28000 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

erosion based on 4 tables reflecting the

relationship of rill to interrill erosion.

(5) C is the cover and management

factor. Estimates the soil loss ratio at

one-half month intervals throughout the

year, accounting for the individual

effects of prior land use, crop canopy,

surface cover, surface roughness, and

soil moisture.

(6) P is the support practice factor.

Accounts for the effect of conservation

support practices, such as cross-slope

farming, stripcropping, buffer strips,

and terraces on soil erosion.

§ 610.13 Equations For Predicting Soil

Loss Due To Wind Erosion.

(a) The equation for predicting soil

loss due to wind in the Wind Erosion

Equation (WEQ) is E=f(IKCLV). (For

further information on WEQ see the

paper by N.P. Woodruff and F.H.

Siddaway, 1965. ‘‘A Wind Erosion

Equation,’’ Soil Science Society of

America Proceedings, Vol. 29, No. 5,

pages 602–608, which is available from

the American Society of Agronomy,

Madison, Wisconsin. In addition, the

use of the WEQ in NRCS is explained

in the Natural Resources Conservation

Service (NRCS) National Agronomy

Manual, 190–V–NAM, second ed., Part

502, March, 1988, which is available

from the NRCS, P.O. Box 2890,

Washington, DC 20013.)

(c) The factors in the WEQ equation

are defined as follows:

(1) E is the estimation of the average

annual soil loss in tons per acre.

(2) f indicates the equation includes

functional relationships that are not

straight-line mathematical calculations.

(3) I is the soil erodibility index. It is

the potential for soil loss from a wide,

level, unsheltered, isolated field with a

bare, smooth, loose and uncrusted

surface. Soil erodibility is based on soil

surface texture, calcium carbonate

content, and percent day.

(4) K is the ridge roughness factor. It

is a measure of the effect of ridges

formed by tillage and planting

implements on wind erosion. The ridge

roughness is based on ridge spacing,

height, and erosive wind directions in

relation to the ridge direction

(5) C is the climatic factor. It is a

measure of the erosive potential of the

wind speed and surface moisture at a

given location compared with the same

factors at Garden City, Kansas. The

annual climatic factor at Garden City is

arbitrarily set at 100. All climatic factor

values are expressed as a percentage of

that at Garden City.

(6) L is the unsheltered distance. It is

the unsheltered distance across an

erodible field, measured along the

prevailing wind erosion direction. This

distance is measured beginning at a

stable border on the upwind side and

continuing downward to the

nonerodible or stable area, or to the

downwind edge of the area being

evaluated.

(7) V is the vegetative cover factor. It

accounts for the kind, amount, and

orientation of growing plants or plant

residue on the soil surface.

§ 610.14 Use of USLE, RUSLE, and WEQ.

(a) All Highly Erodible Land (HEL)

determinations are based on the

formulas set forth in 7 CFR § 12.21 using

some of the factors from the USLE and

WEQ and the factor values that were

contained in the local Field Office

Technical Guide (FOTG) as of January 1,

1990. In addition, this includes the soil

loss tolerance values used in those

formulas for determining HEL. The soil

loss tolerance value is used as one of the

criteria for planning soil conservation

systems. These values are available in

the FOTG in the local field office of the

Natural Resources Conservation Service.

(b) RUSLE will be used to:

(1)(i) Evaluate the soil loss estimates

of conservation systems contained in

the FOTG.

(ii) Evaluate the soil loss estimates of

systems actually applied, where those

systems were applied differently than

specified in the conservation plan

adopted by the producer or where a

conservation plan was not developed, in

determining whether a producer has

complied with the HEL conservation

provisions of the Food Security Act of

1985, as amended, 16 U.S.C. § 3801 et

seq., set forth in 7 CFR Part 12; and

(2) Develop new or revised

conservation plans.

Dated: May 30, 1996.

Paul W. Johnson,

Chief, Natural Resources Conservation

Service.

[FR Doc. 96–13920 Filed 5–31–96; 11:33 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–16–M

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 928

[Docket No. FV96–928–1–IFR]

Papayas Grown in Hawaii; Assessment

Rate

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Interim final rule with request

for comments.

SUMMARY: This interim final rule

establishes an assessment rate for the

Papaya Administrative Committee

(Committee) under Marketing Order No.

928 for the 1996–97 and subsequent

fiscal periods. The Committee is

responsible for local administration of

the marketing order which regulates the

handling of papayas grown in Hawaii.

Authorization to assess papaya handlers

enables the Committee to incur

expenses that are reasonable and

necessary to administer the program.

DATES: Effective on July 1, 1996.

Comments received by July 5, 1996, 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 in triplicate to the Docket Clerk,

Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS,

USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2523–S,

Washington, DC 20090–6456, FAX (202)

720–5698. Comments should reference

the docket 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Kate Nelson, Marketing Assistant,

California Marketing Field Office, Fruit

and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA,

2202 Monterey Street, suite 102B,

Fresno, California 93721, telephone

(209) 487–5901, FAX (209) 487–5901, or

Charles L. Rush, Marketing Specialist,

Marketing Order Administration

Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division,

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

2523–S, Washington, DC 20090–6456,

telephone (202) 720–5127, FAX (202)

720–5698.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule

is issued under Marketing Agreement

No. 928 and 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 12778, Civil Justice

Reform. Under the marketing order now

in effect, handlers of papayas grown in

Hawaii are subject to assessments.

Funds to administer the order are

derived from such assessments. It is

intended that the assessment rate as

issued herein will be applicable to all

assessable papayas beginning July 1,

1996, and continuing until amended,

suspended, or terminated. This rule will

not preempt any State or local laws,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 28001

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 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.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 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 400

producers of papayas in the production

area and approximately 60 handlers

subject to regulation under the

marketing order. Small agricultural

producers have been defined by the

Small Business Administration (13 CFR

121.601) 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. The majority of papaya

producers and handlers may be

classified as small entities.

The papaya marketing order provides

authority for the Committee, with the

approval of the Department, to

formulate an annual budget of expenses

and collect assessments from handlers

to administer the program. The

members of the Committee are

producers and handlers of papayas

grown in Hawaii. They are familiar with

the Committee’s needs and with the

costs for goods and services in their

local area and are thus in a position to

formulate an appropriate budget and

assessment rate. The assessment rate is

formulated and discussed in a public

meeting. Thus, all directly affected

persons have an opportunity to

participate and provide input.

The Committee met on April 26, 1996,

and unanimously recommended 1996–

97 expenditures of $485,300 and an

assessment rate of $0.0059 per pound of

papayas. In comparison, last year’s

budgeted expenditures were $435,800.

The assessment rate of $0.0059 is the

same as last year’s established rate.

Major expenditures recommended by

the Committee for the 1996–97 year

include $160,000 for the marketing and

promotion program, $130,000 for

research and development, and $67,000

for salaries. Budgeted expenses for these

items in 1995–96 were $165,500,

$115,000, and $67,000 respectively.

The assessment rate recommended by

the Committee was derived by dividing

anticipated expenses by expected

shipments of papayas grown in Hawaii.

Papaya shipments for the year are

estimated at 30 million pounds which

should provide $177,000 in assessment

income. Income derived from handler

assessments, the Hawaii Department of

Agriculture, the USDA’s Foreign

Agricultural Service, the County of

Hawaii, and the Japanese Inspection

program, along with interest income and

funds from the Committee’s authorized

reserve, will be adequate to cover

budgeted expenses. Funds in the reserve

will be kept within the maximum

permitted by the order.

While this rule will impose some

costs on handlers, the costs are in the

form of uniform assessments on all

handlers. Some of the costs may be

passed on to producers.

However, these costs should be offset

by the benefits derived by the operation

of the marketing order.

Based on available information, the

Agricultural Marketing Service has

determined that this rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The assessment rate established in

this rule will continue in effect

indefinitely unless modified,

suspended, or terminated by the

Secretary upon recommendation and

information submitted by the

Committee or other available

information.

Although this assessment rate is

effective for an indefinite period, the

Committee will continue to meet prior

to or during each fiscal period to

recommend a budget of expenses and

consider recommendations for

modification of the assessment rate. The

dates and times of Committee meetings

are available from the Committee or the

Department. Committee meetings are

open to the public and interested

persons may express their views at these

meetings. The Department will evaluate

Committee recommendations and other

available information to determine

whether modification of the assessment

rate is needed. Further rulemaking will

be undertaken as necessary. The

Committee’s 1996–97 budget and those

for subsequent fiscal periods will be

reviewed and, as appropriate, approved

by the Department.

After consideration of all relevant

material presented, including the

information and recommendation

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.

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

found and determined upon good cause

that it is impracticable, unnecessary,

and contrary to the public interest to

give preliminary notice prior to putting

this rule into effect, because: (1) The

Committee needs to have sufficient

funds to pay its expenses which are

incurred on a continuous basis; (2) the

1996–97 fiscal period begins on July 1,

1996, and the marketing order requires

that the rate of assessment for each

fiscal period apply to all assessable

papayas handled during such fiscal

period; (3) handlers are aware of this

action which was unanimously

recommended by the Committee at a

public meeting and is similar to other

assessment rate actions issued in past

years; and (4) this interim final rule

provides a 30-day comment period, and

all comments timely 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.

2. Section 928.226 is added to read as

follows:

Note: This section will appear in the Code

of Federal Regulations.

§ 928.226 Assessment rate.

On and after July 1, 1996, an

assessment rate of $0.0059 per pound is
28002 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

established for papayas grown in

Hawaii.

Dated: May 29, 1996.

Robert C. Keeney,

Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.

[FR Doc. 96–13853 Filed 6–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

7 CFR Part 1230

[No. LS–96–001]

Pork Promotion, Research, and

Consumer Information Order—

Increase in Importer Assessments

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Pork

Promotion, Research, and Consumer

Information Act (Act) of 1985 and the

Order issued thereunder, this final rule

increases the amount of the assessment

per pound due on imported pork and

pork products to reflect an increase in

the 1995 five-market average price for

domestic barrows and gilts. This action

brings the equivalent market value of

the live animals from which such

imported pork and pork products were

derived in line with the market values

of domestic porcine animals. These

changes will facilitate the continued

collection of assessments on imported

porcine animals, pork, and pork

products.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 5, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ralph L. Tapp, Chief, Marketing

Programs Branch, 202/720–1115.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Department of Agriculture (Department)

is issuing this final rule in conformance

with Executive Order 12866.

This final rule has been reviewed

under Executive Order 12778, Civil

Justice Reform. This is not intended to

have a retroactive effect. The Act states

that the statute is intended to occupy

the field of promotion and consumer

education involving pork and pork

products and of obtaining funds thereof

from pork producers and that the

regulation of such activity (other than a

regulation or requirement relating to a

matter of public health or the provision

of State or local funds for such activity)

that is in addition to or different from

the Act may not be imposed by a State.

The Act provides that administrative

proceedings must be exhausted before

parties may file suit in court. Under

§ 1625 of the Act, a person subject to an

order may file a petition with the

Secretary stating that such order, a

provision of such order or an obligation

imposed in connection with such order

is not in accordance with law; and

requesting a modification of the order or

an exemption from the order. Such

person 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 the

district in which such person resides or

does business has jurisdiction to review

the Secretary’s determination, if a

complaint is filed not later than 20 days

after the date such person receives

notice of such determination.

Pursuant to requirements set forth in

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5

United States Code(U.S.C.) 601 et seq.),

the Agricultural Marketing Service

(AMS) has considered the economic

impact of this final action on small

entities. The effect of the Order upon

small entities was discussed in the

September 5, 1986, issue of the Federal

Register (51 FR 31898), and it was

determined that the Order would not

have a significant effect upon a

substantial number of small entities.

Many of the estimated 200 importers

may be classified as small entities. This

final rule increases the amount of

assessments on imported pork and pork

products subject to assessment by twohundredths of a cent per pound, or as

expressed in cents per kilogram, fourhundredths of a cent per kilogram.

Adjusting the assessments on imported

pork and pork products would result in

an estimated increase in assessments of

$104,000 over a 12-month period.

Accordingly, the Administrator of AMS

has determined that this action will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

The Act (7 U.S.C. 4801–4819)

approved December 23, 1985,

authorized the establishment of a

national pork promotion, research, and

consumer information program. The

program was funded by an initial

assessment rate of 0.25 percent of the

market value of all porcine animals

marketed in the United States and an

equivalent amount of assessment on

imported porcine animals, pork, and

pork products. However, that rate was

increased to 0.35 percent in 1991 (56 FR

51635) and to 0.45 percent effective

September 3, 1995 (60 FR 29963). The

final Order establishing a pork

promotion, research, and consumer

information program was published in

the September 5, 1986, issue of the

Federal Register (51 FR 31898; as

corrected, at 51 FR 36383 and amended

at 53 FR 1909, 53 FR 30243, 56 FR 4,

56 FR 51635, and 60 FR 29963) and

assessments began on November 1,

1986.

The Order requires importers of

porcine animals to pay the U.S. Customs

Service (USCS), upon importation, the

assessment of 0.45 percent of the

animal’s declared value and importers

of pork and pork products to pay USCS,

upon importation, the assessment of

0.45 percent of the market value of the

live porcine animals from which such

pork and pork products were produced.

This final rule increases the assessments

on all of the imported pork and pork

products subject to assessment as

published in the Federal Register as a

final rule June 7, 1995, and effective

September 3, 1995; (60 FR 29965). This

increase is consistent with the increase

in the annual average price of domestic

barrows and gilts for calendar year 1995

as reported by USDA, AMS, Livestock

and Grain Market News (LGMN)

Branch. This increase in assessments

will make the equivalent market value

of the live porcine animal from which

the imported pork and pork products

were derived reflect the recent increase

in the market value of domestic porcine

animals, thereby promoting

comparability between importer and

domestic assessments. This final rule

will not change the current assessment

rate of 0.45 percent of the market value.

The methodology for determining the

per pound amounts for imported pork

and pork products was described in the

Supplementary Information

accompanying the Order and published

in the September 5, 1986, Federal

Register at 51 FR 31901. The weight of

imported pork and pork products is

converted to a carcass weight equivalent

by utilizing conversion factors which

are published in the Department’s

Statistical Bulletin No. 697 ‘‘Conversion

Factors and Weights and Measures.’’

These conversion factors take into

account the removal of bone, weight lost

in cooking or other processing, and the

nonpork components of pork products.

Secondly, the carcass weight equivalent

is converted to a live animal equivalent

weight by dividing the carcass weight

equivalent by 70 percent, which is the

average dressing percentage of porcine

animals in the United States. Thirdly,

the equivalent value of the live porcine

animal is determined by multiplying the

live animal equivalent weight by an

annual average market price for barrows

and gilts as reported by USDA, AMS,

LGMN Branch. This average price is

published on a yearly basis during the

month of January in LGMN Branch’s

publication ‘‘Livestock, Meat, and Wool

Weekly Summary and Statistics.’’

Finally, the equivalent value is

multiplied by the applicable assessment

rate of 0.45 percent due on imported