[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6307-6309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-3609]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
7 CFR Part 989
[FV95-989-5FIR]
Raisins Produced From Grapes Grown In California; Reduction in
the Production Cap for the 1996 Raisin Diversion Program for Natural
(sun-dried) Seedless Raisins
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 reduced the production cap for the 1996 Raisin Diversion Program
(RDP) for Natural (sun-dried) Seedless raisins. The production cap,
which limits the amount of raisin tonnage per acre for which an RDP
participant can receive credit, was reduced from 2.75 tons per acre to
2.2 tons per acre for this program. This reduction is intended to bring
the production cap for 1996 in line with 1995 production per acre,
which was approximately 20 percent smaller than the 1994 crop yield per
acre.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 21, 1996.
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 Mark A. Slupek, Marketing
Specialist, Marketing Order Administration Branch, Fruit and Vegetable
Division, AMS, USDA, room 2523-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-
6456; telephone: 202-205-2830.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule is issued under Marketing
Agreement and Order No. 989 (7 CFR part 989), both as amended,
regulating the handling of raisins produced from grapes grown 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 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 requesting a modification of the order or to be exempt
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/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 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.
[[Page 6308]]
There are approximately 20 handlers of California raisins who are
subject to regulation under the raisin marketing order, and
approximately 4,500 producers in the production area. Small
agricultural service firms have been defined by the Small Business
Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as those whose annual receipts (from
all sources) are less than $5,000,000, and small agricultural producers
are defined as those having annual receipts of less than $500,000. No
more than eight handlers, and a majority of producers, of California
raisins may be classified as small entities. Twelve of the 20 handlers
subject to regulation have annual sales estimated to be at least
$5,000,000, and the remaining eight handlers have sales less than
$5,000,000, excluding receipts from any other sources.
This rule finalizes the establishment of a production cap of 2.2
tons per acre for the 1996 RDP. This action was unanimously recommended
by the Raisin Administrative Committee (Committee), the body which
locally administers the order.
The interim final rule being finalized was issued on December 26,
1995, and published in the Federal Register (61 FR 100, January 3,
1996), with an effective date of January 3, 1996. That rule added a new
paragraph (t) to Sec. 989.156 of the rules and regulations in effect
under the order. That rule provided a 15-day comment period which ended
January 18, 1996. No comments were received.
The authority for the RDP and implementing rules and regulations
are specified in Sec. 989.56 and 989.156, respectively. The purpose of
the RDP is to give producers the means to voluntarily reduce their
raisin production. Each approved producer who has removed grapes in
accordance with rules and regulations receives a diversion certificate
from the Committee. Such certificates represent reserve tonnage raisins
equal to the amount of raisins diverted. That is, the certificates
represent the amount of grape acreage removed from production (for RDP
purposes) multiplied by the producer's previous crop year yield in tons
per acre, or multiplied by the production cap if the previous year's
actual yield exceeds the cap.
These certificates may be submitted by producers only to handlers.
The handler pays the producer for the free tonnage applicable to the
diversion certificate minus the established harvest cost for the entire
tonnage shown on the certificate. Factors reviewed by the Committee in
determining allowable harvest costs are specified in
Sec. 989.156(a)(1).
Any handler holding diversion certificates may redeem such
certificates with the Committee for reserve pool raisins. To redeem a
certificate, the handler must present the certificate to the Committee
and pay the Committee an amount equal to the established harvest costs
plus an amount equal to the payment for receiving, storing, fumigating,
handling, and inspecting reserve tonnage raisins specified in
Sec. 989.401 for the entire tonnage represented on the certificate.
The marketing order requires the Committee to meet on or before
November 30 of each crop year to review production data, supply data,
demand data, inventory, and other matters relating to the quantity of
raisins available to or needed by the market. If the Committee decides
that the current crop year's reserve pool has more than enough raisins
to meet projected market needs, it can announce the amount of such
excess eligible for diversion during the subsequent crop year. The
administrative rules and regulations established under the order
require that such announcement be made on or before November 30 of each
year.
A production cap of 2.75 tons of raisins per acre is established
under the order for any production unit of a producer approved for
participation in an RDP. When the diversion tonnage is announced, the
Committee may recommend, subject to the approval of the Secretary, that
the production cap for that RDP be less than 2.75 tons per acre. The
production cap limits the yield that a producer can claim and is
designed to allow most high yield producers to participate in an RDP.
When the cap was added to the marketing order in 1989, only 8 percent
of raisin producers exceeded the 2.75 tons per acre yield. Producers
who historically produce yields above the production cap can choose to
produce a crop rather than participate in a diversion program. No
producer is required to participate in an RDP.
A producer who wants to participate in an RDP must apply to the
Committee. The producer must specify, among other things, the raisin
production and the acreage covered by the application. The Committee
verifies producers' production claims using handler acquisition reports
and other available information. However, a producer could misrepresent
production by claiming that some raisins produced on one ranch were
produced on another, and use an inflated yield on the RDP application.
Thus, the production cap limits the amount of raisins for which a
producer participating in an RDP may be credited, and protects the
program from overstated production yields.
For example, a producer whose actual yield was 2.5 tons per acre
might claim that the yield was 3.5 tons per acre on the RDP
application. The current production cap would allow that producer to
receive a diversion certificate for 2.75 tons per acre, which is 0.25
tons above the actual yield but far less than the 1.0 ton which would
have been improperly credited if the diversion certificate had been
based on a yield of 3.5 tons per acre. The production cap reduces the
amount of inflated tonnage which could be improperly credited and
allows more producers to participate. When the production cap is more
in line with the actual yield per acre, the total quantity of raisins
available under the RDP can be allocated to more applicants. A producer
who actually produced 3.5 tons per acre might decide to produce a
raisin crop rather than apply for the RDP and be subject to the
production cap.
The Committee met on November 27, 1995, and reviewed data relating
to the quantity of reserve pool raisins and anticipated market needs.
The Committee decided that the 1995-96 reserve pool had more raisins
than necessary to meet projected market needs and announced that 20,000
tons of Natural (sun-dried) Seedless raisins would be eligible for
diversion under the 1996 RDP.
The 20,000 ton maximum eligible level was determined to be
inappropriate since later information indicated that the excess tonnage
in the 1995-96 reserve pool was not as large as had been earlier
expected. The Committee met again on December 18, 1995, and announced,
therefore, that applications from producers who intended to remove
their grape vines would be accepted, but that other applications would
be rejected. After reviewing the applications, the Committee determined
that approximately 2,221 tons of Natural (sun-dried) Seedless raisins
will be eligible for diversion under the 1996 RDP.
The Committee members also believed that the former production cap
was too high because 1995 crop year yields per acre were down 20
percent compared to 1994. The Committee, therefore, unanimously
recommended a reduction in the production cap of 20 percent, from 2.75
tons per acre to 2.2 tons per acre for the 1996 RDP, based on 1995
production. Reducing the production cap proportionately to the decrease
in yield per acre more
[[Page 6309]]
accurately reflected actual production yields during the 1995 crop
year.
The information collection requirement (i.e., the RDP application)
referred to in this rule has been previously approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35 and has been assigned OMB number 0581-0083.
Based on these considerations, 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 information presented,
including the Committee's recommendations and other information, it is
found that finalizing the interim final rule, without change, as
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 100, January 3, 1996) will
tend to effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 989
Grapes, Marketing agreements, Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR Part 989 is
amended to read as follows:
PART 989--RAISINS PRODUCED FROM GRAPES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
Accordingly, the interim final rule amending 7 CFR part 989, which
was published at 61 FR 100 on January 3, 1996, is adopted as a final
rule without change.
Dated: February 12, 1996.
Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,
Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 96-3609 Filed 2-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P