29216 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

price deflator of the gross national

product (as indexed for the most recent

12-month period for which statistics are

available). However, gross national

product has been replaced by the gross

domestic product by the Department of

Commerce as a more appropriate

measure for the short-term monitoring

and analysis of the U.S. economy. The

number of bales to be classed by the

United States Department of Agriculture

from the 2001 crop is estimated at

18,337,850 bales. The 2001 base fee was

decreased 15 percent based on the

estimated number of bales to be classed

(1 percent for every 100,000 bales or

portion thereof above the base of

12,500,000, limited to a maximum

adjustment of 15 percent). This

percentage factor amounts to a 33 cents

per bale reduction and was subtracted

from the 2001 base fee of $2.22 per bale,

resulting in a fee of $1.89 per bale.

With a fee of $1.89 per bale, the

projected operating reserve would be

51.56 percent. The Act specifies that the

Secretary shall not establish a fee

which, when combined with other

sources of revenue, will result in a

projected operating reserve of more than

25 percent. Accordingly, the fee of $1.89

must be reduced by 54 cents per bale,

to $1.35 per bale, to provide an ending

accumulated operating reserve for the

fiscal year of 25 percent of the projected

cost of operating the program. This

would establish the 2001 season fee at

$1.35 per bale.

Accordingly, § 28.909, paragraph (b)

would reflect the continuation of the

HVI classification fee at $1.35 per bale.

As provided for in the Uniform Cotton

Classing Fees Act of 1987, as amended,

a 5 cent per bale discount would

continue to be applied to voluntary

centralized billing and collecting agents

as specified in § 28.909 (c). Growers or

their designated agents requesting

classification data provided on

computer punched cards will continue

to be charged the fee of 10 cents per

card in § 28.910 (a) to reflect the costs

of providing this service. Requests for

punch card classification data

represented less than 1.0 percent of the

total bales classed from the 2000 crop,

down from 2.6 percent in 1997. Growers

or their designated agents receiving

classification data by methods other

than computer-punched cards would

continue to incur no additional fees if

only one method of receiving

classification data was requested. The

fee for each additional method of

receiving classification data in § 28.910

would remain at 5 cents per bale, and

it would be applicable even if the same

method was requested. However, if

computer punched cards were

requested, a fee of 10 cents per card

would be charged. The fee in § 28.910

(b) for an owner receiving classification

data from the central database would

remain at 5 cents per bale, and the

minimum charge of $5.00 for services

provided per monthly billing period

would remain the same. The provisions

of § 28.910 (c) concerning the fee for

new classification memoranda issued

from the central database for the

business convenience of an owner

without reclassification of the cotton

will remain the same.

The fee for review classification in

§ 28.911 will be maintained at $1.35 per

bale.

The fee for returning samples after

classification in § 28.911 will remain at

40 cents per sample.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 28

Administrative practice and

procedure, Cotton, Cotton samples,

Grades, Market news, Reporting and

record keeping requirements, Standards,

Staples, Testing, Warehouses.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR Part 28 is amended as

follows:

PART 28—COTTON CLASSING

TESTING STANDARDS

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

Part 28, Subpart D—Cotton

Classification and Market News Services

for Producers, continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 471–476.

2. In § 28.909, paragraph (b) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 28.909 Costs.

* * * * *

(b) The cost of High Volume

Instrument (HVI) cotton classification

service to producers is $1.35 per bale.

* * * * *

3. In § 28.911, the last sentence of

paragraph (a) is revised to read as

follows:

§ 28.911 Review classification.

(a) * * * The fee for review

classification is $1.35 per bale.

* * * * *

Dated: May 23, 2001.

Kenneth C. Clayton,

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing

Service.

[FR Doc. 01–13562 Filed 5–25–01; 10:50 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–U

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 928

[Docket No. FV01–928–1 IFR]

Papayas Grown in Hawaii; Suspension

of Grade, Inspection, and Related

Reporting Requirements

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Interim final rule with request

for comments.

SUMMARY: This rule indefinitely

suspends the grade, inspection,

inspection waiver procedures, and

related exempt shipment reporting

requirements under the marketing order

regulating papayas grown in Hawaii,

due to current overproduction and

unprecedented low prices for fresh

papayas. These requirements went into

effect on January 2, 2001. This action

results from a unanimous

recommendation of the Papaya

Administrative Committee (committee

or PAC) at an emergency meeting on

December 28, 2000. This action is

expected to permit the industry to

utilize funds earmarked for inspection

for enhanced marketing efforts, thus

improving producer returns by

increasing consumer demand.

DATES: Effective May 31, 2001;

comments received by July 30, 2001 will

be considered prior to issuance of a final

rule.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are

invited to submit written comments

concerning this rule. Comments must be

sent to the Docket Clerk, Marketing

Order Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room

2525–S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,

DC 20090–6456; Fax: (202) 720–8938, or

E-mail: moab.docketclerk@usda.gov. 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, or

can be viewed at: http://

www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Terry Vawter, Marketing Specialist,

California Marketing Field Office,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,

AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street,

suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721;

telephone: (559) 487–5901, Fax: (559)

487–5906; or George Kelhart, Technical

Advisor, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 29217

Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room

2525–S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,

DC 20090–6456; telephone: (202) 720–

2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938.

Small businesses may request

information on compliance with this

regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,

AMS, USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box

96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456;

telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)

720–8938, or E-mail:

Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

No. 155 and Marketing Order No. 928,

both as amended (7 CFR part 928),

regulating the handling of papayas

grown in Hawaii, hereinafter referred to

as the ‘‘order.’’ 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 Department of Agriculture

(Department) is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule is not intended to

have retroactive effect. This rule will

not preempt any State or local laws,

regulations, or policies, unless they

present an irreconcilable conflict with

this rule.

The Act provides that administrative

proceedings must be exhausted before

parties may file suit in court. Under

section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any

handler subject to an order may file

with the Secretary a petition stating that

the order, any provision of the order, or

any obligation imposed in connection

with the order is not in accordance with

law and request a modification of the

order or to be exempted therefrom. A

handler is afforded the opportunity for

a hearing on the petition. After the

hearing the Secretary would rule on the

petition. The Act provides that the

district court of the United States in any

district in which the handler is an

inhabitant, or has his or her principal

place of business, has jurisdiction to

review the Secretary’s ruling on the

petition, provided an action is filed not

later than 20 days after the date of the

entry of the ruling.

This rule suspends three sections of

the order’s rules and regulations

regarding minimum grade requirements

(§ 928.313), maturity exemptions

(§ 928.152), and inspection waiver

procedures (§ 928.150). It also amends

§ 928.160 of the order’s rules and

regulations. The amendment to

§ 928.160 removes references to

mandatory regulations and relieves

handlers from the requirement to add

the inspection certificate number on

PAC Form 1, Papaya Utilization.

This rule results from a unanimous

recommendation of the committee at an

emergency meeting on December 28,

2000. At that meeting, the committee

recommended postponing, until July 1,

2001, the effective date of a final rule

published by the Department on

November 22, 2000, which reinstated

grade, inspection, and related reporting

requirements, effective January 2, 2001.

The committee held a subsequent

committee meeting on January 11, 2001,

at which further public discussion was

held. After considering the committee’s

recommendation and other relevant

information, the Department is

suspending, for an indefinite period, the

requirements that were reinstated on

January 2, 2001.

Section 928.52 of the papaya

marketing order authorizes the

establishment of grade, size, quality,

maturity, and pack and container

regulations for shipments of papayas.

Section 928.53 allows for the

modification, suspension, or

termination of such regulations when

warranted. Section 928.55 provides that

whenever papayas are regulated

pursuant to §§ 928.52 or 928.53, such

papayas must be inspected by the

inspection service and certified as

meeting the applicable requirements.

The cost of inspection and certification

is borne by handlers. Section 928.54

authorizes regulation exemptions when

shipping papayas for commercial

processing, relief agencies, or charitable

institutions. In addition, the Secretary

may relieve from any or all

requirements under or established

pursuant to §§ 928.41, 928.52, 928.53,

and 928.55, the handling of papayas in

such minimum quantities, in such types

of shipments, or for such specified

purposes (including shipments to

facilitate the conduct of marketing

research and development projects

established pursuant to § 928.45) as the

committee, with the approval of the

Secretary, may prescribe. Section 928.60

of the papaya marketing order

authorizes handler reporting

requirements.

This rule suspends § 928.313 of the

order s rules and regulations regarding

minimum grade requirements. That

section states that no handler shall ship

papayas to any destination unless such

papayas meet the minimum grade of

Hawaii No 1.

This rule also removes the

requirement that handlers obtain

inspection through the Federal or

Federal-State Inspection Service

(inspection service) prior to shipment of

fresh papayas. Suspension of the

inspection waiver procedures in

§ 928.150 of the order’s rules and

regulations results in the elimination of

the authority of the inspection service to

grant inspection waivers. Inspection

waivers allow handlers to ship papayas

without inspection under certain

conditions when it is not practicable for

the inspection service to provide such

inspection. In the absence of mandatory

inspection, handlers do not need

inspection waivers issued by the

inspection service.

This rule also suspends the maturity

exemption and related reporting

requirements in § 928.152 of the order’s

rules and regulations to remove the

requirement that handlers interested in

becoming handlers of immature papayas

apply to the committee for approval,

and report handling of immature

papayas. Immature papayas are used in

a popular dish called green papaya

salad and as a vegetable substitute in

recipes. Suspension of the maturity

exemption and related reporting

requirements relieves handlers from

filing PAC Forms 7 and 7(c) with the

committee.

In addition, this rule amends

§ 928.160 to remove the references to

mandatory regulations and the

requirement that handlers include the

number of the inspection certificate

issued by the inspection service on each

PAC Form 1 filed with the committee.

Grade, inspection, and reporting

requirements under the order were

suspended in 1994. As previously

mentioned, in a final rule published on

November 22, 2000, and effective

January 2, 2001, the Department

reinstated those requirements under

§§ 928.150, 928.152, 928.313, and

928.160 of the order’s rules and

regulations.

The committee met on December 28,

2000, and voted unanimously to

postpone the effective date until July 1,

2001. During that meeting, and a

subsequent meeting on January 11,

2001, the committee noted that

producer prices currently range from 6

to 12 cents per pound, compared to 25

to 45 cents per pound reported by the

committee for the same period the

previous year. Such prices, coupled

with overproduction, have had a

negative effect on the entire industry,

especially for the new Rainbow variety

of papayas. The Rainbow variety has

been developed to tolerate the effects of

the Papaya Ringspot Virus, which has

decimated papaya trees in Hawaii for

several years. The Rainbow variety,

29218 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

however, has not yet been approved for

exportation to possible significant

markets, especially Japan or Canada,

and is only marketed in the United

States.

Given the current marketing

limitations and overproduction of

papayas, the committee recommended

that funds earmarked for inspection

costs be redirected to marketing and

promotion in an effort to increase

demand and improve returns to

producers. Currently, with low prices to

producers, there is little money

available for inspection. What funds are

available, the committee believes,

would best be utilized in increasing

demand by enhanced marketing and

promotion activities at this time. The

committee proposed to review the

condition of the industry in late spring

or early summer to determine if

overproduction has eased or demand

improved. Historically, the summer

months result in lower production, due

to the reduced availability of rainwater.

This has been true for most varieties of

papayas, and may also be true for the

Rainbow variety. This information

would place the committee in a better

position to evaluate what further

recommendations to make in the

interests of the industry.

While the committee recommended a

postponement of the effective date for

implementing mandatory grade,

inspection, and related reporting

requirements until July 1, 2001, the

Department believes that a suspension

of the requirements is preferable at this

time. First, the emergency

recommendation was made five days

prior to the effective date of the

regulations, January 2, 2001. Since that

time inspections of papayas have not

occurred. Second, the committee does

not yet have a timetable for entry of the

new Rainbow variety of papayas into

the export markets to which the

traditional variety, Kapoho, currently

has entry. The committee believes

increased demand would help absorb

the current overproduction of the

prolific Rainbow variety, and have a

positive affect on producer returns.

Third, the committee also believes that

enhanced marketing and promotion may

also improve demand for all fresh

papayas. The committee believes that

funds earmarked for inspection costs

would be better utilized on promotional

efforts. Thus, there would be no funds

available later in the fiscal year for

implementing mandatory inspection.

There is no evidence that the conditions

that currently exist in the industry

would be greatly improved in the next

several months.

For these reasons, the mandatory

grade, inspection, and reporting

requirements effective January 2, 2001,

are suspended until such time as the

conditions in the industry improve and

the committee can demonstrate a longterm commitment to a quality control

program.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),

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 400

producers of papayas in the production

area and approximately 60 handlers

subject to regulation under the

marketing order. Small agricultural

producers are defined by the Small

Business Administration (13 CFR

121.201) as those having annual receipts

less than $500,000, and small

agricultural service firms are defined as

those whose annual receipts are less

than $5,000,000.

Based on a reported current average

f.o.b. price of $.65 per pound of

papayas, a handler would have to ship

in excess of 7.69 million pounds of

papayas to have annual receipts of

$5,000,000. Last year, only one handler

shipped more than 7.69 million pounds

of papayas, and, therefore, could be

considered a large business. The

remaining handlers could be considered

small businesses, excluding receipts

from other sources.

Based on a reported current average

grower price of $0.09 per pound and

annual industry shipments of 40 million

pounds, total grower revenues would be

$3.6 million. Average annual grower

revenue would, thus, be $9,000. Based

on the foregoing, the majority of

handlers and producers of papayas may

be classified as small entities, excluding

receipts from other sources.

This rule suspends the grade,

inspection, and related reporting

requirements under the order’s rules

and regulations. As a result,§§ 928.150,

928.152, and 928.313 are suspended in

their entirety, and § 928.160 is amended

to remove the reference to mandatory

regulations and the requirement that the

inspection certificate number be added

to the utilization reports filed by

handlers.

At the meeting, the committee

discussed the impact of these changes

on handlers and producers in terms of

cost. Since mandatory inspection and

certification costs are borne by handlers,

the cost savings to each handler are

estimated to be a total $24.24 per hour

for on-site inspections. In addition, the

inspection service charges mileage costs

of $.37 per mile round trip from the

inspection service office to the handler’s

premises or processing plant. According

to the inspection service, for a trip

taking 10 or more minutes, or covering

7 or more miles, the travel time cost is

based on the $24.24 hourly rate. Some

handlers could pass the inspection costs

onto producers, thus, further decreasing

overall producer returns. These costs do

not apply in the absence of minimum

quality requirements and associated

mandatory inspection.

During its deliberations, the

committee discussed possible

alternatives to this action. They

deliberated the impacts of the final rule

taking effect on January 2, 2001.

However, because economic conditions

in the papaya industry are currently at

a historically low level, the committee

rejected that alternative.

The committee also debated the value

of suspending, rather than postponing,

the regulations in their entirety. That

alternative, however, was also rejected,

as the committee felt suspension of the

regulations was too drastic an action to

take at the time. Instead, the committee

proposed postponing the effective date

of the requirements until July 1, 2001,

and further reviewing the conditions

within the industry at that time. The

requirements were originally suspended

beginning on July 1, 1994.

However, as noted earlier, the

Department has determined that a

suspension of the requirements is

preferable, given the current industry

conditions and likelihood that there will

be no substantial improvement in the

next several months. If industry

conditions improve, implementation of

the quality control program could again

be recommended by the committee.

Accordingly, this action will have a

favorable effect on both large and small

entities.

In accordance with the Paperwork

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

Chapter 35), the information collection

requirements contained in this rule have

been previously approved by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) and

have been assigned OMB No. 0581–

0102.

This rule relaxes reporting

requirements under the order, since

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 30, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 29219

PAC Form 1 will no longer require the

addition of the inspection certificate

number on it. In addition, PAC Forms

7 and 7(c) will not be required from

handlers wishing to be approved

handlers of immature papayas. In the

absence of mandatory inspection, no

handlers will be required to apply for

approval to handle immature papayas

using PAC Form 7 nor report shipments

of immature papayas to the committee

using PAC Form 7(c). This rule will

decrease the burden by 9.25 hours.

The Department has not identified

any relevant Federal rules that

duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this

proposed rule.

In addition, the committee’s meetings

were widely publicized throughout the

papaya industry and all interested

persons were encouraged to attend the

meetings and participate in committee

deliberations on all issues. Like all

committee meetings, the December 28,

2000, and the subsequent January 11,

2001, meetings were public meetings

and all entities, both large and small,

were encouraged to express views on

this issue. The committee itself is

comprised of 13 members, consisting of

nine producer members and three

handlers members. The committee also

includes a public member who does not

represent an agricultural interest nor

have a financial interest in papayas.

Finally, interested persons are invited to

submit information on the regulatory

and informational impacts of this action

on small businesses.

A small business guide on complying

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop

marketing agreements and orders may

be viewed at the following web site:

http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/

moab.html. Any questions about the

compliance guide should be sent to Jay

Guerber at the previously mentioned

address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section.

After consideration of all relevant

matters presented, including the

information and recommendation

submitted by the committee and other

available information, it is hereby found

that the suspensions and revision made

by this rule, as hereinafter set forth, will

tend to effectuate the declared policy of

the Act.

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

found and determined that it is

impracticable, unnecessary, and

contrary to the public interest to give

preliminary notice prior to putting this

rule into effect, and that good cause

exists for not postponing the effective

date of this rule until 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register

because: (1) This rule needs to be in

effect as soon as possible to continue to

provide relief to the Hawaii papaya

industry; (2) this action reflects the

emergency recommendation of the

committee and the Department’s

assessment of the industry; and (3) this

rule provides a 60-day comment period

and any comments received will be

considered prior to finalization of this

rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 928

Marketing agreements, Papayas,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 928 is amended as

follows:

PART 928—PAPAYAS GROWN IN

HAWAII

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 928 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

§§ 928.150, 928.152, 928.313 [Suspended]

2. Sections 928.150, 928.152, and

928.313 are indefinitely suspended in

their entirety.

3. In § 928.160, paragraph (a)(1) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 928.160 Utilization reports.

(a) * * *

(1) Quantity of papayas handled

subject to assessments including the

date and destination of each shipment;

* * * * *

Dated: May 21, 2001.

Kenneth C. Clayton,

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing

Service.

[FR Doc. 01–13472 Filed 5–29–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and

Technology

15 CFR Part 285

[Docket No.: 000831249–1129–02]

RIN 0693–ZA39

National Voluntary Laboratory

Accreditation Program; Operating

Procedures

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards

and Technology, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Director of the National

Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST), United States Department of

Commerce, is today issuing a final rule

revising regulations found at 15 CFR

part 285 pertaining to the operation of

the National Voluntary Laboratory

Accreditation Program (NVLAP). The

NVLAP procedures are revised to ensure

continued consistency with

international standards and guidelines

currently set forth in the International

Organization for Standardization (ISO)/

International Electrotechnical

Commission (IEC) 17025:1999, General

requirements for the competence of

testing and calibration laboratories, and

ISO/IEC Guide 58:1993, Calibration and

testing laboratory accreditation

systems—General requirements for

operation and recognition, thereby

facilitating and promoting acceptance of

test and calibration results between

countries to avoid barriers to trade.

Provisions in this regard will facilitate

cooperation between laboratories and

other bodies, assist in the exchange of

information and experience and in the

harmonization of standards and

procedures, and establish the basis for

national and international mutual

recognition arrangements.

In addition, NIST is reorganizing and

simplifying part 285 for ease of use and

understanding. While the existing

regulations accurately set forth the

NVLAP procedures, the regulations

themselves are complex and difficult to

understand. In an effort to simplify the

format and make the regulations more

user friendly, NIST is rewriting in plain

English and consolidating sections

previously contained in subparts A

through C of part 285.

DATES: This rule is effective June 29,

2001.

ADDRESSES: David F. Alderman, Chief,

National Voluntary Laboratory

Accreditation Program, National

Institute of Standards and Technology,

100 Bureau Drive, Stop 2140,

Gaithersburg, MD 20899–2140.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David F. Alderman, Chief, National

Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation

Program, 301–975–4016.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Part 285 of title 15 of the Code of

Federal Regulations sets out procedures

and general requirements under which

the National Voluntary Accreditation

Program (NVLAP) operates as an

unbiased third party to accredit both

testing and calibration laboratories.

The NVLAP procedures were first

published in the Federal Register as

part 7 of title 15 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) (41 FR 8163,

February 25, 1976). On June 2, 1994, the

procedures were redesignated as part

285 of title 15 of the CFR, expanded to