This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

4254 

Vol. 76, No. 16 

Tuesday, January 25, 2011 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 945 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–10–0109; FV11–945–1] 

Irish Potatoes Grown in Certain 

Designated Counties in Idaho, and 

Malheur County, Oregon; Continuance 

Referendum 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Referendum order. 

SUMMARY: This document directs that a 

referendum be conducted among 

eligible producers of Irish potatoes in 

certain designated counties in Idaho, 

and Malheur County, Oregon, to 

determine whether they favor 

continuance of the marketing order 

regulating the handling of Irish potatoes 

grown in the production area. 

DATES: The referendum will be 

conducted from March 5 to March 18, 

2011. To vote in this referendum, 

producers must have produced Irish 

potatoes for the fresh market within the 

designated production area in Idaho, or 

Malheur County, Oregon, during the 

period August 1, 2009, through July 31, 

2010. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the marketing 

order may be obtained from the office of 

the referendum agents at 805 SW 

Broadway, Suite 930, Portland, OR 

97205, or the Office of the Docket Clerk, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barry Broadbent or Gary Olson, 

Northwest Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA, 805 SW Broadway, Suite 

930, Portland, OR 97205; Telephone: 

(503) 326–2724, Fax: (503) 326–7440, or 

E-mail: Barry.Broadbent@ams.usda.gov 

or GaryD.Olson@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to Marketing Order No. 945 (7 CFR part 

945), 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,’’ it is hereby directed that 

a referendum be conducted to ascertain 

whether continuance of the order is 

favored by the producers. The 

referendum shall be conducted from 

March 5 to March 18, 2011, among 

eligible Irish potato producers in the 

production area. Only producers that 

were engaged in the production of Irish 

potatoes for the fresh market in Idaho, 

and Malheur County, Oregon, during 

the period of August 1, 2009, through 

July 31, 2010, may participate in the 

continuance referendum. 

USDA has determined that 

continuance referenda are an effective 

means for determining whether 

producers favor continuation of 

marketing order programs. USDA would 

consider termination of the order if less 

than two-thirds of producers voting in 

the referendum and producers of less 

than two-thirds of the volume of Irish 

potatoes represented in the referendum 

favor continuance. In evaluating the 

merits of continuance versus 

termination, USDA will not exclusively 

consider the results of the continuance 

referendum. USDA will also consider all 

other relevant information concerning 

the operation of the order and the 

relative benefits and disadvantages to 

producers, handlers, and consumers in 

order to determine whether continued 

operation of the order would tend to 

effectuate the declared policy of the Act. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

chapter 35), the ballot materials to be 

used in the referendum herein ordered 

have been submitted to and approved by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) and have been assigned OMB 

No. 0581–0178—Vegetable and 

Specialty Crop Marketing Orders. It has 

been estimated that it will take an 

average of 20 minutes for each of the 

approximately 990 producers of Irish 

potatoes in Idaho and Malheur County, 

Oregon, to cast a ballot. Participation is 

voluntary. Ballots postmarked after 

March 18, 2011, will not be included in 

the vote tabulation. 

Barry Broadbent and Gary Olson of 

the Northwest Marketing Field Office, 

Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, 

USDA, are hereby designated as the 

referendum agents of the Secretary of 

Agriculture to conduct this referendum. 

The procedure applicable to the 

referendum shall be the ‘‘Procedure for 

the Conduct of Referenda in Connection 

With Marketing Orders for Fruits, 

Vegetables, and Nuts Pursuant to the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937, as Amended’’ (7 CFR 900.400– 

900.407). 

Ballots will be mailed to all producers 

of record and may also be obtained from 

the referendum agents, or from their 

appointees. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 945 

Irish potatoes, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

Dated: January 19, 2011. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–1424 Filed 1–24–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 989 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–10–0090; FV10–989–3 

PR] 

Raisins Produced From Grapes Grown 

in California; Increased Assessment 

Rate 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

increase the assessment rate established 

for the Raisin Administrative Committee 

(committee) for the 2010–11 and 

subsequent crop years from $7.50 to 

$14.00 per ton of free tonnage raisins 

acquired by handlers and reserve 

tonnage raisins released or sold to 

handlers for use in free tonnage outlets. 

The committee locally administers the 

marketing order which regulates the 

handling of California raisins produced 

from grapes grown in California. 

Assessments upon raisin handlers are 

used by the committee to fund 

reasonable and necessary expenses of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 4255 

the program. The 2010–11 crop year 

began August 1 and ends July 31. No 

volume regulation will be implemented 

for the 2010–11 crop year, and no 

reserve pool will be established for this 

crop. Some committee expenses usually 

covered by reserve pool revenues must 

therefore be covered by handler 

assessments, necessitating an increased 

assessment rate. The proposed $14.00 

per ton assessment would remain in 

effect indefinitely unless modified, 

suspended, or terminated. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

February 4, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this rule. Comments must be 

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing 

Order Administration Branch, Fruit and 

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 

0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: 

(202) 720–8938, or Internet: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Comments should 

reference the docket number and the 

date and page number of this issue of 

the Federal Register and will be 

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 

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: 

Terry Vawter, Senior Marketing 

Specialist, or Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional 

Manager, California Marketing Field 

Office, Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– 

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906; or E-mail: 

Terry.Vawter@ams.usda.gov or 

Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Antoinette 

Carter, Marketing Order Administration 

Branch, 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 E-mail: 

Antoinette.Carter@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

and Order No. 989, both as amended (7 

CFR part 989), regulating the handling 

of raisins produced from grapes grown 

in California, 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 Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Order 

12866. 

This rule has been reviewed under 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. Under the marketing order now 

in effect, California raisin handlers are 

subject to assessments. Funds to 

administer the order are derived from 

such assessments. It is intended that the 

assessment rate as proposed herein 

would be applicable to all assessable 

raisins beginning on August 1, 2010, 

and continue until amended, 

suspended, or terminated. 

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. 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 not later than 

20 days after the date of the entry of the 

ruling. 

This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

committee for the 2010–11 and 

subsequent crop years from $7.50 to 

$14.00 per ton of free tonnage California 

raisins acquired by handlers and reserve 

raisins tonnage raisins released or sold 

to handlers for use in free tonnage 

outlets. 

Sections 989.79 and 989.80, 

respectively, of the order provide 

authority for the committee, with the 

approval of the USDA, to formulate an 

annual budget of expenses and collect 

assessments from handlers to administer 

the program. The members of the 

committee are producers and handlers 

of California raisins. They are familiar 

with the committee’s needs and with 

costs for goods and services in their 

local area, and are, thus, in a position 

to formulate an appropriate budget and 

assessment rate. The assessment rate is 

formulated and discussed in a public 

meeting. Thus, all directly affected 

persons have an opportunity to 

participate and provide input. 

Section 989.79 also provides authority 

for the committee to formulate an 

annual budget of expenses likely to be 

incurred during the crop year in 

connection with reserve raisins held for 

the account of the committee. A certain 

percentage of each year’s raisin crop 

may be held in a reserve pool during 

years when volume regulation is 

implemented to help stabilize raisin 

supplies and prices. The remaining 

‘‘free’’ percentage may be sold by 

handlers to any market. Reserve raisins 

are disposed of through various 

programs authorized under the order. 

Reserve pool expenses are deducted 

from proceeds obtained from the sale of 

reserve raisins, as are costs to cover the 

Export Replacement Offer (ERO) 

program, which supports handler 

exports in various foreign markets. Net 

proceeds are returned to the pool’s 

equity holders, primarily producers. 

The Committee Formulates Two 

Budgets Initially 

Prior to each crop year, the committee 

formulates two distinct budgets: one 

which envisions volume regulation 

during the upcoming season, and 

another which does not. This is a 

practical contingency plan, since the 

crop year begins several months prior to 

the committee’s consideration of a 

recommendation for volume regulation, 

which cannot be made before the crop’s 

size can be estimated. 

When volume regulation is 

recommended, the committee adopts an 

administrative budget funded by 

handler assessments, and a reserve pool 

budget funded by the current year’s 

reserve pool. Thus, some committee 

costs, some variable and some fixed, 

may be shared by the two revenue 

sources or allocated to one or the other. 

Variable costs solely attributed to the 

reserve budget include such expenses as 

insurance policies for committee-owned 

raisin bins and on stacks of reserve 

raisins, and reserve raisin hauling costs. 

Variable costs which are attributable 

solely to the administrative budget 

include such expenses as costs for 

committee and staff travel, or software 

and programming costs, etc. Because of 

the nature of these variable expenses, 

they can be changed or redirected 

without significant impact on either 

budget, if necessary. 

On the other hand, fixed costs are less 

flexible, and, thus, cannot be readily 

changed from one accounting period to 

another. Because these are ‘‘sunk’’ costs, 

like rent, salaries and other related 

personnel costs, utilities, etc., they may 

be attributable to both the reserve and 

the administrative budget, depending on 

the nature of the expense. In the short 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
4256 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

term of one crop year, these fixed costs 

generally remain fixed costs. 

When volume regulation is not 

implemented, the committee funds 

program operations with an 

administrative budget funded only from 

handler assessments, where some 

expenses associated with a reserve pool 

are eliminated or reduced from the 

combined administrative and reserve 

program budget. 

The Committee Recommended Two 

Budgets Initially 

The committee initially met on July 

22, 2010, and recommended two 2010– 

11 crop year budget scenarios to 

accommodate both situations, because it 

was not known at that time whether 

volume regulations would be 

implemented. 

The first budget scenario 

recommended was premised on the 

assumption that volume regulation 

would be implemented. Under this 

scenario, the committee recommended 

an administrative budget of expenses 

totaling $2,245,900, and a reserve pool 

budget of expenses totaling $2,530,700. 

The assessment rate would remain 

unchanged at $7.50 per ton. The 

assessment rate applied to the estimated 

acquisitions of raisins by handlers of 

330,640 tons would provide adequate 

revenue to fund the shared 

administrative and reserve budgets 

(salaries, administrative expenses, 

research, compliance activities, industry 

outreach), and those costs exclusively 

funded by the reserve budget, including: 

insurance on raisin bins and reserve 

raisins, hauling of reserve raisins and 

reserve raisin bins, as well as bin repair 

and maintenance. Total expenses of this 

budget scenario equal $4,776,600, not 

including $233,900 set aside as a 

financial reserve, bringing the total 

budget to $5,010,500. 

The second budget scenario 

recommended was based on the premise 

that volume regulation would not be 

implemented for the 2010–11 season. 

Under this scenario, various expenses 

typically split between the reserve pool 

budget and the administrative budget 

would be funded by the administrative 

budget because the activities continue, 

even in the absence of a reserve 

program. These expenses include 

salaries, bin maintenance costs, export 

consultants hired to assist the 

committee in administering USDA’s 

Market Access Program (MAP) funds, 

etc. However, it should be noted that 

even some salaries would be subject to 

reduction or elimination if no reserve 

program were in place after the 2010– 

2011 crop year. In the long term, even 

fixed costs such as these become 

variable costs. 

In addition, some expense categories 

would be eliminated in the absence of 

a reserve program. These expenses 

include: insurance for bins and reserve 

raisins, reserve raisin hauling, and the 

committee’s Market Incentive Program 

(MIP) and the Industry Marketing 

Promotion Fund (IMPF). 

Other expenses which have been 

reduced include: travel for committee 

and staff members, software and 

programming costs, and generic 

marketing efforts in foreign countries. 

The administrative budget expenses 

total $4,423,500 not including a smaller 

financial reserve of $205,460, bringing 

the total administrative budget to 

$4,628,960; necessitating a higher 

assessment rate of $14.00 per ton to 

cover the proposed expenses, as 

unanimously recommended by the 

committee. 

Committee Consideration of Volume 

Regulation 

The committee met on October 5, 

2010, and determined that volume 

regulation is not warranted for the 

2010–11 crop year because the 

calculated volume regulation formula 

resulted in 100 percent free tonnage and 

zero percent reserve tonnage. Without 

volume regulation, the committee’s 

relevant recommendation is the July 22, 

2010, proposed administrative budget of 

$4,628,960, along with an increased 

assessment rate of $14.00 per ton. 

In developing this budget, the 

committee reviewed and identified 

those expenses that were considered 

reasonable and necessary to continue 

operation of the raisin marketing order 

program. As noted previously, several 

costs normally associated with 

administering a reserve pool would be 

eliminated such as insurance coverage 

($98,700); raisin hauling costs ($65,000), 

and 2011–2012 MIP/IMPF costs 

(typically $4.3 million each year). These 

costs would be unnecessary in the 

absence of a reserve pool. 

Some expenses traditionally split 

between the administrative and reserve 

pool budgets would be reduced and 

funded through the administrative 

budget. For example, total office and 

field staff travel related to reserve and 

administrative activities, budgeted at 

$66,200 ($33,100 allocated to the 

reserve budget and an additional 

$33,100 allocated to the administrative 

budget), would be reduced to $48,000. 

Other reduced expenses include: 

Reduction in costs for outside counsel 

approved by USDA for personnel issues 

from $8,000 to $6,000; travel for foreign 

committee representatives from $65,000 

to $40,000; staff travel for generic 

foreign market relations from $70,000 to 

$40,000; and MAP trade activity from 

$440,000 to $400,000. In all, the 

committee has proposed eliminating or 

reducing expenses by a total of 

$353,100. 

Other costs usually split between the 

reserve pool and administrative budgets 

that would be funded by the 

administrative budget include: Salaries 

and related employment costs, 

administration, generic marketing 

efforts, research, compliance activities, 

and industry outreach. These costs 

remain the same regardless of whether 

there is a reserve pool, as they are 

necessary to continue administration of 

the program. 

The major expenditures 

recommended by the committee for the 

2010–11 crop year include salaries and 

employee-related costs, administration 

costs, compliance activities, research 

and studies, and costs for operation and 

maintenance of the generic marketing 

programs. 

The committee recommended 

$1,745,000 to cover salaries for all 18 

committee employees, vacation 

accruals, payroll taxes, unemployment 

compensation, retirement contributions, 

employee benefits, employment costs, 

staff training and travel; insurance, and 

health insurance. Administrative 

expenses of $925,700 include expenses 

for rent, utilities, postage, office 

supplies, repairs and maintenance, 

memberships and subscriptions, 

committee training, consultants, audits, 

equipment leases and depreciation, 

committee and staff travel, committee 

mileage reimbursements, meeting 

expenses, bank charges, software and 

programming, and empty raisin bin 

hauling and maintenance. Costs for 

order compliance activities, not 

including compliance staff salaries, are 

anticipated to be $90,000; and research 

and studies, especially the cost for the 

five-year review of its marketing 

programs mandated by the Federal 

Agricultural Improvement and Reform 

(FAIR) Act of 1996, are anticipated to be 

$140,000. Costs for industry outreach 

are estimated to be $15,000. Costs for 

outside counsel approved by USDA for 

personnel issues are estimated to be 

$6,000. Generic costs for market 

maintenance and travel costs total 

$1,676,000, and include costs for foreign 

administration of MAP funds, travel for 

industry representatives in foreign 

countries—not including Mexico or 

Canada, which are considered part of 

the domestic market—and export 

consulting costs associated with MAP 

fund administration. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 4257 

The $14.00 per ton assessment rate 

recommended by the committee was 

derived by dividing the $4,628,960 

recommended budget ($4,423,500 

anticipated expenses plus a financial 

reserve of $205,460) by an estimated 

330,640 tons of assessable raisins. 

Sufficient income should be generated 

at the higher assessment rate for the 

committee to meet its anticipated and 

unanimously-recommended expenses. 

Due to a relatively small crop over 

which to spread the assessment rate, the 

recommended rate of $14.00 per ton is 

higher than recent assessment rates, and 

is enough to meet the anticipated 

expenses and maintain a small financial 

reserve. Pursuant to § 989.81(a) of the 

order, any unexpended assessment 

funds from the crop year must be 

credited or refunded to the handlers 

from whom collected. 

The proposed assessment rate would 

continue in effect indefinitely unless 

modified, suspended, or terminated by 

USDA upon recommendation and 

information submitted by the committee 

or other available information. 

Although this assessment rate would 

be in effect for an indefinite period, the 

committee would continue to meet prior 

to or during each crop year to 

recommend a budget of expenses and 

consider recommendations for 

modification of the assessment rate. The 

dates and times of committee meetings 

are available from the committee or 

USDA. Committee meetings are open to 

the public and interested persons may 

express their views at these meetings. 

USDA would evaluate committee 

recommendations and other available 

information to determine whether 

modification of the assessment rate is 

needed. Further rulemaking would be 

undertaken as necessary. The 

committee’s 2010–11 budget and those 

for subsequent crop years would be 

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved 

by USDA, in accordance with USDA’s 

program oversight responsibilities. 

Initial 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 

rule on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial 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 3,000 

producers of California raisins and 

approximately 28 handlers subject to 

regulation under the marketing order. 

The Small Business Administration (13 

CFR 121.201) defines small agricultural 

producers as those having annual 

receipts less than $750,000, and defines 

small agricultural service firms as those 

whose annual receipts are less than 

$7,000,000. 

Based upon shipment data and other 

information provided by the committee, 

it may be concluded that a majority of 

producers and approximately 18 

handlers of California raisins may be 

classified as small entities. 

This rule would increase the 

assessment rate established for the 

committee and collected from handlers 

for the 2010–11 and subsequent crop 

years from $7.50 to $14.00 per ton of 

assessable raisins acquired by handlers. 

The committee determined that volume 

regulation was not warranted for the 

2010–11 crop year because the trade 

demand calculated under the order is 

currently higher than the crop estimate. 

Thus, given the current balance between 

supply and demand, the committee 

unanimously determined that volume 

regulation was not warranted for the 

2010–2011 crop year. 

When volume regulation is in effect, 

the committee establishes a budget 

allocated between administrative 

expenses funded by handler 

assessments, and expenses incurred in 

connection with a reserve pool, funded 

from the sale of reserve pool raisins for 

free tonnage use. As noted earlier, costs 

which can be associated directly with 

the reserve pool, such as insurance on 

bins and reserve raisins, can readily be 

allocated to the reserve pool portion of 

the budget. Other costs, such as salaries 

or administrative expenses, represent 

expenditures which have been jointly 

allocated between the two portions of 

the budget, because these expenses and 

staff’s time are shared between 

administrative and pool operations. 

When no volume regulation is in 

effect during a crop year, there is no 

reserve pool budget for that crop year. 

However, as noted previously, the 

committee continues to incur fixed costs 

associated with salaries and 

administering the marketing order 

program, including expenses for their 

part of the MAP grant. 

The committee reviewed and 

identified the expenses that would be 

reasonable and necessary to continue 

program operations without a reserve 

pool in effect during the 2010–11 crop 

year. As illustrated earlier, some 

expenses that are typically split between 

the administrative and reserve pool 

budgets have been allocated to the 

administrative budget, some expenses 

were reduced, and some expenses have 

been eliminated. 

Each reserve pool maintains a 

separate identity from any other pools 

which may be in existence. For 

example, currently the 2008–09 and 

2009–10 pools are still open, largely due 

to the lag time between the opening of 

the pool and the receipt of all 

documents applicable to that pool. 

Under the MIP/IMPF programs, for 

example, importers have two years in 

which to claim financial incentives from 

the pools. Thus, reserve pools cannot 

close until at least two years have 

elapsed. 

The resulting recommended 

administrative budget includes 

expenses of $4,423,500 and a financial 

reserve of $205,460, for a total budget of 

$4,628,960 for the 2010–11 crop year. 

This represents an overall decrease from 

the 2009–10 combined administrative 

and reserve pool budgets, which totaled 

$5,463,975. The financial reserve 

provides a safety net to cover 

unexpected expenses and opportunities 

that present themselves during the 

2010–2011 crop year. 

The quantity of assessable raisins for 

2010–11 crop year is estimated to be 

330,640 tons. The $14.00 per ton 

assessment rate unanimously 

recommended by the committee was 

derived by dividing the $4,628,960 

anticipated expenses, which includes a 

financial reserve of $205,460, by an 

estimated 330,640 tons of assessable 

raisins. Sufficient income should be 

generated at the higher assessment rate 

for the committee to meet its anticipated 

expenses. Pursuant to § 989.81(a) of the 

order, any unexpended assessment 

funds from the crop year must be 

credited or refunded to the handlers 

from whom collected. 

Prior to arriving at this budget, the 

committee considered information from 

various sources, such as the committee’s 

Executive, Audit, and Administrative 

Issues Subcommittees. Alternate 

spending levels were discussed by the 

Audit Subcommittee, which met on July 

22, 2010, to review the committee’s 

financial condition and consider 

preliminary budgets. The committee 

was aware that the current raisin supply 

and demand were relatively balanced, 

and that volume regulations might not 

be warranted for the 2010–11 crop. 

Therefore, the committee developed two 

alternative budget and assessment rate 

recommendations to accommodate a 

scenario with volume regulation and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
4258 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

another scenario without volume 

regulation. If volume regulation were to 

be implemented, the assessment rate 

would remain at $7.50 per ton. If 

volume regulation were not to be 

implemented, some costs typically 

allocated to a reserve pool budget would 

be absorbed by the administrative 

budget, thus necessitating an increased 

assessment rate to $14.00 per ton. The 

committee unanimously approved these 

alternative budget and assessment 

recommendations on July 22, 2010. 

The committee met again on October 

5, 2010, and determined that volume 

regulation was not warranted for the 

2010–11 season. This triggered 

recommendation of the committee’s 

proposal for an administrative budget of 

$4,628,960 and an assessment rate of 

$14.00 per ton, since the current 

assessment rate of $7.50 would not 

provide enough funds to cover 

anticipated expenses of $4,423,500. 

A review of statistical data on the 

California raisin industry indicates that 

assessment revenue has consistently 

been less than one percent of grower 

revenue in recent years. A minimum 

grower price of $1,500 per ton of raisins 

for the 2010–11 crop year has been 

announced by the Raisin Bargaining 

Association. If this price is realized, 

assessment revenue would continue to 

represent less than one percent of 

grower revenue in the 2010–11 crop 

year, even with the increased 

assessment rate. 

Regarding the impact of this action on 

affected entities, this action would 

increase the assessment obligation 

imposed on handlers. While increased 

assessments impose additional costs on 

handlers regulated under the order, the 

rates are uniform on all handlers, and 

proportional to the size of their 

businesses. However, these costs would 

be offset by the benefits derived by the 

operation of the marketing order. 

In addition, the Audit Subcommittee 

and the full committee’s meetings were 

widely publicized throughout the 

California raisin industry and all 

interested persons were invited to 

attend the meetings and encouraged to 

participate in committee deliberations 

on all issues. Like all subcommittee and 

committee meetings, the July 22 and 

October 5, 2010, meetings were public 

meetings, and all entities, both large and 

small, were able to express views on 

this issue, if they chose to do so. Based 

upon the discussions and the 

unanimous vote by the committee, the 

increased assessment is reasonable and 

necessary to maintain the program. 

Finally, interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on this proposed rule, 

including the regulatory and 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California 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 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 rule. 

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 Antoinette 

Carter at the previously mentioned 

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

A 10-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. Ten days is 

deemed appropriate because: (1) The 

2010–11 crop year began on August 1, 

2010, and the order requires the rate of 

assessments for each crop year to apply 

to all assessable raisins handled during 

the crop year; (2) the committee needs 

to have sufficient funds to pay its 

expenses, which are incurred on a 

continuous basis, and (3) handlers are 

aware of this action, which was 

unanimously recommended by the 

committee at a public meeting. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 989 

Grapes, Marketing agreements, 

Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 989 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 989—RAISINS PRODUCED 

FROM GRAPES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 989 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

2. Section 989.347 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 989.347 Assessment rate. 

On and after August 1, 2010, an 

assessment rate of $14.00 per ton is 

established for assessable raisins 

produced from grapes grown in 

California. 

Dated: January 19, 2011. 

Rayne Pegg, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–1427 Filed 1–24–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 835 

[Docket No. HS–RM–09–835] 

RIN 1901–AA–95 

Occupational Radiation Protection; 

Revision 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Proposed rule and opportunity 

for public comment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) proposes to revise the values in 

an appendix to its Occupational 

Radiation Protection requirements. The 

derived air concentration values for air 

immersion are calculated using several 

parameters. One of these, exposure time, 

is better represented by the hours in the 

workday, rather than the hours in a 

calendar day, and is therefore used in 

the revised calculations. 

DATES: Public comments on the 

proposed revisions must be received on 

or before February 24, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. HS–RM–09– 

835 and/or RIN 1901–AA–95, by any of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: Judy.Foulke@hq.doe.gov. 

Include Docket Number HS–RM–09–835 

and/or RIN 1901–AA–95 in the subject 

line of the message. 

• Mail: Dr. Judith D. Foulke, Office of 

Worker Safety and Health Policy (HS– 

11), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Judith Foulke, (301) 903–5865, e-mail: 

Judy.Foulke@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The requirements in title 10, Code of 

Federal Regulations, part 835 (10 CFR 

part 835), Occupational Radiation 

Protection, are designed to protect the 

health and safety of workers at DOE 

facilities. One situation that must be 

addressed is the exposure of workers to 

radioactive material dispersed in the air. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS