Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona, and New Mexico; Modification of Aflatoxin Regulations, 15050-15052 [2014-05834]
Download as PDF
15050
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 79, No. 52
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 983
[Doc. No. AMS–FV–12–0068; FV13–983–1
PR]
Pistachios Grown in California,
Arizona, and New Mexico; Modification
of Aflatoxin Regulations
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule invites
comments on revisions to the aflatoxin
sampling regulations currently
prescribed under the California,
Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio
marketing order (order). The order
regulates the handling of pistachios
grown in California, Arizona, and New
Mexico, and is administered locally by
the Administrative Committee for
Pistachios (Committee). This action
would allow the use of mechanical
samplers (auto-samplers) for in-line
sampling as a method to obtain samples
for aflatoxin analysis. The use of autosamplers is expected to reduce handler
costs by providing a more efficient and
cost-effective process.
DATES: Comments must be received by
April 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments
concerning this proposal. Comments
must be sent to the Docket Clerk,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Fax: (202) 720–8938; or
internet: https://www.regulations.gov. All
comments should reference the
document number and the date and
page number of this issue of the Federal
Register and will be made available for
public inspection in the Office of the
Docket Clerk during regular business
hours, or can be viewed at: https://
www.regulations.gov. All comments
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:26 Mar 17, 2014
Jkt 232001
submitted in response to this proposal
will be included in the record and will
be made available to the public. Please
be advised that the identity of the
individuals or entities submitting the
comments will be made public on the
internet at the address provided above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrea Ricci, Marketing Specialist, or
Martin Engeler, Regional Director,
California Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program,
AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487–
5901, Fax: (559) 487–5906, or Email:
Andrea.Ricci@ams.usda.gov or
Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request
information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; Telephone: (202) 720–
2491, Fax: (202) 720–8938, or Email:
Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
proposal is issued under Marketing
Agreement and Order No. 983, both as
amended (7 CFR part 983), regulating
the handling of pistachios grown in
California, Arizona, and New Mexico,
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 proposed rule in
conformance with Executive Orders
12866, 13175, and 13563.
This proposal has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This proposed rule is
not intended to have retroactive effect.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the handler is an inhabitant, or has his
or her principal place of business, has
jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on
the petition, provided an action is filed
not later than 20 days after the date of
the entry of the ruling.
This proposed rule invites comments
on revisions to the aflatoxin sampling
regulations currently prescribed under
the order. This proposal would allow
the use of mechanical samplers (autosamplers) as an additional method to
obtain lot samples for aflatoxin analysis.
All auto-samplers would need to be
approved by and be subject to
procedures and requirements
established by the USDA Federal-State
Inspection Service prior to their use.
The proposed rule was unanimously
recommended by the Committee at its
meeting held on August 19, 2013.
Section 983.50 of the order provides
authority for aflatoxin regulations that
establish aflatoxin sampling, analysis,
and inspection requirements applicable
to pistachios to be shipped for human
consumption in domestic and export
markets. Aflatoxin regulations are
currently in effect for pistachios
shipped to domestic markets.
Section 983.150 of the order’s rules
and regulations contains specific
requirements regarding sampling and
testing of pistachios for aflatoxin.
Paragraph (d)(1) of that section provides
that a sample shall be drawn from each
lot of pistachios and such samples shall
meet specific weight requirements
according to the size of the lot.
The current method of collecting
samples of pistachios to be tested
requires hand sampling of static lots by,
or under the supervision of, an
inspector of the Federal-State Inspection
Service (inspector). This process
requires handler personnel to stage the
lots to be sampled, which requires
moving large containers around with a
forklift. This process utilizes a
considerable amount of time and
warehouse space. Inspectors are then
required to manually conduct the
sampling by drawing samples from the
containers, which is very labor
intensive. Once the lot sample is
collected, the inspector prepares test
samples for aflatoxin analysis.
Since the order’s promulgation in
2004, the volume of open inshell
pistachios processed annually has
increased significantly, from 165
million pounds to 354 million pounds
E:\FR\FM\18MRP1.SGM
18MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
in the 2011–12 production year. This
change in volume has significantly
increased the amount of warehouse
space and handler labor needed to stage
lots for sampling. It has also driven up
the total labor costs associated with
sampling, as the number of lots to be
sampled has increased significantly.
If this rule is implemented, handlers
would have the option of using
mechanized sampling instead of manual
sampling. Automatic samplers in
handlers’ processing facilities would
mechanically draw samples of
pistachios as they are being processed.
This would make the sampling process
more efficient by eliminating the extra
warehouse space and handler labor
needed for staging static lots for
sampling. In addition, the labor costs of
manual sampling would be eliminated,
further reducing handler costs. A
discussion of the costs is included in
the Initial Regulatory Flexibility section
of this document.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5
U.S.C. 601–612), the Agricultural
Marketing Service (AMS) has
considered the economic impact of this
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
businesses subject to such actions in
order that small businesses will not be
unduly or disproportionately burdened.
Marketing orders issued pursuant to the
Act, and rules issued thereunder, are
unique in that they are brought about
through group action of essentially
small entities acting on their own
behalf.
There are approximately 23 handlers
of California, Arizona, and New Mexico
pistachios subject to regulation under
the order and approximately 990
pistachio producers in the regulated
area. Small agricultural service firms are
defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201)
as those having annual receipts of less
than $7,000,000, and small agricultural
producers are defined as those having
annual receipts of less than $750,000.
Currently, about 70 percent of
handlers ship less than $7,000,000
worth of pistachios on an annual basis
and would be considered small
businesses under the SBA definition.
Data provided by the Committee
regarding the size of the 2012 crop
indicates that approximately 80 percent
of producers delivered less than 375,000
pounds of assessable dry weight of
pistachios. Using an estimated price of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:41 Mar 17, 2014
Jkt 232001
$2 per pound of pistachios, this would
equate to less than $750,000 in receipts;
thus, 80 percent of producers would be
considered small businesses according
to the SBA definition.
This proposal would modify the
aflatoxin sampling regulations currently
prescribed under § 983.150(d) of the
order’s rules and regulations. This rule
would allow the use of auto-samplers as
a method to obtain samples for aflatoxin
analysis. Currently, only manual handdrawn sampling from static lots is
permitted. Allowing the use of autosamplers for in-line sampling would
streamline the sampling process for
pistachios. It is expected to make the
sampling process more efficient by
eliminating the time and space needed
for staging and inspecting static lots,
reducing the amount of labor, and
therefore reducing handler costs.
Authority for this action is provided in
§ 983.50 of the order.
The Committee estimates the current
method of sampling to range in cost
from $135 to $170 per lot. This expense
includes the warehouse space and
employee labor needed to stage a lot for
inspection and the costs of the
inspection. The initial expense of
purchasing an auto-sampler ranges from
as low as $1,000 to as high as $5,000.
The cost of collecting samples with the
auto-sampler is estimated at about $5
per lot, which is significantly lower
than the static lot sampling method,
which ranges from $135 to $170 per lot.
The following example is used to
illustrate potential savings for a handler
that processes 3,000,000 pounds of
pistachios per year. Assuming a lot size
of 50,000 pounds, this handler would
require inspection on 60 lots of
pistachios (3,000,000 ⁄ 50,000). Under
the current manual sampling method,
this would result in a total sampling
cost of $8,100 (60 × $135). If this
handler purchased an automatic
sampler for $5,000, the total sampling
cost (including equipment) would be
$5,300 ($5,000 + $5 cost per lot to pull
the samples). Thus, in this example the
handler would save $2,800 in the first
year of operation. After the first year,
the savings would increase because
there would be no additional equipment
cost. Applying this on an industry-wide
basis, the aggregate cost savings could
be significant, considering recent
shipment levels have exceeded
300,000,000 pounds of pistachios.
Based on these cost estimates and the
example provided, use of automatic
samplers could provide a significant
cost saving to the industry. The
potential cost savings for individual
handlers would vary, depending on the
size and structure of their operation.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15051
Each handler would need to evaluate
their operation to determine which
method of sampling best fits their needs.
This proposal would provide an
additional option for sampling that does
not currently exist for handlers.
The Committee discussed alternatives
to this change, including continuing to
operate under the current aflatoxin
sampling procedures. However, the
Committee unanimously agreed that
adding the option to use mechanical
sampling equipment would provide
handlers with a more efficient and costeffective sampling alternative to the
manual sampling process.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the order’s information
collection requirements have been
previously approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and
assigned OMB No. 0581–0215,
Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona,
and New Mexico. No changes in those
requirements as a result of this action
are necessary. Should any changes
become necessary, they would be
submitted to OMB for approval.
This proposed rule would modify
aflatoxin sampling regulations currently
prescribed under the California,
Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio
marketing order. Accordingly, this
action would not impose any additional
reporting or recordkeeping requirements
on either small or large pistachio
handlers. As with all Federal marketing
order programs, reports and forms are
periodically reviewed to reduce
information requirements and
duplication by industry and public
sector agencies.
AMS is committed to complying with
the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the internet and other
information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and
services, and for other purposes.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this proposed rule.
In addition, the Committee’s meeting
was widely publicized throughout the
pistachio industry and all interested
persons were invited to attend the
meeting and participate in Committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all
Committee meetings, the August 19,
2013, meeting was a public meeting and
all entities, both large and small, were
able to express views on this issue.
Finally, interested persons are invited to
submit comments on this proposed rule,
including the regulatory and
informational impacts of this action on
small businesses.
E:\FR\FM\18MRP1.SGM
18MRP1
15052
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Proposed Rules
A small business guide on complying
with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop
marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: www.ams.usda.gov/
MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide.
Any questions about the compliance
guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny
at the previously mentioned address in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
A 30-day comment period is provided
to allow interested persons to respond
to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed
appropriate because the industry would
like the modified regulation to be in
place prior to the 2014–15 production
year, which begins September 1, 2014.
This regulation would need to be in
effect before the production year to
allow handlers to install auto-sampling
equipment prior to harvest. All written
comments timely received will be
considered before a final determination
is made on this matter.
Dated: Feb. 28, 2014.
Rex A. Barnes,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural
Marketing Service.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 983
AGENCY:
Marketing agreements and orders,
Pistachios, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 983 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 983—PISTACHIOS GROWN IN
CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, AND NEW
MEXICO
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 983 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Section 983.150 is amended by
revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as
follows:
■
§ 983.150
Aflatoxin regulations.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) Samples for testing. Prior to
testing, each handler shall cause a
representative sample to be drawn from
each lot (‘‘lot samples’’) of sufficient
weight to comply with Tables 1 and 2
of this section.
(i) At premises with mechanical
sampling equipment (auto-samplers)
approved by the USDA Federal-State
Inspection Service, samples shall be
drawn by the handler in a manner
acceptable to the Committee and the
USDA Federal-State Inspection Service.
(ii) At premises without mechanical
sampling equipment, sampling shall be
conducted by or under the supervision
of an inspector, or as approved under an
alternative USDA-recognized inspection
program.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:26 Mar 17, 2014
Jkt 232001
[FR Doc. 2014–05834 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
Rural Housing Service
Rural Utilities Service
Farm Service Agency
7 CFR Part 1940
RIN 0570–AA30
Methodology and Formulas for
Allocation of Loan and Grant Program
Funds
Rural Business-Cooperative
Service, Rural Housing Service, Rural
Utilities Service, and Farm Service
Agency, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
The Rural BusinessCooperative Service (RBS) is proposing
to amend its regulations found in 7 CFR
part 1940, subpart L for allocating
program funds to its State Offices. RBS
is proposing to amend 7 CFR part 1940,
subpart L to add three programs—the
Rural Energy for America Program, the
Value-Added Producer Grant program,
and the Intermediary Relending
Program. In addition, RBS is proposing
revisions to its state allocation formulae
for existing programs within 7 CFR part
1940, subpart L to account for changes
in data reported by the U.S. Bureau of
the Census’ decennial Census. RBS is
also proposing to make various other
changes including: revising the weight
percentages associated with each of the
allocation criteria; providing flexibility
in determining when not to make state
allocations for a program; restricting the
use of the transition formula and
changing the limitations on how much
program funds can change when the
transition formula is used; adding
provisions for making state allocation
for other RBS programs, including new
ones; and providing consistency, where
necessary, in the allocation of RBS
program funds to State Offices.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before May 19, 2014 to
be assured of consideration.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments on
this rule by any of the following
methods:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments via
the U.S. Postal Service to the Branch
Chief, Regulations and Paperwork
Management Branch, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, STOP 0742, 1400
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–0742.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Submit
written comments via Federal Express
Mail, or other courier service requiring
a street address, to the Branch Chief,
Regulations and Paperwork
Management Branch, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 300 7th Street SW., 7th
Floor, Washington, DC 20024.
All written comments will be
available for public inspection during
regular work hours at the 300 7th Street
SW., 7th Floor address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chad Parker, Deputy Admininstrator
Business Programs, Rural BusinessCooperative Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, STOP 3220, 1400
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–3225; email:
chad.parker@wdc.usda.gov; telephone
(202) 720–7558.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866, Classification
This rule has been determined to be
not significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866 and has not been reviewed
by the Office of Management and
Budget.
Programs Affected
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Program numbers for the
programs affected by this action are
10.352, Value-Added Producer Grant
Program; 10.767, Intermediary
Relending Program; 10.768, Business
and Industry Guaranteed Loan Program;
10.769, Rural Business Enterprise Grant
Program; 10.773, Rural Business
Opportunity Grant Program, 10.868,
Rural Energy for America Program.
Executive Order 12372,
Intergovernmental Consultation
This action is not subject to the
provisions of Executive Order 12372,
which requires intergovernmental
consultation with state and local
officials.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform
This proposed rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. The Agency has
determined that this rule meets the
applicable standards provided in
section 3 of the Executive Order.
E:\FR\FM\18MRP1.SGM
18MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 18, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15050-15052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05834]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 15050]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 983
[Doc. No. AMS-FV-12-0068; FV13-983-1 PR]
Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona, and New Mexico;
Modification of Aflatoxin Regulations
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule invites comments on revisions to the
aflatoxin sampling regulations currently prescribed under the
California, Arizona, and New Mexico pistachio marketing order (order).
The order regulates the handling of pistachios grown in California,
Arizona, and New Mexico, and is administered locally by the
Administrative Committee for Pistachios (Committee). This action would
allow the use of mechanical samplers (auto-samplers) for in-line
sampling as a method to obtain samples for aflatoxin analysis. The use
of auto-samplers is expected to reduce handler costs by providing a
more efficient and cost-effective process.
DATES: Comments must be received by April 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments
concerning this proposal. Comments must be sent to the Docket Clerk,
Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC
20250-0237; Fax: (202) 720-8938; or internet: https://www.regulations.gov. All comments should reference the document number
and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register and
will be made available for public inspection in the Office of the
Docket Clerk during regular business hours, or can be viewed at: https://www.regulations.gov. All comments submitted in response to this
proposal will be included in the record and will be made available to
the public. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or
entities submitting the comments will be made public on the internet at
the address provided above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Ricci, Marketing Specialist, or
Martin Engeler, Regional Director, California Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program,
AMS, USDA; Telephone: (559) 487-5901, Fax: (559) 487-5906, or Email:
Andrea.Ricci@ams.usda.gov or Martin.Engeler@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request information on complying with this
regulation by contacting Jeffrey Smutny, Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue SW., STOP 0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-
2491, Fax: (202) 720-8938, or Email: Jeffrey.Smutny@ams.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal is issued under Marketing
Agreement and Order No. 983, both as amended (7 CFR part 983),
regulating the handling of pistachios grown in California, Arizona, and
New Mexico, 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 proposed rule
in conformance with Executive Orders 12866, 13175, and 13563.
This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This proposed rule is not intended to have retroactive
effect.
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 not later than 20 days after the date of
the entry of the ruling.
This proposed rule invites comments on revisions to the aflatoxin
sampling regulations currently prescribed under the order. This
proposal would allow the use of mechanical samplers (auto-samplers) as
an additional method to obtain lot samples for aflatoxin analysis. All
auto-samplers would need to be approved by and be subject to procedures
and requirements established by the USDA Federal-State Inspection
Service prior to their use. The proposed rule was unanimously
recommended by the Committee at its meeting held on August 19, 2013.
Section 983.50 of the order provides authority for aflatoxin
regulations that establish aflatoxin sampling, analysis, and inspection
requirements applicable to pistachios to be shipped for human
consumption in domestic and export markets. Aflatoxin regulations are
currently in effect for pistachios shipped to domestic markets.
Section 983.150 of the order's rules and regulations contains
specific requirements regarding sampling and testing of pistachios for
aflatoxin. Paragraph (d)(1) of that section provides that a sample
shall be drawn from each lot of pistachios and such samples shall meet
specific weight requirements according to the size of the lot.
The current method of collecting samples of pistachios to be tested
requires hand sampling of static lots by, or under the supervision of,
an inspector of the Federal-State Inspection Service (inspector). This
process requires handler personnel to stage the lots to be sampled,
which requires moving large containers around with a forklift. This
process utilizes a considerable amount of time and warehouse space.
Inspectors are then required to manually conduct the sampling by
drawing samples from the containers, which is very labor intensive.
Once the lot sample is collected, the inspector prepares test samples
for aflatoxin analysis.
Since the order's promulgation in 2004, the volume of open inshell
pistachios processed annually has increased significantly, from 165
million pounds to 354 million pounds
[[Page 15051]]
in the 2011-12 production year. This change in volume has significantly
increased the amount of warehouse space and handler labor needed to
stage lots for sampling. It has also driven up the total labor costs
associated with sampling, as the number of lots to be sampled has
increased significantly.
If this rule is implemented, handlers would have the option of
using mechanized sampling instead of manual sampling. Automatic
samplers in handlers' processing facilities would mechanically draw
samples of pistachios as they are being processed. This would make the
sampling process more efficient by eliminating the extra warehouse
space and handler labor needed for staging static lots for sampling. In
addition, the labor costs of manual sampling would be eliminated,
further reducing handler costs. A discussion of the costs is included
in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility section of this document.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
has considered the economic impact of this 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
businesses subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf.
There are approximately 23 handlers of California, Arizona, and New
Mexico pistachios subject to regulation under the order and
approximately 990 pistachio producers in the regulated area. Small
agricultural service firms are defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) as those having annual receipts
of less than $7,000,000, and small agricultural producers are defined
as those having annual receipts of less than $750,000.
Currently, about 70 percent of handlers ship less than $7,000,000
worth of pistachios on an annual basis and would be considered small
businesses under the SBA definition. Data provided by the Committee
regarding the size of the 2012 crop indicates that approximately 80
percent of producers delivered less than 375,000 pounds of assessable
dry weight of pistachios. Using an estimated price of $2 per pound of
pistachios, this would equate to less than $750,000 in receipts; thus,
80 percent of producers would be considered small businesses according
to the SBA definition.
This proposal would modify the aflatoxin sampling regulations
currently prescribed under Sec. 983.150(d) of the order's rules and
regulations. This rule would allow the use of auto-samplers as a method
to obtain samples for aflatoxin analysis. Currently, only manual hand-
drawn sampling from static lots is permitted. Allowing the use of auto-
samplers for in-line sampling would streamline the sampling process for
pistachios. It is expected to make the sampling process more efficient
by eliminating the time and space needed for staging and inspecting
static lots, reducing the amount of labor, and therefore reducing
handler costs. Authority for this action is provided in Sec. 983.50 of
the order.
The Committee estimates the current method of sampling to range in
cost from $135 to $170 per lot. This expense includes the warehouse
space and employee labor needed to stage a lot for inspection and the
costs of the inspection. The initial expense of purchasing an auto-
sampler ranges from as low as $1,000 to as high as $5,000. The cost of
collecting samples with the auto-sampler is estimated at about $5 per
lot, which is significantly lower than the static lot sampling method,
which ranges from $135 to $170 per lot.
The following example is used to illustrate potential savings for a
handler that processes 3,000,000 pounds of pistachios per year.
Assuming a lot size of 50,000 pounds, this handler would require
inspection on 60 lots of pistachios (3,000,000 [bdsol] 50,000). Under
the current manual sampling method, this would result in a total
sampling cost of $8,100 (60 x $135). If this handler purchased an
automatic sampler for $5,000, the total sampling cost (including
equipment) would be $5,300 ($5,000 + $5 cost per lot to pull the
samples). Thus, in this example the handler would save $2,800 in the
first year of operation. After the first year, the savings would
increase because there would be no additional equipment cost. Applying
this on an industry-wide basis, the aggregate cost savings could be
significant, considering recent shipment levels have exceeded
300,000,000 pounds of pistachios.
Based on these cost estimates and the example provided, use of
automatic samplers could provide a significant cost saving to the
industry. The potential cost savings for individual handlers would
vary, depending on the size and structure of their operation. Each
handler would need to evaluate their operation to determine which
method of sampling best fits their needs. This proposal would provide
an additional option for sampling that does not currently exist for
handlers.
The Committee discussed alternatives to this change, including
continuing to operate under the current aflatoxin sampling procedures.
However, the Committee unanimously agreed that adding the option to use
mechanical sampling equipment would provide handlers with a more
efficient and cost-effective sampling alternative to the manual
sampling process.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the order's information collection requirements have been
previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and
assigned OMB No. 0581-0215, Pistachios Grown in California, Arizona,
and New Mexico. No changes in those requirements as a result of this
action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would
be submitted to OMB for approval.
This proposed rule would modify aflatoxin sampling regulations
currently prescribed under the California, Arizona, and New Mexico
pistachio marketing order. Accordingly, this action would not impose
any additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small
or large pistachio handlers. As with all Federal marketing order
programs, reports and forms are periodically reviewed to reduce
information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector
agencies.
AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote
the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information
and services, and for other purposes.
USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap or conflict with this proposed rule.
In addition, the Committee's meeting was widely publicized
throughout the pistachio industry and all interested persons were
invited to attend the meeting and participate in Committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all Committee meetings, the August
19, 2013, meeting was a public meeting and all entities, both large and
small, were able to express views on this issue. Finally, interested
persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including
the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on small
businesses.
[[Page 15052]]
A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and
specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at:
www.ams.usda.gov/MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any questions about
the compliance guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny at the previously
mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to
respond to this proposal. Thirty days is deemed appropriate because the
industry would like the modified regulation to be in place prior to the
2014-15 production year, which begins September 1, 2014. This
regulation would need to be in effect before the production year to
allow handlers to install auto-sampling equipment prior to harvest. All
written comments timely received will be considered before a final
determination is made on this matter.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 983
Marketing agreements and orders, Pistachios, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 983 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 983--PISTACHIOS GROWN IN CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, AND NEW MEXICO
0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 983 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
0
2. Section 983.150 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 983.150 Aflatoxin regulations.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) Samples for testing. Prior to testing, each handler shall cause
a representative sample to be drawn from each lot (``lot samples'') of
sufficient weight to comply with Tables 1 and 2 of this section.
(i) At premises with mechanical sampling equipment (auto-samplers)
approved by the USDA Federal-State Inspection Service, samples shall be
drawn by the handler in a manner acceptable to the Committee and the
USDA Federal-State Inspection Service.
(ii) At premises without mechanical sampling equipment, sampling
shall be conducted by or under the supervision of an inspector, or as
approved under an alternative USDA-recognized inspection program.
* * * * *
Dated: Feb. 28, 2014.
Rex A. Barnes,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-05834 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P