U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples, 51939-51942 [2019-20570]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
5 U.S.C. 553, 601, and 804
Executive Order 13132
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
This final rule modifies a definition in
agency rules of practice and procedure.
Under the Administrative Procedure
Act, prior notice and opportunity for
comment are not required for the
promulgation of agency rules of practice
and procedure. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).
Only substantive rules require
publication 30 days prior to their
effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
Therefore, this final rule is effective
upon publication in the Federal
Register.
Furthermore, under 5 U.S.C. 804, this
rule is not subject to congressional
review under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, Public Law 104–121. In addition,
because prior notice and opportunity for
comment are not required to be
provided for this final rule, this rule is
exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.
This rule has been reviewed in
accordance with the requirements of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The
review reveals that this rule does not
contain policies with federalism
implications sufficient to warrant
federalism consultation under Executive
Order 13132.
Agricultural Marketing Service
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
This rule does not meet the definition
of a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563. Because this rule is not a
significant regulatory action, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
designated this rule as not a major rule,
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 13771
Additionally, because this rule does
not meet the definition of a significant
regulatory action, it does not trigger the
requirements of Executive Order 13771.
See OMB’s Memorandum on ‘‘Interim
Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the
Executive Order of January 30, 2017,
Titled ‘Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs’ ’’
(February 2, 2017).
Executive Order 12988
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
51939
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. This rule is not intended to
have retroactive effect. This rule will
not preempt any State or local laws,
regulations, or policies, unless they
present an irreconcilable conflict with
this rule. There are no administrative
proceedings that must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court
challenging this rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Sep 30, 2019
Jkt 250001
This rule has been reviewed in
accordance with the requirements of
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. The review reveals that
this regulation would not have
substantial and direct effects on tribal
governments and would not have
significant tribal implications.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains no information
collections or recordkeeping
requirements under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.].
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedure.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 7 CFR part 1 is amended as
follows:
PART 1—ADMINISTRATIVE
REGULATIONS
Subpart P—Rules of Practice and
Procedure Governing Formal
Rulemaking Proceedings Instituted by
the Secretary
1. Add an authority citation for
subpart P of part 1 to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301.
2. Section 1.802 is amended by
revising the definition of ‘‘Judge’’ to
read as follows:
■
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Judge means any administrative law
Judge appointed pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
3105 or any presiding official appointed
by the Secretary, and assigned to
conduct the proceeding.
*
*
*
*
*
Stephen Alexander Vaden,
General Counsel, Office of the General
Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2019–20585 Filed 9–30–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–90–P
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[Document Number AMS–SC–18–0055, SC–
18–330]
U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Executive Order 13175
§ 1.802
7 CFR Part 51
SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing
Service (AMS) of the Department of
Agriculture (USDA) is amending the
U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples by
removing smooth net-like russeting as a
grade-determining factor in the U.S.
Extra Fancy, U.S. Fancy, and U.S. No.
1 grades for Fuji apples. In addition,
AMS is removing obsolete references to
the location where color standards may
be examined and purchased. The
changes modernize the standards and
meet consumer demand by providing
greater marketing flexibility.
DATES: Effective October 31, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David G. Horner, Agricultural Marketing
Specialist, USDA, AMS, Specialty Crops
Program, Specialty Crops Inspection
Division, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite
101, Fredericksburg VA, 22406; phone
(540) 361–1120; fax (540) 361–1199; or,
email Dave.Horner@usda.gov. Copies of
the revised U.S. Standards for Apples
are available at https://
www.regulations.gov or on the AMS
website at https://www.ams.usda.gov/
grades-standards/fruits.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
changes exempt Fuji apples from
smooth net-like russeting as a gradedetermining factor. These revisions also
affect the grade requirements under the
Export Apple Act.
Executive Orders 12866, 13771, and
13563
This rule does not meet the definition
of a significant regulatory action
contained in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, and is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Because this rule does
not meet the definition of a significant
regulatory action, it does not trigger the
requirements in Executive Order 13771.
See OMB’s 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). Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies
to assess all costs and benefits of
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
51940
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility.
Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
designated this rule as not a major rule,
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 13175
This action has been reviewed in
accordance with the requirements of
Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. The review reveals that
this regulation would not have
substantial and direct effects on Tribal
governments or significant Tribal
implications.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. It is not intended to have
retroactive effect. There are no
administrative procedures that must be
exhausted prior to any judicial
challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Background
The current U.S. standards provide
for apples to be sorted into various
grades, including but not limited to U.S.
Extra Fancy, U.S. Fancy, and U.S. No.
1. Each of the grades describes the
qualities required for apples to meet the
standards and those that are not to be
scored against certain varieties of apples
when determining grade. AMS proposed
amending the U.S. standards for apples
so that smooth net-like russeting of Fuji
apples would not be scored in any grade
(See 84 FR 19743). Smooth net-like
russeting is a cosmetic defect that affects
the skin of the apple but not the internal
quality of the fruit. Smooth net-like
russeting, which is called flecking by
the Pacific Northwest apple industry, is
prevalent in the Fuji variety. U.S. apple
standards restricted apples from
exhibiting an aggregate area of smooth
net-like russeting greater than 10
percent for U.S. Extra Fancy, 15 percent
for U.S. Fancy, and 25 percent for U.S.
No. 1 from meeting the grade
requirements. The Export Apple Act
regulations (7 CFR part 33) require that
apples grade at least U.S. No. 1 or U.S.
No. 1 Early (except apples for export to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Sep 30, 2019
Jkt 250001
Pacific ports of Russia must grade at
least U.S. Utility or U.S. No. 1 Hail for
hail damaged apples, as specified in the
U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples).
Fuji apples that display smooth net-like
russeting greater than the percentages
allowed are therefore excluded from the
export market due to current U.S. grade
standards.
The Washington State Grade
Standards for Apples (16 W.A.C. 403)
do not consider smooth net-like
russeting to be a defect for Fuji apples
if the russeting does not rise above the
surface of the skin and the skin is not
rough to the touch. Apples grown in
Washington account for nearly 75
percent of domestic production and
more than 90 percent of U.S. export
apples. Revising the U.S. apple
standards to exclude scoring of smooth
net-like russeting on Fuji apples as a
quality defect, in alignment with the
Washington State standards, will
promote consistency across the apple
market and remove barriers to the
export market for growers of the Fuji
variety.
In December 2016, the Northwest
Horticultural Council (NHC) petitioned
AMS to remove the requirement for
scoring smooth net-like russeting from
the U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples
for the Fuji variety. In response, AMS
asked the NHC to provide justification
and evidence of industry support,
which they did in a memorandum
submitted in April 2018. The NHC
provided research showing that Fuji
apples have a propensity for smooth
net-like russeting and that the feature
does not negatively affect the internal
quality of the fruit. In addition, the NHC
stated that revising the U.S. apple
standards would partially harmonize
them with the Washington State apple
standards, and help prevent sound Fuji
apples from being rejected in domestic
and international markets. The NHC
petition was supported by the
Washington Apple Commission, Idaho
Apple Commission, California Apple
Commission, and many other apple
organizations. AMS conducted research
on the proposal by meeting with
Washington State and industry
personnel in November 2018. Based on
available data, AMS concluded that
exempting Fuji apples from scoring
smooth net-like russeting as a quality
defect would provide the industry with
greater flexibility, and align the U.S.
standards with current state and
industry practices.
Comments
On May 6, 2019, AMS published a
proposed rule in the Federal Register
(84 FR 19743) soliciting comments on
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
removing smooth net-like russeting as a
grade-determining factor from the U.S.
Extra Fancy, U.S. Fancy, and U.S. No.
1 grades for Fuji apples. In addition,
AMS proposed removing obsolete
references to the location where color
standards may be examined and
purchased. The comment period closed
on July 5, 2019. Three comments were
received; all supported the proposed
revisions.
One commenter was an association
representing 7,500 apple growers
throughout America as well as more
than 400 individual firms involved in
the apple business. They ‘‘strongly
support[ed]’’ the revisions as they will
remove an unnecessary obstacle to U.S.grown Fuji apples accessing the global
marketplace. Another commenter
representing growers, shippers, and
packers in the Pacific Northwest ‘‘fully
supported’’ the proposed revisions and
‘‘encourage[d] its swift adoption.’’ The
third commenter was anonymous and
stated that the revisions were ‘‘ideal’’
since the changes would prevent sound
apples from going to waste.
Based on the information gathered,
AMS is making the following revisions
to the U.S. Standards for Grades of
Apples:
• Section 51.300 U.S. Extra Fancy:
Revised to exempt the Fuji variety from
scoring of smooth net-like russeting as
a defect.
• Section 51.301 U.S. Fancy: Revised
to exempt the Fuji variety from scoring
of smooth net-like russeting as a defect.
• Section 51.302 U.S. No. 1: Revised
to exempt the Fuji variety from scoring
of smooth net-like russeting as a defect.
The revision of the U.S. No. 1 grade also
will affect the U.S. No. 1 Hail
(§ 51.302(a)) grade and the permitted
combination grades (§ 51.304).
• Section 51.305 Color Requirements:
Revised to remove obsolete references to
the location where color standards may
be examined and purchased.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), AMS has considered
the economic impacts of the revision to
the U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples
(7 CFR 51.300–51.322). The purpose of
the RFA is to structure regulatory
actions such that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately
burdened. Accordingly, AMS has
prepared this regulatory flexibility
analysis.
The revision will result in a minor
change to the current U.S. standards to
allow smooth net-like russeting of the
Fuji variety of apple. There will be little
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
or no additional cost to implement this
revision.
According to the Small Business
Administration (SBA) (13 CFR 121.601),
the definition of a small apple producer
is one whose annual sales are less than
$750,000. Based on this definition, data
from the 2012 Agricultural Census show
that at least 94 percent of farm
operations that produce apples are
considered small. These small growers
will not be disproportionately affected
by the rule as all changes to the
standard will be applied uniformly on
all market participants.
The proposal for the change to the
U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples was
submitted by the NHC, which represents
apple growers, packers, and shippers in
Washington, Oregon, and Idaho who
account for 75 percent of domestic fresh
apple production. This proposal was
reviewed by the U.S. Apple Association
and the U.S. Apple Export Council. The
addition of smooth net-like russeting to
the list of features that are not scorable
against Fuji apples in the U.S. Standards
for Grades of Apples will promote
consistency in apple grading, increase
U.S. Fuji apple access into export
markets, and provide for greater price
stability for the Fuji variety of apples.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 51
Food grades and standards, Fruits,
Nuts, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Vegetables.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
7 CFR part 51 is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 51
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621—1627.
2. Revise § 51.300 to read as follows:
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
§ 51.300
U.S. Extra Fancy.
‘‘U.S. Extra Fancy’’ consists of apples
of one variety (except when more than
one variety is printed on the container)
which are mature but not overripe,
clean, fairly well formed, free from
decay, internal browning, internal
breakdown, soft scald, scab, freezing
injury, visible watercore, and broken
skins. The apples are also free from
injury caused by bruises, brown surface
discoloration, smooth net-like russeting,
sunburn or sprayburn, limb rubs, hail,
drought spots, scars, disease, insects, or
other means. The apples are free from
damage caused by bitter pit or Jonathan
spot and by smooth solid, slightly rough
or rough russeting, or stem or calyx
cracks, as well as damage by invisible
watercore after January 31st of the year
following the year of production except
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Sep 30, 2019
§ 51.301
Jkt 250001
U.S. Fancy.
‘‘U.S. Fancy’’ consists of apples of one
variety (except when more than one
variety is printed on the container)
which are mature but not overripe,
clean, fairly well formed, and free from
decay, internal browning, internal
breakdown, soft scald, freezing injury,
visible watercore, and broken skins. The
apples are also free from damage caused
by bruises, brown surface discoloration,
russeting, sunburn or sprayburn, limb
rubs, hail, drought spots, scars, stem or
calyx cracks, disease, insects, bitter pit,
Jonathan spot, or damage by other
means, or invisible watercore after
January 31st of the year following the
year of production, except for the Fuji
variety of apples. Invisible watercore
and smooth net-like russeting shall not
be scored against the Fuji variety of
apples under any circumstances. For the
apple varieties listed in table 1 of
§ 51.305, each apple of this grade has
the amount of color specified for the
variety. (See §§ 51.305 and 51.306.)
■ 4. Amend § 51.302 by revising the
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 51.302
PART 51—[AMENDED]
■
for the Fuji variety of apples. Invisible
watercore and smooth net-like russeting
shall not be scored against the Fuji
variety of apples under any
circumstances. For the apple varieties
listed in table 1 of § 51.305, each apple
of this grade has the amount of color
specified for the variety. (See §§ 51.305
and 51.306.)
■ 3. Revise § 51.301 to read as follows:
U.S. No. 1.
‘‘U.S. No. 1’’ consists of apples which
meet the requirements of U.S. Fancy
grade except for color, russeting, and
invisible water core. In this grade, less
color is required for all varieties listed
in table 1 of § 51.305. Apples of this
grade are free from excessive damage
caused by russeting which means that
apples meet the russeting requirements
for U.S. Fancy as defined under the
definitions of ‘‘damage by russeting,’’
except the aggregate area of an apple
which may be covered by smooth netlike russeting shall not exceed 25
percent; and the aggregate area of an
apple which may be covered by smooth
solid russeting shall not exceed 10
percent: Provided, That, in the case of
the Yellow Newtown or similar
varieties, the aggregate area of an apple
which may be covered with smooth
solid russeting shall not exceed 20
percent; and that smooth net-like
russeting shall not be scored against the
Fuji variety under any circumstances.
Each apple of this grade has the amount
of color specified in § 51.305 for the
variety. Invisible watercore shall not be
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51941
scored in this grade. (See §§ 51.305 and
51.306.)
*
*
*
*
*
5. In § 51.305, remove the two
undesignated introductory paragraphs
and add paragraphs (a) and (b) in their
place to read as follows:
■
§ 51.305
Color requirements.
(a) In addition to the requirements
specified for the grades set forth in
§§ 51.300 through 51.304, apples of
these grades shall have the percentage of
color specified for the variety in table 1
of this section. All apple varieties other
than those appearing in table 1 of this
section shall have no color requirements
pertaining to these grades. For the solid
red varieties, the percentage stated
refers to the area of the surface which
must be covered with a good shade of
solid red characteristic of the variety:
Provided, That an apple having color of
a lighter shade of solid red or striped
red than that considered as a good shade
of red characteristic of the variety may
be admitted to a grade, provided it has
sufficient additional area covered so
that the apple has as good an
appearance as one with the minimum
percentage of good red characteristic of
the variety required for the grade. For
the striped red varieties, the percentage
stated refers to the area of the surface in
which the stripes of a good shade of red
characteristic of the variety shall
predominate over stripes of lighter red,
green, or yellow. However, an apple
having color of a lighter shade than that
considered as a good shade of red
characteristic of the variety may be
admitted to a grade, provided it has
sufficient additional area covered so
that the apple has as good an
appearance as one with the minimum
percentage of stripes of a good red
characteristic of the variety required for
the grade. Faded brown stripes shall not
be considered as color.
(b) Color standards USDA Visual Aid
APL–CC–1 (Plates a–e) consists of a
folder containing the color requirements
for apples set forth in paragraph (a) of
this section and five plates illustrating
minimum good shade of solid red or
striped red color, minimum
compensating color and shade not
considered color, for the following 12
varieties: Red Delicious, Red Rome,
Empire, Idared, Winesap, Jonathan,
Stayman, McIntosh, Cortland, Rome
Beauty, Delicious, and York. The color
standards are available for purchase at
https://www.ams.usda.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
51942
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 190 / Tuesday, October 1, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: September 18, 2019.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–20570 Filed 9–30–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 701
RIN 3133–AE84
Payday Alternative Loans
National Credit Union
Administration (NCUA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The NCUA Board (Board) is
issuing a final rule (referred to as the
PALs II rule) to allow federal credit
unions (FCUs) to offer additional
payday alternative loans (PALs) to their
members. The final rule does not
replace the NCUA’s current PALs rule
(referred to as the PALs I rule). Rather,
the PALs II rule grants FCUs additional
flexibility to offer their members
meaningful alternatives to traditional
payday loans while maintaining many
of the key structural safeguards of the
PALs I rule.
DATES: The final rule is effective on
December 2, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Matthew Biliouris, Director, Office of
Consumer Financial Protection; Joseph
Goldberg, Director, Division of
Consumer Compliance Policy and
Outreach, Office of Consumer Financial
Protection; or Marvin Shaw, Staff
Attorney, Division of Regulations and
Legislation, Office of General Counsel;
1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA
22314–6113 or telephone: (703) 518–
1140 (Messrs. Biliouris and Goldberg),
or (703) 518–6540 (Mr. Shaw).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES
I. Background
II. Summary of Comments
III. Summary of the Final Rule
IV. Statement of Legal Authority
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Procedures
I. Background
Federal credit unions (FCUs) provide
individuals of modest means access to
affordable credit for productive and
provident purposes.1 This core credit
union mission puts FCUs in natural
competition with short-term, smalldollar lenders that offer payday, vehicle
1 See Credit Union Membership Access Act,
Public Law 105–219, section 2, 112 Stat. 913 (Aug.
7, 1998) (codified as 12 U.S.C. 1751 note).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Sep 30, 2019
Jkt 250001
title, and other high-cost installment
loans to borrowers of modest means.2
A ‘‘payday loan’’ generally refers to a
short-term, small-dollar loan repayable
in one or more installments with
repayment secured by a pre- or postdated check or a preauthorized
electronic fund transfer (EFT) from the
borrower’s checking account.3 A payday
loan usually matures in 14 days, around
the borrower’s next payday, at which
time the borrower is often required to
repay the loan in a single balloon
payment. The borrower typically does
not pay interest on a payday loan.
Rather, payday lenders charge high
‘‘application’’ fees relative to the
amount borrowed, which typically
range between $15 and $35 per 100
borrowed.4 This pricing structure
produces a triple-digit annual
percentage rate (APR).5
Despite marketing payday loans as a
temporary lifeline to borrowers, most
payday lenders refinance or ‘‘rollover’’
the borrower’s initial payday loan
charging additional fees without a
significant economic benefit to the
borrower. In fact, the Center for
Responsible Lending estimates that 76
percent of payday loans are rollovers.6
Borrowers most often rollover a payday
loan because the borrower does not have
the ability to repay the initial loan upon
maturity or will have limited funds to
meet other obligations.7 This pattern of
repeated borrowings creates a ‘‘cycle of
debt’’ that can increase the borrower’s
risk of becoming unbanked, filing for
bankruptcy, or experiencing severe
financial hardship.8
2010 Payday Alternative Loan
Rulemaking (PALs I Rule)
In 2010, the Board amended the
NCUA’s general lending rule, § 701.21,
to provide a regulatory framework for
FCUs to make viable alternatives to
2 Roy F. Bergengren, Coo
¨ perative Credit, 191 The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science 144–148 (1937).
3 Robert W. Snarr, Jr., Fed. Reserve Bank of Phila.,
No Cash ‘til Payday: The Payday Lending Industry,
Compliance Corner (1st Quarter 2002) available at
www.philadelphiafed.org/bank-resources/
publications/compliance-corner/2002/first-quarter/
q1cc1_02.cfm.
4 See National Consumer Law Center, Consumer
Credit Regulation 403–6 (1st ed. 2012).
5 The ‘‘annual percentage rate’’ is a ‘‘measure of
the cost of credit, expressed as a yearly rate.’’ 12
CFR 1026.14(a).
6 Uriah King & Leslie Parrish, Center for
Responsible Lending, Phantom Demand: ShortTerm Due Date Generates 76% of Total Volume 15
(July 2009) available at
www.responsiblelending.org/payday-lending/
research-analysis/phantom-demand-short-termdue-date-genderates-need-for-repeat-payday-loansaccounting-for-76-of-total-volume.html.
7 Id.
8 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
payday loans, the PALs I rule.9 The
PALs I rule, § 701.21(c)(7)(iii), permits
an FCU to offer to its members a PAL
loan, a form of closed-end consumer
credit, at a higher APR than other credit
union loans as long as the PAL has
certain structural features, developed by
the Board, to protect borrowers from
predatory payday lending practices that
can trap borrowers in repeated
borrowing cycles.
For example, the PALs I rule
eliminates the potential for ‘‘loan
churning,’’ the practice of inducing a
borrower to repay an existing loan with
another loan without significant
economic benefit to the borrower, by
prohibiting an FCU from rolling one
PALs I loan into another PALs I loan.10
As the Board previously explained,
‘‘these provisions of the [PALs I rule]
will work to curtail a member’s
repetitive use and reliance on this type
of product, which often compounds the
member’s already unstable financial
condition . . . The Board recognizes
that continuously ‘rolling-over’ a loan
can subject a borrower to additional fees
and repayment amounts that are
substantially more than the initial
amount borrowed.’’ 11 However, to
avoid the possibility of a default in
cases where the borrower cannot repay
the initial PAL loan, an FCU may extend
the maturity of an existing PALs I loan
to the maximum term limit permissible
under the regulation as long as the
borrower does not pay any additional
fees or receive additional credit. An
FCU may also refinance a traditional
payday loan into a PALs I loan.12
The PALs I rule also eliminates the
underlying borrower payment shock
from a single balloon payment, which
often forces a borrower to rollover a
payday loan, by requiring that each PAL
loan fully amortize over the life of the
loan.13 As the Board previously stated
in the preamble to the final PALs I rule,
‘‘balloon payments often create
additional difficulty for borrowers
trying to repay their loans, and requiring
FCUs to fully amortize the loans will
allow borrowers to make manageable
payments over the term of the loan,
rather than trying to make one large
payment.’’ 14 Accordingly, an FCU must
structure a PALs I loan so that a member
repays principal and interest in
9 Short-Term, Small Amount Loans, 75 FR 58285
(Sept. 24, 2010).
10 12 CFR 701.21(c)(7)(iii)(A)(4).
11 Short-Term, Small Amount Loans, 75 FR
24497, 24499 (May 5, 2010).
12 Short-Term, Small Amount Loans, 75 FR
58285, 58286 (Sept. 24, 2010).
13 12 CFR 701.21(c)(7)(iii)(A)(5).
14 Short-Term, Small Amount Loans, 75 FR
58285, 58287 (Sept. 24, 2010).
E:\FR\FM\01OCR1.SGM
01OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 1, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51939-51942]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20570]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 51
[Document Number AMS-SC-18-0055, SC-18-330]
U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) of the Department of
Agriculture (USDA) is amending the U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples
by removing smooth net-like russeting as a grade-determining factor in
the U.S. Extra Fancy, U.S. Fancy, and U.S. No. 1 grades for Fuji
apples. In addition, AMS is removing obsolete references to the
location where color standards may be examined and purchased. The
changes modernize the standards and meet consumer demand by providing
greater marketing flexibility.
DATES: Effective October 31, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David G. Horner, Agricultural
Marketing Specialist, USDA, AMS, Specialty Crops Program, Specialty
Crops Inspection Division, 100 Riverside Parkway, Suite 101,
Fredericksburg VA, 22406; phone (540) 361-1120; fax (540) 361-1199; or,
email [email protected]. Copies of the revised U.S. Standards for
Apples are available at https://www.regulations.gov or on the AMS
website at https://www.ams.usda.gov/grades-standards/fruits.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The changes exempt Fuji apples from smooth
net-like russeting as a grade-determining factor. These revisions also
affect the grade requirements under the Export Apple Act.
Executive Orders 12866, 13771, and 13563
This rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory
action contained in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Because
this rule does not meet the definition of a significant regulatory
action, it does not trigger the requirements in Executive Order 13771.
See OMB's 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). Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of
[[Page 51940]]
available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects,
distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, reducing costs,
harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule
as not a major rule, as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Executive Order 13175
This action has been reviewed in accordance with the requirements
of Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments. The review reveals that this regulation would not
have substantial and direct effects on Tribal governments or
significant Tribal implications.
Executive Order 12988
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. There
are no administrative procedures that must be exhausted prior to any
judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Background
The current U.S. standards provide for apples to be sorted into
various grades, including but not limited to U.S. Extra Fancy, U.S.
Fancy, and U.S. No. 1. Each of the grades describes the qualities
required for apples to meet the standards and those that are not to be
scored against certain varieties of apples when determining grade. AMS
proposed amending the U.S. standards for apples so that smooth net-like
russeting of Fuji apples would not be scored in any grade (See 84 FR
19743). Smooth net-like russeting is a cosmetic defect that affects the
skin of the apple but not the internal quality of the fruit. Smooth
net-like russeting, which is called flecking by the Pacific Northwest
apple industry, is prevalent in the Fuji variety. U.S. apple standards
restricted apples from exhibiting an aggregate area of smooth net-like
russeting greater than 10 percent for U.S. Extra Fancy, 15 percent for
U.S. Fancy, and 25 percent for U.S. No. 1 from meeting the grade
requirements. The Export Apple Act regulations (7 CFR part 33) require
that apples grade at least U.S. No. 1 or U.S. No. 1 Early (except
apples for export to Pacific ports of Russia must grade at least U.S.
Utility or U.S. No. 1 Hail for hail damaged apples, as specified in the
U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples). Fuji apples that display smooth
net-like russeting greater than the percentages allowed are therefore
excluded from the export market due to current U.S. grade standards.
The Washington State Grade Standards for Apples (16 W.A.C. 403) do
not consider smooth net-like russeting to be a defect for Fuji apples
if the russeting does not rise above the surface of the skin and the
skin is not rough to the touch. Apples grown in Washington account for
nearly 75 percent of domestic production and more than 90 percent of
U.S. export apples. Revising the U.S. apple standards to exclude
scoring of smooth net-like russeting on Fuji apples as a quality
defect, in alignment with the Washington State standards, will promote
consistency across the apple market and remove barriers to the export
market for growers of the Fuji variety.
In December 2016, the Northwest Horticultural Council (NHC)
petitioned AMS to remove the requirement for scoring smooth net-like
russeting from the U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples for the Fuji
variety. In response, AMS asked the NHC to provide justification and
evidence of industry support, which they did in a memorandum submitted
in April 2018. The NHC provided research showing that Fuji apples have
a propensity for smooth net-like russeting and that the feature does
not negatively affect the internal quality of the fruit. In addition,
the NHC stated that revising the U.S. apple standards would partially
harmonize them with the Washington State apple standards, and help
prevent sound Fuji apples from being rejected in domestic and
international markets. The NHC petition was supported by the Washington
Apple Commission, Idaho Apple Commission, California Apple Commission,
and many other apple organizations. AMS conducted research on the
proposal by meeting with Washington State and industry personnel in
November 2018. Based on available data, AMS concluded that exempting
Fuji apples from scoring smooth net-like russeting as a quality defect
would provide the industry with greater flexibility, and align the U.S.
standards with current state and industry practices.
Comments
On May 6, 2019, AMS published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register (84 FR 19743) soliciting comments on removing smooth net-like
russeting as a grade-determining factor from the U.S. Extra Fancy, U.S.
Fancy, and U.S. No. 1 grades for Fuji apples. In addition, AMS proposed
removing obsolete references to the location where color standards may
be examined and purchased. The comment period closed on July 5, 2019.
Three comments were received; all supported the proposed revisions.
One commenter was an association representing 7,500 apple growers
throughout America as well as more than 400 individual firms involved
in the apple business. They ``strongly support[ed]'' the revisions as
they will remove an unnecessary obstacle to U.S.-grown Fuji apples
accessing the global marketplace. Another commenter representing
growers, shippers, and packers in the Pacific Northwest ``fully
supported'' the proposed revisions and ``encourage[d] its swift
adoption.'' The third commenter was anonymous and stated that the
revisions were ``ideal'' since the changes would prevent sound apples
from going to waste.
Based on the information gathered, AMS is making the following
revisions to the U.S. Standards for Grades of Apples:
Section 51.300 U.S. Extra Fancy: Revised to exempt the
Fuji variety from scoring of smooth net-like russeting as a defect.
Section 51.301 U.S. Fancy: Revised to exempt the Fuji
variety from scoring of smooth net-like russeting as a defect.
Section 51.302 U.S. No. 1: Revised to exempt the Fuji
variety from scoring of smooth net-like russeting as a defect. The
revision of the U.S. No. 1 grade also will affect the U.S. No. 1 Hail
(Sec. 51.302(a)) grade and the permitted combination grades (Sec.
51.304).
Section 51.305 Color Requirements: Revised to remove
obsolete references to the location where color standards may be
examined and purchased.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), AMS has considered the
economic impacts of the revision to the U.S. Standards for Grades of
Apples (7 CFR 51.300-51.322). The purpose of the RFA is to structure
regulatory actions such that small businesses will not be unduly or
disproportionately burdened. Accordingly, AMS has prepared this
regulatory flexibility analysis.
The revision will result in a minor change to the current U.S.
standards to allow smooth net-like russeting of the Fuji variety of
apple. There will be little
[[Page 51941]]
or no additional cost to implement this revision.
According to the Small Business Administration (SBA) (13 CFR
121.601), the definition of a small apple producer is one whose annual
sales are less than $750,000. Based on this definition, data from the
2012 Agricultural Census show that at least 94 percent of farm
operations that produce apples are considered small. These small
growers will not be disproportionately affected by the rule as all
changes to the standard will be applied uniformly on all market
participants.
The proposal for the change to the U.S. Standards for Grades of
Apples was submitted by the NHC, which represents apple growers,
packers, and shippers in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho who account for
75 percent of domestic fresh apple production. This proposal was
reviewed by the U.S. Apple Association and the U.S. Apple Export
Council. The addition of smooth net-like russeting to the list of
features that are not scorable against Fuji apples in the U.S.
Standards for Grades of Apples will promote consistency in apple
grading, increase U.S. Fuji apple access into export markets, and
provide for greater price stability for the Fuji variety of apples.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 51
Food grades and standards, Fruits, Nuts, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Vegetables.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 51 is amended as
follows:
PART 51--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621--1627.
0
2. Revise Sec. 51.300 to read as follows:
Sec. 51.300 U.S. Extra Fancy.
``U.S. Extra Fancy'' consists of apples of one variety (except when
more than one variety is printed on the container) which are mature but
not overripe, clean, fairly well formed, free from decay, internal
browning, internal breakdown, soft scald, scab, freezing injury,
visible watercore, and broken skins. The apples are also free from
injury caused by bruises, brown surface discoloration, smooth net-like
russeting, sunburn or sprayburn, limb rubs, hail, drought spots, scars,
disease, insects, or other means. The apples are free from damage
caused by bitter pit or Jonathan spot and by smooth solid, slightly
rough or rough russeting, or stem or calyx cracks, as well as damage by
invisible watercore after January 31st of the year following the year
of production except for the Fuji variety of apples. Invisible
watercore and smooth net-like russeting shall not be scored against the
Fuji variety of apples under any circumstances. For the apple varieties
listed in table 1 of Sec. 51.305, each apple of this grade has the
amount of color specified for the variety. (See Sec. Sec. 51.305 and
51.306.)
0
3. Revise Sec. 51.301 to read as follows:
Sec. 51.301 U.S. Fancy.
``U.S. Fancy'' consists of apples of one variety (except when more
than one variety is printed on the container) which are mature but not
overripe, clean, fairly well formed, and free from decay, internal
browning, internal breakdown, soft scald, freezing injury, visible
watercore, and broken skins. The apples are also free from damage
caused by bruises, brown surface discoloration, russeting, sunburn or
sprayburn, limb rubs, hail, drought spots, scars, stem or calyx cracks,
disease, insects, bitter pit, Jonathan spot, or damage by other means,
or invisible watercore after January 31st of the year following the
year of production, except for the Fuji variety of apples. Invisible
watercore and smooth net-like russeting shall not be scored against the
Fuji variety of apples under any circumstances. For the apple varieties
listed in table 1 of Sec. 51.305, each apple of this grade has the
amount of color specified for the variety. (See Sec. Sec. 51.305 and
51.306.)
0
4. Amend Sec. 51.302 by revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 51.302 U.S. No. 1.
``U.S. No. 1'' consists of apples which meet the requirements of
U.S. Fancy grade except for color, russeting, and invisible water core.
In this grade, less color is required for all varieties listed in table
1 of Sec. 51.305. Apples of this grade are free from excessive damage
caused by russeting which means that apples meet the russeting
requirements for U.S. Fancy as defined under the definitions of
``damage by russeting,'' except the aggregate area of an apple which
may be covered by smooth net-like russeting shall not exceed 25
percent; and the aggregate area of an apple which may be covered by
smooth solid russeting shall not exceed 10 percent: Provided, That, in
the case of the Yellow Newtown or similar varieties, the aggregate area
of an apple which may be covered with smooth solid russeting shall not
exceed 20 percent; and that smooth net-like russeting shall not be
scored against the Fuji variety under any circumstances. Each apple of
this grade has the amount of color specified in Sec. 51.305 for the
variety. Invisible watercore shall not be scored in this grade. (See
Sec. Sec. 51.305 and 51.306.)
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 51.305, remove the two undesignated introductory paragraphs
and add paragraphs (a) and (b) in their place to read as follows:
Sec. 51.305 Color requirements.
(a) In addition to the requirements specified for the grades set
forth in Sec. Sec. 51.300 through 51.304, apples of these grades shall
have the percentage of color specified for the variety in table 1 of
this section. All apple varieties other than those appearing in table 1
of this section shall have no color requirements pertaining to these
grades. For the solid red varieties, the percentage stated refers to
the area of the surface which must be covered with a good shade of
solid red characteristic of the variety: Provided, That an apple having
color of a lighter shade of solid red or striped red than that
considered as a good shade of red characteristic of the variety may be
admitted to a grade, provided it has sufficient additional area covered
so that the apple has as good an appearance as one with the minimum
percentage of good red characteristic of the variety required for the
grade. For the striped red varieties, the percentage stated refers to
the area of the surface in which the stripes of a good shade of red
characteristic of the variety shall predominate over stripes of lighter
red, green, or yellow. However, an apple having color of a lighter
shade than that considered as a good shade of red characteristic of the
variety may be admitted to a grade, provided it has sufficient
additional area covered so that the apple has as good an appearance as
one with the minimum percentage of stripes of a good red characteristic
of the variety required for the grade. Faded brown stripes shall not be
considered as color.
(b) Color standards USDA Visual Aid APL-CC-1 (Plates a-e) consists
of a folder containing the color requirements for apples set forth in
paragraph (a) of this section and five plates illustrating minimum good
shade of solid red or striped red color, minimum compensating color and
shade not considered color, for the following 12 varieties: Red
Delicious, Red Rome, Empire, Idared, Winesap, Jonathan, Stayman,
McIntosh, Cortland, Rome Beauty, Delicious, and York. The color
standards are available for purchase at https://www.ams.usda.gov.
* * * * *
[[Page 51942]]
Dated: September 18, 2019.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-20570 Filed 9-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
