Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 66859

Need for Correction

As published, the final regulation

contains errors which may prove to be

misleading and are in need of proper

clarification.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR parts 923

Cherries, Marketing agreements,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Accordingly, 7 CFR part 923 is

corrected by making the following

correcting amendments:

PART 923—SWEET CHERRIES

GROWN IN DESIGNATED COUNTIES

IN WASHINGTON

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR

part 923 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

2. In § 923.322, paragraphs (f) (1), (2),

and (3) are added to read as follows:

§ 923.322 Washington Cherry Regulation

22.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(1) The shipment consists of cherries

sold for home use and not for resale;

(2) The shipment does not, in the

aggregate, exceed 100 pounds, net

weight, of cherries; and

(3) Each container is stamped or

marked with the words ‘‘not for resale’’

in letters at least one-half inch in height.

* * * * *

Dated: December 18, 1995.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 95–31278 Filed 12–26–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 966

[Docket No. FV95–966–1FIR]

Tomatoes Grown in Florida; 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 Florida Tomato

Committee (Committee) to incur

expenses that are reasonable and

necessary to administer the program.

Funds to administer this program are

derived from assessments on handlers.

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, P.O.

Box 96456, room 2523–S, Washington,

DC 20090–6456, telephone 202–720–

9918, or Aleck J. Jonas, Southeast

Marketing Field Office, Fruit and

Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O.

Box 2276, Winter Haven, FL 33883–

2276, telephone 941–299–4770.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

No. 125 and Order No. 966, both as

amended (7 CFR part 966), regulating

the handling of tomatoes grown in

Florida, 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, Florida

tomatoes are subject to assessments. It is

intended that the assessment rate as

issued herein will be applicable to all

assessable tomatoes handled during the

1995–96 fiscal period, 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

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

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.

Since the interim final rule was

issued, new information on the actual

number of producers and handlers was

received. There are approximately 90

producers of Florida tomatoes under

this marketing order, and approximately

75 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 Florida

tomato producers and handlers may be

classified as small entities.

The budget of expenses for the 1995–

96 fiscal period was prepared by the

Florida Tomato Committee, the agency

responsible for local administration of

the marketing order, and submitted to

the Department for approval. The

members of the Committee are

producers of Florida tomatoes. They are

familiar with the Committee’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 Committee was derived by dividing

anticipated expenses by expected

shipments of Florida tomatoes. Because

that rate will be applied to actual

shipments, it must be established at a

rate that will provide sufficient income

to pay the Committee’s expenses.

The Committee met September 7,

1995, and unanimously recommended a

1995–96 budget of $2,025,000, $190,000

less than the previous year. Budget

items for 1995–96 which have increased

compared to those budgeted for 1994–95

(in parentheses) are: Office salaries,

$319,100 ($297,300), depreciation,

$19,000 ($18,200), employee’s

retirement program, $50,500 ($46,600),

insurance and bonds, $8,000 ($7,000),

payroll tax, $22,150 ($20,000), supplies

and printing, $8,500 ($7,500), and

miscellaneous, $2,000 ($1,600), audit,

$3,750 ($2,500), and research expense,

$245,000 ($192,100). Items which have

decreased compared to those budgeted

for 1994–95 (in parentheses) are: Office
66860 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

rent, $24,500 ($24,700), and education

and promotion expense, $1,225,000

($1,500,000). All other items are

budgeted at last year’s amounts.

The Committee also unanimously

recommended an assessment rate of

$0.04 per 25-pound container, the same

as last year. This rate, when applied to

anticipated shipments of 50,000,000 25-

pound containers, will yield $2,000,000

in assessment income. This, along with

$25,000 in interest and other income,

will be adequate to cover budgeted

expenses.

An interim final rule was published

in the Federal Register on October 30,

1995 (60 FR 55176). That interim final

rule added § 966.233 to authorize

expenses and establish an assessment

rate for the Committee. That rule

provided that interested persons could

file comments through November 29,

1995. No comments were received.

While this action will impose some

additional costs on handlers, the costs

are in the form of uniform assessments

on handlers. Some of the additional

costs may be passed on to producers.

However, these costs will be offset by

the benefits derived by the operation of

the marketing order. Therefore, the

Administrator of the AMS has

determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

After consideration of all relevant

matter presented, including the

information and recommendations

submitted by the Committee and other

available information, it is hereby found

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth,

will tend to effectuate the declared

policy of the Act.

It is further found that good cause

exists for not postponing the effective

date of this action until 30 days after

publication in the Federal Register (5

U.S.C. 553) because the Committee

needs to have sufficient funds to pay its

expenses which are incurred on a

continuous basis. The 1995–96 fiscal

period began on August 1, 1995. The

marketing order requires that the rate of

assessment for the fiscal period apply to

all assessable tomatoes handled during

the fiscal period. In addition, handlers

are aware of this action which was

unanimously recommended by the

Committee at a public meeting and

published in the Federal Register as an

interim final rule.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 966

Marketing agreements, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Tomatoes.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 7 CFR part 966 is amended as

follows:

PART 966—TOMATOES GROWN IN

FLORIDA

Accordingly, the interim final rule

amending 7 CFR part 966 which was

published at 60 FR 55176 on October

30, 1995, is adopted as a final rule

without change.

Dated: December 18, 1995.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,

Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 95–31274 Filed 12–26–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 1250

[Docket No. PY–95–005]

Technical Amendments to Egg

Research and Promotion Order and

Rules and Regulations

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service.

ACTION: Final Rule; Termination Order.

SUMMARY: A review of the Order and

rules and regulations implementing the

egg research and promotion program

identified a number of changes to

eliminate sections which are duplicative

or obsolete and will avoid current and

future conflict. The revisions eliminate

certain sections dealing with

membership on the Egg Board, obtaining

refunds, and other miscellaneous

provisions.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 27, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angela C. Clonts, Standardization

Branch, Poultry Division, AMS, USDA,

P.O. Box 96456, Room 3944–S,

Washington, DC 20090–6456; telephone

(202) 720–3506; fax (202) 720–5631.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

amends the Egg Research and Promotion

Order and Rules and Regulations [7 CFR

part 1250], hereinafter referred to as the

Order and regulations. The Order and

regulations are effective under the Egg

Research and Consumer Information

Act, as amended, hereinafter referred to

as the Act.

This regulatory action is being taken

as part of the National Performance

Review program to eliminate

unnecessary regulations and improve

those that remain in force.

Executive Orders 12866 and 12778

This rule has been determined to be

not-significant for purposes of Executive

Order 12866 and therefore has not been

reviewed by OMB.

This rule has been reviewed under

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform. It is not intended to have

retroactive effect. This rule would 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 14 of the Act, a person subject

to the Order may file a petition with the

Secretary stating that the Order, any

provisions of the order, or any

obligations imposed in connection with

the Order, are not in accordance with

law and requesting a modification of the

Order or an exemption therefrom. The

petitioner is afforded the opportunity

for a hearing on the petition. After a

hearing, the Secretary would rule on the

petition. The Act provides that the

district court of the United States in any

district in which such person is an

inhabitant, or has his principal place of

business, has jurisdiction to review the

Secretary’s ruling on the petition, if a

complaint for that purpose is filed

within 20 days after the date of the entry

of the ruling.

Effect on Small Entities

The Administrator of the Agricultural

Marketing Service has determined that

this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities, as defined by

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

601 et seq.), because the changes are

primarily to remove obsolete and

duplicate material and establish

definitions consistent with current

industry terminology.

Paperwork Reduction

Information collection requirements

and recordkeeping provisions contained

in 7 CFR Part 1250 have been previously

approved by the Office of Management

and Budget and assigned OMB Control

No. 0581–0093 under the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1980.

No additional recordkeeping

requirements are imposed as a result of

this rule.

Background and Proposed Changes

A review of the Order and regulations

was conducted in response to the

President’s Regulatory Review Initiative

of March 4, 1995. As a result, a number

of provisions were identified that could

be removed without adverse impact to

the program. The amendments eliminate

sections that contain provisions

duplicated in other sections or are

obsolete.

Membership Provisions

Section 1250.328(d) was developed to

establish the manner in which the

initial Board would be nominated. Since

June 1984, any changes in the