33010 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 116 /Wednesday, June 17, 1998 / Proposed Rules

t. Emergency Payment—emergency

includes hurricane, tornado, storm,

flood, high water, wind-driven water,

tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake,

volcanic eruption, landslide, mud slide,

snowstorm, drought, fire, explosion, or

other catastrophe which requires

Federal emergency assistance to

supplement State and local efforts to

save lives and property, and ensure

public health and safety.

u. Evaluated Receipts—contractually

designated use of the acceptance

document and the contract as the basis

for payment without requiring a

separate invoice.

v. Fast Payment—under the Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 13.3, the

Fast Payment procedure allows payment

under limited conditions to a vendor

prior to the Government’s verification

that supplies have been received and

accepted.

w. Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR)—the regulation that governs most

Federal acquisition and related payment

issues. Agencies may also have

supplements prescribing unique agency

policies.

x. Government Credit Card—

internationally accepted credit card

available to all Federal agencies under

a General Services Administration

contract for the purpose of making

simplified acquisitions of up to

$100,000.

y. Invoice—a bill, written document

or electronic transmission, provided by

a vendor requesting payment for

property received or services rendered.

A proper invoice must meet the

requirements of section 8.b of this

regulation. The term invoice can

include receiving reports and delivery

tickets contractually designated as

invoices.

z. Payment Date—the date on which

a check for payment is dated or the date

of an electronic fund transfer (EFT)

payment (settlement date).

aa. Receiving Office—the entity which

physically receives the goods or

services, may be separate from the

accepting entity.

bb. Receiving Report—written or

electronic evidence of receipt of goods

or services by a Government official.

Receiving reports must meet the

requirements of section 5.g. of this

regulation.

cc. Recurring Payments—Fixed

Amounts—payments for services of a

recurring nature, such as rents, building

maintenance, transportation services,

parking, leases, and maintenance for

equipment, pagers and cellular phones,

etc., which are performed under agencyvendor agreements providing for

payments of definite amounts at fixed

periodic intervals.

dd. Taxpayer Identification Number

(TIN)—nine digit Employer

Identification Number or Social Security

Number as defined in section 6109 of

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26

U.S.C. 6109).

ee. Utilities and Telephones—

contractual or non-contractual purchase

of electricity, water, sewage services,

telephone services, and natural gas.

Utilities can be regulated, unregulated,

or under contract.

ff. Vendor—any person, organization,

or business concern engaged in a

profession, trade, or business and any

not-for-profit entity operating as a

vendor (including State and local

governments and foreign entities and

foreign governments, but excluding

Federal entities).

19. Effective Dates

This regulation will be effective 30

days after final publication. For

payments under contracts or purchase

orders solicited on or after July 26, 1996,

the requirement to collect banking

information, for purposes of making an

EFT payment pursuant to 31 U.S.C.

3332, as amended, will be effective 30

days after final publication. For

payments under contracts or purchase

orders solicited before July 26, 1996, the

requirement to collect banking

information is effective January 2, 1999.

[FR Doc. 98–15397 Filed 6–16–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3110–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 981

[Docket No. FV98–981–1 PR]

Almonds Grown in California; Revision

of Requirements Regarding Quality

Control Program

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This rule invites comments

on a revision to the administrative rules

and regulations of the California almond

marketing order (order) pertaining to the

quality control program. The order

regulates the handling of almonds

grown in California, and is administered

locally by the Almond Board of

California (Board). Under the terms of

the order, handlers are required to

obtain inspection on almonds received

from growers to determine the percent

of inedible almonds in each lot of any

variety. Handlers are then required to

dispose of a quantity of almonds in

excess of 1 percent of the weight of

almonds reported as inedible to

accepted users of such product.

Accepted users are approved annually

by the Board. This rule would clarify

conditions upon which accepted users’

status may be denied or revoked by the

Board. This rule would help to ensure

that inedible almonds are removed from

human consumption channels, thereby

maintaining the integrity of the quality

control provisions of the order.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 17, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are

invited to submit written comments

concerning this proposal. Comments

must be sent to the Docket Clerk, Fruit

and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA,

room 2525–S, P.O. Box 96456,

Washington, DC 20090–6456; Fax: (202)

205–6632. All comments should

reference the docket number and the

date and page number of this issue of

the Federal Register and will be made

available for public inspection in the

Office of the Docket Clerk during regular

business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martin Engeler, Assistant Regional

Manager, California Marketing Field

Office, Marketing Order Administration

Branch, F&V, 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, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,

DC 20090–6456; telephone: (202) 690–

3919, Fax: (202) 205–6632. Small

businesses may request information on

compliance with this regulation by

contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, F&V, AMS,

USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box 96456,

Washington, DC 20090–6456; telephone:

(202) 720–2491, Fax: (202) 205–6632.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

proposal is issued under Marketing

Order No. 981, as amended (7 CFR part

981), regulating the handling of almonds

grown in California, hereinafter referred

to as the ‘‘order.’’ The marketing 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

(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
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 116 /Wednesday, June 17, 1998 / Proposed Rules 33011

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 date of the entry

of the ruling.

This proposal invites comments on

revisions to the administrative rules and

regulations pertaining to a quality

control program under the California

almond order. The proposal was

recommended unanimously by the

Board, and would clarify conditions

under which the Board could deny or

revoke the status of accepted users of

inedible almonds.

Section 981.42 of the order provides

authority for a quality control program.

Section 981.42(a) requires handlers to

obtain incoming inspection on almonds

received from growers to determine the

percent of inedible kernels in each lot

of any variety. Handlers are required to

report such inedible determination for

each lot received to the Board. Section

981.42(a) also provides authority for the

Board, with the approval of the

Secretary, to establish rules and

regulations necessary and incidental to

the administration of the order’s quality

control provisions.

Section 981.442 of the order’s

administrative rules and regulations

specifies that the weight of inedible

kernels in each lot of any variety of

almonds in excess of 1 percent of the

kernel weight received by a handler

shall constitute such handler’s inedible

disposition obligation. Handlers are

required to deliver inedible kernels

accumulated in the course of processing

to Board-approved accepted users of

such product in order to satisfy the

disposition obligation. Accepted users

then dispose of inedible kernels to nonhuman consumption outlets. Because

inedible kernels are considered unfit for

human consumption, requiring handlers

to meet this obligation helps to ensure

that each handler’s outgoing shipments

of almonds are relatively free of

almonds with serious damage, and the

number of kernels with minor damage

should be minimal.

Accepted users of inedible almonds

file an application with the Board

specifying certain terms and conditions

with which they will voluntarily abide.

The application also indicates they will

dispose of the inedible almonds

received from handlers in one or more

of the following manners: crushing into

oil, manufacturing into animal feed, or

feeding directly to animals. The Board

staff reviews and approves accepted

user applications on an annual basis.

Section 981.442(a)(7) of the rules and

regulations lists eligibility criteria for

accepted users. These criteria are

applied by the Board when reviewing

and approving accepted users. However,

the regulations do not specifically

address when the Board may deny or

revoke accepted user status. Situations

have occurred in the past wherein

accepted users have failed to completely

meet these conditions, and the Board

could not be assured the inedible

almonds were being disposed of in nonhuman consumption outlets.

The Board met on March 25, 1998,

and unanimously recommended adding

language to § 981.442(a)(7) of the

administrative rules and regulations

stating that an accepted user’s status

may be denied or revoked if the

eligibility requirements are not met or if

the terms and conditions agreed to in

the accepted user application are not

met. The Board recommended that this

change be made prior to August 1, 1998,

so that it could be made effective at the

beginning of the crop year, and to

coincide with the approval cycle for

accepted user applications.

This change would provide a clear

foundation of understanding between

the Board, handlers, and accepted users.

The proposal would assist in

maintaining the integrity of the Board’s

quality control program by providing

clear authority to deny or revoke

accepted user status. This would help to

ensure inedible almonds are properly

disposed of in non-human consumption

outlets, which is in the interest of

producers, handlers, and consumers.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

has considered the economic impact of

this action 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 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 97 handlers

of California almonds who are subject to

regulation under the order and

approximately 7,000 almond producers

in the regulated area. Small agricultural

service firms have been defined by the

Small Business Administration (13 CFR

121.601) as those having annual receipts

of less than $5,000,000, and small

agricultural producers are defined as

those having annual receipts of less than

$500,000.

Currently, about 58 percent of the

handlers ship under $5,000,000 worth

of almonds and 42 percent ship over

$5,000,000 worth on an annual basis. In

addition, based on acreage, production,

and grower prices reported by the

National Agricultural Statistics Service,

and the total number of almond

growers, the average annual grower

revenue is approximately $156,000. In

view of the foregoing, it can be

concluded that the majority of handlers

and producers of California almonds

may be classified as small entities.

There are currently 23 accepted users

of inedible almonds approved by the

Board. Accepted users may enter into a

voluntary agreement with the Board to

function as an outlet to which handlers

can ship inedible almonds to satisfy an

order obligation. While data concerning

these entities is limited, based on a

review of the quantity of inedible

almonds delivered to each entity, it is

believed that the majority may be

classified as small entities.

This proposal invites comments on

revisions to the quality control

provisions of the administrative rules

and regulations issued under the

California almond order. Under the

terms of the order, handlers are required

to obtain inspection on almonds

received from growers to determine the

percent of inedible almonds in each lot

of any variety. Handlers are then

required to dispose of a quantity of

almonds in excess of one percent of the

weight of almonds reported as inedible

to accepted users of such product.

Accepted users are approved annually

by the Board.

Section 981.442(a)(7) of the order’s

administrative rules and regulations

provides criteria which accepted users

must meet. This rule would revise this

section to specify that an accepted
33012 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 116 /Wednesday, June 17, 1998 / Proposed Rules

user’s status may be denied or revoked

if the criteria are not met. This rule

would help maintain the integrity of the

Board’s quality control program.

This proposed change is not expected

to impact handlers, other than to clarify

to them that accepted user’s status may

be denied or revoked. Handlers are

provided a listing of approved accepted

users so they know who they can

deliver inedible material to and receive

credit against their obligation. In the

event an application for accepted user

status is denied or an accepted user’s

status is revoked, handlers would be

notified by Board staff and provided an

updated listing.

This rule would only impact

applicants for accepted user status, or

accepted users in the sense that it would

clarify that accepted user status may be

denied or revoked if the terms and

conditions set forth in the rules and

regulations and the accepted user

application are not met. Accepted users

are approved entities to which handlers

may deliver inedible almonds and

receive credit against their inedible

disposition obligation. Accepted users

voluntarily agree to meet certain terms

and conditions so the Board may be

assured that inedible almonds do not

enter human consumption channels. If

these dealers in inedible almonds do not

agree to the terms and conditions, they

are not approved by the Board.

However, they may still operate in the

business, although handlers do not

receive credit against their inedible

disposition obligation if they deliver

product to such non-approved entities.

Situations have occurred in the past

wherein accepted users have failed to

completely meet these conditions, and

the Board could not be assured the

inedible almonds were being disposed

of in non-human consumption outlets.

One alternative to the proposal would

be to maintain the regulatory language

as it currently exists, in which case

there would be no clarification. Another

alternative would be to specify at length

all possible reasons for denying or

revoking an accepted user’s status. The

first alternative fails to address the

issue, and the second would require

unnecessary lengthy additions to

regulatory language, and may be

incomplete.

This proposed rule would not impose

any additional reporting or

recordkeeping requirements on either

small or large almond 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 accordance with the Paperwork

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

Chapter 35), the information collection

requirements that are contained in this

rule have been approved by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) and

have been assigned OMB No. 0581–

0071.

The Department has not identified

any relevant Federal rules that

duplicate, overlap or conflict with this

proposed rule.

In addition, the Board’s meeting was

widely publicized throughout the

almond industry and all interested

persons were invited to attend the

meeting and participate in Board

deliberations. Like all Board meetings,

the March 25, 1998, meeting was a

public meeting and all entities, both

large and small, were able to express

their views on this issue. The Board

itself is composed of ten members, of

which five are producers and five are

handlers.

Also, the Board has a number of

appointed committees to review certain

issues and make recommendations to

the Board. The Board’s Quality Control

Committee met on February 25, 1998,

and discussed this issue. That meeting

was also a public meeting and both large

and small entities were able to

participate and express their views.

Finally, interested persons are invited to

submit information on the regulatory

and informational impacts of this action

on small businesses.

A 30-day comment period is provided

to allow interested persons to respond

to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed

appropriate because this rule would

need to be in effect prior to the 1998–

99 crop year, which begins August 1,

1998. All written comments timely

received will be considered before a

final determination is made on this

matter.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981

Almonds, Marketing agreements,

Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 981 is proposed to

be amended as follows:

PART 981—ALMONDS GROWN IN

CALIFORNIA

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 981 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. Section 981.442 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (a)(7)(iv) to

read as follows:

§ 981.442 Quality Control.

(a) * * *

(7) * * *

(iv) The Board may deny or revoke

accepted user status at any time if the

applicant or accepted user fails to meet

the terms and conditions of § 981.442,

or if the applicant or accepted user fails

to meet the terms and conditions set

forth in the accepted user application

(ABC Form 34).

* * * * *

Dated: June 11, 1998.

Robert C. Keeney,

Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable

Programs.

[FR Doc. 98–16011 Filed 6–16–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

11 CFR Parts 9003 and 9033

[Notice 1998–11]

Electronic Filing of Reports by Publicly

Financed Presidential Primary and

General Election Candidates

AGENCY:Federal Election Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:The Federal Election

Commission requests comments on

proposed changes to its regulations to

address the electronic filing of reports

by publicly financed Presidential

primary and general election

candidates. The proposed rules would

specify that if Presidential candidates

and their authorized committees have

computerized their campaign finance

records, they must agree to participate

in the Commission’s recently

established electronic filing program as

a condition of voluntarily accepting

federal funding. These regulations

would implement the provisions of the

Presidential Election Campaign Fund

Act (‘‘Fund Act’’) and the Presidential

Primary Matching Payment Account Act

(‘‘Matching Payment Act’’), which

establish eligibility requirements for

Presidential candidates seeking public

financing, as well as Public Law 104–97,

which amended the reporting

provisions of the Federal Election

Campaign Act of 1971 (‘‘FECA’’). No

final decisions have been made by the

Commission on the proposed revisions

in this Notice. Further information is

provided in the supplementary

information which follows.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 17, 1998.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be

addressed to Ms. Susan E. Propper,

Assistant General Counsel, and must be

submitted in either written or electronic

form. Written comments should be sent