### 12034 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

kiwifruit producers may also be classified as small entities. In addition,
based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Department of Commerce, the value of imported kiwifruit for 50 of the 53 importers was less than $7,000,000. Thus, it can be concluded that the majority of kiwifruit importers may be
classified as small entities.

This rule continues in effect the action that relaxed the minimum grade requirement for KAC No. 1 kiwifruit grown in California and for imported
kiwifruit. This rule relaxes the tolerance for kiwifruit that is ‘‘badly misshapen’’ from 7 percent to 16 percent under the provisions of §§ 920.302(b) and 944.550 of the order. Authority for the change in the order’s rules and regulations is provided in § 920.53. The change in the import regulation is provided under
section 8e of the Act.

This action is not expected to increase
costs associated with the order requirements or the kiwifruit import regulation. Rather, this action is expected to reduce costs to handlers and growers of kiwifruit, and to increase efficiencies in the packing process. Increasing the tolerance for misshapen fruit will reduce the amount of product that fails to meet the minimum grade, thus reducing re-sorting and repacking costs and reducing inefficiencies in the packing process. The quality of fruit to consumers is not expected to be significantly affected.

Importers also benefit from this change as a greater volume of fruit is available for shipment to the United States. The opportunities and benefits of this rule are equally available to all kiwifruit handlers, growers, and importers, regardless of their size.

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. 0581–0189, Generic Fruit 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.

This rule will not impose any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large
kiwifruit handlers in California or importers. 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 where this change was recommended was widely publicized throughout the California kiwifruit industry. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in

Committee deliberations. Like all Committee meetings, the March 27, 2013, meeting was a public meeting. All entities, both large and small, were able to express their views on this issue.

Comments on the interim rule were required to be received on or before September 20, 2013. One comment was received. The commenter supported this action, stating that increasing the tolerance for misshapen fruit would

decrease food waste and increase the availability of affordable fresh fruit for consumers. No changes are being made

to the interim rule based on comments

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/ #!documentDetail;D=AMS-FV-13-0032-

0001

.

This action also affirms information contained in the interim rule concerning Executive Orders 12866 and 12988, the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), and the E-Gov Act (44 U.S.C. 101).

In accordance with section 8e of the Act, the United States Trade Representative has concurred with the

issuance of this final rule.

After consideration of all relevant material presented, it is found that finalizing the interim rule, without change, as published in the Federal Register (78 FR 43758, July 22, 2013)

will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.

List of Subjects

7 CFR Part 920

Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements.

7 CFR Part 944

Avocados, Food grades and standards, Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, Kiwifruit, Limes, Olives, Oranges.

**§§ 920 AND 944 [AMENDED]**

Accordingly, the interim rule that amended 7 CFR parts 920 and 944 and that was published at 78 FR 43758 on July 22, 2013, is adopted as a final rule, without change. Dated: February 25, 2014.

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

[FR Doc. 2014–04689 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Agricultural Marketing Service**

**7 CFR Part 993**

**[Doc. No. AMS–FV–13–0065; FV13–993–1 FR]** 

**Dried Prunes Produced in California;**

**Increased Assessment Rate**

**AGENCY :**  Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  This rule increases the
assessment rate established for the Prune Marketing Committee (Committee) for the 2013–14 and subsequent crop years from $0.22 to $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes handled. The Committee locally administers the marketing order, which regulates the handling of dried prunes grown in California. Assessments upon dried prune handlers are used by the
Committee to fund reasonable and necessary expenses of the program. The crop year begins August 1 and ends July
31. The assessment rate will remain in effect indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: March 5, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Jerry L. Simmons, Marketing Specialist, or Martin Engeler, Regional Director, California Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487–5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or Email: Jerry.Simmons@ ams.usda.gov or Martin.Engeler@ ams.usda.gov

.

Small businesses may request information on complying with this regulation 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 Agreement No. 110 and Order No. 993, both as amended (7 CFR part 993), regulating the handling of dried prunes grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the
‘‘order.’’ The order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act


### 12035 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

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 and 13563.

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. Under the marketing order now in effect, California dried prune handlers 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 dried prunes beginning on August 1, 2013, 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 2013–14 and subsequent crop years from $0.22 to $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes handled.

The California dried prune 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 dried prunes. They are familiar with the
Committee’s needs and with the costs for goods and services in their local area. Therefore, they are 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 2011–12 and subsequent crop years, the Committee recommended, and USDA approved, an assessment rate that would continue in effect from crop year to crop 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 June 25, 2013, and unanimously recommended 2013– 14 expenditures of $43,791 and an assessment rate of $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes. The assessment rate of $0.28 is $0.06 higher than the rate currently in effect, even though last year’s budgeted expenditures of $44,968 were higher than those recommended for this year.

The Committee unanimously recommended the higher assessment rate because the production estimate of 105,000 tons of salable dried prunes for the 2013–14 crop year is substantially lower than the 137,285 tons produced during the 2012–13 crop year. Using the proposed assessment rate, assessment income for the 2013–14 crop year will be $29,400. Assessment income,
combined with funds carried over from the prior crop year and interest income, is expected to be adequate to cover budgeted expenses for the year.

The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2013–14 year include $26,944 for salaries, $9,538 for operating expenses, and $7,308 for contingencies. Budgeted expenses for these items in 2012–13 were $22,997, $9,970, and $12,001, respectively.

The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by considering the funds needed to meet anticipated expenses, the estimated salable tons of California dried prunes, excess funds in the amount of $14,384 carried forward into the 2013–14 crop year, and estimated interest income in the amount of $7. As mentioned earlier, dried prune production for the year is estimated at 105,000 salable tons, which should provide $29,400 in assessment
income. Income derived from handler assessments, along with interest income
and funds from the Committee’s authorized reserve, will be adequate to cover budgeted expenses.

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 crop 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 will evaluate 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 2013–14 budget and those for subsequent crop years 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 businesses. 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 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 800 producers of dried prunes in the production area and approximately 21 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 of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $7,000,000.

Committee data indicates that about 64 percent of the handlers ship less than $7,000,000 worth of dried prunes. Dividing the average prune crop value for 2012 reported by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) of $172,500,000 by the number of producers (800) yields an average annual producer revenue estimate of about $215,625. Based on the foregoing, the majority of handlers and producers of dried prunes may be classified as
small entities.

This rule increases the assessment
rate established for the Committee and
collected from handlers for the 2013–14 and subsequent crop years from $0.22 to $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes. The Committee unanimously recommended 2013–14 expenditures of $43,791 and an assessment rate of $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes. The assessment rate of $0.28 is $0.06 higher


### 12036 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

than the 2012–13 rate. The quantity of assessable dried prunes for the 2013–14 crop year is estimated at 105,000 tons. Thus, the $0.28 rate should provide $29,400 in assessment income, and when combined with carry-in funds and interest income, should be adequate to meet this year’s expenses.

The major expenditures recommended by the Committee for the 2013–14 year include $26,944 for salaries, $9,538 for operating expenses, and $7,308 for contingencies. Budgeted expenses for these items in 2012–13 were $22,997, $9,970, and $12,001, respectively.

The Committee unanimously recommended the higher assessment rate because the production estimate of 105,000 tons of salable dried prunes for this year is substantially lower than the 137,285 tons produced last year. At the current assessment rate, the anticipated crop would not generate sufficient revenue to meet the 2013–14 budgeted

expenses.

Prior to arriving at this budget and assessment rate, the Committee
considered information from various sources, including the Committee’s
Executive Subcommittee. The assessment rate of $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes was recommended after considering various factors, including the amount of handler
assessment revenue needed to meet anticipated expenses, the estimated quantity of salable tons of California dried prunes for the 2013–14 crop year,
excess funds carried forward into the 2013–14 crop year, and estimated
interest income. An alternative to this
action would be to continue with the $0.22 per ton assessment rate. However, an assessment rate of $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes, along with excess funds from the 2012–13 crop year, is needed to provide sufficient income to fund the Committee’s operations.

A review of historical crop and price information, as well as preliminary information pertaining to the 2013–14 season, indicates that the producer price for salable dried prunes for the 2013–14 season could average about $1,300 per ton. Utilizing this estimate and the proposed assessment rate of $0.28,
estimated assessment revenue as a percentage of total estimated producer revenue should be about 0.02 percent for the 2013–14 season ($0.28 divided by $1,300 per ton).

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 from the operation of the marketing order. In addition, the Committee’s meeting was widely publicized throughout the California dried prune industry. All interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in
Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the June 25, 2013, meeting was a public meeting. All entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue.

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. 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 rule imposes no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California dried prune 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. 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 October 23, 2013 (78 FR 63128). Copies of the proposed rule
were also mailed or sent via facsimile to all dried prune handlers. Finally, the proposal was made available through the Internet by USDA and the Office of the Federal Register. A 15-day comment period ending November 7, 2013, was provided for interested persons to respond to the proposal.

One comment was received during the comment period in response to the proposal. The commenter expressed disagreement with the proposed
increase in the assessment rate and that
the increase in the assessment should be
reconsidered. The commenter also asserted that the proposal failed to explain how the additional cost coupled
with the substantial decrease in production of dried prunes for the 2013–14 year would harm handlers and producers. We disagree. The proposal stated that the members of the Committee that unanimously
recommended the increased assessment rate are producers and handlers of California dried prunes, and represent those who are affected by the assessment rate. They are familiar with
the Committee’s needs and with the costs for goods and services in their
local area. The assessment rate was
formulated and the increase was thoroughly discussed in a public meeting. The Committee members and other interested parties did not believe that the increase in the assessment rate, as proposed, would harm either handlers or producers. Further, the increase to $0.28 is approximately .022% of the producer price for salable dried prunes, which could average about $1,300 per ton for the 2013–14 season. The percent of producer price for the last four years was .017%, .023%, .012%, and .020%, respectively. Therefore, AMS has concluded that the proposed assessment rate, as proposed, is reasonable and in line with previous years’ rates. Further, the increase is the minimal amount necessary to fund basic Committee operations. Accordingly, no change to the assessment rate as proposed is made in the final 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/ 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 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 2013–14 crop year began on August 1, 2013, and the marketing order requires that the rate of assessment for each crop year apply to all assessable dried prunes handled during such crop year; (2) the
Committee needs to have sufficient funds to pay its expenses, which are incurred on a continuous basis; and (3) handlers are aware of this rule, which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public meeting and is
similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past years. Also, a 15-day


### 12037 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

comment period was provided for in the proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 993

Marketing agreements, Plums, Prunes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 993 is amended as
follows:

**PART 993—DRIED PRUNES**
**PRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA**

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 993 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

■ 2. Section 993.347 is revised to read
as follows:

**§ 993.347 Assessment rate.**

On and after August 1, 2013, an assessment rate of $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes is established for California dried prunes.

Dated: February 25, 2014.

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

[FR Doc. 2014–04691 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Agricultural Marketing Service**

**7 CFR Part 1220**

**[Docket No. AMS–LPS–13–0066]**

**Soybean Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Program:** 
**Amendment of Procedures and Notification of Request for Referendum** 

**AGENCY :**  Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS); U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

**ACTION :**  Interim final rule with opportunity for comments.

**SUMMARY :**  This interim final rule would amend the procedures to Request a Referendum by removing the specific number of soybean producers eligible to request a referendum under the Soybean Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information program, commonly known as the Soybean Checkoff Program. The number of soybean producers will be replaced with language that allows the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) to update this number based on information provided by USDA. Additionally, this action would remove specific USDA and Farm Service Agency (FSA) Web site and office addresses and replace them with more flexible language. These changes will enable AMS to announce future Requests for Referendum withoutengaging in additional notice-andcomment rulemaking. This rule also
serves as AMS’ official notice that soybean producers may request a referendum to determine if producers want a referendum on the Soybean Promotion and Research Order (Order), as authorized under the Soybean Promotion, Research, and Consumer Information Act (Act). If at least 10 percent (not in excess of one-fifth of which may be producers in any one State) of eligible producers, as determined by USDA, participate in the Request for Referendum, a referendum will be held within 1 year from that determination. If results of the Request
for Referendum indicate that a referendum is not supported, a
referendum would not be conducted. The results of the Request for Referendum will be published in the Federal Register

. **DATES :**  Effective March 5, 2014. Comments must be received by April 3,

2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments may be posted
online at www.regulations.gov, or sent to James R. Brow, Agricultural Marketing Specialist, Research and Promotion Division, Livestock, Poultry and Seed Program, AMS, USDA, Room 2610–S, STOP 0251, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20250– 0251; or via Fax to (202) 720–1125.
Comments will be made available for public inspection at the above address during regular business hours or via the

Internet at www.regulations.gov. Comments received will be posted without change, including any personal information provided. All comments should reference the document number, Document No. AMS–LPS–13–0066; the date of submission; and the page
number of this issue in the Federal Register

.

AMS also announces that soybean producers may request a referendum during a 4-week period beginning on May 5, 2014, and ending May 30, 2014. To be eligible to participate in the Request for Referendum, producers must certify that they or the producer entity they are authorized to represent paid an assessment at any time between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2013.

Form LS–51–1, Soybean Promotion and Research Order Request for Referendum, may be obtained by mail, fax, or in person from FSA county offices from May 5, 2014, to May 30, 2014. Form LS–51–1 may also be
obtained via the internet at http:// www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ SoybeanInformationont heSoybeanRequestforReferendum during the same time period. Completed forms and supporting documentation must be returned to the appropriate county FSA office by fax or in person no later than close of business May 30, 2014; or if returned by mail, must be postmarked by midnight May 30, 2014, and received in the county FSA office by close of business on June 6, 2014.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  James Brow, Agricultural Marketing Specialist, Research and Promotion Division, Livestock, Poultry and Seed Program, AMS, USDA, Room 2092–S, STOP 0251, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20250–0251; Telephone 202/720–0633; Fax 202/720– 1125; email to James.Brow@ ams.usda.gov or Rick Pinkston, Field Operations Staff, FSA, USDA, at Telephone 202/720–1857, Fax 202/720– 1096, or by email at Rick.Pinkston@ wdc.usda.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Executive Order 12866 and Executive
Order 13563

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health, and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility. This action has been designated as a ‘‘non-significant regulatory action’’ under § 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has waived the review process.

Executive Order 13175

This interim final rule has been
reviewed in accordance with the requirements of Executive Order 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments. The review
reveals that this interim final rule would
not have substantial and direct effects
on Tribal Governments and would not have significant tribal implications.

Executive Order 12988

This interim final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This action is not
intended to have a retroactive effect.

The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted before parties may file suit in court. Under section 1971 of the Act, a person subject