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

23761 

Vol. 72, No. 83 

Tuesday, May 1, 2007 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 982 

[Docket No. AMS–FV–06–0175; FV07–982– 

1 FIR] 

Hazelnuts Grown in Oregon and 

Washington; Establishment of Final 

Free and Restricted Percentages for 

the 2006–2007 Marketing Year 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) is adopting, as a 

final rule, an interim final rule 

establishing final free and restricted 

percentages for domestic inshell 

hazelnuts for the 2006–2007 marketing 

year under the Federal marketing order 

for hazelnuts grown in Oregon and 

Washington. This rule continues in 

effect the final free and restricted 

percentages of 8.2840 percent and 

91.7160 percent, respectively. The 

percentages allocate the quantity of 

domestically produced hazelnuts which 

may be marketed in the domestic inshell 

market (free) and the quantity of 

domestically produced hazelnuts that 

must be disposed of in outlets approved 

by the Board (restricted). Volume 

regulation is intended to stabilize the 

supply of domestic inshell hazelnuts to 

meet the limited domestic demand for 

such hazelnuts with the goal of 

providing producers with reasonable 

returns. This rule was recommended 

unanimously by the Hazelnut Marketing 

Board (Board), which is the agency 

responsible for local administration of 

the marketing order. 

DATES: Effective: May 31, 2007 the 

regulation published January 22, 2007 

(72 FR 2599, Jan. 22, 2007) is confirmed 

as final. This rule applies to all 2006– 

2007 marketing year restricted hazelnuts 

until they are properly disposed of in 

accordance with marketing order 

requirements. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barry Broadbent or Gary Olson, 

Northwest Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1220 SW Third Avenue, 

Suite 385, Portland, OR 97204; 

Telephone: (503) 326–2724, Fax: (503) 

326–7440, or e-mail: 

Barry.Broadbent@usda.gov or 

GaryD.Olson@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. 115 and Marketing Order No. 982, 

both as amended (7 CFR part 982), 

regulating the handling of hazelnuts 

grown in Oregon and Washington, 

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.’’ 

USDA is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. It is intended that this action 

apply to all merchantable hazelnuts 

handled during the 2006–2007 

marketing year beginning July 1, 2006. 

This action applies to all 2006–2007 

marketing year restricted hazelnuts until 

they are properly disposed of in 

accordance with marketing order 

requirements. 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. A handler 

is afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

not later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling. 

This rule continues in effect free and 

restricted percentages which allocate 

the quantity of domestically produced 

hazelnuts which may be marketed in 

domestic inshell markets (free) and 

hazelnuts which must be exported, 

shelled, or otherwise disposed of by 

handlers (restricted). The Board met 

and, after determining that volume 

regulation would tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act, developed a 

marketing policy to be employed for the 

duration of the 2006–2007 marketing 

year. Volume regulation is intended to 

stabilize the supply of domestic inshell 

hazelnuts to meet the limited domestic 

demand for such hazelnuts with the 

goal of providing producers with 

reasonable returns. Based on an estimate 

of the domestic inshell trade demand 

and total supply of domestically 

produced hazelnuts available for the 

2006–2007 marketing year, the Board 

voted unanimously at their November 

15, 2006, meeting to recommend to 

USDA that the final free and restricted 

percentages for the 2006–2007 

marketing year be established at 8.2840 

percent and 91.7160 percent, 

respectively. 

The Board’s authority to recommend 

volume regulation and use 

computations to determine the 

allocation of hazelnuts to individual 

markets is specified in § 982.40 of the 

order. Under the order’s provisions, free 

and restricted market allocations of 

hazelnuts are expressed as percentages 

of the total hazelnut supply subject to 

regulation. The percentages are derived 

by dividing the estimated domestic 

inshell trade demand (computed by 

formula) by the Board’s estimate of the 

total domestically produced supply of 

hazelnuts that are expected to be 

available over the course of the 

marketing year. 

Inshell trade demand, the key 

component of the marketing policy, is 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
23762 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 1, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

the estimated quantity of inshell 

hazelnuts necessary to adequately 

supply the domestic inshell hazelnut 

market for the duration of the marketing 

year. The Board determines the 

domestic inshell trade demand for each 

year and uses that estimate as the basis 

for setting the percentage of the 

available supply of domestically 

produced hazelnuts that handlers may 

ship to the domestic inshell market 

throughout the marketing season. The 

order specifies that inshell trade 

demand be computed by averaging the 

preceding three years’ trade acquisitions 

of inshell hazelnuts, allowing 

adjustments for abnormal crop or 

marketing conditions. In addition, the 

Board may increase the computed 

inshell trade demand by up to 25 

percent, if market conditions warrant an 

increase. 

As required by the order, prior to 

September 20 of each marketing year, 

the Board meets to establish its 

marketing policy for that year. If the 

Board determines that volume control 

would tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act, the Board then follows 

a procedure, specified by the order, to 

compute and announce preliminary free 

and restricted percentages. The 

preliminary free percentage releases 80 

percent of the adjusted inshell trade 

demand that handlers may ship to the 

domestic market. The purpose of 

releasing only 80 percent of the inshell 

trade demand under the preliminary 

stage of regulation is to guard against 

any potential underestimate of crop 

size. The preliminary free percentage is 

expressed as a percentage of the total 

hazelnut supply subject to regulation, 

where total supply is the sum of the 

estimated crop production less the 

three-year average disappearance plus 

the undeclared carry-in from the 

previous marketing year. 

On August 22, 2006, the National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) 

released an estimate of 2006 hazelnut 

production for the Oregon and 

Washington area at 41,000 dry orchardrun tons. NASS uses an objective yield 

survey method to estimate hazelnut 

production which has historically been 

very accurate. 

On August 24, 2006, the Board met for 

the purpose of (1) Determining if 

volume control regulation would tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act; 

(2) estimating the total available supply 

and the domestic inshell trade demand 

for hazelnuts; (3) establishing 

preliminary free and restricted 

marketing percentages for the 2006– 

2007 marketing year; and (4) authorizing 

market outlets for restricted hazelnuts. 

After discussion, the Board 

unanimously determined that volume 

regulation is necessary to effectively 

market the industry’s 2006 crop and 

would tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. The determination 

was based on (1) The large size of the 

2006 hazelnut crop; (2) the inability of 

the domestic inshell market to absorb 

such a large crop; (3) the projected 

record-setting world hazelnut crop and 

the probability of an oversupplied world 

market; and (4) the average price paid to 

Oregon-Washington growers has not 

exceeded the parity price in any one of 

the past 18 years. 

The Board then estimated the total 

available supply for the 2006 crop year 

to be 39,234 tons. The Board arrived at 

that quantity by using the crop estimate 

compiled by NASS (41,000 tons) and 

then adjusting that estimate to account 

for disappearance and carry-in. The 

order requires the Board to reduce the 

crop estimate by the average 

disappearance over the preceding three 

years (1,792 tons) and to increase it by 

the amount of undeclared carry-in from 

previous years’ production (26 tons). 

In the calculation, disappearance is 

defined as the difference between the 

estimated orchard-run production and 

the actual supply of merchantable 

product available for sale by handlers. 

Disappearance can consist of (1) 

Unharvested hazelnuts; (2) culled 

product (nuts that are delivered to 

handlers but later discarded); (3) 

product used on the farm, sold locally, 

or otherwise disposed of by producers; 

and (4) statistical error in the orchardrun production estimate. 

Undeclared carry-in is defined as 

hazelnuts that were produced in a 

previous marketing year but were not 

subject to regulation because they were 

not shipped during that marketing year. 

Undeclared carry-in is subject to 

regulation during the current marketing 

year and is accounted for as such by the 

Board. 

Additionally, the Board estimated 

domestic inshell trade demand for the 

2006–2007 marketing year to be 3,067 

tons. The Board arrived at this estimate 

by taking the average of the domestic 

inshell trade acquisitions for the 2002– 

2005 marketing years (2,775 tons) and 

then reducing that quantity by the 

declared carry-in from last year’s crop 

(124 tons). The trade acquisition data for 

the 2005–2006 marketing year was 

omitted from the Board’s calculations, 

as allowed by the order, after it was 

determined to be abnormal due to crop 

and marketing conditions. 

The declared carry-in represents 

product regulated under the order 

during a preceding marketing year but 

not shipped during that year. This 

inventory must be accounted for when 

estimating the quantity of product to 

make available to adequately supply the 

market. 

After establishing estimates for total 

available hazelnut supply and domestic 

inshell trade demand, the Board used 

those estimates to compute and 

announce preliminary free and 

restricted percentages of 5.4055 percent 

and 94.5945 percent, respectively. The 

Board computed the preliminary free 

percentage by multiplying the adjusted 

inshell trade demand by 80 percent and 

dividing the result by the estimate of the 

total available supply subject to 

regulation (2,651 tons x 80 percent/ 

39,234 tons = 5.4055 percent). The 

preliminary free percentage initially 

released 2,121 tons of hazelnuts from 

the 2006–2007 supply for domestic 

inshell use. The Board authorized the 

preliminary restricted percentage 

(37,113 tons) to be exported or shelled 

for the domestic kernel markets. 

Under the order, the Board must meet 

again on or before November 15 to 

review and revise the preliminary 

estimate of the total available supply of 

hazelnuts and to recommend interim 

final and final free and restricted 

percentages. Initially, when establishing 

preliminary free and restricted 

percentages, the Board utilizes a preharvest objective yield survey, compiled 

by NASS on behalf of the Board, to 

estimate the upcoming crop size. After 

the hazelnut harvest has concluded, 

usually sometime in October, 

information is available directly from 

handlers to more accurately estimate 

crop size. The Board may use this 

information to amend their preliminary 

estimate of total available supply before 

calculating the interim final and final 

percentages. 

Interim final percentages are 

calculated in the same way as the 

preliminary percentages but release 100 

percent of the inshell trade demand, 

effectively releasing the additional 20 

percent held back at the preliminary 

stage. Final free and restricted 

percentages may release up to an 

additional 15 percent of the average 

trade acquisitions of inshell hazelnuts 

for desirable carryout, to provide an 

adequate carryover of product into the 

following season. The order requires 

that final free and restricted percentages 

be effective 30 days prior to the end of 

the marketing year, or earlier, if 

recommended by the Board and 

approved by USDA. The Board is 

allowed to combine the interim final 

and the final stages of the marketing 

policy, if marketing conditions so 

warrant, by recommending final 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 1, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 23763 

percentages which immediately release 

100 percent of the inshell trade demand 

(the preliminary percentage plus the 

additional 20 held back) plus any 

percentage increase the Board 

determines for desirable carryout. 

Revisions in the marketing policy can be 

made until February 15 of each 

marketing year, but the inshell trade 

demand can only be revised upward, 

consistent with § 982.40(e). 

The Board met on November 15, 2006, 

and reviewed and approved an 

amended marketing policy and 

recommended the establishment of final 

free and restricted percentages. During 

the meeting, the Board revised the crop 

estimate in the marketing policy to 

38,688 tons (from 41,000 tons), which 

reflects the results of post-harvest 

handler survey information compiled by 

the Board. In addition, the Board 

decided that market conditions were 

such that the immediate release of an 

additional 15 percent of the three-year 

average trade acquisitions to allow for 

desirable carryout will not adversely 

affect the 2006–2007 domestic inshell 

market. Final percentages were 

recommended at 8.2840 percent free 

and 91.1760 percent restricted. The final 

free percentage releases 3,067 tons of 

inshell hazelnuts from the 2006–2007 

supply for domestic use, which includes 

416 tons for desirable carryout. 

Accordingly, since the final percentages 

were recommended for immediate 

release, no recommendations for interim 

final free and restricted percentages 

were necessary. 

The final marketing percentages are 

based on the Board’s final production 

estimate and the following supply and 

demand information for the 2006–2007 

marketing year: 

Tons 

Total available supply: 

(1) Production forecast (11/15/06 crop estimate) ........................................................................................................................ 38,688 

(2) Minus: Disappearance (three year average—4.37 percent of Item 1) ................................................................................... -1,691 

(3) Merchantable production (Item 1 minus Item 2) .................................................................................................................... 36,997 

(4) Plus: Undeclared carry-in as of July 1, 2006 (subject to 2006–2007 regulation) .................................................................. +26 

(5) Available supply subject to regulation (Item 3 plus Item 4) ................................................................................................... 37,023 

Inshell Trade Demand: 

(6) Average trade acquisitions of inshell hazelnuts (three prior years domestic sales) .............................................................. 2,775 

(7) Plus: Increase to encourage increased sales (15% of average trade acquisitions) .............................................................. +416 

(8) Minus: Declared carry-in as of July 1, 2006 (not subject to 2006–2007 regulation) ............................................................. -124 

(9) Adjusted inshell trade demand (Item 6 plus Item 7 minus Item 8) ........................................................................................ 3,067 

Percentages Free Restricted 

(10) Final percentages (Item 9 divided by Item 5) x 100 ................................................................................ 8.2840 91.7160 

(11) Final free tonnage (Item 9) ....................................................................................................................... 3,067 ........................

(12) Final restricted tonnage (Item 5 minus Item 11) ...................................................................................... ........................ 33,956 

In addition to complying with the 

provisions of the order, the Board also 

considered USDA’s 1982 ‘‘Guidelines 

for Fruit, Vegetable, and Specialty Crop 

Marketing Orders’’ (Guidelines) when 

making its computations in the 

marketing policy. This volume control 

regulation provides a method to 

collectively limit the supply of inshell 

hazelnuts available for sale in domestic 

markets. The Guidelines provide that 

the domestic inshell market has 

available a quantity equal to 110 percent 

of prior years’ shipments before 

allocating supplies for the export 

inshell, export kernel, and domestic 

kernel markets. This provides for a 

plentiful supply of inshell hazelnuts for 

consumers and for market expansion, 

while retaining the mechanism for 

dealing with oversupply situations. The 

established final percentages make 

available approximately 416 additional 

tons to encourage increased sales. The 

total free supply for the 2006–2007 

marketing year is estimated to be 3,067 

tons of hazelnuts, which is 127 percent 

of the average of the last three prior 

years’ sales and exceeds the goal of the 

Guidelines. 

Final 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 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 

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. 

Small agricultural producers are 

defined by the Small Business 

Administration (13 CFR 121.201) 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 $6,500,000. There 

are approximately 700 producers of 

hazelnuts in the production area and 

approximately 18 handlers subject to 

regulation under the order. Using 

statistics compiled by NASS, the 

average value of production received by 

producers in 2004 and 2005 was 

$57,912,000. Using those estimates, the 

average annual hazelnut revenue per 

producer would be approximately 

$82,700. The level of sales of other 

crops by hazelnut producers is not 

known. In addition, based on Board 

records, about 83 percent of the 

handlers ship under $6,500,000 worth 

of hazelnuts on an annual basis. In view 

of the foregoing, it can be concluded 

that the majority of hazelnut producers 

and handlers may be classified as small 

entities. 

Board meetings are widely publicized 

in advance of the meetings and are held 

in a location central to the production 

area. The meetings are open to all 

industry members and other interested 

persons who are encouraged to 

participate in the deliberations and 

voice their opinions on topics under 

discussion. Thus, Board 

recommendations can be considered to 

represent the interests of small business 

entities in the industry. 

Currently, U.S. hazelnut production is 

allocated among three main market 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
23764 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 1, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

outlets: Domestic inshell, export inshell, 

and kernel markets. Handlers and 

growers receive the highest return for 

sales in the domestic inshell market. 

They receive less for product going to 

export inshell, and the least for kernels. 

Based on Board records of average 

shipments for 1996–2005, the 

percentage going to each of these 

markets was 10 percent (domestic 

inshell), 51 percent (export inshell), and 

37 percent (kernels). Other minor 

market outlets make up the remaining 2 

percent. 

The inshell hazelnut market can be 

characterized as having limited and 

inelastic demand with a very short 

primary marketing period. On average, 

79 percent of domestic inshell hazelnut 

shipments occur between October 1 and 

November 30, primarily to supply 

holiday nut demand. The inshell market 

is, therefore, prone to oversupply and 

correspondingly low grower prices in 

the absence of supply restrictions. This 

volume control regulation provides a 

method for the U.S. hazelnut industry to 

limit the supply of domestic inshell 

hazelnuts available for sale in the 

continental U.S. and thereby mitigate 

market oversupply conditions. 

Many years of marketing experience 

led to the development of the current 

volume control procedures. These 

procedures have helped the industry 

solve its marketing problems by keeping 

inshell supplies in balance with 

domestic needs. Volume controls ensure 

that the domestic inshell market is fully 

supplied while protecting the market 

from the negative effects of oversupply. 

Although the domestic inshell market 

is a relatively small portion of total 

hazelnut sales (averaging 10 percent of 

total shipments for 1996–2005), it 

remains a profitable market segment. 

The volume control provisions of the 

marketing order are designed to avoid 

oversupplying this particular market 

segment, because that would likely lead 

to substantially lower grower prices. 

The other market segments, export 

inshell and kernels, are expected to 

continue to provide good outlets for 

U.S. hazelnut production into the 

future. Adverse climatic conditions that 

negatively impacted hazelnut 

production in the other hazelnut 

producing regions of the world in 2004 

and 2005 have corrected and the total 

world supply in 2006–2007 is predicted 

to increase dramatically. Product prices 

in the world market have trended 

downward in the expectation of the 

greater supply. While the U.S. hazelnut 

industry continues to experience high 

demand for their large sized and high 

quality product, the prices that 

producers receive are tied to the global 

market. In light of the anticipated world 

oversupply situation, regulation of the 

domestic inshell market is important to 

the U.S. hazelnut industry to insulate 

that specialty market from the supply 

related challenges of the world hazelnut 

market. 

In Oregon and Washington, high 

hazelnut production years typically 

follow low production years (a 

historically consistent pattern). The 

2005 crop of 27,600 tons was 16 percent 

below the 32,685 ton average for the 

1995–2004 period, while the 

preliminary NASS estimate for 2006 is 

25 percent higher. The lowest 

production (15,000 tons in 1998) and 

highest production (49,500 tons in 2001) 

were 47 and 151 percent, respectively, 

of the 10 year average. 

This cyclical trait also leads to an 

inversely corresponding cyclical price 

pattern for hazelnuts. Grower price, 

however, does not fluctuate to the 

extent of production. The lower level of 

variability of price versus the variability 

of production provides an illustration of 

the order’s price-stabilizing impact. The 

coefficient of variation (a standard 

statistical measure of variability; ‘‘CV’’) 

for hazelnut production over the most 

recent 10-year period is 0.36. In 

contrast, the coefficient of variation for 

hazelnut grower prices over the same 

period is 0.19, about half of the CV for 

production. The lower level of 

variability of price versus the variability 

of production provides an illustration of 

the order’s price-stabilizing impact. 

Comparing grower revenue to cost is 

useful in highlighting the impact on 

growers of recent product and price 

levels. A recent hazelnut production 

cost study from Oregon State University 

estimated cost-of-production per acre to 

be approximately $1,340 for a typical 

100-acre hazelnut enterprise. Average 

grower revenue per bearing acre (based 

on NASS acreage and value of 

production data) equaled or exceeded 

that typical cost level less than half the 

time from 1995 to 2004. Average grower 

revenue was below typical costs in the 

other years. While crop size has 

fluctuated, volume regulations 

contribute to orderly marketing and 

market stability by moderating the 

variation in returns for all producers 

and handlers, both large and small. 

While the level of benefits of this 

rulemaking is difficult to quantify, the 

stabilizing effects of volume regulation 

impact both small and large handlers 

positively by helping them maintain 

and expand markets even though 

hazelnut supplies fluctuate widely from 

season to season. This regulation 

provides equitable allotment of the most 

profitable market, the domestic inshell 

market. That market is available to all 

handlers, regardless of size. 

As an alternative to this regulation, 

the Board discussed not regulating the 

marketing of the 2006 hazelnut crop. 

However, without any regulation in 

effect, the Board believes that the 

industry would tend to oversupply the 

inshell domestic market. The 2006 

hazelnut crop is larger than last year’s 

crop and 22 percent above the ten-year 

average. The unregulated release of 

38,688 tons on the domestic inshell 

market could easily oversupply the 

small, but lucrative domestic inshell 

market. The Board believes that any 

oversupply would completely disrupt 

the market, causing producer returns to 

decrease dramatically. 

Section 982.40 of the order establishes 

a procedure and computations for the 

Board to follow in recommending to 

USDA establishment of preliminary, 

interim final, and final percentages of 

hazelnuts to be released to the free and 

restricted markets each marketing year. 

The program results in a plentiful 

supply of hazelnuts for consumers and 

for market expansion while retaining 

the mechanism for dealing with 

oversupply situations. 

Hazelnuts produced under the order 

comprise virtually all of the hazelnuts 

produced in the U.S. This production 

represents, on average, less than 2 

percent of total U.S. production of all 

tree nuts, and less than 7 percent of the 

world’s hazelnut production. 

Last season, 85 percent of the 

domestically produced hazelnut kernels 

were marketed in the domestic market 

and 15 percent were exported. 

Domestically produced kernels 

generally command a higher price in the 

domestic market than imported kernels. 

The industry is continuing its efforts to 

develop and expand other markets with 

emphasis on the domestic kernel 

market. Small business entities, both 

producers and handlers, benefit from 

the expansion efforts resulting from this 

program. 

Inshell hazelnuts produced under the 

order compete well in export markets 

because of their high quality. Based on 

Board statistics, Europe has historically 

been the primary export market for U.S. 

produced inshell hazelnuts. Shipments 

have also been relatively consistent, not 

varying much from the 10 year average 

of 4,958 tons. Recent years, though, 

have seen a significant increase in 

export destinations. Last season, inshell 

shipments to Europe totaled 4,622 tons, 

representing just 38 percent of exports, 

with the largest share going to Germany. 

Inshell shipments to Southwest Pacific 

countries, and Hong Kong in particular, 

have increased dramatically in the past 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 1, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 23765 

few years, rising to 50 percent of total 

exports of 12,042 tons for the 2005–2006 

marketing year. The industry continues 

to pursue export opportunities. 

There are some reporting, 

recordkeeping, and other compliance 

requirements under the order. The 

reporting and recordkeeping burdens 

are necessary for compliance purposes 

and for developing statistical data for 

maintenance of the program. The 

information collection requirements are 

currently approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget under OMB 

No. 0581–0178, Vegetable and Specialty 

Crops. The forms require information 

which is readily available from handler 

records and which can be provided 

without data processing equipment or 

trained statistical staff. 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. 

This rule does not change those 

requirements. 

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. 

In addition, USDA has not identified 

any relevant Federal rules that 

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this 

rule. 

Further, the Board’s meetings were 

widely publicized throughout the 

hazelnut industry and all interested 

persons were invited to attend the 

meetings and participate in Board 

deliberations. Like all Board meetings, 

those held on August 24 and November 

15, 2006, were public meetings and all 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express their views on this issue. 

An interim final rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on January 22, 2007. Copies of 

this rule were mailed by the Board’s 

staff to all Board members. In addition, 

the rule was made available through the 

Internet by the Office of the Federal 

Register. A 60-day comment period 

ending March 23, 2007, was provided to 

allow interested parties to respond to 

the rule. 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 

material presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Board and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that finalizing the interim final rule, 

without change, as published in the 

Federal Register (72 FR 2599, January 

22, 2007) will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 982 

Filberts, Hazelnuts, Marketing 

agreements, Nuts, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

PART 982—HAZELNUTS GROWN IN 

OREGON AND WASHINGTON 

■ Accordingly, the interim final rule 

amending 7 CFR part 982 which was 

published at 72 FR 2599 on January 22, 

2007, is adopted as a final rule without 

change. 

Dated: April 25, 2007. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–8235 Filed 4–30–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–27014; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–253–AD; Amendment 

39–15041; AD 2007–09–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A330 Airplanes and Model A340–200 

and –300 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD results 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by an airworthiness authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as un-damped extension of 

the main landing gear (MLG), 

potentially leading to loss of side stay 

integrity and then MLG collapse. We are 

issuing this AD to require actions to 

correct the unsafe condition on these 

products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 

5, 2007. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of June 5, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim 

Backman, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2797; 

fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

The FAA is implementing a new 

process for streamlining the issuance of 

ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined 

process will allow us to adopt MCAI 

safety requirements in a more efficient 

manner and will reduce safety risks to 

the public. This process continues to 

allow all FAA AD issuance processes to 

meet legal, economic, Administrative 

Procedure Act, and Federal Register 

requirements. We also continue to meet 

our technical decision-making 

responsibilities to identify and correct 

unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated 

products. 

This AD references the MCAI and 

related service information that we 

considered in forming the engineering 

basis to correct the unsafe condition. 

The AD contains text copied from the 

MCAI and for this reason might not 

follow our plain language principles. 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on January 26, 2007 (72 FR 

3759). That NPRM proposed to require 

replacement of the retraction link 

assembly. The MCAI states that during 

full-scale fatigue tests, the retraction 

link failed on the latest growth 

production standard MLG (main landing 

gear) prior to its expected life limit. 

Investigations confirm that the root 

cause of this premature fracture is due 

to high lug stress. The retraction link is 

included in the ALS (Airworthiness 

Limitation section) Part 1—Safe Life 

Airworthiness Limitation Item—and is 

currently limited to 35,200 flight cycles 

(FC). Its fracture causes un-damped 

extension of the MLG, potentially 

leading to loss of side stay integrity and 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS