37928 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

information about SIGAR and about 

themselves maintained by SIGAR. The 

absence of well-defined exemptions to 

the Privacy Act regulations could impair 

the confidentiality and privacy rights of 

those who submit sensitive information 

to SIGAR as well as the ability of SIGAR 

to use that information to carry out its 

statutory mission. SIGAR has 

determined that this interim rule should 

be issued without a delayed effective 

date pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Finally, notice of proposed 

rulemaking is not required, because the 

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6) do not apply. 

It has been determined that this 

rulemaking is not a significant 

regulatory action for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, a 

regulatory impact analysis is not 

required. 

Dated: June 6, 2014. 

John F. Sopko, 

Inspector General. 

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 9301 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Freedom of information, 

Privacy. 

Authority and Issuance 

For the reasons set forth above, SIGAR 

amends 5 CFR part 9301 as follows: 

PART 9301—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 9301 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; Pub. L. 110–175, 

121 Stat. 2524 (2007); 5 U.S.C. 301 and 552; 

Exec. Order 12600, 52 FR 23781, 3 CFR, 1987 

Comp., p. 235; Exec. Order No. 13392, 70 FR 

75373–75377, 3 CFR, 2006 Comp., pp. 216– 

200. 

■ 2. Section 9301.20 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 9301.20 Exemptions. 

Systems of records maintained by 

SIGAR are authorized to be exempted 

from certain provisions of the Privacy 

Act under the general and specific 

exemptions set forth in the Act. In 

utilizing these exemptions, SIGAR is 

exempting only those portions of 

systems that are necessary for the proper 

functioning of SIGAR and that are 

consistent with the Privacy Act. Where 

compliance would not appear to 

interfere with or adversely affect the law 

enforcement process, and/or where it 

may be appropriate to permit 

individuals to contest the accuracy of 

the information collected, e.g., public 

source materials, the applicable 

exemption may be waived, either 

partially or totally, by SIGAR, in the 

sole discretion of SIGAR, as appropriate. 

(a) General exemptions. (1) 

Individuals may not have access to 

records maintained by SIGAR that were 

provided by another agency that has 

determined by regulation that such 

information is subject to general 

exemption under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(1). If 

such exempt records are the subject of 

an access request, SIGAR will advise the 

requester of their existence and of the 

name and address of the source agency, 

unless that information is itself exempt 

from disclosure. 

(2) The systems of records maintained 

by the Investigations Directorate 

(SIGAR–08), are subject to general 

exemption under 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2). All 

records contained in record system 

SIGAR–08, Investigations Records, are 

exempt from all provisions of the 

Privacy Act except sections (b), (c)(1) 

and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (e)(6), (7), 

(9), (10), and (11), and (i) to the extent 

to which they meet the criteria of 

section (j)(2). These exemptions are 

necessary to ensure the effectiveness of 

the investigative, judicial, and 

protective processes. These exemptions 

are necessary to ensure the proper 

functions of the law enforcement 

activity, to protect confidential sources 

of information, to fulfill promises of 

confidentiality, to prevent interference 

with the enforcement of criminal laws, 

to avoid the disclosure of investigative 

techniques, to avoid the endangering of 

the life and safety of any individual, to 

avoid premature disclosure of the 

knowledge of potential criminal activity 

and the evidentiary bases of possible 

enforcement actions, and to maintain 

the integrity of the law enforcement 

process. 

(3) The systems of records maintained 

by the Investigations Directorate 

(SIGAR–08) are exempted from 5 U.S.C. 

552a (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H), and 

(I), and (f) pursuant to the provisions of 

5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(1), (2), and (5). These 

exemptions are necessary to protect 

material required to be kept secret in the 

interest of national defense and foreign 

policy; to prevent individuals that are 

the subject of investigation from 

frustrating the investigatory process; to 

ensure the proper functioning and 

integrity of law enforcement activities; 

to prevent disclosure of investigative 

techniques; to maintain the confidence 

of foreign governments in the integrity 

of the procedures under which 

privileged or confidential information 

may be provided; to fulfill commitments 

made to sources to protect their 

identities and the confidentiality of 

information and to avoid endangering 

these sources and law enforcement 

personnel; and to ensure the proper 

functioning of the investigatory process, 

to ensure effective determination of 

suitability, eligibility, and qualification 

for employment and to protect the 

confidentiality of sources of 

information. 

(b) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2014–14194 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 906 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0015; FV14–906–2 

FIR] 

Oranges and Grapefruit Grown in 

Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas; 

Change in Size and Grade 

Requirements for Grapefruit 

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 relaxed the minimum size and 

grade requirements prescribed for 

grapefruit under the marketing order for 

oranges and grapefruit grown the Lower 

Rio Grande Valley in Texas (order). The 

interim rule relaxed the minimum size 

requirement for grapefruit from 3–5/16 

inches to 3 inches in diameter and 

reduced the minimum grade 

requirement for small-sized grapefruit. 

This rule provides additional grapefruit 

to meet market demand, helping to 

maximize fresh shipments. 

DATES: Effective July 7, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doris Jamieson, Marketing Specialist, or 

Christian D. Nissen, Regional Director, 

Southeast Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324– 

3375, Fax: (863) 325–8793, or Email: 

Doris.Jamieson@ams.usda.gov or 

Christian.Nissen@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 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 37929 

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email: 

Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule 

is issued under Marketing Agreement 

and Order No. 906, as amended (7 CFR 

part 906), regulating the handling of 

oranges and grapefruit grown in the 

Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, 

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.’’ 

USDA is issuing this rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 13175. 

The handling of oranges and 

grapefruit grown in the Lower Rio 

Grande Valley in Texas is regulated by 

7 CFR part 906. Prior to this change, the 

minimum size requirement for 

grapefruit was 3–5/16 inches in 

diameter (size 56) and size 56 fruit had 

to meet a minimum grade of a U.S. No. 

1. The Texas Valley Citrus Committee 

(Committee) believes there is a shortage 

of fruit available to supply the fresh 

fruit market, which the Texas citrus 

growers and handlers should fill. The 

Committee also recognized that 

consumers are now showing a 

preference for smaller-sized fruit. The 

Committee believes relaxing the 

requirements makes more fruit available 

to fill the market shortfall and provides 

smaller-sized fruit to meet consumer 

demand. Therefore, this rule continues 

in effect the rule that relaxed the 

minimum size requirement for 

grapefruit from 3–5/16 inches (size 56) 

to 3 inches (size 64) in diameter and 

relaxed the minimum grade for a size 

56, establishing a minimum grade of 

‘‘Texas Choice’’ for both size 56 and size 

64 grapefruit. 

In an interim rule published in the 

Federal Register on February 28, 2014, 

and effective March 1, 2014, (79 FR 

11295, Doc. No. AMS–FV–14–0015, 

FV14–906–2 IR), § 906.356 was 

amended by changing the minimum size 

requirement for grapefruit from 3–5/16 

inches (size 56) to 3 inches (size 64) in 

diameter. Section 906.340 was also 

revised by adding size 64 to the 

available pack sizes for grapefruit listed 

under Table II, and by adding language 

concerning pack and sizing 

requirements as appropriate. In 

addition, this rule changed the 

minimum grade requirement for size 56 

fruit from a U.S. No. 1 to a ‘‘Texas 

Choice’’ and established the minimum 

grade for a size 64 as a ‘‘Texas Choice.’’ 

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 13 registered handlers of 

Texas citrus who are subject to 

regulation under the marketing order 

and approximately 150 producers of 

grapefruit in the regulated area. Small 

agricultural service firms, which 

include handlers, are defined by the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) as 

those having annual receipts of less than 

$7,000,000, and small agricultural 

producers are defined as those having 

annual receipts of less than $750,000 

(13 CFR 121.201). 

According to National Agricultural 

Statistics Service data, the average f.o.b. 

price for Texas grapefruit during the 

2012–13 season was $24.10 per box, and 

total fresh shipments were 

approximately 3 million boxes. Using 

the average f.o.b. price and shipment 

data, and considering a normal 

distribution, the majority of Texas 

grapefruit handlers could be considered 

small businesses under SBA’s 

definition. In addition, based on 

production data, grower prices, and the 

total number of Texas citrus growers, 

the average annual grower revenue is 

below $750,000. Thus, the majority of 

handlers and producers of grapefruit 

may be classified as small entities. 

This rule continues in effect the 

action that relaxed the size and grade 

requirements for grapefruit prescribed 

under the order. This rule relaxes the 

minimum size requirement for 

grapefruit from 35⁄16 inches (size 56) to 

3 inches (size 64). This action also 

relaxes the minimum grade requirement 

for size 56 fruit from a U.S. No. 1 to a 

‘‘Texas Choice’’ and establishes the 

minimum grade for size 64 as a ‘‘Texas 

Choice.’’ These changes make additional 

fruit available for shipment to the fresh 

market, maximize shipments, provide 

additional returns to handlers and 

growers, and respond to consumer 

demand for small-sized fruit. This rule 

amends the provisions in §§ 906.340 

and 906.356. Authority for these 

changes is provided in § 906.40. 

This action is not expected to increase 

costs associated with the order’s 

requirements. Rather, it is anticipated 

that this action will have a beneficial 

impact. Reducing size and grade 

requirements makes additional fruit 

available for shipment to the fresh 

market. The Committee believes that 

this provides additional fruit to fill a 

shortage in the fresh market and 

provides the opportunity to fulfill a 

growing consumer demand for smaller 

sized fruit. This action also provides an 

outlet for fruit that may otherwise go 

unharvested, maximizing fresh 

shipments and increasing returns to 

handlers and growers. The benefits of 

this rule are expected to be equally 

available to all fresh grapefruit growers 

and handlers, regardless of their size. 

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. 0581–0189, Generic 

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. 

This rule will not impose any 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

Texas citrus 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 Texas 

citrus industry and all interested 

persons were invited to attend the 

meeting and participate in Committee 

deliberations. Like all Committee 

meetings, the December 11, 2013, 

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 

April 29, 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-14-0015- 

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). 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37930 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

After consideration of all relevant 

material presented, it is found that 

finalizing the interim rule, without 

change, as published in the Federal 

Register (79 FR 11295, February 28, 

2014) will tend to effectuate the 

declared policy of the Act. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 906 

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, 

Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Accordingly, the interim rule that 

amended 7 CFR part 906 and was 

published at 79 FR 11295 on February 

28, 2014, is adopted as a final rule, 

without change. 

Dated: June 27, 2014. 

Rex A. Barnes, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15594 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 983 

[Doc. No. AMS–FV–12–0068; FV13–983–1 

FR] 

Pistachios Grown in California, 

Arizona, and New Mexico; Modification 

of Aflatoxin Regulations 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule revises the aflatoxin 

sampling regulations currently 

prescribed under the California, 

Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio 

marketing order (order). The order 

regulates the handling of pistachios 

grown in California, Arizona, and New 

Mexico, and is administered locally by 

the Administrative Committee for 

Pistachios (Committee). This rule allows 

the use of mechanical samplers (autosamplers) for in-line sampling as a 

method to obtain samples for aflatoxin 

analysis. The use of auto-samplers is 

expected to reduce handler costs by 

providing a more efficient and costeffective process. 

DATES: Effective Date: August 4, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andrea Ricci, Marketing Specialist, or 

Martin Engeler, Regional Director, 

California Marketing Field Office, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487– 

5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or Email: 

Andrea.Ricci@ams.usda.gov or 

Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

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 final 

rule is issued under Marketing 

Agreement and Order No. 983, both as 

amended (7 CFR part 983), regulating 

the handling of pistachios grown in 

California, Arizona, and New Mexico, 

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 Orders 

12866, 13175, and 13563. 

This final 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 

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 final rule revises the aflatoxin 

sampling regulations currently 

prescribed under the order. This rule 

allows the use of mechanical samplers 

(auto-samplers) as an additional method 

to obtain lot samples for aflatoxin 

analysis. All auto-samplers will need to 

be approved by and be subject to 

procedures and requirements 

established by the USDA Federal-State 

Inspection Service prior to their use. 

This rule will be in effect indefinitely 

until amended, suspended, or 

terminated, and was unanimously 

recommended by the Committee at its 

meeting held on August 19, 2013. 

Section 983.50 of the order provides 

authority for aflatoxin regulations that 

establish aflatoxin sampling, analysis, 

and inspection requirements applicable 

to pistachios to be shipped for human 

consumption in domestic and export 

markets. Aflatoxin regulations are 

currently in effect for pistachios 

shipped to domestic markets. 

Section 983.150 of the order’s rules 

and regulations contains specific 

requirements regarding sampling and 

testing of pistachios for aflatoxin. 

Paragraph (d)(1) of that section provides 

that a sample shall be drawn from each 

lot of pistachios and such samples shall 

meet specific weight requirements 

according to the size of the lot. 

The current method of collecting 

samples of pistachios to be tested 

requires hand sampling of static lots by, 

or under the supervision of, an 

inspector of the Federal-State Inspection 

Service (inspector). This process 

requires handler personnel to stage the 

lots to be sampled, which requires 

moving large containers around with a 

forklift. This process utilizes a 

considerable amount of time and 

warehouse space. Inspectors are then 

required to manually conduct the 

sampling by drawing samples from the 

containers, which is very labor 

intensive. Once the lot sample is 

collected, the inspector prepares test 

samples for aflatoxin analysis. 

Since the order’s promulgation in 

2004, the volume of open inshell 

pistachios processed annually has 

increased significantly, from 165 

million pounds to 385 million pounds 

in the 2012–13 production year. This 

change in volume has significantly 

increased the amount of warehouse 

space and handler labor needed to stage 

lots for sampling. It has also driven up 

the total labor costs associated with 

sampling, as the number of lots to be 

sampled has increased significantly. 

With the implementation of this rule, 

handlers will have the option of using 

mechanized sampling instead of manual 

sampling. Automatic samplers in 

handlers’ processing facilities will 

mechanically draw samples of 

pistachios as they are being processed. 

This will make the sampling process 

more efficient by eliminating the extra 

warehouse space and handler labor 

needed for staging static lots for 

sampling. In addition, the labor costs of 

manual sampling will be eliminated, 

further reducing handler costs. A 

discussion of the costs is included in 

the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

section of this document. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES