Gallant, Airspace and Rules Group, 

Office of System Operations Airspace 

and AIM, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA– 

2010–0049 and Airspace Docket No. 08– 

AWA–1) and be submitted in triplicate 

to the Docket Management Facility (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number). You may also submit 

comments through the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this action must submit with those 

comments a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket Nos. FAA–2010–0049 and 

Airspace Docket No.08–AWA–1.’’ The 

postcard will be date/time stamped and 

returned to the commenter. 

All communications received on or 

before the specified closing date for 

comments will be considered before 

taking action on the proposed rule. The 

proposal contained in this action may 

be changed in light of comments 

received. All comments submitted will 

be available for examination in the 

public docket both before and after the 

closing date for comments. A report 

summarizing each substantive public 

contact with FAA personnel concerned 

with this rulemaking will be filed in the 

docket. 

Availability of NPRM’s 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Recently published rulemaking 

documents can also be accessed through 

the FAA’s Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

rulemaking/recently_published/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. An informal docket 

may also be examined during normal 

business hours at the office of the 

Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation 

Administration, Room 210, 1701 

Columbia Ave., College Park, GA 30337. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRMs should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking, 

(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory 

Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1