Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67039 

Fruit Crops. No changes in those 

requirements as a result of this action 

are necessary. Should any changes 

become necessary, they would be 

submitted to OMB for approval. 

Accordingly, this action will not 

impose any additional reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements on either 

small or large Florida avocado 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. 

As noted in the initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis, USDA has not 

identified any relevant Federal rules 

that duplicate, overlap or conflict with 

this final rule. However, as previously 

stated, imported avocados and those 

shipped within the production area 

must meet the applicable requirements 

for grade, as specified in the United 

States Standards for Grades of Florida 

Avocados (7 CFR 51.3050 through 

51.3069) issued under the Agricultural 

Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621 

through 1627). 

Further, the Committee’s meeting was 

widely publicized throughout the 

Florida avocado industry, and all 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meeting and participate in 

Committee deliberations on all issues. 

Like all Committee meetings, the June 

12, 2013, meeting was a public meeting. 

All entities, both large and small, were 

able to express views on this issue. 

A proposed rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on June 23, 2014 (79 FR 35498). 

Copies of the rule were mailed or sent 

via facsimile to all Committee members 

and Florida avocado handlers. Finally, 

the rule was made available through the 

Internet by USDA and the Office of the 

Federal Register. A 30-day comment 

period ending July 23, 2014, was 

provided to allow interested persons to 

respond to the proposal. No comments 

were received. Accordingly, no changes 

will be made to the rule as proposed. 

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 Jeffrey Smutny 

at the previously mentioned address in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. 

After consideration of all relevant 

matter presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Committee and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

In accordance with section 8e of the 

Act, the United States Trade 

Representative has concurred with the 

issuance of this final rule. 

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 Florida avocado 

handlers began shipping in mid-May, 

and the technical correction to the 

import regulation is to clarify that the 

grade requirement is unchanged. In 

addition, handlers are aware of this rule, 

which was recommended at a public 

meeting. Also, a 30-day comment period 

was provided for in the proposed rule. 

List of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 915 

Avocados, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

7 CFR Part 944 

Avocados, Food grades and standards, 

Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, Kiwifruit, 

Limes, Olives, Oranges. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR parts 915 and 944 are 

amended as follows: 

PART 915—AVOCADOS GROWN IN 

SOUTH FLORIDA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 915 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. In § 915.306, paragraph (a)(1) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 915.306 Florida avocado grade, pack, 

and container marking regulation. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Such avocados grade at least U.S. 

Combination, except that avocados 

handled to destinations within the 

production area grade at least U.S. No. 

2. 

* * * * * 

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT 

REGULATIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 944 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 4. In § 944.28, paragraph (a) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 944.28 Avocado Import Grade 

Regulation. 

(a) Pursuant to section 8e of the Act 

and Part 944—Fruits; Import 

Regulations, the importation into the 

United States of any avocados is 

prohibited unless such avocados grade 

at least U.S. No. 2, as such grade is 

defined in the United States Standards 

for Grades of Florida Avocados (7 CFR 

51.3050 through 51.3069). 

* * * * * 

Dated: November 5, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26663 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 945 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0046; FV14–945–2 

FIR] 

Irish Potatoes Grown in Certain 

Designated Counties in Idaho, and 

Malheur County, Oregon; Modification 

of Container Requirements 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as 

final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) is adopting, as a 

final rule, without change, an interim 

rule that modified the container 

requirements prescribed under the 

Idaho-Eastern Oregon potato marketing 

order. The interim rule removed the 

requirement that fiberboard cartons 

used to pack 50-pound quantities of 

U.S. No. 2 grade potatoes be of onepiece construction. This change is in 

response to market demands and 

provides handlers flexibility in shipping 

U.S. No. 2 grade potatoes. In addition, 

this rule corrected a citation reference in 

the handling regulations. 

DATES: Effective November 13, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue 

Coleman, Marketing Specialist, or Gary 

D. Olson, Regional Director, Northwest 

Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order 

and Agreement Division, Fruit and 

Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA; 

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

326–7440, or Email: Sue.Coleman@

ams.usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@

ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may obtain 

information on complying with this and 

other marketing order and agreement 

regulations by viewing a guide at the 

following Web site: http://

www.ams.usda.gov/

MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide; 

or by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
67040 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

No. 98 and Marketing Order No. 945, 

both as amended (7 CFR part 945), 

regulating the handling of Irish potatoes 

grown in certain designated counties in 

Idaho, and Malheur County, Oregon, 

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ 

The order is effective under the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

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

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ 

The USDA is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 13175. 

The handling of Irish potatoes grown 

in certain designated counties in Idaho, 

and Malheur County, Oregon is 

regulated by 7 CFR part 945. Prior to 

this change, handlers could only pack 

50-pound quantities of U.S. No. 2 grade 

potatoes in a one-piece fiberboard 

carton. These one-piece cartons were 

often damaged in transit and were more 

expensive to purchase. Therefore, this 

rule continues in effect the rule that 

removed the container requirement that 

fiberboard cartons used to pack 50- 

pound quantities of U.S. No. 2 grade 

potatoes be of one-piece construction. 

Additionally, this rule corrected a 

citation reference in the order’s 

handling regulations. 

In an interim rule published in the 

Federal Register on August 6, 2014, and 

effective on August 7, 2014, (79 FR 

45673, Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0046, 

FV14–945–2 IR), § 945.341(c)(2)(ii) was 

amended by removing the word ‘‘onepiece’’ and § 945.341(b)(3)(i) and (ii) 

were amended by replacing the 

reference ‘‘(b)(4)(iii)’’ with the reference 

‘‘(b)(3)(iii)’’. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this final regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

business subject to such actions in order 

that small businesses will not be unduly 

or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and 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 450 

producers of potatoes in the production 

area and approximately 32 handlers 

subject to regulation under the 

marketing order. Small agricultural 

producers are defined by the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) as those 

having annual receipts of less than 

$750,000, and small agricultural service 

firms are defined as those whose annual 

receipts are less than $7,000,000 (13 

CFR 121.201). 

During the 2012–2013 fiscal period, 

the most recent for which statistics are 

available, 35,148,900 hundredweight of 

Idaho-Eastern Oregon potatoes were 

inspected under the order and sold into 

the fresh market. Based on information 

provided by the National Agricultural 

Statistics Service, the average producer 

price for the 2012 Idaho potato crop was 

$5.30 per hundredweight. Multiplying 

$5.30 by the shipment quantity of 

35,148,900 hundredweight yields an 

annual crop revenue estimate of 

$186,289,170. The average annual fresh 

potato revenue for each of the 450 

producers is therefore calculated to be 

$413,396 ($186,289,170 divided by 450), 

which is less than the SBA threshold of 

$750,000. Consequently, on average 

almost all of the Idaho-Eastern Oregon 

potato producers may be classified as 

small entities. 

In addition, based on information 

reported by USDA’s Market News 

Service, the average f.o.b. shipping 

point price for the 2012 Idaho potato 

crop was $5.87 per hundredweight. 

Multiplying $5.87 by the shipment 

quantity of 35,148,900 hundredweight 

yields an annual crop revenue estimate 

of $206,324,043. The average annual 

fresh potato revenue for each of the 32 

handlers is therefore calculated to be 

$6,447,626 ($206,324,043 divided by 

32), which is less than the SBA 

threshold of $7,000,000. Consequently, 

on average most all of the Idaho-Eastern 

Oregon potato handlers may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule continues in effect the 

action that relaxed the container 

requirements to allow handlers to ship 

U.S. No. 2 grade potatoes in any type of 

50-pound fiberboard cartons of natural 

kraft color, provided the cartons are 

permanently and conspicuously marked 

as to grade. This will enable handlers to 

respond to market demands and provide 

greater flexibility in shipping U.S. No. 2 

grade potatoes. In addition, this rule 

makes changes to the order’s handling 

regulations to correct a citation 

reference. 

The authority for the establishment of 

pack and marking requirements is 

provided in § 945.52 of the order. 

Section 945.341(c) of the order’s 

administrative rules prescribes the pack 

and marking requirements for domestic 

and export shipments of potatoes. 

This action is expected to increase 

shipments of U.S. No. 2 potatoes to the 

food service industry and help the 

Idaho-Eastern Oregon potato industry 

benefit from the recent increased growth 

in demand from the food service 

industry sector. The benefits of this rule 

are not expected to be 

disproportionately greater or lesser for 

small entities than large entities. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0178 (Generic 

Vegetable and Specialty Crops). No 

changes in those requirements as a 

result of this action are necessary. 

Should any changes become necessary, 

they would be submitted to OMB for 

approval. 

This rule will not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

potato 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. In addition, USDA has 

not identified any relevant Federal rules 

that duplicate, overlap or conflict with 

this rule. 

Further, the Committee’s meeting was 

widely publicized throughout the IdahoEastern Oregon potato industry and all 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meeting and participate in 

Committee deliberations. Like all 

Committee meetings, the April 22, 2014, 

meeting was a public meeting and all 

entities, both large and small, were able 

to express their views on this issue. 

Comments on the interim rule were 

required to be received on or before 

October 6, 2014. No comments were 

received. Therefore, for the reasons 

given in the interim rule, we are 

adopting the interim rule as a final rule, 

without change. 

To view the interim rule, go to: http:// 

www.regulations.gov/

#!documentDetail;D=AMS-FV-14-0046- 

0001. 

This action also affirms information 

contained in the interim rule concerning 

Executive Orders 12866, 12988, 13175, 

and 13563; the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35); and the EGov Act (44 U.S.C. 101). 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, it is found that 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 67041 

1 ‘‘Evaluating the National Mango Board’s 

Programs for Impact on U.S. Demand for Mangos,’’ 

Ronald L. Ward. 

finalizing the interim rule, without 

change, as published in the Federal 

Register (79 FR 45673, August 6, 2014) 

will tend to effectuate the declared 

policy of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 945 

Marketing agreements, Potatoes, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

■ Accordingly, the interim rule that 

amended 7 CFR part 945 and that was 

published at 79 FR 45673 on August 6, 

2014, is adopted as a final rule, without 

change. 

Dated: November 5, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26679 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 1206 

[Document Number AMS–FV–14–0047] 

Mango Promotion, Research, and 

Information Order; Section 610 Review 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Confirmation of regulations. 

SUMMARY: This document summarizes 

the results of an Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS) review of the Mango 

Promotion, Research, and Information 

Order (Order) under criteria contained 

in section 610 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA). Based upon its 

review, AMS concluded that there is a 

continued need for the Order. 

DATES: This confirmation is effective 

November 12, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may 

obtain a copy of the review on the 

Internet at: http://www.regulations.gov 

or request a copy from the Promotion 

and Economics Division, Fruit and 

Vegetable Program, AMS, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA or 

Department), 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., Room 1406–S, Stop 0244, 

Washington, DC 20250–0244; facsimile: 

(202) 205–2800 or electronic mail: 

Jeanette.Palmer@ams.usda.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeanette Palmer, Marketing Specialist, 

Promotion and Economics Division, 

Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, 

USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue 

SW., Room 1406–S, Stop 0244, 

Washington, DC 20250–0244; telephone: 

(202) 720–9915; facsimile: (202) 205– 

2800; or electronic mail: 

Jeanette.Palmer@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Order 

(7 CFR part 1206) is authorized under 

the Commodity Promotion, Research, 

and Information Act of 1996 (Act) (7 

U.S.C. 7411–7425). 

The Order became effective on 

November 3, 2004. It is administered by 

the National Mango Board (Board) with 

oversight by the Department. The 

program is financed by an assessment of 

three-quarters of a cent per pound on 

first handlers and importers of 500,000 

pounds or more of mangos annually. 

The Order specifies that first handlers 

are responsible for submitting 

assessments to the Board on a monthly 

basis and maintaining records necessary 

to verify their reporting. Importers are 

responsible for paying assessments on 

mangos imported for consumption in 

the United States through the U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection. The 

purpose of the Order is to carry out an 

effective, continuous, and coordinated 

program of promotion, research, and 

information designed to strengthen 

mangos’ competitive position, and to 

maintain and expand the domestic 

market for mangos. 

The Board is composed of 18 

members as follows: 8 importers; 2 

domestic producers; 1 first handler; and 

7 foreign producers. Nominations for 

importer, domestic producer, and first 

handler members are solicited by 

importers, domestic producers, and first 

handlers, respectively. Nominations for 

foreign producer members are solicited 

from foreign producers and foreign 

producer associations. Members are 

appointed to the Board by the Secretary 

of Agriculture and serve a term of three 

years. 

There are approximately 190 

importers and 5 first handlers of mangos 

subject to the provisions of the Order. 

The majority of importers, first handlers 

and producers may be classified as 

small entities. 

AMS published in the Federal 

Register on March 24, 2006, (71 FR 

14827) its plan to review certain 

regulations, including the mango 

program, under criteria contained in 

section 610 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601– 

612). Because many AMS regulations 

impact small entities, AMS decided, as 

a matter of policy, to review certain 

regulations which, although they may 

not meet the threshold requirement 

under section 610 of the RFA, warrant 

review. 

AMS published a notice of review and 

request for written comments in the 

Federal Register on June 20, 2014 (79 

FR 35296). The comment period ended 

on August 19, 2014. Three comments 

were received in response to the notice 

and are discussed later in this 

document. 

The review was undertaken to 

determine whether the Order should be 

continued without change, amended, or 

rescinded (consistent with the 

objectives of the Act) to minimize the 

impacts on small entities. AMS 

considered the following factors: (1) The 

continued need for the Order; (2) the 

nature of complaints or comments 

received from the public concerning the 

Order; (3) the complexity of the Order; 

(4) the extent to which the Order 

overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with 

other Federal rules, and, to the extent 

feasible, with State and local 

regulations; and (5) the length of time 

since the Order has been evaluated or 

the degree to which technology, 

economic conditions, or other factors 

have changed in the area affected by the 

Order. 

Continued Need for the Order. Based 

on its review, the Department has 

concluded that there is a continued 

need for the Order. Numerous benefits 

to the mango industry would likely not 

be achieved without the research and 

promotion collectively funded through 

the Order. The Board continues to 

conduct useful research projects on 

various aspects of mango production, 

processing, and nutritional impacts. 

Examples of recent studies include 

potential beneficial impacts of mango 

consumption on mitigating diseases 

such as diabetes, breast cancer and 

colon cancer. 

An impact study conducted in 2010 1

reviewed the Board’s investment in 

developing a database for monitoring 

potential and actual mango consumers, 

and found that the data is quite useful 

for economic research and for other 

analytical purposes. The economic data 

was used for evaluating NMB program 

impacts on mango demand, and 

concluded that the impact was 

significant. 

The majority of mangos consumed in 

the United States are imported and the 

study reported that the value of U.S. 

mango imports grew from $169 million 

to $217 million during the period 

covered by the study, 2005 through 

2009. The growth in value was the 

result of both higher prices and greater 

volumes imported. 

Nature of Complaints and Comments. 

The three public comments received are 

discussed in the following paragraphs. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES