27682 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

of members of the group as they relate

to measures taken in connection with

the importation of the regulated article

to mitigate the plant pest risk associated

with the regulated article. For example,

if the plant pest risk assessment for the

highest ranked plant pest indicates a

need for a mitigation measure that

would result in the same reduction of

risk for other plant pests ranked in the

group, the other members need not be

subjected to individual plant pest risk

assessment.

(d) Conducting individual plant pest

risk assessments. APHIS will evaluate

each of the plant pests identified in

paragraph (c)(4) of this section by:

(1) Estimation of the probability of the

plant pest being on, with, or in the

regulated article at the time of

importation;

(2) Estimation of the probability of the

plant pest surviving in transit on the

regulated article and entering the United

States undetected;

(3) Estimation of the probability of the

plant pest colonizing once it has entered

into the United States;

(4) Estimation of the probability of the

plant pest spreading beyond any

colonized area; and

(5) Estimation of the damage to plants

that could be expected upon

introduction and dissemination within

the United States of the plant pest.

(e) Estimating unmitigated overall

plant pest risk. APHIS will develop an

estimation of the overall plant pest risk

associated with importing the regulated

article based on compilation of

individual plant pest risk assessments

performed in accordance with

paragraph (d) of this section.

(f) Evaluating available requirements

to determine whether they would allow

safe importation of the regulated article.

The requirements of this subpart, and

any other requirements relevant to the

regulated article and plant pests

involved, will be compared with the

individual plant pest risk assessments

in order to determine whether particular

conditions on the importation of the

regulated article would reduce the plant

pest risk to an insignificant level. If

APHIS determines that the imposition

of particular conditions on the

importation of the regulated article

could reduce the plant pest risk to an

insignificant level, and determines that

sufficient APHIS resources are available

to implement or ensure implementation

of the conditions, APHIS will

implement rulemaking to allow

importation of the requested regulated

article under the conditions identified

by the plant pest risk assessment

process.

Subpart—Packing Materials

§ 319.69 [Amended]

8. The introductory text to § 319.69 is

removed.

9. In § 319.69, paragraph (a), the

phrase ‘‘On and after July 1, 1933, the’’

is removed and the word ‘‘The’’ is

added in its place.

10. In § 319.69, paragraph (b), the

phrase ‘‘On and after June 8, 1953, the’’

is removed and the word ‘‘The’’ is

added in its place.

11. In § 319.69, paragraph (b)(3) is

removed, and paragraphs (b)(4) and

(b)(5) are redesignated as paragraphs

(b)(3) and (b)(4), respectively.

§ 319.69a [Amended]

12. In § 319.69a, paragraph (a) is

amended by removing the reference

‘‘(b)(1), (3), and (4)’’ and adding the

reference ‘‘(b)(1) and (3)’’ in its place.

Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of

May 1995.

Terry L. Medley,

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12789 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 946

[FV95–946–2FR]

Irish Potatoes Grown in Washington;

Establishment of Interest Charge on

Overdue Assessment Payments and

Clarification of Operating Reserve

Authority

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes an

interest charge on overdue assessments

under the marketing order and clarifies

authority for an operating reserve not to

exceed approximately two fiscal

periods’ expenses. This action will

contribute to the efficient operation of

the order by ensuring that adequate

funds are available to cover authorized

expenses incurred under the order. This

rule was recommended by the State of

Washington Potato Committee

(Committee), the agency responsible for

the local administration of the order.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 25, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dennis L. West, Northwest Marketing

Field Office, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, 1220

SW Third Avenue, room 369, Portland,

Oregon 97204–2807; telephone: (503)

326–2724; or James B. Wendland,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division,

AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room

2523–S, Washington, D.C. 20090–6456;

telephone: (202) 720–2170.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

No. 113 and Marketing Order No. 946 (7

CFR part 946), both as amended,

regulating the handling of Irish potatoes

grown in Washington, hereinafter

referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order is

authorized by 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 final rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform. This action 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 action.

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 of Agriculture

(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 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

action 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
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 27683

small entities acting on their own

behalf. Thus, both statutes have small

entity orientation and compatibility.

There are approximately 50 handlers

of Washington potatoes subject to

regulation under the order and

approximately 450 producers of

Washington potatoes in the regulated

production 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 whose annual receipts are less

than $500,000. The majority of potato

handlers and producers regulated under

the order may be classified as small

entities.

This rule (1) establishes an interest

charge of one (1) percent per month to

be applied to any assessment balance

remaining unpaid after 30 days, and (2)

clarifies that funds in the operating

reserve may not exceed approximately

two fiscal periods’ expenses.

These changes were unanimously

recommended by the Committee. The

changes will contribute to the efficient

operation of the program by ensuring

that adequate funds are available to

cover the Committee’s authorized

expenses.

Section 946.41 of the order specifies

that if handlers do not pay their

assessments within the time prescribed

by the Committee, the assessments may

be increased by a late payment charge

or an interest charge, or both, at rates

prescribed by the Committee with the

approval of the Secretary.

The Committee depends upon

handler assessment payments for

operating funds. Handlers are invoiced

by the Committee on a monthly basis.

However, some handlers are continually

late with their assessment payments,

and a few wait until the end of the

season to remit to the Committee what

is owed. When assessments are not paid

in a timely manner, the handlers paying

assessments on time are placed in an

unfair situation compared with the

delinquent handlers, who have use of

that unpaid assessment money for other

purposes, including earning interest in

a financial institution.

As part of its collection efforts, the

Committee has requested handlers to

promptly submit delinquent assessment

payments. However, such requests have

not substantially decreased the

frequency of delinquent payments. To

facilitate the collection of assessments

needed for the maintenance and

functioning of the Committee, it

recommended the establishment of an

interest charge of one (1) percent per

month to be applied to any assessment

balance remaining unpaid after 30 days,

and that this one (1) percent interest

charge shall be applied monthly

thereafter to the unpaid balance,

including any accumulated unpaid

interest. The Committee believes that

these charges are high enough to

encourage timely assessment payments.

The charges are within the interest

range customarily charged by banks on

commercial accounts.

This change will encourage handlers

to pay their assessments when due,

thereby eliminating inequities. The

Committee believes that this will be an

effective means to ensure timely

payments. This action is expected to

reduce the need for Department

involvement with compliance efforts

and thereby reduce the costs for the

government to administer the order.

Effective June 5, 1972, § 946.42 of the

order was revised to authorize the

Committee to maintain an operating

reserve not to exceed approximately two

fiscal periods’ operational expenses, or

such lower limits as the Committee,

with the approval of the Secretary, may

establish (37 FR 10915; June 1, 1972).

Funds in the reserve are available for

use by the Committee for expenses

authorized pursuant to § 946.40. Since

June of 1972, the Committee has

conducted its financial operations with

a reserve approximating two fiscal

periods’ expenses and has not

recommended a lower limit.

However, the proviso in paragraph (a)

of § 946.142 of Subpart—Rules and

Regulations (7 CFR § 946.100–946.142;

32 FR 16199; November 28, 1967)

limiting the operating reserve to

approximately one fiscal year’s

expenses has never been updated to

bring it into conformity with amended

paragraph (a) of § 946.42 of the order.

This rule makes that conforming change

by changing the words ‘‘one fiscal year’s

expenses’’ at the end of the proviso to

‘‘two fiscal periods’ expenses’’.

A proposed rule on these actions was

published in the Federal Register on

April 18, 1995, (60 FR 19382). It

provided a 15-day comment period

which ended May 3, 1995. No

comments were received.

Based on available information, the

Administrator of the AMS has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

After consideration of all relevant

matters presented, the information and

recommendations submitted by the

Committee and other information, it is

found that finalizing the proposed rule,

without change, as published in the

Federal Register (60 FR 19382, April 18,

1995), will tend to effectuate the

declared policy of the Act.

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

found and determined that good cause

exists for not postponing the effective

date of this action until 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register

because: (1) This action clarifies

authority for an operating financial

reserve approximating two fiscal

periods’ expenses rather than one; (2)

this action should be in effect as soon

as possible so handlers can make plans

for the upcoming shipping season and

to encourage any handlers owing

delinquent assessments to promptly

pay; (3) this action was unanimously

recommended by the Committee at an

open public meeting and all interested

persons had an opportunity to provide

input; and (4) this action provided a 15-

day period for submission of written

comments and none were received.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 946

Marketing agreements, Potatoes,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 946 is amended as

follows:

PART 946—IRISH POTATOES GROWN

IN WASHINGTON

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 946 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. A new § 946.141 is added to read

as follows:

§ 946.141 Late payment and interest

charge.

The Committee shall impose an

interest charge on any handler who fails

to pay his or her assessment within

thirty (30) days of the billing date

shown on the handler’s assessment

statement received from the Committee.

The interest charge shall, after 30 days,

be one percent of the unpaid assessment

balance. In the event the handler fails to

pay the delinquent assessment, the one

percent interest charge shall be applied

monthly thereafter to the unpaid

balance, including any accumulated

unpaid interest. Any amount paid by a

handler as an assessment, including any

charges imposed pursuant to this

paragraph, shall be credited when the

payment is received in the Committee

office.

3. In § 946.142, paragraph (a) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 946.142 Operating reserve.

(a) The Committee, with the approval

of the Secretary, may carry over excess

funds into subsequent fiscal periods as

an operating reserve: Provided, That
27684 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

funds in the operating reserve may not

exceed approximately two fiscal

periods’ expenses.

* * * * *

Dated: May 19, 1995.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 95–12803 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

12 CFR Part 620

RIN 3052–AB37

Disclosure to Shareholders; Effective

Date

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.

ACTION: Notice of effective date.

SUMMARY: The Farm Credit

Administration (FCA) published a final

regulation under part 620 on April 24,

1995 (60 FR 20011). The final regulation

amends its disclosure requirements for

association annual meeting information

statements including required

disclosures for director candidates

nominated from the floor. The

amendments provide associations more

flexibility in accepting floor

nominations for director positions,

clarify disclosure requirements when

annual meetings are held in more than

one session and shareholders vote by

mail, and make other technical changes.

In accordance with 12 U.S.C. 2252, the

effective date of the final rule is 30 days

from the date of publication in the

Federal Register during which either or

both Houses of Congress are in session.

Based on the records of the sessions of

Congress, the effective date of the

regulations is May 24, 1995.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The regulation

amending 12 CFR part 620 published on

April 24, 1995 (60 FR 20011) is effective

May 24, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laurie A. Rea, Policy Analyst,

Regulation Development, Office of

Examination, Farm Credit

Administration, McLean, Virginia

22102–5090, (703) 883–4498, TDD

(703) 883–4444,

or

James M. Morris, Senior Attorney,

Regulatory Operations Division,

Office of General Counsel, Farm

Credit Administration, McLean,

Virginia 22102–5090, (703) 883–4020,

TDD (703) 883–4444.

(12 U.S.C. 2252(a) (9) and (10))

Dated: May 19, 1995.

Floyd Fithian,

Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.

[FR Doc. 95–12761 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6705–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–SW–09–AD; Amendment

39–9239; AD 95–11–05]

Airworthiness Directives; Societe

Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale and

Eurocopter France Model AS–355 E, F,

F1, F2, and N Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to Societe Nationale

Industrielle Aerospatiale and

Eurocopter France (Eurocopter France)

Model AS–355 E, F, F1, F2, and N

helicopters. This action requires a check

to ensure that the main gearbox (MGB)

oil pressure warning light illuminates

during each shutdown of the helicopter

engine until the MGB oil pressure

switch (switch) is removed and

replaced. This amendment is prompted

by a malfunction of the MGB switch.

This condition, if not corrected, could

result in failure to detect a loss of oil

pressure, loss of the MGB, loss of power

to the main rotor system, and

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter.

DATES: Effective June 9, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 9,

1995.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

July 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–SW–09–AD, 2601

Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,

Texas 76137.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from American

Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum

Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 75053–4005.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room

663, Fort Worth, Texas; or at the Office

of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Richard Monschke, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft

Standards Staff, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,

Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone

(817) 222–5116, fax (817) 222–5961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Direction Generale De L’Aviation Civile,

which is the airworthiness authority for

France, has notified the FAA that an

unsafe condition may exist on

Eurocopter France Model AS–355 E, F,

F1, F2, and N helicopters. The Direction

Generale De L’Aviation Civile advises

that a possible malfunction of the MGB

switch, part number (P/N) 704A37–721–

082 (S1130–021–082), modification

number 350A07–7141, was reported by

the manufacturer.

Eurocopter France has issued

Eurocopter Service Bulletin AS 355 No.

01.39, Revision 1, dated April 21, 1994,

which specifies a check each time the

rotor is stopped to ensure that the MGB

oil pressure warning light illuminates,

and removal of the MGB switch, P/N

704A37–721–082 (S1130–021–082),

modification number 350A07–7141, and

replacement with an airworthy MGB

switch. The Direction Generale De

L’Aviation Civile classified this service

bulletin as mandatory and issued AD

94–088–050(B) in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

helicopters in France.

These helicopter models are

manufactured in France and are type

certificated for operation in the United

States under the provisions of section

21.29 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the

applicable bilateral airworthiness

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral

airworthiness agreement, the Direction

Generale De L’Aviation Civile has kept

the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the Direction

Generale De L’Aviation Civile, reviewed

all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other Eurocopter France

Model AS–355 E, F, F1, F2, and N

helicopters of the same type design

registered in the United States, this AD

is being issued to prevent an undetected

loss of oil pressure, loss of the MGB,

loss of power to the main rotor system,

and subsequent loss of control of the