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

52154 

Vol. 74, No. 195 

Friday, October 9, 2009 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 984 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–09–0050; FV09–984–5 

PR] 

Walnuts Grown in California; Changes 

to Regulations Governing Voting 

Procedures 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule invites comments 

on revisions to the administrative 

regulations governing voting procedures 

for the California Walnut Board (Board). 

The Board locally administers the 

marketing order that regulates the 

handling of walnuts grown in California 

(order). This rule would specify the 

voting procedures to be used for 

expanded types of non-assembled 

meetings and remove voting by 

telegraph. This would enable the Board 

to conduct business using current 

communication methods, which would 

result in time and cost savings to the 

Board and its members. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

December 8, 2009. 

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: 

Debbie Wray, 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: 

Debbie.Wray@ams.usda.gov or 

Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, 

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: 

Jay.Guerber@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal is issued under Marketing 

Order No. 984, as amended (7 CFR part 

984), regulating the handling of walnuts 

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 proposal 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 

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 proposal invites comments on 

revisions to the administrative 

regulations governing the Board’s voting 

procedures to implement authority from 

a recent amendment to the order. It 

would expand the current procedures 

for voting by allowing voting by e-mail, 

facsimile, telephone, and 

videoconference, or by other means of 

communication. This proposal was 

unanimously recommended by the 

Board at a meeting on May 18, 2009. 

Section 984.45(b) of the California 

walnut marketing order specifies the 

percentage requirements for quorum 

and voting procedures of the Board. 

Section 984.45(c) of the order provides 

authority for the Board to vote by mail 

or telegram, or by any other means of 

communication, and to prescribe, with 

the approval of USDA, the minimum 

number of votes that must be cast, as 

well as any other procedures that are 

necessary when the voting is by any of 

these communication methods. Section 

984.45(d) of the order provides 

authority for the Board to meet by 

telephone or other means of 

communication. 

Currently, Section 984.445 of the 

order’s administrative regulations 

prescribes procedures for voting by mail 

or telegram but does not include 

procedures for voting by other means of 

communication, such as e-mail, 

facsimile, telephone, or 

videoconference. 

At its meeting on May 18, 2009, the 

Board discussed the need to change the 

order’s administrative regulations to 

include the use of current 

communication technologies to conduct 

business at non-assembled meetings, as 

authorized by a recent amendment to 

the order (73 FR 11328, March 3, 2008). 

Prior to the amendment, the Board had 

the authority to vote by mail or telegram 

upon due notice to all members but not 

to hold non-assembled meetings. As 

amended, the order provides for nonassembled meetings, but voting 

requirements and procedures for all 

such communication methods needed to 

be recommended by the Board and 

established through informal 

rulemaking. The Board unanimously 

recommended these changes at its 

meeting on May 18, 2009. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 195 / Friday, October 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 52155 

Using current communication 

methods and technology to vote at nonassembled meetings on matters deemed 

to be non-controversial, administrative, 

or of an emergency nature would result 

in cost savings by reducing time and 

travel expenses of Board members, 

many of whom are walnut producers 

and handlers who must travel long 

distances within California to attend 

meetings. Other Board expenses 

associated with holding assembled 

meetings, such as reserving meeting 

spaces, could also be reduced. 

This proposal would expand the 

procedures currently prescribed for 

voting by mail or telegram to include 

voting by e-mail and facsimile. In 

addition, reference to voting by telegram 

would be removed from the regulations 

since this communication method 

generally has been replaced by newer 

technology. Finally, voting by roll call 

would be prescribed for meetings 

conducted by telephone, 

videoconference, or any other method of 

communication that enables interaction 

of Board members to ensure each 

member’s vote by such method is 

accurately recorded. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this 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 currently 58 handlers of 

California walnuts subject to regulation 

under the marketing order, and there are 

approximately 4,500 growers in the 

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 growers are defined as those 

having annual receipts of less than 

$750,000. 

USDA’s National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS) reports that 

California walnuts were harvested from 

a total of 223,000 bearing acres during 

2008–09. The average yield for the 

2008–09 crop was 1.96 tons per acre, 

which is higher than the 1.56 tons per 

acre average for the previous five years. 

NASS reported the value of the 2008– 

09 crop at $1,210 per ton, which is 

lower than the previous five-year 

average of $1,598 per ton. 

At the time of the 2007 Census of 

Agriculture, which is the most recent 

information available, approximately 89 

percent of California’s walnut farms 

were smaller than 100 acres. Fifty-four 

percent were between 1 and 15 acres. A 

100-acre farm with an average yield of 

1.96 tons per acre would have been 

expected to produce about 196 tons of 

walnuts during 2008–09. At $1,210 per 

ton, that farm’s production would have 

had an approximate value of $237,000. 

Assuming that the majority of 

California’s walnut farms are still 

smaller than 100 acres, it could be 

concluded that the majority of the 

growers had receipts of less than 

$237,000 in 2008–09. This is well below 

the SBA threshold of $750,000; thus, the 

majority of California’s walnut growers 

would be considered small growers 

according to SBA’s definition. 

Industry information regarding the 

value of merchantable walnuts shipped 

by handlers during the 2008–09 

marketing year is not yet available; 

however, the industry reported that 

during the 2007–08 marketing year, 

approximately two-thirds of California’s 

walnut handlers shipped merchantable 

walnuts valued under $7,000,000 and 

would therefore be considered small 

handlers according to the SBA 

definition. 

This proposal would revise 

procedures currently prescribed under 

§ 984.445 of the order for voting by mail 

and telegram to include other means of 

communication, including e-mail, 

facsimile, telephone, and 

videoconference. This revision to the 

regulations would incorporate authority 

from a recent amendment to the order 

concerning voting procedures and 

would allow the Board to conduct 

business at non-assembled meetings 

using current methods of 

communication. Authority for this 

action is provided in § 984.45 of the 

order. 

The majority of the Board’s members 

are walnut producers and handlers who 

are located at various locations 

throughout California, and it can be 

difficult to assemble these members in 

one location for a meeting, especially 

during harvest season. By prescribing 

procedures for voting by the 

communication methods authorized by 

the order, the Board would be able to 

vote on non-controversial, 

administrative, or emergency matters at 

non-assembled meetings, which would 

reduce travel time and expenses for 

producer and handler Board members. 

Board expenses associated with holding 

assembled meetings, such as the cost of 

reserving a meeting room, would also be 

reduced. 

The Board unanimously 

recommended these changes, which are 

necessary to implement authority 

provided by a recent amendment to the 

order. Therefore, no alternatives to these 

changes were considered practicable. 

This action would not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

walnut handlers. As with all Federal 

marketing order programs, reports and 

forms are periodically reviewed to 

reduce information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or 

conflict with this proposed rule. 

The Board’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the walnut 

industry, and all interested persons 

were invited to attend the meeting and 

participate in Board deliberations on all 

issues. Like all Board meetings, the May 

18, 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. 

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 Jay Guerber at 

the previously mentioned address in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

A 60-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposal. All written comments 

timely received will be considered 

before a final determination is made on 

this matter. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 984 

Marketing agreements, Nuts, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Walnuts. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
52156 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 195 / Friday, October 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 984 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 984—WALNUTS GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 984 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

2. Section 984.445 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 984.445 Procedures for voting by mail, email, telephone, videoconference, facsimile, 

or any other means of communication. 

(a) Whenever the Board votes upon 

any proposition by mail, e-mail, or 

facsimile, at least six members or 

alternates acting as members must vote 

and one dissenting vote shall prevent its 

adoption. Each proposition to be voted 

upon by mail, e-mail, or facsimile shall 

specify a time limit for members to vote, 

after which the alternates shall be given 

the opportunity to vote. 

(b) Whenever the Board conducts 

meetings by telephone, 

videoconference, or any technology that 

enables member interaction, the vote 

shall be conducted by roll call. 

Dated: October 1, 2009. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–24299 Filed 10–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0938; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–CE–052–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; PILATUS 

Aircraft Ltd. Model PC–7 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is 

prompted due to the discovery of cracks 

caused by stress corrosion in the main-gear 

support struts. All the main-gear support 

struts that had cracks were made from 

material AA2024–T351 which has a lower 

resistance to stress corrosion cracking. 

Such cracks, if undetected, could lead to 

the failure of the strut during landing which 

could then cause the Main Landing Gear 

(MLG) to collapse. 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 23, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4059; fax: (816) 329–4090; e-mail: 

doug.rudolph@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0938; Directorate Identifier 

2009–CE–052–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

The Federal Office of Civil Aviation 

(FOCA), which is the aviation authority 

for Switzerland, has issued FOCA AD 

HB–2009–011, dated September 10, 

2009 (referred to after this as ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is 

prompted due to the discovery of cracks 

caused by stress corrosion in the main-gear 

support struts. All the main-gear support 

struts that had cracks were made from 

material AA2024–T351 which has a lower 

resistance to stress corrosion cracking. 

Such cracks, if undetected, could lead to 

the failure of the strut during landing which 

could then cause the Main Landing Gear 

(MLG) to collapse. 

In order to correct and control the 

situation, this AD mandates the identification 

of the main-gear support struts to check if 

they have rounded clevis lugs and a NonDestructive Inspection (NDI) procedure on 

the main-gear support struts if they have 

chamfered clevis lugs. 

For main-gear support struts with 

chamfered clevis lugs that show cracks 

during the NDI, the MCAI also requires 

replacing any cracked main-gear 

support struts with parts of improved 

design. You may obtain further 

information by examining the MCAI in 

the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

PILATUS Aircraft Ltd. has issued 

PILATUS PC–7 Service Bulletin No. 32– 

024, Rev. No. 1, dated November 17, 

2008; and PILATUS PC–7 Service 

Bulletin No. 32–025, Rev. No. 1, dated 

November 17, 2008. The actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1