[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 18, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12097]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: May 18, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 993
[Docket No. FV93-993-3FIR]
Dried Prunes Produced in California; Changes in Producer District
Boundaries
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a
final rule, without change, the provisions of an interim final rule
which realigned the boundaries of seven districts established for
independent producer representation on the Prune Marketing Committee
(Committee). Realigning the boundaries provides for more equitable
representation for those members, and makes provisions of the order
consistent with current industry demographics. This rule was
unanimously recommended by the Committee, the agency responsible for
local administration of the federal marketing order regulating dried
prunes produced in California.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 17, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Van Diest, Marketing
Specialist, California Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable
Division, AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street, suite 102B, Fresno,
California 93721; telephone: (209) 487-5901, or FAX (209) 487-5906; or
Valerie L. Emmer, Marketing Specialist, Marketing Order Administration
Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, room 2523-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC
20050-6456; Telephone: (202) 205-2829, or FAX (202) 720-5698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement and Order No. 993 (7 CFR part 993), as amended, regulating
the handling of dried prunes produced in California, hereinafter
referred to as the ``order.'' The order is effective under the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-
674), hereinafter referred to as the ``Act.''
The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive
Order 12866.
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, 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.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 8c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary 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 requesting a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. Such handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on
the petition. After the hearing the Secretary 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 in equity to review
the Secretary's ruling on the petition, provided a bill in equity is
filed not later than 20 days after the date of entry of the ruling.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service
(AMS) has considered the economic impact of this action on small
entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility.
There are approximately 20 handlers of dried prunes who are subject
to regulation under the dried prune marketing order and approximately
1,360 producers in the regulated area. Small agricultural service firms
are defined by the Small Business Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as
those whose annual receipts are less than $5,000,000, and small
agricultural producers have been defined as those having annual
receipts of less than $500,000. The majority of handlers and producers
of California dried prunes may be classified as small entities.
The interim final rule realigned the boundaries of the seven
districts established for independent producer representation on the
Committee. To be consistent with current industry demographics, the
interim rule ensured that, insofar as practicable, each district
represents an equal number of independent producers and an equal volume
of prunes grown by such producers. The change did not impose any
additional regulatory, informational, or cost requirements on handlers
or producers.
This rule finalizes an interim final rule which revised
Sec. 993.128 of Subpart--Administrative Rules and Regulations and was
based on a unanimous recommendation of the Committee and other
available information.
Section 993.24 of the order provides that the Committee shall
consist of 22 members, of which 14 shall represent producers, 7 shall
represent handlers, and one shall represent the public. The 14 producer
member positions are apportioned between cooperative producers and
independent producers in the same proportion, insofar as is
practicable, as the percentage of the total prune tonnage handled by
the cooperative and independent handlers during the year preceding the
year in which nominations are made is to the total handled by all
handlers. In recent years and currently, cooperative producers and
independent producers each have been eligible to nominate seven
members.
Section 993.28 of the order provides that, for independent
producers, the Committee shall, with the approval of the Secretary of
Agriculture, divide the production area into districts, giving, insofar
as practicable, equal representation throughout the production area by
numbers of independent producers and production of prune tonnage by
such producers. When revisions are required, the Committee must make
its recommendations to the Secretary of Agriculture to change the
district boundaries prior to January 31 of any year in which
nominations are to be made. Nominations are made in all even-numbered
years, including 1994.
The Committee recommended this change at its December 8, 1993,
meeting. Since the last redistricting in 1990, the number of producers
and volume of production in most districts changed, causing imbalances
among some districts. Thus, redistricting was needed to bring the
districts in line with order requirements and current California prune
industry demographics.
The interim final rule established Colusa and Glenn counties as
District 1 and added Tehama and Shasta counties to District 4. It also
moved the boundary between the central Sutter and southern Sutter
districts north from Oswald Road to Bogue Road, and made the central
Sutter County area a part of District 2. That rule also designated the
portion of District 4, which includes the San Joaquin Valley counties,
as District 7. That rule also added northern Sutter County to Butte
County which became a new District 5. District 6 continued to be Yuba
County.
The Committee calculated the percentage of total independent prune
growers and the percentage of total independent grower prune tonnage
for each proposed new district. The two percentages were averaged for
each district to determine a representation factor for each district.
The optimal representation factor was determined to be 14.29 percent
(100 percent divided by 7 districts).
The representation factors for the seven old and the seven new
districts are shown below, based on the 1992-93 crop year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representation factor
-------------------------
District Old New
districts districts
(percent) (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................. 7.52 12.81
2............................................. 21.02 14.89
3............................................. 11.07 15.09
4............................................. 14.27 12.78
5............................................. 9.15 16.67
6............................................. 16.10 16.10
7............................................. 20.88 11.67
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The redistricting recommendation was deemed to be desirable because
it allowed each district to approximate the optimal representation
factor, while maintaining a continuous geographic boundary for each
district. In addition, several of the districts whose representation
factors are below the optimum are expected to experience production
increases in the next few years which are likely to be above the
industry average.
The interim final rule which changed the boundaries of the
districts established for independent producer representation on the
Committee was issued on February 17, 1994, and published in the Federal
Register (59 FR 8517, February 23, 1994), with an effective date of
February 23, 1994. That rule provided a 30-day comment period which
ended March 25, 1994. No comments were received.
Based on the above, the Administrator of the AMS has determined
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
After consideration of all relevant material presented, including
the Committee's unanimous recommendation and other information, it is
found that finalizing the interim final rule, without change, will tend
to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 993
Marketing agreements, Plums, Prunes, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 993 is
amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 993 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
PART 993--DRIED PRUNES PRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA
2. Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR Part 993
which was published at 59 FR 8517 on February 23, 1994, is adopted as a
final rule without change.
Dated: May 12, 1994.
Robert C. Keeney,
Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 94-12097 Filed 5-17-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
