68510 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

provide the public the option of 

submitting information or transacting 

business electronically to the maximum 

extent possible. 

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. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 205 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Agriculture, Animals, 

Archives and records, Imports, Labeling, 

Organically produced products, Plants, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Seals and insignia, Soil 

conservation. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 205, Subpart G is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 205—NATIONAL ORGANIC 

PROGRAM 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 205 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6501–6522. 

2. Section 205.601 is amended by 

adding paragraph (o) to read as follows: 

§ 205.601 Synthetic substances allowed 

for use in organic crop production. 

* * * * * 

(o) As production aids. 

Microcrystalline cheesewax (CAS #’s 

64742–42–3, 8009–03–08, and 8002–74– 

2)—for use in log grown mushroom 

culture. Must be made without either 

ethylene-propylene co-polymer or 

synthetic colors. 

* * * * * 

3. Section 205.605, paragraph (b), is 

amended by: 

A. Removing ‘‘Lecithin—bleached.’’; 

and 

B. Adding one new substance to 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) 

substances allowed as ingredients in or on 

processed products labeled as ‘‘organic’’ or 

‘‘made with organic (specified ingredients 

or food group(s)).’’ 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

Acidified sodium chlorite— 

Secondary direct antimicrobial food 

treatment and indirect food contact 

surface sanitizing. Acidified with citric 

acid only. 

* * * * * 

4. Section 205.606 is amended by: 

A. Revising paragraph (p); 

B. Redesignating paragraphs (r) 

through (t) and paragraphs (u) through 

(y) as paragraphs (s) through (u) and (w) 

through (aa) respectively; and 

C. Adding new paragraphs (r) and (v) 

to read as follows: 

§ 205.606 Nonorganically produced 

agricultural products allowed as ingredients 

in or on processed products labeled as 

‘‘organic.’’ 

* * * * * 

(p) Lecithin—de-oiled. 

* * * * * 

(r) Orange pulp, dried. 

* * * * * 

(v) Seaweed, Pacific kombu. 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 2, 2010. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–28042 Filed 11–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 924 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–10–0053; FV10–924–1 

PR] 

Fresh Prunes Grown in Designated 

Counties in Washington and in 

Umatilla County, OR; Termination of 

Marketing Order 924 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule invites comments 

on the proposed termination of the 

Federal marketing order regulating the 

handling of fresh prunes grown in 

designated counties in Washington and 

in Umatilla County, Oregon, and the 

rules and regulations issued thereunder. 

Marketing Order No. 924 is 

administered locally by the WashingtonOregon Fresh Prune Marketing 

Committee (Committee), which 

unanimously recommended termination 

of the marketing order at a meeting held 

on June 1, 2010. This recommendation 

is based on the Committee’s 

determination that this order is no 

longer an effective marketing tool for the 

fresh prune industry, and that 

termination would best serve the 

current needs of the industry while also 

eliminating the costs associated with the 

operation of the marketing order. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

January 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this proposal. 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. All 

comments should reference the 

document number and the date and 

page number of this issue of the Federal 

Register and will be made 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: 

Martin Engeler, Marketing Order 

Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 2202 

Monterey Street, Suite 102–B, Fresno, 

California 93721, Telephone: (559) 487– 

5110, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or E-mail: 

Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov; or Robert 

Curry, Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1220 SW Third Avenue, 

Suite 385, Portland, Oregon 97068, 

Telephone: (503) 326–2724, Fax: (503) 

326–7440, or E-mail: 

Robert.Curry@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 

proposed rule is governed by 

§ 608c(16)(A) of the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Act’’, and § 924.64 of 

Marketing Agreement and Order No. 

924, both as amended (7 CFR part 924), 

effective under the Act and hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘order’’. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This proposal to terminate the order 

has been reviewed under Executive 

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This 

rule is not intended to have retroactive 

effect. 

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 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 68511 

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. A 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 proposes to terminate the 

order and the rules and regulations 

issued thereunder. The order contains 

authority for regulation of the handling 

of fresh prunes grown in designated 

counties in Washington and in Umatilla 

County, Oregon. At a meeting held in 

Prosser, Washington, on June 1, 2010, 

the Committee unanimously 

recommended termination of the order. 

Section 924.64 of the order provides, 

in pertinent part, that USDA terminate 

or suspend any or all provisions of the 

order when a finding is made that the 

order does not tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. In addition, 

section 608c(16)(A) of the Act provides 

that USDA terminate or suspend the 

operation of any order whenever the 

order or any provision thereof obstructs 

or does not tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. Additionally, 

USDA is required to notify Congress not 

later than 60 days before the date the 

order would be terminated. 

The order has been in effect since 

1960 and has provided the fresh prune 

industry in Washington and Oregon 

with authority for grade, size, quality, 

maturity, pack, and container 

regulations, as well as the authority for 

mandatory inspection. The order also 

authorizes production research and 

marketing research and development 

projects, as well as the necessary 

reporting, recordkeeping, and 

assessment functions required for 

operation. 

Based on the Committee’s 

recommendation, USDA suspended the 

order’s handling regulations on May 9, 

2006 (71 FR 26817). The suspended 

handling regulations (§ 924.319) consist 

of minimum quality requirements for 

certain fresh prunes produced within 

the regulated production area. When the 

Committee made the recommendation 

to suspend the handling regulations, the 

industry believed that the costs of 

inspection outweighed the benefits of 

having the regulatory requirements in 

effect. The Committee decided to 

evaluate the marketing conditions 

annually thereafter to determine 

whether to continue the regulatory 

suspension, reinstate handling 

regulations, or take some other action. 

The only regulatory provisions in effect 

since 2006 have been collection of 

assessments to maintain the 

functionality of the Committee, and a 

reporting provision that provides a basis 

for assessment collection. 

After four years of evaluating the 

effects of operating without the quality 

regulations, the Committee has 

determined that the suspension of the 

regulations has not negatively impacted 

the marketing of fresh WashingtonOregon prunes. Analysis of the 

marketing conditions over the past four 

years, as well as an analysis of statistics 

showing that the fresh prune industry 

has been in steady decline over the past 

several decades, led the Committee to 

conclude that the order is no longer an 

effective marketing tool for the fresh 

prune industry, and that termination 

would be the best means of relieving the 

industry of the costs and burdens 

associated with the order. 

Evidence supporting the conclusion 

that the industry has been decreasing in 

scope and volume include statistics 

showing that the Washington-Oregon 

fresh prune industry has fewer 

producers and handlers today then there 

were when the order was promulgated, 

and that acreage and production has 

significantly declined as well. For 

example, USDA Marketing Order 

Administration Branch records from an 

amendatory referendum indicate that 

there were approximately 720 producers 

of fresh prunes in the order’s production 

area in 1974, while the most recent 

information received from the 

Committee indicates that there are now 

only 56 currently active producers. 

Furthermore, Committee records 

indicate that there were 51 handlers in 

1961—the year after the order was 

promulgated—as opposed to the six 

currently operating handlers. Committee 

records also indicate that 12,120 tons of 

fresh prunes were shipped in 1961 as 

compared to the 4,260 tons shipped in 

2009. Finally, data provided by the 

USDA National Agricultural Statistics 

Service (NASS) indicates that prune 

acreage in Washington and Oregon has 

declined in the past 50 years by about 

80 percent. 

This proposed termination of the 

order is intended to solicit input and 

any additional information available 

from interested parties regarding 

whether the order should be terminated. 

USDA will evaluate all available 

information prior to making a final 

determination on this matter. 

Termination of the order would become 

effective only after a 60-day notification 

to Congress as required by law. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to the 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 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 six handlers of WashingtonOregon fresh prunes subject to 

regulation under the order and 

approximately 56 fresh prune producers 

in the regulated production area. Small 

agricultural service firms are defined by 

the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) 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. 

Based on information compiled by 

both the Committee and NASS, the 

average producer price for fresh prunes 

in 2009 was approximately $385 per 

ton. With 4,260 tons of fresh prunes 

shipped from the Washington and 

Oregon production areas in 2009, this 

equates to average producer revenue of 

about $30,000. In addition, AMS Market 

News Service reported that 2009 f.o.b. 

prices ranged from $12.00 to $18.00 per 

30-pound container, indicating that the 

entire Washington-Oregon fresh prune 

industry handled less than $7,000,000 

worth of prunes last season. In view of 

the foregoing, the majority of 

Washington-Oregon fresh prune 

producers and handlers may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule proposes to terminate the 

Federal marketing order for fresh prunes 

grown in Washington and Oregon, and 

the rules and regulations issued 

thereunder. The order contains 

authority to regulate the handling of 

fresh prunes grown in designated 

counties in Washington and in Umatilla 

County, Oregon. The Committee has 

determined that the order no longer 

provides the fresh prune industry with 

an effective marketing tool since 

evidence shows that prunes can be 

shipped absent the order’s quality 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
68512 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 215 / Monday, November 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

regulations without negative impact, 

and that the costs associated with the 

order outweigh the benefits. The 

Committee also believes that the overall 

decline in the scope and volume of the 

fresh prune industry in Washington and 

Oregon supports order termination. As a 

consequence, in action taken on June 1, 

2010, the Committee unanimously 

recommended that USDA terminate the 

order. 

Section 924.64 of the order provides 

that USDA terminate or suspend any or 

all provisions of the order when a 

finding is made that the order does not 

tend to effectuate the declared policy of 

the Act. Furthermore, § 608c(16)(A) of 

the Act provides that USDA shall 

terminate or suspend the operation of 

any order whenever the order or 

provision thereof obstructs or does not 

tend to effectuate the declared policy of 

the Act. An additional provision 

requires that Congress be notified not 

later than 60 days before the date the 

order would be terminated. 

The proposed termination of the order 

is a regulatory relaxation and would 

consequently reduce the costs to both 

handlers and producers (while 

marketing order requirements are 

applied to handlers, the costs of such 

requirements are often passed on to 

producers). Furthermore, the Committee 

has determined, through its analysis of 

the four year period of regulatory 

suspension, that termination would not 

negatively impact the marketing of fresh 

prunes. The Committee considered 

alternatives to this rule including 

leaving the order active but continuing 

with regulatory suspension, and 

suspending the order rather than 

terminating it. Interest was not shown 

for either option, however, and the 

Committee subsequently recommended 

that the order be terminated. 

This proposed rule is intended to 

solicit input and other available 

information from interested parties on 

whether the order should be terminated. 

USDA will evaluate all available 

information prior to making a final 

determination on this matter. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the information collection 

requirements being suspended were 

approved previously by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Fruit 

Crops. Termination of the reporting 

requirements under the order is 

expected to reduce the reporting burden 

on Washington-Oregon prune handlers 

by 2.92 hours, and should further 

reduce industry expenses. Handlers are 

no longer required to file forms with the 

Committee. This proposed rule would 

thus not impose any additional 

reporting or recordkeeping requirements 

on either small or large 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. 

In addition, USDA has not identified 

any relevant Federal rules that 

duplicate, overlap or conflict with this 

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. 

The Committee’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the WashingtonOregon fresh prune industry and all 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meeting and participate in 

Committee deliberations. Like all 

Committee meetings, the June 1, 2010, 

meeting was a public meeting and all 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express their views on this issue. 

Additionally, interested persons are 

invited to submit information on the 

regulatory and informational impacts of 

this action on small businesses. 

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. 

This rule invites comments on the 

proposed termination of Marketing 

Order 924, which regulates the handling 

of fresh prunes grown in designated 

counties in Washington and in Umatilla 

County, Oregon. All written comments 

received in a timely manner will be 

considered before a final determination 

is made on this matter. 

Based on the foregoing, and pursuant 

to § 608c(16)(A) of the Act and § 924.64 

of the order, USDA is considering 

termination of the order. If USDA 

decides to terminate the order, trustees 

would be appointed to conclude and 

liquidate the affairs of the Committee, 

and would continue in that capacity 

until discharged by USDA. In addition, 

USDA would notify Congress 60 days in 

advance of termination pursuant to 

§ 608c(16)(A) of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 924 

Prunes, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

PART 924—FRESH PRUNES GROWN 

IN DESIGNATED COUNTIES IN 

WASHINGTON AND IN UMATILLA 

COUNTY, OREGON—[REMOVED] 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, under the authority of 

7 U.S.C. 601–674, 7 CFR part 924 is 

proposed to be removed. 

Dated: November 2, 2010. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–28046 Filed 11–5–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1214 

[Document No. AMS–FV–10–0008–PR–1A] 

RIN 0581–AD00 

Proposed Christmas Tree Promotion, 

Research, and Information Order 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule invites 

comments on the establishment of an 

industry-funded promotion, research, 

and information program for fresh cut 

Christmas trees. The proposed 

Christmas Tree Promotion, Research, 

and Information Order (Proposed 

Order), was submitted to the 

Department of Agriculture (Department) 

by the Christmas Tree Checkoff Task 

Force, an industry wide group of 

producers and importers that support 

this proposed program. Under the 

Proposed Order, producers and 

importers of fresh cut Christmas trees 

would pay an initial assessment of $0.15 

per tree, which would be paid to the 

proposed Christmas Tree Promotion 

Board (Board). This Board would be 

responsible for administration and 

operation of the proposed Order. 

Producers and importers that 

domestically produce or import less 

than 500 Christmas trees annually 

would be exempt from the assessment. 

The proposed program is authorized 

under the Commodity Promotion, 

Research, and Information Act of 1996 

(1996 Act). A referendum will be 

conducted, among producers and 

importers, three years after the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS