This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

4165 

Vol. 89, No. 15 

Tuesday, January 23, 2024 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 989 

[Doc. No. AMS–SC–23–0007] 

Raisins Produced From Grapes Grown 

in California; Temporary Suspension 

of Continuance Referendum 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

Department of Agriculture (USDA). 

ACTION: Affirmation of interim final rule 

as final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule adopts, 

without change, an interim final rule 

implementing a recommendation from 

the Raisin Administrative Committee 

(Committee) to temporarily suspend the 

continuance referendum requirement 

under the Federal marketing order for 

California raisins. This final rule 

continues in effect the temporary 

suspension to give precedence to the 

formal rulemaking process and to 

provide the California raisin industry 

time to operate under the marketing 

order, if amended, before the next 

scheduled continuance referendum. 

DATES: Effective January 23, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christy Pankey, Marketing Specialist, or 

Matthew Pavone, Chief, Rulemaking 

Services Branch, Market Development 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, 

Stop 0237, Washington, DC 20250– 

0237; Telephone: (202) 720–8085 Fax: 

(202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Christy.Pankey@usda.gov or 

Matthew.Pavone@usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Richard Lower, 

Market Development Division, Specialty 

Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237, 

Washington, DC 20250–0237; 

Telephone: (202) 720–8085, or Email: 

Richard.Lower@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

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

amends regulations issued to carry out 

a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 

900.2(j). This rule is issued under 

Marketing Agreement No. 989 and 

Marketing Order No. 989, both as 

amended (7 CFR part 989), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Order,’’ and the 

applicable provisions of the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

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

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

Administrative Committee (Committee) 

locally administers the Order and is 

comprised of growers and handlers of 

raisins operating within the production 

area and a public member. The 

Committee consists of 47 members, of 

whom 35 represent producers, 10 

represent handlers, one represents the 

cooperative bargaining association(s), 

and one is a public member. 

The Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 14094. Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies 

to assess costs and benefits of available 

regulatory alternatives and, if regulation 

is necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, 

reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and 

promoting flexibility. Executive Order 

14094 reaffirms, supplements, and 

updates Executive Order 12866 and 

further directs agencies to solicit and 

consider input from a wide range of 

affected and interested parties through a 

variety of means. This action falls 

within a category of regulatory actions 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive 

Order 12866 review. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, which requires agencies 

to consider whether their rulemaking 

actions would have Tribal implications. 

AMS has determined that this rule is 

unlikely to have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian Tribes. 

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 sec. 

608c(15)(A) of the Act, any handler 

subject to an order may file with the 

Department of Agriculture (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. Such 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 

the entry of the ruling. 

This rule continues in effect the 

temporary suspension of the 

continuance referendum requirement 

under § 989.91(c). On October 20, 2022, 

the Committee recommended amending 

the marketing order through formal 

rulemaking and, in a separate request, 

recommended the suspension of the 

continuance referendum scheduled to 

occur sometime between November 

2023 and November 2025. The 

Committee believes the suspension 

eliminates any potential confusion 

among producers who would otherwise 

be voting in two referenda in a two-year 

period. 

Section 989.91(b) states that the 

Secretary shall terminate or suspend the 

operation of any or all provisions of the 

Order, whenever the Secretary finds that 

such provisions do not tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act. 

Section 989.91(c) specifies the Secretary 

shall conduct a referendum no less than 

five crop years and no later than six 

crop years from November 26, 2018, to 

ascertain whether continuance of the 

Order is favored by producers. The 

requirement also specifies that 

subsequent referenda be conducted 

every six crop years thereafter. Under 

this requirement, the next continuance 

referendum is scheduled to occur 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4166 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

sometime between November 2023 and 

November 2025. AMS identified this 

period as the same period when the 

formal rulemaking process will occur, 

which may also include its own 

referendum. In consideration of the 

anticipated time necessary to complete 

the proposed formal rulemaking action 

and the likelihood of an amendatory 

referendum being conducted within two 

years of the scheduled continuance 

referendum, AMS determined that the 

continuance referendum requirement 

should be suspended to minimize 

confusion among voters. Additionally, 

AMS determined that conducting a 

continuance referendum during the 

same period as the formal rulemaking is 

expected to occur would not allow the 

industry time to fully consider the 

impact of potential amendments to the 

Order. For these reasons, the 

continuance referendum requirement 

does not tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act for that period of time. 

Therefore, AMS has determined not to 

conduct the continuance referendum at 

the time required by the Order. 

Alternatively, AMS considered 

suspending the continuance referendum 

until immediately after the conclusion 

of the formal rulemaking. However, this 

timing would still result in multiple 

referenda occurring within the same 2- 

year period, which may cause voter 

confusion and prevent producers from 

having adequate time to evaluate any 

potential effects of the amendatory 

process before voting on Order 

continuance. To address these temporal 

concerns, AMS determined that the 

suspension of the continuance 

referendum requirement should extend 

until 2029, at which point the original 

timeframe under the Order as discussed 

in the preceding paragraph will be 

resumed. Based on that timetable, the 

next continuance referendum will be 

conducted sometime between November 

2029 and November 2030 to determine 

whether California raisin producers 

sufficiently support continuation of the 

Order. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), AMS considered the 

economic impact of this action on small 

entities. Accordingly, AMS prepared 

this regulatory flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses that are subject to such 

actions so that small businesses will not 

be unduly or disproportionately 

burdened by the action. 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. 

Presently, there are approximately 18 

handlers of raisins subject to regulation 

under the Order and approximately 

2,000 raisin producers in the regulated 

area. 

Small agricultural producers are 

defined by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA) as those having 

annual receipts of less than $4,000,000 

(NAICS code 111332, Grape Vineyards). 

Small agricultural service firms are 

defined by the SBA as those having 

annual receipts of less than $34,000,000 

(NAICS code 115114, Postharvest Crop 

Activities) (13 CFR 121.201). 

Using USDA National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS) data, the 2021 

season average value of utilized 

production of California processed 

raisin-type grapes (most of which are 

dried into raisins) is $393.649 million. 

Dividing that figure by 2,000 producers 

yields an annual average revenue per 

producer of $196,825, well below the 

SBA large farm size of threshold of 

$4,000,000. In terms of annual sales of 

processed raisin-type grapes, the 

majority of producers may be classified 

as small entities. 

Dividing the $393.649 million crop 

value figure by 18 handlers yields an 

average annual sales per handler 

estimate of $21,869,389. This annual 

average sales figure is measured at the 

producer-level crop value, and to draw 

conclusions about the proportion of 

small handlers, a handler margin 

estimate is needed. 

There is no current publicly available 

estimate of an average raisin handler 

margin, but a 1988 economic study of 

the California raisin industry estimated 

producer-handler average margins of 

about 30 percent for bulk raisin 

shipments and about 60 percent for 

packaged shipments. Current handler 

margins are likely somewhat smaller, 

since the study was completed more 

than three decades ago, and current bulk 

handling and packaging technologies 

are more efficient. 

An alternative method to compute an 

average handler margin for packaged 

raisins is to compare the NASS season 

average grower price per ton for 

processed raisin-type grapes (converted 

to its dried weight equivalent) with an 

average price per ton for packaged 

raisins that USDA paid under its 

Commodity Procurement Program in 

recent years ($1.41 per pound, $2,820 

per ton). The NASS 2021 season average 

grower price for raisin-type grapes was 

$369 per ton. Using a standard 

conversion factor of 4.62 to convert to 

a dried-weight equivalent, the price per 

ton for raisins is $1,705 ($369 * 4.62). 

A computed handler margin estimate is 

65 percent ($2,820/$1,705¥1). Since the 

Commodity Procurement average price 

includes shipping cost to recipient 

locations, the 65 percent margin is 

moderately overstated. 

If a handler had annual raisin sales of 

exactly $34 million (the SBA large firm 

size threshold) that would mean a 

handler margin of 55 percent above the 

producer level ($34,000,000/ 

$21,869,389). 

Since both abovementioned margin 

estimates for packaged raisin shipments 

(60 and 65 percent) are close to the 55 

percent margin implied by the $34 

million SBA size threshold, it can be 

concluded that there are raisin handlers 

with annual sales both above and below 

the size threshold. It is reasonable to 

assume that fewer than 9 of the 18 

handlers have annual raisin sales well 

above $34 million. Therefore, more than 

9, a majority of handlers, have raisin 

sales below $34 million and may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule continues in effect the 

temporary suspension of the 

continuance referendum requirement 

under section 989.91(c). The Committee 

recommended this action to avoid the 

scheduled referendum period 

overlapping with the formal rulemaking 

to amend the Order and any potential 

confusion it would otherwise cause 

producers. After considering the 

Committee’s request, AMS determined 

the scheduled continuance referendum 

should be suspended while AMS 

conducts a formal rulemaking to amend 

the Order and, if effectuated, while the 

industry operates under such amended 

Order. 

Section 989.91(b) authorizes the 

Secretary to terminate or suspend the 

operation of any or all provisions of the 

Order whenever the Secretary finds that 

such provisions do not tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the act. 

An interim final rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on October 16, 2023 (88 FR 

71273). AMS provided a 30-day 

comment period ending November 15, 

2023, to give interested persons time to 

respond to the interim final rule. AMS 

received one comment in support of the 

interim final rule. Accordingly, no 

changes were made to the rule as 

published. 

This final rule continues in effect the 

temporary suspension of the 

continuance referendum requirement 

under § 989.91(c) of the Federal 

marketing order regulating the handling 

of raisins produced from grapes grown 

in California. The next scheduled 

continuance referendum will be 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 4167 

1 85 FR 77987 (Dec. 3, 2020). 

2See 15 U.S.C. 1681–1681x. 

3Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Barr, 551 U.S. 47, 52 

(2007); see also 15 U.S.C. 1681 (recognizing ‘‘a need 

to insure that consumer reporting agencies exercise 

their grave responsibilities with fairness, 

impartiality, and a respect for the consumer’s right 

to privacy’’); S. Rep. No. 91–517, at 1 (1969) (noting 

that purpose of the statute is, in part, to ‘‘prevent 

consumers from being unjustly damaged because of 

inaccurate or arbitrary information in a credit 

report’’ and to ‘‘prevent an undue invasion of the 

individual’s right of privacy in the collection and 

dissemination of credit information’’). 

4S. Rep. No. 91–517, at 3 (1969) (noting, as an 

example of this problem, that ‘‘[i]nsurance reporting 

firms generally do not admit to making a report on 

an individual and ordinarily will not reveal the 

contents of their file to [them]. Credit bureaus 

sometimes build roadblocks in the path of the 

consumer.’’). When introducing the bill that would 

become the FCRA, Senator Proxmire stated that 

‘‘[m]any credit reporting agencies refuse to show 

consumers their files possibly out of fear of 

litigation and partly to protect its information 

sources.’’ 115 Cong. Rec. 2412 (1969). 

5See, e.g., Fed. Trade Comm’n, 40 Years of 

Experience With the Fair Credit Reporting Act: An 

FTC Staff Report With Summary of Interpretations, 

at 32 (2011); Cortez v. Trans Union, LLC, 617 F.3d 

688, 706 (3rd Cir. 2010); Guimond v. Trans Union 

Credit Info. Co., 45 F.3d 1329, 1333 (9th Cir. 1995) 

(‘‘[The FCRA] was crafted to protect consumers 

from the transmission of inaccurate information 

about them, and to establish credit reporting 

practices that utilize accurate, relevant, and current 

information in a confidential and responsible 

manner. These consumer[-]oriented objectives 

support a liberal construction of the FCRA’’ 

(citations omitted).). 

6See 15 U.S.C. 1681g(a). This requirement is 

subject to several exceptions. For example, 

consumer reporting agencies are not required to 

disclose to a consumer any information concerning 

credit scores or any other risk scores or predictors 

relating to the consumer. See 15 U.S.C. 

1681g(a)(1)(B). The Consumer Credit Reporting 

Reform Act of 1996 revised FCRA section 609(a) to 

require that consumers receive all information in 

the file rather than only the ‘‘nature and substance’’ 

of the information. Public Law 104–208, 110 Stat. 

3009 (1996). 

7See 15 U.S.C. 1681a(f) (defining ‘‘consumer 

reporting agency’’). 

conducted no earlier than November 26, 

2029. 

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 to those requirements are 

necessary as a result of this rule. Should 

any changes become necessary, they 

would be submitted to OMB for 

approval. 

This final rule does not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

raisin 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 has not identified 

any relevant Federal rules that 

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this 

final 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. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

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

gov/rules-regulations/moa/smallbusinesses. Any questions about the 

compliance guide should be sent to 

Richard Lower at the previously 

mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, including the 

information and recommendations 

submitted by the Committee and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that finalizing the interim final rule, 

without change, as published in the 

Federal Register of October 16, 2023 (88 

FR 71273), will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 989 

Grapes, Marketing agreements, 

Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

■ Accordingly, the interim final rule 

amending 7 CFR part 989, which was 

published at 88 FR 71273 on October 

16, 2023, is adopted as a final rule 

without change. 

Erin Morris, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01252 Filed 1–22–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 

BUREAU 

12 CFR Part 1022 

Fair Credit Reporting; File Disclosure 

AGENCY: Consumer Financial Protection 

Bureau. 

ACTION: Advisory opinion. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) is 

issuing this advisory opinion to address 

certain obligations that consumer 

reporting agencies have under section 

609(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act 

(FCRA). This advisory opinion 

underscores that, to trigger a consumer 

reporting agency’s file disclosure 

requirement under FCRA section 609(a), 

a consumer does not need to use 

specific language, such as ‘‘complete 

file’’ or ‘‘file.’’ This advisory opinion 

also highlights the requirements 

regarding the information that must be 

disclosed to a consumer under FCRA 

section 609(a). In addition, this advisory 

opinion affirms that consumer reporting 

agencies must disclose to a consumer 

both the original source and any 

intermediary or vendor source (or 

sources) that provide the item of 

information to the consumer reporting 

agency under FCRA section 609(a). 

DATES: This advisory opinion is 

effective on January 23, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amanda Quester, Alexandra Reimelt, or 

Ruth Van Veldhuizen, Senior Counsels, 

Office of Regulations at (202) 435–7700 

or https://reginquiries.consumerfinance.

gov/. If you require this document in an 

alternative electronic format, please 

contact CFPB_Accessibility@cfpb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Bureau is issuing this advisory opinion 

through the procedures for its Advisory 

Opinions Policy.1 Refer to those 

procedures for more information. 

I. Advisory Opinion 

A. Background 

The FCRA regulates consumer 

reporting.2 Congress enacted the statute 

‘‘to ensure fair and accurate credit 

reporting, promote efficiency in the 

banking system, and protect consumer 

privacy.’’ 3 One of the problems with the 

credit reporting industry that Congress 

recognized and sought to remedy with 

the FCRA was that a consumer ‘‘is not 

always given access to the information 

in [their] file.’’ 4 In light of its broad 

remedial and consumer protection 

purposes, courts have recognized that 

the FCRA ‘‘must be read in a liberal 

manner in order to effectuate the 

congressional intent underlying it.’’ 5

The FCRA also promotes transparency 

of the credit reporting system to 

consumers in many ways, including by 

generally requiring that consumer 

reporting agencies disclose to 

consumers all information in their file 

upon request. Under section 609(a), a 

consumer reporting agency must, upon 

request, clearly and accurately disclose 

to the consumer ‘‘[a]ll information in 

the consumer’s file at the time of the 

request’’ and ‘‘[t]he sources of the 

information.’’ 6 This requirement 

applies to all consumer reporting 

agencies.7 Consumers are entitled to free 

file disclosures in many circumstances. 

For example, each nationwide consumer 

reporting agency and nationwide 

specialty consumer reporting agency, 

including any nationwide tenant 

screening or employment background 

screening company, must provide at 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES