55380 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

day, following the end of the billing 

cycle in which voluntary laboratory 

services and other services were 

rendered at a particular Science and 

Technology laboratory or office. 

(b) The total charge or fee shall 

normally be stated directly on the 

analysis report or on a standardized 

official certificate form for the 

laboratory analysis of a specific 

agricultural commodity and related 

commodity products. 

(c) The actual bill for collection will 

be issued by the USDA, National 

Finance Center Billings and Collection 

Branch, (Mail: P.O. Box 60075), 13800 

Old Gentilly Road, New Orleans, 

Louisiana 70160–0001. 

PART 92—[REMOVED AND 

RESERVED] 

5. Part 92 is removed in its entirety 

and reserved. 

Dated: September 14, 2006. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–7821 Filed 9–21–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–M 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 993 

[Docket No. FV06–993–1 PR] 

Dried Prunes Produced in California; 

Decreased Assessment Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule would decrease the 

assessment rate established for the 

Prune Marketing Committee 

(committee) under Marketing Order No. 

993 for the 2006–07 and subsequent 

crop years from $0.65 to $0.40 per ton 

of salable dried prunes. 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 began 

August 1 and ends July 31. The 

assessment rate would remain in effect 

indefinitely unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

October 23, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this rule. Comments must be 

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing 

Order Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: 

(202) 720–8938; or E-mail: 

moab.docketclerk@usda.gov, or Internet: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Comments 

should reference the docket number and 

the date and page number of this issue 

of the Federal Register and will be 

available for public inspection in the 

Office of the Docket Clerk during regular 

business hours, or can be viewed at: 

http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni 

Sasselli, Program Analyst, or Terry 

Vawter, Marketing Specialist, California 

Marketing Field Office, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA; 

Telephone: (559) 487–5901; Fax (559) 

487–5906, or E-mail: 

Toni.Sasselli@usda.gov or 

Terry.Vawter@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@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

No. 110 and Marketing 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 marketing 

agreement and order are effective under 

the Agricultural Marketing Agreement 

Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–

674), hereinafter referred to as the 

‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Under the marketing order now 

in effect, California 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 

proposed herein would be applicable to 

all assessable dried prunes beginning 

August 1, 2006, and continue until 

amended, suspended, or terminated. 

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 USDA a petition stating that the 

order, any provision of the order, or any 

obligation imposed in connection with 

the order is not in accordance with law 

and request a modification of the order 

or to be exempted therefrom. Such 

handler is afforded the opportunity for 

a hearing on the petition. After the 

hearing USDA would rule on the 

petition. The Act provides that the 

district court of the United States in any 

district in which the handler is an 

inhabitant, or has his or her principal 

place of business, has jurisdiction to 

review USDA’s ruling on the petition, 

provided an action is filed not later than 

20 days after the date of the entry of the 

ruling. 

This rule would decrease the 

assessment rate established for the 

committee for the 2006–07 and 

subsequent crop years from $0.65 to 

$0.40 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; and are, thus, in a position to 

formulate an appropriate budget and 

assessment rate. The assessment rate is 

formulated and discussed in at least one 

public meeting. Thus, all directly 

affected persons have an opportunity to 

participate and provide input. 

For the 2005–06 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 29, 2006, 

and unanimously recommended a 

decreased assessment rate of $0.40 per 

ton of salable dried prunes and 

expenditures totaling $77,215 for the 

2006–07 crop year. In comparison, last 

year’s approved expenses were $89,090. 

The proposed assessment rate of $0.40 

per ton of salable dried prunes is $0.25 

lower than the rate currently in effect. 

The committee recommended a lower 

assessment rate based on an estimated 

production of 145,000 tons of salable 

dried prunes. At the proposed 

assessment rate, the assessment income 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules 55381 

for the 2006–07 crop year would be 

$58,000. The committee currently has 

$19,215 of excess assessment income 

available; and those funds, plus 

assessment and interest income, would 

be adequate to cover its estimated 

expenses of $77,215. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the committee for the 

2006–07 crop year include $48,405 for 

personnel salaries, $15,645 for operating 

expenses, and $13,165 for 

contingencies. For the 2005–06 crop 

year, the committee’s budgeted 

expenses for personnel salaries, 

operating expenses, and contingencies 

were $45,945, $16,755, and $26,390, 

respectively. 

The assessment rate, recommended by 

the committee was derived by dividing 

anticipated expenses by the estimated 

salable tons of California dried prunes. 

Dried prune production for the year is 

estimated to be 145,000 salable tons, 

which should provide $58,000 in 

assessment income at the proposed 

$0.40 per ton of salable dried prunes. 

Income derived from handler 

assessments, plus excess funds from the 

2005–06 crop year should be adequate 

to cover budgeted expenses. 

The committee is authorized under 

§ 993.81(c) of the order to use excess 

assessment funds from the 2005–06 crop 

year (currently estimated at $19,215) for 

up to 5 months beyond the end of the 

crop year to meet 2006–07 crop year 

expenses. At the end of the 5 months, 

the committee either refunds or credits 

excess funds to handlers. 

The proposed assessment rate would 

continue in effect indefinitely unless 

modified, suspended, or terminated by 

USDA upon recommendation and 

information submitted by the committee 

or other available information. 

Although this assessment rate would 

be in effect for an indefinite period, the 

committee would continue to meet prior 

to or during each 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 would evaluate committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking would be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

committee’s 2006–07 budget and those 

for subsequent crop years would be 

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved 

by USDA. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 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. Thus, both statutes have small 

entity orientation and compatibility. 

There are approximately 1,100 

producers of dried prunes in the 

production area and approximately 22 

handlers subject to regulation under the 

marketing order. The Small Business 

Administration (13 CFR 121.201) 

defines small agricultural producers as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $750,000, and small agricultural 

service firms as those whose annual 

receipts are less than $6,500,000. 

An estimated 1,068 of the 1,100 

producers (97.1 percent) have incomes 

of less than $750,000 and would be 

considered small producers. Fourteen of 

the 22 handlers (63.6 percent) have 

incomes from handling prunes of less 

than $6,500,000 and could be 

considered small handlers. Therefore, 

the majority of handlers and producers 

of California dried prunes may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule would decrease the 

assessment rate established for the 

committee and collected from handlers 

for the 2006–07 and subsequent crop 

years from $0.65 to $0.40 per ton of 

salable dried prunes. 

The committee met on June 29, 2006, 

and unanimously recommended a 

2006–07 total budget of $77,215 and a 

decreased assessment rate of $0.40 per 

ton of salable dried prunes. The 

proposed recommended budget of 

$77,215 for the 2006–07 crop year is 

smaller than the budgets in previous 

crop years. The proposed assessment 

rate of $0.40 per ton of salable dried 

prunes is $0.25 lower than the rate 

currently in effect. The quantity of 

salable dried prunes for the 2006–07 

crop year is currently estimated at 

145,000 tons of salable dried prunes, 

compared to 94,402 tons of salable dried 

prunes for the 2005–06 crop year. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the committee for the 

2006–07 crop year include $48,405 for 

personnel salaries, $15,645 for operating 

expenses, and $13,165 for 

contingencies. For the 2005–06 crop 

year, the committee’s budgeted 

expenses for personnel salaries, 

operating expenses, and contingencies 

were $45,945, $16,755, and $26,390, 

respectively. 

Prior to arriving at its budget of 

$77,215, the committee considered 

information from various sources, 

including the committee’s Executive 

Subcommittee. Alternative assessment 

rates, including the rate currently in 

effect, and different expenditure levels 

were discussed by the subcommittee 

and the committee. An alternative to 

this action would be to continue with 

the $0.65 per ton assessment rate. 

However, an assessment rate of $0.40 

per ton of salable dried prunes and 

excess funds from the 2005–06 crop 

year will provide enough income to 

fund the committee’s operations. 

Therefore, the committee agreed that 

$0.40 per ton of salable dried prunes in 

an acceptable assessment rate. Section 

993.81(c) of the order provides the 

committee the authority to use excess 

assessment funds from the 2005–06 crop 

year (currently estimated at $19,215) for 

up to 5 months beyond the end of the 

crop year to meet 2005–06 crop year 

expenses. At the end of the 5 months, 

the committee either refunds or credits 

excess funds to handlers. 

A review of historical information and 

preliminary data pertaining to the 

upcoming crop year indicates that the 

producer price for the 2006–07 crop 

year is expected to average between 

$1,500 and $1,600 per ton of salable 

dried prunes. Based on an estimated 

145,000 salable tons of dried prunes, 

assessment revenue as a percentage of 

producer prices during the 2006–07 

crop year is expected to be between .025 

and .026 percent. 

This action would decrease the 

assessment obligation imposed on 

handlers. Assessments are applied 

uniformly on all handlers, and some of 

the costs may be passed on to 

producers. However, decreasing the 

assessment rate reduces the burden on 

handlers, and may reduce the burden on 

producers. In addition, the committee’s 

meeting was widely publicized 

throughout the California dried prune 

industry and all interested persons were 

invited to attend the meeting and 

participate in committee deliberations 

on all issues. Like all committee 

meetings, the June 29, 2006, meeting 

was public and all entities, both large 

and small, were encouraged to express 

views on this issue. Finally, interested 

persons are invited to submit 

information on the regulatory and 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
55382 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California 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. 

The AMS is committed to complying 

with the E-Government Act, to promote 

the use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this rule. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

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

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. 

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. Thirty days is 

deemed appropriate because: (1) The 

2006–07 crop year began on August 1, 

2006, and the marketing order requires 

that the rate of assessment for each crop 

year apply to all assessable prunes 

handled during such crop year; (2) the 

assessment rate is considerably lower 

than that which is currently in effect; 

and (3) handlers are aware of this 

action, which was unanimously 

recommended by the committee at a 

public meeting. 

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 proposed to 

be 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, 2006, an 

assessment rate of $0.40 per ton of 

salable dried prunes is established for 

California dried prunes. 

Dated: September 15, 2006. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–7867 Filed 9–21–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Parts 19, 20, and 50 

RIN 3150–AH40 

Occupational Dose Records, Labeling 

Containers, and the Total Effective 

Dose Equivalent 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC or Commission) is 

proposing to amend its regulations 

related to the reporting of annual dose 

to workers, the definition of the total 

effective dose equivalent (TEDE), the 

labeling of certain containers holding 

licensed material, and the determination 

of cumulative occupational radiation 

dose. The proposed rule would limit the 

routine reporting of annual doses to 

workers to those whose annual dose 

exceeds a specific dose threshold or 

who request a report. The proposed rule 

would also amend the definition of 

TEDE to be consistent with current 

Commission policy. The proposed rule 

would also modify the labeling 

requirements for certain containers 

holding licensed material within posted 

areas in nuclear power facilities. 

Finally, the proposed rule would 

remove the requirement that licensees 

attempt to obtain cumulative exposure 

records for workers unless these 

individuals are being authorized to 

receive a planned special exposure. 

These revisions would reduce the 

administrative and information 

collection burdens on NRC and 

Agreement State licensees without 

affecting the level of protection to either 

the health and safety of workers and the 

public or the environment. 

DATES: Submit comments on this 

proposed rule by December 6, 2006. 

Submit comments on the information 

collection aspects of this proposed rule 

by October 23, 2006. Comments 

received after the above dates will be 

considered if it is practical to do so, but 

assurance of consideration cannot be 

given to comments received after these 

dates. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods. Please 

include the following number RIN 

3150–AH40 in the subject line of your 

comments. Comments on rulemakings 

submitted in writing or in electronic 

form will be made available for public 

inspection. Because your comments will 

not be edited to remove any identifying 

or contact information, the NRC 

cautions you against including personal 

information such as social security 

numbers and birth dates in your 

submission. 

Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: 

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. 

E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov. If 

you do not receive a reply e-mail 

confirming that we have received your 

comments, contact us directly at (301) 

415–1966. You may also submit 

comments via the NRC’s rulemaking 

Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. 

Address questions about our rulemaking 

Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415–

5905; e-mail cag@nrc.gov. Comments 

can also be submitted via the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Hand deliver comments to: 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 

20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 

Federal workdays. (Telephone (301) 

415–1966). 

Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 

415–1101. 

Publicly available documents related 

to this rulemaking may be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

located at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), O1 F21, One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland. The PDR reproduction 

contractor will copy documents for a 

fee. Selected documents, including 

comments, may be viewed and 

downloaded electronically via the NRC 

rulemaking Web site at http:// 

ruleforum.llnl.gov. 

Publically available documents 

created or received at the NRC after 

November 1, 1999, are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, 

the public can gain entry into the NRC’s 

Agencywide Document Access and 

Management System (ADAMS), which 

provides text and image files of NRC’s 

public documents. If you do not have 

access to ADAMS, contact the NRC 

Public Document Room (PDR) Reference 

staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737 

or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

You may submit comments on the 

information collections by the methods 

indicated in the Paperwork Reduction 

Act Statement. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL