97-11164. Limes Grown in Florida and Imported Limes; Change in Regulatory Period and Minimum Size Requirements  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 82 (Tuesday, April 29, 1997)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 23185-23188]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-11164]
    
    
    ========================================================================
    Proposed Rules
                                                    Federal Register
    ________________________________________________________________________
    
    This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
    the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
    notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
    the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
    
    ========================================================================
    
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 1997 / 
    Proposed Rules
    
    [[Page 23185]]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
    
    Agricultural Marketing Service
    
    7 CFR Parts 911 and 944
    
    [Docket No. FV97-911-1PR]
    
    
    Limes Grown in Florida and Imported Limes; Change in Regulatory 
    Period and Minimum Size Requirements
    
    AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This proposal invites comments on proposed changes to the 
    regulatory period and the minimum size requirements currently 
    prescribed under the lime marketing order and the lime import 
    regulations. The marketing order regulates the handling of limes grown 
    in Florida and is administered locally by the Florida Lime 
    Administrative Committee (committee). This rule would revoke the 
    suspension and maintain continuous, year round, implementation of 
    regulations. This proposed rule would also increase the minimum size 
    requirement from 1\7/8\ to 2 inches in diameter for the month of June. 
    This would result in the 2 inch minimum being required from January 1 
    through June 30 of each year. This rule would maintain and improve 
    quality standards ensuring continued customer satisfaction with fresh 
    limes. The changes in import requirements are necessary under section 
    8e of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937.
    
    DATES: Comments must be received by May 29, 1997.
    
    ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
    concerning this proposal. Comments must be sent in triplicate to the 
    Docket Clerk, Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, room 2525-S, 
    P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456, Fax: (202) 720-5698. All 
    comments should reference the docket number and the date and page 
    number of this issue of the Federal Register and will be available for 
    public inspection in the Office of the Docket Clerk during regular 
    business hours.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aleck Jonas, Southeast Marketing Field 
    Office, Marketing Order Administration Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 
    2276, Winter Haven, Florida 33883; telephone: (941) 299-4770, Fax: 
    (941) 299-5169; or Caroline Thorpe, Marketing Order Administration 
    Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, room 2522-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 
    20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-8139, Fax: (202) 720-5698. Small 
    businesses may request information on compliance with this regulation 
    by contacting: Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch, 
    Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2525-S, 
    Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone: (202) 720-2491, Fax: (202) 720-
    5698.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal is issued under Marketing 
    Agreement No. 126 and Marketing Order No. 911 (7 CFR part 911), both as 
    amended, regulating the handling of limes, hereinafter referred to as 
    the ``order.'' The marketing agreement and order are effective under 
    the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 
    601-674), hereinafter referred to as the ``Act.''
        This proposed rule is also issued under section 8e of the Act, 
    which provides that whenever certain specified commodities, including 
    limes, are regulated under a Federal marketing order, imports of these 
    commodities into the United States are prohibited unless they meet the 
    same or comparable grade, size, quality, or maturity requirements as 
    those in effect for the domestically produced commodities.
        The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this rule in 
    conformance with Executive Order 12866.
        This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil 
    Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive effect. 
    This proposal 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 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 the Secretary's 
    ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20 
    days after date of the entry of the ruling.
        There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted 
    prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of import regulations 
    issued under section 8e of the Act.
        This proposal would make two changes to the regulations currently 
    prescribed under the lime marketing order and the lime import 
    regulations. The first change would revoke the temporary suspension of 
    regulations scheduled for June 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997. This 
    proposal would keep the regulations in effect throughout all of 1997 
    and thereafter. The second change would increase the minimum size from 
    1\7/8\ inches to 2 inches for the month of June. This change would 
    extend the current regulations requiring a minimum diameter of 2 inches 
    from January 1 through May 31 to January 1 through June 30.
        Section 911.48 of the lime marketing order provides authority to 
    issue regulations establishing specific pack, container, grade and size 
    requirements. These requirements are specified under Sections 911.311, 
    911.329 and 911.344. Currently, the requirements specified under 
    Sections 911.311, 911.329 and 911.344 are temporarily suspended from 
    June 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997.
        This rule would revoke the scheduled suspension of regulations from 
    June 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997. The committee met on February 
    5, 1997, and, on a unanimous vote, recommended terminating the 
    scheduled suspension.
        The suspension of regulations was first published, as a proposed 
    rule, in the May 8, 1996, Federal Register (60
    
    [[Page 23186]]
    
    FR 20754). A notice, published in the June 26, 1996, Federal Register 
    (61 FR 33047), extended the comment period of the proposed rule. The 
    final rule was published in the August 21, 1996, Federal Register (61 
    FR 43141).
        In its deliberations, the committee noted that this issue has been 
    argued and debated by the committee since its original proposal. Even 
    then, the committee was divided, passing the measure on a split vote of 
    six in favor and four opposed, January 10, 1996. Comments from growers 
    and grower/handlers concerning the changes in the proposed rule 
    expressed concern that the loss of regulation and the associated 
    quality standards would result in poor quality limes on the market and 
    consumer dissatisfaction.
        The committee, upon further discussion, shared these concerns. In 
    fact, the committee revisited the issue on April 17, 1996. After 
    deliberations on the possibilities of what could occur without 
    regulations, the committee recommended, on a vote of seven in support, 
    none against and one abstention, that the original proposal be modified 
    from a permanent change to a one year experiment. This action was taken 
    to provide the committee with an opportunity to study the effects the 
    suspension of the handling regulations would have on the industry and 
    market versus the cost savings derived from it.
        The change was originally to have begun on June 1, 1996. However, 
    an extended comment period, and the requested modifications to the 
    proposal itself, resulted in the start date being delayed to June 1, 
    1997. This one year delay in implementation has allowed the committee 
    time to reevaluate the need to suspend regulations.
        The proposed rule was issued in response to changes in the market, 
    rising costs of production and the cost of replanting in the aftermath 
    of Hurricane Andrew. The committee commented that when the change was 
    originally recommended on January 10, 1996, the industry's position and 
    future prospects appeared quite different from today. At that time, 
    many of the lime trees were less than 3 years old and too young to bear 
    fruit. These lime trees had been replanted after Hurricane Andrew. 
    Money was being expended on replanting and no revenue was coming in 
    from these young non-bearing trees. Further, last year citrus leaf 
    minor was a new threat to the lime trees and at that time predictions 
    called for expensive control methods that may or may not have worked. 
    Throughout the industry, the concern to save money was great, and the 
    suspension of regulations was thought to be a money saving avenue. By 
    reducing the regulatory period and its associated costs, the committee 
    hoped to provide a decrease in industry expenses. The committee hoped 
    the reduced costs of no regulations, no inspection fees and reduced 
    committee expenses, resulting from fewer meetings and less compliance 
    monitoring, would benefit the industry and foster growth.
        The industry's present situation is much improved over what it was 
    when the changes to the regulation were proposed and made final. The 
    young lime trees are now 3 and 4 years old and bearing fruit, resulting 
    in a larger crop and more revenue. Citrus leaf minor is far less a 
    threat than originally presumed, due, in part, to native insect 
    predation against it. This has resulted in less funds being required to 
    combat this pest.
        Also, the lime committee has operated off reserves this current 
    season with a zero assessment, and it has budgeted to work off reserves 
    with a zero assessment for the next season. This will result in 
    industry savings of approximately $75,000 each season. The committee 
    believes that all of these factors have eliminated the critical need 
    for the further cost savings which prompted the original request for 
    the change.
        Reviewing the past year, committee members stated that fresh limes 
    sold were generally plentiful and of good quality. However, they also 
    noted that even with quality regulations in effect, some poor quality 
    limes do reach the retail market. The committee is now concerned that 
    removing quality regulations, even for an experimental period, may 
    result in even larger quantities of poor quality fruit reaching the 
    retail market, resulting in consumer dissatisfaction and product 
    substitution. Committee members commented that past experience has 
    indicated the difficulty of enticing customers to return to a product 
    once substitution has taken place.
        Committee members maintain that although some poor quality limes 
    still appear on the market, the regulations have done much to reduce 
    the number and help provide uniform quality. This, in turn, has ensured 
    customer satisfaction with fresh limes which is a primary concern to 
    the industry. Thus, the committee believes the benefits of the quality 
    regulations outweigh the now diminished need to take action that would 
    result in cost savings.
        This proposed rule would also change the minimum size regulations 
    established under the order. This proposal would increase the minimum 
    size diameter from 1\7/8\ inches to 2 inches for the month of June. 
    This change would extend the current regulations requiring a minimum 
    diameter of 2 inches to January 1 through June 30, with 1\7/8\ inches 
    the standard for the remainder of the year. This change was recommended 
    by the committee, on a unanimous vote, at its February 5, 1997, 
    meeting.
        Section 911.344 of the regulations specifies that limes contain not 
    less than 42 percent juice by volume. This section was amended by a 
    final rule published on December 4, 1996, and effective on January 3, 
    1997, (61 FR 64255). That rule was intended to increase the minimum 
    size requirement for limes grown in Florida from 1\7/8\ inches to 2 
    inches in diameter during the period January 1 through May 31. The 
    December 4, 1996, rule when read with the May 8, 1996, proposed 
    suspension would result in a minimum size diameter of 2 inches for the 
    months of January through May. During that time prices are high and 
    quality lower, resulting in an incentive to pack lower quality fruit. 
    From January 1, 1996, through May 31, 1996, Florida shipped 50,365 
    bushels of limes, approximately 14 percent of the total, 362,289 
    bushels, shipped in 1996. Florida shipped 55,136 bushels of limes in 
    June 1996, approximately 14 percent of the total, 387,833 bushels, 
    shipped thus far in the 1996-97 season which ends in March.
        Limes that are 2 inches or larger in diameter have a higher juice 
    content than smaller limes. The larger limes have a greater chance of 
    meeting the 42 percent juice content requirement. Increasing the 
    minimum size to 2 inches in diameter would result in more fresh limes 
    meeting the 42 percent juice content requirement. The larger size 
    should also reduce the number of limes failing inspection for low juice 
    content. This would help lower handling costs by reducing the expense 
    of repacking and regrading fruit that fails inspection.
        During committee deliberations, members commented that the current 
    2 inch minimum diameter rule has been well received by their customers. 
    Committee members expressed that the 2 inch requirement ends too early 
    in the season. The committee agreed that the problem with limes with 
    low juice content extends into June and July. Committee members were 
    concerned that customers would switch to a substitute product in place 
    of fresh limes after being disappointed with the lack of juice.
        The committee discussed increasing the minimum size requirements 
    for both June and July. The committee members noted that weather 
    conditions in South Florida are in transition during the month of July, 
    changing from relatively
    
    [[Page 23187]]
    
    dry, to increasing rains and tropical storms as the month progresses. 
    The increasing rains allow the smaller limes to contain more juice. 
    Unfortunately, the same rains cause larger limes to begin having 
    problems, such as stylar-end break down and yellowing. Also, limes left 
    on the tree to gain size can be lost during topical storms. Although 
    some retail samples in July had low juice content in the smaller limes, 
    committee members reasoned that the transitory weather conditions of 
    July and its corresponding problems support maintaining the current 
    minimum of 1\7/8\ for July. Therefore, the committee is recommending 
    that the 2 inch minimum diameter extension end June 30 with 1\7/8\ inch 
    minimum diameter the standard for the rest of the season.
        Section 8e of the Act provides that when certain domestically 
    produced commodities, including limes, are regulated under a Federal 
    marketing order, imports of that commodity must meet the same or 
    comparable grade, size, quality, and maturity requirements. Since this 
    rule would change the regulatory period and the minimum size 
    requirements under the domestic handling regulations, a corresponding 
    change to the import regulations must also be considered.
        Minimum grade and size requirements for limes imported into the 
    United States are currently in effect under Section 944.209 [7 CFR 
    944.209]. This proposed rule would revoke the temporary suspension 
    period scheduled for June 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997. This rule 
    would leave the lime import regulations in effect throughout 1997 and 
    thereafter. This proposal would also increase the minimum size 
    requirement for imported limes during the month of June. Under this 
    rule, the minimum size requirement for June would increase from the 
    current 1\7/8\ inches to 2 inches. This reflects the same changes that 
    would be made under the order for Florida limes. The minimum size and 
    grade requirements for Florida limes are specified in section 911.344 
    under marketing order 911. The minimum diameter size requirement is not 
    specifically stated in the lime import regulation. Therefore, no change 
    is needed in the text of Section 944.209.
        Mexico is the largest exporter of limes to the United States. 
    During the 1995-96 season, Mexico exported 5,591,451 bushels to the 
    United States, while all other import sources shipped a combined total 
    of 167,832 bushels during the same time period. From June 1, 1996, 
    through December 31, 1996, Mexico exported 4,151,867 bushels of limes 
    to the United States, approximately 71 percent of the total, 5,819,410 
    bushels, shipped thus far in the 1996-97 season ending in March. Mexico 
    exported 559,525 bushels of limes to the United States for the month of 
    June 1996, approximately 10 percent of the total, 5,819,410 bushels, 
    shipped thus far in the 1996-97 season.
        Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory 
    Flexibility Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has 
    considered the economic impact of this action on small entities. 
    Accordingly, AMS has prepared this regulatory flexibility analysis.
        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. Import regulations issued under 
    the Act are based on those established under Federal marketing orders.
        There are approximately 10 handlers subject to regulation under the 
    order and about 50 producers of Florida limes. There are approximately 
    35 importers of limes. Small agricultural service firms, which include 
    lime handlers and importers, 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, producers, and importers may be classified as small entities.
        Based on the Florida Agricultural Statistic Service and committee 
    data for the 1995-96 season, the average annual f.o.b. price for fresh 
    Florida limes during the 1995-96 season was $16.50 per 55 pound bushel 
    box equivalent for all domestic shipments, and the total shipments for 
    the 1995-96 season were 371,413. Approximately 20 percent of all 
    handlers handled 86 percent of Florida lime shipments. In addition, 
    many of these handlers ship other tropical fruit and vegetable products 
    which are not included in committee data but would contribute further 
    to handler receipts.
        Section 911.48 of the lime marketing order provides authority to 
    issue regulations establishing specific grade and size requirements, 
    and section 8e of the Act requires that when such regulations are in 
    effect for limes, the same or comparable requirements be applied to 
    imports.
        This proposal would change the regulatory period and the minimum 
    size requirements currently prescribed under the lime marketing order 
    and the lime import regulations. This rule would revise both the 
    domestic and import regulations by removing a scheduled, June 1, 1997, 
    through December 31, 1997, suspension of regulations and maintaining 
    continuous, year round, handling regulations. The regulations are 
    specified in sections 911.311, 911.329 and 911.344 and establish pack, 
    container, grade and size requirements. This proposed rule would also 
    increase the minimum size requirement from 1\7/8\ inches to 2 inches in 
    diameter for the month of June. The committee recommended these changes 
    to maintain and improve the quality of limes in the marketplace.
        This proposal is expected to have a positive impact on growers, 
    handlers and importers, as fruit and vegetable prices are quite 
    responsive to quality differentials. This action is intended to 
    maintain and improve quality. At the meeting, the committee discussed 
    the impact of this change on handlers and producers in terms of cost. 
    Any costs to handlers and importers caused by this proposal would be 
    the loss of projected savings from the suspension. The majority of 
    possible cost savings would have resulted from eliminating inspection 
    fees during the suspension.
        The scheduled suspension period would have only been effective for 
    one year, resulting in limited cost savings. The industry is already 
    used to budgeting for inspection and associated regulation costs. The 
    Federal/State Inspection Service assesses fees to provide their 
    service. The cost for inspection is equitable. Small and large handlers 
    are charged the same base rate, with the overall cost determined by a 
    handler's volume.
        During this season, and the season prior, the committee voted to 
    operate on reserves rather than assessing the industry. This will 
    result in an industry cost savings of approximately $75,000, the 
    approximate cost of operating the committee for a year, during each of 
    these two years. This will do much to offset any costs that result from 
    the revocation of the suspension period. Assessments, when they are 
    applied, are based on the amount of fruit handled, therefore, the costs 
    are borne proportionally by small and large operations. Consequently, 
    the benefits of no assessments are received equally. Importers do not 
    have to pay assessments to maintain the marketing order.
        Since the recommendation to establish the suspension period was
    
    [[Page 23188]]
    
    made, industry needs for cost savings have diminished. The focus has 
    shifted to the need for stable markets and returns. Customers are 
    willing to pay for quality, and complementary studies show that 
    customers return purchase rate declines considerably if they are 
    disappointed by the quality of the original purchase. The current cost 
    of inspection is $.14 per 55 pound equivalent. However, a drop in 
    quality could result in a price reduction measured in dollars rather 
    than cents on the same equivalent. Thus, the benefits of a quality 
    standard outweigh the minimal cost savings that may have resulted from 
    the suspension.
        The increase in the minimum size for June would also provide a cost 
    benefit. With an increase in the minimum size, limes are more likely to 
    meet the 42 percent minimum juice content requirement. This is expected 
    to reduce the incidence of repacking, resulting in lower costs to 
    handlers and importers. Maintaining and increasing quality to the 
    consumer would result in a strong and stable market, benefiting 
    growers, handlers and importers.
        Shipments of Florida limes for the 1994-95 season were 289,213 
    bushels, for the 1995-96 season they were 371,413 bushels, and for the 
    current 1996-97 season, though not complete, shipments through February 
    18, 1997, with 41 days remaining in the season, stand at 382,991 
    bushels. A steady increase in production is indicated. Mexican exports 
    have also increased from 2,626,707 bushels in the 1990-91 season to 
    5,591,451 bushels in the 1995-96 season.
        Committee members have considered alternatives to rescinding the 
    suspension period. The committee considered a continuous period of no 
    regulations for the months of June through December. They reconsidered 
    the merits of such an action, determining that removing regulations to 
    save money may have costs, such as lost market share, which would 
    overshadow any potential savings. The committee determined that in the 
    time that had passed since the original consideration of a suspension 
    period, the need for cost savings measures had passed, and that the 
    benefits of the quality standards outweighed the cost savings that may 
    have been realized. The committee was unanimous in its belief that the 
    need for the suspension has passed.
        Under the change in minimum size, the committee considered the 
    alternative of also changing the minimum size for July. While the 
    committee agreed that there are limes with low juice in July, there 
    were problems with increasing the minimum size requirement for that 
    month. During July, the weather begins to shift to more tropical 
    conditions. Rainfall increases, which adds juice to the limes, but it 
    also causes problems with the larger sized fruit. Because of these 
    problems, this alternative was rejected. Accordingly, the committee 
    unanimously recommended the changes as outlined.
        This action would not impose any additional reporting or 
    recordkeeping requirements on either small or large lime handlers. As 
    with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are 
    periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and 
    duplication by industry and public sector agencies.
        The Department has not identified any relevant Federal rules that 
    duplicate, overlap or conflict with this proposed rule. However, limes 
    must meet the requirements as specified in the U.S. Standards for 
    Grades of Persian Limes (7 CFR 51.1000 through 51.1016) issued under 
    the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621 through 1627).
        The committee's meeting was widely publicized throughout the lime 
    industry and all interested persons were invited to attend the meeting 
    and participate in committee deliberations on all issues. Like all 
    committee meetings, the February 5, 1997, meeting was a public meeting 
    and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on 
    these issues. The committee itself is composed of ten members, of which 
    four are handlers, five are producers and one is a public member. The 
    majority of committee members represent small entities. Finally, 
    interested persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory 
    and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.
        In accordance with section 8e of the Act, the United States Trade 
    Representative has concurred with the issuance of this proposed rule, 
    as it pertains to limes imported into the United States.
        A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to 
    respond to this proposal. All written comments timely received will be 
    considered before a final determination is made on this matter.
    
    List of Subjects
    
    7 CFR Part 911
    
        Limes, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping 
    requirements.
    
    7 CFR Part 944
    
        Avocados, Food grades and standards, Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports, 
    Kiwifruit, Limes, Olives, Oranges.
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 911 and 944 
    are proposed to be amended as follows:
        1. The authority citation for 7 CFR parts 911 and 944 continues to 
    read as follows:
    
        Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
    
    PART 911--LIMES GROWN IN FLORIDA
    
    
    Secs. 911.311, 911.329  [Amended]
    
        2. Scheduled suspension of Secs. 911.311 and 911.329 effective June 
    1, 1997, through December 31, 1997, is terminated.
    
    
    Sec. 911.344  [Amended]
    
        3. Scheduled suspension of Sec. 911.344, effective June 1, 1997, 
    through December 31, 1997, is terminated, and paragraph (a)(3) is 
    amended by removing the words ``at least 2 inches diameter'' and 
    adding, in their place, the words ``at least 2 inches in diameter from 
    January 1 through June 30, and at least 1\7/8\ inches in diameter from 
    July 1 through December 31''.
    
    PART 944--FRUITS, IMPORT REGULATIONS
    
    
    Sec. 944.209  [Amended]
    
        4. Scheduled suspension of Sec. 944.209 effective June 1, 1997, 
    through December 31, 1997, is revoked.
    
        Dated: April 25, 1997.
    Robert C. Keeney,
    Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
    [FR Doc. 97-11164 Filed 4-25-97; 1:54 pm]
    BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
04/29/1997
Department:
Agricultural Marketing Service
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
97-11164
Dates:
Comments must be received by May 29, 1997.
Pages:
23185-23188 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. FV97-911-1PR
PDF File:
97-11164.pdf
CFR: (2)
7 CFR 911.344
7 CFR 944.209