Olives Grown in California; Increased Assessment Rate, 7782-7785 [E9-3596]
Download as PDF
7782
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Flare® 30), Burnectfifteen (Summer
Flare® 27), Burnectseventeen (Summer
Flare® 32), Candy Gold, Candy Pearl,
Diamond Ray, Early Red Jim, Fire Pearl,
Fire Sweet, Giant Pearl, Grand Bright,
Grand Candy, Grand Pearl, Grand
Sweet, Honey Blaze, Honey Dew, Honey
Diva, Honey Fire, Honey Kist, Honey
Rose, Honey Royale, July Pearl, July
Red, Kay Pearl, La Pinta, La Reina,
Larry’s Red, Late Red Jim, Mike’s Red,
Neptune, Orange Honey, P–R Red,
Prima Diamond IX, Prima Diamond X,
Prima Diamond XIX, Prima Diamond
XXIV, Prima Diamond XXVIII, Prince
Jim 3, Red Bright, Red Diamond, Red
Glen, Red Jim, Red Pearl, Regal Pearl,
Regal Red, Royal Giant, Ruby Bright,
Ruby Diamond, Ruby Pearl, Ruby
Sweet, Saucer, September Bright (26P–
490), September Free, September Red,
Signature, Sparkling June, Spring
Bright, Spring Pearl TM, Spring Sweet,
Sugar Pearl TM, Sugarine, Summer
Blush, Summer Bright, Summer
Diamond, Summer Fire, Summer Jewel,
Summer Lion, Summer Red, Sunburst,
Sun Valley Sweet, Terra White, Zee Glo
or Zephyr variety nectarines unless:
*
*
*
*
*
PART 917—FRESH PEARS AND
PEACHES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
3. Section 917.459 is amended by
revising the introductory text of
paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6),
and by adding paragraph (a)(6)(iii) to
read as follows:
■
§ 917.459 California peach grade and size
regulation.
(a) * * *
(2) Any package or container of April
Snow, Earlitreat, Snow Angel,
Supechfifteen, or Super Lady variety
peaches unless:
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Any package or container of Island
Prince, Snow Kist, Snow Peak, Spring
Princess, or Super Rich variety peaches
unless:
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Any package or container of
Babcock, Bev’s Red, Bright Princess,
Brittney Lane, Burpeachone (Spring
Flame® 21), Burpeachfourteen (Spring
Flame® 20), Burpeachnineteen (Spring
Flame® 22), Candy Red, Crimson Lady,
Crown Princess, David Sun, Early May
Crest, Flavorcrest, Honey Sweet, Ivory
Queen, June Lady, Magenta Queen, May
Crest, May Sweet, Prima Peach IV,
Queencrest, Rich May, Sauzee Queen,
Scarlet Queen, Sierra Snow, Snow Brite,
Springcrest, Spring Lady, Spring Snow,
Springtreat (60EF32), Sugar Time
(214LC68), Supecheight (012–094),
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
Supechnine, Sweet Scarlet, Sweet Crest
or Zee Diamond variety peaches unless:
*
*
*
*
*
(6) Any package or container of
August Lady, August Saturn, Autumn
Flame, Autumn Jewel, Autumn Red,
Autumn Rich, Autumn Rose, Autumn
Snow, Autumn Sun, Burpeachtwo
(Henry II® ), Burpeachthree (September
Flame® ), Burpeachfour (August
Flame® ), Burpeachfive (July Flame® ),
Burpeachsix (June Flame® ),
Burpeachseven (Summer Flame® 29),
Burpeachfifteen (Summer Flame® 34),
Burpeachtwenty (Summer Flame® ),
Burpeachtwentyone (Summer Flame®
26), Candy Princess, Coral Princess,
Country Sweet, Diamond Candy,
Diamond Princess, Earlirich, Early
Elegant Lady, Elegant Lady, Fancy Lady,
Fay Elberta, Full Moon, Galaxy, Glacier
White, Henry III, Henry IV, Ice Princess,
Ivory Princess, Jasper Gem, Jasper
Treasure, Jillie White, Joanna Sweet,
John Henry, Kaweah, Klondike, Last
Tango, Natures #10, O’Henry, Peach-NCream, Pink Giant, Pink Moon, Prima
Gattie 8, Prima Peach 13, Prima Peach
XV, Prima Peach 20, Prima Peach 23,
Prima Peach XXVII, Queen Jewel, Rich
Lady, Royal Lady, Ruby Queen, Ryan
Sun, Saturn (Donut), September Blaze,
September Lady, September Snow,
September Sun, Sierra Gem, Sierra Rich,
Snow Beauty, Snow Blaze, Snow Fall,
Snow Gem, Snow Giant, Snow Jewel,
Snow King, Snow Magic, Snow
Princess, Sprague Last Chance, Spring
Candy, Strawberry, Sugar Crisp, Sugar
Giant, Sugar Lady, Summer Dragon,
Summer Fling, Summer Lady, Summer
Sweet, Summer Zee, Sweet Blaze, Sweet
Dream, Sweet Henry, Sweet Kay, Sweet
September, Tra Zee, Valley Sweet, Vista,
White Lady, or Zee Lady variety
peaches unless:
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Such peaches in any container
when packed other than as specified in
paragraphs (a)(6)(i) and (ii) of this
section are of a size that a 16-pound
sample, representative of the peaches in
the package or container, contains not
more than 73 peaches, except for Peento
type peaches.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 13, 2009.
David R. Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–3585 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 932
[Doc. No. AMS–FV–08–0105; FV09–932–1
IFR]
Olives Grown in California; Increased
Assessment Rate
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Interim final rule with request
for comments.
SUMMARY: This rule increases the
assessment rate established for the
California Olive Committee (committee)
for the 2009 and subsequent fiscal years
from $15.60 to $28.63 per assessable ton
of olives handled. The committee
locally administers the marketing order
which regulates the handling of olives
grown in California. Assessments upon
olive handlers are used by the
committee to fund reasonable and
necessary expenses of the program. The
fiscal year began January 1 and ends
December 31. The assessment rate will
remain in effect indefinitely unless
modified, suspended, or terminated.
DATES: Effective February 21, 2009.
Comments received by April 21, 2009,
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, 1400
Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237,
Washington, DC 20250–0237; Fax: (202)
720–8938; or Internet: https://
www.regulations.gov. 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:
https://www.regulations.gov. All
comments submitted in response to this
rule will be included in the record and
will be made available to the public.
Please be advised that the identity of the
individuals or entities submitting the
comments will be made public on the
Internet at the address provided above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer R. Garcia, Marketing Specialist,
or Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional Manager,
California Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487–
5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906; or E-mail:
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Jennifer.Garcia@ams.usda.gov or
Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov.
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@ams.usda.gov.
This rule
is issued under Marketing Agreement
No. 148 and Order No. 932, both as
amended (7 CFR part 932), regulating
the handling of olives 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 olive handlers 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 olives
beginning on January 1, 2009, 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 there from. 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 increases the assessment
rate established for the committee for
the 2009 and subsequent fiscal years
from $15.60 to $28.63 per ton of
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
assessable olives from the applicable
crop years.
The California olive 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 fiscal year,
which is the 12-month period between
January 1 and December 31, begins after
the corresponding crop year, which is
the 12-month period beginning August
1 and ending July 31 of the subsequent
year. Fiscal year budget and assessment
recommendations are made after the
corresponding crop year olive tonnage is
reported. The members of the committee
are producers and handlers of California
olives. They are familiar with the
committee’s needs and with 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 discussed in
a public meeting. Thus, all directly
affected persons have an opportunity to
participate and provide input.
For the 2008 and subsequent fiscal
years, the committee recommended, and
USDA approved, an assessment rate that
would continue in effect from fiscal year
to fiscal year 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 December 10,
2008, and unanimously recommended
2009 fiscal year expenditures of
$1,482,349 and an assessment rate of
$28.63 per ton of assessable olives. In
comparison, last year’s budgeted
expenditures were $1,588,552. The
assessment rate of $28.63 is $13.03
higher than the rate currently in effect.
The committee recommended the higher
assessment rate because the 2008–09
assessable olive receipts as reported by
the California Agricultural Statistics
Service (CASS) are only 49,067 tons,
which compares to 108,059 tons in
2007–08. A series of very high
temperatures and a large crop in 2007
contributed to a substantially smaller
crop in 2008. The committee also plans
to use available reserve funds to help
meet its 2009 expenses.
The major expenditures
recommended by the committee for the
2009 fiscal year include $495,000 for
research, $627,800 for marketing
activities, and $359,549 for
administration. Budgeted expenditures
for these items in 2008 were $500,000,
$750,000, and $288,552, respectively.
The 2009 marketing and research
programs will be scaled back.
Recommended increases in the
administrative budget are due to
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7783
additional costs associated with the
anticipated hiring of a new Executive
Director.
The assessment rate recommended by
the committee was derived by
considering anticipated fiscal year
expenses, actual olive tonnage received
by handlers during the 2008–09 crop
year, and additional pertinent factors.
Actual assessable tonnage for the 2009
fiscal year is expected to be lower than
the 2008–09 crop receipts of 49,067 tons
reported by the CASS because some
olives may be diverted by handlers to
uses that are exempt from marketing
order requirements. Income derived
from handler assessments, along with
funds from the committee’s authorized
reserve and interest income, should be
adequate to cover budgeted expenses.
Funds in the reserve would be kept
within the maximum permitted by the
order of approximately one fiscal year’s
expenses (§ 932.40).
The assessment rate established in
this rule will 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 is
effective for an indefinite period, the
committee will continue to meet prior to
or during each fiscal year 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 will be
undertaken as necessary. The
committee’s 2009 budget and those for
subsequent fiscal years will be reviewed
and, as appropriate, approved by USDA.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601–612), 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
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
7784
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
unique in that they are brought about
through group action of essentially
small entities acting on their own
behalf.
There are approximately 1,000
producers of olives in the production
area and 2 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 $750,000, and small
agricultural service firms are defined as
those whose annual receipts are less
than $7,000,000.
Based upon information from the
committee, the majority of olive
producers may be classified as small
entities. Both of the handlers may be
classified as large entities.
This rule increases the assessment
rate established for the committee and
collected from handlers for the 2009 and
subsequent fiscal years from $15.60 to
$28.63 per ton of assessable olives. The
committee unanimously recommended
2009 expenditures of $1,482,349 and an
assessment rate of $28.63 per ton. The
assessment rate of $28.63 is $13.03
higher than the 2008 rate. The higher
assessment rate is necessary because
assessable olive receipts for the 2008–09
crop year were reported by the CASS to
be 49,067 tons, compared to 108,059
tons for the 2007–08 crop year. Actual
assessable tonnage for the 2009 fiscal
year is expected to be lower because
some of the receipts may be diverted by
handlers to exempt outlets on which
assessments are not paid.
Income generated from the $28.63 per
ton assessment rate should be adequate
to meet this year’s expenses when
combined with funds from the
authorized reserve and interest income.
Funds in the reserve would be kept
within the maximum permitted by the
order of about one fiscal year’s expenses
(§ 932.40).
Expenditures recommended by the
committee for the 2009 fiscal year
include $495,000 for research, $627,800
for marketing activities, and $359,549
for administration. Budgeted
expenditures for these items in 2008
were $500,000, $750,000, and $288,552,
respectively. The 2009 marketing and
research programs will be scaled back.
Prior to arriving at this budget, the
committee considered information from
various sources, such as the committee’s
Executive, Market Development, and
Research Subcommittees. Alternate
spending levels were discussed by these
groups, based upon the relative value of
various research and marketing projects
to the olive industry and the reduced
olive production. The assessment rate of
$28.63 per ton of assessable olives was
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
derived by considering anticipated
expenses, the volume of assessable
olives and additional pertinent factors.
A review of historical information
indicates that the grower price for the
2008–09 crop year was approximately
$1,109.47 per ton for canning fruit and
$380.71 per ton for limited-use sizes,
leaving the balance as unusable cull
fruit. Approximately 84 percent of the
total tonnage of olives received is
canning fruit sizes and 11 percent is
limited use sizes, leaving the balance as
unusable cull fruit. Grower revenue on
49,067 total tons of canning and limiteduse sizes would be $49,283,177 given
the current grower prices for those sizes.
Therefore, with an assessment rate
increased from $15.60 to $28.63, the
estimated assessment revenue is
expected to be almost 3 percent of
grower revenue.
This action increases the assessment
obligation imposed on 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 will
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 olive industry and all
interested persons were invited to
attend the meeting and participate in
committee deliberations on all issues.
Like all committee meetings, the
December 10, 2008, 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 action imposes no additional
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
on either small or large California olive
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.
AMS is committed to complying with
the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the Internet and other
information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and
services, and for other purposes.
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/
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?
template=TemplateN&page=Marketing
OrdersSmallBusinessGuide. 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
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, 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) The 2009 fiscal year began
on January 1, 2009, and the marketing
order requires that the rate of
assessment for each fiscal year apply to
all assessable olives handled during
such fiscal year; (2) the committee needs
sufficient funds to pay its expenses,
which are incurred on a continuous
basis; (3) handlers are aware of this
action, which was discussed by the
committee and unanimously
recommended at a public meeting, and
is similar to other assessment rate
actions issued in past years; and (4) this
interim final rule provides a 60-day
comment period, and all comments
timely received will be considered prior
to finalization of this rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932
Marketing agreements, Olives,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is amended as
follows:
■
PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN
CALIFORNIA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 932 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Section 932.230 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 932.230
Assessment rate.
On and after January 1, 2009, an
assessment rate of $28.63 per ton is
established for California olives.
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 33 / Friday, February 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: February 13, 2009.
David R. Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–3596 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Lesar,
Chief, Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing
Branch, Division of Administrative Services,
Office of Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–3629 Filed 2–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 229
10 CFR Part 30
[Regulation CC; Docket No. R–1352]
[NRC–2005–0001]
Availability of Funds and Collection of
Checks
RIN 3150–AH57
Protection of Safeguards Information;
Correction
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION:
Final rule; correction.
SUMMARY: This document corrects a rule
that appeared in the Federal Register on
October 24, 2008 (73 FR 63546), that
amends the regulations for the
protection of Safeguards Information
(SGI) to protect SGI from inadvertent
release and unauthorized disclosure
which might compromise the security of
nuclear facilities and materials. This
document is necessary to correct an
erroneous amendatory instruction
which resulted in duplicate paragraph
designations.
DATES: The correction is effective
February 23, 2009, the date the original
rule becomes effective.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing Branch, Office of
Administration, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, telephone 301–492–3663, e-mail
Michael.Lesar@nrc.gov.
In FR doc.
E8–24904, published on October 24,
2008, on page 63570, in the third
column, instruction 13 is corrected to
read as follows:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
13. In § 30.34, paragraph (l) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 30.34
Terms and conditions of licenses.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) Each licensee shall ensure that
Safeguards Information is protected
against unauthorized disclosure in
accordance with the requirements in
§§ 73.21 and 73.23 of this chapter, as
applicable.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day
of February 2009.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:40 Feb 19, 2009
Jkt 217001
AGENCY: Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Final rule; technical
amendment.
SUMMARY: The Board of Governors
(Board) is amending the routing number
guide to next-day availability checks
and local checks in Regulation CC to
delete the reference to the Baltimore
branch office of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Richmond and to reassign the
Federal Reserve routing symbols
currently listed under that office to the
head office of the Federal Reserve Bank
of Philadelphia. These amendments
reflect the restructuring of checkprocessing operations within the
Federal Reserve System.
DATES: The final rule will become
effective on April 18, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey S. H. Yeganeh, Financial Services
Manager (202/728–5801), or Joseph P.
Baressi, Financial Services Project
Leader (202/452–3959), Division of
Reserve Bank Operations and Payment
Systems; or Sophia H. Allison, Senior
Counsel (202/452–3565), Legal Division.
For users of Telecommunications
Devices for the Deaf (TDD) only, contact
202/263–4869.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulation
CC establishes the maximum period a
depositary bank may wait between
receiving a deposit and making the
deposited funds available for
withdrawal.1 A depositary bank
generally must provide faster
availability for funds deposited by a
‘‘local check’’ than by a ‘‘nonlocal
check.’’ A check is considered local if it
is payable by or at or through a bank
located in the same Federal Reserve
check-processing region as the
depositary bank.
1 For purposes of Regulation CC, the term ‘‘bank’’
refers to any depository institution, including
commercial banks, savings institutions, and credit
unions.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7785
Appendix A to Regulation CC
contains a routing number guide that
assists banks in identifying local and
nonlocal banks and thereby determining
the maximum permissible hold periods
for most deposited checks. The
appendix includes a list of each Federal
Reserve check-processing office and the
first four digits of the routing number,
known as the Federal Reserve routing
symbol, of each bank that is served by
that office for check-processing
purposes. Banks whose Federal Reserve
routing symbols are grouped under the
same office are in the same checkprocessing region and thus are local to
one another.
On April 18, 2009, the Reserve Banks
will transfer the check-processing
operations of the Baltimore branch
office of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Richmond to the head office of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
As a result of this change, some checks
that are drawn on and deposited at
banks located in the Baltimore and
Philadelphia check-processing regions
and that currently are nonlocal checks
will become local checks subject to
faster availability schedules. To assist
banks in identifying local and nonlocal
checks and making funds availability
decisions, the Board is amending the list
of routing symbols in appendix A
associated with the Federal Reserve
Banks of Richmond and Philadelphia to
reflect the transfer of check-processing
operations from the Baltimore branch
office of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Richmond to the head office of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
To coincide with the effective date of
the underlying check-processing
changes, the amendments to appendix A
are effective April 18, 2009. The Board
is providing notice of the amendments
at this time to give affected banks ample
time to make any needed processing
changes. Early notice also will enable
affected banks to amend their
availability schedules and related
disclosures if necessary and provide
their customers with notice of these
changes.2
Administrative Procedure Act
The Board has not followed the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) relating to
notice and public participation in
connection with the adoption of the
final rule. The revisions to appendix A
are technical in nature and are required
by the statutory and regulatory
definitions of ‘‘check-processing
2 Section 229.18(e) of Regulation CC requires that
banks notify account holders who are consumers
within 30 days after implementing a change that
improves the availability of funds.
E:\FR\FM\20FER1.SGM
20FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 33 (Friday, February 20, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7782-7785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-3596]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 932
[Doc. No. AMS-FV-08-0105; FV09-932-1 IFR]
Olives Grown in California; Increased Assessment Rate
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Interim final rule with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule increases the assessment rate established for the
California Olive Committee (committee) for the 2009 and subsequent
fiscal years from $15.60 to $28.63 per assessable ton of olives
handled. The committee locally administers the marketing order which
regulates the handling of olives grown in California. Assessments upon
olive handlers are used by the committee to fund reasonable and
necessary expenses of the program. The fiscal year began January 1 and
ends December 31. The assessment rate will remain in effect
indefinitely unless modified, suspended, or terminated.
DATES: Effective February 21, 2009. Comments received by April 21,
2009, 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, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC
20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or Internet: https://
www.regulations.gov. 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: https://
www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this rule
will be included in the record and will be made available to the
public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or
entities submitting the comments will be made public on the Internet at
the address provided above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer R. Garcia, Marketing
Specialist, or Kurt J. Kimmel, Regional Manager, California Marketing
Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and
Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559)
487-5906; or E-mail:
[[Page 7783]]
Jennifer.Garcia@ams.usda.gov or Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov.
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@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement No. 148 and Order No. 932, both as amended (7 CFR part 932),
regulating the handling of olives 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
olive handlers 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
olives beginning on January 1, 2009, 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 there from. 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 increases the assessment rate established for the
committee for the 2009 and subsequent fiscal years from $15.60 to
$28.63 per ton of assessable olives from the applicable crop years.
The California olive 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 fiscal year, which is the 12-month period between January
1 and December 31, begins after the corresponding crop year, which is
the 12-month period beginning August 1 and ending July 31 of the
subsequent year. Fiscal year budget and assessment recommendations are
made after the corresponding crop year olive tonnage is reported. The
members of the committee are producers and handlers of California
olives. They are familiar with the committee's needs and with 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 discussed in a public meeting. Thus, all directly affected
persons have an opportunity to participate and provide input.
For the 2008 and subsequent fiscal years, the committee
recommended, and USDA approved, an assessment rate that would continue
in effect from fiscal year to fiscal year 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 December 10, 2008, and unanimously recommended
2009 fiscal year expenditures of $1,482,349 and an assessment rate of
$28.63 per ton of assessable olives. In comparison, last year's
budgeted expenditures were $1,588,552. The assessment rate of $28.63 is
$13.03 higher than the rate currently in effect. The committee
recommended the higher assessment rate because the 2008-09 assessable
olive receipts as reported by the California Agricultural Statistics
Service (CASS) are only 49,067 tons, which compares to 108,059 tons in
2007-08. A series of very high temperatures and a large crop in 2007
contributed to a substantially smaller crop in 2008. The committee also
plans to use available reserve funds to help meet its 2009 expenses.
The major expenditures recommended by the committee for the 2009
fiscal year include $495,000 for research, $627,800 for marketing
activities, and $359,549 for administration. Budgeted expenditures for
these items in 2008 were $500,000, $750,000, and $288,552,
respectively. The 2009 marketing and research programs will be scaled
back. Recommended increases in the administrative budget are due to
additional costs associated with the anticipated hiring of a new
Executive Director.
The assessment rate recommended by the committee was derived by
considering anticipated fiscal year expenses, actual olive tonnage
received by handlers during the 2008-09 crop year, and additional
pertinent factors. Actual assessable tonnage for the 2009 fiscal year
is expected to be lower than the 2008-09 crop receipts of 49,067 tons
reported by the CASS because some olives may be diverted by handlers to
uses that are exempt from marketing order requirements. Income derived
from handler assessments, along with funds from the committee's
authorized reserve and interest income, should be adequate to cover
budgeted expenses. Funds in the reserve would be kept within the
maximum permitted by the order of approximately one fiscal year's
expenses (Sec. 932.40).
The assessment rate established in this rule will 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 is effective for an indefinite
period, the committee will continue to meet prior to or during each
fiscal year 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 will
be undertaken as necessary. The committee's 2009 budget and those for
subsequent fiscal years will be reviewed and, as appropriate, approved
by USDA.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), 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
[[Page 7784]]
unique in that they are brought about through group action of
essentially small entities acting on their own behalf.
There are approximately 1,000 producers of olives in the production
area and 2 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 $750,000, and small agricultural service firms are defined as
those whose annual receipts are less than $7,000,000.
Based upon information from the committee, the majority of olive
producers may be classified as small entities. Both of the handlers may
be classified as large entities.
This rule increases the assessment rate established for the
committee and collected from handlers for the 2009 and subsequent
fiscal years from $15.60 to $28.63 per ton of assessable olives. The
committee unanimously recommended 2009 expenditures of $1,482,349 and
an assessment rate of $28.63 per ton. The assessment rate of $28.63 is
$13.03 higher than the 2008 rate. The higher assessment rate is
necessary because assessable olive receipts for the 2008-09 crop year
were reported by the CASS to be 49,067 tons, compared to 108,059 tons
for the 2007-08 crop year. Actual assessable tonnage for the 2009
fiscal year is expected to be lower because some of the receipts may be
diverted by handlers to exempt outlets on which assessments are not
paid.
Income generated from the $28.63 per ton assessment rate should be
adequate to meet this year's expenses when combined with funds from the
authorized reserve and interest income. Funds in the reserve would be
kept within the maximum permitted by the order of about one fiscal
year's expenses (Sec. 932.40).
Expenditures recommended by the committee for the 2009 fiscal year
include $495,000 for research, $627,800 for marketing activities, and
$359,549 for administration. Budgeted expenditures for these items in
2008 were $500,000, $750,000, and $288,552, respectively. The 2009
marketing and research programs will be scaled back.
Prior to arriving at this budget, the committee considered
information from various sources, such as the committee's Executive,
Market Development, and Research Subcommittees. Alternate spending
levels were discussed by these groups, based upon the relative value of
various research and marketing projects to the olive industry and the
reduced olive production. The assessment rate of $28.63 per ton of
assessable olives was derived by considering anticipated expenses, the
volume of assessable olives and additional pertinent factors.
A review of historical information indicates that the grower price
for the 2008-09 crop year was approximately $1,109.47 per ton for
canning fruit and $380.71 per ton for limited-use sizes, leaving the
balance as unusable cull fruit. Approximately 84 percent of the total
tonnage of olives received is canning fruit sizes and 11 percent is
limited use sizes, leaving the balance as unusable cull fruit. Grower
revenue on 49,067 total tons of canning and limited-use sizes would be
$49,283,177 given the current grower prices for those sizes. Therefore,
with an assessment rate increased from $15.60 to $28.63, the estimated
assessment revenue is expected to be almost 3 percent of grower
revenue.
This action increases the assessment obligation imposed on
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
will 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 olive industry and all interested
persons were invited to attend the meeting and participate in committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all committee meetings, the December
10, 2008, 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 action imposes no additional reporting or recordkeeping
requirements on either small or large California olive 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.
AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote
the use of the Internet and other information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information
and services, and for other purposes.
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/AMSv1.0/
ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateN&page=MarketingOrdersSmallBus
inessGuide. 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 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, 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) The 2009 fiscal year began on January 1, 2009,
and the marketing order requires that the rate of assessment for each
fiscal year apply to all assessable olives handled during such fiscal
year; (2) the committee needs sufficient funds to pay its expenses,
which are incurred on a continuous basis; (3) handlers are aware of
this action, which was discussed by the committee and unanimously
recommended at a public meeting, and is similar to other assessment
rate actions issued in past years; and (4) this interim final rule
provides a 60-day comment period, and all comments timely received will
be considered prior to finalization of this rule.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932
Marketing agreements, Olives, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is amended as
follows:
PART 932--OLIVES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 932 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
0
2. Section 932.230 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 932.230 Assessment rate.
On and after January 1, 2009, an assessment rate of $28.63 per ton
is established for California olives.
[[Page 7785]]
Dated: February 13, 2009.
David R. Shipman,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. E9-3596 Filed 2-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P