[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 169 (Thursday, September 1, 1994)] [Unknown Section] [Page 0] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 94-21635] [[Page Unknown]] [Federal Register: September 1, 1994] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 7 CFR Part 922 [Docket No. FV94-922-1FIR] Apricots Grown in Designated Counties in Washington; Revision in Container Regulations 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 the interim final rule that revised container regulations for apricots shipped to fresh market outlets under Marketing Order No. 922. This rule gives handlers greater flexibility in selecting containers to meet their packaging needs by eliminating the inside dimension requirements on each type of container that has a minimum apricot net weight requirement. This rule eliminates reference to the obsolete lidded four-basket crate, and replaces the term ``closed L.A. lugs and equivalent cartons'' with the term ``closed containers'' to simplify wording and improve clarity. This rule also includes a correction to the container regulations which had previously appeared in the Federal Register as a final rule, but did not appear in the annual Code of Federal Regulations. EFFECTIVE DATE: October 3, 1994. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark J. Kreaggor, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 2523-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-5127; or Teresa Hutchinson, Northwest Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, 1220 SW Third Avenue, Room 369, Portland, OR 97204; telephone: (503) 326-2724. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Order No. 922 [7 CFR Part 922], regulating the handling of apricots grown in designated counties in Washington, hereinafter referred to as the order. This order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended [7 U.S.C. 601-674], hereinafter referred to as the Act. The Department of Agriculture (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 608c(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 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 the Secretary will 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 a 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 the 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 55 handlers of Washington apricots that are subject to regulation under the marketing order. In addition, there are approximately 400 producers in the regulated area. Small agricultural service firms, which include handlers of Washington apricots, have been 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 are defined as those whose annual receipts are less than $500,000. A majority of these handlers and producers may be classified as small entities. Section 922.52 [7 CFR 922.52] authorizes the issuance of regulations for grade, size, quality, maturity, pack, markings, and container for any variety or varieties of apricots grown in any district or districts of the production area. Section 922.53 [7 CFR 922.53] authorizes the modification, suspension, or termination of regulations issued under section 922.52. Container regulations are currently in effect under section 922.306. This rule finalizes an interim final rule that eliminated references to inside dimensions for each type of container that has a minimum apricot net weight requirement. This rule also finalizes the removal of references to the obsolete lidded four-basket crate and replaces the term ``closed L.A. lugs and equivalent cartons'' with the term ``closed containers.'' The Washington Apricot Marketing Committee (Committee) met on December 15, 1993, and unanimously recommended elimination of inside dimension requirements for each type of container that has a minimum apricot net weight requirement. The Committee also unanimously recommended deleting reference in the container regulation to the lidded four-basket crate, and that the term ``closed L.A. lugs and equivalent cartons'' be replaced with the term ``closed containers.'' Handlers have experienced difficulty in packing many of the new, larger varieties of apricots, particularly in row-faced and tray-packed containers because of the inside dimension requirements in effect. Container height limits, for example, can cause a higher incidence of compression damage in large apricots that are row-faced or tray-packed. In addition, the inside dimension requirements have prevented handlers from using many generic containers used in other fruit and vegetable industries. This rule deletes references to designated container dimensions for each type of container that has a minimum apricot net weight requirement. The Committee believes that continued standardization of the minimum net weight requirements of the authorized containers is needed to prevent market confusion resulting from the use of deceptive containers. This rule allows handlers greater flexibility in packaging. By allowing different container dimensions, as long as the minimum weight requirements are met, handlers will have the flexibility to use containers commonly used in other fruit and vegetable industries, to use different containers for different varieties of apricots, and to develop new containers. This rule removes authority for the use of the obsolete lidded four-basket crate. The rule also removes reference in the regulation to the term ``closed L.A. lugs and equivalent cartons'' replacing it with the term ``closed containers.'' This change is intended only to simplify wording and improve clarity. This rule also corrects the container regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations for Apricots Grown in Designated Counties in Washington [7 CFR Part 922]. Changes to the container requirements appeared in the Federal Register [44 FR 37598, June 28, 1979] [Apricot Regulation 6, Amendment 4], but did not correspondingly appear in the annual Code of Federal Regulations. The interim final rule which revised container regulations for apricots shipped to fresh market outlets under Marketing Order No. 922, and included a correction to the container regulations which previously appeared in the Federal Register as a final rule, but did not appear in the annual Code of Federal Regulations, was published in the Federal Register [59 FR 30672, June 15, 1994]. That rule provided a 30-day comment period which ended July 15, 1994. No comments were received. Based on the above information, the Administrator of the AMS has determined that this final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. After consideration of all relevant matter presented, the information and recommendations submitted by the Committee, and other information, it is found that the finalization set forth below will tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 922 Apricots, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR Part 922 is amended as follows: PART 922--APRICOTS GROWN IN DESIGNATED COUNTIES IN WASHINGTON 1. Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR Part 922, which was published at 59 FR 30672 on June 15, 1994, is adopted as a final rule without change. Dated: August 25, 1994. Eric M. Forman, Acting Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division. [FR Doc. 94-21635 Filed 8-31-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
