Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida; Secretary's Decision and Referendum Order on Proposed Amendments to Marketing Agreement 84 and Order No. 905, 16798-16802 [E9-8171]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
16798
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules
This issue-focused meeting will be
open to the public. The proceedings will
be transcribed, and the transcripts will
be made part of the rulemaking record.
The meeting is intended to provide a
forum for all interested parties to attend
and participate in all the discussions to
foster focused, substantive dialogue on
the key issues.
Those wishing to attend the April 29
and 30, 2009, meeting may register on
the Internet at https://
web01.aphis.usda.gov/
BRS_PublicMeeting.nsf/. If you require a
sign language interpreter or other
special accommodations, you may
provide this information when you
register or by contacting the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Parking and Security Procedures
Please note that a fee of $3.00 in exact
change is required to enter the parking
lot at the USDA Center at Riverside. The
machine accepts $1 bills or quarters.
Upon entering the building, visitors
should inform security personnel that
they are attending the 340 Proposed
Rule public meeting. State-issued photo
identification is required and all bags
will be screened. Security personnel
will direct visitors to the registration
tables located outside of Conference
Room B on the first floor. Registration
upon arrival is required for all
participants.
Extension of Comment Period
In the March 2009 notice that
announced the scoping meeting
described above, we also announced
that the comment period for the
proposed rule will be extended for 60
days following the April meeting, and
that the new date for the close of the
comment period would be provided in
the notice announcing the date and
other details for the April 2009 meeting.
The new date for the close of the
comment period will be June 29, 2009,
which is 60 days after April 30, 2009,
the second day of our public meeting.
Persons wishing to submit written
comments on the proposed rule may
continue to do so until June 29, 2009,
using either of the methods described
under ADDRESSES above.
Done in Washington, DC, this 7th day of
April 2009.
Kevin Shea,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. E9–8352 Filed 4–10–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:52 Apr 10, 2009
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 905
[Docket No. AO–85–A10; AMS–FV–07–0132;
FV08–905–1]
Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and
Tangelos Grown in Florida; Secretary’s
Decision and Referendum Order on
Proposed Amendments to Marketing
Agreement 84 and Order No. 905
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule and referendum
order.
SUMMARY: This decision proposes
amendments to Marketing Agreement
No. 84 and Order No. 905 (order), which
regulate the handling of oranges,
grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos
(citrus) grown in Florida; and provides
growers with the opportunity to vote in
a referendum to determine if they favor
the changes. The amendments are based
on proposals by the Citrus
Administrative Committee (committee),
which is responsible for local
administration of the order. These
amendments would: (1) Modify
committee representation by
cooperative entities; (2) allow substitute
alternates to temporarily represent
absent members at committee meetings;
(3) authorize the committee to conduct
meetings by telephone or other means of
communication; and (4) authorize the
committee to conduct research and
promotion programs, including paid
advertising, for fresh Florida citrus. The
amendments are intended to improve
the operation and administration of the
order and provide the industry with
additional tools for the marketing of
fresh citrus.
DATES: The referendum will be
conducted from May 4 through May 18,
2009. The representative period for the
purpose of the referendum is August 1,
2007, through July 31, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and
Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220
SW. Third Avenue, Room 385, Portland,
OR 97204.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and
Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220
SW. Third Avenue, Room 385, Portland,
Oregon 97204; Telephone: (503) 326–
2724, Fax: (503) 326–7440, or e-mail:
Melissa.Schmaedick@ams.usda.gov; or
Laurel May, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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:
Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request
information on this proceeding 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, e-mail:
Jay.Guerber@ams.usda.gov.
Prior
documents in this proceeding: Notice of
Hearing issued on January 24, 2008, and
published in the January 29, 2008, issue
of the Federal Register (73 FR 5130),
and a Recommended Decision issued on
December 19, 2008, and published in
the December 24, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 79028).
This action is governed by the
provisions of sections 556 and 557 of
title 5 of the United States Code and is
therefore excluded from the
requirements of Executive Order 12866.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preliminary Statement
The proposed amendments are based
on the record of a public hearing held
February 12, 2008, in Winter Haven,
Florida, to consider such amendments
to the order. The hearing was held
pursuant to the provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674),
hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act,’’ and
the applicable rules of practice and
procedure governing the formulation of
marketing agreements and orders (7 CFR
part 900). The Notice of Hearing was
published in the Federal Register on
January 29, 2008 (73 FR 5130), and
contained amendment proposals
submitted by the committee.
The amendments included in this
decision would:
1. Modify committee representation
by cooperative entities;
2. Allow substitute alternates to
temporarily represent absent members
at committee meetings;
3. Authorize the committee to
conduct meetings by telephone or other
means of communication; and
4. Add authority for research and
promotion programs, including paid
advertising, for fresh Florida citrus.
The Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) also proposed to make such
changes to the order as may be
necessary, if any of the proposed
changes are adopted, so that all of the
order’s provisions conform to the
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules
effectuated amendments. AMS proposed
replacing the word ‘‘he’’ in the second
sentence of § 905.22(a)(2) with ‘‘he and
she’’, and replacing the word ‘‘his’’ in
the last sentence of § 905.22(b)(2) with
the words ‘‘his or her’’ to conform to
other proposed changes to that section.
Upon the basis of evidence
introduced at the hearing and the record
thereof, the Administrator of AMS on
December 19, 2008, filed with the
Hearing Clerk, U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), a Recommended
Decision and Opportunity to File
Written Exceptions thereto by January
23, 2009. None were filed.
Small Business Considerations
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601–612) (RFA), AMS has
considered the economic impact of this
action 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 so that
small businesses will not be unduly or
disproportionately burdened. Marketing
orders and amendments thereto are
unique in that they are normally
brought about through group action of
essentially small entities for their own
benefit.
Small agricultural service firms,
which include handlers regulated under
the order, have been defined by the
Small Business Administration (SBA)
(13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual
receipts of less than $7,000,000. Small
agricultural producers have been
defined as those with annual receipts of
less than $750,000.
There are approximately 48 handlers
of fresh citrus subject to regulation
under the order and approximately
7,700 producers of fresh citrus in the
regulated area. Information provided at
the hearing indicates that over 90
percent of the handlers would be
considered small agricultural service
firms. Hearing testimony also suggests
that the majority of producers would
also be considered small entities
according to the SBA’s definition.
The order regulates the handling of
fresh citrus grown in the state of
Florida. Total bearing citrus acreage has
declined from a peak of approximately
800,000 acres in 1996–97 to about
550,000 acres in 2006–07, largely due to
hurricane damage and the removal of
diseased citrus trees. Approximately
7.236 million tons of citrus were
produced in Florida during the 2006–07
season—a decline of approximately 6
million tons compared to the 1996–97
season. According to evidence provided
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:52 Apr 10, 2009
Jkt 217001
at the hearing, approximately 10 percent
of Florida citrus is used in the fresh
market, while the remainder is used in
the production of processed juice
products. Generally, 40 percent of
Florida’s fresh citrus is shipped to
export markets, including the Pacific
Rim countries, Europe, and Canada.
Under the order, outgoing quality
regulations are established for fresh
citrus shipments, and statistical
information is collected. Program
activities administered by the
committee are designed to support large
and small citrus producers and
handlers. The 18-member committee is
comprised of both producer and handler
representatives from the production
area, as well as a public member.
Committee meetings where regulatory
recommendations and other decisions
are made are open to the public. All
members are able to participate in
committee deliberations, and each
committee member has an equal vote.
Others in attendance at meetings are
also allowed to express their views.
After discussions within the citrus
industry, the committee considered
developing its own research and
marketing promotion programs focusing
on fresh Florida citrus. An amendment
study subcommittee was formed to
explore this idea and other possible
order revisions. The subcommittee
developed a list of proposed
amendments to the order, which was
then presented to the committee and
shared with other industry
organizations. The proposed
amendments were also posted on the
committee’s Web site for review by the
Florida citrus industry at large.
The committee met to review and
discuss the subcommittee’s proposals at
its meeting on May 29, 2007. At that
time, the committee voted unanimously
to support the four proposed
amendments that were forwarded to
AMS.
The proposed amendments are
intended to provide the committee and
the industry with additional flexibility
in administering the order and
producing and marketing fresh Florida
citrus. Record evidence indicates that
the proposals are intended to benefit all
producers and handlers under the order,
regardless of size.
All producer and handler witnesses
supported the proposed amendments at
the hearing. Some witnesses commented
on the implications of implementing
specific marketing, research, and
development programs. In that context,
witnesses stated that they expected the
benefits to producers and handlers to
outweigh any potential costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16799
A description of the proposed
amendments and their anticipated
economic impact on small and large
entities is discussed below.
Proposal 1—Cooperative
Representation
Proposal 1 would amend the order by
reducing the required number of
cooperative producer and cooperative
handler seats on the committee from
three each to two each.
At the time the order was
promulgated, there were numerous
cooperative entities in the industry. The
committee’s original structure was
designed to afford proportional
representation for cooperative producers
and handlers on the committee. The
shrinking number of cooperatives
entities, especially cooperative
marketing entities, over time has
prompted the committee to evaluate the
appropriateness of the current
committee structure. The committee
believes that reducing the number of
required cooperative seats on the
committee would better reflect the
current composition of the industry.
The reduction would ensure that the
interests of all large and small producers
and handlers, whether independent or
members of cooperatives, are
represented appropriately during
committee deliberations. Adoption of
the proposed amendment would have
no economic impact on producers or
handlers of any size.
Proposal 2—Substitute Alternates
Proposal 2 would amend the order by
allowing members who are unable to
attend committee meetings to designate
available alternates to represent them if
their own alternates are also unavailable
in order to achieve a quorum. If
members are unable to designate
substitute alternates, the committee
could designate substitutes at the
meeting if necessary to secure a quorum.
Substitute alternates would be required
to represent the same group affiliation
(producer or handler) as the absent
members and alternates. Under current
order provisions, only a member’s
respective alternate may represent the
member if the member is unable to
attend a meeting. There is no provision
for a situation in which both the
member and his or her alternate are
unavailable for a meeting. In the past,
meetings have been cancelled at the last
minute because attendance was
insufficient to meet quorum
requirements.
If implemented, the proposed
amendment would allow alternates not
otherwise representing absent members
to represent other members at
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16800
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules
committee meetings in order to secure a
quorum. This would help ensure that
quorum requirements could be met and
that committee business could be
addressed in a timely manner. This
amendment would have no adverse
economic impact on producers or
handlers of any size.
Proposal Number 3—Telephone
Meetings
Proposal 3 would amend the order by
adding authority to conduct committee
meetings by telephone or other means of
communication. Currently, the
committee is limited to meeting in
person, with provision for emergency
voting by telephone. This amendment
would give the committee greater
flexibility in scheduling meetings and
would be consistent with current
practices in other citrus industry
settings.
Witnesses stated that using modern
communication technology would allow
the committee to respond more quickly
to urgent industry needs and would
provide greater access to meetings by
members and other industry
participants. Greater meeting flexibility
would make it easier for the committee
to hold additional meetings where there
is a need for lengthier discussion and
consensus building. The quorum and
voting requirements specified for
assembled meetings would also apply to
meetings held via telephone or
teleconference. The votes of members
participating by telephone or other
means of communication would be
confirmed in writing. Faxes and e-mails
would be considered acceptable forms
of written vote confirmation by the
committee.
This amendment is expected to
benefit producers and handlers of all
sizes by improving committee
efficiencies, encouraging greater
participation in industry deliberations
and is not expected to result in any
significant increased costs to producers
or handlers.
Proposal Number 4—Research and
Promotion
Proposal 4 would amend the order by
adding authority to establish research
and promotion programs. If this
authority was implemented, the
committee would be able to address the
specific needs of the Florida fresh citrus
industry by recommending, conducting,
and funding research projects and
promotional programs, including paid
advertising, that focus on the
production, handling, and marketing of
fresh citrus.
Witnesses testified that the
committee’s assessment rate would
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:52 Apr 10, 2009
Jkt 217001
increase to cover the costs of any newly
authorized research and promotion
projects, and that there may be an offset
by decreases in payments by the
industry to fund projects through other
entities. Any increased assessment costs
would be based on the volume of fresh
citrus shipped by each handler.
Therefore, any increased costs would be
applied proportionately to all handlers.
Witnesses testified that the benefits
expected to accrue to producers and
handlers following implementation of
this amendment would outweigh the
costs. Witnesses advocated the
establishment of production research
programs that would assist with the
development of new varieties and postharvest handling methods to improve
the marketability of fresh Florida citrus.
Witnesses expect that marketing
programs specific to fresh citrus would
increase consumer demand and sales,
which would in turn increase returns to
producers and handlers. There was
unanimous support for this proposal
from witnesses at the hearing.
Interested persons were invited to
present evidence at the hearing on the
probable regulatory and informational
impact of the proposed amendments to
the order on small entities. The record
evidence is that implementation of the
proposals to reallocate membership
seats, authorize the use of substitute
alternates, and authorize use of modern
communication technology at meetings
would have little or no impact on
producers and handlers. Adding
authority to conduct research and
promotion programs would result in
additional costs being imposed on
handlers once implemented. Evidence
provided at the hearing shows that
committee expenses, and therefore
handler assessments, would increase
with the implementation of the proposal
to authorize research and promotion
programs. However, the record indicates
that there may be an offset by decreases
in payments to other industry entities
now conducting research. Improved
production and marketing strategies
developed under the authorized
programs would be expected to
outweigh any additional costs to the
Florida fresh citrus industry. In
addition, any increased costs would be
proportional to a handler’s size and
would not unduly or disproportionately
impact small entities.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this proposed rule. These
amendments are intended to improve
the operation and administration of the
order and to assist in the marketing of
fresh Florida citrus.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Paperwork Reduction Act
Information collection requirements
for Part 905 are currently approved by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), under OMB Number 0581–
0189—‘‘Generic OMB Fruit Crops.’’ No
changes in these requirements are
anticipated as a result of this
proceeding. Should any such changes
become necessary, they would be
submitted to OMB for approval.
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 Government Paperwork Elimination
Act (GPEA), which requires Government
agencies in general to provide the public
the option of submitting information or
transacting business electronically to
the maximum extent possible.
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.
Civil Justice Reform
The amendments to Marketing
Agreement No. 84 and Marketing Order
No. 905 proposed herein have been
reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. They are not
intended to have retroactive effect. If
adopted, the proposed amendments
would not preempt any State or local
laws, regulations, or policies, unless
they present an irreconcilable conflict
with this proposal.
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. A 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
no later than 20 days after the date of
the entry of the ruling.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Findings and Conclusions
The findings and conclusions, rulings,
and general findings and determinations
included in the Recommended Decision
set forth in the December 24, 2008, issue
of the Federal Register are hereby
approved and adopted.
Marketing Agreement and Order
Annexed hereto and made a part
hereof is the document entitled ‘‘Order
Amending the Order Regulating the
Handling of Oranges, Grapefruit,
Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in
Florida.’’ This document has been
decided upon as the detailed and
appropriate means of effectuating the
foregoing findings and conclusions.
It is hereby ordered, that this entire
decision be published in the Federal
Register.
Referendum Order
It is hereby directed that a referendum
be conducted in accordance with the
procedure for the conduct of referenda
(7 CFR part 900.400–407) to determine
whether the annexed order amending
the order regulating the handling of
oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and
tangelos grown in Florida is approved or
favored by producers, as defined under
the terms of the order, who during the
representative period where engaged in
the production of citrus in the
production area.
The representative period for the
conduct of such referendum is hereby
determined to be August 1, 2007,
though July 31, 2008.
The agents of the Secretary to conduct
such referendum are hereby designated
to be Christian Nissen and Doris
Jamieson, Southeast Marketing Field
Office, Marketing Order Administration
Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs,
AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324–
3375, Fax: (863) 325–8793, or E-mail:
Christian.Nissen@ams.usda.gov or
Doris.Jamieson@ams.usda.gov,
respectively.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905
Grapefruit, Marketing agreements,
Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines.
Dated: April 6, 2009.
Robert C. Keeney,
Acting Associate Administrator.
Order Amending the Order Regulating
the Handling of Oranges, Grapefruit,
Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in
Florida 1
Findings and Determinations
The findings and determinations
hereinafter set forth are supplementary
to the findings and determinations that
were previously made in connection
with the issuance of the marketing
order; and all said previous findings and
determinations are hereby ratified and
affirmed, except insofar as such findings
and determinations may be in conflict
with the findings and determinations set
forth herein.
(a) Findings and Determinations Upon
the Basis of the Hearing Record.
Pursuant to the provisions of the
Agricultural marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–612),
and the applicable rules of practice and
procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR
part 900), a public hearing was held
upon proposed further amendment of
Marketing Agreement No. 84 and
Marketing Order No. 905, regulating the
handling of oranges, grapefruit,
tangerines, and tangelos grown in
Florida.
Upon the basis of the record, it is
found that:
(1) The marketing agreement and
order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended, and all
of the terms and conditions thereof,
would tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act;
(2) The marketing agreement and
order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended,
regulate the handling of oranges,
grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos
grown in the production area in the
same manner as, and are applicable only
to, persons in the respective classes of
commercial and industrial activity
specified in the marketing agreement
and order upon which a hearing has
been held;
(3) The marketing agreement and
order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended, are
limited in their application to the
smallest regional production area that is
practicable, consistent with carrying out
the declared policy of the Act, and the
issuance of several orders applicable to
subdivisions of the production area
1 This order shall not become effective unless and
until the requirements of § 900.14 of the rules of
practice and procedure governing proceedings to
formulate marketing agreements and marketing
orders have been met.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:52 Apr 10, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16801
would not effectively carry out the
declared policy of the Act;
(4) The marketing agreement and
order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended,
prescribe, insofar as practicable, such
different terms applicable to different
parts of the production area as are
necessary to give due recognition to the
differences in the production and
marketing of oranges, grapefruit,
tangerines, and tangelos grown in the
production area; and
(5) All handling of oranges, grapefruit,
tangerines, and tangelos grown in the
production area as defined in the
marketing agreement and order is in the
current of interstate or foreign
commerce or directly burdens,
obstructs, or affects such commerce.
Order Relative to Handling
It is therefore ordered, That on and
after the effective date hereof, all
handling of oranges, grapefruit,
tangerines, and tangelos grown in
Florida shall be in conformity to, and in
compliance with, the terms and
conditions of the said order as hereby
proposed to be amended as follows:
The provisions of the proposed
marketing agreement and order
amending the order contained in the
Recommended Decision issued by the
Administrator on December 19, 2008,
and published in the Federal Register
on December 24, 2008, will be and are
the terms and provisions of this order
amending the order and are set forth in
full herein.
PART 905—ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT,
TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS
GROWN IN FLORIDA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 905 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Amend § 905.22 by revising
paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 905.22
Nominations.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) Each nominee shall be a producer
in the district from which he or she is
nominated. In voting for nominees, each
producer shall be entitled to cast one
vote for each nominee in each of the
districts in which he or she is a
producer. At least two of the nominees
and their alternates so nominated shall
be affiliated with a bona fide
cooperative marketing organization.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) Nomination of at least two
members and their alternates shall be
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16802
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 69 / Monday, April 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules
made by bona fide cooperative
marketing organizations which are
handlers. Nominations for not more
than six members and their alternates
shall be made by handlers who are not
so affiliated. In voting for nominees,
each handler or his or her authorized
representative shall be entitled to cast
one vote, which shall be weighted by
the volume of fruit by such handler
during the then current fiscal period.
3. Revise § 905.23 to read as follows:
§ 905.23
Selection.
(a) From the nominations made
pursuant to § 905.22(a) or from other
qualified persons, the Secretary shall
select one member and one alternate
member to represent District 2 and two
members and two alternate members
each to represent Districts 1, 3, 4, and
5 or such other number of members and
alternate members from each district as
may be prescribed pursuant to § 905.14.
At least two such members and their
alternates shall be affiliated with bona
fide cooperative marketing
organizations.
(b) From the nominations made
pursuant to § 905.22 (b) or from other
qualified persons, the Secretary shall
select at least two members and their
alternates to represent bona fide
cooperative marketing organizations
which are handlers, and the remaining
members and their alternates to
represent handlers who are not so
affiliated.
4. In § 905.29, redesignate paragraph
(b) as paragraph (c), and add a new
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 905.29
Inability of members to serve.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) If both a member and his or her
respective alternate are unable to attend
a committee meeting, such member may
designate another alternate to act in his
or her place in order to obtain a quorum:
Provided, That such alternate member
represents the same group affiliation as
the absent member. If the member is
unable to designate such an alternate,
the committee members present may
designate such alternate.
*
*
*
*
*
5. Revise paragraph (c) of § 905.34 to
read as follows:
§ 905.34
Procedure of committees.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The committee may provide for
meeting by telephone, telegraph, or
other means of communication, and any
vote cast at such a meeting shall be
promptly confirmed in writing:
Provided, That if any assembled meeting
is held, all votes shall be cast in person.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:52 Apr 10, 2009
Jkt 217001
6. Add a new § 905.54 to read as
follows:
§ 905.54 Marketing, research and
development.
The committee may, with the
approval of the Secretary, establish, or
provide for the establishment of,
projects including production research,
marketing research and development
projects, and marketing promotion
including paid advertising, designed to
assist, improve, or promote the
marketing, distribution, and
consumption or efficient production of
fruit. The expenses of such projects
shall be paid by funds collected
pursuant to § 905.41. Upon conclusion
of each project, but at least annually, the
committee shall summarize the program
status and accomplishments to its
members and the Secretary. A similar
report to the committee shall be
required of any contracting party on any
project carried out under this section.
Also, for each project, the contracting
party shall be required to maintain
records of money received and
expenditures, and such shall be
available to the committee and the
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–8171 Filed 4–10–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50
[Docket No. PRM–50–77; NRC–2002–0020]
Bob Christie; Consideration of Petition
in Rulemaking Process
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Closure of petition for
rulemaking docket.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) will consider the
issues raised in a petition for
rulemaking (PRM) submitted by Bob
Christie (petitioner) in the NRC’s
rulemaking process. The petition was
dated May 2, 2002, and was docketed as
PRM–50–77. The petitioner requested
that the NRC amend its regulations at 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix A, to eliminate
the requirement for assuming a loss-ofoffsite power (LOOP) coincident with
postulated accidents. The petitioner
believes this requirement is detrimental
to safety because it results in fast start
time requirements for emergency diesel
generators (EDG) and because it requires
operator training to focus on unrealistic
events.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DATES: The docket for the petition for
rulemaking PRM–50–77 is closed on
April 13, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You can access publicly
available documents related to this
petition for rulemaking using the
following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Further
NRC action on the issues raised by this
petition will be considered in the
rulemaking activity directed at
decoupling an assumed LOOP from a
coincident loss-of-coolant accident
(LOCA) as currently required by 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix A, Criterion 35. This
rulemaking activity is entitled,
‘‘Decoupling of Assumed Loss of Offsite
Power from Loss-of-Coolant Accident,’’
in NUREG–0936, ‘‘NRC Regulatory
Agenda: Semiannual Report,’’ and is
designated with rulemaking
identification number RIN 3150–AH43.
Information on this rulemaking activity
can be monitored at the Federal
rulemaking portal, https://
www.regulations.gov, by searching on
rulemaking docket ID NRC–2008–0602.
The regulatory history regarding PRM–
50–77, including the public comment
received, can be found by searching on
docket ID NRC–2002–0020. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher 301–415–5905; e-mail
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR):
The public may examine and have
copied for a fee, publicly available
documents at the NRC’s PDR, Public
File Area Room O1–F21, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
NRC’s Agencywide Document Access
and Management System (ADAMS):
Publicly available documents created or
received at the NRC are available
electronically at the NRC’s Electronic
Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/
NRC/reading-rm/adams.html. From this
page, the public can gain entry into
ADAMS, which provides text and image
files of NRC’s public documents. If you
do not have access to ADAMS or if there
are any problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1–800–
397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail
at PDR.resource@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barry Miller, Mail Stop O–9E3, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, United
States Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone
(301) 415–4117, or e-mail
Barry.Miller@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 69 (Monday, April 13, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16798-16802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8171]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 905
[Docket No. AO-85-A10; AMS-FV-07-0132; FV08-905-1]
Oranges, Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida;
Secretary's Decision and Referendum Order on Proposed Amendments to
Marketing Agreement 84 and Order No. 905
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule and referendum order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This decision proposes amendments to Marketing Agreement No.
84 and Order No. 905 (order), which regulate the handling of oranges,
grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos (citrus) grown in Florida; and
provides growers with the opportunity to vote in a referendum to
determine if they favor the changes. The amendments are based on
proposals by the Citrus Administrative Committee (committee), which is
responsible for local administration of the order. These amendments
would: (1) Modify committee representation by cooperative entities; (2)
allow substitute alternates to temporarily represent absent members at
committee meetings; (3) authorize the committee to conduct meetings by
telephone or other means of communication; and (4) authorize the
committee to conduct research and promotion programs, including paid
advertising, for fresh Florida citrus. The amendments are intended to
improve the operation and administration of the order and provide the
industry with additional tools for the marketing of fresh citrus.
DATES: The referendum will be conducted from May 4 through May 18,
2009. The representative period for the purpose of the referendum is
August 1, 2007, through July 31, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable
Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220 SW. Third Avenue, Room 385, Portland, OR
97204.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220
SW. Third Avenue, Room 385, Portland, Oregon 97204; Telephone: (503)
326-2724, Fax: (503) 326-7440, or e-mail:
Melissa.Schmaedick@ams.usda.gov; or Laurel May, 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:
Laurel.May@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request information on this proceeding 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, e-mail: Jay.Guerber@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior documents in this proceeding: Notice
of Hearing issued on January 24, 2008, and published in the January 29,
2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 5130), and a Recommended
Decision issued on December 19, 2008, and published in the December 24,
2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 79028).
This action is governed by the provisions of sections 556 and 557
of title 5 of the United States Code and is therefore excluded from the
requirements of Executive Order 12866.
Preliminary Statement
The proposed amendments are based on the record of a public hearing
held February 12, 2008, in Winter Haven, Florida, to consider such
amendments to the order. The hearing was held pursuant to the
provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the ``Act,'' and
the applicable rules of practice and procedure governing the
formulation of marketing agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900). The
Notice of Hearing was published in the Federal Register on January 29,
2008 (73 FR 5130), and contained amendment proposals submitted by the
committee.
The amendments included in this decision would:
1. Modify committee representation by cooperative entities;
2. Allow substitute alternates to temporarily represent absent
members at committee meetings;
3. Authorize the committee to conduct meetings by telephone or
other means of communication; and
4. Add authority for research and promotion programs, including
paid advertising, for fresh Florida citrus.
The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) also proposed to make such
changes to the order as may be necessary, if any of the proposed
changes are adopted, so that all of the order's provisions conform to
the
[[Page 16799]]
effectuated amendments. AMS proposed replacing the word ``he'' in the
second sentence of Sec. 905.22(a)(2) with ``he and she'', and
replacing the word ``his'' in the last sentence of Sec. 905.22(b)(2)
with the words ``his or her'' to conform to other proposed changes to
that section.
Upon the basis of evidence introduced at the hearing and the record
thereof, the Administrator of AMS on December 19, 2008, filed with the
Hearing Clerk, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), a Recommended
Decision and Opportunity to File Written Exceptions thereto by January
23, 2009. None were filed.
Small Business Considerations
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) (RFA), AMS has considered the
economic impact of this action 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 so that small businesses will not be
unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders and amendments
thereto are unique in that they are normally brought about through
group action of essentially small entities for their own benefit.
Small agricultural service firms, which include handlers regulated
under the order, have been defined by the Small Business Administration
(SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual receipts of less than
$7,000,000. Small agricultural producers have been defined as those
with annual receipts of less than $750,000.
There are approximately 48 handlers of fresh citrus subject to
regulation under the order and approximately 7,700 producers of fresh
citrus in the regulated area. Information provided at the hearing
indicates that over 90 percent of the handlers would be considered
small agricultural service firms. Hearing testimony also suggests that
the majority of producers would also be considered small entities
according to the SBA's definition.
The order regulates the handling of fresh citrus grown in the state
of Florida. Total bearing citrus acreage has declined from a peak of
approximately 800,000 acres in 1996-97 to about 550,000 acres in 2006-
07, largely due to hurricane damage and the removal of diseased citrus
trees. Approximately 7.236 million tons of citrus were produced in
Florida during the 2006-07 season--a decline of approximately 6 million
tons compared to the 1996-97 season. According to evidence provided at
the hearing, approximately 10 percent of Florida citrus is used in the
fresh market, while the remainder is used in the production of
processed juice products. Generally, 40 percent of Florida's fresh
citrus is shipped to export markets, including the Pacific Rim
countries, Europe, and Canada.
Under the order, outgoing quality regulations are established for
fresh citrus shipments, and statistical information is collected.
Program activities administered by the committee are designed to
support large and small citrus producers and handlers. The 18-member
committee is comprised of both producer and handler representatives
from the production area, as well as a public member. Committee
meetings where regulatory recommendations and other decisions are made
are open to the public. All members are able to participate in
committee deliberations, and each committee member has an equal vote.
Others in attendance at meetings are also allowed to express their
views.
After discussions within the citrus industry, the committee
considered developing its own research and marketing promotion programs
focusing on fresh Florida citrus. An amendment study subcommittee was
formed to explore this idea and other possible order revisions. The
subcommittee developed a list of proposed amendments to the order,
which was then presented to the committee and shared with other
industry organizations. The proposed amendments were also posted on the
committee's Web site for review by the Florida citrus industry at
large.
The committee met to review and discuss the subcommittee's
proposals at its meeting on May 29, 2007. At that time, the committee
voted unanimously to support the four proposed amendments that were
forwarded to AMS.
The proposed amendments are intended to provide the committee and
the industry with additional flexibility in administering the order and
producing and marketing fresh Florida citrus. Record evidence indicates
that the proposals are intended to benefit all producers and handlers
under the order, regardless of size.
All producer and handler witnesses supported the proposed
amendments at the hearing. Some witnesses commented on the implications
of implementing specific marketing, research, and development programs.
In that context, witnesses stated that they expected the benefits to
producers and handlers to outweigh any potential costs.
A description of the proposed amendments and their anticipated
economic impact on small and large entities is discussed below.
Proposal 1--Cooperative Representation
Proposal 1 would amend the order by reducing the required number of
cooperative producer and cooperative handler seats on the committee
from three each to two each.
At the time the order was promulgated, there were numerous
cooperative entities in the industry. The committee's original
structure was designed to afford proportional representation for
cooperative producers and handlers on the committee. The shrinking
number of cooperatives entities, especially cooperative marketing
entities, over time has prompted the committee to evaluate the
appropriateness of the current committee structure. The committee
believes that reducing the number of required cooperative seats on the
committee would better reflect the current composition of the industry.
The reduction would ensure that the interests of all large and small
producers and handlers, whether independent or members of cooperatives,
are represented appropriately during committee deliberations. Adoption
of the proposed amendment would have no economic impact on producers or
handlers of any size.
Proposal 2--Substitute Alternates
Proposal 2 would amend the order by allowing members who are unable
to attend committee meetings to designate available alternates to
represent them if their own alternates are also unavailable in order to
achieve a quorum. If members are unable to designate substitute
alternates, the committee could designate substitutes at the meeting if
necessary to secure a quorum. Substitute alternates would be required
to represent the same group affiliation (producer or handler) as the
absent members and alternates. Under current order provisions, only a
member's respective alternate may represent the member if the member is
unable to attend a meeting. There is no provision for a situation in
which both the member and his or her alternate are unavailable for a
meeting. In the past, meetings have been cancelled at the last minute
because attendance was insufficient to meet quorum requirements.
If implemented, the proposed amendment would allow alternates not
otherwise representing absent members to represent other members at
[[Page 16800]]
committee meetings in order to secure a quorum. This would help ensure
that quorum requirements could be met and that committee business could
be addressed in a timely manner. This amendment would have no adverse
economic impact on producers or handlers of any size.
Proposal Number 3--Telephone Meetings
Proposal 3 would amend the order by adding authority to conduct
committee meetings by telephone or other means of communication.
Currently, the committee is limited to meeting in person, with
provision for emergency voting by telephone. This amendment would give
the committee greater flexibility in scheduling meetings and would be
consistent with current practices in other citrus industry settings.
Witnesses stated that using modern communication technology would
allow the committee to respond more quickly to urgent industry needs
and would provide greater access to meetings by members and other
industry participants. Greater meeting flexibility would make it easier
for the committee to hold additional meetings where there is a need for
lengthier discussion and consensus building. The quorum and voting
requirements specified for assembled meetings would also apply to
meetings held via telephone or teleconference. The votes of members
participating by telephone or other means of communication would be
confirmed in writing. Faxes and e-mails would be considered acceptable
forms of written vote confirmation by the committee.
This amendment is expected to benefit producers and handlers of all
sizes by improving committee efficiencies, encouraging greater
participation in industry deliberations and is not expected to result
in any significant increased costs to producers or handlers.
Proposal Number 4--Research and Promotion
Proposal 4 would amend the order by adding authority to establish
research and promotion programs. If this authority was implemented, the
committee would be able to address the specific needs of the Florida
fresh citrus industry by recommending, conducting, and funding research
projects and promotional programs, including paid advertising, that
focus on the production, handling, and marketing of fresh citrus.
Witnesses testified that the committee's assessment rate would
increase to cover the costs of any newly authorized research and
promotion projects, and that there may be an offset by decreases in
payments by the industry to fund projects through other entities. Any
increased assessment costs would be based on the volume of fresh citrus
shipped by each handler. Therefore, any increased costs would be
applied proportionately to all handlers.
Witnesses testified that the benefits expected to accrue to
producers and handlers following implementation of this amendment would
outweigh the costs. Witnesses advocated the establishment of production
research programs that would assist with the development of new
varieties and post-harvest handling methods to improve the
marketability of fresh Florida citrus. Witnesses expect that marketing
programs specific to fresh citrus would increase consumer demand and
sales, which would in turn increase returns to producers and handlers.
There was unanimous support for this proposal from witnesses at the
hearing.
Interested persons were invited to present evidence at the hearing
on the probable regulatory and informational impact of the proposed
amendments to the order on small entities. The record evidence is that
implementation of the proposals to reallocate membership seats,
authorize the use of substitute alternates, and authorize use of modern
communication technology at meetings would have little or no impact on
producers and handlers. Adding authority to conduct research and
promotion programs would result in additional costs being imposed on
handlers once implemented. Evidence provided at the hearing shows that
committee expenses, and therefore handler assessments, would increase
with the implementation of the proposal to authorize research and
promotion programs. However, the record indicates that there may be an
offset by decreases in payments to other industry entities now
conducting research. Improved production and marketing strategies
developed under the authorized programs would be expected to outweigh
any additional costs to the Florida fresh citrus industry. In addition,
any increased costs would be proportional to a handler's size and would
not unduly or disproportionately impact small entities.
USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap or conflict with this proposed rule. These amendments are
intended to improve the operation and administration of the order and
to assist in the marketing of fresh Florida citrus.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Information collection requirements for Part 905 are currently
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), under OMB Number
0581-0189--``Generic OMB Fruit Crops.'' No changes in these
requirements are anticipated as a result of this proceeding. Should any
such changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for
approval.
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 Government Paperwork
Elimination Act (GPEA), which requires Government agencies in general
to provide the public the option of submitting information or
transacting business electronically to the maximum extent possible.
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.
Civil Justice Reform
The amendments to Marketing Agreement No. 84 and Marketing Order
No. 905 proposed herein have been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. They are not intended to have retroactive effect.
If adopted, the proposed amendments would not preempt any State or
local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an
irreconcilable conflict with this proposal.
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. A
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 no later than 20 days after the date of the
entry of the ruling.
[[Page 16801]]
Findings and Conclusions
The findings and conclusions, rulings, and general findings and
determinations included in the Recommended Decision set forth in the
December 24, 2008, issue of the Federal Register are hereby approved
and adopted.
Marketing Agreement and Order
Annexed hereto and made a part hereof is the document entitled
``Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of Oranges,
Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida.'' This document
has been decided upon as the detailed and appropriate means of
effectuating the foregoing findings and conclusions.
It is hereby ordered, that this entire decision be published in the
Federal Register.
Referendum Order
It is hereby directed that a referendum be conducted in accordance
with the procedure for the conduct of referenda (7 CFR part 900.400-
407) to determine whether the annexed order amending the order
regulating the handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and
tangelos grown in Florida is approved or favored by producers, as
defined under the terms of the order, who during the representative
period where engaged in the production of citrus in the production
area.
The representative period for the conduct of such referendum is
hereby determined to be August 1, 2007, though July 31, 2008.
The agents of the Secretary to conduct such referendum are hereby
designated to be Christian Nissen and Doris Jamieson, Southeast
Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit
and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA; Telephone: (863) 324-3375, Fax:
(863) 325-8793, or E-mail: Christian.Nissen@ams.usda.gov or
Doris.Jamieson@ams.usda.gov, respectively.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 905
Grapefruit, Marketing agreements, Oranges, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Tangelos, Tangerines.
Dated: April 6, 2009.
Robert C. Keeney,
Acting Associate Administrator.
Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of Oranges,
Grapefruit, Tangerines, and Tangelos Grown in Florida \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This order shall not become effective unless and until the
requirements of Sec. 900.14 of the rules of practice and procedure
governing proceedings to formulate marketing agreements and
marketing orders have been met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings and Determinations
The findings and determinations hereinafter set forth are
supplementary to the findings and determinations that were previously
made in connection with the issuance of the marketing order; and all
said previous findings and determinations are hereby ratified and
affirmed, except insofar as such findings and determinations may be in
conflict with the findings and determinations set forth herein.
(a) Findings and Determinations Upon the Basis of the Hearing
Record.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Agricultural marketing Agreement
Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-612), and the applicable rules of
practice and procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR part 900), a public
hearing was held upon proposed further amendment of Marketing Agreement
No. 84 and Marketing Order No. 905, regulating the handling of oranges,
grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos grown in Florida.
Upon the basis of the record, it is found that:
(1) The marketing agreement and order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended, and all of the terms and conditions
thereof, would tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act;
(2) The marketing agreement and order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended, regulate the handling of oranges,
grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos grown in the production area in
the same manner as, and are applicable only to, persons in the
respective classes of commercial and industrial activity specified in
the marketing agreement and order upon which a hearing has been held;
(3) The marketing agreement and order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended, are limited in their application to the
smallest regional production area that is practicable, consistent with
carrying out the declared policy of the Act, and the issuance of
several orders applicable to subdivisions of the production area would
not effectively carry out the declared policy of the Act;
(4) The marketing agreement and order, as amended, and as hereby
proposed to be further amended, prescribe, insofar as practicable, such
different terms applicable to different parts of the production area as
are necessary to give due recognition to the differences in the
production and marketing of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and
tangelos grown in the production area; and
(5) All handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos
grown in the production area as defined in the marketing agreement and
order is in the current of interstate or foreign commerce or directly
burdens, obstructs, or affects such commerce.
Order Relative to Handling
It is therefore ordered, That on and after the effective date
hereof, all handling of oranges, grapefruit, tangerines, and tangelos
grown in Florida shall be in conformity to, and in compliance with, the
terms and conditions of the said order as hereby proposed to be amended
as follows:
The provisions of the proposed marketing agreement and order
amending the order contained in the Recommended Decision issued by the
Administrator on December 19, 2008, and published in the Federal
Register on December 24, 2008, will be and are the terms and provisions
of this order amending the order and are set forth in full herein.
PART 905--ORANGES, GRAPEFRUIT, TANGERINES, AND TANGELOS GROWN IN
FLORIDA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 905 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
2. Amend Sec. 905.22 by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(2) to
read as follows:
Sec. 905.22 Nominations.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) Each nominee shall be a producer in the district from which he
or she is nominated. In voting for nominees, each producer shall be
entitled to cast one vote for each nominee in each of the districts in
which he or she is a producer. At least two of the nominees and their
alternates so nominated shall be affiliated with a bona fide
cooperative marketing organization.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) Nomination of at least two members and their alternates shall
be
[[Page 16802]]
made by bona fide cooperative marketing organizations which are
handlers. Nominations for not more than six members and their
alternates shall be made by handlers who are not so affiliated. In
voting for nominees, each handler or his or her authorized
representative shall be entitled to cast one vote, which shall be
weighted by the volume of fruit by such handler during the then current
fiscal period.
3. Revise Sec. 905.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 905.23 Selection.
(a) From the nominations made pursuant to Sec. 905.22(a) or from
other qualified persons, the Secretary shall select one member and one
alternate member to represent District 2 and two members and two
alternate members each to represent Districts 1, 3, 4, and 5 or such
other number of members and alternate members from each district as may
be prescribed pursuant to Sec. 905.14. At least two such members and
their alternates shall be affiliated with bona fide cooperative
marketing organizations.
(b) From the nominations made pursuant to Sec. 905.22 (b) or from
other qualified persons, the Secretary shall select at least two
members and their alternates to represent bona fide cooperative
marketing organizations which are handlers, and the remaining members
and their alternates to represent handlers who are not so affiliated.
4. In Sec. 905.29, redesignate paragraph (b) as paragraph (c), and
add a new paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 905.29 Inability of members to serve.
* * * * *
(b) If both a member and his or her respective alternate are unable
to attend a committee meeting, such member may designate another
alternate to act in his or her place in order to obtain a quorum:
Provided, That such alternate member represents the same group
affiliation as the absent member. If the member is unable to designate
such an alternate, the committee members present may designate such
alternate.
* * * * *
5. Revise paragraph (c) of Sec. 905.34 to read as follows:
Sec. 905.34 Procedure of committees.
* * * * *
(c) The committee may provide for meeting by telephone, telegraph,
or other means of communication, and any vote cast at such a meeting
shall be promptly confirmed in writing: Provided, That if any assembled
meeting is held, all votes shall be cast in person.
* * * * *
6. Add a new Sec. 905.54 to read as follows:
Sec. 905.54 Marketing, research and development.
The committee may, with the approval of the Secretary, establish,
or provide for the establishment of, projects including production
research, marketing research and development projects, and marketing
promotion including paid advertising, designed to assist, improve, or
promote the marketing, distribution, and consumption or efficient
production of fruit. The expenses of such projects shall be paid by
funds collected pursuant to Sec. 905.41. Upon conclusion of each
project, but at least annually, the committee shall summarize the
program status and accomplishments to its members and the Secretary. A
similar report to the committee shall be required of any contracting
party on any project carried out under this section. Also, for each
project, the contracting party shall be required to maintain records of
money received and expenditures, and such shall be available to the
committee and the Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8171 Filed 4-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
