66602 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 208 / Thursday, October 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Communications Budget Officer, (202) 

360–3962. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

relates to internal agency management. 

Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553(a)(2), notice of proposed rulemaking 

and opportunity for comment are not 

required, and this rule may be made 

effective less than 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Further, because this rule relates to 

internal agency management, it is 

exempt from the provisions of Executive 

Order No. 12866. Finally, this action is 

not a rule as defined by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., and 

is, therefore, exempt from the provisions 

of the Act. Accordingly, as authorized 

by 5 U.S.C. 808, this rule may be made 

effective upon publication. 

This rule contains no information 

collection or recordkeeping 

requirements under the Paper Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq). 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 2 

Authority Delegations (Government 

agencies). 

Accordingly, Subtitle A of Title 7 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations is 

amended as set forth below: 

PART 2—DELEGATIONS OF 

AUTHORITY BY THE SECRETARY OF 

AGRICULTURE AND GENERAL 

OFFICERS OF THE DEPARTMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 2 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 6912(a): 5 U.S.C. 301; 

Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1953, 3 CFR 

1949–1953 Comp. p. 1024. 

Subpart D—Delegation of Authority to 

Other General Officers and Agency 

Heads 

■ 2. Amend § 2.36 by adding a new 

paragraph (a)(2)(xiv), to read as follows: 

§ 2.36 Director, Office of Communications. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(xiv) Serve as the central authority to 

determine policy, plans, procedures, 

guidelines, and standards for the 

creation and use of logos/marks by the 

Department’s mission areas, staff offices 

or agencies, not otherwise provided for 

by specific laws and regulations, and 

excluding the Official USDA Seal and 

Official USDA Symbol. 

* * * * * 

Signed in Washington, DC, on October 21, 

2011. 

Thomas J. Vilsack, 

Secretary of Agriculture. 

[FR Doc. 2011–27759 Filed 10–26–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3411–N8–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 916 and 917 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–11–0018; FV11–916/917– 

4 FR] 

Nectarines and Fresh Peaches Grown 

in California; Termination of Marketing 

Order 916 and the Peach Provisions of 

Marketing Order 917 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule, termination of order. 

SUMMARY: This final rule terminates the 

Federal marketing orders regulating the 

handling of nectarines and fresh 

peaches grown in California (orders) 

and the rules and regulations issued 

thereunder. The Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) has determined that 

these marketing orders are no longer an 

effective marketing tool for the handling 

of nectarines and fresh peaches grown 

in California and that termination best 

serves the current needs of the industry 

while also eliminating the costs 

associated with the operation of the 

marketing orders. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 28, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry 

L. Simmons, Marketing Specialist, or 

Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional Manager, 

California Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreements 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– 

5901; Fax: (559) 487–5906; or Email: 

Jerry.Simmons@ams.usda.gov or 

Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Laurel May, 

Marketing Order and Agreements 

Division, 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 Email: 

Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

action is governed by Section 

608c(16)(A) of the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

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

referred to as the ‘‘Act’’ and issued 

under Marketing Order Nos. 916 and 

917, both as amended (7 CFR parts 916 

and 917), regulating the handling of 

nectarines and peaches grown in 

California, respectively, hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘orders.’’ 

USDA is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This final rule to terminate the orders 

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. 

This rule terminates Marketing Order 

916—the nectarine order—and the 

peach provisions of Marketing Order 

917—the fresh pear and peach order— 

as well as the pertinent rules and 

regulations issued thereunder. USDA 

believes that termination of these 

programs is appropriate because the 

programs are no longer favored by 

industry growers. 

The orders authorize regulation of the 

handling of nectarines and fresh pears 

and peaches grown in California. 

Sections 916.64 and 917.61 of the orders 

require USDA to conduct continuance 

referenda among growers of these fruits 

every four years to ascertain continuing 

support for the orders and their 

programs. These sections further require 

USDA to terminate the orders if it finds 

that the provisions of the orders no 

longer tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. Section 608c(16)(A) of 

the Act requires USDA to terminate or 

suspend the operation of any order 

whenever the order or any provision 

thereof obstructs or does not tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act. 

Finally, USDA is required to notify 

Congress of the intended terminations 

not later than 60 days before the date 

the orders would be terminated. 

Continuance referenda were 

conducted among growers of California 

nectarines and fresh pears and peaches 

in January and February 2011. Less than 

two-thirds of participating growers, by 

number and production volume, voted 

in favor of continuing the nectarine and 

peach orders. By contrast, more than 94 

percent of pear growers voted to 

continue the pear order provisions. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 208 / Thursday, October 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 66603 

Grower support for the programs was 

similar in the last referenda, which were 

conducted in 2003. USDA conducted 

public listening sessions following the 

referenda and found that the nectarine 

and peach orders might continue to 

benefit the industries if modifications 

were made to the programs. 

Subsequently, several revisions were 

made to the orders and the handling 

regulations over the last several years. 

Continuance referendum requirements 

were suspended for 2007 because the 

orders had just been amended, and the 

industries wanted to operate the 

amended orders for a period of time 

before voting again on continuance. 

Nevertheless, the results of the most 

recent referenda, as well as feedback 

from the industries over the last few 

years, suggest that the nectarine and 

peach programs no longer meet industry 

needs and that the benefits of such 

programs no longer outweigh costs to 

handlers and growers. USDA believes 

that the referendum results and industry 

feedback support termination of the 

programs. 

As stated earlier, pear growers in the 

most recent referendum, as well as in 

previous referenda, supported 

continuance of the pear order 

provisions, which have been suspended 

since 1994 (59 FR 10055; March 3, 

1994). USDA does not intend to 

terminate the pear order provisions at 

this time. The remainder of this 

document pertains to the termination of 

the nectarine and peach order 

provisions only. 

The nectarine order has been in effect 

since 1958, and the peach order since 

1939. Operating under the management 

umbrella of the California Tree Fruit 

Agreement (CTFA), the orders have 

provided the California fresh tree fruit 

industries with authority for grade, size, 

quality, maturity, pack, and container 

regulations, as well as the authority for 

mandatory inspection. The orders also 

authorize production research and 

marketing research and development 

projects, as well as the necessary 

reporting, recordkeeping, and 

assessment functions required for 

operation. 

Based on the referendum results and 

other pertinent factors, USDA 

suspended the orders’ handling 

regulations on April 19, 2011 (76 FR 

21615). The suspended handling 

regulations consist of minimum quality 

and inspection requirements for 

nectarines and peaches marked with the 

‘‘California Well Matured’’ label, which 

is available for use only by handlers 

complying with prescribed quality and 

maturity requirements under the orders. 

As well, all reporting and assessment 

requirements were suspended. 

Originally established to maintain the 

orderly marketing of California tree 

fruit, the quality regulations under the 

order evolved over the years to reflect 

industry trends. The ‘‘California Well 

Matured’’ label was developed to define 

standards for premium quality fruit 

harvested and packed at its peak to 

satisfy customer demands. Working 

with the Federal and Federal-State 

Inspection Programs, the Nectarine 

Administrative Committee and Peach 

Commodity Committee (committees), 

which administer the day-to-day 

operations of the programs, 

recommended variety-specific size and 

maturity standards that were 

incorporated into the regulations. These 

standards helped ensure that the 

industry marketed and shipped the 

highest quality fruit, which in turn 

supported increased returns to growers 

and handlers. A ‘‘utility grade’’ was 

defined to allow for the movement of a 

certain percentage of lesser quality fruit 

to markets where it could be sold 

without undermining the industry’s 

overall marketing goals. 

Funded through assessments paid by 

handlers, the committees sponsored 

production research programs to 

address grower needs such as pesticide 

use and development of new fruit 

varieties. As well, post-harvest handling 

concerns, such as container and pack 

configuration, were addressed through 

committee-funded research. Assessment 

funds were also used to fund market 

research and development projects, 

promoting California tree fruit in both 

domestic and international markets. 

In recent years, changes in the 

industry led the committees to reduce 

the number of programs they supported 

through the orders. Because many 

customers now establish their own 

quality standards, the committees felt it 

was no longer essential to mandate 

inspection and certification of packed 

fruit to marketing order standards. 

During the last few years, only those 

handlers wishing to use the ‘‘California 

Well Matured’’ label were required to 

obtain inspection and certification. With 

the consolidation of many smaller 

farms, larger companies have 

undertaken their own research and 

promotion programs, thus minimizing 

the desirability of committee-funded 

generic programs. 

The industries proposed several 

amendments to the orders, which were 

effectuated in 2006 and 2007 (71 FR 

41345; July 21, 2006). The amendments 

modernized the orders to streamline 

administration of the programs. The 

district boundaries within the regulated 

production areas were redefined, and 

the committee structures and 

nomination procedures were modified 

to provide greater opportunities for 

participation in committee activities by 

industry members. 

Despite USDA efforts to help refine 

the programs over the past several years, 

growers have continued to express their 

belief that the programs no longer meet 

their needs. These referendum results 

demonstrate a lack of grower support 

needed to carry out the objectives of the 

Act. Thus, it has been determined that 

the provisions of the orders no longer 

tend to effectuate the declared policy of 

the Act and should be terminated. 

Specifically, part 916, regulating the 

handling of nectarines grown in 

California is removed from the Code of 

Federal Regulations. In part 917, which 

regulates the handling of both pears and 

peaches, §§ 916.8, 917.22, 917.150, 

917.258, 917.259, 917.442, and 917.459, 

which relate solely to peaches, are 

removed. §§ 917.4, 917.5, 917.6, 917.15, 

917.20, 917.24, 917.25, 917.26, 917.28, 

917.29, 917.34, 917.35, 917.37, 917.100, 

917.119, and 917.143 are revised to 

remove references to peaches and to 

conform to removal of other sections. In 

some sections of part 917, language 

relating to the regulation of pears is 

currently suspended. Such suspensions 

are lifted to facilitate revision of these 

sections. Finally, the remaining 

provisions and administrative rules and 

regulations under part 917 are 

suspended indefinitely. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth 

in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

rule 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. 

There are approximately 97 California 

nectarine and peach handlers subject to 

regulation under the orders covering 

nectarines and peaches grown in 

California, and about 447 growers of 

these fruits in California. Small 

agricultural service firms, which 

include handlers, are defined by the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

66604 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 208 / Thursday, October 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

(13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual 

receipts of less than $7,000,000, and 

small agricultural growers are defined as 

those having annual receipts of less than 

$750,000. A majority of these handlers 

and growers may be classified as small 

entities. 

For the 2010 marketing season, the 

committees’ staff estimated that the 

average handler price received was 

$10.50 per container or container 

equivalent of nectarines or peaches. A 

handler would have to ship at least 

666,667 containers to have annual 

receipts of $7,000,000. Given data on 

shipments maintained by the 

committees’ staff and the average 

handler price received during the 2010 

season, the committees’ staff estimates 

that approximately 46 percent of 

handlers in the industry would be 

considered small entities. 

For the 2010 marketing season, the 

committees’ staff estimated the average 

grower price received was $5.50 per 

container or container equivalent for 

nectarines and peaches. A grower would 

have to produce at least 136,364 

containers of nectarines and peaches to 

have annual receipts of $750,000. Given 

data maintained by the committees’ staff 

and the average grower price received 

during the 2010 season, the committees’ 

staff estimates that more than 80 percent 

of the growers within the industry 

would be considered small entities. 

This rule terminates the Federal 

marketing orders for nectarines and 

peaches grown in California, and the 

rules and regulations issued thereunder. 

USDA believes that the orders no longer 

meet the needs of growers and handlers. 

The results of recent grower referenda 

and experience with the industries 

support order terminations. 

Sections 916.64 and 917.61 of the 

orders provide that USDA shall 

terminate or suspend any or all 

provisions of the orders when a finding 

is made that the orders do not tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act. 

Furthermore, § 608c(16)(A) of the Act 

provides that USDA shall terminate or 

suspend the operation of any order 

whenever the order or provision thereof 

obstructs or does not tend to effectuate 

the declared policy of the Act. An 

additional provision requires that 

Congress be notified not later than 60 

days before the date the orders would be 

terminated. 

Although marketing order 

requirements are applied to handlers, 

the costs of such requirements are often 

passed on to growers. Termination of 

the orders, and the resulting regulatory 

relaxation, would therefore be expected 

to reduce costs for both handlers and 

growers. 

As an alternative to this rule, AMS 

considered not terminating the 

nectarine and peach order provisions. In 

that case, the industries could have 

recommended further refinements to the 

orders and the handling regulations in 

order to meet current marketing needs. 

However, such changes made to the 

programs over the last several years 

have failed to improve the programs 

enough to warrant continuing grower 

support. Therefore, this alternative was 

rejected, and AMS recommended that 

the programs be terminated. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the information collection 

requirements being terminated were 

approved previously by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Generic 

Fruit Crops. Termination of the 

reporting requirements under the orders 

would reduce the reporting and 

recordkeeping burden on California 

nectarine and peach handlers by 339.45 

hours, and should further reduce 

industry expenses. Since handlers 

would no longer be required to file 

forms with the Committee, this final 

rule does not impose any additional 

reporting or recordkeeping requirements 

on either small or large entities. 

On February 25, 2011, AMS 

published a notice and request for 

comments regarding the request for 

OMB approval of a new information 

collection for nectarine and peach 

handlers (76 FR 10555). Five new forms 

were proposed for the collection of 

industry information that would have 

facilitated administration of the orders. 

Such information collection would have 

increased the annual reporting burden 

for industry handlers by 2,878.70 hours. 

The request for OMB approval of the 

new information collection has been 

withdrawn. 

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 grower referendum was well 

publicized in the production area, and 

referendum ballots were mailed to all 

known growers of nectarines and 

peaches in California. As well, all 

interested persons have been invited to 

attend the committees’ meetings over 

the years and participate in discussions 

regarding the programs developed under 

the orders. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

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

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 

Any questions about the compliance 

guide should be sent to Laurel May at 

the previously mentioned address in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

A proposed rule inviting comments 

regarding the termination of nectarines 

and peaches was published in the 

Federal Register on June 2, 2011 (75 FR 

31888). The rule was made available by 

the Committees to handlers and 

producers. In addition the rule was 

made available through the Internet by 

the USDA and the office of the Federal 

Register. The rule provided a 15 day 

comment period which ended on June 

17, 2011. No comments were received. 

Based on the foregoing, and pursuant 

to § 608c(16)(A) of the Act and §§ 916.64 

and 917.61 of the orders, USDA is 

terminating the orders, as they do not 

tend to effectuate the declared policy of 

the Act. USDA hereby appoints a 

Trustee Oversight Committee to 

conclude and liquidate the affairs of the 

Committee, and to continue in that 

capacity until discharged by USDA. The 

appointed Committee members are Russ 

Tavlan (Vice Chairman), Mike Reimer, 

Mark Bybee, and Rick Jackson 

(Chairman) of the Peach Commodity 

Committee and Casey Jones, Rick 

Jackson, Jeff Bolt (Vice Chairman) and 

Rod Milton (Chairman) of the Nectarine 

Administrative Committee, as trustees 

they will oversee this liquidation. 

Section 8c(16)(A) of the Act requires 

USDA to notify Congress at least 60 

days before terminating a Federal 

marketing order program. USDA 

notified Congress on July 5, 2011 of its 

intention to terminate this marketing 

order. 

It is further found that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register 

(5 U.S.C. 553) because (1) This action 

relieves restrictions on handlers by 

terminating the requirements of the 

nectarine and peach orders, (2) A 

proposed rule inviting comments 

regarding the termination of nectarines 

and Peaches was published in the 

Federal Register on June 2, 2011 (75 FR 

31888) and no comments were received, 

(3) all handling regulations have been 

suspended under the order for nectarine 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 208 / Thursday, October 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 66605 

and peaches since April 19, 2011, and 

(4) no useful purpose would be served 

by delaying the effective date. 

List of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 916 

Marketing agreements, Nectarines, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

7 CFR Part 917 

Marketing agreements, Peaches, Pears, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 916 is removed 

and 7 CFR part 917 is amended as 

follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

parts 916 and 917 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

PART 916—NECTARINES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 2. 7 CFR part 916 is removed. 

PART 917—FRESH PEARS AND 

PEACHES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA 

■ 3. In part 917, §§ 917.1 through 917.3, 

§ 917.7, § 917.9, §§ 917.11 through 

917.14, §§ 917.16 through 917.19, 

§ 917.27, §§ 917.30 through 917.33, 

§ 917.36, §§ 917.38 through 917.43, 

§ 917.45, § 917.50, §§ 917.60 through 

917.69, §§ 917.101, § 917.103, § 917.110, 

§ 917.115, and § 917.122 are suspended 

indefinitely. 

§ 917.4 [Amended] 

■ 4. In § 917.4, lift the suspension of 

July 21, 2006 (71 FR 41351); remove 

paragraphs (a) and (b); redesignate 

paragraph (c) as paragraph (a); add and 

reserve paragraph (b); and suspend the 

section indefinitely. 

§ 917.5 [Amended] 

■ 5. In § 917.5, remove the second 

sentence and suspend the section 

indefinitely. 

§ 917.6 [Amended] 

■ 6. In § 917.6, remove the words ‘‘That 

for peaches, packing or causing the fruit 

to be packed also constitutes handling; 

Provided further,’’ and suspend the 

section indefinitely. 

§ 917.8 [Removed] 

■ 7. Remove § 917.8. 

§ 917.15 [Amended] 

■ 8. In § 917.15, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘§§ 917.21 through 917.22’’ 

and add in their place the words 

‘‘§ 917.21,’’ and suspend the section 

indefinitely. 

§ 917.20 [Amended] 

■ 9. In § 917.20, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), and revise 

the section to read as follows, and 

suspend the section indefinitely: 

§ 917.20 Designation of members of 

commodity committees. 

There is hereby established a Pear 

Commodity Committee consisting of 13 

members. Each commodity committee 

may be increased by one public member 

nominated by the respective commodity 

committee and selected by the 

Secretary. The members of each said 

committee shall be selected biennially 

for a term ending on the last day of 

February of odd numbered years, and 

such members shall serve until their 

respective successors are selected and 

have qualified. The members of each 

commodity committee shall be selected 

in accordance with the provisions of 

§ 917.25. 

§ 917.22 [Removed] 

■ 10. Remove § 917.22. 

§ 917.24 [Amended] 

■ 11. In § 917.24, lift the suspensions of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), and 

February 21, 2007 (72 FR 7821); revise 

the section to read as follows; and 

suspend the section indefinitely: 

§ 917.24 Procedure for nominating 

members of various commodity 

committees. 

(a) The Control Committee shall hold 

or cause to be held not later than 

February 15 for pears of each odd 

numbered year a meeting or meetings of 

the growers of the fruits in each 

representation area set forth in § 917.21. 

These meetings shall be supervised by 

the Control Committee, which shall 

prescribe such procedures as shall be 

reasonable and fair to all persons 

concerned. 

(b) With respect to each commodity 

committee, only growers of the 

particular fruit who are present at such 

nomination meetings or represented at 

such meetings by duly authorized 

employees may participate in the 

nomination and election of nominees 

for commodity committee members and 

alternates. Each such grower, including 

employees of such grower, shall be 

entitled to cast but one vote for each 

position to be filled for the 

representation area in which he 

produces such fruit. 

(c) A particular grower, including 

employees of such growers, shall be 

eligible for membership as principle or 

alternate to fill only one position on a 

commodity committee. A grower 

nominated for membership on the Pear 

Commodity Committee must have 

produced at least 51 percent of the pears 

shipped by him during the previous 

fiscal period, or he must represent an 

organization which produced at least 51 

percent of the pears shipped by it 

during such period. 

§ 917.25 [Amended] 

■ 12. In § 917.25, lift the suspension of 

July 1, 2006 (71 FR 41352), remove and 

reserve paragraph (b), and suspend the 

section indefinitely. 

§ 917.26 [Amended] 

■ 13. In § 917.26, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘§§ 917.21 and 917.22’’ and 

add in their place the word ‘‘§ 917.21,’’ 

and suspend the section indefinitely. 

§ 917.28 [Amended] 

■ 14. In § 917.28, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘§§ 917.16, 917.21, and 

917.22’’ and add in their place the 

words ‘‘§§ 917.16 and 917.21,’’ and 

suspend the section indefinitely. 

§ 917.29 [Amended] 

■ 15. In § 917.29, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘and of the Peach Commodity 

Committee’’ and ‘‘each’’ from paragraph 

(b), remove the final sentence of 

paragraph (d), and suspend the section 

indefinitely. 

§ 917.34 [Amended] 

■ 16. In § 917.34, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘§§ 917.21 and 917.22’’ in 

paragraph (k) and add in their place the 

word ‘‘§ 917.21’’, and suspend the 

section indefinitely. 

§ 917.35 [Amended] 

■ 17. In § 917.35, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘Peach and’’ and ‘‘each’’ 

wherever they appear in paragraph (a), 

remove the final sentence of paragraph 

(d), and suspend the section 

indefinitely. 

§ 917.37 [Amended] 

■ 18. In § 917.37, remove the final three 

sentences of paragraph (b) and suspend 

the section indefinitely. 

§ 917.100 [Amended] 

■ 19. In § 917.100, lift the suspension of 

March 3, 1994 (59 FR 10055), remove 

the words ‘‘and peaches’’, and suspend 

the section indefinitely. 

§ 917.119 [Amended] 

■ 20. In § 917.119, remove paragraph 

(a), redesignate paragraphs (b) through 

(e) as paragraphs (a) through (d), and 

suspend the section indefinitely. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

66606 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 208 / Thursday, October 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 917.143 [Amended] 

■ 21. In § 917.143, lift the suspension of 

April 18, 2011 (76 FR 21618); remove 

the words ‘‘and peaches’’ from the 

introductory text of paragraph (b) and 

from paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(4); 

remove the words ‘‘and 200 pounds of 

peaches’’ from paragraph (b)(3); and 

suspend the section indefinitely. 

§ 917.150 [Removed] 

■ 22. Remove § 917.150. 

Subpart—Assessment Rates 

(§§ 917.258 through 917.259) 

[Removed] 

■ 23. Remove Subpart—Assessment 

Rates, consisting of §§ 917.258 through 

917.259. 

Subpart—Container and Pack 

Regulation (§§ 917.442) [Removed] 

■ 24. Remove Subpart—Container and 

Pack Regulation, consisting of § 917.442. 

§ 917.459 [Removed] 

■ 25. Remove §§ 917.459. 

Dated: October 14, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–27286 Filed 10–26–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0939; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–SW–067–AD; Amendment 39 

16798; AD 2011–18–16] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter 

France (Eurocopter) Model AS332C, 

AS332L, AS332L1, and AS332L2 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

specified Eurocopter model helicopters. 

This action requires inspecting the 

upper end fitting ball joints of the main 

rotor servocontrols for lateral play, and 

depending on the findings either 

repetitively inspecting the ball joint or 

replacing the servocontrol. This 

amendment is prompted by reports of 

noncompliant swaging of the end fitting 

ball joints on main rotor servocontrols. 

Investigation has shown that the 

swaging load applied to the ball joints 

was 1.3 metric tons instead of the 

specified 13 metric tons. The actions 

specified in this AD are intended to 

prevent failure of the upper end fitting 

ball joints of the main rotor 

servocontrols, failure of the upper end 

fittings, and loss of control of the 

helicopter. 

DATES: Effective November 14, 2011. 

Comments for inclusion in the Rules 

Docket must be received on or before 

December 27, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

AD: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

You may get the service information 

identified in this AD from American 

Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum 

Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75053–4005, 

telephone (800) 232–0323, fax (972) 

641–3710, or at http:// 

www.eurocopter.com. 

Examining the Docket: You may 

examine the docket that contains the 

AD, any comments, and other 

information on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The Docket 

Operations office (telephone (800) 647 

5527) is located in Room W12–140 on 

the ground floor of the West Building at 

the street address stated in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 

Roach, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 

Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and 

Guidance Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., 

Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone 

(817) 222–5130, fax (817) 222–5961. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA AD No. 2010– 

0117–E, dated June 16, 2010, to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

Eurocopter model helicopters. EASA 

advises that the equipment 

manufacturer (Goodrich) has identified 

two servocontrol production batches as 

noncompliant with swaging of the end 

fitting ball joints on main rotor 

servocontrols. EASA states that 

investigations have revealed that the 

swaging load applied to the ball joints 

in these two batches was 1.3 metric 

tons, instead of the specified 13 metric 

tons, which could lead the ball joints to 

slip in service. The slipping of the ball 

joint of the servocontrol lower end 

fitting does not significantly affect the 

service life of the end fitting. However, 

the slipping of the ball joint of the 

servocontrol upper end fitting can lead 

to a significant reduction in the service 

life of the end fitting. This condition, if 

not corrected, could lead to failure of 

the upper end fitting ball joint of a main 

rotor servocontrol and result in loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

EASA AD 

We refer to flight hours as hours timein-service (TIS). 

Related Service Information 

Eurocopter has issued an Emergency 

Alert Service Bulletin (EASB), dated 

June 15, 2010, with two numbers: No. 

67.00.40 for FAA type-certificated 

Models AS332C, L, L1, and L2 and for 

Models AS332C1, B, B1, F1, M, and M1 

that are not FAA type certificated, and 

No. 67.00.27 for Models AS532AC, AL, 

SC, UC, UE, UL, A2, and U2 that are not 

FAA type certificated. The EASB 

specifies checking and restoring 

conformity of the affected end fitting 

ball joints of the servocontrols. The 

EASB contains Appendix 1 and 2, 

Goodrich Service Bulletins No. SC7203– 

67–31–02 and No. SC7221–67–39–02, 

both dated May 11, 2010, which specify 

the process for comforming each 

affected servocontrol. EASA classified 

this EASB as mandatory and issued 

Emergency AD No. 2010–0117–E, dated 

June 16, 2010, to ensure the continued 

airworthiness of these helicopters. 

FAA’s Evaluation and Unsafe Condition 

Determination 

These helicopters have been approved 

by the aviation authority of France and 

are approved for operation in the United 

States. Pursuant to our bilateral 

agreement with France, EASA, their 

technical representative, has notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

EASA AD. We are issuing this AD 

because we evaluated all information 

provided by EASA and determined the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES