Hazelnuts Grown in Oregon and Washington; Order Amending Marketing Order No. 982, 52946-52950 [2018-22762]
Download as PDF
52946
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 203 / Friday, October 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
A proposed rule concerning this
action was published in the Federal
Register on July 6, 2018 (83 FR 31471).
Copies of the proposed rule were sent
via email to all Committee members and
Texas citrus handlers. The proposed
rule was made available through the
internet by USDA and the Office of the
Federal Register. A 30-day comment
period ending August 6, 2018, was
provided to allow interested persons to
respond to the proposal. No comments
were received.
A small business guide on complying
with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop
marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: https://www.ams.usda.gov/
rules-regulations/moa/small-businesses.
Any questions about the compliance
guide should be sent to Richard Lower
at the previously mentioned address in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
After consideration of all relevant
matter presented, including the
information and recommendation
submitted by the Committee and other
available information, it is hereby found
that this rule, as hereinafter set forth,
will tend to effectuate the declared
policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 906
Grapefruit, Marketing agreements,
Oranges, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 906 is amended as
follows:
PART 906—ORANGES AND
GRAPEFRUIT GROWN IN LOWER RIO
GRANDE VALLEY IN TEXAS
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 906 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
2. Revise § 906.340(a)(1) to read as
follows:
■
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
§ 906.340 Container, pack, and container
marking regulations.
(a) * * *
(1) Containers. (i) Closed fiberboard
carton with approximate inside
dimensions of 131⁄4 x 101⁄2 x 71⁄4 inches:
Provided, That the container has a
Mullen or Cady test of at least 200
pounds;
(ii) Closed fully telescopic fiberboard
carton with approximate inside
dimensions of 161⁄2 x 103⁄4 x 91⁄2 inches
(Standard carton);
(iii) Poly or mesh bags having a
capacity of 4, 5, 8, 10, or 18 pounds of
fruit;
(iv) Rectangular or octagonal bulk
fiberboard crib with approximate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 Oct 18, 2018
Jkt 247001
dimensions of 46 to 471⁄2 inches in
length, 37 to 38 inches in width, and 36
inches in height: Provided, That the
container has a Mullen or Cady test of
at least 1,300 pounds, and that it is used
only once for the shipment of citrus
fruit: And Provided further, That the
container may be used to pack any poly
or mesh bags authorized in this section,
or bulk fruit;
(v) Rectangular or octagonal 2⁄3
fiberboard crib with approximate
dimensions of 46 to 471⁄2 inches in
length, 37 to 38 inches in width, and 24
inches in height: Provided, That the crib
has a Mullen or Cady test of at least
1,300 pounds, and that it is used only
once for the shipment of citrus fruit:
And Provided further, That the
container may be used to pack any poly
or mesh bags authorized in this section,
or bulk fruit;
(vi) Octagonal fiberboard crib with
approximate dimensions of 46 to 471⁄2
inches in width, 37 to 38 inches in
depth, and 26 to 261⁄2 inches in height:
Provided, That the crib has a Mullen or
Cady test of at least 1,300 pounds, and
that it is used only once for the
shipment of citrus fruit: And Provided
further, That the crib may be used to
pack any poly or mesh bags authorized
in this section, or bulk fruit;
(vii) Fiberboard box holding two
layers of fruit, with approximate
dimensions of 23 inches in length, 151⁄2
inches in width, and 7 inches in depth;
(viii) Reusable collapsible plastic
container with approximate dimensions
of 23 inches in length, 15 inches in
width, and 7 to 11 inches in depth;
(ix) Reusable collapsible plastic bin
with approximate dimensions of 363⁄4 x
443⁄4 x 27 inches;
(x) Octagonal bulk triple wall
fiberboard crib with approximate
dimensions of 373⁄4 inches in length, 25
inches in width, and 25 inches in
height: Provided, That the container has
a Mullen or Cady test of at least 1,100
pounds: And Provided further, That the
container may be used to pack any poly
or mesh bags authorized in this section,
or bulk fruit;
(xi) Bag having the capacity of 15
pounds of fruit, either in a combination
1⁄2 poly and 1⁄2 mesh bag or mesh bag;
(xii) Reusable collapsible plastic mini
bin with approximate dimensions of
391⁄2 inches in length, 24 inches in
width, and 301⁄2 inches in height:
Provided, That the container may be
used to pack any poly or mesh bags
authorized in this section, or bulk fruit;
(xiii) Bag having the capacity of three
pounds of fruit;
(xiv) Standard carton with
approximate inside dimensions of
16.375 x 10.6875 x 10.25 inches;
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(xv) 8⁄5 Body master carton with
approximate inside dimensions of
19.5385 x 13.125 x 11.625 inches, one
piece;
(xvi) Euro 8⁄5 (5 Down) with
approximate inside dimensions of
22.813 x 14.688 x 7.0 up to 7.936
inches;
(xvii) Fiberboard one piece display
container with approximate inside
dimensions of 23 inches x 15 inches x
91⁄2 up to 101⁄2 inches in depth;
(xviii) Such types and sizes of
containers as may be approved by the
committee for testing in connection
with a research project conducted by or
in cooperation with the committee:
Provided, That the handling of each lot
of fruit in such test containers shall be
subject to prior approval and under the
supervision of the committee.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: October 15, 2018.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–22759 Filed 10–18–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 982
[Doc. No. AO–SC–16–0136; AMS–SC–16–
0074; SC16–982–1]
Hazelnuts Grown in Oregon and
Washington; Order Amending
Marketing Order No. 982
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends
Marketing Order No. 982 (Order), which
regulates the handling of hazelnuts
grown in Oregon and Washington. The
amendments were proposed by the
Hazelnut Marketing Board (Board) and
add the authority to regulate quality for
the purpose of pathogen reduction and
to establish different regulations for
different markets.
This final rule also makes
administrative revisions to subpart
headings to bring the language into
conformance with the Office of Federal
Register requirements.
DATES: This rule is effective November
19, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Marketing Order and
Agreement Division, Specialty Crops
Program, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Stop 0237,
Washington, DC 20250–0237.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 203 / Friday, October 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order
and Agreement Division, Specialty
Crops Program, AMS, USDA, Post Office
Box 952, Moab, UT 84532; Telephone:
(202) 557–4783, Fax: (435) 259–1502, or
Michelle Sharrow, Marketing Order and
Agreement Division, Specialty Crops
Program, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, Stop 0237,
Washington, DC 20250–0237;
Telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)
720–8938, or Email:
Melissa.Schmaedick@ams.usda.gov or
Michelle.Sharrow@ams.usda.gov.
Small businesses may request
information on this proceeding by
contacting Richard Lower, Marketing
Order and Agreement Division,
Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA,
1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop
0237, Washington, DC 20250–0237;
Telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202)
720–8938, or Email: Richard.Lower@
ams.usda.gov.
Prior
documents in this proceeding: Notice of
Hearing issued on September 27, 2016,
and published in the September 30,
2016, issue of the Federal Register (81
FR 67217); a Recommended Decision
issued on June 5, 2017, and published
in the June 12, 2017, issue of the
Federal Register (82 FR 26859); and a
Secretary’s Decision and Referendum
Order issued September 14, 2017, and
published in the September 28, 2017,
issue of the Federal Register (82 FR
45208).
This action is governed by the
provisions of sections 556 and 557 of
title 5 of the United States Code and,
therefore, is excluded from the
requirements of Executive Orders
12866, 13563, and 13175. Additionally,
because this rule does not meet the
definition of a significant regulatory
action it does not trigger the
requirements contained in Executive
Order 13771. See the Office of
Management and Budget’s (OMB)
Memorandum titled ‘‘Interim Guidance
Implementing Section 2 of the Executive
Order of January 30, 2017 titled
‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs’ ’’ (February 2, 2017).
Notice of this rulemaking action was
provided to tribal governments through
the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA)
Office of Tribal Relations.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preliminary Statement
This action finalizes an amendment to
regulations issued to carry out a
marketing order as defined in 7 CFR
900.2(j). This rule is issued under
Marketing Order No. 982, as amended (7
CFR part 982), regulating the handling
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 Oct 18, 2018
Jkt 247001
of hazelnuts grown in Oregon and
Washington. Part 982 (referred to as 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
final rule was formulated on the record
of a public hearing held on October 18,
2016, in Wilsonville, Oregon. The
hearing was held pursuant to the
provisions of the Act, and the applicable
rules of practice and procedure
governing the formulation of marketing
agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900).
Notice of this hearing was published in
the Federal Register September 30, 2016
(81 FR 67217). The notice of hearing
contained two proposals submitted by
the Board and one submitted by USDA.
Upon the basis of evidence
introduced at the hearing and the record
thereof, the Administrator of the
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
on June 5, 2017, filed with the Hearing
Clerk, USDA, a Recommended Decision
and Opportunity to File Written
Exceptions thereto by July 12, 2017. No
exceptions were filed.
A Secretary’s Decision and
Referendum Order was published in the
Federal Register on September 28, 2017
(82 FR 45208), directing that a
referendum be conducted during the
period of October 16 through November
3, 2017, among eligible Oregon and
Washington hazelnut growers to
determine whether they favored the
proposed amendments to the Order. To
become effective, the amendments had
to be approved by at least two-thirds of
those growers voting, or by voters
representing at least two-thirds of the
volume of hazelnuts represented by
voters voting in the referendum. The
amendment adding authority to regulate
quality was favored by 69.5 percent of
the growers voting in the referendum,
representing 71.6 percent of the total
volume of hazelnuts produced by those
voting. The amendment adding
authority to establish different
regulations for different markets was
favored by 67.9 percent of the growers
voting in the referendum, representing
69.5 percent of the total volume of
hazelnuts produced by those voting.
The amendments favored by voters
and included in this final order
authorize the regulation of quality for
the purpose of pathogen reduction and
the establishment of different outgoing
quality regulations for different markets.
USDA also made such changes as
were necessary to the Order so that all
of the Order’s provisions conform to the
effectuated amendments. USDA
recommended one clarifying change to
the language in the new paragraph
982.45(c), which adds authority to
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52947
regulate quality. USDA determined that
the language as presented in the Notice
of Hearing was redundant and,
therefore, confusing. USDA revised the
language in the new paragraph
§ 982.45(c) so that its intent is more
clearly stated. This language is included
in the regulatory text of this Order.
The amended marketing agreement
was subsequently mailed to all hazelnut
handlers in the production area for their
approval. The marketing agreement was
not approved by handlers representing
more than 50 percent of the volume of
hazelnuts handled by all handlers
during the representative period of July
1, 2016, through June 30, 2017.
Consequently, no companion handler
agreement will be established.
Small Business Consideration
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
AMS has considered the economic
impact of this action 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
businesses subject to such actions so
that small businesses will not be unduly
or disproportionately burdened.
Marketing orders and amendments
thereto are unique in that they are
normally brought about through group
action of essentially small entities for
their own benefit.
Hazelnut Industry Background and
Overview
According to the hearing transcript,
there are currently over 800 hazelnut
growers in the production area.
According to National Agricultural
Statistics Service (NASS) data presented
at the hearing, 2015 grower receipts
averaged $2,800 per ton. With a total
2015 production of 31,000 tons, the
farm gate value for hazelnuts in that
year totaled $86.8 million ($2,800 per
ton multiplied by 31,000 tons). Taking
the total value of production for
hazelnuts and dividing it by the total
number of hazelnut growers provides a
return per grower of $108,500. A small
grower as defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201)
is one having annual receipts of less
than $750,000 annually. Therefore, a
majority of hazelnut growers are
considered small entities under the SBA
standards. Record evidence indicates
that approximately 98 percent of
hazelnut growers are small businesses.
According to the industry, there are
17 hazelnut handlers, four of which
handle 80 percent of the crop. While
market prices for hazelnuts were not
included among the data presented at
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
52948
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 203 / Friday, October 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
the hearing, an estimation of handler
receipts can be calculated using the
2015 grower receipt value of $86.8
million. Multiplying $86.8 million by 80
percent ($86.8 million multiplied by 80
percent equals $69.4 million) and
dividing by four indicates that the
largest hazelnut handlers received an
estimated $17.3 million each. Dividing
the remaining 20 percent of $86.8
million, or $17.4 million, by the
remaining 13 handlers, indicates
average receipts of $1.3 million each. A
small agricultural service firm is defined
by the SBA as one having annual
receipts of less than $7,500,000. Based
on the above calculations, a majority of
hazelnut handlers are considered small
entities under the SBA’s standards.
The production area regulated under
the Order covers Oregon and
Washington. According to the record,
Eastern Filbert Blight has heavily
impacted hazelnut production in
Washington. One witness stated that
there is currently no commercial
production in that state. As a result,
production data entered into the record
pertains almost exclusively to Oregon.
NASS data indicates bearing acres of
hazelnuts reached a fifteen-year high
during the 2013–2014 crop year at
30,000 acres. Acreage remained steady,
at 30,000 bearing acres for the 2015–
2016 crop year. By dividing 30,000 acres
by 800 growers, NASS data indicate
there are approximately 37.5 acres per
grower. Industry testimony estimates
that due to new plantings, there are
potentially 60,000 bearing acres of
hazelnuts, or an estimated 75 bearing
acres per hazelnut grower.
During the hearing held October 18,
2016, interested parties were invited to
present evidence on the probable
regulatory impact of the amendments to
the Order on small businesses. The
evidence presented at the hearing shows
that none of the amendments would
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small
agricultural growers or firms.
Material Issues
This action amends the Order to
authorize the regulation of quality for
the purpose of pathogen reduction and
the establishment of different outgoing
quality regulations for different markets.
These authorities will aid in pathogen
reduction in hazelnuts and increase the
industry’s ability to meet the needs of
different market destinations.
During the hearing held on October
18, 2016, interested persons were
invited to present evidence on the
probable regulatory and informational
impact of the amendments to the Order
on small businesses. The evidence
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 Oct 18, 2018
Jkt 247001
presented at the hearing shows that the
amendments would have no
burdensome effects on small
agricultural producers or firms.
In discussing the impacts of the
amendments on growers and handlers,
record evidence indicates that the
authority to establish quality regulations
that require hazelnuts to be treated prior
to shipment to reduce pathogen load
would not significantly impact the
majority of handlers. Regulations
implemented under that authority could
impose additional costs on handlers
required to comply with them.
However, witnesses testified that
establishing mandatory treatment
regulations could increase the industry’s
credibility and reduce the risk that
shipments of substandard product could
jeopardize the entire industry’s
reputation. Record evidence shows that
any additional costs are likely to be
offset by the benefits of complying with
those requirements.
The record shows that the proposal to
add authority to establish different
outgoing quality requirements for
different markets would, in itself, have
no economic impact on growers or
handlers of any size. While regulations
implemented under that authority could
potentially impose additional costs on
handlers required to comply with them,
the record indicates the benefits of such
regulation would outweigh the potential
future costs. The record indicates that
allowing different regulations for
different markets would likely lower the
costs to handlers and prevent multiple
treatments of hazelnuts while
preserving hazelnut quality.
This final rule also makes
administrative revisions to subpart
headings to bring the language into
conformance with the Office of Federal
Register requirements.
USDA has not identified any relevant
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this rule. These
amendments are intended to improve
the operation and administration of the
Order and to assist in the marketing of
hazelnuts.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Current information collection
requirements for Part 982 are approved
by OMB, under 0581–0178 ‘‘Vegetable
and Specialty Crops.’’ No changes are
anticipated in these requirements as a
result of this proceeding. Should any
such changes become necessary, they
would be submitted to OMB for
approval.
As with all Federal marketing order
programs, reports and forms are
periodically reviewed to reduce
information requirements and
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
duplication by industry and publicsector agencies.
AMS is committed to complying with
the Government Paperwork Elimination
Act, which requires Government
agencies in general to provide the public
the option of submitting information or
transacting business electronically to
the maximum extent possible.
AMS is committed to complying with
the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the internet and other
information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and
services, and for other purposes.
Civil Justice Reform
The amendments to the Order stated
herein have been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. They are not intended to have
retroactive effect. The amendments do
not preempt any State or local laws,
regulations, or policies, unless they
present an irreconcilable conflict with
this rule.
The Act provides that administrative
proceedings must be exhausted before
parties may file suit in court. Under
section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any
handler subject to an order may file
with USDA a petition stating that the
order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with
the order is not in accordance with law
and request a modification of the order
or to be exempted therefrom. A handler
is afforded the opportunity for a hearing
on the petition. After the hearing, USDA
would rule on the petition. The Act
provides that the district court of the
United States in any district in which
the handler is an inhabitant, or has his
or her principal place of business, has
jurisdiction to review USDA’s ruling on
the petition, provided an action is filed
no later than 20 days after the date of
entry of the ruling.
Order Amending the Order Regulating
the Handling of Hazelnuts Grown in
Oregon and Washington 1
Findings and Determinations
The findings and determinations
hereinafter set forth are supplementary
to the findings and determinations that
were previously made in connection
with the issuance of the Marketing
Order; and all said previous findings
and determinations are hereby ratified
and affirmed, except insofar as such
findings and determinations may be in
1 This order shall not become effective unless and
until the requirements of § 900.14 of the rules of
practice and procedure governing proceedings to
formulate marketing agreements and marketing
orders have been met.
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 203 / Friday, October 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
conflict with the findings and
determinations set forth herein.
(a) Findings and Determinations Upon
the Basis of the Hearing Record
Pursuant to the provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674),
and the applicable rules of practice and
procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR
part 900), a public hearing was held
upon further amendment of Marketing
Order No. 982, regulating the handling
of hazelnuts grown in Oregon and
Washington.
Upon the basis of the record, it is
found that:
(1) The Order, as amended, and as
hereby further amended, and all of the
terms and conditions thereof, would
tend to effectuate the declared policy of
the Act;
(2) The Order, as amended, and as
hereby further amended, regulates the
handling of hazelnuts grown in the
production area in the same manner as,
and is applicable only to, persons in the
respective classes of commercial and
industrial activity specified in the Order
upon which a hearing has been held;
(3) The Order, as amended, and as
hereby further amended, is limited in its
application to the smallest regional
production area that is practicable,
consistent with carrying out the
declared policy of the Act, and the
issuance of several orders applicable to
subdivisions of the production area
would not effectively carry out the
declared policy of the Act;
(4) The Order, as amended, and as
hereby further amended, prescribes,
insofar as practicable, such different
terms applicable to different parts of the
production area as are necessary to give
due recognition to the differences in the
production and marketing of hazelnuts
grown in Oregon and Washington; and
(5) All handling of hazelnuts grown in
the production area as defined in the
Order is in the current of interstate or
foreign commerce or directly burdens,
obstructs, or affects such commerce.
(b) Determinations. It is hereby
determined that:
(1) Handlers (excluding cooperative
associations of growers who are not
engaged in processing, distributing, or
shipping hazelnuts covered by the order
as hereby amended) who, during the
period July 1, 2016, through June 30,
2017, handled 50 percent or more of the
volume of such hazelnuts covered by
said order, as hereby amended, have not
signed an amended marketing
agreement;
(2) The issuance of this amendatory
Order, further amending the aforesaid
Order, was favored or approved by at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 Oct 18, 2018
Jkt 247001
least two-thirds of the growers who
participated in a referendum on the
question of approval and who, during
the period of July 1, 2016, through June
30, 2017 (which has been deemed to be
a representative period), have been
engaged within the production area in
the production of such hazelnuts, such
growers having also produced for
market at least two-thirds of the volume
of such commodity represented in the
referendum; and
(3) The issuance of this amendatory
Order advances the interests of growers
of hazelnuts in the production area
pursuant to the declared policy of the
Act.
Order Relative to Handling
It is therefore ordered, that on and
after the effective date hereof, all
handling of hazelnuts grown in Oregon
and Washington shall be in conformity
to, and in compliance with, the terms
and conditions of the said Order as
hereby amended as follows:
The provisions of the amendments to
the Order contained in the Secretary’s
Decision issued on September 14, 2017,
and published in the September 28,
2017, issue of the Federal Register (82
FR 45208) will be and are the terms and
provisions of this order amending the
Order and are set forth in full herein.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 982
Hazelnuts, Marketing agreements,
Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 982 is amended as
follows:
PART 982—HAZELNUTS GROWN IN
OREGON AND WASHINGTON
1. The authority citation for part 982
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart A]
2. Redesignate the ‘‘Subpart—Order
Regulating Handling’’ as ‘‘Subpart A—
Order Regulating Handling’’.
■ 3. Revise § 982.12 to read as follows:
■
§ 982.12
(d) Grade, size, and quality
regulations. Prior to September 20, the
Board may consider grade, size, and
quality regulations in effect and may
recommend modifications thereof to the
Secretary.
*
*
*
*
*
5. Revise the undesignated center
heading prior to § 982.45 to read as
follows:
■
Grade, Size, and Quality Regulation
6. In § 982.45, revise the section
heading and add paragraphs (c) and (d)
to read as follows:
■
§ 982.45 Establishment of grade, size, and
quality regulations.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Quality regulations. For any
marketing year, the Board may establish,
with the approval of the Secretary, such
minimum quality and inspection
requirements applicable to hazelnuts to
facilitate the reduction of pathogens as
will contribute to orderly marketing or
will be in the public interest. In such
marketing year, no handler shall handle
hazelnuts unless they meet applicable
minimum quality and inspection
requirements as evidenced by
certification acceptable to the Board.
(d) Different regulations for different
markets. The Board may, with the
approval of the Secretary, recommend
different outgoing quality requirements
for different markets. The Board, with
the approval of the Secretary, may
establish rules and regulations
necessary and incidental to the
administration of this provision.
7. Amend § 982.46 by adding
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
§ 982.46
*
*
*
*
(d) Whenever quality regulations are
in effect pursuant to § 982.45, each
handler shall certify that all product to
be handled or credited in satisfaction of
a restricted obligation meets the quality
regulations as prescribed.
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart B
and Amended]
Merchantable hazelnuts.
8. Redesignate ‘‘Subpart—Grade and
Size Regulation’’ as subpart B and revise
the heading to read as follows:
■
§ 982.40 Marketing policy and volume
regulation.
■
PO 00000
*
Inspection and certification.
*
Merchantable hazelnuts means inshell
hazelnuts that meet the grade, size, and
quality regulations in effect pursuant to
§ 982.45 and are likely to be available
for handling as inshell hazelnuts.
■ 4. Amend § 982.40 by revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
*
52949
*
Frm 00007
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
Subpart B—Grade and Size
Requirements
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart C]
9. Redesignate ‘‘Subpart—Free and
Restricted Percentages’’ as ‘‘Subpart C—
Free and Restricted Percentages’’.
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
52950
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 203 / Friday, October 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart D]
10. Redesignate ‘‘Subpart—
Assessment Rates’’ as ‘‘Subpart D—
Assessment Rates’’.
■
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart E
and Amended]
11. Redesignate ‘‘Subpart—
Administrative Rules and Regulations’’
as subpart E and revise the heading to
read as follows:
■
Subpart E—Administrative
Requirements
Dated: October 15, 2018.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–22762 Filed 10–18–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE
AGENCY
12 CFR Parts 1239 and 1273
RIN 2590–AA90
Responsibilities of Boards of
Directors, Corporate Practices, and
Corporate Governance
Federal Housing Finance
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Federal Housing Finance
Agency (FHFA) is amending its
regulation on the Responsibilities of
Boards of Directors, Corporate Practices,
and Corporate Governance for its
regulated entities. The final rule amends
the existing regulation pertaining to
Federal Home Loan Bank strategic
business plans so that it applies as well
to the Enterprises, and makes a number
of adjustments and conforming changes
to the existing regulation. As amended,
the regulation requires that the board of
directors of each regulated entity have
in effect at all times a strategic business
plan that describes its strategy for
achieving its mission and public
purposes. It extends to the Enterprise
boards the existing provision requiring
the board of each Federal Home Loan
Bank to review the strategic business
plan at least annually, re-adopt it at
least once every three years, and
establish reporting requirements for and
monitor implementation of the strategic
business plan. The final rule adds a new
provision regarding current and
emerging risks, repeals two outdated
provisions of the existing regulation,
and makes a conforming change to the
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:11 Oct 18, 2018
Jkt 247001
Office of Finance Board of Directors
regulation.
DATES: The final rule is effective on
December 18, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Callis, Principal Risk Analyst,
Office of the Chief Accountant, at
Daniel.Callis@fhfa.gov or (202) 649–
3448, or Ming-Yuen Meyer-Fong, Office
of General Counsel, at MingYuen.Meyer-Fong@fhfa.gov or (202)
649–3078 (these are not toll-free
numbers), Federal Housing Finance
Agency, Constitution Center, 400
Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC
20219. The telephone number for the
Telecommunications Device for the
Hearing Impaired is (800) 877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On April 6, 2018, FHFA published a
proposed rule that would amend the
existing FHFA regulation on
Responsibilities of Boards of Directors,
Corporate Practices and Corporate
Governance Matters. The proposed rule
would amend, and extend to apply to
the board of directors of each Enterprise,
the existing provision requiring the
board of directors for each Federal
Home Loan Bank to have in effect at all
times a strategic business plan for the
entity. It would also require the strategic
business plan to: (1) Articulate
measurable operating goals; (2) address
credit needs identified through ongoing
market research and stakeholder
consultations; (3) describe significant
activities being planned, including any
changes to business strategy; (4) be
supported by appropriate and timely
research; and (5) identify current and
emerging risks, including those
associated with the entity’s existing
activities or new activities. It would also
require a board to review the strategic
business plan at least annually, re-adopt
it at least once every three years, and
establish reporting requirements for and
monitor implementation of the strategic
business plan.
The proposed rule would also repeal
two outdated provisions, and make a
conforming change to the Office of
Finance Board of Directors regulation.
II. Summary of Comments and FHFA
Responses
FHFA received comments on the
proposed rule from Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac (Enterprises) and U.S.
Mortgage Insurers (USMI), a trade
association comprising various private
mortgage insurance companies. The
commenters generally agreed with the
establishment of a regulatory
requirement for a strategic business
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
plan. Two commenters also argued that
a regulated board should be permitted to
articulate goals, strategies, and risks at
a high level, rather than with granular
specificity. Other comments included
one concerning the effect that the new
activities process and conservatorship
have on the strategic business plan
process.
The comments are summarized
below, along with FHFA’s responses
and discussion of changes, if any, to the
final rule text in consideration of the
comments.
A. Commenters Agreed on a
Requirement for a Board-Approved
Strategic Business Plan
The commenters agreed generally
with the establishment of a regulatory
requirement for a board-approved
strategic business plan. The commenters
also generally agreed that a strategic
business plan should have measurable
goals and objectives to hold
management accountable.
B. Appropriate Balance Between HighLevel View and Granular Detail
(§ 1239.14(a) (Opening Provision);
§ 1239.14(a)(1)(i) and (ii);
§ 1239.14(a)(3); and § 1239.14(a)(5))
Commenters differed on the
appropriate balance between board
flexibility to plan from a high-level
perspective and at a more detailed level.
Two commenters proposed modifying
the final rule to permit a board to
articulate goals and strategies at a high
level, while one commenter supported
requirements on the level of individual
activities.
The commenters offered specific
suggestions to revise the language of the
regulation to permit high-level
discussion. With respect to proposed
§ 1239.14(a)(1)(ii), FHFA received
suggestions for the plan to articulate
goals and objectives for ‘‘strategic
activities,’’ not ‘‘for each significant
activity and all authorized new
activities’’ as proposed. Another
commenter suggested that goals and
objectives be articulated for ‘‘significant
business strategy.’’
For proposed § 1239.14(a)(3), one
commenter suggested that the
requirement should be that the plan
describe ‘‘significant strategic activities’’
while another suggested ‘‘strategies.’’
Commenters suggested that the final
regulation exclude from strategic
planning changes in business strategy
not determined ‘‘significant.’’
For proposed § 1239.14(a)(5),
commenters suggested excluding lessthan-significant risks from being
required to be addressed in the strategic
business plan. One commenter
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 203 (Friday, October 19, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52946-52950]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22762]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 982
[Doc. No. AO-SC-16-0136; AMS-SC-16-0074; SC16-982-1]
Hazelnuts Grown in Oregon and Washington; Order Amending
Marketing Order No. 982
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends Marketing Order No. 982 (Order), which
regulates the handling of hazelnuts grown in Oregon and Washington. The
amendments were proposed by the Hazelnut Marketing Board (Board) and
add the authority to regulate quality for the purpose of pathogen
reduction and to establish different regulations for different markets.
This final rule also makes administrative revisions to subpart
headings to bring the language into conformance with the Office of
Federal Register requirements.
DATES: This rule is effective November 19, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Marketing Order and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops
Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop 0237, Washington,
DC 20250-0237.
[[Page 52947]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Schmaedick, Marketing Order
and Agreement Division, Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, Post Office
Box 952, Moab, UT 84532; Telephone: (202) 557-4783, Fax: (435) 259-
1502, or Michelle Sharrow, Marketing Order and Agreement Division,
Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop
0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202)
720-8938, or Email: [email protected] or
[email protected].
Small businesses may request information on this proceeding by
contacting Richard Lower, Marketing Order and Agreement Division,
Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Stop
0237, Washington, DC 20250-0237; Telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202)
720-8938, or Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prior documents in this proceeding: Notice
of Hearing issued on September 27, 2016, and published in the September
30, 2016, issue of the Federal Register (81 FR 67217); a Recommended
Decision issued on June 5, 2017, and published in the June 12, 2017,
issue of the Federal Register (82 FR 26859); and a Secretary's Decision
and Referendum Order issued September 14, 2017, and published in the
September 28, 2017, issue of the Federal Register (82 FR 45208).
This action is governed by the provisions of sections 556 and 557
of title 5 of the United States Code and, therefore, is excluded from
the requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13175.
Additionally, because this rule does not meet the definition of a
significant regulatory action it does not trigger the requirements
contained in Executive Order 13771. See the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) Memorandum titled ``Interim Guidance Implementing
Section 2 of the Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (February 2, 2017).
Notice of this rulemaking action was provided to tribal governments
through the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Office of Tribal
Relations.
Preliminary Statement
This action finalizes an amendment to regulations issued to carry
out a marketing order as defined in 7 CFR 900.2(j). This rule is issued
under Marketing Order No. 982, as amended (7 CFR part 982), regulating
the handling of hazelnuts grown in Oregon and Washington. Part 982
(referred to as 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 final rule was formulated
on the record of a public hearing held on October 18, 2016, in
Wilsonville, Oregon. The hearing was held pursuant to the provisions of
the Act, and the applicable rules of practice and procedure governing
the formulation of marketing agreements and orders (7 CFR part 900).
Notice of this hearing was published in the Federal Register September
30, 2016 (81 FR 67217). The notice of hearing contained two proposals
submitted by the Board and one submitted by USDA.
Upon the basis of evidence introduced at the hearing and the record
thereof, the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)
on June 5, 2017, filed with the Hearing Clerk, USDA, a Recommended
Decision and Opportunity to File Written Exceptions thereto by July 12,
2017. No exceptions were filed.
A Secretary's Decision and Referendum Order was published in the
Federal Register on September 28, 2017 (82 FR 45208), directing that a
referendum be conducted during the period of October 16 through
November 3, 2017, among eligible Oregon and Washington hazelnut growers
to determine whether they favored the proposed amendments to the Order.
To become effective, the amendments had to be approved by at least two-
thirds of those growers voting, or by voters representing at least two-
thirds of the volume of hazelnuts represented by voters voting in the
referendum. The amendment adding authority to regulate quality was
favored by 69.5 percent of the growers voting in the referendum,
representing 71.6 percent of the total volume of hazelnuts produced by
those voting. The amendment adding authority to establish different
regulations for different markets was favored by 67.9 percent of the
growers voting in the referendum, representing 69.5 percent of the
total volume of hazelnuts produced by those voting.
The amendments favored by voters and included in this final order
authorize the regulation of quality for the purpose of pathogen
reduction and the establishment of different outgoing quality
regulations for different markets.
USDA also made such changes as were necessary to the Order so that
all of the Order's provisions conform to the effectuated amendments.
USDA recommended one clarifying change to the language in the new
paragraph 982.45(c), which adds authority to regulate quality. USDA
determined that the language as presented in the Notice of Hearing was
redundant and, therefore, confusing. USDA revised the language in the
new paragraph Sec. 982.45(c) so that its intent is more clearly
stated. This language is included in the regulatory text of this Order.
The amended marketing agreement was subsequently mailed to all
hazelnut handlers in the production area for their approval. The
marketing agreement was not approved by handlers representing more than
50 percent of the volume of hazelnuts handled by all handlers during
the representative period of July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017.
Consequently, no companion handler agreement will be established.
Small Business Consideration
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), AMS has considered the economic impact of this
action 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
businesses subject to such actions so that small businesses will not be
unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders and amendments
thereto are unique in that they are normally brought about through
group action of essentially small entities for their own benefit.
Hazelnut Industry Background and Overview
According to the hearing transcript, there are currently over 800
hazelnut growers in the production area. According to National
Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) data presented at the hearing,
2015 grower receipts averaged $2,800 per ton. With a total 2015
production of 31,000 tons, the farm gate value for hazelnuts in that
year totaled $86.8 million ($2,800 per ton multiplied by 31,000 tons).
Taking the total value of production for hazelnuts and dividing it by
the total number of hazelnut growers provides a return per grower of
$108,500. A small grower as defined by the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) is one having annual receipts of
less than $750,000 annually. Therefore, a majority of hazelnut growers
are considered small entities under the SBA standards. Record evidence
indicates that approximately 98 percent of hazelnut growers are small
businesses.
According to the industry, there are 17 hazelnut handlers, four of
which handle 80 percent of the crop. While market prices for hazelnuts
were not included among the data presented at
[[Page 52948]]
the hearing, an estimation of handler receipts can be calculated using
the 2015 grower receipt value of $86.8 million. Multiplying $86.8
million by 80 percent ($86.8 million multiplied by 80 percent equals
$69.4 million) and dividing by four indicates that the largest hazelnut
handlers received an estimated $17.3 million each. Dividing the
remaining 20 percent of $86.8 million, or $17.4 million, by the
remaining 13 handlers, indicates average receipts of $1.3 million each.
A small agricultural service firm is defined by the SBA as one having
annual receipts of less than $7,500,000. Based on the above
calculations, a majority of hazelnut handlers are considered small
entities under the SBA's standards.
The production area regulated under the Order covers Oregon and
Washington. According to the record, Eastern Filbert Blight has heavily
impacted hazelnut production in Washington. One witness stated that
there is currently no commercial production in that state. As a result,
production data entered into the record pertains almost exclusively to
Oregon.
NASS data indicates bearing acres of hazelnuts reached a fifteen-
year high during the 2013-2014 crop year at 30,000 acres. Acreage
remained steady, at 30,000 bearing acres for the 2015-2016 crop year.
By dividing 30,000 acres by 800 growers, NASS data indicate there are
approximately 37.5 acres per grower. Industry testimony estimates that
due to new plantings, there are potentially 60,000 bearing acres of
hazelnuts, or an estimated 75 bearing acres per hazelnut grower.
During the hearing held October 18, 2016, interested parties were
invited to present evidence on the probable regulatory impact of the
amendments to the Order on small businesses. The evidence presented at
the hearing shows that none of the amendments would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small agricultural growers
or firms.
Material Issues
This action amends the Order to authorize the regulation of quality
for the purpose of pathogen reduction and the establishment of
different outgoing quality regulations for different markets. These
authorities will aid in pathogen reduction in hazelnuts and increase
the industry's ability to meet the needs of different market
destinations.
During the hearing held on October 18, 2016, interested persons
were invited to present evidence on the probable regulatory and
informational impact of the amendments to the Order on small
businesses. The evidence presented at the hearing shows that the
amendments would have no burdensome effects on small agricultural
producers or firms.
In discussing the impacts of the amendments on growers and
handlers, record evidence indicates that the authority to establish
quality regulations that require hazelnuts to be treated prior to
shipment to reduce pathogen load would not significantly impact the
majority of handlers. Regulations implemented under that authority
could impose additional costs on handlers required to comply with them.
However, witnesses testified that establishing mandatory treatment
regulations could increase the industry's credibility and reduce the
risk that shipments of substandard product could jeopardize the entire
industry's reputation. Record evidence shows that any additional costs
are likely to be offset by the benefits of complying with those
requirements.
The record shows that the proposal to add authority to establish
different outgoing quality requirements for different markets would, in
itself, have no economic impact on growers or handlers of any size.
While regulations implemented under that authority could potentially
impose additional costs on handlers required to comply with them, the
record indicates the benefits of such regulation would outweigh the
potential future costs. The record indicates that allowing different
regulations for different markets would likely lower the costs to
handlers and prevent multiple treatments of hazelnuts while preserving
hazelnut quality.
This final rule also makes administrative revisions to subpart
headings to bring the language into conformance with the Office of
Federal Register requirements.
USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate,
overlap or conflict with this rule. These amendments are intended to
improve the operation and administration of the Order and to assist in
the marketing of hazelnuts.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Current information collection requirements for Part 982 are
approved by OMB, under 0581-0178 ``Vegetable and Specialty Crops.'' No
changes are anticipated in these requirements as a result of this
proceeding. Should any such changes become necessary, they would be
submitted to OMB for approval.
As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are
periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and
duplication by industry and public-sector agencies.
AMS is committed to complying with the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act, which requires Government agencies in general to
provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting
business electronically to the maximum extent possible.
AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote
the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide
increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information
and services, and for other purposes.
Civil Justice Reform
The amendments to the Order stated herein have been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. They are not intended to
have retroactive effect. The amendments do not preempt any State or
local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an
irreconcilable conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with USDA a petition
stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any obligation
imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance with law and
request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A
handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the petition.
After the hearing, USDA would rule on the petition. The Act provides
that the district court of the United States in any district in which
the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of
business, has jurisdiction to review USDA's ruling on the petition,
provided an action is filed no later than 20 days after the date of
entry of the ruling.
Order Amending the Order Regulating the Handling of Hazelnuts Grown in
Oregon and Washington 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This order shall not become effective unless and until the
requirements of Sec. 900.14 of the rules of practice and procedure
governing proceedings to formulate marketing agreements and
marketing orders have been met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Findings and Determinations
The findings and determinations hereinafter set forth are
supplementary to the findings and determinations that were previously
made in connection with the issuance of the Marketing Order; and all
said previous findings and determinations are hereby ratified and
affirmed, except insofar as such findings and determinations may be in
[[Page 52949]]
conflict with the findings and determinations set forth herein.
(a) Findings and Determinations Upon the Basis of the Hearing Record
Pursuant to the provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement
Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), and the applicable rules of
practice and procedure effective thereunder (7 CFR part 900), a public
hearing was held upon further amendment of Marketing Order No. 982,
regulating the handling of hazelnuts grown in Oregon and Washington.
Upon the basis of the record, it is found that:
(1) The Order, as amended, and as hereby further amended, and all
of the terms and conditions thereof, would tend to effectuate the
declared policy of the Act;
(2) The Order, as amended, and as hereby further amended, regulates
the handling of hazelnuts grown in the production area in the same
manner as, and is applicable only to, persons in the respective classes
of commercial and industrial activity specified in the Order upon which
a hearing has been held;
(3) The Order, as amended, and as hereby further amended, is
limited in its application to the smallest regional production area
that is practicable, consistent with carrying out the declared policy
of the Act, and the issuance of several orders applicable to
subdivisions of the production area would not effectively carry out the
declared policy of the Act;
(4) The Order, as amended, and as hereby further amended,
prescribes, insofar as practicable, such different terms applicable to
different parts of the production area as are necessary to give due
recognition to the differences in the production and marketing of
hazelnuts grown in Oregon and Washington; and
(5) All handling of hazelnuts grown in the production area as
defined in the Order is in the current of interstate or foreign
commerce or directly burdens, obstructs, or affects such commerce.
(b) Determinations. It is hereby determined that:
(1) Handlers (excluding cooperative associations of growers who are
not engaged in processing, distributing, or shipping hazelnuts covered
by the order as hereby amended) who, during the period July 1, 2016,
through June 30, 2017, handled 50 percent or more of the volume of such
hazelnuts covered by said order, as hereby amended, have not signed an
amended marketing agreement;
(2) The issuance of this amendatory Order, further amending the
aforesaid Order, was favored or approved by at least two-thirds of the
growers who participated in a referendum on the question of approval
and who, during the period of July 1, 2016, through June 30, 2017
(which has been deemed to be a representative period), have been
engaged within the production area in the production of such hazelnuts,
such growers having also produced for market at least two-thirds of the
volume of such commodity represented in the referendum; and
(3) The issuance of this amendatory Order advances the interests of
growers of hazelnuts in the production area pursuant to the declared
policy of the Act.
Order Relative to Handling
It is therefore ordered, that on and after the effective date
hereof, all handling of hazelnuts grown in Oregon and Washington shall
be in conformity to, and in compliance with, the terms and conditions
of the said Order as hereby amended as follows:
The provisions of the amendments to the Order contained in the
Secretary's Decision issued on September 14, 2017, and published in the
September 28, 2017, issue of the Federal Register (82 FR 45208) will be
and are the terms and provisions of this order amending the Order and
are set forth in full herein.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 982
Hazelnuts, Marketing agreements, Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 7 CFR part 982 is amended
as follows:
PART 982--HAZELNUTS GROWN IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON
0
1. The authority citation for part 982 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart A]
0
2. Redesignate the ``Subpart--Order Regulating Handling'' as ``Subpart
A--Order Regulating Handling''.
0
3. Revise Sec. 982.12 to read as follows:
Sec. 982.12 Merchantable hazelnuts.
Merchantable hazelnuts means inshell hazelnuts that meet the grade,
size, and quality regulations in effect pursuant to Sec. 982.45 and
are likely to be available for handling as inshell hazelnuts.
0
4. Amend Sec. 982.40 by revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 982.40 Marketing policy and volume regulation.
* * * * *
(d) Grade, size, and quality regulations. Prior to September 20,
the Board may consider grade, size, and quality regulations in effect
and may recommend modifications thereof to the Secretary.
* * * * *
0
5. Revise the undesignated center heading prior to Sec. 982.45 to read
as follows:
Grade, Size, and Quality Regulation
0
6. In Sec. 982.45, revise the section heading and add paragraphs (c)
and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 982.45 Establishment of grade, size, and quality regulations.
* * * * *
(c) Quality regulations. For any marketing year, the Board may
establish, with the approval of the Secretary, such minimum quality and
inspection requirements applicable to hazelnuts to facilitate the
reduction of pathogens as will contribute to orderly marketing or will
be in the public interest. In such marketing year, no handler shall
handle hazelnuts unless they meet applicable minimum quality and
inspection requirements as evidenced by certification acceptable to the
Board.
(d) Different regulations for different markets. The Board may,
with the approval of the Secretary, recommend different outgoing
quality requirements for different markets. The Board, with the
approval of the Secretary, may establish rules and regulations
necessary and incidental to the administration of this provision.
0
7. Amend Sec. 982.46 by adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 982.46 Inspection and certification.
* * * * *
(d) Whenever quality regulations are in effect pursuant to Sec.
982.45, each handler shall certify that all product to be handled or
credited in satisfaction of a restricted obligation meets the quality
regulations as prescribed.
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart B and Amended]
0
8. Redesignate ``Subpart--Grade and Size Regulation'' as subpart B and
revise the heading to read as follows:
Subpart B--Grade and Size Requirements
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart C]
0
9. Redesignate ``Subpart--Free and Restricted Percentages'' as
``Subpart C--Free and Restricted Percentages''.
[[Page 52950]]
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart D]
0
10. Redesignate ``Subpart--Assessment Rates'' as ``Subpart D--
Assessment Rates''.
[Subpart Redesignated as Subpart E and Amended]
0
11. Redesignate ``Subpart--Administrative Rules and Regulations'' as
subpart E and revise the heading to read as follows:
Subpart E--Administrative Requirements
Dated: October 15, 2018.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-22762 Filed 10-18-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P