Kiwifruit Grown in California; Increased Assessment Rate, 48082-48084 [05-16207]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
48082
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 920
[Docket No. FV05–920–2 PR]
Kiwifruit Grown in California;
Increased Assessment Rate
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This rule would increase the
assessment rate and change the
assessable unit established for the
Kiwifruit Administrative Committee
(Committee) for the 2005–06 and
subsequent fiscal periods from $0.002
per pound of kiwifruit to $0.045 per 9kilo volume-fill container or equivalent
of kiwifruit. The Committee locally
administers the marketing order which
regulates the handling of kiwifruit
grown in California. Authorization to
assess kiwifruit handlers enables the
Committee to incur expenses that are
reasonable and necessary to administer
the program. The fiscal period begins
August 1 and ends July 31. The
assessment rate would remain in effect
indefinitely unless modified,
suspended, or terminated.
DATES: Comments must be received by
September 6, 2005.
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, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., STOP
0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax:
(202) 720–8938, e-mail:
moab.docketclerk@usda.gov. 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, or can be viewed at:
https://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/moab.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shereen Marino, Marketing Specialist,
California Marketing Field Office, Fruit
and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA;
Telephone: (559) 487–5901; Fax: (559)
487–5906; or George Kelhart, Technical
Advisor, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and
Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., STOP
0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237;
telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)
720–8938. Small businesses may request
information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Jay Guerber,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; telephone: (202) 720–
2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or e-mail:
Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule
is issued under Marketing Order No.
920, as amended (7 CFR part 920),
regulating the handling of kiwifruit
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
(USDA) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order
12866.
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. Under the marketing order now
in effect, California kiwifruit handlers
are subject to assessments. Funds to
administer the order are derived from
such assessments. It is intended that the
assessment rate as proposed herein
would be applicable to all assessable
kiwifruit beginning on August 1, 2005,
and continue until amended,
suspended, or terminated. 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 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
not later than 20 days after the date of
the entry of the ruling.
This rule would increase the
assessment rate and change the
assessable unit established for the
Committee for the 2005–06 and
subsequent fiscal periods from $0.002
per pound of kiwifruit to $0.045 per 9kilo volume-fill container or equivalent
of kiwifruit.
The California kiwifruit marketing
order provides authority for the
Committee, with the approval of USDA,
to formulate an annual budget of
expenses and collect assessments from
handlers to administer the program. The
members of the Committee are
producers of California kiwifruit. They
are familiar with the Committee’s needs
and 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 at a public meeting. Thus, all
directly affected persons have an
opportunity to participate and provide
input.
For the 2004–05 and subsequent fiscal
periods, the Committee recommended,
and USDA approved, an assessment rate
that would continue in effect from fiscal
period to fiscal period unless modified,
suspended, or terminated by USDA
upon recommendation and information
submitted by the Committee or other
information available to USDA.
The Committee met on June 28, 2005,
and unanimously recommended 2005–
06 expenditures of $91,989 and an
assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-kilo
volume-fill container or equivalent of
kiwifruit. In comparison, last year’s
budgeted expenditures were $91,839.
The assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-kilo
volume-fill container or equivalent is
about $0.0003 per pound higher than
the rate currently in effect. The higher
assessment rate is needed because the
2004–2005 crop was smaller than
expected and assessment income fell
short of expenses. Reserve funds were
used to meet the shortfall. The higher
assessment rate should generate
sufficient income to cover anticipated
2005–06 expenses and maintain an
adequate reserve.
The following table compares major
budget expenditures recommended by
the Committee for the 2004–05 and
2005–06 fiscal periods:
Budget expense categories
2004–05
Administrative Staff & Field Salaries .......................................................................................................................
Travel .......................................................................................................................................................................
Office Costs/Annual Audit ........................................................................................................................................
VerDate jul<14>2003
10:09 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16AUP1.SGM
16AUP1
$61,000
6,500
14,555
2005–06
$61,000
6,500
14,705
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Budget expense categories
2004–05
Vehicle Expense Account ........................................................................................................................................
The assessment rate recommended by
the Committee was derived by the
following formula: Anticipated
expenses ($91,989), plus the desired
2006 ending reserve ($35,010), minus
the 2005 beginning reserve ($15,524),
divided by the total estimated 2005–06
shipments (2,475,000 9-kilo volume-fill
containers). An additional $100 in
interest income is also anticipated,
bringing the total projected 2005–06
revenue to $111,475. This calculation
requires the $0.045 per 9-kilo volumefill container assessment rate. This rate
should provide sufficient funds to meet
the anticipated expenses of $91,839 and
result in a July 2006 ending reserve of
$35,010, which is within the authorized
reserve permitted by the order. The
authorized reserve is approximately one
fiscal period’s expenses (§ 920.41).
The proposed assessment rate would
continue in effect indefinitely unless
modified, suspended, or terminated by
USDA upon recommendation and
information submitted by the
Committee or other available
information.
Although this assessment rate would
be in effect for an indefinite period, the
Committee would 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
USDA. Committee meetings are open to
the public and interested persons may
express their views at these meetings.
USDA would evaluate Committee
recommendations and other available
information to determine whether
modification of the assessment rate is
needed. Further rulemaking would be
undertaken as necessary. The
Committee’s 2005–06 budget and those
for subsequent fiscal periods would be
reviewed and, as appropriate, approved
by USDA.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
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. 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 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 45 handlers
of California kiwifruit subject to
regulation under the marketing order
and approximately 275 growers in the
production area. Small agricultural
service firms are defined by the Small
Business Administration (13 CFR
2004–05
Administrative Staff & Field Salaries .......................................................................................................................
Travel .......................................................................................................................................................................
Office Costs/Annual Audit ........................................................................................................................................
Vehicle Expense Account ........................................................................................................................................
VerDate jul<14>2003
10:09 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
reserve ($15,524), divided by the total
estimated 2005–06 shipments
(2,475,000 9-kilo volume-fill
containers). This calculation resulted in
the $0.045 per 9-kilo volume-fill
container assessment rate. This rate
would provide sufficient funds to meet
the anticipated expenses of $91,989 and
result in a July 2006 ending reserve of
$35,010, which is within the authorized
reserve permitted by the order. The
authorized reserve is approximately one
fiscal period’s expenses (§ 920.41). An
additional $100 in interest income is
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2005–06
9,784
121.201) as those whose annual receipts
are less than $6,000,000, and small
agricultural producers are defined as
those whose annual receipts are less
than $750,000.
None of the 45 handlers subject to
regulation have annual kiwifruit sales of
at least $6,000,000. In addition, six
growers subject to regulation have
annual sales exceeding $750,000.
Therefore, a majority of the kiwifruit
handlers and growers may be classified
as small entities.
This rule would increase the
assessment rate and change the
assessable unit established for the
Committee and collected from handlers
for the 2005–06 and subsequent fiscal
periods from $0.002 per pound of
kiwifruit to $0.045 per 9-kilo volume-fill
container or equivalent of kiwifruit. The
Committee unanimously recommended
2005–06 expenditures of $91,989 and an
assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-kilo
volume-fill container or equivalent of
kiwifruit. The proposed assessment rate
of $0.045 is $0.0003 higher than the
2004–05 rate. The quantity of assessable
kiwifruit for the 2005–06 fiscal period is
estimated at 2,475,000 9-kilo volume-fill
containers or equivalent of kiwifruit.
Thus, the $0.045 rate should provide
$111,375 in assessment income and be
adequate to meet this year’s expenses.
The following table compares major
budget expenditures recommended by
the Committee for the 2004–05 and
2005–06 fiscal years:
Budget expense categories
The Committee reviewed and
unanimously recommended 2005–06
expenditures of $91,989, which
included an increase in audit expenses.
Prior to arriving at this budget, the
Committee considered alternative
expenditure levels, but ultimately
decided that the recommended levels
were reasonable to properly administer
the order. The assessment rate
recommended by the Committee was
derived by the following formula:
Anticipated expenses ($91,989), plus
the desired 2006 ending reserve
($35,010), minus the 2005 beginning
9,784
48083
$61,000
6,500
14,555
9,784
2005–06
$61,000
6,500
14,705
9,784
also anticipated, bringing the total
projected 2005–06 revenue to $111,475.
A review of historical information and
preliminary information pertaining to
the upcoming fiscal period indicates
that the grower price for the 2005–06
season could be about $8.09 per 9-kilo
volume-fill container or equivalent of
kiwifruit. Therefore, the estimated
assessment revenue for the 2005–06
fiscal period as a percentage of total
grower revenue is estimated at about
0.56 percent.
This action would increase the
assessment obligation imposed on
E:\FR\FM\16AUP1.SGM
16AUP1
48084
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 16, 2005 / Proposed Rules
handlers. While assessments impose
some additional costs on handlers, the
costs are minimal and uniform on all
handlers. Some of the additional costs
may be passed on to producers.
However, these costs would be offset by
the benefits derived by the operation of
the marketing order. In addition, the
Committee’s meeting was widely
publicized throughout the California
kiwifruit industry and all interested
persons were invited to attend the
meeting and participate in Committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all
Committee meetings, the June 28, 2005,
meeting was a public meeting and all
entities, both large and small, were able
to express views on this issue. Finally,
interested persons are invited to submit
information on the regulatory and
informational impacts of this action on
small businesses.
This proposed rule would impose no
additional reporting or recordkeeping
requirements on either small or large
California kiwifruit 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 rule.
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/
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.
A 20-day comment period is provided
to allow interested persons to respond
to this proposed rule. Twenty days is
deemed appropriate because: (1) The
2005–06 fiscal period began on August
1, 2005, and the marketing order
requires that the rate of assessment for
each fiscal period apply to all assessable
kiwifruit handled during such fiscal
period; (2) the Committee needs to have
sufficient funds to pay its expenses
which are incurred on a continuous
basis and; (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.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920
Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements,
Reporting and record keeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 920 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
VerDate jul<14>2003
10:09 Aug 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
Ian
Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
part 920 continues to read as follows:
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–
5299; telephone (781) 238–7178; fax
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
(781) 238–7199.
2. Section 920.213 is revised to read
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA
as follows:
proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with
§ 920.213 Assessment rate.
a proposed airworthiness directive (AD).
The proposed AD applies to Rolls-Royce
On and after August 1, 2005, an
plc (RR) models RB211–535C–37,
assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-kilo
RB211–535E4–37, RB211–535E4-B–37,
volume-fill container or equivalent of
and RB211–535E4-B–75 turbofan
kiwifruit is established for kiwifruit
engines. The proposed AD would have
grown in California.
applied to those engines with radial
Dated: August 11, 2005.
drive steady bearing, P/N LK76084
Kenneth C. Clayton,
installed, with fewer than 3,000 engineActing Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
operating-hours on the bearing. We
Service.
published the proposed AD in the
[FR Doc. 05–16207 Filed 8–15–05; 8:45 am]
Federal Register on October 9, 2003, (68
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
FR 58291). That proposed action would
have required initial and repetitive
visual inspections of the engine oil
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION scavenge filter for evidence of radial
drive steady bearing failure. If evidence
Federal Aviation Administration
was found, that proposed action would
have required a visual inspection of the
14 CFR Part 39
radial drive steady bearing for damage
and evidence of bearing debris. That
[Docket No. 2003–NE–31–AD]
proposed action was prompted by
notification from the Civil Aviation
Airworthiness Directives: Rolls-Royce
Authority (CAA), which is the
plc RB211–535 Turbofan Engines
airworthiness authority for the U.K. The
CAA notified us that an unsafe
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
condition may exist on RR models
Administration, DOT.
RB211–535C–37, RB211–535E4–37,
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
RB211–535E4–B–37, and RB211–
535E4–B–75 turbofan engines. The
SUMMARY: The FAA is withdrawing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). unsafe condition had applied to those
engines with radial drive steady bearing
That NPRM proposed a new
P/N LK76084 installed with fewer than
airworthiness directive (AD) that
3,000 engine operating hours on the
applies to certain Rolls-Royce plc (RR)
models RB211–535C–37, RB211–535E4– bearing. The CAA received reports of
seven low time failures of radial drive
37, RB211–535E4–B–37, and RB211–
steady bearings within a four-month
535E4–B–75 turbofan engines. The
period. These failures were not detected
NPRM had applied to those engines
through routine magnetic chip detector
with radial drive steady bearing part
monitoring because the failed bronze
number (P/N) LK76084 installed, with
fewer than 3,000 engine operating hours bearing cages are nonmagnetic, and the
cage failure mode is rapid. The
on the bearing. That proposed action
proposed actions intended to prevent a
would have required initial and
possible dual-engine in-flight shutdown
repetitive visual inspections of the
engine oil scavenge filter for evidence of caused by radial drive steady bearing
failure.
radial drive steady bearing failure. If
Since the issuance of that NPRM, RR
after finding evidence, the proposed
notified us that all at-risk radial drive
action would have required a visual
steady bearings are removed from
inspection of the radial drive steady
service. RR also notified us that the
bearing for damage and evidence of
remaining bearings in service are now
bearing debris. Since we issued that
well over the 3,000-engine-operatingNPRM, RR notified us that all at-risk
radial drive steady bearings are removed hour threshold and are no longer at risk.
Upon further consideration, we
from service. RR also notified us that
hereby withdraw the proposed rule for
remaining bearings in service are now
the following reasons:
well over the 3,000-engine-operating• After RR notifying us of the removal
hour threshold and are no longer at risk.
Accordingly, we withdraw the proposed from service and bearing threshold
information, stated previously.
rule.
PART 920—KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN
CALIFORNIA
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\16AUP1.SGM
16AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 16, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48082-48084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16207]
[[Page 48082]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 920
[Docket No. FV05-920-2 PR]
Kiwifruit Grown in California; Increased Assessment Rate
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule would increase the assessment rate and change the
assessable unit established for the Kiwifruit Administrative Committee
(Committee) for the 2005-06 and subsequent fiscal periods from $0.002
per pound of kiwifruit to $0.045 per 9-kilo volume-fill container or
equivalent of kiwifruit. The Committee locally administers the
marketing order which regulates the handling of kiwifruit grown in
California. Authorization to assess kiwifruit handlers enables the
Committee to incur expenses that are reasonable and necessary to
administer the program. The fiscal period begins August 1 and ends July
31. The assessment rate would remain in effect indefinitely unless
modified, suspended, or terminated.
DATES: Comments must be received by September 6, 2005.
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, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC
20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938, e-mail: moab.docketclerk@usda.gov.
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, or can be viewed at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/
moab.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shereen Marino, Marketing Specialist,
California Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS,
USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901; Fax: (559) 487-5906; or George
Kelhart, Technical Advisor, Marketing Order Administration Branch,
Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax:
(202) 720-8938. Small businesses may request information on complying
with this regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237;
telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or e-mail:
Jay.Guerber@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Order
No. 920, as amended (7 CFR part 920), regulating the handling of
kiwifruit 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 (USDA) is issuing this rule in
conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. Under the marketing order now in effect, California
kiwifruit handlers are subject to assessments. Funds to administer the
order are derived from such assessments. It is intended that the
assessment rate as proposed herein would be applicable to all
assessable kiwifruit beginning on August 1, 2005, and continue until
amended, suspended, or terminated. 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 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 not later than 20 days after the
date of the entry of the ruling.
This rule would increase the assessment rate and change the
assessable unit established for the Committee for the 2005-06 and
subsequent fiscal periods from $0.002 per pound of kiwifruit to $0.045
per 9-kilo volume-fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit.
The California kiwifruit marketing order provides authority for the
Committee, with the approval of USDA, to formulate an annual budget of
expenses and collect assessments from handlers to administer the
program. The members of the Committee are producers of California
kiwifruit. They are familiar with the Committee's needs and 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 at a public meeting. Thus, all
directly affected persons have an opportunity to participate and
provide input.
For the 2004-05 and subsequent fiscal periods, the Committee
recommended, and USDA approved, an assessment rate that would continue
in effect from fiscal period to fiscal period unless modified,
suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation and information
submitted by the Committee or other information available to USDA.
The Committee met on June 28, 2005, and unanimously recommended
2005-06 expenditures of $91,989 and an assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-
kilo volume-fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit. In comparison,
last year's budgeted expenditures were $91,839. The assessment rate of
$0.045 per 9-kilo volume-fill container or equivalent is about $0.0003
per pound higher than the rate currently in effect. The higher
assessment rate is needed because the 2004-2005 crop was smaller than
expected and assessment income fell short of expenses. Reserve funds
were used to meet the shortfall. The higher assessment rate should
generate sufficient income to cover anticipated 2005-06 expenses and
maintain an adequate reserve.
The following table compares major budget expenditures recommended
by the Committee for the 2004-05 and 2005-06 fiscal periods:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget expense categories 2004-05 2005-06
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Staff & Field Salaries... $61,000 $61,000
Travel.................................. 6,500 6,500
Office Costs/Annual Audit............... 14,555 14,705
[[Page 48083]]
Vehicle Expense Account................. 9,784 9,784
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The assessment rate recommended by the Committee was derived by the
following formula: Anticipated expenses ($91,989), plus the desired
2006 ending reserve ($35,010), minus the 2005 beginning reserve
($15,524), divided by the total estimated 2005-06 shipments (2,475,000
9-kilo volume-fill containers). An additional $100 in interest income
is also anticipated, bringing the total projected 2005-06 revenue to
$111,475. This calculation requires the $0.045 per 9-kilo volume-fill
container assessment rate. This rate should provide sufficient funds to
meet the anticipated expenses of $91,839 and result in a July 2006
ending reserve of $35,010, which is within the authorized reserve
permitted by the order. The authorized reserve is approximately one
fiscal period's expenses (Sec. 920.41).
The proposed assessment rate would continue in effect indefinitely
unless modified, suspended, or terminated by USDA upon recommendation
and information submitted by the Committee or other available
information.
Although this assessment rate would be in effect for an indefinite
period, the Committee would 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 USDA.
Committee meetings are open to the public and interested persons may
express their views at these meetings. USDA would evaluate Committee
recommendations and other available information to determine whether
modification of the assessment rate is needed. Further rulemaking would
be undertaken as necessary. The Committee's 2005-06 budget and those
for subsequent fiscal periods would be reviewed and, as appropriate,
approved by USDA.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
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. 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 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 45 handlers of California kiwifruit subject
to regulation under the marketing order and approximately 275 growers
in the production area. Small agricultural service firms are defined by
the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.201) as those whose
annual receipts are less than $6,000,000, and small agricultural
producers are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than
$750,000.
None of the 45 handlers subject to regulation have annual kiwifruit
sales of at least $6,000,000. In addition, six growers subject to
regulation have annual sales exceeding $750,000. Therefore, a majority
of the kiwifruit handlers and growers may be classified as small
entities.
This rule would increase the assessment rate and change the
assessable unit established for the Committee and collected from
handlers for the 2005-06 and subsequent fiscal periods from $0.002 per
pound of kiwifruit to $0.045 per 9-kilo volume-fill container or
equivalent of kiwifruit. The Committee unanimously recommended 2005-06
expenditures of $91,989 and an assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-kilo
volume-fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit. The proposed
assessment rate of $0.045 is $0.0003 higher than the 2004-05 rate. The
quantity of assessable kiwifruit for the 2005-06 fiscal period is
estimated at 2,475,000 9-kilo volume-fill containers or equivalent of
kiwifruit. Thus, the $0.045 rate should provide $111,375 in assessment
income and be adequate to meet this year's expenses.
The following table compares major budget expenditures recommended
by the Committee for the 2004-05 and 2005-06 fiscal years:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget expense categories 2004-05 2005-06
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Staff & Field Salaries... $61,000 $61,000
Travel.................................. 6,500 6,500
Office Costs/Annual Audit............... 14,555 14,705
Vehicle Expense Account................. 9,784 9,784
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee reviewed and unanimously recommended 2005-06
expenditures of $91,989, which included an increase in audit expenses.
Prior to arriving at this budget, the Committee considered alternative
expenditure levels, but ultimately decided that the recommended levels
were reasonable to properly administer the order. The assessment rate
recommended by the Committee was derived by the following formula:
Anticipated expenses ($91,989), plus the desired 2006 ending reserve
($35,010), minus the 2005 beginning reserve ($15,524), divided by the
total estimated 2005-06 shipments (2,475,000 9-kilo volume-fill
containers). This calculation resulted in the $0.045 per 9-kilo volume-
fill container assessment rate. This rate would provide sufficient
funds to meet the anticipated expenses of $91,989 and result in a July
2006 ending reserve of $35,010, which is within the authorized reserve
permitted by the order. The authorized reserve is approximately one
fiscal period's expenses (Sec. 920.41). An additional $100 in interest
income is also anticipated, bringing the total projected 2005-06
revenue to $111,475.
A review of historical information and preliminary information
pertaining to the upcoming fiscal period indicates that the grower
price for the 2005-06 season could be about $8.09 per 9-kilo volume-
fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit. Therefore, the estimated
assessment revenue for the 2005-06 fiscal period as a percentage of
total grower revenue is estimated at about 0.56 percent.
This action would increase the assessment obligation imposed on
[[Page 48084]]
handlers. While assessments impose some additional costs on handlers,
the costs are minimal and uniform on all handlers. Some of the
additional costs may be passed on to producers. However, these costs
would be offset by the benefits derived by the operation of the
marketing order. In addition, the Committee's meeting was widely
publicized throughout the California kiwifruit industry and all
interested persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate
in Committee deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings,
the June 28, 2005, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both
large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Finally,
interested persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory
and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.
This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting or
recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California
kiwifruit 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 rule.
A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and
specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: 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.
A 20-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to
respond to this proposed rule. Twenty days is deemed appropriate
because: (1) The 2005-06 fiscal period began on August 1, 2005, and the
marketing order requires that the rate of assessment for each fiscal
period apply to all assessable kiwifruit handled during such fiscal
period; (2) the Committee needs to have sufficient funds to pay its
expenses which are incurred on a continuous basis and; (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.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920
Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements, Reporting and record keeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 920 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 920--KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 920 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
2. Section 920.213 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 920.213 Assessment rate.
On and after August 1, 2005, an assessment rate of $0.045 per 9-
kilo volume-fill container or equivalent of kiwifruit is established
for kiwifruit grown in California.
Dated: August 11, 2005.
Kenneth C. Clayton,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 05-16207 Filed 8-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
