37762 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

(4) There is no Authority precedent 

on the legal issue in the case; or 

(5) The manner in which the Region 

conducted the investigation has resulted 

in prejudicial error. 

(f) General Counsel action. The 

General Counsel may deny the appeal of 

the Regional Director’s dismissal of the 

charge, or may grant the appeal and 

remand the case to the Regional Director 

to take further action. The General 

Counsel’s decision on the appeal states 

the grounds listed in paragraph (e) of 

this section for denying or granting the 

appeal, and is served on all the parties. 

Absent a timely motion for 

reconsideration, the General Counsel’s 

decision is final. 

(g) Reconsideration. After the General 

Counsel issues a final decision, the 

Charging Party may move for 

reconsideration of the final decision if it 

can establish extraordinary 

circumstances in its moving papers. The 

motion must be filed within 10 days 

after the date on which the General 

Counsel’s final decision is postmarked. 

A motion for reconsideration must state 

with particularity the extraordinary 

circumstances claimed and must be 

supported by appropriate citations. The 

decision of the General Counsel on a 

motion for reconsideration is final. 

§ 2423.12 What types of settlements of 

unfair labor practice charges are possible 

after a Regional Director decides to issue a 

complaint but before issuance of a 

complaint? 

(a) Bilateral informal settlement 

agreement. Before issuing a complaint, 

the Regional Director may give the 

Charging Party and the Charged Party a 

reasonable period of time to enter into 

an informal settlement agreement to be 

approved by the Regional Director. 

When a Charged Party complies with 

the terms of an informal settlement 

agreement approved by the Regional 

Director, no further action is taken in 

the case. If the Charged Party fails to 

perform its obligations under the 

approved informal settlement 

agreement, the Regional Director may 

institute further proceedings. 

(b) Unilateral informal settlement 

agreement. If the Charging Party elects 

not to become a party to a bilateral 

settlement agreement, which the 

Regional Director concludes fulfills the 

policies of the Statute, the Regional 

Director may choose to approve a 

unilateral settlement between the 

Regional Director and the Charged 

Party. The Regional Director, on behalf 

of the General Counsel, must issue a 

letter stating the grounds for approving 

the settlement agreement and declining 

to issue a complaint. The Charging Party 

may obtain review of the Regional 

Director’s action by filing an appeal 

with the General Counsel under 

§ 2423.11(c) and (d). The General 

Counsel may grant an appeal when the 

Charging Party has shown that the 

Regional Director’s approval of a 

unilateral settlement agreement does not 

fulfill the purposes and policies of the 

Statute. The General Counsel must take 

action on the appeal as set forth in 

§ 2423.11(b) through (g). 

§§ 2423.13–2423.19 [Reserved] 

PART 2429—MISCELLANEOUS AND 

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 2429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7134; § 2429.18 also 

issued under 28 U.S.C. 2112(a). 

■ 5. Section 2429.24 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (f)(12) through (f)(14) 

and revising paragraph (g) to read as 

follows: 

§ 2429.24 Place and method of filing; 

acknowledgement. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(12) Petitions under 5 CFR part 2422. 

(13) Cross-petitions under 5 CFR part 

2422. 

(14) Charges under 5 CFR part 2423. 

(g) As another alternative to the 

methods of filing described in paragraph 

(e) of this section, you may file the 

following documents by facsimile 

(‘‘fax’’), so long as fax equipment is 

available and your entire, individual 

filing does not exceed 10 pages in total 

length, with normal margins and font 

sizes. You may file only the following 

documents by fax under this paragraph 

(g): 

(1) Motions; 

(2) Information pertaining to 

prehearing disclosure, conferences, 

orders, or hearing dates, times, and 

locations; 

(3) Information pertaining to 

subpoenas; 

(4) Appeals of a dismissal of an unfair 

labor practice charge; and 

(5) Other matters that are similar to 

those in paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of 

this section. 

Dated: June 20, 2012. 

Julia Akins Clark, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15462 Filed 6–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6727–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 987 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–10–0025; FV10–987–1 

FR] 

Domestic Dates Produced or Packed in 

Riverside County, CA; Order 

Amending Marketing Order 987 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends 

Marketing Agreement and Order No. 

987 (order), which regulates the 

handling of domestic dates produced or 

packed in Riverside County, California. 

The amendments approved by 

producers in referendum were proposed 

by the California Date Administrative 

Committee (CDAC or committee), which 

is responsible for local administration of 

the order. The amendments are 

intended to improve administration of 

and compliance with the order and 

reflect current industry practices. Two 

amendments proposed by the 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) 

were not approved in referendum. 

DATES: This rule is effective July 25, 

2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Martin Engeler, Marketing Order and 

Agreement Division, Fruit and 

Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA; 

Telephone: (559) 487–5110, Fax: (559) 

487–5906, or Kathleen M. Finn, 

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: 

Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov or 

Kathy.Finn@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Laurel May, 

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: 

Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

and Order No. 987, both as amended (7 

CFR part 987), regulating the handling 

of domestic dates produced or packed in 

Riverside County, California, hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is 

effective under the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 37763 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ The applicable 

rules of practice and procedure 

governing the formulation of marketing 

agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900) 

authorize amendment of the order 

through this informal rulemaking 

action. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. 

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. 

Section 1504 of the Food, 

Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 

(2008 Farm Bill) (Pub. L. 110–246) made 

changes to 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 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 if 

certain criteria are met. 

AMS has considered the nature and 

complexity of the proposed 

amendments, the potential regulatory 

and economic impacts on affected 

entities, and other relevant matters, and 

has determined that amending the order 

as proposed by the committee could 

appropriately be accomplished through 

informal rulemaking. 

The committee’s proposed 

amendments were recommended 

following deliberations at public 

meetings on October 30, 2008; October 

29, 2009; and February 25, 2010. The 

proposed amendments were first 

submitted to AMS on May 29, 2009. 

After further discussions with AMS, the 

committee submitted revised proposals 

to AMS on March 2, 2010. 

A proposed rule soliciting comments 

on the proposed amendments was 

issued on June 6, 2011, and published 

in the Federal Register on June 14, 2011 

(76 FR 34618). No comments were 

received. A proposed rule and 

referendum order was issued on 

November 3, 2011, and published in the 

Federal Register on November 9, 2011 

(76 FR 69678). This document directed 

that a referendum among date producers 

be conducted during the period January 

16, 2012 through February 3, 2012, to 

determine whether they favor 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 dates represented by 

voters in the referendum. The 

amendments recommended by the 

committee were favored by more than 

92 percent of those voting in the 

referendum and by more than 99 

percent of the volume represented in the 

referendum. 

The amendments included in this 

final rule will: (1) Authorize the 

committee to recommend regulatory 

exemptions for certain date varieties if 

market conditions warrant such 

exemption; (2) Increase the terms of 

office for committee members and 

alternates from two to three years; (3) 

Authorize the committee to conduct 

business by means of telephone or video 

conference technologies; (4) Authorize 

the committee to collect interest charges 

and late fees on delinquent assessment 

payments; and (5) Authorize the 

committee to build and maintain an 

operating monetary reserve not to 

exceed one year’s average expenses. 

An amended marketing agreement 

was subsequently provided to all date 

handlers in the production area for their 

approval. The marketing agreement was 

approved by handlers representing more 

than 50 percent of the volume of dates 

handled by all handlers covered under 

the order. 

Two amendments concerning 

periodic continuance referenda and 

committee member term limits 

recommend by AMS were not approved 

by producers in referendum. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to 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 

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 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 79 producers 

of dates in the production area and 8 

handlers subject to regulation under the 

marketing order. The Small Business 

Administration (13 CFR 121.201) 

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. 

According to the National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), 

the 2010 crop yield was approximately 

7,080 pounds, or 3.54 tons, of dates per 

acre. NASS estimates that the 2010 

grower price was approximately $0.585 

per pound, or $1,170 per ton. Thus, the 

value of date production in 2010 

averaged about $4,142 per acre (7,080 

pounds per acre times $0.585 per 

pound). At that average price, a 

producer would have to farm over 181 

acres to receive an annual income from 

dates of $750,000 ($750,000 divided by 

$4,142 per acre equals 181.1 acres). 

According to committee staff, the 

majority of California date producers 

farm fewer than 181 acres. Thus, it can 

be concluded that the majority of date 

producers could be considered small 

entities. According to data from the 

committee, the majority of handlers of 

California dates may also be considered 

small entities. 

The amendments will authorize the 

committee to recommend regulatory 

exemptions for dates by variety, provide 

for three years terms of office for 

committee members, provide for 

committee meetings by telephone and 

other means of communication, 

authorize an operating monetary reserve 

not to exceed one year’s average 

expenses, and authorize the collection 

of interest and late payment charges on 

delinquent assessment payments. 

Conforming changes to the order’s 

administrative rules and regulations 

will be made to facilitate 

implementation of the amendments 

approved by voters in the referendum. 

Specifically, the committee’s 

nomination and polling procedures will 

be modified to require that balloting 

materials be provided to producers by 

June 15 of every third year. 

The amendments were unanimously 

recommended at public meetings held 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37764 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

on October 30, 2008; October 29, 2009; 

and February 25, 2010. The committee 

believes that each of their amendments 

will benefit producers and handlers of 

all sizes. 

The amendment granting authority to 

temporarily exempt certain date 

varieties from regulation will allow the 

committee to determine whether the 

costs of collecting assessments and 

reports on individual varieties are 

warranted. Handler burden related to 

those functions will be reduced for 

exempted varieties. Decreases in 

handler assessment obligation and 

reporting costs could be passed on to 

producers. Administrative costs related 

to enforcing regulatory compliance for 

those varieties will also be reduced. 

Producer and handler participation in 

committee nominations is expected to 

improve when member terms of office 

are extended from two to three years. 

Extending the terms of office will afford 

the committee more time to identify and 

develop potential new members 

between committee selections. 

Coordinating committee nomination 

periods with those of other industry 

programs is expected to reduce voter 

confusion and increase the number of 

ballots returned, thus improving 

producer and handler representation on 

the committee. 

Adding authority for alternative 

meeting formats is expected to improve 

participation in committee deliberations 

by industry members of all sizes. Using 

alternative meeting formats will 

minimize the time that committee 

members are required to be away from 

their individual businesses. Authorizing 

the chairperson to determine the format 

for each meeting will ensure that critical 

committee business is addressed 

appropriately. By providing greater 

flexibility for meeting attendance and 

participation, the committee hopes to 

benefit from the input of a greater 

number of interested persons whose 

perspectives and ideas could improve 

the marketing of California dates, which 

would in turn benefit both producers 

and handlers. 

Authorizing the committee to impose 

interest and late payment charges on 

delinquent assessments is intended to 

encourage handlers to make payments 

on a timely basis. There will be no 

additional cost to handlers who comply 

with the order’s assessment 

requirements. Timely assessment 

payments allow the committee to make 

and keep financial obligations with 

regard to operation of its programs, 

including marketing and promotion, 

which are intended to benefit all 

producers and handlers. 

Adding authority to build and 

maintain an operating reserve equal to 

one year’s average expenses is intended 

to allow the committee to recommend 

increases to their assessment rate in 

order to gradually build the reserve. 

During high production years, excess 

assessments could be added to the 

reserve until the fund’s limit is reached. 

The larger operating reserve will help 

ensure that the committee has sufficient 

funds to meet its financial obligations 

and maintain critical marketing 

programs, even during short crop years. 

Such stability is expected to allow the 

committee to conduct programs that 

will benefit all entities, regardless of 

size. 

The changes to the order’s nomination 

and polling regulations are intended to 

facilitate implementation of the 

proposed amendments. 

Where measurable, the costs outlined 

in this analysis are expected to be 

proportional to the size of business, so 

smaller businesses should not be 

unduly burdened. Benefits associated 

with improved efficiencies and greater 

representation on the committee should 

accrue to all entities, regardless of size. 

Alternatives to these proposals 

included making no changes at this 

time. However, the changes are 

necessary to update administration of 

the order to reflect current industry 

practices, provide consistent funding 

that will enable the committee to 

maintain valuable marketing programs, 

and provide greater opportunity for 

committee participation. 

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. 0581–0178, 

Vegetable and Specialty 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 date 

industry. All interested persons were 

invited to attend the meetings and 

encouraged to participate in committee 

deliberations on all issues. Like all 

committee meetings, the 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 June 14, 2011 (76 FR 34618). 

Copies of the rule were mailed or sent 

via facsimile to all committee members 

and date handlers. Finally, the rule was 

made available through the internet by 

USDA and the Office of the Federal 

Register. A 30-day comment period 

ending July 14, 2011, was provided to 

allow interested persons to respond to 

the proposal. No comments were 

received in response to the proposed 

order amendments. Further, no 

comments were received in response to 

the proposed conforming changes to the 

administrative regulations. 

A proposed rule and referendum 

order was then issued on November 3, 

2011, and published in the Federal 

Register on November 9, 2011 (76 FR 

69678). This document directed that a 

referendum among date producers be 

conducted during the period January 16, 

2012, through February 3, 2012, to 

determine whether they favor 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 dates represented by 

voters in the referendum. All of the 

proposed amendments were favored by 

more than 92 percent of those voting in 

the referendum and by more than 99 

percent of the volume represented in the 

referendum. 

An amended marketing agreement 

was subsequently provided to all date 

handlers in the production area for their 

approval. The marketing agreement was 

approved by handlers representing more 

than 50 percent of the volume of dates 

handled by all handlers covered under 

the order. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

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

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Laurel May at 

the previously mentioned address in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 37765 

Order Amending the Order Regulating 

the Handling of Dates Produced or 

Packed in Riverside County, 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 agreement and 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 agreement and 

order, as amended, and all of the terms 

and conditions thereof, will tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act; 

2. The marketing agreement and 

order, as amended, regulate the 

handling of dates produced or packed in 

the production area (Riverside County, 

California) in the same manner as, and 

are applicable only to, persons in the 

respective classes of commercial and 

industrial activity specified in the 

marketing agreement and order; 

3. The marketing agreement and 

order, as amended, are 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 agreement and 

order, as amended, prescribe, 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 dates 

produced or packed in the production 

area; and 

5. All handling of dates produced or 

packed in the production area as 

defined in the marketing agreement and 

order is in the current of interstate or 

foreign commerce or directly burdens, 

obstructs, or affects such commerce. 

(b) Determinations. It is hereby 

determined that: 

1. The ‘‘Marketing Agreement 

Regulating the Handling of Dates 

Produced or Packed in Riverside 

County, California,’’ has been signed by 

handlers (excluding cooperative 

associations of producers who are not 

engaged in processing, distributing, or 

shipping dates covered under the order) 

who during the period October 1, 2010, 

through September 30, 2011, handled 

not less than 50 percent of the volume 

of such dates covered under the order; 

and 

2. The issuance of this amendatory 

order, amending the aforesaid order, is 

favored or approved by at least twothirds of the producers who participated 

in a referendum on the question of 

approval and who, during the period of 

October 1, 2010, through September 30, 

2011, have been engaged within the 

production area in the production of 

such dates, such producers having also 

produced for market at least two-thirds 

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 dates grown or packed in 

Riverside County, California, shall be in 

conformity to, and in compliance with, 

the terms and conditions of the said 

order as hereby proposed to be amended 

as follows: 

The provisions of Proposals Number 1 

through 5 of the proposed marketing 

order amending the order contained in 

the proposed rule issued by the 

Administrator on November 5, 2011, 

and published in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 69678) on November 9, 2011, 

will 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 987 

Dates, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR Part 987 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 987—DOMESTIC DATES 

PRODUCED OR PACKED IN 

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 987 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Revise § 987.23 to read as follows: 

§ 987.23 Term of office. 

The term of office for members and 

alternate members shall be three years 

beginning August 1, except that such 

term may be shorter if the Committee 

composition is changed in the interim 

pursuant to § 987.21. Provided, That the 

terms of office of all members and 

alternates currently serving at the time 

of the amendment will end on July 31, 

2014. Each member and alternate 

member shall, unless otherwise ordered 

by the Secretary, continue to serve until 

his or her successor has been selected 

and has qualified. 

■ 3. Revise paragraph (a) of § 987.24 to 

read as follows: 

§ 987.24 Nomination and selection. 

(a) Nomination for members and 

alternate members of the Committee 

shall be made not later than June 15 of 

every third year. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 987.31 by revising 

paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows: 

§ 987.31 Procedure. 

* * * * * 

(d) At the discretion of the 

chairperson, Committee meetings may 

be assembled or conducted by means of 

teleconference, video conference, or 

other means of communication that may 

be developed. Assembled meetings may 

also allow for participation by means of 

teleconference or video conference or 

other communication methods, at the 

discretion of the chair. Members 

participating in meetings via any of 

these alternative means retain the same 

voting privileges that they would 

otherwise have. 

(e) The Committee may vote upon any 

proposition by mail, or by telephone 

when confirmed in writing within two 

weeks, upon due notice and full and 

identical explanation to all members, 

including alternates acting as members, 

but any such action shall not be 

considered valid unless unanimously 

approved. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 987.52 by designating the 

existing text as paragraph (a) and by 

adding a new paragraph (b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 987.52 Exemption. 

* * * * * 

(b) The Committee may, with the 

approval of the Secretary, recommend 

that the handling of any date variety be 

exempted from regulations established 

pursuant to §§ 987.39 through 987.51 

and §§ 987.61 through 987.72. 

■ 6. Amend § 987.72 by redesignating 

paragraphs (b) through (d) as paragraphs 

(c) through (e), respectively; by adding 

a new paragraph (b); and by revising 

redesignated paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 987.72 Assessments. 

* * * * * 

(b) Delinquent payments. Any 

assessment not paid by a handler within 

a period of time prescribed by the 

Committee may be subject to an interest 

or late payment charge, or both. The 

period of time, rate of interest, and late 

payment charge shall be as 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37766 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

recommended by the Committee and 

approved by the Secretary. 

* * * * * 

(d) Operating reserve. The Committee, 

with the approval of the Secretary, may 

establish and maintain during one or 

more crop years an operating monetary 

reserve in an amount not to exceed the 

average of one year’s expenses incurred 

during the most recent five preceding 

crop years, except that an established 

reserve need not be reduced to conform 

to any recomputed average. Funds in 

reserve shall be available for use by the 

Committee for expenses authorized 

pursuant to § 987.71. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Revise § 987.124(a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 987.124 Nomination and polling. 

(a) Date producers and producerhandlers shall be provided an 

opportunity to nominate and vote for 

individuals to serve on the Committee. 

For this purpose, the Committee shall, 

no later than June 15 of every third year, 

provide date producers and producerhandlers nomination and balloting 

material by mail or equivalent electronic 

means, upon which producers and 

producer-handlers may nominate 

candidates and cast their votes for 

members and alternate members of the 

Committee in accordance with the 

requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) and 

(b)(2) of this section, respectively. All 

ballots are subject to verification. 

Balloting material should be provided to 

voters at least two weeks before the due 

date and should contain, at least, the 

following information: 

(1) The names of incumbents who are 

willing and eligible to continue to serve 

on the Committee; 

(2) The names of other persons 

willing and eligible to serve; 

(3) Instructions on how voters may 

add write-in candidates; 

(4) The date on which the ballot is 

due to the Committee or its agent; and 

(5) How and where to return ballots. 

* * * * * 

Dated: June 20, 2012. 

Ruihong Guo, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15428 Filed 6–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–1089; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–110–AD; Amendment 

39–17097; AD 2012–12–17] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Bombardier, Inc. Model BD–100–1A10 

(Challenger 300) airplanes. This AD was 

prompted by reports of deformation 

found at the neck of the pressure 

regulator body on the oxygen cylinder 

and regulator assembly (CRA). This AD 

requires an inspection to determine if a 

certain oxygen CRA is installed and the 

replacement of affected oxygen CRAs. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent 

elongation of the pressure regulator 

neck, which could result in rupture of 

the oxygen cylinder, and, in the case of 

cabin depressurization, oxygen not 

being available when required. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 

30, 2012. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of July 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 

7318; fax (516) 794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to 

amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD 

that would apply to the specified 

products. That SNPRM was published 

in the Federal Register on February 8, 

2012 (77 FR 6525). The original NPRM 

(76 FR 64857, October 19, 2011) 

proposed to require an inspection to 

determine if a certain oxygen cylinder 

and regulator assembly (CRA) is 

installed and the replacement of 

affected oxygen CRAs. The SNPRM 

proposed to change the compliance time 

in paragraph (g) of the SNPRM. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the SNPRM 

(77 FR 6525, February 8, 2012), or on 

the determination of the cost to the 

public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

as proposed. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

79 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 3 workhours per product to comply with the 

basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts will cost about $0 per 

product. Where the service information 

lists required parts costs that are 

covered under warranty, we have 

assumed that there will be no charge for 

these parts. As we do not control 

warranty coverage for affected parties, 

some parties may incur costs higher 

than estimated here. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of this AD 

to the U.S. operators to be $29,145, or 

$255 per product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES