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

70608 

Vol. 88, No. 196 

Thursday, October 12, 2023 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 993 

[Doc. No. AMS–SC–23–0021] 

Dried Prunes Produced in California; 

Suspension of the Marketing Order 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

suspend the Federal marketing order 

regulating dried prunes produced in 

California (Order) effective at the 

beginning of the 2023–2024 crop year. 

After operating for 18 years without 

handling regulations, the Prune 

Administrative Committee (Committee) 

recommended the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) indefinitely 

suspend the Order. After reviewing the 

Committee’s recommendation, AMS 

determined that regulatory suspension 

with a sunset provision of seven years 

is appropriate. This suspension period 

would extend through the end of the 

2029–2030 crop year and would provide 

industry sufficient time to assess 

whether the Order’s reinstatement is 

beneficial. If no recommendation is 

made by the Committee to reinstate the 

Order by the end of the 2029–2030 crop 

year, AMS would proceed to terminate 

the Order. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

November 13, 2023 to be assured 

consideration. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this proposed rule. 

Comments may be sent to the Docket 

Clerk, Market Development Division, 

Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW, STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237. 

Comments may also be sent to the 

Docket Clerk electronically by Email: 

MarketingOrderComment@usda.gov or 

via the internet at: https://

www.regulations.gov. Comments should 

reference the document number and the 

date and page number of this issue of 

the Federal Register. All comments 

submitted in response to this proposed 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public and 

can be viewed at: https://

www.regulations.gov. 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: 

Jeremy Sasselli, Marketing Specialist, or 

Gary Olson, Chief, West Region Branch, 

Market Development Division, Specialty 

Crops Program, AMS, USDA; 

Telephone: (559) 487–5901, or Email: 

Jeremy.Sasselli@usda.gov or 

GaryD.Olson@usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Richard Lower, 

Market Development Division, Specialty 

Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, 

Washington, DC 20250–0237; 

Telephone: (202) 720–8085, or Email: 

Richard.Lower@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposed action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553, proposes to amend regulations 

issued to carry out a marketing order as 

defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This proposed 

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 produced in California. 

Part 993 (referred to as 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 Prune 

Administrative Committee (Committee) 

locally administers the Order and is 

comprised of producers and handlers of 

dried prunes operating within the area 

of production, and one public member. 

The Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) is issuing this proposed rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 14094. Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies 

to assess all costs and benefits of 

available regulatory alternatives and, if 

regulation is necessary, to select 

regulatory approaches that maximize 

net benefits (including potential 

economic, environmental, public health 

and safety effects, distributive impacts, 

and equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, 

reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and 

promoting flexibility. Executive Order 

14094 reaffirms, supplements, and 

updates Executive Order 12866 and 

further directs agencies to solicit and 

consider input from a wide range of 

affected and interested parties through a 

variety of means. This action falls 

within a category of regulatory actions 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive 

Order 12866 review. 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 13175— 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments, which 

requires agencies to consider whether 

their rulemaking actions would have 

Tribal implications. AMS has 

determined that this proposed rule is 

unlikely to have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This proposed rule is 

not intended to have retroactive effect, 

prior to crop year 2023–2024. 

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 United States Department of 

Agriculture (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 proposed rule would suspend 

the Order’s regulatory provisions. The 

Committee recommended this action at 

its March 22, 2023, meeting. Section 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 70609 

993.90(a) of the Order provides that the 

Secretary shall terminate or suspend the 

operation of any or all of the provisions 

of the Order, whenever the Secretary 

finds that such provisions do not tend 

to effectuate the declared policy of the 

Act. 

The Committee meets regularly to 

consider recommendations for 

modification, suspension, or 

termination of the Order, and such 

meetings are open to the public where 

interested persons may express their 

views at these meetings. AMS reviews 

Committee recommendations, including 

information provided by the Committee 

and from other available sources, and 

determines whether such 

recommendations would tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act. 

On May 27, 2005, following a 

recommendation from the Committee, 

AMS indefinitely suspended handling 

and reporting requirements under the 

Order, extended the temporary 

suspension of outgoing inspection and 

volume control regulations, and 

extended the temporary suspension of 

the Prune Import Regulation (70 FR 

30610). Since 2005, the Committee has 

continued to perform the administrative 

duties prescribed under the Order, 

including the collection of assessments, 

conducting Committee nominations, 

and assessing whether to recommend a 

marketing policy, which may include 

handling regulations. 

On March 22, 2023, the Committee 

held a public meeting to consider the 

future of regulation under the Order. 

The Committee determined that the 

2005 suspension of handling and 

volume regulations did not adversely 

impact the marketing of California 

prunes and that there is no value in 

funding the administrative duties 

prescribed under the Order when the 

handling regulations and reserve control 

provisions are not in effect. The 

Committee discussed terminating the 

Order but rejected the idea because its 

members believe the sector of industry 

is not yet ready to terminate, given the 

length of time and expense that would 

be required to establish a new marketing 

order should regulation again be 

deemed necessary in the future. In 

addition, several Committee members 

expressed the opinion that future 

market conditions may warrant 

regulation, particularly volume control, 

and urged the Committee not to 

terminate the Order at this time. After 

much deliberation, the Committee voted 

unanimously to indefinitely suspend 

the Order with the expectation that the 

Order would either remain indefinitely 

suspended or AMS would at a future 

time act to terminate the Order if no 

recommendation for reinstatement is 

submitted by industry. In the event of 

no such recommendation for 

reinstatement, the Committee would 

take the necessary steps to ensure an 

orderly and complete termination of the 

Order. 

The Committee recommended to AMS 

the Order’s suspension for an indefinite 

period to allow for the reinstatement of 

regulation to remain an option and to 

provide industry time to assess the 

market environment and other external 

factors affecting California prunes. 

Under the proposed suspension, 

handlers would no longer be required to 

pay assessments. The Committee 

believes this cost savings would benefit 

both small and large handlers, and that 

producers would also be relieved of 

some costs because such payments are 

often passed onto them by handlers. 

After reviewing the Committee’s 

recommendation and supporting 

materials, AMS included a sunset 

provision that if no recommendation is 

received by July 31, 2030, AMS would 

then issue a rule proposing termination 

of the Order. The Committee agreed that 

a suspension period of seven years is 

adequate time for the California prune 

industry to assess future market 

conditions and reestablishment of the 

Order, if warranted. This proposed rule 

would lift the portions of the Order 

currently under suspension and then 

suspend the entire Order for seven 

years, beginning with the 2023–2024 

crop year and ending with the 2029– 

2030 crop year, which ends on July 31, 

2030. If industry does not recommend 

reinstating the Order by the end of the 

proposed suspension period, AMS will 

issue a proposal to terminate the Order. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), AMS has considered 

the economic impact of this proposed 

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 

businesses subject to such actions in 

order that small businesses will not be 

unduly or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

There are approximately 600 

producers of dried prunes in the 

production area and 27 handlers subject 

to regulation under the Order. Small 

agricultural producers are defined by 

the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) as those having annual receipts 

less than $3,500,000, and small 

agricultural service firms are defined as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $34,000,000 (13 CFR 121.201). 

According to the National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), 

the average producer price for California 

dried prunes for the 2021 crop was 

$2,000 per ton. NASS further reported 

2021 crop year production for California 

dried prunes was 74,000 tons. The 

estimated total 2021–22 crop year value 

of California dried prunes is 

$148,000,000 (74,000 tons times $2,000 

per ton equals $148,000,000). Dividing 

the estimated total crop value by the 

estimated number of producers (600) 

yields an estimated average receipt per 

producer of $246,667, which is 

considerably lower than the $3,500,000 

SBA small agricultural producer 

threshold. 

In addition, according to USDA 

Market News data, the reported average 

terminal market price for 2022 for 

California dried prunes was $39.04 per 

carton. Dividing the average carton price 

by the 28-pound carton size yields an 

estimated price per pound of $1.39. 

($39.04 average price divided by 28 

pounds). Multiplying $1.39 per pound 

by 2,000 pounds yields $2,780 per ton, 

which, when multiplied by total 

estimated 2021 production of 74,000 

tons, yields estimated total handler 

receipts of $205,720,000. Dividing this 

figure by the 27 regulated handlers 

yields estimated average annual handler 

receipts of $7,619,259, well below the 

$34 million SBA threshold for small 

agricultural service firms. Therefore, 

using the above data, the majority of 

producers and handlers of California 

dried prunes may be classified as small 

entities. 

This proposed rule would suspend all 

provisions of the Order starting with the 

2023–2023 crop year, through the 2029– 

2030 crop year. On March 22, 2023, the 

Committee voted unanimously to 

indefinitely suspend the Order after 

determining that the 2005 suspension of 

handling regulations, volume control 

and reporting requirements did not 

negatively impact the marketing of 

California prunes and that the costs to 

continue the Order outweighs its benefit 

to industry. The Committee believes 

that such suspension would provide a 

cost savings to large and small handlers 

and producers. 

After reviewing the Committee’s 

recommendation and other supporting 

material, AMS included a sunset 

provision that if no recommendation for 

reinstatement is received during the 

proposed suspension period, AMS 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
70610 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 196 / Thursday, October 12, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

would then proceed to terminate the 

Order. 

This action would suspend the 

Federal marketing order regulating dried 

prunes produced in California though 

July 31, 2030. Authority for this action 

is provided in section 993.90(a) of the 

Order. 

Committee meetings are widely 

publicized throughout the production 

area. The California dried prune 

industry and all interested persons are 

invited to attend the meetings and 

participate in Committee deliberations 

on all issues. Similarly, the March 22, 

2023, meeting was a public meeting and 

all entities, both large and small, were 

able to express views on this issue. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the Order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by OMB and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0178, 

Vegetable Crops. OMB’s three-year 

approval of the forms in the Vegetable 

Crops package expire March 31, 2024. 

AMS’ submission of the renewal 

package prior to its expiration will 

retain prune forms but will drawdown 

the information collection burden to 

zero during the time when respondents 

will not be completing and submitting 

the forms during the seven-year 

suspension. Should any changes 

become necessary, they would be 

submitted to OMB for approval. 

This proposed rule would not impose 

any 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. 

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. 

AMS has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this proposed rule. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: https://

www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/ 

moa/small-businesses. Any questions 

about the compliance guide should be 

sent to Richard Lower 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. All written 

comments timely received will be 

considered before a final determination 

is made on this rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 993 

Marketing agreements, Plum, Prunes, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Agricultural Marketing 

Service proposes to amend 7 CFR part 

993 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. In Part 993, lift the suspension of 

May 27, 2005, on §§ 993.21d, 993.41, 

993.48, 993.49, 993.50, 993.51, 993.52, 

993.53, 993.54, 993.55, 993.56, 993.57, 

993.58, 993.59, 993.62, 993.65, 993.72, 

993.73, 993.74, 993.75, 993.97, 993.104, 

993.105, 993.106, 993.107, 993.108, 

993.149, 993.150, 993.156, 993.157, 

993.158, 993.159, 993.162, 993.165, 

993.172, 993.173, 993.174, 993.400, 

993.409, 993.501, 993.503, 993.504, 

993.505, 993.506, 993.515, 993.516, 

993.517, 993.518, 993.601, and 993.602. 

PART 993—[STAYED] 

■ 3. Stay 7 CFR part 993 until July 31, 

2030. 

Erin Morris, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–22333 Filed 10–11–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

21 CFR Part 1310 

[Docket No. DEA–1189] 

Propionyl Chloride 

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement 

Administration, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement 

Administration finds that propionyl 

chloride is used in the illicit 

manufacture of the controlled substance 

fentanyl, as well as fentanyl analogues, 

and fentanyl-related substances and is 

important to the manufacture of these 

substances because it is often used in 

synthetic pathways to illicitly 

manufacture fentanyl, fentanyl 

analogues, and fentanyl-related 

substances. Prior to proposing to list 

propionyl chloride as a list I chemical, 

DEA is soliciting information on the 

current uses of propionyl chloride 

(other than for the synthesis of fentanyl) 

in order to properly determine the effect 

such a proposed action would have on 

legitimate industry. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted 

electronically or postmarked on or 

before November 13, 2023. Commenters 

should be aware that the electronic 

Federal Docket Management System 

will not accept any comments after 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the last day 

of the comment period. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling 

of comments, please reference ‘‘Docket 

No. DEA–1189’’ on all electronic and 

written correspondence, including any 

attachments. 

• Electronic comments: The Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA) 

encourages that all comments be 

submitted electronically through the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal which 

provides the ability to type short 

comments directly into the comment 

field on the web page or attach a file for 

lengthier comments. Please go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions at that site for 

submitting comments.Upon completion 

of your submission, you will receive a 

Comment Tracking Number for your 

comment. Please be aware that 

submitted comments are not 

instantaneously available for public 

view on Regulations.gov. If you have 

received a Comment Tracking Number, 

your comment has been successfully 

submitted and there is no need to 

resubmit the same comment. 

• Paper comments: Paper comments 

that duplicate electronic submissions 

are not necessary. Should you wish to 

mail a paper comment, in lieu of an 

electronic comment, it should be sent 

via regular or express mail to: Drug 

Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA 

Federal Register Representative/DPW, 

8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, 

Virginia 22152. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Terrence L. Boos, Drug and Chemical 

Evaluation Section, Diversion Control 

Division, Drug Enforcement 

Administration; Telephone: (571) 362– 

3249. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Posting of Public Comments 

Please note that all comments 

received in response to this docket are 

considered part of the public record. 

They will, unless reasonable cause is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1