24536 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are amending the

regulations concerning overtime

services provided by employees of Plant

Protection and Quarantine by removing

and adding commuted traveltime

allowances for travel between various

locations in California and North

Carolina. Commuted traveltime

allowances are the periods of time

required for Plant Protection and

Quarantine employees to travel from

their dispatch points and return there

from the places where they perform

Sunday, holiday, or other overtime

duty. The Government charges a fee for

certain overtime services provided by

Plant Protection and Quarantine

employees and, under certain

circumstances, the fee may include the

cost of commuted traveltime. This

action is necessary to inform the public

of commuted traveltime for these

locations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 9, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Paul R. Eggert, Assistant to the Deputy

Administrator, Resource Management

Staff, PPQ, APHIS, Suite 4C03, 4700

River Road Unit 130, Riverdale, MD

20737–1236; (301) 734–7764.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The regulations in 7 CFR, chapter III,

and 9 CFR, chapter I, subchapter D,

require inspection, laboratory testing,

certification, or quarantine of certain

plants, plant products, animals, animal

byproducts, or other commodities

intended for importation into, or

exportation from, the United States.

When these services must be provided

by an employee of Plant Protection and

Quarantine (PPQ) on a Sunday or

holiday, or at any other time outside the

PPQ employee’s regular duty hours, the

Government charges a fee for the

services in accordance with 7 CFR part

354. Under circumstances described in

§ 354.1(a)(2), this fee may include the

cost of commuted traveltime. Section

354.2 contains administrative

instructions prescribing commuted

traveltime allowances, which reflect, as

nearly as practicable, the periods of time

required for PPQ employees to travel

from their dispatch points and return

there from the places where they

perform Sunday, holiday, or other

overtime duty.

We are amending § 354.2 of the

regulations by removing and adding

commuted traveltime allowances for

travel between various locations in

California and North Carolina. The

amendments are set forth in the rule

portion of this document. This action is

necessary to inform the public of the

commuted traveltime between the

dispatch and service locations.

Effective Date

The commuted traveltime allowances

appropriate for employees performing

services at ports of entry, and the

features of the reimbursement plan for

recovering the cost of furnishing port of

entry services, depend upon facts

within the knowledge of the Department

of Agriculture. It does not appear that

public participation in this rulemaking

proceeding would make additional

relevant information available to the

Department.

Accordingly, pursuant to the

administrative procedure provisions in

5 U.S.C. 553, we find upon good cause

that prior notice and other public

procedure with respect to this rule are

impracticable and unnecessary; we also

find good cause for making this rule

effective less than 30 days after

publication of this document in the

Federal Register.

Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory

Flexibility Act

This final rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12866. For this

action, the Office of Management and

Budget has waived its review process

required by Executive Order 12866.

The number of requests for overtime

services of a PPQ employee at the

locations affected by our rule represents

an insignificant portion of the total

number of requests for these services in

the United States.

Under these circumstances, the

Administrator of the Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12372

This program/activity is listed in the

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

under No. 10.025 and is subject to

Executive Order 12372, which requires

intergovernmental consultation with

State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part

3015, subpart V.)

Executive Order 12778

This final rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12778, Civil

Justice Reform. This rule is intended to

have preemptive effect with respect to

any State or local laws, regulations, or

policies that conflict with its provisions

or that would otherwise impede its full

implementation. This rule is not

intended to have retroactive effect.

There are no administrative procedures

that must be exhausted prior to any

judicial challenge to the provisions of

this rule or the application of its

provisions.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule contains no new

information collection or recordkeeping

requirements under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.).

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 354

Exports, Government employees,

Imports, Plant diseases and pests,

Quarantine, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Travel and

transportation expenses.

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 354 is

amended as follows:

PART 354—OVERTIME SERVICES

RELATING TO IMPORTS AND

EXPORTS; AND USER FEES

1. The authority citation for part 354

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2260; 21 U.S.C. 136

and 136a; 49 U.S.C. 1741; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51,

and 371.2(c).

2. Section 354.2 is amended by

removing or adding in the table, in

alphabetical order under California and

North Carolina, the following entries to

read as follows:

§ 354.2 Administrative instructions

prescribing commuted traveltime.

* * * * *
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 24537

COMMUTED TRAVELTIME ALLOWANCES

[In hours]

Location covered Served from

Metropolitan area

Within Outside

[Remove]

* * * * * * *

North Carolina:

Camp Lejeune .................................................................................................................. Kenansville or Kinston ....... ............... 3

Camp Lejeune .................................................................................................................. Wallace or Wilmington ....... ............... 3

* * * * * * *

New River MCAS ............................................................................................................. Kenansville ......................... ............... 3

New River MCAS ............................................................................................................. Wallace ............................... ............... 3

Pope AFB ......................................................................................................................... Fayetteville ......................... 11⁄4 ...............

Pope AFB ......................................................................................................................... Raeford ............................... ............... 2

* * * * * * *

[Add]

* * * * * * *

California:

March AFB ....................................................................................................................... Ontario ................................ ............... 3

* * * * * * *

North Carolina:

* * * * * * *

Camp Lejeune .................................................................................................................. Wilmington .......................... ............... 3

Morehead City .................................................................................................................. Clinton ................................ ............... 4

* * * * * * *

Pope AFB ......................................................................................................................... Clinton ................................ ............... 21⁄2

Pope AFB ......................................................................................................................... Fayetteville ......................... 11⁄2 ...............

Pope AFB ......................................................................................................................... Goldsboro ........................... ............... 4

* * * * * * *

Raleigh ............................................................................................................................. Fayetteville ......................... ............... 4

* * * * * * *

Done in Washington, DC, this 28th day of

April 1995.

Lonnie J. King,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 95–11295 Filed 5–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Parts 911 and 915

[FV95–911–1FIR]

Expenses and Assessment Rates for

Marketing Orders Covering Limes and

Avocados Grown in Florida

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Finalization of interim final

rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Agriculture (Department) is adopting as

a final rule, without change, the

provisions of the interim final rule

which authorized expenses and

established assessment rates for the

Florida Lime Administrative Committee

and the Avocado Administrative

Committee (Committees) under

Marketing Orders 911 and 915 for the

1995–96 fiscal year. Authorization of

these budgets enables the Committees to

incur expenses that are reasonable and

necessary to administer their respective

programs. Funds to administer these

programs are derived from assessments

on handlers.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective beginning

April 1, 1995, through March 31, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Britthany Beadle, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, F&V, AMS,

USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523–S,

Washington, DC 20090–6456; telephone

(202) 720–5331; or Aleck Jonas,

Southeast Marketing Field Office, Fruit

and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA,

P.O. Box 2276, Winter Haven, Florida

33883, telephone (813) 299–4770.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final

rule is issued under Marketing

Agreement and Order No. 911 [7 CFR

Part 911], as amended, regulating the

handling of limes grown in Florida; and

Marketing Agreement and Order No.

915 [7 CFR Part 915] regulating the

handling of avocados grown in Florida.

These agreements and orders are

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 is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This final rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12778, Civil

Justice Reform. Under the marketing

order provisions now in effect, limes

and avocados grown in Florida are
24538 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

subject to assessments. It is intended

that the assessment rates as issued

herein will be applicable to all

assessable Florida limes and avocados

handled during the 1995–96 fiscal year,

beginning April 1, 1995, through March

31, 1996. This interim final 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 in

equity to review the Secretary’s ruling

on the petition, provided a bill in equity

is filed not later than 20 days after date

of the entry of the ruling.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the

Administrator of the Agricultural

Marketing Service (AMS) has

considered the economic impact of this

rule on small entities.

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 45 handlers

of limes grown in Florida, and

approximately 40 producers in the

regulated area. Also, there are

approximately 65 handlers of avocados

grown in Florida, and approximately 95

producers in the regulated area. Small

agricultural producers have been

defined by the Small Business

Administration [13 CFR 121.601] as

those having annual receipts of less than

$500,000, and small agricultural service

firms are defined as those whose annual

receipts are less than $5,000,000. The

majority of lime and avocado producers

and handlers may be classified as small

entities.

The lime and avocado marketing

orders, administered by the Department,

require that the assessment rates for a

particular fiscal year apply to all

assessable limes and avocados handled

from the beginning of such year. Annual

budgets of expenses are prepared by the

Committees, the agencies responsible

for local administration of their

respective marketing orders, and

submitted to the Department for

approval. Each Committee consists of

producers, handlers and a non-industry

public member. They are familiar with

the Committees’ needs and with the

costs for goods, services, and personnel

in their local area and are thus in a

position to formulate appropriate

budgets. The Committees’ budgets are

formulated and discussed in public

meetings. Thus, all directly affected

persons have an opportunity to

participate and provide input.

The assessment rates recommended

by the Committees are derived by

dividing anticipated expenses by

expected shipments of limes and

avocados (in bushels). Because those

rates are applied to actual shipments,

they must be established at rates which

will produce sufficient income to pay

the Committees’ expected expenses. The

recommended budgets and rates of

assessment are usually acted upon by

the Committees shortly before a season

starts, and expenses are incurred on a

continuous basis. Therefore, the budget

and assessment rate approval must be

expedited so that the Committees will

have funds to pay their expenses.

The Florida Lime Administrative

Committee met on December 14, 1994,

and unanimously recommended 1995–

96 expenses of $92,270. In comparison,

the 1994–95 fiscal year expense amount

was $92,197, which is $73 less in

expenses than the amount

recommended for this fiscal year.

The Committee also unanimously

recommended an assessment rate of

$0.16 per 55-pound bushel of limes. The

1995–96 assessment rate remains

unchanged from the previous fiscal

year. Assessment income for 1995–96 is

estimated to total $64,000 based on

anticipated fresh domestic shipments of

400,000 bushels of limes. This, along

with $2,500 in interest income, and a

withdrawal of $25,770 from the

Committee’s reserve fund will be

adequate to cover estimated expenses.

Funds in the reserve at the end of the

1995–96 fiscal year are within the

maximum permitted by the order of

three fiscal years’ expenses.

Major budget categories for the 1995–

96 fiscal year are $34,000 for

administrative staff salaries, $10,000 for

research, $8,300 for compliance, and

$7,300 for employee benefits.

The Avocado Administrative

Committee also met on December 14,

1994, and unanimously recommended

1995–96 expenses of $107,570. In

comparison, 1994–95 fiscal year

expenses were $116,420, which is

$8,850 more than the $107,570

recommended for this fiscal year.

An assessment rate of $0.16 per 55-

pound bushel of avocados was also

unanimously recommended by the

Committee. The 1995–96 rate of

assessment remains the same as the

previous fiscal year. Assessment income

for 1995–96 is estimated to total

$112,000 based on anticipated fresh

domestic shipments of 700,000 bushels

of avocados. Assessment income, plus

an additional $1,500 in interest income

will provide sufficient funds to cover

budgeted expenses. The Committee

anticipates a reserve fund increase of

$5,930 because assessment income is

more than budgeted expenses. Funds in

the reserve at the end of the 1995–96

fiscal year are within the maximum

permitted by the order of three fiscal

years’ expenses.

Major budget categories for the 1995–

96 fiscal year are $34,000 for

administrative staff salaries, $15,600 for

compliance, $12,810 for insurance and

bonds, and $10,000 for research.

An interim final rule was issued on

February 8, 1995, and published in the

Federal Register [60 FR 8523; February

15, 1995] and provided a 30-day

comment period for interested persons.

No comments were received.

While this action will impose some

additional costs on handlers, the costs

are in the form of uniform assessments

on all handlers. Some of the additional

costs may be passed on to producers.

However, these costs will be offset by

the benefits derived from the operation

of the marketing orders. Therefore, the

Administrator of the AMS has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

It is found that the specified expenses

for the marketing orders covered in this

rule are reasonable and likely to be

incurred and that such expenses and the

specified assessment rates to cover such

expenses will tend to effectuate the

declared policy of the Act.

It is further found that good cause

exists for not postponing the effective

date of this action until 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register [5

U.S.C. 553] because the Committees

need to have sufficient funds to pay

their expenses which are incurred on a

continuous basis. The 1995–96 fiscal

year for the programs began April 1,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 9, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 24539

1995. The marketing orders require that

the rates of assessment apply to all

assessable limes and avocados handled

during the fiscal year. In addition,

handlers are aware of this action which

was recommended by the Committees at

public meetings and published in the

Federal Register as an interim final rule.

No comments were received concerning

the interim final rule that is adopted in

this action as a final rule without

change.

List of Subjects

7 CFR Part 911

Limes, Marketing agreements,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

7 CFR Part 915

Avocados, Marketing agreements,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR parts 911 and 915 are

amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for both 7

CFR parts 911 and 915 continues to read

as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

PART 911—LIMES GROWN IN

FLORIDA

Accordingly, the interim final rule

amending 7 CFR part 911 which was

published at 60 FR 8523 on February 15,

1995, is adopted as a final rule without

change.

PART 915—AVOCADOS GROWN IN

SOUTH FLORIDA

Accordingly, the interim final rule

amending 7 CFR part 915 which was

published at 60 FR 8523 on February 15,

1995, is adopted as a final rule without

change.

Dated: May 3, 1995.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 95–11307 Filed 5–8–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 958

[Docket No. FV95–958–1IFR]

Idaho-Eastern Oregon Onions;

Expenses and Assessment Rate

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Interim final rule with request

for comments.

SUMMARY: This interim final rule

authorizes expenditures of $1,111,447

and establishes an assessment rate of

$0.10 per hundredweight of onions

under Marketing Order No. 958 for the

1995–96 fiscal period. Authorization of

this budget enables the Idaho-Eastern

Oregon Onion Committee (Committee)

to incur expenses that are reasonable

and necessary to administer the

program. Funds to administer this

program are derived from assessments

on handlers.

DATES: Effective July 1, 1995, through

June 30, 1996. Comments received by

June 8, 1995, will be considered prior to

issuance of a final rule.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are

invited to submit written comments

concerning this action. Comments must

be sent in triplicate to the Docket Clerk,

Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS,

USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523–S,

Washington, DC 20090–6456, FAX 202–

720–5698. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martha Sue Clark, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O.

Box 96456, room 2523–S, Washington,

DC 20090–6456, telephone number 202–

720–9918, or Robert J. Curry, Northwest

Marketing Field Office, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, GreenWyatt Federal Building, room 369, 1220

Southwest Third Avenue, Portland, OR

97204, telephone number 503–326–

2724.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

No. 130 and Marketing Order No. 958,

both as amended (7 CFR part 958),

regulating the handling of onions grown

in designated counties in Idaho, and

Malheur County, Oregon. The marketing

agreement and order are effective under

the Agricultural Marketing Agreement

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

674), hereinafter referred to as the Act.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture

(Department) is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This interim final rule has been

reviewed under Executive Order 12778,

Civil Justice Reform. Under the

marketing order now in effect IdahoEastern Oregon onions are subject to

assessments. Funds to administer the

Idaho-Eastern Oregon onion marketing

order are derived from such

assessments. It is intended that the

assessment rate as issued herein will be

applicable to all assessable onions

during the 1995–96 fiscal period which

begins July 1, 1995, and ends June 30,

1996. This interim final 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 8c(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. Such

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 in

equity to review the Secretary’s ruling

on the petition, provided a bill in equity

is filed not later than 20 days after the

date of the entry of the ruling.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the

Administrator of the Agricultural

Marketing Service (AMS) has

considered the economic impact of this

rule on small entities.

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 450

producers of Idaho-Eastern Oregon

onions under the marketing order and

approximately 35 handlers. Small

agricultural producers have been

defined by the Small Business

Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as

those having annual receipts of less than

$500,000, and small agricultural service

firms are defined as those whose annual

receipts are less than $5,000,000. The

majority of Idaho-Eastern Oregon onion

producers and handlers may be

classified as small entities.

The budget of expenses for the 1995–

96 fiscal period was prepared by the

Idaho-Eastern Oregon Onion Committee,

the agency responsible for local

administration of the marketing order,

and submitted to the Department for

approval. The members of the

Committee are producers and handlers