[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 81 (Monday, April 27, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23248-23252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08395]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 1210

[Document Number AMS-SC-19-0109]


Watermelon Research and Promotion Plan; Realignment

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposal invites comments on realigning the 
representation on the National Watermelon Promotion Board (Board) 
prescribed in the Watermelon Research and Promotion Plan (Plan) by 
reducing the number of production districts and reducing the number 
importers on the Board, accordingly. This action would contribute to 
effective administration of the program.

DATES: Comments must be received by May 27, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning this proposed rule. All comments must be submitted through 
the Federal e-rulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov and 
should reference the document number and the

[[Page 23249]]

date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register. All 
comments submitted in response to this proposed rule will be included 
in the rulemaking record and will be made available to the public. 
Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities 
submitting comments will be made public on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy Jones King, Agricultural 
Marketing Specialist, Promotion and Economics Division, Specialty Crops 
Program, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Room 1406-S, Stop 
0244, Washington, DC 20250-0244; telephone: (202) 731-2117; facsimile: 
(202) 205-2800; or electronic mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This proposal affecting 7 CFR part 1210 is 
authorized under the Watermelon Research and Promotion Act (Act) (7 
U.S.C. 4901-4916).

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all 
costs and benefits of 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. 
This action falls within a category of regulatory actions that the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) exempted from Executive Order 
12866 review. Additionally, because this rule does not meet the 
definition of a significant regulatory action it does not trigger the 
requirements contained 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 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 and would not 
have significant Tribal implications.

Executive Order 12988

    This proposal has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil 
Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. The Act 
provides that it shall not affect or preempt any other State or Federal 
law authorizing promotion or research relating to an agricultural 
commodity.
    Under section 1650 of the Act (7 U.S.C. 4909), a person may file a 
written petition with USDA if they believe that the Plan, any provision 
of the Plan, or any obligation imposed in connection with the Plan, is 
not in accordance with the law. In any petition, the person may request 
a modification of the Plan or an exemption from the Plan. The 
petitioner will have the opportunity for a hearing on the petition. 
Afterwards, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) will issue a decision. If 
the petitioner disagrees with the ALJ's ruling, the petitioner has 30 
days to appeal to the Judicial Officer, who will issue a ruling on 
behalf of USDA. If the petitioner disagrees with USDA's ruling, the 
petitioner may file, within 20 days, an appeal in the U.S. District 
Court for the district in which the petitioner resides or conducts 
business.

Background

    This proposal invites comments on realigning the Board's 
representation and procedures under the Plan. The Board administers the 
Plan with oversight by USDA. The Plan is a nationally coordinated 
program of research, development, advertising, and promotion designed 
to strengthen the watermelon's position in the marketplace and to 
establish, maintain, and expand markets for watermelons. The program is 
financed by assessments on producers growing 10 acres or more of 
watermelons, handlers of watermelons, and importers of 150,000 pounds 
of watermelons or more per year. The Plan specifies that handlers are 
responsible for collecting and submitting both the producer and handler 
assessments to the Board, reporting their handling of watermelons, and 
maintaining records necessary to verify their reporting(s). Importers 
are responsible for payment of assessments to the Board on watermelons 
imported into the United States through U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (Customs).
    This proposal invites comments on realignment of the Board by 
reducing the number of production districts under the Plan for producer 
and handler representation on the Board, and proportionally reducing 
the number of importer seats on the Board from twelve to nine. The 
Board administers the Plan with oversight by USDA. These changes were 
recommended by the Board after a review of the production volume and 
assessments paid in each production district as well as the assessments 
paid by importers. The Plan requires that such a review be conducted at 
least every 5 years. These changes would help facilitate program 
operations and the Board voted to forward this recommendation to the 
Secretary at their October 26, 2019 meeting.
    Section 1210.320(a) of the Plan specifies that the Board shall be 
comprised of producers, handlers, importers, and one public 
representative appointed by the Secretary. Pursuant to Sec.  
1210.320(b), the Plan originally divided the United States into seven 
districts of comparable production volumes of watermelons, and each 
district was allocated two producer members and two handler members. 
Section 1210.320(d) specifies that importer representation on the Board 
shall be proportionate to the percentage of assessments paid by 
importers to the Board, except that at least one representative of 
importers shall serve on the Board.
    The current Board is comprised of 41 members--14 producers (two 
from each district), 14 handlers (two from each district), 12 
importers, and one public member.

Review of U.S. Districts

    Section 1210.320(c) requires the Board, at least every five years, 
to review the districts to determine whether realignment is necessary. 
In conducting the review, the Board must consider: (1) The most recent 
three years of USDA production reports or Board assessment reports if 
USDA production reports are unavailable; (2) shifts and trends in 
quantities of watermelon produced, and (3) other relevant factors. As a 
result of the review, the Board may recommend to USDA that the 
districts be realigned.
    Pursuant to Sec.  1210.501 of the Plan, the seven current districts 
are as follows:
    District 1--The State of Florida;
    District 2--The States of Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia;
    District 3--The State of Georgia;
    District 4--The States of Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, 
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, 
New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, and 
Washington, DC;
    District 5--The State of California;
    District 6--The State of Texas;

[[Page 23250]]

    District 7--The States of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, 
Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, 
Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North 
Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
    The districts listed above were recommended by the Board in 2016 
and established through rulemaking by USDA in 2017 (82 FR 44966).
    In 2019, the Board's Executive Committee conducted a review of the 
U.S. watermelon production districts to determine whether realignment 
was necessary. The committee held teleconferences on August 14 and 
September 11, 2019, and reviewed production data for 2016, 2017 and 
2018 from USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service's (NASS) 
Vegetables Annual Summary for 2018 and Market News Reports. Due to 
changes in the geographical coverage of USDA's data collection on 
watermelon production, Board assessment data was used for the states 
for which USDA data was not available. To protect personally 
identifiable information (PII) of watermelon producers and handlers, 
the average of 2016-2018 assessment data was converted to a percentage 
of production. The combined data is shown in Table 1 below.

 Table 1--State Production Based on USDA and Board Assessment Data 2016-
                                  2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          % of 3-year
                        State                           average of U.S.
                                                           production
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama..............................................                0.2
Arizona..............................................                2.9
Arkansas.............................................                0.8
California...........................................               13.8
Colorado.............................................                0.4
Delaware.............................................                2.8
Florida..............................................               17.9
Georgia..............................................               18.0
Hawaii...............................................                0.1
Illinois.............................................                1.8
Indiana..............................................               10.6
Kentucky.............................................                0.2
Louisiana............................................                0.1
Maryland.............................................                1.9
Michigan.............................................                2.3
Mississippi..........................................                0.2
Missouri.............................................                4.3
Nebraska.............................................                0.2
New Mexico...........................................                0.6
New York.............................................                0.6
North Carolina.......................................                4.0
Ohio.................................................                0.1
Oklahoma.............................................                0.2
Oregon...............................................                1.0
South Carolina.......................................                1.8
Texas................................................               11.8
Virginia.............................................                0.3
Washington...........................................                1.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon review, the Board recommended at their October 26, 2019 
meeting to reduce the number of U.S. production districts from seven to 
five, thus eliminating two districts, retaining two districts as drawn, 
and creating three new districts. The proposed districts would be as 
follows:
    District 1--The State of Florida (no change);
    District 2--The State of Georgia (formerly District 3).
    District 3--The States of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, 
Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and 
Texas.
    District 4--The States of Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, 
Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, New 
Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, 
West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Washington, DC.
    District 5--The States of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, 
Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, 
Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, 
Washington, and Wyoming.
    As shown in Table 2, each district would represent, on average, 20 
percent of the total U.S. production, with a range of approximately 18 
to 24.5 percent. USDA has reviewed NASS, Market News, and Board 
assessment data, and as shown in Table 2, determined that the 
production estimates are consistent with the Board's recommendation.

                          Table 2--Proposed Percent of U.S. Production by District \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               USDA analysis
                  District                    Board data (%)        (%)                 Difference (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...........................................            17.8            18.2  +0.4
2...........................................            18.0            18.0  None.
3...........................................            19.0            19.2  +0.2
4...........................................            20.6            20.7  +0.1
5...........................................            24.5            23.9  -0.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 1210.501 of the Plan would be revised accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Table values were rounded to the nearest percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Review of Imports

    Section 1210.320(e) of the Plan requires USDA to evaluate the 
average annual percentage of assessments paid by importers during the 
three-year period preceding the date of the evaluation and adjust, to 
the extent practicable, the number of importer representatives on the 
Board.
    Table 4 below shows domestic and import assessment data for 
watermelons for the years 2016, 2017 and 2018. The data is from the 
Board's financial audits for 2016, 2017 \2\ and 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ National Watermelon Promotion Board, Financial Statements 
and Supplementary Information, Years Ending March 31, 2016, 2017, 
and 2018, BDO USA, LLP.

                             Table 4--U.S. and Import Assessment Data for 2016-2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Domestic (U.S.)
                  Year                            assessments             Import assessments           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2016....................................  $2,319,704................  $1,172,834................      $3,492,538
2017....................................  2,347,522.................  1,049,875.................       3,397,397
2018....................................  2,311,116.................  1,041,244.................       3,352,360

[[Page 23251]]

 
3-Year Average..........................  2,326,114.................  1,087,984.................       3,414,098
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Percent of Total....................  68 percent................  32 percent................  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on this data, the three-year average annual import 
assessments for watermelons for 2016-2018 was $1,087,984, approximately 
32 percent of the Board's assessment income. To make the number of 
importers on the Board proportionate to the assessments paid as well as 
to the percentages of U.S. watermelon produced by the reduced number of 
production districts, the number of importers should decrease from 
twelve to nine members.
    In order to clearly summarize the change in board membership for 
producers, handlers, and importers, Sec.  1210.502 of the Plan would be 
revised to reflect the new composition of the Board.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 
601-612), AMS is required to examine the economic impact of the 
proposed rule on the small entities. Accordingly, AMS has considered 
the economic impact of this action on such entities.
    The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of 
businesses subject to such actions so that small businesses will not be 
disproportionately burdened. The Small Business Administration defines, 
in 13 CFR part 121, small agricultural producers as those having annual 
receipts of no more than $1,000,000 and small agricultural service 
firms (handlers and importers) as those having annual receipts of no 
more than $30 million.
    According to the Board, there are 505 producers, 140 handlers, and 
252 importers who were required to pay assessments under the Plan in 
2018. NASS data for the 2018 crop year estimated about 350.5 
hundredweight (cwt.) of watermelons were produced per acre in the 
United States, and the 2018 grower price was $16.90 per cwt.\3\ Thus, 
the value of watermelon production per acre in 2018 averaged about 
$5,923 (350.5 cwt. x $16.90). At that average price, a producer would 
have to farm over 169 acres to receive an annual income from 
watermelons of $1,000,000 ($1,000,000 divided by $5,923 per acre equals 
approximately 169 acres). Using 2017 USDA Census of Agriculture data, a 
maximum of 119 farms had watermelon acreage greater than or equal to 
250 acres, and 13,401 out of a total of 13,520 farms producing 
watermelons reported less than 250 acres of watermelon on their 
farms.\4\ Therefore, assuming watermelon producers operate no more than 
one farm, a majority (99 percent) of all U.S. watermelon farms would be 
classified as small businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Vegetables, 2018 Summary, March 2019, USDA, p. 10.; https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/02870v86p/gm80j322z/5138jn50j/vegean19.pdf.
    \4\ 2017 Census of Agriculture, April 11, 2019, USDA, National 
Agricultural Statistics Service, p. 39; https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/Full_Report/Volume_1,_Chapter_1_US/usv1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also based on the Board's data, using a price of $0.169 per pound 
and the number of pounds handled annually, none of the watermelon 
handlers have receipts over the $30 million threshold.5 6 
Therefore, all watermelon handlers would be considered small 
businesses. A handler would have to ship over 177 million pounds of 
watermelons to be considered large (177,514,793 x $0.169 f.o.b. equals 
approximately $30,000,000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Vegetables, 2018 Summary, March 2019, USDA, https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/02870v86p/gm80j322z/5138jn50j/vegean19.pdf.
    \6\ National Watermelon Promotion Board assessment records, 
2016-2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on 2018 Customs data, over 99 percent of watermelon importers 
shipped less than $30 million worth of watermelons that year. Based on 
the foregoing, the majority of watermelon producers, handlers and 
importers that would be affected by this proposed rule would be 
classified as small entities.
    Regarding the value of the commodity, based on 2018 NASS data, the 
value of the U.S. watermelon crop was about $656.6 million.\7\ 
According to Customs data, the value of 2018 imports was about $312.4 
million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Vegetables, 2018 Summary, March 2019, USDA, p. 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposal invites comments on revising Sec. Sec.  1210.321, 
1210.423, 1210.501 and 1210.502 of the Plan to reduce the number of 
U.S. production districts from seven to five, thus eliminating two 
districts, retaining two districts as drawn, and creating three new 
districts. Accordingly, Sec.  1210.320 requires the number of importer 
members to also decrease proportionately from 12 to 9 members, for a 
total of 30 Board members.
    The Plan currently divides the United States into seven districts 
of comparable production volumes of watermelons, and each district is 
allocated two producer members and two handler members. Further, 
importer representation on the Board must be, to the extent 
practicable, proportionate to the percentage of assessments paid by 
importers, except there must be at least one importer on the Board.
    At least every five years, the Board is required to evaluate, based 
on the preceding three-year period, the average production in each 
production district and the average annual percentage of assessments 
paid by importers. The Board conducted this review in 2019 and 
recommended reducing the number of districts from seven to five. 
Authority for these changes is provided in Sec.  1210.320 of the Plan.
    Regarding the economic impact of the proposed rule on affected 
entities, neither the reduction in the number of production districts 
nor the reduction in Board membership imposes any additional costs on 
industry members. The recommended changes are necessary to improve the 
Board's ability to ensure both a quorum at Board meetings and a 
sufficient number of potential nominees. Further, the accompanying 
reduction of importer seats from twelve to nine provides for the 
equitable representation of producers, handlers and importers on the 
Board.
    Regarding alternatives, the Board considered two scenarios in 
realigning the districts. Scenario 1 would divide the U.S. into four 
production districts, and Scenario 2 would divide the U.S. into five 
production districts. In accordance with the Plan, both scenarios 
preserve the composition of 2 producers and 2 handlers per district. 
Ultimately the Board recommended Scenario 2, retaining the State of 
Florida as District 1, changing the district designation for Georgia 
from District 3 to District 2, and creating new Districts 3, 4, and 5 
as follows:

[[Page 23252]]

    (a) District 3 would be comprised of the States of Alabama, 
Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South 
Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas;
    (b) District 4 would be comprised of the States of Connecticut, 
Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Maine, 
Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 
Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and 
Washington, DC; and
    (c) District 5 would be comprised of the States of Alaska, Arizona, 
California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, 
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South 
Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
    In accordance with Sec.  1210.320, the Board recommended the 
alignment scenario described in this proposed rule because it: (1) 
Would provide for a proportional geographical representation on the 
Board for producers and handlers; (2) would not create any producer or 
handler vacancies on the Board; and (3) would increase the pool of 
candidates to be considered for appointment to the Board by the 
Secretary.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), the Plan's information collection and recordkeeping 
requirements have been approved previously under OMB number 0581-0093. 
This proposed rule would not result in a change to the information 
collection and recordkeeping requirements previously approved and would 
impose no additional reporting requirements or recordkeeping burden on 
domestic producers, handlers, or importers of watermelon.
    As with all Federal promotion programs, reports and forms are 
periodically reviewed to reduce information requirements and 
duplication by industry and public sector agencies. Finally, USDA has 
not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 
conflict with this proposed rule.
    AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote 
the use of the internet and other information technologies to provide 
increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information 
and services, and for other purposes.
    Regarding outreach efforts, the Board's Executive Committee held 
teleconferences on August 14 and September 11, 2019 to review the 
production data to assess whether changes to the number of districts 
and district boundaries were warranted. All Board and committee 
meetings, including meetings held via teleconference, are open to the 
public and interested persons are invited to participate and express 
their views.
    AMS has performed this initial RFA analysis regarding the impact of 
these changes to the Plan on small entities and invites comments 
concerning potential effects of this action.
    USDA has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with and 
would effectuate the purposes of the Act.
    A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to 
respond to this proposal. All written comments received in response to 
this proposed rule by the date specified will be considered prior to 
finalizing this action.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1210

    Administrative practice and procedure, Advertising, Consumer 
information, Marketing agreements, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Watermelon promotion.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 1210 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 1210--WATERMELON RESEARCH AND PROMOTION PLAN

0
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 1210 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 4901-4916 and 7 U.S.C. 7401.

Subpart C--Rules and Regulations

0
2. Amend Sec.  1210.321 by revising the section heading and paragraph 
(f)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  1210.321  Realignment of districts.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) No State in a multi-State district shall have more than three 
producer and handler representatives concurrently on the Board.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  1210.403 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  1210.403  Voting procedures.

* * * * *
    (c) In multi-State districts, the convention chairperson will 
direct the eligible producer voters and handler voters from each State 
to caucus separately for the purpose of electing a State spokesperson 
for each group. Election of each State spokesperson shall be by simple 
majority of all individual voters in attendance. In lieu of written 
ballots, a State spokesperson may be elected by voice vote or a show of 
hands. The role of the State spokesperson is to coordinate State voting 
and to cast all State votes.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 1210.501 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  1210.501  Realignment of districts.

    In accordance with Sec.  1210.320(c) of the Plan, the districts 
shall be as follows:
    (a) District 1--The State of Florida.
    (b) District 2--The State of Georgia.
    (c) District 3--The States of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, 
Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and 
Texas.
    (d) District 4--The States of Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, 
Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, New 
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, 
Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Washington, DC.
    (e) District 5--The States of Alaska, Arizona, California, 
Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, 
Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, 
Washington, and Wyoming.
0
5. Section 1210.502 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  1210.502  Board members.

    The Board consists of 10 producers, 10 handlers, nine importers, 
and one public member appointed by the Secretary.

Bruce Summers,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-08395 Filed 4-24-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P