This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

65017

Vol. 60, No. 242

Monday, December 18, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 906

[Docket No. FV95–906–3–FIR]

Oranges and Grapefruit Grown in the

Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas;

Final Rule To Temporarily Relax Size

Requirements for Texas Grapefruit

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Agriculture (Department) is adopting as

a final rule, without change, the

provisions of an interim final rule

which temporarily relaxed the

minimum size requirements for Texas

grapefruit for the entire 1995–96 season.

This interim final rule is designed to

help the Texas citrus industry

successfully market the 1995–96 season

grapefruit crop.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 17, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles L. Rush, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O.

Box 96456, room 2523–S, Washington,

DC 20090–6456; telephone: 202–690–

3670; or Belinda G. Garza, McAllen

Marketing Field Office, USDA/AMS,

1313 East Hackberry, McAllen, Texas

78501; telephone: 210–682–2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final

rule is issued under Marketing

Agreement and Marketing Order No.

906 (7 CFR Part 906) regulating the

handling of oranges and grapefruit

grown in the Lower Rio Grande Valley

in Texas, hereinafter referred to as the

order. This order is effective under the

Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act

of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C 601–674),

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act.’’

The Department of Agriculture

(Department) is issuing this rule in

conformance with Executive Order

12866.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform. This rule is not intended to

have retroactive effect. This 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 requesting 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 the 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

small entities acting on their own

behalf. Thus, both statutes have small

entity orientation and compatibility.

There are approximately 15 citrus

handlers subject to regulation under the

order covering oranges and grapefruit

grown in Texas, and approximately

1,500 producers of these citrus fruits in

Texas. Small agricultural service firms,

which includes grapefruit handlers,

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. A majority of these

handlers and producers may be

classified as small entities.

This rule finalizes the temporary

relaxation of the minimum size

requirements for grapefruit as

prescribed under the Texas citrus

marketing order. The rule provides that

pack size 112 grapefruit may be shipped

throughout the entire 1995–96 season if

such grapefruit grade at least U.S. No. 1.

This relaxation is similar to the

relaxations which were issued for the

1993–94 and 1994–95 seasons. This

relaxation was unanimously

recommended by the Texas Valley

Citrus Committee (TVCC).

The interim final rule was issued on

October 17, 1995, and published in the

October 23, 1995, Federal Register (60

FR 54291), providing a 30-day comment

period ending November 22, 1995. No

comments were received.

Minimum grade and size

requirements for fresh grapefruit grown

in Texas are in effect under § 906.365 (7

CFR 906.365). This rule amends

§ 906.365 by revising paragraph (a)(4) to

permit shipment of grapefruit measuring

at least 35⁄16 inches in diameter (pack

size 112) and grading at least U.S. No.

1 for the entire 1995–96 season ending

June 30, 1996.

Section 906.365 establishes minimum

size requirements for Texas grapefruit.

During the period November 16 through

January 31 each season, grapefruit must

be at least pack size 96, that is the

minimum diameter for the grapefruit in

any lot is 39⁄16 inches. At other times,

grapefruit that is pack size 112, except

that the minimum diameter for

grapefruit in any lot is 35⁄16 inches, may

be shipped if it grades at least U.S. No.

1. The minimum grade requirement for

grapefruit is Texas Choice.

Permitting shipments of pack size 112

grapefruit grading at least U.S. No. 1 for

the remainder of the 1995–96 season

will enable Texas grapefruit handlers to

meet market needs and compete with

similar sized grapefruit expected to be

shipped from Florida.

The relaxation is expected to help the

Texas citrus industry successfully

market its 1995–96 season grapefruit

crop and have a positive effect on

producer returns. Permitting shipments

of pack size 112 grapefruit grading at

least U.S. No. 1 for the entire 1995–96
65018 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 242 / Monday, December 18, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

season will enable Texas grapefruit

handlers to meet market needs. This

final rule is based on the current and

prospective crop and market conditions

for Texas grapefruit. Fresh Texas

grapefruit shipments began in late

September this season.

Based on the above, 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

matter presented, including the

information and recommendations

submitted by the TVCC and other

available information, it is found that

finalizing this rule without change, as

published in the Federal Register (60

FR 54291, October 23, 1995) will tend

to effectuate the declared policy of the

Act.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 906

Grapefruit, Marketing agreements,

Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 906 is amended as

follows:

PART 906—ORANGES AND

GRAPEFRUIT GROWN IN THE LOWER

RIO GRANDE VALLEY IN TEXAS

Accordingly, the interim final rule

amending 7 CFR part 906 which was

published at 60 FR 54291 on October

23, 1995, is adopted as a final rule

without change.

Dated: December 12, 1995.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 95–30672 Filed 12–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 984

[Docket No. FV95–984–2FIR]

Walnuts Grown in California; Expenses

and Assessment Rate

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of

Agriculture (Department) is adopting as

a final rule, without change, the

provisions of an interim final rule that

authorized expenses and established an

assessment rate that generated funds to

pay those expenses. Authorization of

this budget enables the Walnut

Marketing Board (Board) to incur

expenses that are reasonable and

necessary to administer the program.

Funds to administer this program are

derived from assessments on handlers.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 1, 1995, through

July 31, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martha Sue Clark, Marketing Order

Administration Branch, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, PO.

Box 96456, room 2523–S, Washington,

DC 20090–6456, telephone 202–720–

9918, or Mark A. Hessel, California

Marketing Field Office, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, Suite

102B, 2202 Monterey Street, Fresno, CA

93721, telephone 209–487–5901.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

and Order No. 984, both as amended (7

CFR part 984), regulating the handling

of walnuts grown in California,

hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘order.’’

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 Department of Agriculture is

issuing this rule in conformance with

Executive Order 12866.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform. Under the provisions of the

marketing order now in effect,

California walnuts are subject to

assessments. It is intended that the

assessment rate as issued herein will be

applicable to all assessable walnuts

handled during the 1995–96 marketing

year, which began August 1, 1995, and

ends July 31, 1996. This 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. 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

not later than 20 days after the date of

the entry of the ruling.

Pursuant to the 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 5,000

producers of California walnuts under

this marketing order, and approximately

65 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

California walnut producers and

handlers may be classified as small

entities.

The budget of expenses for the 1995–

96 marketing year was prepared by the

Walnut Marketing Board, the agency

responsible for local administration of

the marketing order, and submitted to

the Department for approval. The

members of the Board are producers and

handlers of California walnuts. They are

familiar with the Board’s needs and

with the costs of goods and services in

their local area and are thus in a

position to formulate an appropriate

budget. The budget was formulated and

discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all

directly affected persons have had an

opportunity to participate and provide

input.

The assessment rate recommended by

the Board was derived by dividing

anticipated expenses by expected

merchantable certifications of California

walnuts. Because that rate will be

applied to the actual quantity of

certified merchantable walnuts, it must

be established at a rate that will provide

sufficient income to pay the Board’s

expenses.

The Board met September 8, 1995,

and unanimously recommended a

1995–96 budget of $2,280,175, $109,403

more than the previous year. Budget

items for 1995–96 which have increased

compared to those budgeted for 1994–95

(in parentheses) are: Field travel and

relates expenses, $17,000 ($13,000),

general insurance, $6,800 ($6,400),

social security and hospital insurance

taxes, $9,286 ($8,129), audit, $8,900,

($8,700), group life, retirement, and

medical, $45,861 ($44,370), office