Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 30441 

interim rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also 

found and determined upon good cause 

that it is impracticable, unnecessary, 

and contrary to the public interest to 

give preliminary notice prior to putting 

this rule into effect and that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register 

because: (1) This action relaxes the 

current grade requirements under the 

order; (2) these changes need to be in 

effect by May 15, 2014; (3) the 

Committee unanimously recommended 

these changes at a public meeting and 

interested parties had an opportunity to 

provide input; and (4) this rule provides 

a 60-day comment period and any 

comments received will be considered 

prior to finalization of this rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905 

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, 

Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 905 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, 

TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS 

GROWN IN FLORIDA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

parts 905 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. In § 905.306, Table I in paragraph 

(a) is amended by revising the entry for 

‘‘Valencia and other late type’’ under 

‘‘Oranges’’ to read as follows: 

§ 905.306 Orange, Grapefruit, Tangerine, 

and Tangelo Regulation. 

(a) * * * 

TABLE I 

Variety Regulation period Minimum grade 

Minimum 

diameter 

(inches) 

(1) (2) (3) (4) 

*******

Valencia and other late type .................... September 1–May 14 .............................. U.S. No. 1 ............................................... 28⁄16

May 15–June 14 ..................................... U.S. No. 1 Golden ................................... 24⁄16

June 15–August 31 ................................. U.S. No. 2, External/U.S. No. 1, Internal 24⁄16

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 22, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12287 Filed 5–23–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 920 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–12–0008; FV12–920–1 

FR] 

Kiwifruit Grown in California; Order 

Amending Marketing Order No. 920 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends 

Marketing Order No. 920 (order), which 

regulates the handling of kiwifruit 

grown in California. The amendments 

were proposed by the Kiwifruit 

Administrative Committee (Committee 

or KAC), which is responsible for the 

local administration of the order. The 

five amendments will provide authority 

to recommend and conduct production 

and postharvest research, to recommend 

and conduct market research and 

development projects, to receive and 

expend voluntary contributions, to 

specify that recommendations for 

production research and market 

development be approved by eight 

members of the Committee, and to 

update provisions regarding alternate 

members’ service on the Committee. 

These amendments are intended to 

improve administration of and 

compliance with the order, as well as 

reflect current industry practices. 

DATES: This rule is effective May 29, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order 

and Agreement Division, Fruit and 

Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, Post 

Office Box 952, Moab, UT 84532; 

Telephone: (202) 557–4783, Fax: (435) 

259–1502, or Email: 

Melissa.Schmaedick@ams.usda.gov; or, 

Michelle Sharrow, Marketing Order and 

Agreement Division, Fruit and 

Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW., Stop 0237, 

Washington, DC 20250–0237; 

Telephone: (202) 720–9921, Fax: (202) 

720–8938 or Email: Michelle.Sharrow@

ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Order No. 

920, as amended (7 CFR part 920), 

regulating the handling of kiwifruit 

produced 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.’’ Section 

608c(17) of the Act and the applicable 

rules of practice and procedure 

governing the formulation of marketing 

agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900) 

authorize amendments of the order 

through this informal rulemaking 

action. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 13175. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. This rule shall 

not be deemed to preclude, preempt, or 

supersede any research and market 

development provisions of any State 

program covering California kiwifruit (7 

U.S.C. 608c(6)(I)). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

30442 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

no later than 20 days after the date of 

entry of the ruling. 

Section 1504 of the Food, 

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

(2008 Farm Bill) (Pub. L. 110–246) 

amended section 18c(17) of the Act, 

which in turn required the addition of 

supplemental rules of practice to 7 CFR 

Part 900 (73 FR 49307; August 21, 

2008). The amendment of section 

18c(17) of the Act and additional 

supplemental rules of practice authorize 

the use of informal rulemaking (5 U.S.C. 

553) to amend Federal fruit, vegetable, 

and nut marketing agreements and 

orders. USDA may use informal 

rulemaking to amend marketing orders 

based on the nature and complexity of 

the proposed amendments, the potential 

regulatory and economic impacts on 

affected entities, and any other relevant 

matters. 

AMS considered the nature and 

complexity of the proposed 

amendments, the potential regulatory 

and economic impacts on affected 

entities, and other relevant matters, and 

determined that amending the order as 

proposed by the Committee could 

appropriately be accomplished through 

informal rulemaking. 

The proposed amendments were 

unanimously recommended by the 

Committee following deliberations at 

public meetings on July 12 and 

December 13, 2011. A proposed rule 

soliciting comments on the proposed 

amendments was issued on February 4, 

2013, and published in the Federal 

Register on February 8, 2013 (78 FR 

9331). Three comments were received. 

Two comments were supportive of the 

proposed amendments. The third 

comment was supportive of some of the 

proposed amendments and not 

supportive of others. A proposed rule 

and referendum order was issued on 

July 29, 2013, and published in the 

Federal Register on August 2, 2013 (78 

FR 46823). This document directed that 

USDA conduct a referendum among 

kiwifruit producers who produced 

kiwifruit during the period of August 1, 

2012, through July 31, 2013, to 

determine whether they favored the 

proposed amendments to the order. To 

become effective, the amendments had 

to be approved by at least two-thirds of 

the producers voting or two-thirds of the 

volume of kiwifruit represented by 

voters in the referendum. All of the 

proposed amendments were favored by 

at least 80 percent of those voting in the 

referendum and by at least 83 percent of 

the volume represented in the 

referendum. 

The amendments included in this 

final rule will: 

(1) Provide authority to recommend 

and conduct production and postharvest 

research; 

(2) Provide authority to recommend 

and conduct market research and 

development projects; 

(3) Provide authority to receive and 

expend voluntary contributions; 

(4) Amend procedures to specify that 

recommendations for production 

research and market development be 

approved by eight members of the 

Committee; and 

(5) Clarify provisions regarding 

alternate members’ service on the 

Committee. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this final 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 rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

Based on Committee data, there are 

approximately 175 producers and 27 

handlers of kiwifruit in the California 

production area. The Small Business 

Administration (SBA) defines small 

agricultural producers as those having 

annual receipts of less than $750,000, 

and small agricultural service firms are 

defined as those having annual receipts 

of less than $7,000,000. (13 CFR 

121.201) 

The California Agricultural Statistical 

Service (CASS) reported total California 

kiwifruit production for the 2011–12 

season at 37,700 tons, with an average 

price of $775 per ton. Based on the 

average price, shipment, and grower 

information provided by the CASS and 

the Committee, the majority of kiwifruit 

handlers would be considered small 

businesses under the SBA definition. In 

addition, based on kiwifruit production 

and price information, as well as the 

total number of California kiwifruit 

growers, the average annual grower 

revenue is less than $750,000. Thus, the 

majority of California kiwifruit 

producers may also be classified as 

small entities. 

The amendments will provide 

authority to recommend and conduct 

production and postharvest research; 

provide authority to recommend and 

conduct marketing research and 

development projects; provide authority 

to receive and expend voluntary 

contributions; amend procedures to 

specify that recommendations for 

production research and market 

development be approved by eight 

members of the Committee; and update 

provisions regarding alternate members’ 

service on the Committee. 

These amendments were 

unanimously recommended at public 

meetings of the Committee held on July 

12 and December 13, 2011. None of 

these amendments will have an 

immediate impact on handlers or 

producers because they will not 

establish any requirements or 

regulations on handlers. However, the 

amendments will add authority to 

conduct production and postharvest 

research as well as market research and 

development projects. In the event the 

Committee decides to conduct these 

activities in the future, there would be 

a cost associated with funding any 

projects recommended. 

Research activities were previously 

funded by the industry through the 

California Kiwifruit Commission (CKC), 

which no longer exists. Therefore, there 

would be no net overall increase in 

costs to the industry if the Committee 

chose to take over projects previously 

funded through the CKC. Furthermore, 

the newly established authority for the 

Committee to accept voluntary 

contributions could provide additional 

sources of funds and reduce the amount 

of assessment monies otherwise needed 

to fund research activities. 

Although there would be a cost 

associated with any research activities 

undertaken by the industry, the benefits 

of such activities would be expected to 

outweigh the costs. Past benefits of 

production research to the California 

kiwifruit industry include improved 

techniques for establishing vineyards, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 30443 

pruning, thinning, irrigating, 

pollination, fertilizer application, 

disease and pest management, and 

harvesting. Benefits of postharvest 

research include improved methods of 

fruit storage, packaging, and 

transportation. These research results 

have been disseminated to growers and 

handlers in the past and have been 

instrumental in maintaining a viable 

kiwifruit industry in California. 

Prior to undertaking any research 

activities, the Committee would 

evaluate potential projects and weigh 

their costs against the potential benefits 

to the industry. Any projects 

recommended by the Committee would 

be reviewed and approved by USDA 

before implementation. The Committee 

and USDA would provide oversight to 

help ensure that the goals and objectives 

were being met. The results would be 

disseminated to industry members and 

would also be made available to the 

public. 

Adding authority to the order for 

marketing research and development 

projects will not result in immediate 

costs to the industry. It will provide 

authority to recommend marketing 

research and development activities. In 

the event the Committee decides to 

undertake these activities in the future, 

there would be a cost associated with 

funding any marketing research and 

development projects. 

Like the production and postharvest 

research activities discussed above, 

marketing research and development 

projects could also be funded with 

voluntary contributions. This could 

help mitigate any possible assessment 

rate increases to offset the costs of these 

activities. To the extent that the 

assessment rate may need to be 

increased, any increase would be 

limited to remain within the maximum 

level authorized under § 920.41 of the 

order. 

Any increased costs associated with 

marketing research and development 

activities are expected to be outweighed 

by the benefits. Marketing research 

could be conducted on consumer tastes 

and preferences. This type of 

information is valuable in developing 

marketing strategies. Collection of 

market data can also be used to evaluate 

prior programs and to develop future 

programs. Market development 

programs could be used to conduct 

activities designed to increase consumer 

awareness and demand for California 

kiwifruit. These demand-building 

activities would be expected to increase 

sales, which would ultimately increase 

producer returns. 

Prior to undertaking any marketing 

research and/or market development 

activities, the Committee would 

evaluate potential projects and their 

costs against the potential benefits to the 

industry. Any projects recommended by 

the Committee would be reviewed and 

approved by USDA before 

implementation. The Committee and 

USDA would provide oversight to help 

ensure that the goals and objectives 

were being met. In addition, as required 

by the Federal Agricultural 

Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, 

any marketing research and 

development programs engaged in 

under a Federal marketing order require 

periodic evaluation by an independent 

third party to ensure that they are 

effective. Thus, any such programs 

conducted under the kiwifruit order 

would be evaluated to ensure that the 

benefits exceed the costs. 

Adding authority for the Committee to 

receive voluntary contributions will 

provide an additional monetary source 

to help fund research and development 

programs. These types of programs are 

intended to benefit the entire industry. 

This change will not increase or 

decrease any reporting, recordkeeping, 

or compliance costs. Acceptance of 

voluntary financial contributions by the 

Committee would not result in 

increased costs. Rather, it might reduce 

the amount of assessment revenue 

needed to fund programs. 

Amendments four and five relate to 

voting procedures and alternate member 

service on the Committee. Both are 

procedural in nature and will have no 

economic impact on producers or 

handlers. They will not establish any 

regulatory requirements on handlers 

and will also not result in any 

assessment or funding implications. 

There will be no change in financial 

costs, reporting, or recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Alternatives to these proposals, 

including making no changes at this 

time, were considered. However, the 

Committee believes it would be 

beneficial to have the ability to conduct 

production research and market 

development activities, collect 

voluntary contributions, and clarify 

procedural language for Committee 

meetings. 

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 the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Generic 

OMB Fruit Crops. No changes in those 

requirements as a result of this 

proceeding are anticipated. Should any 

changes become necessary, they would 

be submitted to OMB for approval. 

As with all Federal marketing order 

programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

In addition, USDA has not identified 

any relevant Federal rules that 

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this 

rule. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

The Committee’s meetings, at which 

these proposals were discussed, were 

widely publicized throughout the 

California kiwifruit industry. All 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meetings and encouraged to 

participate in Committee deliberations 

on all issues. The Committee meetings 

were public, and all entities, both large 

and small, were encouraged to express 

their views on these proposals. 

A proposed rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on February 8, 2013 (78 FR 

9331). 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 USDA and the 

Office of the Federal Register. A 60-day 

comment period ending April 9, 2013, 

was provided to allow interested 

persons to respond to the proposal. 

Three comments were received. Two 

comments were supportive of the 

proposed amendments. 

The third commenter supported the 

amendments to §§ 920.32 and 920.45 

concerning Committee quorum (voting) 

and accepting voluntary contributions, 

respectively. However, the commenter 

was opposed to the amendment to 

§ 920.27 regarding alternate member 

procedures that will allow substitute 

alternates, from within the same district, 

to represent absent members at 

Committee meetings in districts with 

two or more members because he was 

concerned that it gave the Committee 

the opportunity to choose an alternate 

who shared their views. The change will 

improve the likelihood that quorum 

requirements are met. This should 

ensure a timely and orderly flow of 

business so that important matters 

would not have to be postponed. The 

substitute alternate would only be 

called upon if the member and their 

designated alternate were both absent. 

Because the substitute would be from 

the same district as the absent member 

and alternate, it is more likely that the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

30444 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

substitute would represent the views of 

other growers in that district. 

In 2010, the order was amended and 

the number of districts decreased to 

three. Each district is now represented 

on the Committee by two, four, or five 

members and alternate members, for a 

total of twenty-two grower positions. 

However, § 920.27 only addresses 

alternate members’ service on the 

Committee in districts with one and two 

grower positions. This amendment 

addresses alternate members’ service on 

the Committee in districts with more 

than two members, as well as substitute 

alternates if both a member and his or 

her respective alternate are unable to 

attend a Committee meeting. In such 

situations, the Committee will be 

authorized to designate any other 

alternate present, in the same district, to 

serve in place of the absent member. 

Accordingly, no change to the 

amendment based on the comment 

received is being adopted. 

The commenter was also opposed to 

the amendment to § 920.48 regarding 

marketing research and development 

because he believes each marketer 

should conduct their own market 

promotion. The Act authorizes the 

establishment of marketing research and 

development projects, including paid 

advertising, for certain commodities; 

however, paid advertising is not 

authorized for kiwifruit. (7 U.S.C. 

608c(6)(I)) The Committee developed 

this amendment taking into account that 

the CKC is no longer conducting such 

activities. One purpose of such generic 

programs is to benefit all members of 

the kiwifruit industry, including those 

that could not fund their own programs. 

As such, adding authority in the order 

for market research and development 

projects will benefit the entire kiwifruit 

industry. Therefore, no change to the 

proposed amendment is being adopted 

as a result of this comment. 

The commenter only supported the 

amendment to add authority to § 920.47 

to conduct production and postharvest 

research if the quorum requirement of 

eight votes passes in § 920.32. The 

commenter wanted to either eliminate 

or link the two proposed amendments. 

Such a change would not have allowed 

the voters to consider each proposal on 

its own merits. Currently, the order 

requires an eight vote plurality for any 

changes for expenses, assessments, or 

recommended regulations in § 920.32. 

The Committee unanimously supported 

requiring eight votes for approval of 

marketing research and development as 

well as production and postharvest 

research activities. Requiring at least 

eight votes would ensure that a broad 

base of support existed for any major 

actions that would affect the budget. 

Further, the Committee believes, and 

USDA concurs, that this requirement 

will help ensure that industry support 

exists before undertaking these 

activities. The commenter was 

supportive of adding the quorum voting 

requirement for production and 

postharvest research, and the 

commenter was in favor of production 

and postharvest research. Accordingly, 

no changes were made to the proposed 

amendments as a result of this 

comment. 

A proposed rule and referendum 

order was issued on July 29, 2013, and 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 2, 2013 (78 FR 46823). This 

document directed that USDA conduct 

a referendum among kiwifruit producers 

who produced kiwifruit during the 

period of August 1, 2012, through July 

31, 2013, to determine whether they 

favored the proposed amendments to 

the order. To become effective, the 

amendments had to be approved by at 

least two-thirds of the producers voting 

or two-thirds of the volume of kiwifruit 

represented by voters in the referendum. 

All of the proposed amendments were 

favored by at least 80 percent of those 

voting in the referendum and by at least 

83 percent of the volume represented in 

the referendum. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

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

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

Order Amending the Order Regulating 

the Handling of Kiwifruit Grown in 

California 

Findings and Determinations 

(a) Findings and Determinations Upon 

the Basis of the Rulemaking Record 

The findings hereinafter set forth are 

supplementary to the findings and 

determinations which were previously 

made in connection with the issuance of 

the marketing order; and all said 

previous findings and determinations 

are hereby ratified and affirmed, except 

insofar as such findings and 

determinations may be in conflict with 

the findings and determinations set 

forth herein. 

1. The marketing order, as amended, 

and all of the terms and conditions 

thereof, will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act; 

2. The marketing order, as amended, 

and as hereby proposed to be further 

amended, regulates the handling of 

kiwifruit grown in California in the 

same manner as, and is applicable only 

to, persons in the respective classes of 

commercial and industrial activity 

specified in the marketing order; 

3. The marketing order, as amended, 

is limited in application to the smallest 

regional production area which is 

practicable, consistent with carrying out 

the declared policy of the Act, and the 

issuance of several orders applicable to 

subdivisions of the production area 

would not effectively carry out the 

declared policy of the Act; 

4. The marketing order, as amended, 

prescribes, insofar as practicable, such 

different terms applicable to different 

parts of the production area as are 

necessary to give due recognition to the 

differences in the production and 

marketing of kiwifruit produced or 

packed in the production area; and 

5. All handling of kiwifruit produced 

in the production area as defined in the 

marketing order is in the current of 

interstate or foreign commerce or 

directly burdens, obstructs, or affects 

such commerce. 

(b) Additional Findings 

It is necessary and in the public 

interest to make these amendments 

effective not later than one day after 

publication in the Federal Register. A 

later effective date would unnecessarily 

delay implementation of the 

amendments. These amendments 

should be in place as soon as possible 

so that any regulations recommended as 

a result of these amendments can be in 

place prior to the next production year, 

which begins on August 1. In view of 

the foregoing, it is hereby found and 

determined that good cause exists for 

making these amendments effective one 

day after publication in the Federal 

Register and that it would be contrary 

to the public interest to delay the 

effective date for 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. 

(Sec. 553(d), Administrative Procedure 

Act; 5 U.S.C. 551–559.) 

(c) Determinations 

It is hereby determined that: 

1. Handlers (excluding cooperative 

associations of producers who are not 

engaged in processing, distributing, or 

shipping kiwifruit covered under the 

order) who during the period August 1, 

2012, through July 31, 2013, handled 

not less than 50 percent of the volume 

of such kiwifruit covered by said order, 

as hereby amended, have not signed an 

amended marketing agreement; and 

2. The issuance of this amendatory 

order, amending the aforesaid order, is 

favored or approved by at least twomstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 30445 

1 15 U.S.C. 69, et seq. 

2 16 CFR Part 301. 

thirds of the producers who participated 

in a referendum on the question of 

approval and who, during the period of 

August 1, 2012, through July 31, 2013, 

have been engaged within the 

production area in the production of 

such kiwifruit, such producers having 

also produced for market at least twothirds of the volume of such commodity 

represented in the referendum. 

Order Relative To Handling 

It is therefore ordered, That on and 

after the effective date hereof, all 

handling of kiwifruit grown in 

California shall be in conformity to, and 

in compliance with, the terms and 

conditions of the said order as hereby 

amended as follows: 

The provisions of the proposed 

marketing order amending the order 

contained in the proposed rule issued 

by the Administrator on July 29, 2013, 

and published in the Federal Register 

on August 2, 2013 (78 FR 46823), shall 

be and are the terms and provisions of 

this order amending the order and are 

set forth in full herein. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920 

Marketing agreements, Kiwifruit, 

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. 

■ 2. Revise § 920.27 to read as follows: 

§ 920.27 Alternate members. 

An alternate member of the 

committee, during the absence of the 

member for whom that individual is an 

alternate, shall act in the place and 

stead of such member and perform such 

other duties as assigned. In the event 

both a member and his or her alternate 

are unable to attend a committee 

meeting, the committee may designate 

any other alternate member from the 

same district to serve in such member’s 

place and stead. In the event of the 

death, removal, resignation, or 

disqualification of a member, the 

alternate of such member shall act for 

him or her until a successor for such 

member is selected and has qualified. 

■ 3. Revise § 920.32(a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 920.32 Procedure. 

(a) Eight members of the committee, 

or alternates acting for members, shall 

constitute a quorum and any action of 

the committee shall require the 

concurring vote of the majority of those 

present: Provided, That actions of the 

committee with respect to expenses and 

assessments, production and 

postharvest research, market research 

and development, or recommendations 

for regulations pursuant to §§ 920.50 

through 920.55, of this part shall require 

at least eight concurring votes. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Add § 920.45 to read as follows: 

§ 920.45 Contributions. 

The committee may accept voluntary 

contributions, but these shall only be 

used to pay expenses incurred pursuant 

to § 920.47 and § 920.48. Furthermore, 

such contributions shall be free from 

any encumbrances by the donor, and the 

committee shall retain complete control 

of their use. 

■ 5. Add § 920.47 to read as follows: 

§ 920.47 Production and postharvest 

research. 

The committee, with the approval of 

the Secretary, may establish or provide 

for the establishment of projects 

involving research designed to assist or 

improve the efficient production and 

postharvest handling of kiwifruit. 

■ 6. Add § 920.48 to read as follows: 

§ 920.48 Market research and 

development. 

The committee, with the approval of 

the Secretary, may establish or provide 

for the establishment of marketing 

research and development projects 

designed to assist, improve, or promote 

the marketing, distribution, and 

consumption of kiwifruit. 

Dated: May 22, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12327 Filed 5–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 301 

Regulations Under the Fur Products 

Labeling Act 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade 

Commission amends its Regulations 

under the Fur Products Labeling Act to 

update the Fur Products Name Guide, 

provide more labeling flexibility, 

incorporate Truth in Fur Labeling Act 

provisions, and conform the guaranty 

provisions to those governing textiles. 

The Commission does not change the 

required name for nyctereutes 

procyonoides fur products. Labels will 

continue to describe this animal as 

‘‘Asiatic Raccoon.’’ 

DATES: The amendments published in 

this document will become effective 

November 19, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Wilshire, (202) 326–2976, 

Attorney, Division of Enforcement, 

Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal 

Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

After considering comments on 

proposed amendments to the Rules and 

Regulations (‘‘Fur Rules’’ or ‘‘Rules’’) 

under the Fur Products Labeling Act 

(‘‘Fur Act’’ or ‘‘Act’’), the Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) 

adopts those amendments with minor 

changes. The final amendments update 

the Fur Products Name Guide (‘‘Name 

Guide’’), provide businesses with more 

flexibility in labeling, incorporate the 

provisions of the Truth in Fur Labeling 

Act (‘‘TFLA’’), and conform the Rules’ 

guaranty provisions to those governing 

textile products. The amendments do 

not change the Guide’s name for 

nyctereutes procyonoides. The name 

‘‘Asiatic Raccoon’’ best identifies this 

animal for fur consumers. The final 

rules also do not adopt the proposed 

annual renewal requirement for 

continuing guaranties. 

This supplementary information 

section first provides background on the 

Fur Act and Rules, the Name Guide, 

TFLA, and this rulemaking. Next, it 

summarizes the comments. Finally, it 

analyzes those comments and discusses 

the amendments. 

II. Background 

A. The Fur Act and Rules 

The Fur Act prohibits misbranding 

and false advertising of fur products, 

and requires labeling of most fur 

products.1 Pursuant to this Act, the 

Commission promulgated the Fur 

Rules.2 These Rules set forth disclosure 

requirements that assist consumers in 

making informed purchasing decisions. 

Specifically, the Fur Act and Rules 

require manufacturers, dealers, and 

retailers to label products made entirely 

or partly of fur. These labels must 

disclose: (1) The animal’s name as 

provided in the Name Guide; (2) the 

presence of any used, bleached, dyed, or 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES