20058 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

assessment rate is not increased from

the 1997 fiscal year assessment rate of

$14.99, funds will fall approximately

$467,481 short of 1998 fiscal year

budgeted expenses.

A review of historical and preliminary

information pertaining to the current

crop year indicates that the grower

prices for the 1997–98 crop year could

range from $150 to $825 per ton of

olives for canning sizes. Therefore, the

estimated assessment revenue for the

1998 fiscal year as a percentage of total

grower revenue could range between

11.4 and 2 percent, respectively. If the

prices for canning sizes average about

$500 per ton during the 1997–98 crop

year, the estimated assessment revenue

for the 1998 fiscal year as a percentage

of total grower revenue will be about 3

percent.

This action increases the assessment

obligation imposed on handlers. While

assessments impose some additional

costs on handlers, the costs are minimal

and uniform on all handlers. Some of

the additional costs may be passed on

to producers. However, these costs will

be offset by the benefits derived by the

operation of the marketing order. In

addition, the Committee’s meeting was

widely publicized throughout the

California olive industry and all

interested persons were invited to

attend the meeting and participate in

Committee deliberations on all issues.

Like all Committee meetings, the

December 11, 1997, meeting was a

public meeting and all entities, both

large and small, were able to express

views on this issue. In addition, all four

regulated handlers are equally

represented on the Committee and voted

unanimously in favor of the assessment

increase. Finally, interested persons

were invited to submit information on

the regulatory and information impacts

of this rule on small entities.

This rule imposes no additional

reporting or recordkeeping requirements

on California olive handlers, none of

which are small entities. 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.

The Department has not identified

any relevant Federal rules that

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this

rule.

A proposed rule concerning this

action was published in the Federal

Register on February 17, 1998 (63 FR

7732). Copies of the proposed rule were

also mailed or sent via facsimile to all

olive handlers. Finally, the proposal

was made available through the Internet

by the Office of the Federal Register.

A 30-day comment period ending

March 19, 1998, was provided for

interested persons to respond to the

proposal. No comments were received

in response to the proposal.

After consideration of all relevant

material 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.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it also found

and determined that good cause exists

for not postponing the effective date of

this rule until 30 days after publication

in the Federal Register because the

marketing order requires that the rate of

assessment for each fiscal period apply

to all assessable olives handled during

such period. The fiscal year under the

order covers the period January 1

through December 31. Further, handlers

are aware of this rule which was

recommended at a public meeting. Also,

a 30-day comment period was provided

in the proposed rule, and no comments

were received.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932

Marketing agreements, Olives,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is amended as

follows:

PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN

CALIFORNIA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 932 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. Section 932.230 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 932.230 Assessment rate.

On and after January 1, 1998, an

assessment rate of $17.10 per ton is

established for assessable olives grown

in California.

Dated: April 9, 1998.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 98–10772 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–22–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 993

[Docket No. FV98–993–1 FR]

Dried Prunes Produced in California;

Undersized Regulation for the 1998–99

Crop Year

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule changes the

undersized regulation for dried prunes

received by handlers from producers

and dehydrators under Marketing Order

No. 993 for the 1998–99 crop year. The

marketing order regulates the handling

of dried prunes produced in California

and is administered locally by the Prune

Marketing Committee (Committee). This

rule removes the smallest, least

desirable of the marketable size dried

prunes produced in California from

human consumption outlets, and allows

handlers to dispose of undersized

prunes in such outlets as livestock feed.

The Committee estimated that this rule

will reduce the calculated excess of

about 78,000 tons of dried prunes

expected at the end of the 1997–98 crop

year by approximately 7,300 tons,

leaving sufficient prunes to fulfill

foreign and domestic trade demand.

EFFECTIVE DATES: August 1, 1998,

through July 31, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard P. Van Diest, Marketing

Specialist, California Marketing Field

Office, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,

AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street,

suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721;

telephone: (209) 487–5901, Fax: (209)

487–5906; or George Kelhart, Technical

Advisor, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room

2525–S, PO Box 96456, Washington, DC

20090–6456; telephone: (202) 720–2491,

Fax: (202) 205–6632. Small businesses

may request information on compliance

with this regulation by contacting Jay

Guerber, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room

2525–S, PO Box 96456, Washington, DC

20090–6456; telephone: (202) 720–2491,

Fax: (202) 205–6632.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

and Order No. 993, both as amended (7

CFR part 993), regulating the handling

of dried prunes produced in California,

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘order.’’

The marketing agreement and order are
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 20059

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

(Department) is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule is not intended to

have retroactive effect. This rule will

not preempt any State or local laws,

regulations, or policies, unless they

present an irreconcilable conflict with

this rule.

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 the Secretary 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 the Secretary 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 the Secretary’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 adds § 993.405 to Subpart—

Undersized Prune Regulation (7 CFR

part 993.400) to implement changes to

the undersized regulation currently in

effect for French prunes which pass

freely through a screen opening from

23⁄32 to 24⁄32 of an inch in diameter and

for non-French prunes from 28⁄32 to 30⁄32

of an inch in diameter for the 1998–99

crop year for volume control purposes.

This rule removes the smallest, least

desirable of the marketable size dried

prunes produced in California from

human consumption outlets. The rule

will be in effect from August 1, 1998,

through July 31, 1999, and was

unanimously recommended by the

Committee at a November 18, 1997,

meeting.

Section 993.19b of the prune

marketing order defines undersized

prunes as prunes which pass freely

through a round opening of a specified

diameter. Since August 1, 1982, the

undersized dried prune regulation

specified in § 993.49(c) of the prune

marketing order has been 23⁄32 of an inch

for French prunes and 28⁄32 of an inch

for non-French prunes. These diameter

openings have been in effect

continuously for quality control

purposes. Section 993.49(c) also

provides that the Secretary, upon a

recommendation of the Committee, may

establish larger openings for undersized

dried prunes whenever it is determined

that supply conditions for a crop year

warrant such regulation.

Section 993.50(g) states in part: ‘‘No

handler shall ship or otherwise dispose

of, for human consumption, the quantity

of prunes determined by the inspection

service pursuant to § 993.49(c) to be

undersized prunes * * *’’ Pursuant to

§ 993.52, minimum standards, pack

specifications, including the openings

prescribed in § 993.49(c), may be

modified by the Secretary, on the basis

of a recommendation of the Committee

or other information.

Pursuant to the authority in § 993.52

of the order, § 993.400 modifies the

undersized openings prescribed in

§ 993.49(c) to permit undersized

regulations using openings of 23⁄32 or 24⁄32 of an inch for French prunes, and 28⁄32 or 30⁄32 of an inch for non-French

prunes.

During the 1974–75 and 1977–78 crop

years, the undersized prune regulation

was established by the Department at

23⁄32 of an inch in diameter for French

prunes and 28⁄32 of an inch in diameter

for non-French prunes. These diameter

openings were established in §§ 993.401

and 993.404, respectively (39 FR 32733,

September 11, 1974; and 42 FR 49802,

September 28, 1977). During the 1975–

76 and 1976–77 crop years, the

undersized prune regulation was

established at 24⁄32 of an inch for French

prunes, and 30⁄32 of an inch for nonFrench prunes. These diameter

openings were established in §§ 993.402

and 993.403 respectively (40 FR 42530,

September 15, 1975; and 41 FR 37306,

September 3, 1976). The prune industry

had an excess supply of prunes,

particularly small-sized prunes. Rather

than recommending volume regulation

percentages for the 1975–76, 1976–77

and 1977–78 crop years, the Committee

recommended the establishment of an

undersized prune regulation applicable

to all prunes received by handlers from

producers and dehydrators during each

of those crop years. For the 1974–75

crop year, the Committee recommended

and the Department established volume

regulation percentages and an

undersized regulation at the

aforementioned 23⁄32 and 28⁄32 inch

diameter screen sizes.

The objective of the undersized

regulations during each of those crop

years was to preclude the use of these

small prunes in manufactured prune

products, such as juice and concentrate.

Handlers could not market undersized

prunes for human consumption, but

could dispose of them in nonhuman

outlets such as livestock feed.

With these experiences as a basis, the

marketing order was amended on

August 1, 1982, establishing the

continuing quality-related regulation for

undersized French and non-French

prunes under § 993.49(c). That

regulation has removed from the

marketable supply those prunes which

are not desirable for use in prune

products.

As in the 1970’s, the prune industry

is currently experiencing an excess

supply of prunes, particularly in the

smaller sizes. At its meeting on

November 18, 1997, the Committee

unanimously recommended establishing

an undersized prune regulation at 24⁄32

of an inch in diameter for French prunes

and 30⁄32 of an inch in diameter for nonFrench prunes for volume control

purposes for the 1998–99 crop year.

That crop year begins August 1, 1998,

and ends July 31, 1999.

The Committee estimated that this

rule will reduce the calculated excess of

about 78,000 natural condition tons of

dried prunes as of July 31, 1998, by

approximately 7,300 natural condition

tons, still leaving sufficient prunes to

fill domestic and foreign trade demand

during the 1998–99 crop year, and

provide an adequate carry-out on July

31, 1999, for early season shipments

until the new crop is available for

shipment. According to the Committee,

the desired inventory level to keep trade

distribution channels full while

awaiting the new crop is almost 41,000

natural condition tons.

In its deliberations, the Committee

reviewed statistics reflecting: (1) A

worldwide prune demand which has

been relatively stable at about 260,000

tons; (2) a worldwide oversupply that is

expected to continue growing into the

next century (estimated at 387,170

natural condition tons by the year 2001);

(3) a continuing oversupply situation in

California caused by increased

production from additional plantings

and higher yields per acre (between the

1993–94 and 1996–97 crop years, the

yield ranged from 2.3 to 2.8 versus a 10

year average of 2.2 tons per acre); and

(4) a worsening of California’s excess

supply situation, even though dried

prune shipments in 1996–97 reached a

near-record high of 183,252 packed

tons. The Committee also considered

the quantity of ‘‘D’’ screen (24⁄32 of an

inch in diameter for French prunes and

30⁄32 of an inch in diameter for nonFrench prunes) prunes produced during

the 1990–91 through 1996–97 crop

years. The production of these small

sizes ranged from 2,575 to 8,778 natural
20060 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

condition tons during that period. The

Committee concluded that it had to

utilize supply management techniques

to accelerate the return to a balanced

supply/demand situation in the interest

of California dried prune producers and

handlers. The changes to the undersized

regulation for the 1998–99 crop year are

the result of these deliberations, and the

Committee’s desire to bring supplies

more in line with market needs.

The current oversupply situation

facing the California prune industry has

been caused by four consecutive large

crops of over 180,000 natural condition

tons. Another large crop of 215,000

natural condition tons is forecast for the

1997–98 crop year, which will add to

the existing oversupply. The yield per

acre is forecast at 2.6 tons per acre. With

an anticipated increase in bearing

acreage, the 1998–99 season crop could

be larger.

Because of the oversupply situation,

producer prices for undersized prunes

during the 1997–98 crop year have

declined to $40–50 per ton. This

represents a loss to the producer of

about $260–270 per ton. The lower

pricing of the smaller prunes is

expected to provide producers an

incentive to produce larger sizes which

the industry needs to meet the

increasing market demand for pitted

prunes. However, the Committee felt

that the undersized rule change was

needed to expedite the reduction of the

inventories of small prunes, and more

quickly bring supplies in line with

needs. Attainment of this goal will

benefit all of the producers and handlers

of California prunes.

The recommended decision of June 1,

1981 (46 FR 29271) regarding

undersized prunes states that the

undersized prune regulation at the 23⁄32

and 28⁄32 inch diameter size openings

would be continuous for the purposes of

quality control even in above parity

situations. It further states that any

change (i.e., increase) in the size of

those openings would not be for the

purpose of establishing a new qualityrelated minimum. Larger openings

would only be applicable when supply

conditions warranted the regulation of a

larger quantity of prunes as undersized

prunes. Thus, any regulation prescribing

openings larger than those in § 993.49(c)

should not be implemented when the

grower average price is expected to be

above parity. As discussed later, the

average grower price for prunes during

the 1998–99 crop year is not expected

to be above parity, and implementation

of this more restrictive undersized

regulation will be appropriate as far as

parity is concerned.

Section 8e of the Act requires that

when certain domestically produced

commodities, including prunes, are

regulated under a Federal marketing

order, imports of that commodity must

meet the same or comparable grade,

size, quality, or maturity requirements

for the domestically produced

commodity. This action does not impact

the dried prune import regulation

because the action to be implemented is

for volume control, not quality control,

purposes. The smaller diameter

openings of 23⁄32 of an inch for French

prunes and 28⁄32 of an inch for nonFrench prunes were implemented for

the purpose of improving product

quality. The increases to 24⁄32 of an inch

in diameter for French prunes and 30⁄32

of an inch in diameter for non-French

prunes are for purposes of volume

control. Therefore, the increased

diameters will not be applied to

imported prunes.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

has considered the economic impact of

this rule on small entities. Accordingly,

AMS has prepared this final regulatory

flexibility analysis.

The purpose of the RFA is to fit

regulatory actions to the scale of

business subject to such actions in order

that small businesses will not be unduly

or disproportionately burdened.

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are

unique in that they are brought about

through group action of essentially

small entities acting on their own

behalf. Thus, both statutes have small

entity orientation and compatibility.

There are approximately 1,400

producers of dried prunes in the

production area and approximately 21

handlers subject to regulation under the

marketing order. Small agricultural

producers have been defined by the

Small Business Administration (13 CFR

121.601) as those having annual receipts

less than $500,000, and small

agricultural service firms are defined as

those whose annual receipts are less

than $5,000,000.

Last year, as a percentage, about 34

percent of the handlers shipped over

$5,000,000 worth of dried prunes and

66 percent of the handlers shipped

under $5,000,000 worth of prunes. In

addition, based on production, producer

prices, and the total number of dried

prune producers provided by the

Committee, the average annual producer

revenue is approximately $136,000. The

majority of handlers and producers of

California dried prunes may be

classified as small entities.

This rule will establish an undersized

prune regulation of 24⁄32 of an inch in

diameter for French prunes and 30⁄32 of

an inch in diameter for non-French

prunes for the 1998–99 crop year for

volume control purposes. This change

in regulation will result in more of the

smaller sized prunes being classified as

undersized prunes, and is expected to

benefit producers, handlers, and

consumers. The prune industry

currently uses a ‘‘D’’ screen (24⁄32 of an

inch in diameter for French prunes and

30⁄32 of an inch in diameter for nonFrench prunes) for separating small

prunes from the larger sizes. Thus

producers and handlers, both small and

large, will not incur extra costs from

having to purchase new screen sizes.

Moreover, because the quality related

undersized regulation has been in place

continuously since the early 1980’s, the

only additional cost resulting from the

increased openings will be the disposal

of additional undersized prune tonnage

(about 7,300 natural condition tons,

based on a 3-year average) to nonhuman

consumption outlets as required by the

order. This will be in addition to the

5,019 natural condition tons (or 2.86

percent of the marketable production)

that has been removed on average over

the past seven crop years since 1990–91.

Since the benefits and costs of this

action will be directly proportional to

the quantity of ‘‘D’’ screen prunes

produced or handled, small businesses

should not be disproportionately

affected by the action. Sugar content,

prune density, and dry-away ratio vary

from county to county, from orchard to

orchard, and from season to season in

the major producing areas of the

Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys.

These areas account for over 99 percent

of the State’s production, and the

prunes produced are homogeneous

enough so that this rule will not be

inequitable to producers, both large and

small, in any area of the State.

The quantity of small prunes in a lot

is not dependent on whether a producer

or handler is small or large, but is

primarily dependant on cultural

practices, soil composition, and water

costs. The cost to minimize the quantity

of small prunes is similar for small and

large entities. The anticipated benefits

of this rule are not expected to be

disproportionately greater or lesser for

small handlers or producers than for

larger entities. While this rule may

initially impose some additional costs

on producers and handlers, the costs are

expected to be minimal, and will be

offset by the benefits derived by the

elimination of some of the excess

supply of small-sized prunes.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 20061

At the November 18, 1997, meeting,

the Committee discussed the impact of

this change on handlers and producers

in terms of cost. Handlers and producers

receive higher returns for the larger size

prunes. According to industry members,

the small-sized prunes being eliminated

through this rule have very little value.

As mentioned earlier, the current

situation for these small sizes is quite

bleak, as producers lose money on every

ton delivered to handlers. The 1997

grower field price for ‘‘D’’ screen prunes

ranges between $40 and $50 per ton.

The cost of drying a ton of such prunes

is $260 per ton at a 4 to 1 dry-away

ratio, the cost to haul these prunes is at

least $20 per ton, and the producer

assessment that must be paid to the

California Prune Board (a body which

administers the State marketing order

for promotion and research) is $30 per

ton. The total cost is about $310 per ton

which equates to a loss of about $260

per ton for every ton of ‘‘D’’ screen

prunes produced and delivered to

handlers.

The rule is expected to benefit all

producers and handlers by eliminating

the smallest, least valuable prunes from

the crop. This is expected to help

reduce the oversupply situation and

lessen the downward pressure on small

prune prices to producers. Further,

producers may alter their cultural

practices to grow the larger sizes needed

by the industry to meet the market

demand for pitted prunes.

Utilizing data provided by the

Committee, the Department has

evaluated the impact of the undersized

regulation change upon producers and

handlers in the industry. The analysis

shows that a reduction in the

marketable production and carryin

inventory will result in higher seasonaverage prices which will benefit all

producers. The removal of the smallest,

least desirable of the marketable dried

prunes produced in California from

human consumption outlets will

eliminate an estimated 7,300 tons of

small-sized dried prunes during the

1998–99 crop year from the

marketplace. This will help lessen the

negative marketing and pricing effects

resulting from the excess supply

situation facing the industry. California

prune handlers reported that they held

102,386 tons of natural condition

prunes on July 31, 1997, the end of the

1996–97 crop year. This was the largest

year-end inventory reported since the

Committee began collecting such

statistics in 1949. The desired inventory

level, which is based on an average 12-

week supply deemed desirable to keep

trade distribution channels full while

awaiting new crop, is 40,991 natural

condition tons. This leaves an inventory

surplus of over 61,000 tons which will

likely take the industry several years to

market.

Further burdening this oversupply

situation will be larger California prune

crops over the next few years caused by

the new prune plantings of recent years

and higher yields per acre. During the

1990–91 crop year, the non-bearing

acreage totaled 5,900 acres; but by

1996–97, the non-bearing acreage had

quadrupled to more than 23,000 acres.

Yields have ranged from 2.3 to 2.8 tons

per acre over the most recent 3-year

period, compared to a 10-year average of

2.2 tons to the acre. The 1997–98 crop

is expected to be 215,000 natural

condition tons which will add to the

existing oversupply. Barring unforeseen

circumstances, the 1998–99 crop may be

larger which will further worsen the

industry’s oversupply problems.

As the marketable dried prune

production and surplus prune

inventories are reduced through this

action, the trade may begin taking a

position early in the season for its dried

prune needs, which will help firm up

market prices and eventually reflect a

higher overall price to the producers. In

addition, as producers implement

improved cultural and thinning

practices, the overall size of the prunes

will get larger. As a result, producer

returns will increase because producers

will no longer be receiving $40–50 per

ton for the small-sized fruit at a $260–

270 per ton loss, but will receive the

higher prices paid for the larger sizes.

For the 1992–93 through the 1996–97

crop years, the season-average price

received by the producers ranged from

a high of $1,121 per ton to a low of $838

per ton during the 1996–97 crop year.

The season-average price received by

producers averaged about 60 percent of

parity during the 1992–93 through

1996–97 crop years. Based on available

data and estimates of prices, production,

and other economic factors, the seasonaverage producer price for the 1997–98

and 1998–99 seasons is expected to be

below $800 per ton, or about 40 percent

of parity.

The Committee discussed alternatives

to this change, including making no

changes to the undersized prune

regulation and allowing market

dynamics to foster prune inventory

adjustments through lower prices on the

smaller prunes. While reduced grower

prices for small prunes are expected to

contribute toward a slow reduction in

dried prune inventories, the Committee

believed that the undersized rule change

was needed to expedite that reduction.

With the excess tonnage of dried

prunes, the Committee also considered

establishing a reserve pool and

diversion program to reduce the

oversupply situation. These initiatives

were not supported because they would

not specifically eliminate the smallest,

least valuable prunes which are in

oversupply. Instead the reserve pool and

diversion program would eliminate

larger size prunes from human

consumption outlets. Reserve pools for

prunes have historically been

implemented on dried prunes regardless

of the size of the prunes. While the

marketing order also allows handlers to

remove the larger prunes from the pool

by replacing them with small prunes

and cash to reflect the difference in

value, this exchange would be

cumbersome and expensive to

administer compared to this rule.

Section 8e of the Act requires that

when certain domestically produced

commodities, including prunes, are

regulated under a Federal marketing

order, imports of that commodity must

meet the same or comparable grade,

size, quality, or maturity requirements

for the domestically produced

commodity. This action does not impact

the dried prune import regulation

because the action to be implemented is

for volume control, not quality control,

purposes. The smaller diameter

openings of 23/32 of an inch for French

prunes and 28/32 of an inch for nonFrench prunes were implemented for

the purpose of improving product

quality. The increases to 24/32 of an

inch in diameter for French prunes and

30/32 of an inch in diameter for nonFrench prunes are for purposes of

volume control. Therefore, the increased

diameters will not be applied to

imported prunes.

This action will not impose any

additional reporting or recordkeeping

requirements on either small or large

California dried prune 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.

The Department has not identified

any relevant Federal rules that

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this

rule.

In addition, the Committee’s meeting

was widely publicized throughout the

prune industry and all interested

persons were invited to attend the

meeting and participate in Committee

deliberations on all issues. Like all

Committee meetings, the November 18,

1997, meeting was a public meeting and

all entities, both large and small, were

able to express views on this issue. The

Committee itself is composed of 22
20062 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 78 /Thursday, April 23, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

members, of which 7 are handlers, 14

are producers, and 1 is a public

member. The majority of the producer

and handler members are small entities.

Moreover, the Committee and its Supply

Management Subcommittee have been

reviewing this supply management

problem for almost a year, and this rule

reflects their deliberations completely.

Finally, interested persons were invited

to submit information on the regulatory

and informational impacts of this action

on small businesses.

A proposed rule concerning this

action was published in the Federal

Register on February 24, 1998 (63 FR

9160). Copies of this rule were mailed

or sent via facsimile to all Committee

members and dried prune handlers.

Finally, the rule was made available

through the Internet by the U.S.

Government Printing Office. That rule

provided for a 30-day comment period

which ended March 26, 1998. No

comments were received. Accordingly,

no changes are made to the proposed

rule.

After consideration of all relevant

material presented, including the

Committee’s recommendation, and

other information, it is hereby found

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth,

will tend to effectuate the declared

policy of the Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 993

Marketing agreements, Plums, Prunes,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 993 is amended as

follows:

PART 993—DRIED PRUNES

PRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 993 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. A new § 993.405 is added to read

as follows:

Note: This section will not appear in the

Code of Federal Regulations.

§ 993.405 Undersized prune regulation for

the 1998–99 crop year.

Pursuant to §§ 993.49(c) and 993.52,

an undersized prune regulation for the

1998–99 crop year is hereby established.

Undersized prunes are prunes which

pass through openings as follows: for

French prunes, 24/32 of an inch in

diameter; for non-French prunes, 30/32

of an inch in diameter.

Dated: April 9, 1998.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 98–10771 Filed 4–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–125–AD; Amendment

39–10492; AD 98–08–09]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed

Model L–1011–385 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This document publishes in

the Federal Register an amendment

adopting Airworthiness Directive (AD)

98–08–09 that was sent previously to all

known U.S. owners and operators of

certain Lockheed Model L–1011–385

series airplanes by individual notices.

This AD requires revision of the

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to

prohibit operation of the fuel boost

pumps when fuel quantities are below

certain levels, and to add new

maintenance procedures for operating

the airplane with an inoperative fuel

boost pump assembly or with an

inoperative flight station fuel quantity

indicating system. This AD also requires

the installation of a placard on the

engineer’s fuel panel to advise the

maintenance crew that operation of the

fuel boost pumps when less than 1,200

pounds of fuel are in the corresponding

wing fuel tank is prohibited. This action

is prompted by reports of internal

electrical failures in the fuel boost pump

of the wing fuel tanks that could result

in either electrical arcing or localized

overheating. The actions specified by

this AD are intended to prevent such

electrical arcing or overheating, which

could breech the protective housing of

the fuel boost pump and expose it to

fuel vapors and fumes, and consequent

potential fire or explosion in the wing

fuel tank.

DATES: Effective April 28, 1998, to all

persons except those persons to whom

it was made immediately effective by

emergency AD 98–08–09, issued April

3, 1998, which contained the

requirements of this amendment.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

June 22, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–NM–

125–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Peters, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE–

116A, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office,

One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix

Boulevard, suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia

30349; telephone (770) 703–6063; fax

(770) 703–6097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April

3, 1998, the FAA issued emergency AD

98–08–09, which is applicable to certain

Lockheed Model L–1011–385 series

airplanes.

The FAA has received reports of

internal electrical failures in the fuel

boost pump of the wing fuel tanks that

could result in either electrical arcing or

localized overheating. Such electrical

arcing or overheating could burn a hole

in the pump housing and the protective

housing of the fuel boost pump. If

electrical arcing or overheating breeches

the protective housing and the fuel in

the wing fuel tank is at a sufficient level,

the liquid fuel would prevent

combustion. However, if electrical

arcing or overheating breeches the

protective housing of the fuel boost

pump and the fuel level of the wing

tank is low enough to expose the

protective housing to fuel vapors and

fumes, a potential fire or explosion

could occur. The on-going investigation

of the internal electrical failures has not

revealed the cause of the failures as yet.

Explanation of Requirements of the

Rule

Since the unsafe condition described

is likely to exist or develop on other

airplanes of the same type design, the

FAA issued emergency AD 98–08–09 to

prevent a potential fire or explosion in

the wing fuel tank due to exposure of

the fuel boost pump to fuel vapors and

fumes. The AD requires revision of the

Limitations and Procedures Sections of

the FAA-approved Airplane Flight

Manual (AFM) to prohibit operation of

the fuel boost pumps when fuel

quantities are below certain levels, and

to add new maintenance procedures for

operating the airplane with an

inoperative fuel boost pump assembly

or with an inoperative flight station fuel

quantity indicating system (FQIS). The