Watermelon Research and Promotion Plan; Redistricting and Importer Representation, 42009-42012 [2011-17882]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 989 is amended as
follows:
PART 989—RAISINS PRODUCED
FROM GRAPES GROWN IN
CALIFORNIA
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 989 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. In § 989.154, the first sentence of
paragraph (a) is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 989.154
Marketing policy computations.
Dated: July 11, 2011.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1210
[Document Number AMS–FV–10–0093]
Watermelon Research and Promotion
Plan; Redistricting and Importer
Representation
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA
Final rule.
This rule changes the
boundaries of all seven districts under
the Watermelon Research and
Promotion Plan (Plan) to reapportion
the producer, handler, and importer
memberships on the National
Watermelon Promotion Board (Board).
In addition, the Board is adding two
importer seats based on the quantity of
watermelon imports in the past three
years. These changes are based on a
review of the production and
assessments paid in each district and
the amount of watermelon import
assessments, which the Plan requires at
least every five years. As a result of
these changes, the importer seats will
increase from six to eight. Therefore, the
total Board membership will increase
from 35 to 37 members. In addition, a
new Code of Federal Regulation section
is added to reflect the importer
representation on the Board.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:32 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
Jeanette Palmer, Marketing Specialist,
Research and Promotion Branch, Fruit
and Vegetable Programs, AMS, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Stop 0244,
1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room
0632–S, Washington, DC 20250–0244;
telephone: (888) 720–9917; facsimile:
(202) 205–2800; or electronic mail:
Jeanette.Palmer@ams.usda.gov.
This rule
is issued under the Watermelon
Research and Promotion Plan [7 CFR
part 1210]. The Plan is authorized under
the Watermelon Research and
Promotion Act (Act) [7 U.S.C. 4901–
4916].
Executive Orders 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
has waived the review process required
by Executive Order 12866 for this
action.
Executive Order 12988
[FR Doc. 2011–17788 Filed 7–15–11; 8:45 am]
ACTION:
Effective July 19, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(a) Desirable carryout levels. The
desirable carryout level to be used in
computing and announcing a crop
year’s marketing policy for Natural (sundried) Seedless raisins shall be 85,000
natural condition tons.
*
*
*
*
*
AGENCY:
DATES:
In addition, this rule has been
reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. The rule is not
intended to have retroactive effect.
The Act allows producers, producerpackers, handlers, and importers to file
a written petition with the Secretary of
Agriculture (Secretary) if they believe
that the Plan, any provision of the Plan,
or any obligation imposed in connection
with the Plan, is not established in
accordance with the law. In any
petition, the person may request a
modification of the Plan or an
exemption from the Plan. The petitioner
will have the opportunity for a hearing
on the petition. Afterwards, an
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) will
issue a decision. If the petitioner
disagrees with the ALJ’s ruling, the
petitioner has 30 days to appeal to the
Judicial Officer, who will issue a ruling
on behalf of the Secretary. If the
petitioner disagrees with the Secretary’s
ruling, the petitioner may file, within 20
days, an appeal in the U.S. District
Court for the district where the
petitioner resides or conducts business.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601–612], AMS
has examined the economic impact of
this rule on the small producers,
handlers, and importers that would be
affected by this rule.
The Small Business Administration
defines, in 13 CFR part 121, small
agricultural producers as those having
annual receipts of no more than
$750,000 and small agricultural service
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
42009
firms (handlers and importers) as those
having annual receipts of no more than
$7 million. Under these definitions, the
majority of the producers, handlers, and
importers that would be affected by this
rule would be considered small entities.
Producers of less than 10 acres of
watermelons are exempt from this
program. Importers of less than 150,000
pounds of watermelons per year are also
exempt.
USDA’s National Agricultural
Statistics Service (NASS) data for the
2010 crop year was about 310
hundredweight (cwt.) of watermelons
were produced per acre. The 2010
grower price published by NASS was
$12.00 per hundredweight. Thus, the
value of watermelon production per
acre in 2010 averaged about $3,720 (310
cwt. × $12.00). At that average price, a
producer would have to farm over 202
acres to receive an annual income from
watermelons of $750,000 ($750,000
divided by $3,720 per acre equals 202).
Accordingly, as previously noted, a
majority of the watermelon producers
would be classified as small businesses.
Based on the Board’s data, using an
average of freight on board (f.o.b.) price
of $.0164 per pound and the number of
pounds handled in 2010, none of the
watermelon handlers had receipts over
the $7.5 million threshold. Therefore,
the watermelon handlers would all be
considered small businesses. A handler
would have to ship over 457 million
pounds of watermelons to be considered
large (457,317,073 times $.0164 f.o.b.
equals $7,500,000).
According to the Board, there are
approximately 950 producers, 230
handlers, and 137 importers who are
required to pay assessments under the
program.
Based on the watermelon import
assessments received for the year 2010,
the United States imported watermelons
worth over $260 million dollars. The
largest imports of watermelon came
from Mexico which accounted for 93
percent of the total in 2010. Other
suppliers of imported watermelon are
Guatemala at 3 percent and Honduras at
1 percent. The remaining 3 percent of
imported watermelon came from
Canada, Netherlands, Nicaragua,
Nigeria, and Panama.
The Board’s assessment records show
imports for the years 2007, 2008, and
2009 at $681,565, $783,249, and
$742,363 respectively. Based on this
data, the three-year average annual
imports for watermelon total $735,725
(2,207,177 divided by 3). This
represents approximately 29 percent of
the total assessments paid to the Board.
Currently there are 6 importers on the
Board representing 17 percent of the
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
42010
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
total members. Accordingly, two
importer seats should be added to the
Board. The new Board membership
distribution would be 14 producers, 14
handlers, 8 importers, and 1 public
member which would bring the
percentage of seats for importers to 22
percent of the total seats on the Board.
Nominations and appointments to the
Board are conducted pursuant to
sections 1210.321 of the Plan. The Plan
requires producers to be nominated by
producers, handlers to be nominated by
handlers, and importers to be
nominated by importers. This would not
change. Because some current members
are in States or counties which would
be moved to other districts under this
rule, one producer member vacancy in
the new District 2, one handler member
vacancy in the new Districts 3, and one
producer member vacancy in the new
District 7 would result with this change.
Nomination meetings will be held in the
new districts to fill these vacancies.
Appointments to the Board are made
by the Secretary from a slate of
nominated candidates. The nominees
for the two producer, one handler and
two importer positions will be
submitted to the Secretary for
appointment to the Board.
The overall impact is favorable
because the new district boundaries
provide more equitable representation
for the producers, handlers, and
importers who pay assessments in the
various districts.
The Board chose the realignment
scenario that kept the States together.
For instance, California is currently
divided into two districts and the Board
has realigned California so that all the
counties in California are located in one
district. The new realignment would
also give Georgia and Texas their own
respective districts. The other States
will be divided up to reflect their
watermelon production levels and
grouped together for the four remaining
districts.
The Board considered several
alignments of the districts in an effort to
provide balanced representation for
each district. The Board selected the
alignment described in this rule as it
provides proportional representation on
the Board of producers, handlers, and
importers. The addition of two
importers would allow for more
importers representation on the Board’s
decision making and also potentially
provide an opportunity to increase
diversity on the Board.
In accordance with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
regulation [5 CFR part 1320] which
implements the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. Chapter 35], the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:32 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
background form, which represents the
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements that are
imposed by the Plan have been
approved previously under OMB
number 0505–0001.
The Plan requires that two nominees
be submitted for each vacant position.
With regard to information collection
requirements, adding two importers to
the Board means that four additional
importers will be required to submit
background forms to USDA in order to
be considered for appointment to the
Board. However, serving on the Board is
optional, and the burden of submitting
the background form would be offset by
the benefits of serving on the Board. The
estimated annual cost of providing the
information by four importers would be
$33 or $8.25 per importer. The
additional minimal burden will be
included in the existing information
collection package under OMB number
0505–0001.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this rule.
Background
Under the Plan, the Board administers
a nationally coordinated program of
research, development, advertising, and
promotion designed to strengthen the
watermelon’s position in the market
place and to establish, maintain, and
expand markets for watermelons. This
program is financed by assessments on
producers growing 10 acres or more of
watermelons, handlers of watermelons,
and importers of 150,000 pounds of
watermelons or more per year. The Plan
specifies that handlers are responsible
for collecting and submitting both the
producer and handler assessments to
the Board, reporting their handling of
watermelons, and maintaining records
necessary to verify their reporting(s).
Importers are responsible for payment of
assessments to the Board on
watermelons imported into the United
States through the U.S. Customs Service
and Border Protection. This action will
not have any impact on the assessment
rates paid by producers, handlers, and
importers.
Membership on the Board consists of
two producers and two handlers for
each of the seven districts established
by the Plan, at least one importer, and
one public member. The Board
currently consists of 35 members: 14
producers, 14 handlers, 6 importers, and
1 public member.
The seven current districts were
established in 2006. They are:
District 1—The Florida counties of
Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Citrus,
Collier, Dade, DeSoto, Flagler, Glades,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Hardee, Hendry, Hernando, Highlands,
Hillsborough, Indian River, Lake, Lee,
Manatee, Martin, Marion, Monroe,
Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm
Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Putnam,
Sarasota, Seminole, St. Johns, St. Lucie,
Sumter, and Volusia.
District 2—The Florida counties of
Alachua, Baker, Bay, Bradford, Calhoun,
Clay, Columbia, Dixie, Duval, Escambia,
Franklin, Gadsden, Gilchrist, Gulf,
Hamilton, Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson,
Lafayette, Leon, Levy, Liberty, Madison,
Nassau, Okaloosa, Santa Rosa,
Suwannee, Taylor, Union, Wakulla,
Walton, Washington, and the Georgia
counties Early, Baker, Miller, Mitchell,
Colquitt, Thomas, Grady, Decatur,
Seminole, and the States of Alabama,
Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and
Virginia.
District 3—The Georgia counties not
included in District two and the State of
South Carolina.
District 4—The States of North
Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois,
Missouri, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio,
Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland,
New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania,
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Delaware,
Vermont, Wisconsin, Connecticut, and
Washington, DC.
District 5—The States of Alaska,
Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and
Washington and all of the counties in
the state of California except for those
California counties included in District
Seven.
District 6—The counties in the state of
Texas, except for those counties in
Texas included in District Seven.
District 7—The counties in the state of
Texas; Dallam, Sherman, Hanaford,
Ochiltree, Lipscomb, Hartley, Moore,
Hutchinson, Roberts, Hemphill,
Oldham, Potter, Carson, Gray, Wheeler,
Deaf Smith, Randall, Armstrong,
Donley, Collingsworth, Parmer, Castro,
Swisher, Briscoe, Hall, Childress,
Bailey, Lamb, Hale, Floyd, Motley,
Cottle, Cochran, Hockley, Lubbock,
Crosby, Dickens, King, Yoakum, Terry,
Lynn, Garza, Kent, Stonewall, the States
of New Mexico, Arizona, Utah,
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, and
Wyoming, and the following counties in
California; San Bernardino, Riverside,
San Diego, and Imperial.
Pursuant to section 1210.320(c) of the
Plan, the Board shall review the seven
districts every five years to determine
whether realignment of the districts is
necessary. When making a review, the
Plan specifies that the Board should
consider factors such as the most recent
three years of USDA production reports
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
or Board assessment reports if USDA
production reports are unavailable,
shifts and trends in quantities of
watermelons produced, and any other
relevant factors. Any realignment
should be recommended by the Board at
least six months prior to the date of the
call for nominations and should become
effective at least 30 days prior to this
date.
Pursuant to section 1210.320(e) of the
Plan, the Secretary shall review
importer representation every five years.
According to the Plan, the Secretary
shall review a three-year average of
watermelon import assessments and
adjust, to the extent practicable, the
number of importers on the Board.
The Board appointed a subcommittee
to begin reviewing the U.S. districts and
to determine whether realignment was
necessary based on production and
assessment collections in the current
districts. During the review, as
prescribed by the Plan, the
subcommittee reviewed USDA’s Annual
Crop Summary reports for 2007 through
2009, which provided figures for the top
17 watermelon producing States, and
the Board’s assessment collection
records for 2007 through 2009. Both sets
of data showed similar trends in
production among the various States.
However, the Board used the assessment
reports because USDA’s Annual Crop
Summary reports were available for
only 17 of the 34 States in which
watermelons are produced.
The subcommittee recommended to
the Board that the boundaries of all
seven districts be changed in order to
provide for a better distribution of
production among producers and
handlers in the districts.
The subcommittee also considered the
assessments of watermelon imports paid
to the Board. The Board’s assessment
records show imports for the years 2007,
2008, and 2009 at $681,565, $783,249,
and $742,363 respectively. Based on
this data, the three-year average annual
imports for watermelon total $735,725
(2,207,177 divided by 3). The average
annual percentage of assessments paid
by importers represents almost 29
percent of the Board’s assessment
income. In contrast to the 2006
realignment, the importer’s assessment
collection represented 20 percent of the
Board’s assessment income. Because
there was a 9 percent increase in the
assessments on imports, the Board
recommended an increase in the
number of importers on the Board.
USDA has evaluated information
concerning importer assessments and
has determined that the number of
importer representatives on the Board
should be increased by two members.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:32 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
Therefore, the number of importer
Board members would increase from six
to eight.
Section 1647(3)(A) of the Act
authorizes the Board to have at least one
or more importer representative to serve
on the Board. However, there is no
section in the Plan that identifies the
number of importers on the Board.
Section 1210.502 is currently reserved
and will be used to reflect importer
representation on the Board.
The realignment was approved by the
Board at its November 13, 2010,
meeting. Under the realignment, each
district would represent, on average, 16
percent of total U.S. production. The
composition of the Board would
increase to a total of 37 members: 14
producers, 14 handlers, 8 importers, and
1 public member.
Therefore, this rule realigns the
districts as follows:
District 1—The Florida counties of
Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Collier,
Dade, Desoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry,
Highlands, Hillsborough, Indian River,
Lake, Lee, Manatee, Martin, Monroe,
Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm
Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota,
Seminole, St. Lucie, and Volusia.
District 2—The Florida counties of
Alachua, Baker, Bay, Bradford, Calhoun,
Citrus, Clay, Columbia, Dixie, Duval,
Escambia, Flagler, Franklin, Gadsden,
Gilchrist, Gulf, Hamilton, Hernando,
Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette,
Leon, Levy, Liberty, Madison, Marion,
Nassau, Okaloosa, Putnam, Santa Rosa,
St. Johns, Sumter, Suwannee, Taylor,
Union, Wakulla, Walton, and
Washington, and the States of North
Carolina and South Carolina.
District 3—The State of Georgia.
District 4—The States of Alabama,
Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont,
Wisconsin, West Virginia, and
Washington, DC.
District 5—The State of California.
District 6—The State of Texas.
District 7—The States of Alaska,
Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii,
Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
Oregon, South Dakota, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming.
Under this realignment: (1) The
Florida counties of Citrus, Flagler,
Hernando, Marion, Putnam, St. Johns
and Sumter are moved from District 1 to
District 2; (2) Alabama, Tennessee, and
Virginia are moved from District 2 to
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
42011
District 4; (3) Arkansas, Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Oklahoma are moved
from District 2 to District 7; (4) Georgia
counties Early, Baker, Miller, Mitchell,
Colquitt, Thomas, Grady, Decatur, and
Seminole are moved from District 2 to
District 3, (5) South Carolina moved
from District 3 to District 2; (6) Iowa,
Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska,
North Dakota, and South Dakota are
moved from District 4 to District 7; (7)
Alaska, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and
Washington are moved from District 5 to
District 7; (8) The following counties in
the State of Texas: Armstrong, Bailey,
Briscoe, Carson, Castro, Childress,
Cochran, Collingsworth, Cottle, Crosby,
Dallam, Deaf Smith, Dickens, Donley,
Floyd, Garza, Gray, Hale, Hall,
Hanaford, Hartley, Hemphill, Hockley,
Hutchinson, Kent, King, Lamb,
Lipscomb, Lubbock, Lynn, Moore,
Motley, Ochiltree, Oldham, Parmer,
Potter, Randall, Roberts, Sherman,
Stonewall, Swisher, Terry, Wheeler, and
Yoakum are moved from District 7 to
District 6; (9) the following counties in
California: San Bernardino, Riverside,
San Diego, and Imperial are moved from
District 7 to District 5.
Due to the re-alignment of districts,
the following vacancies are created: one
producer vacancy in District 2; one
handler vacancy in District 3, one
producer vacancy in District 7; and two
importer vacancies. Current Board
members would be affected because
their States or counties would be moved
to other districts. Nomination meetings
will be held as soon as possible in the
new districts to fill the vacancies.
A 30-day comment period was
provided to allow interested persons to
respond to the proposal which was
published in the Federal Register on
May 5, 2011 [76 FR 25619]. Copies of
the rule were made available through
the Internet by USDA and the Office of
the Federal Register. The comment
period ended June 6, 2011. Two
comments were received by the
deadline.
Two favorable comments were
received. One commenter agreed with
the Board’s recommendation to realign
the district boundaries. The other
commenter supported the Board’s
recommendation to add two importers
to the Board based on the 29 percent of
assessments paid by importers to the
Board. The number of importer
members would increase from six to
eight importer members on the Board.
After consideration of all relevant
material presented, the Board’s
recommendation, and other
information, it is hereby found that this
rule is consistent with and will
effectuate the purpose of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
42012
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it also found
that good cause exists for not
postponing the effective date of this
action until one day after publication in
the Federal Register because the Board’s
term of office begins January 1, 2012,
and this rule will allow the upcoming
nominations and appointments to be
conducted in a timely manner for the
new members to be appointed to the
Board so they can begin serving during
the next term of office.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1210
(e) District 5—The State of California.
(f) District 6—The State of Texas.
(g) District 7—The States of Alaska,
Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii,
Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
Oregon, South Dakota, Utah,
Washington, and Wyoming.
3. Section 1210.502 is added to read
as follows:
■
§ 1210.502
Importer members.
Administrative practice and
procedure, Advertising, Consumer
information, Marketing agreements,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Watermelon promotion.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, Part 1210, Chapter XI of Title
7 is amended as follows:
Pursuant to § 1210.320(d) of the Plan,
there are eight importer representatives
on the Board based on the proportionate
percentage of assessments paid by
importers to the Board.
PART 1210—WATERMELON
RESEARCH AND PROMOTION PLAN
[FR Doc. 2011–17882 Filed 7–15–11; 8:45 am]
Dated: July 12, 2011.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator.
BILLING CODE P
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
Part 1210 continues to read as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 4901–4916 and 7
U.S.C. 7401.
Agricultural Marketing Service
Subpart C—Rules and Regulations
7 CFR Part 1260
■
2. Section 1210.501 is revised to read
as follows:
■
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 1210.501
Realignment of districts.
Pursuant to § 1210.320(c) of the Plan,
the districts shall be as follows:
(a) District 1—The Florida counties of
Brevard, Broward, Charlotte, Collier,
Dade, Desoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry,
Highlands, Hillsborough, Indian River,
Lake, Lee, Manatee, Martin, Monroe,
Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm
Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota,
Seminole, St. Lucie, and Volusia.
(b) District 2—The Florida counties of
Alachua, Baker, Bay, Bradford, Calhoun,
Citrus, Clay, Columbia, Dixie, Duval,
Escambia, Flagler, Franklin, Gadsden,
Gilchrist, Gulf, Hamilton, Hernando,
Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette,
Leon, Levy, Liberty, Madison, Marion,
Nassau, Okaloosa, Putnam, Santa Rosa,
St. Johns, Sumter, Suwannee, Taylor,
Union, Wakulla, Walton, and
Washington, and the States of North
Carolina and South Carolina.
(c) District 3—The State of Georgia.
(d) District 4—The States of Alabama,
Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont,
Wisconsin, West Virginia, and
Washington, DC.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:32 Jul 15, 2011
Jkt 223001
[No. AMS–LS–10–0086]
Beef Promotion and Research;
Reapportionment
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule adjusts
representation on the Cattlemen’s Beef
Promotion and Research Board (Board),
established under the Beef Promotion
and Research Act of 1985 (Act), to
reflect changes in cattle inventories and
cattle and beef imports that have
occurred since the most recent Board
reapportionment rule became effective
in October 2008. These adjustments are
required by the Beef Promotion and
Research Order (Order) and will result
in a decrease in Board membership from
106 to 103, effective with the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)
appointments for terms beginning early
in the year 2012.
DATES: Effective July 19, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Craig Shackelford, Marketing Programs
Branch, on 202/720–1115, fax 202/720–
1125, or by e-mail at
craig.shackelford@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
has waived the review process required
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
by Executive Order 12866 for this
action.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. It is not intended to have
retroactive effect.
Section 11 of the Act provides that
nothing in the Act may be construed to
preempt or supersede any other program
relating to beef promotion organized
and operated under the laws of the
United States or any State. There are no
administrative proceedings that must be
exhausted prior to any judicial
challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Paperwork Reduction Act
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA)(5 U.S.C. 601–612), the
Administrator of the Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) has
considered the economic effect of this
action on small entities and has
determined that this final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The purpose of RFA is to fit regulatory
actions to the scale of businesses subject
to such actions in order that small
businesses will not be unduly burdened.
In the February 2010 publication of
‘‘Farms, Land in Farms, and Livestock
Operations,’’ USDA’s National
Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS)
estimates that in 2009 the number of
operations in the United States with
cattle totaled approximately 950,000.
The majority of these operations that are
subject to the Order may be classified as
small entities.
The final rule imposes no new burden
on the industry. It only adjusts
representation on the Board to reflect
changes in domestic cattle inventory
and cattle and beef imports. The
adjustments are required by the Order
and will result in a decrease in Board
membership from 106 to 103.
Background and Final Action
The Board was initially appointed
August 4, 1986, pursuant to the
provisions of the Act (7 U.S.C. 2901–
2911) and the Order issued thereunder.
Domestic representation on the Board is
based on cattle inventory numbers, and
importer representation is based on the
conversion of the volume of imported
cattle, beef, or beef products into live
animal equivalencies.
Section 1260.141(b) of the Order
provides that the Board shall be
composed of cattle producers and
importers appointed by the Secretary of
Agriculture (Secretary) from
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42009-42012]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17882]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 1210
[Document Number AMS-FV-10-0093]
Watermelon Research and Promotion Plan; Redistricting and
Importer Representation
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule changes the boundaries of all seven districts under
the Watermelon Research and Promotion Plan (Plan) to reapportion the
producer, handler, and importer memberships on the National Watermelon
Promotion Board (Board). In addition, the Board is adding two importer
seats based on the quantity of watermelon imports in the past three
years. These changes are based on a review of the production and
assessments paid in each district and the amount of watermelon import
assessments, which the Plan requires at least every five years. As a
result of these changes, the importer seats will increase from six to
eight. Therefore, the total Board membership will increase from 35 to
37 members. In addition, a new Code of Federal Regulation section is
added to reflect the importer representation on the Board.
DATES: Effective July 19, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanette Palmer, Marketing Specialist,
Research and Promotion Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Stop 0244, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Room 0632-S, Washington, DC 20250-0244; telephone: (888) 720-9917;
facsimile: (202) 205-2800; or electronic mail:
Jeanette.Palmer@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under the Watermelon
Research and Promotion Plan [7 CFR part 1210]. The Plan is authorized
under the Watermelon Research and Promotion Act (Act) [7 U.S.C. 4901-
4916].
Executive Orders 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has waived the review process
required by Executive Order 12866 for this action.
Executive Order 12988
In addition, this rule has been reviewed under Executive Order
12988, Civil Justice Reform. The rule is not intended to have
retroactive effect.
The Act allows producers, producer-packers, handlers, and importers
to file a written petition with the Secretary of Agriculture
(Secretary) if they believe that the Plan, any provision of the Plan,
or any obligation imposed in connection with the Plan, is not
established in accordance with the law. In any petition, the person may
request a modification of the Plan or an exemption from the Plan. The
petitioner will have the opportunity for a hearing on the petition.
Afterwards, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) will issue a decision. If
the petitioner disagrees with the ALJ's ruling, the petitioner has 30
days to appeal to the Judicial Officer, who will issue a ruling on
behalf of the Secretary. If the petitioner disagrees with the
Secretary's ruling, the petitioner may file, within 20 days, an appeal
in the U.S. District Court for the district where the petitioner
resides or conducts business.
Regulatory Flexibility Act and Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601-
612], AMS has examined the economic impact of this rule on the small
producers, handlers, and importers that would be affected by this rule.
The Small Business Administration defines, in 13 CFR part 121,
small agricultural producers as those having annual receipts of no more
than $750,000 and small agricultural service firms (handlers and
importers) as those having annual receipts of no more than $7 million.
Under these definitions, the majority of the producers, handlers, and
importers that would be affected by this rule would be considered small
entities. Producers of less than 10 acres of watermelons are exempt
from this program. Importers of less than 150,000 pounds of watermelons
per year are also exempt.
USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) data for the
2010 crop year was about 310 hundredweight (cwt.) of watermelons were
produced per acre. The 2010 grower price published by NASS was $12.00
per hundredweight. Thus, the value of watermelon production per acre in
2010 averaged about $3,720 (310 cwt. x $12.00). At that average price,
a producer would have to farm over 202 acres to receive an annual
income from watermelons of $750,000 ($750,000 divided by $3,720 per
acre equals 202). Accordingly, as previously noted, a majority of the
watermelon producers would be classified as small businesses.
Based on the Board's data, using an average of freight on board
(f.o.b.) price of $.0164 per pound and the number of pounds handled in
2010, none of the watermelon handlers had receipts over the $7.5
million threshold. Therefore, the watermelon handlers would all be
considered small businesses. A handler would have to ship over 457
million pounds of watermelons to be considered large (457,317,073 times
$.0164 f.o.b. equals $7,500,000).
According to the Board, there are approximately 950 producers, 230
handlers, and 137 importers who are required to pay assessments under
the program.
Based on the watermelon import assessments received for the year
2010, the United States imported watermelons worth over $260 million
dollars. The largest imports of watermelon came from Mexico which
accounted for 93 percent of the total in 2010. Other suppliers of
imported watermelon are Guatemala at 3 percent and Honduras at 1
percent. The remaining 3 percent of imported watermelon came from
Canada, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Nigeria, and Panama.
The Board's assessment records show imports for the years 2007,
2008, and 2009 at $681,565, $783,249, and $742,363 respectively. Based
on this data, the three-year average annual imports for watermelon
total $735,725 (2,207,177 divided by 3). This represents approximately
29 percent of the total assessments paid to the Board. Currently there
are 6 importers on the Board representing 17 percent of the
[[Page 42010]]
total members. Accordingly, two importer seats should be added to the
Board. The new Board membership distribution would be 14 producers, 14
handlers, 8 importers, and 1 public member which would bring the
percentage of seats for importers to 22 percent of the total seats on
the Board.
Nominations and appointments to the Board are conducted pursuant to
sections 1210.321 of the Plan. The Plan requires producers to be
nominated by producers, handlers to be nominated by handlers, and
importers to be nominated by importers. This would not change. Because
some current members are in States or counties which would be moved to
other districts under this rule, one producer member vacancy in the new
District 2, one handler member vacancy in the new Districts 3, and one
producer member vacancy in the new District 7 would result with this
change. Nomination meetings will be held in the new districts to fill
these vacancies.
Appointments to the Board are made by the Secretary from a slate of
nominated candidates. The nominees for the two producer, one handler
and two importer positions will be submitted to the Secretary for
appointment to the Board.
The overall impact is favorable because the new district boundaries
provide more equitable representation for the producers, handlers, and
importers who pay assessments in the various districts.
The Board chose the realignment scenario that kept the States
together. For instance, California is currently divided into two
districts and the Board has realigned California so that all the
counties in California are located in one district. The new realignment
would also give Georgia and Texas their own respective districts. The
other States will be divided up to reflect their watermelon production
levels and grouped together for the four remaining districts.
The Board considered several alignments of the districts in an
effort to provide balanced representation for each district. The Board
selected the alignment described in this rule as it provides
proportional representation on the Board of producers, handlers, and
importers. The addition of two importers would allow for more importers
representation on the Board's decision making and also potentially
provide an opportunity to increase diversity on the Board.
In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
regulation [5 CFR part 1320] which implements the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. Chapter 35], the background form, which
represents the information collection and recordkeeping requirements
that are imposed by the Plan have been approved previously under OMB
number 0505-0001.
The Plan requires that two nominees be submitted for each vacant
position. With regard to information collection requirements, adding
two importers to the Board means that four additional importers will be
required to submit background forms to USDA in order to be considered
for appointment to the Board. However, serving on the Board is
optional, and the burden of submitting the background form would be
offset by the benefits of serving on the Board. The estimated annual
cost of providing the information by four importers would be $33 or
$8.25 per importer. The additional minimal burden will be included in
the existing information collection package under OMB number 0505-0001.
USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with this rule.
Background
Under the Plan, the Board administers a nationally coordinated
program of research, development, advertising, and promotion designed
to strengthen the watermelon's position in the market place and to
establish, maintain, and expand markets for watermelons. This program
is financed by assessments on producers growing 10 acres or more of
watermelons, handlers of watermelons, and importers of 150,000 pounds
of watermelons or more per year. The Plan specifies that handlers are
responsible for collecting and submitting both the producer and handler
assessments to the Board, reporting their handling of watermelons, and
maintaining records necessary to verify their reporting(s). Importers
are responsible for payment of assessments to the Board on watermelons
imported into the United States through the U.S. Customs Service and
Border Protection. This action will not have any impact on the
assessment rates paid by producers, handlers, and importers.
Membership on the Board consists of two producers and two handlers
for each of the seven districts established by the Plan, at least one
importer, and one public member. The Board currently consists of 35
members: 14 producers, 14 handlers, 6 importers, and 1 public member.
The seven current districts were established in 2006. They are:
District 1--The Florida counties of Brevard, Broward, Charlotte,
Citrus, Collier, Dade, DeSoto, Flagler, Glades, Hardee, Hendry,
Hernando, Highlands, Hillsborough, Indian River, Lake, Lee, Manatee,
Martin, Marion, Monroe, Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm Beach, Pasco,
Pinellas, Polk, Putnam, Sarasota, Seminole, St. Johns, St. Lucie,
Sumter, and Volusia.
District 2--The Florida counties of Alachua, Baker, Bay, Bradford,
Calhoun, Clay, Columbia, Dixie, Duval, Escambia, Franklin, Gadsden,
Gilchrist, Gulf, Hamilton, Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Leon,
Levy, Liberty, Madison, Nassau, Okaloosa, Santa Rosa, Suwannee, Taylor,
Union, Wakulla, Walton, Washington, and the Georgia counties Early,
Baker, Miller, Mitchell, Colquitt, Thomas, Grady, Decatur, Seminole,
and the States of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Virginia.
District 3--The Georgia counties not included in District two and
the State of South Carolina.
District 4--The States of North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska,
Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio,
Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Delaware, Vermont,
Wisconsin, Connecticut, and Washington, DC.
District 5--The States of Alaska, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, and
Washington and all of the counties in the state of California except
for those California counties included in District Seven.
District 6--The counties in the state of Texas, except for those
counties in Texas included in District Seven.
District 7--The counties in the state of Texas; Dallam, Sherman,
Hanaford, Ochiltree, Lipscomb, Hartley, Moore, Hutchinson, Roberts,
Hemphill, Oldham, Potter, Carson, Gray, Wheeler, Deaf Smith, Randall,
Armstrong, Donley, Collingsworth, Parmer, Castro, Swisher, Briscoe,
Hall, Childress, Bailey, Lamb, Hale, Floyd, Motley, Cottle, Cochran,
Hockley, Lubbock, Crosby, Dickens, King, Yoakum, Terry, Lynn, Garza,
Kent, Stonewall, the States of New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Colorado,
Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, and the following counties in California;
San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial.
Pursuant to section 1210.320(c) of the Plan, the Board shall review
the seven districts every five years to determine whether realignment
of the districts is necessary. When making a review, the Plan specifies
that the Board should consider factors such as the most recent three
years of USDA production reports
[[Page 42011]]
or Board assessment reports if USDA production reports are unavailable,
shifts and trends in quantities of watermelons produced, and any other
relevant factors. Any realignment should be recommended by the Board at
least six months prior to the date of the call for nominations and
should become effective at least 30 days prior to this date.
Pursuant to section 1210.320(e) of the Plan, the Secretary shall
review importer representation every five years. According to the Plan,
the Secretary shall review a three-year average of watermelon import
assessments and adjust, to the extent practicable, the number of
importers on the Board.
The Board appointed a subcommittee to begin reviewing the U.S.
districts and to determine whether realignment was necessary based on
production and assessment collections in the current districts. During
the review, as prescribed by the Plan, the subcommittee reviewed USDA's
Annual Crop Summary reports for 2007 through 2009, which provided
figures for the top 17 watermelon producing States, and the Board's
assessment collection records for 2007 through 2009. Both sets of data
showed similar trends in production among the various States. However,
the Board used the assessment reports because USDA's Annual Crop
Summary reports were available for only 17 of the 34 States in which
watermelons are produced.
The subcommittee recommended to the Board that the boundaries of
all seven districts be changed in order to provide for a better
distribution of production among producers and handlers in the
districts.
The subcommittee also considered the assessments of watermelon
imports paid to the Board. The Board's assessment records show imports
for the years 2007, 2008, and 2009 at $681,565, $783,249, and $742,363
respectively. Based on this data, the three-year average annual imports
for watermelon total $735,725 (2,207,177 divided by 3). The average
annual percentage of assessments paid by importers represents almost 29
percent of the Board's assessment income. In contrast to the 2006
realignment, the importer's assessment collection represented 20
percent of the Board's assessment income. Because there was a 9 percent
increase in the assessments on imports, the Board recommended an
increase in the number of importers on the Board. USDA has evaluated
information concerning importer assessments and has determined that the
number of importer representatives on the Board should be increased by
two members. Therefore, the number of importer Board members would
increase from six to eight.
Section 1647(3)(A) of the Act authorizes the Board to have at least
one or more importer representative to serve on the Board. However,
there is no section in the Plan that identifies the number of importers
on the Board. Section 1210.502 is currently reserved and will be used
to reflect importer representation on the Board.
The realignment was approved by the Board at its November 13, 2010,
meeting. Under the realignment, each district would represent, on
average, 16 percent of total U.S. production. The composition of the
Board would increase to a total of 37 members: 14 producers, 14
handlers, 8 importers, and 1 public member.
Therefore, this rule realigns the districts as follows:
District 1--The Florida counties of Brevard, Broward, Charlotte,
Collier, Dade, Desoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, Hillsborough,
Indian River, Lake, Lee, Manatee, Martin, Monroe, Okeechobee, Orange,
Osceola, Palm Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota, Seminole, St.
Lucie, and Volusia.
District 2--The Florida counties of Alachua, Baker, Bay, Bradford,
Calhoun, Citrus, Clay, Columbia, Dixie, Duval, Escambia, Flagler,
Franklin, Gadsden, Gilchrist, Gulf, Hamilton, Hernando, Holmes,
Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Leon, Levy, Liberty, Madison, Marion,
Nassau, Okaloosa, Putnam, Santa Rosa, St. Johns, Sumter, Suwannee,
Taylor, Union, Wakulla, Walton, and Washington, and the States of North
Carolina and South Carolina.
District 3--The State of Georgia.
District 4--The States of Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois,
Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Washington,
DC.
District 5--The State of California.
District 6--The State of Texas.
District 7--The States of Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado,
Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Under this realignment: (1) The Florida counties of Citrus,
Flagler, Hernando, Marion, Putnam, St. Johns and Sumter are moved from
District 1 to District 2; (2) Alabama, Tennessee, and Virginia are
moved from District 2 to District 4; (3) Arkansas, Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Oklahoma are moved from District 2 to District 7; (4)
Georgia counties Early, Baker, Miller, Mitchell, Colquitt, Thomas,
Grady, Decatur, and Seminole are moved from District 2 to District 3,
(5) South Carolina moved from District 3 to District 2; (6) Iowa,
Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota
are moved from District 4 to District 7; (7) Alaska, Hawaii, Nevada,
Oregon, and Washington are moved from District 5 to District 7; (8) The
following counties in the State of Texas: Armstrong, Bailey, Briscoe,
Carson, Castro, Childress, Cochran, Collingsworth, Cottle, Crosby,
Dallam, Deaf Smith, Dickens, Donley, Floyd, Garza, Gray, Hale, Hall,
Hanaford, Hartley, Hemphill, Hockley, Hutchinson, Kent, King, Lamb,
Lipscomb, Lubbock, Lynn, Moore, Motley, Ochiltree, Oldham, Parmer,
Potter, Randall, Roberts, Sherman, Stonewall, Swisher, Terry, Wheeler,
and Yoakum are moved from District 7 to District 6; (9) the following
counties in California: San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and
Imperial are moved from District 7 to District 5.
Due to the re-alignment of districts, the following vacancies are
created: one producer vacancy in District 2; one handler vacancy in
District 3, one producer vacancy in District 7; and two importer
vacancies. Current Board members would be affected because their States
or counties would be moved to other districts. Nomination meetings will
be held as soon as possible in the new districts to fill the vacancies.
A 30-day comment period was provided to allow interested persons to
respond to the proposal which was published in the Federal Register on
May 5, 2011 [76 FR 25619]. Copies of the rule were made available
through the Internet by USDA and the Office of the Federal Register.
The comment period ended June 6, 2011. Two comments were received by
the deadline.
Two favorable comments were received. One commenter agreed with the
Board's recommendation to realign the district boundaries. The other
commenter supported the Board's recommendation to add two importers to
the Board based on the 29 percent of assessments paid by importers to
the Board. The number of importer members would increase from six to
eight importer members on the Board.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, the Board's
recommendation, and other information, it is hereby found that this
rule is consistent with and will effectuate the purpose of the Act.
[[Page 42012]]
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it also found that good cause exists for
not postponing the effective date of this action until one day after
publication in the Federal Register because the Board's term of office
begins January 1, 2012, and this rule will allow the upcoming
nominations and appointments to be conducted in a timely manner for the
new members to be appointed to the Board so they can begin serving
during the next term of office.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1210
Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Consumer
information, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Watermelon promotion.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Part 1210, Chapter XI of
Title 7 is amended as follows:
PART 1210--WATERMELON RESEARCH AND PROMOTION PLAN
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR Part 1210 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 4901-4916 and 7 U.S.C. 7401.
Subpart C--Rules and Regulations
0
2. Section 1210.501 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1210.501 Realignment of districts.
Pursuant to Sec. 1210.320(c) of the Plan, the districts shall be
as follows:
(a) District 1--The Florida counties of Brevard, Broward,
Charlotte, Collier, Dade, Desoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands,
Hillsborough, Indian River, Lake, Lee, Manatee, Martin, Monroe,
Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk,
Sarasota, Seminole, St. Lucie, and Volusia.
(b) District 2--The Florida counties of Alachua, Baker, Bay,
Bradford, Calhoun, Citrus, Clay, Columbia, Dixie, Duval, Escambia,
Flagler, Franklin, Gadsden, Gilchrist, Gulf, Hamilton, Hernando,
Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lafayette, Leon, Levy, Liberty, Madison,
Marion, Nassau, Okaloosa, Putnam, Santa Rosa, St. Johns, Sumter,
Suwannee, Taylor, Union, Wakulla, Walton, and Washington, and the
States of North Carolina and South Carolina.
(c) District 3--The State of Georgia.
(d) District 4--The States of Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware,
Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Washington,
DC.
(e) District 5--The State of California.
(f) District 6--The State of Texas.
(g) District 7--The States of Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado,
Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
0
3. Section 1210.502 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 1210.502 Importer members.
Pursuant to Sec. 1210.320(d) of the Plan, there are eight importer
representatives on the Board based on the proportionate percentage of
assessments paid by importers to the Board.
Dated: July 12, 2011.
Rayne Pegg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-17882 Filed 7-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
