Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 130 / Friday, July 6, 2018 / Proposed Rules 31473 

Committee meetings, the June 8, 2017, 

meeting was a public meeting, and all 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express their views on this issue. 

Finally, interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on this proposed rule, 

including the regulatory and 

information collection impacts of this 

action on small businesses. 

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/ 

rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Richard Lower 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposal. All written comments 

timely received will be considered 

before a final determination is made on 

this matter. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 906 

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, 

Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 906 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 906—ORANGES AND 

GRAPEFRUIT GROWN IN LOWER RIO 

GRANDE VALLEY IN TEXAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 906 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Revise § 906.340(a)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 906.340 Container, pack, and container 

marking regulations. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Containers. (i) Closed fiberboard 

carton with approximate inside 

dimensions of 131⁄4 x 101⁄2 x 71⁄4 inches: 

Provided, That the container has a 

Mullen or Cady test of at least 200 

pounds; 

(ii) Closed fully telescopic fiberboard 

carton with approximate inside 

dimensions of 161⁄2 x 103⁄4 x 91⁄2 inches 

(Standard carton); 

(iii) Poly or mesh bags having a 

capacity of 4, 5, 8, 10, or 18 pounds of 

fruit; 

(iv) Rectangular or octagonal bulk 

fiberboard crib with approximate 

dimensions of 46 to 471⁄2 inches in 

length, 37 to 38 inches in width, and 36 

inches in height: Provided, That the 

container has a Mullen or Cady test of 

at least 1,300 pounds, and that it is used 

only once for the shipment of citrus 

fruit: And Provided further, That the 

container may be used to pack any poly 

or mesh bags authorized in this section, 

or bulk fruit; 

(v) Rectangular or octagonal 2⁄3

fiberboard crib with approximate 

dimensions of 46 to 471⁄2 inches in 

length, 37 to 38 inches in width, and 24 

inches in height: Provided, That the crib 

has a Mullen or Cady test of at least 

1,300 pounds, and that it is used only 

once for the shipment of citrus fruit: 

And Provided further, That the 

container may be used to pack any poly 

or mesh bags authorized in this section, 

or bulk fruit; 

(vi) Octagonal fiberboard crib with 

approximate dimensions of 46 to 471⁄2

inches in width, 37 to 38 inches in 

depth, and 26 to 261⁄2 inches in height: 

Provided, That the crib has a Mullen or 

Cady test of at least 1,300 pounds, and 

that it is used only once for the 

shipment of citrus fruit: And Provided 

further, That the crib may be used to 

pack any poly or mesh bags authorized 

in this section, or bulk fruit; 

(vii) Fiberboard box holding two 

layers of fruit, with approximate 

dimensions of 23 inches in length, 151⁄2

inches in width, and 7 inches in depth; 

(viii) Reusable collapsible plastic 

container with approximate dimensions 

of 23 inches in length, 15 inches in 

width, and 7 to 11 inches in depth; 

(ix) Reusable collapsible plastic bin 

with approximate dimensions of 363⁄4 x 

443⁄4 x 27 inches; 

(x) Octagonal bulk triple wall 

fiberboard crib with approximate 

dimensions of 373⁄4 inches in length, 25 

inches in width, and 25 inches in 

height: Provided, That the container has 

a Mullen or Cady test of at least 1,100 

pounds: And Provided further, That the 

container may be used to pack any poly 

or mesh bags authorized in this section, 

or bulk fruit; 

(xi) Bag having the capacity of 15 

pounds of fruit, either in a combination 

1⁄2 poly and 1⁄2 mesh bag or mesh bag; 

(xii) Reusable collapsible plastic mini 

bin with approximate dimensions of 

391⁄2 inches in length, 24 inches in 

width, and 301⁄2 inches in height: 

Provided, That the container may be 

used to pack any poly or mesh bags 

authorized in this section, or bulk fruit; 

(xiii) Bag having the capacity of three 

pounds of fruit; 

(xiv) Standard carton with 

approximate inside dimensions of 

16.375 x 10.6875 x 10.25 inches; 

(xv) 8⁄5 Body master carton with 

approximate inside dimensions of 

19.5385 x 13.125 x 11.625 inches, one 

piece; 

(xvi) Euro 8⁄5 (5 Down) with 

approximate inside dimensions of 

22.813 x 14.688 x 7.0 up to 7.936 

inches; 

(xvii) Fiberboard one piece display 

container with approximate inside 

dimensions of 23 inches x 15 inches x 

91⁄2 up to 101⁄2 inches in depth; 

(xviii) Such types and sizes of 

containers as may be approved by the 

committee for testing in connection 

with a research project conducted by or 

in cooperation with the committee: 

Provided, That the handling of each lot 

of fruit in such test containers shall be 

subject to prior approval and under the 

supervision of the committee. 

* * * * * 

Dated: July 2, 2018. 

Bruce Summers, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14511 Filed 7–5–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 981 

[AMS–SC–18–0018; SC18–981–3] 

Handling of Almonds Grown in 

California 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule invites 

comments on proposed amendments to 

Marketing Order No. 981, which 

regulates the handling of almonds 

grown in California. The proposed 

amendments would change the dates 

associated with the process to nominate 

members to the Almond Board of 

California (Board) as well as the start of 

the term of office of members of the 

Board. The proposed amendments 

would also add authority to allow future 

revisions of the nomination methods 

and term of office start date through the 

development of regulations using 

informal rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

September 4, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this proposed rule. 

Comments must be sent to the Docket 

Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Fax: (202) 720–8938; or 

internet: http://www.regulations.gov. All 

comments should reference the 

document number and the date and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
31474 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 130 / Friday, July 6, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

page number of this issue of the Federal 

Register and will be made available for 

public inspection in the Office of the 

Docket Clerk during regular business 

hours, or can be viewed at: http://

www.regulations.gov. All comments 

submitted in response to this proposed 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public. 

Please be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Debbie Wray, Senior Marketing 

Specialist, or Julie Santoboni, 

Rulemaking Branch Chief, Marketing 

Order and Agreement Division, 

Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; 

Telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202) 

720–8938, or Email: Debbie.Wray@

ams.usda.gov or Julie.Santoboni@

ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Richard Lower, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Richard.Lower@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, 

proposes amendments to regulations 

issued to carry out a marketing order as 

defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This proposed 

rule is issued under Marketing Order 

No. 981, as amended (7 CFR part 981), 

regulating the handling of almonds 

grown in California. Part 981 (referred to 

as the ‘‘Order’’) is effective under the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), 

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

Board locally administers the Order and 

is comprised of almond growers and 

handlers operating within California. 

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) authorizes amendment of the 

Order through this informal rulemaking 

action. The Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS) will consider comments 

received in response to this proposed 

rule and, based on all the information 

available, will determine if the Order 

amendments are warranted. If AMS 

determines amendment of the Order is 

warranted, a subsequent proposed rule 

and notice of referendum would be 

issued, and growers would be allowed 

to vote for or against the proposed Order 

amendments. AMS would then issue a 

final rule effectuating any amendments 

approved by growers in the referendum. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

13563 and 13175. This action falls 

within a category of regulatory actions 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive 

Order 12866 review. Additionally, 

because this proposed rule does not 

meet the definition of a significant 

regulatory action, it does not trigger the 

requirements contained in Executive 

Order 13771. See OMB’s Memorandum 

titled ‘‘Interim Guidance Implementing 

Section 2 of the Executive Order of 

January 30, 2017, titled ‘Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs’ ’’ (February 2, 2017). 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This proposed rule is 

not intended to have retroactive effect. 

This proposed rule shall not be deemed 

to preclude, preempt, or supersede any 

State program covering almonds grown 

in California. 

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 8c(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 8c(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 its 

consideration of the nature and 

complexity of the proposed 

amendments, the potential regulatory 

and economic impacts on affected 

entities, and any other relevant matters. 

AMS has considered these factors and 

has determined that the amendments 

proposed are not unduly complex, and 

the nature of the proposed amendments 

is appropriate for utilizing the informal 

rulemaking process to amend the Order. 

A discussion of the potential regulatory 

and economic impacts on affected 

entities is discussed later in the ‘‘Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis’’ section 

of this proposed rule. 

The proposed amendments were 

unanimously recommended by the 

Board following deliberations at a 

public meeting held on December 4, 

2017. The proposed rule would amend 

the Order by: (1) Changing the 

nomination deadline for Board 

nominees from January 20 to April 1, 

the deadline for presenting nominees to 

USDA for selection from February 20 to 

June 1, and the start of the term of office 

from March 1 to August 1; (2) adding 

the ability to propose future revisions to 

Board nomination methods by 

developing regulations through informal 

rulemaking; and (3) adding the ability to 

propose future revisions to the start date 

of the Board’s term of office by 

developing regulations through informal 

rulemaking. 

In addition to these proposals, AMS 

proposes to make any additional 

changes to the Order as may be 

necessary to conform to any amendment 

that may result from this rulemaking 

action. 

Proposal 1—Nomination and Term of 

Office Dates 

Section 981.32 provides that, each 

year, nominees for open Board member 

and alternate member positions shall be 

chosen by ballot delivered to the Board. 

In support of this nomination process, 

§ 981.32 further provides that on or 

before January 20 of each year, the 

Board shall mail to all handlers and 

growers, other than the cooperative(s) of 

record, the required ballots with all 

necessary voting information; and that 

nominees chosen by the Board in this 

manner shall be submitted by the Board 

to the USDA Secretary of Agriculture 

(Secretary) on or before February 20 of 

each year. If a nomination for any Board 

member or alternate is not received by 

the Secretary on or before February 20, 

the Secretary may select, without 

nomination, such member or alternate 

from persons belonging to the group to 

be represented. 

Section 981.33 provides that the term 

of office of Board members and alternate 

members selected by the Secretary 

pursuant to § 981.32 shall begin on 

March 1. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 130 / Friday, July 6, 2018 / Proposed Rules 31475 

This proposal would amend § 981.32 

by changing the nomination deadline 

for Board nominees from January 20 to 

April 1 and the deadline for presenting 

nominees for selection to the Secretary 

from February 20 to June 1. It would 

also amend § 981.33 by changing the 

start of the term of office from March 1 

to August 1. A clarifying change would 

also be made to § 981.33 to remove 

language related to a previous 

amendment to the Order that is no 

longer needed. 

Changing the two nomination process 

dates from January 20 and February 20 

to April 1 and June 1, respectively, 

could provide several benefits. First, 

preparing ballots to mail in January is 

very challenging for the Board because 

it prepares for and hosts major industry 

activities in December, including a 

Board meeting and a large, multi-day 

almond conference that is held at an offsite location. The Board office is also 

closed the last week of December every 

year. Because of these year-end 

activities, it is difficult for the Board to 

prepare for a nomination mailing in 

January. Changing the nomination dates 

would allow the Board sufficient time to 

prepare nominations for mailing. 

In addition, the Board believes that 

more industry members might 

participate in the nomination process if 

it occurred later in the calendar year. 

This is because many industry members 

are busy with or returning from winter 

holiday season activities in December 

and January and, therefore, may be less 

likely to participate in nomination 

proceedings that are occurring at that 

time. 

In addition to the challenges the 

Board faces in meeting the January 

nomination deadline, there is currently 

only one month between the deadline 

for mailing ballots (January 20) and the 

date that the Board must process 

returned ballots and prepare a 

nomination package to submit to USDA 

(February 20). In addition to this short 

timeframe, there are only 9 or 10 days 

between the February 20 deadline by 

which the Board must submit 

nominations to USDA and the March 1 

term of office start date. This short 

timeframe does not provide adequate 

time for the nominations to be 

processed and new member selections 

to be made prior to the new term of 

office. The proposed changes would 

provide 60 days between the April 1 

and June 1 nomination process deadline 

dates, compared to the existing 30 days 

between the current dates of January 20 

and February 20. The proposed changes 

would also provide 60 days between the 

June 1 deadline for the Board to submit 

the nominations to USDA and the new 

August 1 term of office start date, 

compared to the existing 10 days 

between the current dates of February 

20 and March 1. Extending the times 

between these dates would improve the 

overall preparation and processing of 

nominations. 

The proposal to change the term of 

office start date would improve Board 

cohesiveness because the Board would 

then operate on the same timeline as the 

crop year and the Board’s committees. 

The Order’s crop year is defined in 

§ 981.19 as August 1 through July 31. 

The Board is responsible for all program 

planning and budgeting for each crop 

year. However, with the current term of 

office beginning on March 1, Board 

members responsible for annual 

program planning and budget 

recommendations leave office prior to 

the end of the crop year; conversely, 

new Board members also begin serving 

in the middle of a crop year. Starting the 

term of office on August 1 would allow 

Board members to administer activities 

for an entire crop year as well as 

provide valuable insight related to the 

next crop year’s activities. In addition, 

changing the start of the term of office 

to August 1 would align with the 

appointment of individuals to various 

committees that operate under the 

Board, which occurs at the beginning of 

each crop year. 

Changing the term of office start date 

from March 1 to August 1 would require 

current members and alternates to serve 

a few additional months, beyond the 

original March 1 start date, until their 

respective successors were selected and 

qualified pursuant to § 981.33(a). 

These changes to the nomination and 

term of office dates that appear in two 

sections of the Order (§§ 981.32 and 

981.33) are being proposed as a single 

amendment because of the relation of 

the nomination process to the start date 

of the term of office; that is, if the 

nomination process dates are changed to 

occur later in the calendar year (on 

April 1 and June 1, respectively, as 

described above), then the start date of 

the term of office would also need to 

change from March 1 to a date that 

would follow the new nomination 

process dates. As noted above, the 

Board recommended the term of office 

start date be changed to August 1. 

Proposal 2—Regulation Authority for 

Nomination Methods 

Section 981.32 provides the methods 

by which nominations for open Board 

member and alternate member positions 

shall be chosen, including the dates by 

which (1) ballots and voting information 

shall be mailed by the Board to all 

handlers and growers, other than 

cooperative(s) of record, and (2) 

nominations shall be submitted by the 

Board to the Secretary. Changes to these 

dates are included in Proposal 1 above 

(to change from January 20 to April 1 

and from February 20 to June 1, 

respectively). 

This proposal would change § 981.32 

by adding authority to modify the 

nomination methods described in 

paragraph (a) through the future 

development of regulations using the 

informal rulemaking process. Currently, 

changes to the nomination methods 

require formal rulemaking. The Board 

would still be required to discuss future 

proposed changes at its meetings and to 

vote on whether to recommend changes 

to USDA. If amended, future changes 

would still require notice be given to the 

public with an opportunity for the 

public to comment on the proposed 

changes. However, it is anticipated that 

this proposed amendment would 

streamline future changes to the Order 

by allowing such changes to be 

proposed and finalized through the use 

of informal rulemaking. 

Proposal 3—Regulation Authority for 

Term of Office Start Date 

Section 981.33 provides that the term 

of office of Board members and alternate 

members selected by the Secretary 

pursuant to § 981.32 shall begin on 

March 1. A change to this term of office 

start date is included in Proposal 1 

above (to change from March 1 to 

August 1). 

This proposal would change § 981.33 

by adding authority to modify the term 

of office start date through the future 

development of regulations using the 

informal rulemaking process. Currently, 

changes to the term of office start date 

require formal rulemaking. The Board 

would still be required to discuss a 

future proposed change at its meetings 

and to vote on whether to recommend 

a change to USDA. If amended, a future 

change to the term of office start date 

would still require notice be given to the 

public with an opportunity for the 

public to comment on the proposed 

change. However, it is anticipated that 

this proposed amendment would 

streamline future changes to the Order 

by allowing such changes to be 

proposed and finalized through the use 

of informal rulemaking. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), AMS has considered 

the economic impact of this action on 

small entities. Accordingly, AMS has 

prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
31476 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 130 / Friday, July 6, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

There are approximately 6,800 

almond growers in the production area 

and approximately 100 almond handlers 

subject to regulation under the Order. 

Small agricultural service firms are 

defined by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) as those having 

annual receipts of less than $7,500,000, 

and small agricultural producers are 

defined as those having annual receipts 

of less than $750,000 (13 CFR 121.201). 

The National Agricultural Statistics 

Service (NASS) reported in its 2012 

Agricultural Census that there were 

6,841 almond farms in the production 

area (California), of which 6,204 had 

bearing acres. The following 

computation provides an estimate of the 

proportion of agricultural producers 

(farms) and agricultural service firms 

(handlers) that would be considered 

small under the SBA definitions. 

The NASS Census data indicates that 

out of the 6,204 California farms with 

bearing acres of almonds, 4,471 (72 

percent) have fewer than 100 bearing 

acres. 

For the almond industry’s most 

recently reported crop year (2016), 

NASS reported an average yield of 2,280 

pounds per acre and a season average 

grower price of $2.44 per pound. A 100- 

acre farm with an average yield of 2,280 

pounds per acre would produce about 

228,000 pounds of almonds. At $2.44 

per pound, that farm’s production 

would be valued at $556,320. The 

Census of Agriculture indicates that the 

majority of California’s almond farms 

are smaller than 100 acres; therefore, it 

could be concluded that the majority of 

growers had annual receipts from the 

sale of almonds in 2016–17 of less than 

$556,320, which is below the SBA 

threshold of $750,000. Thus, over 70 

percent of California’s almond growers 

would be classified as small entities 

according to SBA’s definition. 

To estimate the proportion of almond 

handlers that would be considered 

small businesses, it was assumed that 

the unit value per shelled pound of 

almonds exported in a particular year 

could serve as a representative almond 

price at the handler level. A unit value 

for a commodity is the value of exports 

divided by the quantity. Data from the 

Global Agricultural Trade System 

database of USDA’s Foreign Agricultural 

Service showed that the value of 

almond exports from August 2016 to 

July 2017 (combining shelled and 

inshell almonds) was $4.072 billion. 

The quantity of almond exports over 

that time period was 1.406 billion 

pounds, combining shelled exports and 

the shelled equivalent of inshell 

exports. Dividing the export value by 

the quantity yields a unit value of $2.90 

per pound. Subtracting this figure from 

the NASS 2016 estimate of season 

average grower price per pound ($2.44) 

yields $0.46 per pound as a 

representative grower-handler margin. 

Applying the $2.90 representative 

handler price per pound to 2016–17 

handler shipment quantities provided 

by the Board showed that approximately 

40 percent of California’s almond 

handlers shipped almonds valued under 

$7,500,000 during the 2016–17 crop 

year and would therefore be considered 

small entities according to the SBA 

definition. 

The proposed amendments would 

change the dates associated with the 

process to nominate Board members and 

alternates as well as the start of the term 

of office of Board members. The 

proposed amendments would also add 

authority to allow future revisions of the 

nomination methods and term of office 

dates through the development of 

regulations using informal rulemaking. 

These amendments would improve the 

nomination process, align the term of 

office with the crop year and 

appointment of Board committees, and 

streamline the process for making 

similar changes in the future. 

The Board’s proposed amendments 

were unanimously recommended at a 

public meeting of the Board on 

December 4, 2017. The proposed 

amendments are administrative in 

nature; therefore, if any or all of the 

proposals are approved in referendum, 

there should be no economic impact on 

growers or handlers. Changing the 

nomination dates could encourage 

greater industry participation on the 

Board because the timing of the current 

nominations occurs immediately after 

the winter holiday season, when many 

industry members are just returning to 

their operations and may be less 

inclined to participate. The changes to 

the nomination process dates and the 

term of office start date are expected to 

streamline and improve operations of 

the Board. Adding authority to allow the 

development of regulations through 

informal rulemaking for making future 

changes to the nomination methods and 

term of office start date could reduce the 

time it takes to implement the changes, 

thereby allowing the Board to function 

more effectively. 

Alternatives to the proposals, 

including recommending no changes, 

were considered. However, the Board 

believes that changing the nomination 

process dates and term of office start 

date, as well as adding authority to 

make similar changes in the future by 

creating regulations through informal 

rulemaking, will be beneficial to the 

industry by enhancing Board operations 

and effectiveness. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the Order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by OMB and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0178 

(Vegetable and Specialty Crops). No 

changes in those requirements are 

necessary as a result of this action. 

Should any changes become necessary, 

they would be submitted to OMB for 

approval. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California almond handlers. As with all 

Federal marketing order programs, 

reports and forms are periodically 

reviewed to reduce information 

requirements and duplication by 

industry and public sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this action. 

The Board’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the almond 

industry. All interested persons were 

invited to attend the meeting and 

encouraged to participate in Board 

deliberations on all issues. Like all 

Board meetings, the December 4, 2017, 

meeting was public, and all entities, 

both large and small, were encouraged 

to express their views on these 

proposals. 

Finally, interested persons are invited 

to submit comments on the proposed 

amendments to the Order, including 

comments on the regulatory and 

information collection impacts of this 

action on small businesses. 

Following analysis of any comments 

received on the amendments proposed 

in this proposed rule, AMS will 

evaluate all available information and 

determine whether to proceed. If 

appropriate, a proposed rule and notice 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 130 / Friday, July 6, 2018 / Proposed Rules 31477 

of referendum would be issued, and 

growers would be provided the 

opportunity to vote for or against the 

proposed amendments. Information 

about the referendum, including dates 

and voter eligibility requirements, 

would be published in a future issue of 

the Federal Register. A final rule would 

then be issued to effectuate any 

amendments favored by growers 

participating 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/ 

rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Richard Lower 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

General Findings 

The findings hereinafter set forth are 

supplementary to the findings and 

determinations which were previously 

made in connection with the issuance of 

Marketing Order 981; 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. Marketing Order 981 as hereby 

proposed to be amended and all of the 

terms and conditions thereof, would 

tend to effectuate the declared policy of 

the Act; 

2. Marketing Order 981 as hereby 

proposed to be amended regulates the 

handling of almonds grown in 

California and is applicable only to 

persons in the respective classes of 

commercial and industrial activity 

specified in the Marketing Order; 

3. Marketing Order 981 as hereby 

proposed to be 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 marketing orders 

applicable to subdivisions of the 

production area would not effectively 

carry out the declared policy of the Act; 

4. Marketing Order 981 as hereby 

proposed to be 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 almonds 

produced or packed in the production 

area; and 

5. All handling of almonds produced 

or packed in the production area as 

defined in Marketing Order 981 is in the 

current of interstate or foreign 

commerce or directly burdens, 

obstructs, or affects such commerce. 

A 60-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to these proposals. Any comments 

received on the amendments proposed 

in this proposed rule will be analyzed, 

and if AMS determines to proceed based 

on all the information presented, a 

grower referendum would be conducted 

to determine grower support for the 

proposed amendments. If appropriate, a 

final rule would then be issued to 

effectuate the amendments favored by 

growers participating in the referendum. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981 

Almonds, Marketing agreements, 

Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 981 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 981—ALMONDS GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 981 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Amend § 981.32 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) and adding paragraph 

(a)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 981.32 Nominations. 

(a) Method. (1) Each year the terms of 

office of three of the members elected 

pursuant to § 981.31(a) and (b) shall 

expire, except every third year when the 

term of office for two of those members 

shall expire. Nominees for each 

respective member and alternate 

member shall be chosen by ballot 

delivered to the Board. Nominees 

chosen by the Board in this manner 

shall be submitted by the Board to the 

Secretary on or before June 1 of each 

year together with such information as 

the Secretary may require. If a 

nomination for any Board member or 

alternate is not received by the Secretary 

on or before June 1, the Secretary may 

select such member or alternate from 

persons belonging to the group to be 

represented without nomination. The 

Board shall mail to all handlers and 

growers, other than the cooperative(s) of 

record, the required ballots with all 

necessary voting information including 

the names of incumbents willing to 

accept renomination, and, to such 

growers, the name of any person 

proposed for nomination in a petition 

signed by at least 15 such growers and 

filed with the Board on or before April 

1. Distribution of ballots shall be 

announced by press release, furnishing 

pertinent information on balloting, 

issued by the Board through newspapers 

and other publications having general 

circulation in the almond producing 

areas. 

* * * * * 

(3) The Board may recommend, 

subject to the approval of the Secretary, 

a change to the nomination method, 

should the Board determine that a 

revision is necessary. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 981.33 by revising the first 

sentence of paragraphs (a) and (b), 

revising the last sentence of paragraph 

(c), and adding paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 981.33 Selection and term of office. 

(a) Members and their respective 

alternates for positions open on the 

Board shall be selected by the Secretary 

from persons nominated pursuant to 

§ 981.32, or, at the discretion of the 

Secretary, from other qualified persons, 

for a term of office beginning August 1. 

* * * 

(b) The term of office of members of 

the Board shall be for a period of three 

years beginning on August 1 of the years 

selected except where otherwise 

provided. * * * 

(c) * * * This limitation on tenure 

shall not apply to alternate members. 

(d) The Board may recommend, 

subject to approval of the Secretary, 

revisions to the start date for the term 

of office of members of the Board. 

Dated: July 2, 2018. 

Bruce Summers, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14512 Filed 7–5–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1220 

[Doc. No. AMS–LPS–18–0015] 

Soybean Promotion and Research: 

Amend the Order To Adjust 

Representation on the United Soybean 

Board 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

adjust the number of members on the 

United Soybean Board (Board) to reflect 

changes in production levels that have 

occurred since the Board was last 

reapportioned in 2015. As required by 

the Soybean Promotion, Research, and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS