Almonds Grown in California; Revision of Outgoing Quality Control Requirements, 50681-50683 [E9-23648]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
employee(s) conducting the review.
This charge applies only to requesters
who are seeking documents for
commercial use, and only to the review
necessary at the initial administrative
level to determine the applicability of
any relevant FOIA exemptions, and not
at the administrative appeal level of an
exemption already applied.
(4) Duplication of records. Twentyfive cents per page for paper copy
reproduction of documents, which the
Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel and the IG determined is the
reasonable direct cost of making such
copies, taking into account the average
salary of the operator and the cost of the
reproduction machinery. For copies of
records prepared by computer, such as
tapes or printouts, the Authority, the
General Counsel, the Panel or the IG
shall charge the actual cost, including
operator time, of production of the tape
or printout.
(5) Forwarding material to
destination. Postage, insurance and
special fees will be charged on an actual
cost basis.
(e) Aggregating requests. When the
Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel or the IG reasonably believes that
a requester or group of requesters is
attempting to break a request down into
a series of requests for the purpose of
evading the assessment of fees, the
Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel or the IG will aggregate any such
requests and charge accordingly.
(f) Charging interest. Interest at the
rate prescribed in 31 U.S.C. 3717 may be
charged those requesters who fail to pay
fees charged, beginning on the 30th day
following the billing date. Receipt of a
fee by the Authority, the General
Counsel, the Panel or the IG, whether
processed or not, will stay the accrual
of interest.
(g) Advanced payments. The
Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel or the IG will not require a
requester to make an advance payment,
i.e., payment before work is commenced
or continued on a request, unless:
(1) The Authority, the General
Counsel, the Panel or the IG estimates
or determines that allowable charges
that a requester may be required to pay
are likely to exceed $250. Then the
Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel or the IG will notify the requester
of the likely cost and obtain satisfactory
assurance of full payment where the
requester has a history of prompt
payment of FOIA fees, or require an
advance payment of an amount up to
the full estimated charges in the case of
requesters with no history of payment;
or
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
(2) A requester has previously failed
to pay a fee charged in a timely fashion
(i.e., within 30 days of the date of the
billing), in which case the Authority,
the General Counsel, the Panel or the IG
requires the requester to pay the full
amount owed plus any applicable
interest as provided in this section or
demonstrate that the requester has, in
fact, paid the fee, and to make an
advance payment of the full amount of
the estimated fee before the agency
begins to process a new request or a
pending request from that requester.
When the Authority, the General
Counsel, the Panel or the IG acts under
paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this section,
the administrative time limits
prescribed in subsection (a)(6) of the
FOIA (i.e., 20 working days from receipt
of initial requests and 20 working days
from receipt of appeals from initial
denial, plus permissible extension of
these time limits) will begin only after
the Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel or the IG has received fee
payments described in this section.
(h) When a person other than a party
to a proceeding before the agency makes
a request for a copy of a transcript,
diskette, or other recordation of the
proceeding, the Authority, the General
Counsel, the Panel or the IG, as
appropriate, will handle the request
under this part.
(i) Payment of fees shall be made by
check or money order payable to the
U.S. Treasury.
§ 2411.14 Record retention and
preservation.
The Authority, the General Counsel,
the Panel, and the IG shall preserve all
correspondence pertaining to the
requests that it receives under this
subpart, as well as copies of all
requested records, until such time as
disposition or destruction is authorized
by title 44 of the United States Code or
the National Archives and Records
Administration’s General Records
Schedule 14. Records will not be
disposed of while they are the subject of
a pending request, appeal, or lawsuit
under the FOIA.
§ 2411.15
Annual report.
On or before February 1 annually, the
Chief FOIA Officer of the Authority
shall submit a report of the activities of
the Authority, the General Counsel, the
Panel, and the IG with regard to public
information requests during the
preceding fiscal year to the Attorney
General of the United States. The report
shall include those matters required by
5 U.S.C. 552(e), and shall be made
available electronically.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50681
Dated: September 25, 2009.
Carol Waller Pope,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. E9–23553 Filed 9–30–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6727–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 981
[Doc. No. AMS–FV–08–0045; FV08–981–2
FIR]
Almonds Grown in California; Revision
of Outgoing Quality Control
Requirements
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Affirmation of interim final rule
as final rule.
SUMMARY: The Department of
Agriculture (USDA) is adopting as a
final rule, without change, an interim
final rule that revised the outgoing
quality control regulations issued under
the California almond marketing order
(order). The interim final rule revised
the term ‘‘validation’’ under the
Salmonella bacteria (Salmonella)
treatment program by specifying that
validation data must be both submitted
to and accepted by the Almond Board
of California’s (Board) Technical Expert
Review Panel (TERP) for all treatment
equipment prior to its use under this
program. The interim final rule was
necessary to ensure that all treatment
equipment meets a 4-log reduction of
Salmonella in almonds.
DATES: Effective Date: Effective October
2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Terry Vawter, Senior 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:
Terry.Vawter@ams.usda.gov, or
Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may obtain
information on complying with this and
other marketing order regulations by
viewing a guide at the following Web
site: https://www.ams.usda.gov/
AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.
do?template=TemplateN&page=
MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide;
or by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing
Order Administration Branch, Fruit and
Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., STOP
0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237;
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
50682
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)
720–8938, or E-mail:
Jay.Guerber@ams.usda.gov.
This rule
is issued under Marketing Order No.
981, as amended (7 CFR part 981),
regulating the handling of almonds
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.
The order is administered locally by
the Board. Under the order, handlers are
required to treat shipments of almonds
to reduce the potential for Salmonella
contamination, with limited exceptions.
Various equipment systems must be in
place and must be ‘‘validated’’ by the
Board’s TERP to ensure that treatments
meet a required 4-log reduction of
Salmonella in almonds destined for
consumers in the United States, Canada,
and Mexico. The TERP consists of four
scientists, with a representative from the
Food and Drug Administration serving
as an ex-officio member.
In an interim final rule published in
the Federal Register on June 18, 2009,
and effective on June 19, 2009 (74 FR
28872, Doc. No. AMS–FV–08–0045;
FV08–981–2 IFR), § 981.442 was
amended by specifying that validation
means that the treatment technology
and equipment have been demonstrated
to achieve in total a minimum 4-log
reduction of Salmonella bacteria in
almonds. Validation data must be both
submitted to and accepted by the TERP
for each piece of equipment used to
treat almonds prior to its use under the
program. Prior to the change, the
regulation did not specify that
validation data must be both submitted
to and accepted by the TERP for each
piece of equipment prior to its use
under the program.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
has considered the economic impact of
this rule on small entities. Accordingly,
AMS has prepared this final 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
unique in that they are brought about
through group action of essentially
small entities acting on their own
behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 6,200
producers of almonds in the production
area and approximately 100 handlers
subject to regulation under the
marketing order. Additionally, the
Board estimates there are about 15
process authorities and 30 almond
manufacturers under the Salmonella
treatment program. Small agricultural
producers are defined by the Small
Business Administration (13 CFR
121.201) as those having annual receipts
of less than $750,000, and small
agricultural service firms are defined as
those whose annual receipts are less
than $7,000,000.
Data for the most recently-completed
crop year indicate that about 50 percent
of the handlers shipped under
$7,000,000 worth of almonds. Dividing
average almond crop value for 2006–07
reported by the National Agricultural
Statistics Service of $2.258 billion by
the number of producers (6,200) yields
an average annual producer revenue
estimate of about $364,190. Based on
the foregoing, about half of the handlers
and a majority of almond producers may
be classified as small entities. While
data regarding the size of the process
authorities and almond manufacturers is
not available, it may be assumed that
some process authorities and
manufacturers may be classified as
small entities.
This rule continues in effect the
action that revised § 981.442(b)(3)(i) of
the order’s administrative rules and
regulations specifying that the term
‘‘validation’’ under the Salmonella
treatment program means that
validation data must be both submitted
to and accepted by the TERP for each
piece of treatment equipment prior to its
use under the program. This revision
will help ensure that all treatment
equipment meets the program’s 4-log
requirement prior to its use. Authority
for this action is provided in § 981.42(b)
of the order.
Regarding the overall impact of this
action on the affected entities, it is
expected to be minimal. Validation data
had previously been submitted to the
Board’s TERP for review. This interim
final rule simply specified that such
data must be accepted by the TERP for
all treatment equipment prior to its use
under the program.
The Board’s Food Quality and Safety
Committee (committee) met prior to the
board meeting to consider this change.
The committee considered the
alternative to this action, which
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
maintained the status quo whereby
equipment could be used under the
program that had completed validation
testing, but had not been accepted by
the TERP. The committee, and
subsequently the Board, concluded that
acceptance by the TERP was important
in order to help ensure that all treatment
equipment consistently meets the 4-log
requirement of the program.
The Board, with the expertise of
various committees and subcommittees,
makes recommendations regarding the
revisions to the marketing order rules
and regulations after consideration of all
available information, including
comments received by Board staff. At
the meetings, the impact of and
alternatives to these recommendations
are deliberated. The Board and its
committees and subcommittees consist
of individual producers and handlers
with many years of experience in the
industry, who are familiar with industry
practices and trends. All Board,
committee, and subcommittee meetings
are open to the public and comments
are widely solicited. In addition,
minutes of all meetings are distributed
to Board, committee, and subcommittee
members and others who have
requested them, and are also posted on
the board’s Web site, thereby increasing
the availability of this critical
information within the industry.
This rule will not impose any
additional reporting and recordkeeping
requirements on California almonds
handlers, process authorities, or almond
manufacturers. 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. In addition, USDA has
not identified any relevant Federal rules
that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
this rule.
Further, the subcommittee,
committee, and Board meetings where
this issue was discussed were widely
publicized throughout the California
almond industry, and all interested
persons were encouraged to attend the
meetings and participate in
deliberations on all issues. The issue
was discussed at two Food Quality and
Safety Committee meetings in April
2008 and at two Board meetings, one in
April and one in May 2008. All of these
meetings were public meetings, and all
entities, both large and small, were able
to express views on this issue.
Comments on the interim final rule
were required to be received on or
before August 17, 2009. No comments
were received. Therefore, for the reasons
given in the interim final rule, we are
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 189 / Thursday, October 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
adopting the interim final rule as a final
rule, without change.
To view the interim final rule, go to
https://www.regulations.gov/search/
Regs/home.html#documentDetail?
R=09000064809d2903.
This action also affirms information
contained in the interim final rule
concerning Executive Orders 12866 and
12988, the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35), and the E-Gov Act
(44 U.S.C. 101).
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, it is found that
finalizing the interim final rule, without
change, as published in the Federal
Register (74 FR 28872, June 18, 2009)
will tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981
Almonds, Marketing agreements,
Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PART 981—ALMONDS GROWN IN
CALIFORNIA
Accordingly, the interim final rule
that amended 7 CFR part 981 and that
was published at 74 FR 28872, on June
18, 2009, is adopted as a final rule,
without change.
Dated: September 25, 2009.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. E9–23648 Filed 9–30–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2009–0521; Directorate
Identifier 2008–NM–187–AD; Amendment
39–16034; AD 2009–20–11]
RIN 2120–AA64
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 737–300, –400, and –500 Series
Airplanes Equipped With a Digital
Transient Suppression Device (DTSD)
Installed in Accordance With
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST00127BO
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 737–300, –400, and –500
series airplanes. This AD requires
revising the maintenance program to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:06 Sep 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
include new fuel system limitations for
airplanes modified in accordance with
STC ST00127BO. This AD also requires
inspections and checks of the DTSDs
and corrective actions, if necessary. This
AD results from fuel system reviews
conducted by the manufacturer. We are
issuing this AD to prevent a potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks,
which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank
fire or explosion and consequent loss of
the airplane.
DATES: This AD is effective November 5,
2009.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in the AD
as of November 5, 2009.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this AD, contact Goodrich
Corporation, Fuel and Utility Systems,
100 Panton Road, Vergennes, Vermont
05491–1008; telephone 802–877–4476;
e-mail
lgd.TechPubs.Oakville@goodrich.com;
Internet https://www.goodrich.com/
TechPubs.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527)
is the Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marc Ronell, Aerospace Engineer, ANE–
150, FAA, Boston Aircraft Certification
Office, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, Massachusetts 01803;
telephone (781) 238–7776; fax (781)
238–7170.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that would apply to
certain Boeing Model 737–300, –400,
and –500 series airplanes. That NPRM
was published in the Federal Register
on June 9, 2009 (74 FR 27254). That
NPRM proposed to require revising the
maintenance program to include new
fuel system limitations for airplanes
modified in accordance with
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50683
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST00127BO. That NPRM also proposed
to require inspections and checks of the
digital transient suppression devices
and corrective actions, if necessary.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. We
considered the comment received.
Boeing supports the NPRM.
Actions Since NPRM was Issued
Since we issued the NPRM, we have
determined that it is necessary to clarify
the AD’s intended effect on spare and
on-airplane fuel tank system
components, regarding the use of
maintenance manuals and instructions
for continued airworthiness.
Section 91.403(c) of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 91.403(c))
specifies the following:
No person may operate an aircraft for
which a manufacturer’s maintenance manual
or instructions for continued airworthiness
has been issued that contains an
airworthiness limitation section unless the
mandatory * * * procedures * * * have
been complied with.
Some operators have questioned
whether existing components affected
by the new CDCCLs must be reworked.
We did not intend for the AD to
retroactively require rework of
components that had been maintained
using acceptable methods before the
effective date of the AD. Owners and
operators of the affected airplanes
therefore are not required to rework
affected components identified as
airworthy or installed on the affected
airplanes before the required revisions
of the maintenance program. But once
the CDCCLs are incorporated into the
maintenance program, future
maintenance actions on components
must be done in accordance with those
CDCCLs.
We have added Note 2 to this AD to
clarify the intended effect of the AD on
spare and on-airplane fuel tank system
components.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data,
including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD
with the change described previously.
We also determined that this change
will not increase the economic burden
on any operator or increase the scope of
the AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 12
airplanes of U.S. registry. The following
table provides the estimated costs for
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 189 (Thursday, October 1, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50681-50683]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23648]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 981
[Doc. No. AMS-FV-08-0045; FV08-981-2 FIR]
Almonds Grown in California; Revision of Outgoing Quality Control
Requirements
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Affirmation of interim final rule as final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is adopting as a final
rule, without change, an interim final rule that revised the outgoing
quality control regulations issued under the California almond
marketing order (order). The interim final rule revised the term
``validation'' under the Salmonella bacteria (Salmonella) treatment
program by specifying that validation data must be both submitted to
and accepted by the Almond Board of California's (Board) Technical
Expert Review Panel (TERP) for all treatment equipment prior to its use
under this program. The interim final rule was necessary to ensure that
all treatment equipment meets a 4-log reduction of Salmonella in
almonds.
DATES: Effective Date: Effective October 2, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Vawter, Senior 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: Terry.Vawter@ams.usda.gov, or
Kurt.Kimmel@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may obtain information on complying with this and
other marketing order regulations by viewing a guide at the following
Web site: https://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateN&page=MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide; or by contacting Jay Guerber, Marketing Order
Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237;
[[Page 50682]]
Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or E-mail:
Jay.Guerber@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Order
No. 981, as amended (7 CFR part 981), regulating the handling of
almonds 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.
The order is administered locally by the Board. Under the order,
handlers are required to treat shipments of almonds to reduce the
potential for Salmonella contamination, with limited exceptions.
Various equipment systems must be in place and must be ``validated'' by
the Board's TERP to ensure that treatments meet a required 4-log
reduction of Salmonella in almonds destined for consumers in the United
States, Canada, and Mexico. The TERP consists of four scientists, with
a representative from the Food and Drug Administration serving as an
ex-officio member.
In an interim final rule published in the Federal Register on June
18, 2009, and effective on June 19, 2009 (74 FR 28872, Doc. No. AMS-FV-
08-0045; FV08-981-2 IFR), Sec. 981.442 was amended by specifying that
validation means that the treatment technology and equipment have been
demonstrated to achieve in total a minimum 4-log reduction of
Salmonella bacteria in almonds. Validation data must be both submitted
to and accepted by the TERP for each piece of equipment used to treat
almonds prior to its use under the program. Prior to the change, the
regulation did not specify that validation data must be both submitted
to and accepted by the TERP for each piece of equipment prior to its
use under the program.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this rule on small entities. Accordingly, AMS has
prepared this final regulatory flexibility analysis.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and the rules issued thereunder, are unique in
that they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 6,200 producers of almonds in the
production area and approximately 100 handlers subject to regulation
under the marketing order. Additionally, the Board estimates there are
about 15 process authorities and 30 almond manufacturers under the
Salmonella treatment program. Small agricultural producers are defined
by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.201) as those having
annual receipts of less than $750,000, and small agricultural service
firms are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than
$7,000,000.
Data for the most recently-completed crop year indicate that about
50 percent of the handlers shipped under $7,000,000 worth of almonds.
Dividing average almond crop value for 2006-07 reported by the National
Agricultural Statistics Service of $2.258 billion by the number of
producers (6,200) yields an average annual producer revenue estimate of
about $364,190. Based on the foregoing, about half of the handlers and
a majority of almond producers may be classified as small entities.
While data regarding the size of the process authorities and almond
manufacturers is not available, it may be assumed that some process
authorities and manufacturers may be classified as small entities.
This rule continues in effect the action that revised Sec.
981.442(b)(3)(i) of the order's administrative rules and regulations
specifying that the term ``validation'' under the Salmonella treatment
program means that validation data must be both submitted to and
accepted by the TERP for each piece of treatment equipment prior to its
use under the program. This revision will help ensure that all
treatment equipment meets the program's 4-log requirement prior to its
use. Authority for this action is provided in Sec. 981.42(b) of the
order.
Regarding the overall impact of this action on the affected
entities, it is expected to be minimal. Validation data had previously
been submitted to the Board's TERP for review. This interim final rule
simply specified that such data must be accepted by the TERP for all
treatment equipment prior to its use under the program.
The Board's Food Quality and Safety Committee (committee) met prior
to the board meeting to consider this change. The committee considered
the alternative to this action, which maintained the status quo whereby
equipment could be used under the program that had completed validation
testing, but had not been accepted by the TERP. The committee, and
subsequently the Board, concluded that acceptance by the TERP was
important in order to help ensure that all treatment equipment
consistently meets the 4-log requirement of the program.
The Board, with the expertise of various committees and
subcommittees, makes recommendations regarding the revisions to the
marketing order rules and regulations after consideration of all
available information, including comments received by Board staff. At
the meetings, the impact of and alternatives to these recommendations
are deliberated. The Board and its committees and subcommittees consist
of individual producers and handlers with many years of experience in
the industry, who are familiar with industry practices and trends. All
Board, committee, and subcommittee meetings are open to the public and
comments are widely solicited. In addition, minutes of all meetings are
distributed to Board, committee, and subcommittee members and others
who have requested them, and are also posted on the board's Web site,
thereby increasing the availability of this critical information within
the industry.
This rule will not impose any additional reporting and
recordkeeping requirements on California almonds handlers, process
authorities, or almond manufacturers. 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. In addition, USDA has not identified any relevant Federal
rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this rule.
Further, the subcommittee, committee, and Board meetings where this
issue was discussed were widely publicized throughout the California
almond industry, and all interested persons were encouraged to attend
the meetings and participate in deliberations on all issues. The issue
was discussed at two Food Quality and Safety Committee meetings in
April 2008 and at two Board meetings, one in April and one in May 2008.
All of these meetings were public meetings, and all entities, both
large and small, were able to express views on this issue.
Comments on the interim final rule were required to be received on
or before August 17, 2009. No comments were received. Therefore, for
the reasons given in the interim final rule, we are
[[Page 50683]]
adopting the interim final rule as a final rule, without change.
To view the interim final rule, go to https://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=09000064809d2903.
This action also affirms information contained in the interim final
rule concerning Executive Orders 12866 and 12988, the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), and the E-Gov Act (44 U.S.C.
101).
After consideration of all relevant material presented, it is found
that finalizing the interim final rule, without change, as published in
the Federal Register (74 FR 28872, June 18, 2009) will tend to
effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981
Almonds, Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PART 981--ALMONDS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
Accordingly, the interim final rule that amended 7 CFR part 981 and
that was published at 74 FR 28872, on June 18, 2009, is adopted as a
final rule, without change.
Dated: September 25, 2009.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. E9-23648 Filed 9-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P