This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

44286 

Vol. 86, No. 153 

Thursday, August 12, 2021 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Parts 915 and 944 

[Doc. No. AMS–SC–20–0082; SC20–915–2] 

Avocados Grown in South Florida and 

Imported Avocados; Change in 

Maturity Requirements 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

change the maturity requirements 

currently prescribed under the Florida 

avocado marketing order. The order 

regulates the handling of avocados 

grown in South Florida and is 

administered locally by the Avocado 

Administrative Committee (Committee). 

The proposed change would establish 

beginning and end dates for the annual 

maturity shipping schedule. A 

corresponding change would be made to 

the avocado import regulation as 

required under section 8e of the 

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act 

of 1937. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

October 12, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments 

concerning this proposed rule. 

Comments must be sent to the Docket 

Clerk, Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; or submitted to 

internet: https://www.regulations.gov. 

Comments should reference the 

document 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 or 

can be viewed at: https://

www.regulations.gov. All comments 

submitted in response to this proposed 

rule will be included in the record and 

will be made available to the public. 

Please be advised that the identity of the 

individuals or entities submitting the 

comments will be made public on the 

internet at the address provided above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Abigail Campos, Marketing Specialist, 

or Christian D. Nissen, Regional 

Director, Southeast Marketing Field 

Office, Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324– 

3375, Fax: (863) 291–8614, or Email: 

Abigail.Campos@usda.gov or 

Christian.Nissen@usda.gov. 

Small businesses may request 

information on complying with this 

regulation by contacting Richard Lower, 

Marketing Order and Agreement 

Division, Specialty Crops Program, 

AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington, 

DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720– 

2491, or Email: Richard.Lower@

usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

action, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, 

proposes an amendment to regulations 

issued to carry out a marketing order as 

defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This proposed 

rule is issued under Marketing 

Agreement No. 121 and Marketing 

Order No. 915, both as amended (7 CFR 

part 915), regulating the handling of 

avocados grown in South Florida. Part 

915, (referred to as the ‘‘Order’’) is 

effective under the Agricultural 

Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as 

amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’ The Committee 

locally administers the Order and is 

comprised of growers and handlers of 

avocados operating within the 

production area, and a public member. 

This rule is also issued under section 

8e of the Act (7 U.S.C. 608e–1), which 

provides that whenever certain 

specified commodities, including 

avocados, are regulated under a Federal 

marketing order, imports of these 

commodities into the United States are 

prohibited unless they meet the same or 

comparable grade, size, quality, or 

maturity requirements as those in effect 

for domestically produced commodities. 

The Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) is issuing this proposed rule in 

conformance with Executive Orders 

12866 and 13563. Executive Orders 

12866 and 13563 direct agencies to 

assess all costs and benefits of available 

regulatory alternatives and, if regulation 

is necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts and equity). 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, reducing costs, 

harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. This action falls within a 

category of regulatory actions that the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) exempted from Executive Order 

12866 review. 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 13175— 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments, which 

requires agencies to consider whether 

their rulemaking actions would have 

tribal implications. In accordance with 

Executive Order 13175, AMS has not 

identified any tribal implications as a 

result of this proposed rule. 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. This proposed rule is 

not intended to have retroactive effect. 

The Act provides that administrative 

proceedings must be exhausted before 

parties may file suit in court. Under 

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 

608c(15)(A)), any handler subject to an 

order may file with USDA a petition 

stating that the order, any provision of 

the order, or any obligation imposed in 

connection with the order is not in 

accordance with law and request a 

modification of the order or to be 

exempted therefrom. Such handler is 

afforded the opportunity for a hearing 

on the petition. After the hearing, USDA 

would rule on the petition. The Act 

provides that the district court of the 

United States in any district in which 

the handler is an inhabitant, or has his 

or her principal place of business, has 

jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on 

the petition, provided an action is filed 

no later than 20 days after the date of 

the entry of the ruling (7 U.S.C. 

608c(15)(B)). 

There are no administrative 

procedures that must be exhausted prior 

to any judicial challenge to the 

provisions of import regulations issued 

under section 8e of the Act. 

This proposed rule would change the 

maturity requirements under the Order. 

This action would establish April 16 to 

April 15 of the following year as the 

beginning and end dates for the annual 

maturity shipping schedule, with an 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 153 / Thursday, August 12, 2021 / Proposed Rules 44287 

exception for the requirements listed 

under Guatemalan seedling, which 

would run from June 9 to June 8 of the 

following year. This rule would provide 

clarity regarding the schedule and dates 

in effect, assist with compliance to help 

ensure a quality product reaches 

consumers, and reflect current industry 

practices. These changes were 

unanimously recommended by the 

Committee at its October 14, 2020, 

meeting. 

Section 915.51 of the Order provides, 

in part, authority to establish maturity 

requirements under the Order. Section 

915.52 of the Order provides authority 

for the modification, suspension, or 

termination of established regulations. 

Section 915.332 of the Order’s rules and 

regulations establishes the maturity 

requirements for avocados grown in 

Florida. These requirements are 

specified in Table I of § 915.332(a) and 

establish minimum weights and 

diameters to delineate specific shipping 

time frames for avocados shipped under 

the Order. Maturity requirements for 

avocados imported into the United 

States are currently in effect under 

§ 944.31. 

The maturity regulations are designed 

to prevent the shipment of immature 

avocados and include the annual 

shipping schedule to help ensure only 

mature fruit reaches the market. 

Avocado varieties mature at different 

times, and varieties can vary 

considerably in terms of size and 

weight. Consequently, the schedule 

establishes shipping dates and maturity 

requirements by variety. Varieties not 

specifically listed on the schedule are 

covered by the requirements for West 

Indian seedling or Guatemalan seedling. 

These maturity dates and requirements 

are established based on a testing 

procedure developed by USDA. 

The shipping schedule in Table I 

specifies the individual maturity 

requirements for the numerous avocado 

varieties shipped each season. As larger 

fruit within a variety matures earliest, 

the schedule makes the larger sized fruit 

available for market first followed by 

other dates to incrementally release 

smaller sizes for shipment as they 

mature. As such, the maturity 

requirements for a variety are usually 

divided into A, B, C, and D dates, which 

are associated with specific weights and 

sizes reflecting when a particular variety 

matures. 

Avocados may not be handled until 

the earliest date, the A date, specified 

for that variety on the shipping schedule 

so only the largest, most mature fruits 

are available for market for each variety 

early in its season. The final date, the D 

date, for each variety correlates to the 

end of its season when all fruits of that 

variety should be mature and releases 

all remaining sizes and weights for 

shipment. 

While the maturity schedule includes 

dates and maturity requirements for 

individual varieties, the regulations do 

not specify beginning and end dates for 

the annual maturity schedule itself. In 

the past, there was a gap in shipments 

in April, which created a natural break 

from one season’s schedule to the next, 

with the first varieties appearing on the 

maturity schedule in May. This break 

served as the indicator of where the 

requirements of one annual schedule 

ended, and the new annual schedule 

began. 

Such a differentiation between 

schedules is important as it clarifies 

which schedule is in place, so handlers 

know which maturity requirements 

need to be met. Specifically, this 

demarcation makes it clear the D dates 

for one schedule do not stretch to the A 

dates of the new schedule. Such a 

delineation between schedules provides 

a gap between the D dates and the A 

dates. This helps to ensure avocados are 

not shipped early to take advantage of 

the relaxed maturity requirements of the 

D-date, which could result in the 

shipment of immature fruit, and would 

circumvent the requirement that 

avocados may not be handled prior to 

the earliest date specified by the A date 

for that variety. 

However, with the development of 

late-season varieties, there has been an 

increase in shipments under the 

Guatemalan seedling category in March, 

April, and May. Consequently, there is 

no longer a break in shipments between 

annual schedules, which has created an 

overlap from one annual schedule to the 

next. With this overlap, questions have 

arisen regarding the schedule, and when 

one annual schedule ends and another 

begins. 

In discussing this issue, the 

Committee supported establishing 

beginning and end dates for the 

maturity schedule to address the 

overlap, and to address questions 

regarding which maturity schedule and 

dates were in effect. The Committee 

believes doing so would provide clarity 

regarding the schedule and would help 

assist with any compliance issues 

related to the dates established. 

The Committee agreed that using an 

end date of April 15 for the shipping 

schedule, with an exception for 

avocados handled under the 

Guatemalan seedling category would be 

appropriate. This date reflects the break 

in schedules the industry has used to 

delineate one schedule from the next, 

and it remains applicable for all listings 

on the shipping schedule apart from the 

Guatemalan seedling. 

For most avocados covered under the 

schedule, the normal harvest cycle, from 

the A date when the harvest of a 

particular variety begins to when all 

fruit of that variety has been picked, is 

around three months. The last A date 

listed on the schedule for a specific 

variety is for the Monday nearest 

December 12, with a D date of the 

following Monday nearest January 23. 

Using these dates, April 15 would 

provide more than enough time to 

harvest and ship those varieties listed 

on the schedule, other than Guatemalan 

seedling. 

While the A date for the ‘‘Guatemalan 

Seedling’’ appears on the maturity 

schedule in September, the listing 

provides the maturity requirements for 

avocados of the Guatemalan type 

varieties and seedlings, as well as 

hybrid varieties and seedlings, and 

unidentified seedlings not listed 

elsewhere in Table I. Consequently, the 

requirements for the Guatemalan 

seedling cover numerous varieties with 

shipments extending into March, April, 

and May for some of the varieties in this 

category. 

Recognizing the shipments under the 

Guatemalan seedling and related 

varieties and seedlings do not conform 

to the same seasonal schedule as the 

other varieties listed on the maturity 

schedule, the Committee considered 

alternative dates for the beginning and 

end dates for the maturity requirements 

for those varieties covered under this 

category. In discussing dates for the 

Guatemalan seedling, Committee 

members were concerned about 

establishing an end date that was 

beyond the proper maturity timeframe 

for this fruit, which could allow inferior 

fruit to enter the market. 

Avocados mature on the tree and start 

the ripening process as they are picked. 

Avocados can be held on the tree to 

delay shipments or to lengthen the 

harvest period. However, if they remain 

on the tree too long, they will pass their 

optimal maturity. This can negatively 

impact the quality of the fruit resulting 

in fruit that is overmature or overripe. 

In past seasons, the industry had been 

considering June 30 as an end date for 

the annual requirements for Guatemalan 

seedling. However, Committee members 

agreed this date was too late in the 

season and could result in poor quality 

fruit reaching the market, as some 

overripe avocados had appeared at the 

wholesale level. Committee members 

believe setting an end date earlier in the 

month would address the issues related 

to overmature fruit, improving the 

quality of avocados entering the market, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
44288 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 153 / Thursday, August 12, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

and providing customers with a better 

product. 

According to information from the 

Committee, avocados declared as 

Guatemalan seedling have typically 

completed shipping before the first 

week in June. Considering the timing of 

shipments, and to ensure consumers 

would be receiving a quality product, 

the Committee recommended 

establishing an end date for the 

Guatemalan maturity requirements of 

June 8. 

With most shipments ending before 

the first week in June, a June 8 end date 

would provide an additional week for 

handlers to ship any remaining 

avocados covered by the Guatemalan 

seedling requirements. Also, by having 

a clear end date defining where one 

schedule ends, and the new schedule 

becomes applicable, handlers could 

adjust their shipping dates accordingly 

to meet the requirements. 

As a result, the Committee 

recommended establishing beginning 

and end dates for the annual maturity 

shipping schedule of April 16 to April 

15 of the following year, with an 

exception for Guatemalan seedling 

which would extend from June 9 to June 

8 of the following year. The Committee 

believes establishing these dates would 

provide clarity regarding the schedule, 

assist with compliance to help ensure a 

quality product reaches consumers, and 

reflect current industry practices and 

changes in the industry. This proposed 

change would only impact the maturity 

requirements under the Order and 

would make no change to the current 

grade requirements. 

Section 8e of the Act provides that 

when certain domestically produced 

commodities, including avocados, are 

regulated under a Federal marketing 

order, imports of that commodity must 

meet the same or comparable grade, 

size, quality, and maturity requirements. 

Maturity requirements for avocados 

imported into the United States are 

currently in effect under § 944.31. As 

this rule would revise the maturity 

requirements for Florida avocados by 

establishing beginning and end dates for 

the annual maturity shipping schedule, 

a corresponding change would need to 

be made to the import regulations. 

Imports and importers would also 

benefit from these proposed changes, 

which would establish beginning and 

end dates for the maturity requirements. 

Clarifying the schedule and the 

requirements that are in place, thus 

helping ensure customers are receiving 

a quality product would be beneficial 

for the entire industry, including 

imports. 

The Hass, Fuerte, Zutano, and 

Edranol varieties of avocados currently 

are exempt from the maturity 

regulations and continue to be exempt 

under this rule. However, these varieties 

are not exempt from the import grade 

regulation, which is not being changed 

by this action. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural 

Marketing Service (AMS) has 

considered the economic impact of this 

action on small entities. Accordingly, 

AMS has prepared this initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to such actions in 

order that small businesses will not be 

unduly or disproportionately burdened. 

Marketing orders issued pursuant to the 

Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are 

unique in that they are brought about 

through group action of essentially 

small entities acting on their own 

behalf. 

There are approximately 325 

producers of Florida avocados in the 

production area and 25 handlers subject 

to regulation under the Order. Small 

agricultural producers are defined by 

the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) as those having annual receipts 

less than $1,000,000, and small 

agricultural service firms are defined as 

those whose annual receipts are less 

than $30,000,000 (13 CFR 121.201). 

According to the National 

Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS), 

the average grower price paid for 

Florida avocados during the 2020–21 

season was $21.97 per 55-pound bushel. 

Utilized production was equivalent to 

624,364 55-pound bushels for a total 

value of over $13,718,830. Dividing the 

crop value by the estimated number of 

producers (325) yields an estimated 

average receipt per producer of $42,212, 

so the average producer would have 

annual receipts of less than $1,000,000. 

USDA Market News reported April 

2021 terminal market prices for green 

skinned avocados were about $36.43 per 

24-pound container. Using this price 

and the total utilization, the total 2020– 

21 handler crop value is estimated at 

$52.1 million. Dividing this figure by 

the number of handlers (25) yields an 

estimated average annual handler 

receipts of slightly over $2 million, 

which is below the SBA threshold for 

small agricultural service firms. 

In 2020, the Dominican Republic, 

Peru, Mexico, and Colombia were the 

major countries exporting avocado 

varieties other than Hass to the United 

States. In 2020, shipments of these types 

of avocados imported into the United 

States totaled around 29,630 metric 

tons. Of that amount, 29,133 metric tons 

were imported from the Dominican 

Republic. Information from USDA’s 

Global Agricultural Trade System 

database indicates the dollar value of 

these avocados to be approximately 

$41,385,000. There are approximately 

20 importers of green skin avocadoes. 

Using the total value and the number of 

importers, the average importer would 

have annual receipts of less than $30 

million. 

Based on these estimates, the majority 

of Florida avocado producers and 

handlers, and importers may be 

classified as small entities. 

This proposed rule would change the 

maturity requirements under the Order. 

This action would establish April 16 to 

April 15 of the following year as the 

beginning and end dates for the annual 

maturity shipping schedule, with an 

exception for Guatemalan seedling 

which would run from June 9 to June 8 

of the following year. This rule would 

provide clarity regarding the maturity 

schedule and dates in effect, assist with 

compliance to help ensure a quality 

product reaches consumers, and reflect 

current industry practices. This 

proposed rule would revise § 915.332. 

Authority for this change is provided in 

§§ 915.51 and 915.52. This proposed 

rule would also change § 944.31 in the 

avocado import regulation, as is 

required by section 8e of the Act. 

This action is not expected to increase 

the costs associated with the Order’s 

requirements or the avocado import 

regulation. Rather, it is anticipated that 

this action would have a beneficial 

impact by providing clarity regarding 

the maturity schedule and dates in 

effect, assist with compliance, and help 

ensure a quality product reaches 

consumers. 

This change would provide clarity as 

to which schedule is in place, so 

producers, handlers, and importers 

know which maturity requirements 

need to be met. Establishing beginning 

and end dates for the maturity 

requirements would clearly identify 

when the requirements of one annual 

schedule end, and the new annual 

schedule begins. Further, having a 

delineation between schedules would 

assist with compliance by making it 

clear that the D dates for one schedule 

do not stretch to the A date of the new 

schedule. This would help ensure that 

immature avocados are not shipped 

early using the previous season’s D date 

to circumvent the requirement that 

avocados may not be handled prior to 

the A date specified for that variety. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 153 / Thursday, August 12, 2021 / Proposed Rules 44289 

For the Guatemalan seedling, 

establishing the beginning and end 

dates for the annual maturity 

requirements would help prevent 

shipments beyond the quality lifecycle 

of varieties covered under this category. 

This change would set a clear date by 

which shipments under the D date 

would end, assisting both with 

compliance and with fruit quality. 

Absent this change, fruit could be 

shipped past its proper maturity period, 

which could provide the consumer with 

an inferior product. 

This change would not create any 

additional burdens for producers, 

handlers, or importers. The April 15 end 

date reflects the break in schedules the 

industry has used to delineate one 

schedule from the next, and it remains 

applicable for all listings on the 

shipping schedule, apart from the 

Guatemalan seedling. The April 15 end 

date would provide more than enough 

time to harvest and ship those varieties 

listed on the schedule. 

For those varieties covered under the 

Guatemalan seedling, Committee data 

indicates most shipments are completed 

before the first week in June. This 

change would provide an additional 

week beyond June 1 for handlers to ship 

any remaining avocados covered by the 

Guatemalan seedling requirements. 

Also, by establishing a clear end date, 

handlers would be able to adjust their 

shipping dates accordingly to meet the 

new requirements. Establishing an end 

date of June 8 for maturity requirements 

for the Guatemalan seedling would 

provide sufficient time for avocados to 

ship under this designation, while 

helping prevent the shipment of 

overmature fruit. 

This rule would provide clarity 

regarding the maturity schedule and 

dates in effect, assist with compliance to 

help ensure a quality product reaches 

consumers, and reflect current industry 

practices. The benefits of this rule are 

expected to be equally available to all 

fresh avocado growers, handlers, and 

importers, regardless of their sizes of 

operations. 

One alternative to this action would 

be to maintain the current maturity 

requirements without establishing end 

dates for the maturity schedule. 

However, the Committee recognized 

that shipments have changed over the 

years and wanted to provide clarity 

regarding the maturity schedule. 

Another alternative considered was 

establishing an end date for the 

requirements for Guatemalan seedling of 

June 30. In discussing this date, 

Committee members expressed concern 

that this date was past the proper 

maturity for this fruit and would allow 

inferior fruit to enter the market. The 

Committee believes establishing the 

changes in this proposed rule, rather 

than the alternatives, would assist with 

compliance and help ensure a quality 

product reaches consumers. Therefore, 

the Committee rejected these 

alternatives. 

Committee meetings were widely 

publicized throughout the avocado 

industry. All interested persons were 

invited to attend Committee meetings 

and participate in Committee 

deliberations on all issues. Like all 

Committee meetings, the October 14, 

2020, meeting was a public meeting and 

all entities, both large and small, were 

able to express views on this issue. 

Interested persons are invited to submit 

comments on this proposed rule, 

including the regulatory and 

informational collection impacts of this 

action on small businesses. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

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

Chapter 35), the Order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the OMB and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0189, Fruit 

Crops. No changes in those 

requirements would be necessary as a 

result of this proposed rule. Should any 

changes become necessary, they would 

be submitted to OMB for approval. 

This proposed rule would not impose 

any additional reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements on either 

small or large avocado 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. USDA has not 

identified any relevant Federal rules 

that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with 

this proposed rule. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: https://

www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/ 

moa/small-businesses. Any questions 

about the compliance guide should be 

sent to Richard Lower at the previously 

mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

In accordance with section 8e of the 

Act, the United States Trade 

Representative has concurred with the 

issuance of this proposed rule. 

A 60-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. All written 

comments timely received will be 

considered before a final determination 

is made on this matter. 

List of Subjects 

7 CFR Part 915 

Avocados, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

7 CFR Part 944 

Avocados, Food grades and standards, 

Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, Kiwifruit, 

Limes, Olives, Oranges. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR parts 915 and 944 are 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 915—AVOCADOS GROWN IN 

SOUTH FLORIDA 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 915 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 915.332 is amended by 

adding paragraph (a)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 915.332 Florida avocado maturity 

regulation. 

(a) * * * 

(4) The requirements listed in table I 

of this section are in effect annually 

from April 16 through April 15 of the 

following year, with an exception for 

the requirements for Guatemalan 

seedling which are in effect annually 

from June 9 to June 8 of the following 

year. 

* * * * * 

PART 944—FRUITS; IMPORT 

REGULATIONS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 944 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 4. Section 944.31 is amended by 

adding paragraph (a)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 944.31 Avocado import maturity 

regulation. 

(a) * * * 

(4) The requirements listed in table I 

of this section are in effect annually 

from April 16 through April 15 of the 

following year, with an exception for 

the requirements for Guatemalan 

seedling which are in effect annually 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
44290 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 153 / Thursday, August 12, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

from June 9 to June 8 of the following 

year. 

* * * * * 

Erin Morris, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–17235 Filed 8–11–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 50 

[Docket No. PRM–50–116; NRC–2018–0201] 

Elimination of Immediate Notification 

Requirements for Nonemergency 

Events 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; 

consideration in the rulemaking 

process. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) will consider in its 

rulemaking process issues raised in a 

petition for rulemaking (PRM), dated 

August 2, 2018, submitted by Mr. Bill 

Pitesa on behalf of the Nuclear Energy 

Institute. The petition was docketed by 

the NRC on November 20, 2018, and 

assigned Docket No. PRM–50–116. The 

petitioner requested that the NRC 

amend its regulations to eliminate 

immediate notification requirements for 

nonemergency events for operating 

nuclear power reactors. The NRC will 

evaluate the current requirements and 

guidance for immediate notification of 

nonemergency events for operating 

nuclear power reactors, assess whether 

the requirements present an 

unnecessary reporting burden, and if 

they do, determine whether reporting 

can be reduced or eliminated that does 

not have a commensurate safety benefit. 

DATES: The docket for the petition for 

rulemaking, PRM–50–116, is closed on 

August 12, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID 

NRC–2018–0201 when contacting the 

NRC about the availability of 

information for this action. You may 

obtain publicly available information 

related to this action by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2018–0201 or the 

future rulemaking Docket ID NRC– 

2020–0036. Address questions about 

NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; 

telephone: 301–415–3407; email: 

Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For technical 

questions, contact the individual listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly 

available documents online in the 

ADAMS Public Documents collection at 

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. To begin the search, select 

‘‘Begin Web-Based ADAMS Search.’’ For 

problems with ADAMS, please contact 

the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 

reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, at 

301–415–4737, or by email to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. For the 

convenience of the reader, instructions 

about obtaining materials referenced in 

this document are provided in the 

‘‘Availability of Documents’’ section. 

• Attention: The PDR, where you may 

examine and order copies of public 

documents, is currently closed. You 

may submit your request to the PDR via 

email at pdr.resource@nrc.gov or call 

1–800–397–4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 

4:00 p.m. (ET), Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel Doyle, Office of Nuclear Material 

Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 

3748, email: Daniel.Doyle@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. The Petition 

II. Public Comments on the Petition 

III. Reasons for Consideration 

IV. Availability of Documents 

V. Conclusion 

I. The Petition 

Section 2.802 of title 10 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), 

‘‘Petition for rulemaking—requirements 

for filing,’’ provides an opportunity for 

any person to petition the Commission 

to issue, amend, or rescind any 

regulation. The NRC received and 

docketed a PRM dated August 2, 2018, 

filed by Mr. Bill Pitesa on behalf of the 

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). The NRC 

assigned this PRM the docket number of 

PRM–50–116. On November 20, 2018 

(83 FR 58509), the NRC published a 

notice of docketing and request for 

comment on PRM–50–116 in the 

Federal Register. The petitioner 

requests that the NRC revise its 

regulations in 10 CFR 50.72, 

‘‘Immediate notification requirements 

for operating nuclear power reactors,’’ to 

remove the current requirement for 

licensees to immediately report 

nonemergency events that occur at 

operating nuclear power reactors. The 

petitioner states that licensees currently 

have procedures for responding to 

nonemergency events and ensuring that 

NRC resident inspectors are notified of 

nonemergency events independent of 

the requirements in § 50.72. The 

petitioner did not request removal of 

§ 50.72 in its entirety, only the 

nonemergency notification requirements 

in § 50.72(b). The petitioner believes 

that ‘‘duplicative notifications under 

§ 50.72 serve no safety function and are 

not needed to prevent or minimize 

possible injury to the public or to allow 

the NRC to take necessary action.’’ 

The petitioner suggests that in lieu of 

the currently required notifications, the 

NRC should establish guidance for the 

resident inspectors that provides 

consistent and standard expectations for 

using the existing communication 

protocols that the petitioner claims have 

proven to be effective for 

communicating from the site to the 

resident inspectors and, from there, to 

NRC management. 

II. Public Comments on the Petition 

On November 20, 2018, the NRC 

requested comments from the public on 

the petition and posed five specific 

questions to gain a better understanding 

of the scope and basis for the issues 

raised by the petitioner. The comment 

period ended on February 4, 2019, and 

the NRC received 16 public comments. 

Eleven comments (from NEI and nuclear 

power reactor licensees) supported the 

petition, one comment (from two private 

citizens) partially supported the 

petition, two comments (from a private 

citizen and a nongovernmental 

organization) opposed the petition, and 

two comments (from private citizens) 

were out of scope. The following is a 

summary of the comments organized by 

the specific questions in the notice of 

docketing. 

In the first question, the NRC 

requested feedback on how stakeholders 

review and use the information 

contained in nonemergency event 

notifications, and how they would be 

affected if all nonemergency event 

notifications were eliminated. Two 

private citizens stated that they do not 

regularly review notifications on the 

NRC’s website, but the information may 

be beneficial to maintain for public 

review. The same commenters 

supported the removal of redundancies 

in communication and suggested that 

the NRC maintain only those § 50.72 

requirements that do not have a 

corresponding § 50.73, ‘‘Licensee event 

report system’’ report so the public is 

kept informed. 

Several industry commenters also 

responded to this question. While their 

comments varied regarding the level of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1