This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

37265

Vol. 65, No. 115

Wednesday, June 14, 2000

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 920

[Docket No. FV00–920–1 FR]

Kiwifruit Grown in California;

Temporary Suspension of Inspection

and Pack Requirements

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule continues the

temporary suspensions of inspection

and pack requirements prescribed under

the California kiwifruit marketing order

(order). The order regulates the handling

of kiwifruit grown in California and is

administered locally by the Kiwifruit

Administrative Committee (Committee).

This rule continues, for the 2000–2001

season, the suspension of the

requirement that fruit must be

reinspected if it has not been shipped by

specified dates, and also continues the

suspension of the minimum net weight

requirements for kiwifruit tray packs.

Both suspensions are scheduled to

expire at the end of the 1999–2000

season. These suspensions are expected

to reduce handler packing costs,

increase grower returns, and enable

handlers to compete more effectively in

the marketplace.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule becomes

effective August 1, 2000. The

suspension of §§ 920.302 (a)(4)(iii), and

920.155 expires on July 31, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose

M. Aguayo, Marketing Specialist,

California Marketing Field Office,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,

AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street,

suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721;

telephone: (559) 487–5901, Fax: (559)

487–5906; or George Kelhart, Technical

Advisor, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room

2525–S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,

DC 20090–6456; telephone: (202) 720–

2491, Fax: (202) 720–5698.

Small businesses may request

information on complying with this

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,

AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room

2525–S, Washington, DC 20090–6456;

telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)

720–5698, or E-mail

Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final

rule is issued under Marketing Order

No. 920, as amended (7 CFR part 920),

regulating the handling of kiwifruit

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

(Department) is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This final rule was reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule is not intended to

have retroactive effect. This rule will

not preempt any State or local laws,

regulations, or policies, unless they

present an irreconcilable conflict with

this rule.

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 the Secretary 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 the Secretary 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 the Secretary’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 final rule continues the

temporary suspensions of inspection

and pack requirements prescribed under

the order. This rule will continue, for

the 2000–2001 season, the suspension of

the requirement that fruit must be

reinspected if it has not been shipped by

specified dates, and the suspension of

the minimum net weight requirements

for kiwifruit tray packs. Both

suspensions were scheduled to expire at

the end of the 1999–2000 season (July

31, 2000). These suspensions are

expected to reduce handler packing

costs, increase grower returns, and

enable handlers to compete more

effectively in the marketplace. This rule

was unanimously recommended by the

Committee at its February 24, 2000,

meeting and will be in effect through

July 31, 2001.

Continued Suspension of Reinspection

Requirement

Section 920.55 of the order requires

that prior to handling any variety of

California kiwifruit, such kiwifruit shall

be inspected by the Federal or FederalState Inspection Service (inspection

service) and certified as meeting the

applicable grade, size, quality, or

maturity requirements in effect pursuant

to § 920.52 or § 920.53.

Section 920.55(b) provides authority

for the establishment, through the

order’s rules and regulations, of a period

prior to shipment during which

inspections must be performed.

Prior to its suspension for 1998–1999

season, § 920.155 of the order’s rules

and regulations specified that the

certification of grade, size, quality, and

maturity of kiwifruit pursuant to

§ 920.52 or § 920.53 during each fiscal

year was valid until December 31 of

such year or 21 days from the date of

inspection, whichever is later. Any

inspected kiwifruit shipped after the

certification period lapsed was required

to be reinspected and recertified before

shipment.

Section 920.155 was suspended for

the 1998–1999 season by a final rule

published August 4, 1998 (63 FR

41390). The Committee recommended

this suspension to lessen the expenses

upon the many kiwifruit growers who

had either lost money or merely

recovered their production costs in

recent years. It concluded that the cost

of reinspecting kiwifruit was too high to

justify requiring it in view of the limited

benefit reinspection provided. The

Committee also believed it was no

longer necessary to have fruit

37266 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

reinspected to provide consumers with

a high quality product because storage

and handling operations had improved

in the industry.

During the 1998–1999 season,

handlers voluntarily checked stored

fruit prior to shipment to ensure that the

condition of the fruit had not

deteriorated. Suspension of the

reinspection requirement enabled

handlers to ship quality kiwifruit during

the 1998–1999 season without the

necessity for reinspection and

recertification and the costs associated

with such requirements. However,

because the harvest started later than

normal and more fruit was in-line

inspected and shipped directly to

buyers, less fruit was repacked and

available for evaluation than

anticipated.

Therefore, at its February 25, 1999,

meeting, the Committee unanimously

recommended suspending § 920.155 of

the order for one more season. Section

920.155 was suspended for the 1999–

2000 season by a final rule published on

July 29, 1999 (64 FR 41010).

During the 1999–2000 season a severe

frost reduced the crop size from the

estimated 9 million tray equivalents to

6 million tray equivalents. A tray

equivalent is equal to approximately 7

pounds of fruit. This significant crop

reduction and the excellent quality of

the fruit resulted in limited quantities of

fruit remaining in cold storage for

repacking and evaluation. The

Committee wanted to fully evaluate the

suspension of the reinspection

requirement during a normal season.

Therefore the Committee, at its February

24, 2000, meeting, unanimously

recommended suspending § 920.155 for

another season, the 2000–2001 season.

This suspension will be in effect until

July 31, 2001.

Continued Suspension of Minimum Net

Weight Requirements for Trays

Under the terms of the order, fresh

market shipments of kiwifruit grown in

California are required to be inspected

and meet grade, size, maturity, pack,

and container requirements. Section

920.52 authorizes the establishment of

minimum size, pack, and container

requirements.

Section 920.302(a)(4) of the order’s

rules and regulations outlines pack

requirements for fresh shipments of

California kiwifruit.

Section 920.302(a)(4)(iii) specifies

minimum net weight requirements for

fruit of various sizes packed in

containers with cell compartments,

cardboard fillers, or molded trays.

Prior to the 1989–1990 season, there

were no minimum tray weight

requirements although 73.5 percent of

the crop was packed in trays. During the

1989–1990 season, minimum tray

weights were mandated, as there were

many new packers involved in the

kiwifruit packing process and stricter

regulations were viewed as necessary to

provide uniform container weights for

each size. However, since that season

the proportion of the crop packed in

trays has steadily declined.

During the 1997–1998 season, only

15.5 percent of the crop was packed into

molded trays, and less than 1 percent of

this fruit was rejected for failure to meet

minimum tray weights. As a

consequence, the Committee believed

that minimum tray weight requirements

might no longer be necessary to

maintain uniformity in the marketplace.

Prior to the 1998–1999 season

handlers were required to meet the

minimum net weight requirements as

shown in the following chart:

Count designation of fruit

Minimum

net

weight of

fruit

(pounds)

34 or larger ................................... 7.5

35 to 37 ........................................ 7.25

38 to 40 ........................................ 6.875

41 to 43 ........................................ 6.75

44 and smaller .............................. 6.5

The Committee met on July 8, 1998,

and unanimously recommended

suspension of the minimum net weight

requirements for kiwifruit packed in cell

compartments, cardboard fillers, or

molded trays for the 1998–1999 season.

Section 920.302(a)(4)(iii) was suspended

for the 1998–1999 season by an interim

final rule which was published

September 3, 1998 (63 FR 14861) and

finalized July 29, 1999 (64 FR 41019).

Even though the fruit was shorter,

more full-bodied, and heavier during

the 1998–1999 season, handlers were

able to reduce packing costs and to

compete more effectively in the market.

The industry continued to pack wellfilled trays without having to spend the

extra time weighing them. There was no

reduction in the uniform appearance of

fruit packed into trays. The consensus of

the industry was that the absence of tray

weights had no impact during the 1998–

1999 season due to the exceptionally

heavy weight of the fruit.

The Committee, at its February 25,

1999, meeting unanimously

recommended suspending the minimum

net weight requirements for the 1999–

2000 season to evaluate the suspended

requirements during a season when the

fruit shape and density were normal.

This suspension was implemented by a

final rule published on July 29, 1999 (64

FR 41010) and will be in effect until

July 31, 2000.

As previously mentioned, the 1999–

2000 crop was approximately three

million tray-equivalents shorter than

estimated due to a severe frost during

the spring of 1999. This shortage of fruit

resulted in limited quantities of fruit

available for evaluation. Because of the

uncharacteristic fruit in the 1998–1999

season and the short crop in the 1999–

2000 season, the Committee at its

February 24, 2000, meeting,

unanimously recommended continuing

the suspension of § 920.302(a)(4)(iii) for

another season, the 2000–2001 season.

This suspension will be in effect until

July 31, 2001, and is expected to result

in reduced handler packing costs and

increased grower returns, and to enable

handlers to compete more effectively in

the marketplace.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

considered the economic impact of this

action on small entities. Accordingly,

AMS prepared this final regulatory

flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit

regulatory actions to the scale of

business subject to such actions in order

that small businesses will not be unduly

or disproportionately burdened.

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are

unique in that they are brought about

through group action of essentially

small entities acting on their own

behalf. Thus, both statutes have small

entity orientation and compatibility.

There are approximately 60 handlers

of California kiwifruit subject to

regulation under the marketing order

and approximately 400 producers in the

production area. Small agricultural

producers are defined by the Small

Business Administration (13 CFR

121.201) as those whose annual receipts

are less than $500,000, and small

agricultural service firms are defined as

those whose annual receipts are less

than $5,000,000. Fifty-nine handlers

have annual receipts less than

$5,000,000, excluding receipts from

other sources. Three hundred ninety

producers have annual sales less than

$500,000, excluding receipts from any

other sources. Therefore, a majority of

the kiwifruit handlers and producers

may be classified as small entities.

This rule continues the temporary

suspensions of inspection and pack

requirements prescribed under the

order. This rule continues, for the 2000–

2001 season, the suspension of the

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 37267

requirement that fruit must be

reinspected if it has not been shipped by

specified dates, and the minimum net

weight requirements for kiwifruit tray

packs. Both suspensions were

scheduled to expire at the end of the

1999–2000 season (July 31, 2000).

Continuation of the suspensions is

expected to reduce handler packing

costs, increase grower returns, and

enable handlers to compete more

effectively in the marketplace. This rule

was unanimously recommended by the

Committee at its February 24, 2000,

meeting and will be in effect through

July 31, 2001.

Continued Suspension of Reinspection

Requirement

Section 920.55 of the order requires

that prior to handling any variety of

California kiwifruit, such kiwifruit shall

be inspected by the Federal or FederalState Inspection Service (inspection

service) and certified as meeting the

applicable grade, size, quality, or

maturity requirements in effect pursuant

to § 920.52 or § 920.53.

Section 920.55(b) provides authority

for the establishment, through the

order’s rules and regulations, of a period

prior to shipment during which

inspections must be performed.

Prior to its suspension for 1998–1999

season, § 920.155 of the order’s rules

and regulations specified that the

certification of grade, size, quality, and

maturity of kiwifruit pursuant to

§ 920.52 or § 920.53 during each fiscal

year was valid until December 31 of

such year or 21 days from the date of

inspection, whichever is later. Any

inspected kiwifruit shipped after the

certification period lapsed was required

to be reinspected and recertified before

shipment.

Section 920.155 was suspended for

the 1998–1999 season by a final rule

published August 4, 1998 (63 FR

41390). The Committee recommended

this suspension to lessen the expenses

upon the many kiwifruit growers who

had either lost money or merely

recovered their production costs in

recent years. It concluded that the cost

of reinspecting kiwifruit was too high to

justify requiring it in view of the limited

benefit reinspection provided. The

Committee also believed it was no

longer necessary to have fruit

reinspected to provide consumers with

a high quality product because storage

and handling operations had improved

in the industry.

During the 1998–1999 season,

handlers voluntarily checked stored

fruit prior to shipment to ensure that the

condition of the fruit had not

deteriorated. Suspension of the

reinspection requirement enabled

handlers to ship quality kiwifruit during

the 1998–1999 season without the

necessity for reinspection and

recertification and the costs associated

with such requirements. However,

because the harvest started later than

normal and more fruit was in-line

inspected and shipped directly to

buyers, less fruit was repacked and

available for evaluation than

anticipated.

Therefore, at its February 25, 1999,

meeting, the Committee unanimously

recommended suspending § 920.155 of

the order for one more season. Section

920.155 was suspended for the 1999–

2000 season by a final rule published on

July 29, 1999 (64 FR 41010).

During the 1999–2000 season a severe

frost reduced the crop size from the

estimated 9 million tray equivalents to

6 million tray equivalents. A tray

equivalent is equal to approximately 7

pounds of fruit. This significant crop

reduction and the excellent quality of

the fruit resulted in limited quantities of

fruit remaining in cold storage for

repacking and evaluation. The

Committee wanted to fully evaluate the

suspension of the reinspection

requirement during a normal season.

Therefore the Committee, at its February

24, 2000, meeting, unanimously

recommended suspending § 920.155 for

another season, the 2000–2001 season.

This suspension will be in effect until

July 31, 2001.

Continued Suspension of Minimum Net

Weight Requirements for Trays

Under the terms of the order, fresh

market shipments of kiwifruit grown in

California are required to be inspected

and meet grade, size, maturity, pack,

and container requirements. Section

920.52 authorizes the establishment of

minimum size, pack, and container

requirements.

Section 920.302(a)(4) of the order?s

rules and regulations outlines pack

requirements for fresh shipments of

California kiwifruit.

Section 920.302(a)(4)(iii) specifies

minimum net weight requirements for

fruit of various sizes packed in

containers with cell compartments,

cardboard fillers, or molded trays.

Prior to the 1989–1990 season, there

were no minimum tray weight

requirements although 73.5 percent of

the crop was packed in trays. During the

1989–1990 season, minimum tray

weights were mandated, as there were

many new packers involved in the

kiwifruit packing process and stricter

regulations were viewed as necessary to

provide uniform container weights for

each size. However, since that season

the proportion of the crop packed in

trays has steadily declined.

During the 1997–1998 season, only

15.5 percent of the crop was packed into

molded trays, and less than 1 percent of

this fruit was rejected for failure to meet

minimum tray weights. As a

consequence, the Committee believed

that minimum tray weight requirements

might no longer be necessary to

maintain uniformity in the marketplace.

Prior to the 1998–1999 season

handlers were required to meet the

minimum net weight requirements as

shown in the following chart:

Count designation of fruit

Minimum

net

weight of

fruit

(pounds)

34 or larger ................................... 7.5

35 to 37 ........................................ 7.25

38 to 40 ........................................ 6.875

41 to 43 ........................................ 6.75

44 and smaller .............................. 6.5

The Committee met on July 8, 1998,

and unanimously recommended

suspension of the minimum net weight

requirements for kiwifruit packed in cell

compartments, cardboard fillers, or

molded trays for the 1998–1999 season.

Section 920.302(a)(4)(iii) was suspended

for the 1998–1999 season by an interim

final rule published September 3, 1998

(63 FR 14861).

Even though the fruit was shorter,

more full-bodied, and heavier during

the 1998–1999 season, handlers were

able to reduce packing costs and to

compete more effectively in the market.

The industry continued to pack wellfilled trays without having to spend the

extra time weighing them. There was no

reduction in the uniform appearance of

fruit packed into trays. The consensus of

the industry that season was that the

absence of tray weights had no negative

impact during the 1998–1999 season

due to the exceptionally heavy weight of

the fruit.

The Committee, at its February 25,

1999, meeting, unanimously

recommended suspending the minimum

net weight requirements for the 1999–

2000 season in order to evaluate the

suspended requirements during a

season when the fruit shape and density

were normal. This suspension was

implemented by a final rule published

on July 29, 1999 (64 FR 41010) and will

be in effect until July 31, 2000.

As previously mentioned, the 1999–

2000 crop was approximately three

million tray-equivalents shorter than

estimated due to a severe frost during

the spring of 1999. This shortage of fruit

resulted in limited quantities of fruit

37268 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 14, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

available for evaluation. Because of the

uncharacteristic fruit in the 1998–1999

season and the short crop in the 1999–

2000 season the Committee wanted to

suspend the minimum net weight

requirement for another year of

evaluation. Therefore, at its February 24,

2000, meeting, the Committee, once

again, unanimously recommended

continuing the suspension of

§ 920.302(a)(4)(iii) for another season,

the 2000–2001 season. This suspension

will be in effect until July 31, 2001, and

is expected to reduce handler packing

costs, increase grower returns, and

enable handlers to compete more

effectively in the marketplace.

These changes address the marketing

and shipping needs of the kiwifruit

industry and are in the interest of

handlers, growers, buyers, and

consumers. The impact of these changes

is expected to be beneficial to all

handlers and growers regardless of size.

The Committee discussed alternatives

to this change, including indefinitely

suspending these requirements. While

the industry continues to believe that

the suspensions have helped handlers

reduce packing costs and compete more

effectively in the marketplace, it is not

yet ready to recommend permanent

suspension for the 2000–2001 and

future seasons. Both the 1998–1999 and

1999–2000 seasons were abnormal in

some respects, and the Committee

wanted to study the results of the

suspensions during a normal season.

Thus, the Committee unanimously

agreed to suspend these requirements

for the 2000–2001 season.

This rule relaxes inspection and pack

requirements under the kiwifruit

marketing order. Accordingly, this

action will not impose any additional

reporting or recordkeeping requirements

on either small or large kiwifruit

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, the Department has

not identified any relevant Federal rules

that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with

this final rule.

In addition, the Committee’s meetings

were widely publicized throughout the

kiwifruit industry and all interested

persons were invited to attend the

meetings and participate in Committee

deliberations. Like all Committee

meetings, the February 24, 2000,

meeting was a public meeting and all

entities, both large and small, were able

to express their views on this issue.

A proposed rule concerning this

action was published in the Federal

Register on April 24, 2000 (65 FR

21668). Copies of the rule were mailed

or sent via facsimile to all Committee

members and kiwifruit handlers.

Finally, the rule was made available

through the Internet by the Office of the

Federal Register. A 30-day comment

period ending May 24, 2000, was

provided to allow interested persons to

respond to the proposal. No comments

were received.

A small business guide on complying

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop

marketing agreements and orders may

be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/

fv/moab.html. Any questions about the

compliance guide should be sent to Jay

Guerber at the previously mentioned

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant

matter 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.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920

Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 920 is amended as

follows:

PART 920—KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN

CALIFORNIA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 920 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

§ 920.155 [Suspended]

2. In part 920, § 920.155 is suspended

in its entirety effective August 1, 2000,

through July 31, 2001.

§ 920.302 [Suspended in part]

3. In § 920.302, paragraph (a)(4)(iii) is

suspended effective August 1, 2000,

through July 31, 2001.

Dated: June 8, 2000.

James R. Frazier,

Acting Deputy Administrator, Fruit and

Vegetable Programs.

[FR Doc. 00–15015 Filed 6–13–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service

9 CFR Part 94

[Docket No. 98–095–3]

Pork and Pork Products from Mexico

Transiting the United States

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health

Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

regulations for the importation of

animal products to allow fresh (chilled

or frozen) pork and pork products from

the Mexican States of Baja California

Sur, Campeche, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon,

Quintana Roo, and Sinaloa to transit the

United States, under certain conditions,

for export to another country. We are

taking this action because there has

been no outbreak of hog cholera in any

of these States since 1993, and we are

confident that fresh (chilled or frozen)

pork and pork products from each of the

above States could transit the United

States under seal with a negligible risk

of introducing hog cholera.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Michael David, Senior Staff

Veterinarian, Animals Program,

National Center for Import and Export,

VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 39,

Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 734–8364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 9 CFR part 94

(referred to below as the regulations)

prohibit or restrict the importation of

certain animals and animal products

into the United States to prevent the

introduction of certain animal diseases.

Section 94.9 of the regulations prohibits

the importation of pork and pork

products into the United States from

countries where hog cholera exists,

unless the pork or pork products have

been treated in one of several ways, all

of which involve heating or curing and

drying.

Because hog cholera exists in certain

areas in Mexico, pork and pork products

from most Mexican States must meet the

requirements of § 94.9 to be imported

into the United States. Section 94.20

provides an exception, allowing the

importation of fresh (chilled or frozen)

pork and pork products from the

Mexican States of Sonora and Yucatan.

Under § 94.15, pork and pork

products that are from certain Mexican

States and that are not eligible for entry