[Federal Register: June 4, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 107)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 33408-33412]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04jn03-32]
========================================================================
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.
========================================================================
[[Page 33408]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
7 CFR Parts 810
[Docket No. FGIS-2003-001]
United States Standards for Wheat.
AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS), a program of the
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA),
proposes to revise the United States Standards for Wheat to amend the
definition of the class Hard White wheat to insert subclasses. The
proposed rule would also change the definition of Contrasting Classes
for Hard Red Winter wheat and Hard Red Spring wheat. Additionally, the
rule will insert language into the wheat standard to specify the sample
size used to determine sample grade factors. These changes would
further help to facilitate the marketing of wheat.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 4, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted to Tess Butler at GIPSA,
USDA, STOP 3604, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-
3604; faxed to (202) 690-2755; or E-mailed to comments.gipsa@usda.gov.
Please indicate your comment refers to Docket No. FGIS-2003-001, United
States Standards for Wheat.
All comments received are available for public inspection at Room
1652, South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC,
during regular business hours (7 CFR 1.27 (b)).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick McCluskey, telephone (202)
720-4684 at GIPSA, USDA, STOP 3630, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC, 20250-3630; Fax Number (202) 720-1015.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866
The Department of Agriculture is issuing this rule in conformance
with Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This action is not intended to have a retroactive
effect. The United States Grain Standards Act provides in Section 87g
that no State or subdivision may require or impose any requirements or
restrictions concerning the inspection, weighing, or description of
grain under the Act. Otherwise, this proposed rule will not preempt any
State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present any
irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There are no administrative
procedures, which must be exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to
the provisions of this proposed rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
GIPSA has determined that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,
as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Under the provisions of the United States Grain Standards Act, grain
exported from the United States must be officially inspected and
weighed. Mandatory inspection and weighing services are provided by
GIPSA at 33 export facilities. All of these facilities are owned by
multi-national corporations, large cooperatives, or public entities
that do not meet the requirements for small entities established by the
Small Business Administration. Further, the regulations are applied
equally to all entities. The U.S. wheat industry, including producers
(approximately 240,000), handlers (approximately 6,800 domestic
elevators), traders (approximately 200 active wheat futures traders),
processors (approximately 184 flour mills), merchandisers and exporters
are the primary users of the U.S. Standards for Wheat and utilize the
official standards as a common trading language to market wheat. We
assume that some of the entities may be small. Further, the United
States Grain Standards Act (USGSA) (7 U.S.C. 87f-1) requires the
registration of all persons engaged in the business of buying grain for
sale in foreign commerce. In addition, those individuals who handle,
weigh, or transport grain for sale in foreign commerce must also
register. The USGSA regulations (7 CFR 800.30) define a foreign
commerce grain business as persons who regularly engage in buying for
sale, handling, weighing, or transporting grain totaling 15,000 metric
tons or more during the preceding or current calendar year. At present,
there are 90 registrants who account for practically 100 percent of
U.S. wheat exports, which for fiscal year (FY) 2002 totaled
approximately 24,073,138 metric tons (MT). While most of the 90
registrants are large businesses, we assume that some may be small.
Background
GIPSA established the class Hard White wheat on May 1, 1990. In the
Final Rule (54 FR 48735), FGIS stated ``that classification by varietal
kernel characteristics rather than vitreousness of the kernel is
practicable at this time for HWW and SWW since only a few hard
endosperm white white (sic) varieties are being produced. FGIS
recognizes that if more hard endosperm varieties are released into the
marketplace in the future, the classification system may become less
practical.'' FGIS further stated ``* * * if clear quality or market
distinctions develop * * * it would consider subclasses at a future
date''.
At that time, a minimum visual color line was established based on
the variety Klasic, which was produced in California. GIPSA abandoned
the Klasic color line in 1994, and in 1995 GIPSA issued Program
Bulletin 95-15 which in part stated that GIPSA would class all hard
endosperm white wheat as hard white. Due to pending release of a hard
white variety which closely resembled hard red spring, GIPSA, with
industry input and support, established a new color line in 1999
(Program Bulletin 99-8).
In 2001, environmental conditions caused a significant increase in
the vitreous kernel content, hence darker visual appearance in some
varieties of hard white, resulting in a GIPSA decision to suspend the
color line for classification purposes (Program Notice 01-06). The
rationale for abandoning the color line was that color had not been an
issue in hard white, as grain handlers efficiently segregated it from
[[Page 33409]]
red wheat. Producers received premiums for hard white where it was
appropriate and processors used the hard white primarily without
incident. In addition to the 2001 environmental effect on color, the
Hard White wheat market has been impacted by the introduction of many
new varieties released by both public and private breeding programs.
GIPSA proposes to amend the U.S. Standards for Wheat to better reflect
the current and future needs of the Hard White wheat market.
The specific issues for consideration in this rule are (1)
designation of subclasses in the class hard white, and (2) amending the
definition of Contrasting Classes in hard red wheat classes. While
proposing to amend the standards due to Hard White Wheat issues, GIPSA
will also propose to include language in the standards which states the
amount of wheat within which sample grade factors are determined. This
action is proposed to help clarify the application of the standards for
U.S. Sample Grade factors.
1. Subclass Designation
Under Program Notice 01-06, ``All hard white wheat varieties are
considered hard white wheat regardless of color.'' A common conception
is that the domestic milling industry will accept any hard white
regardless of seed coat color. This may or may not be true depending on
which milling company is being interviewed. Discussions with some U.S.
millers led to the conclusion that some millers do consider seed coat
color when making purchase and processing decisions. Some milling
companies do not yet process much Hard White wheat, thus have few
concerns about bran color, and feel if darker Hard White wheat
processes well and has acceptable protein content, there is no
perceived problem due to bran color.
Depending on the target flour product and the miller's flour
extraction goal, the darker colors can present processing challenges.
For some high extraction rate flours, darker seed coat color
anticipated darker flour color hence final product color problems,
requiring millers to add additional bleaching agents and/or cut flour
streams in order to meet final product specifications. These processes
add additional production costs.
In addition to the domestic millers' position, marketing of Hard
White wheat to export customers must be considered. Currently there is
interest in Hard White wheat from international customers. Many of
these customers view Australian wheat as the benchmark of seed coat
color. The major Asia-Pacific customers of U.S. wheat may not have an
incentive to purchase Hard White wheat if they view the seed coat color
as a detriment. Despite assigning the reason for darker color in 2001
to vitreous kernel content, a high percentage of which is perceived to
be a benefit in milling (e.g. dark northern spring and hard amber
durum), these customers may be hesitant to buy dark Hard White wheat
because it may not meet their processing needs. Other international
customers may have cultural considerations impacting purchase
decisions: red wheat is viewed as appropriate for feeding animals while
white wheat is viewed as appropriate for human food. The annual effect
of environment cannot be predicted, thus making it impossible to say
whether hard white from a given future harvest will be vitreous or not,
whether bran coat will be light or dark, and which varieties will be
more susceptible to environmental influences and genetic x
environmental interactions. One way to facilitate marketing of hard
white is to create subclasses which delineate a particular desirable
quality factor.
Subclasses tend to highlight positive quality factors. In the case
of Hard Red Spring and Durum wheat, subclasses based on vitreous kernel
content convey quality factors which are considered indicative of
improved performance, vis-[aacute]-vis milling yield, and premiums are
often paid to sellers for these improved performance factors. To
delineate the desirable nature of Hard White wheat including both
lighter and darker kernels, the subclass approach could be used for
Hard White wheat.
For Hard White wheat, the proposed subclass names are Hard White
wheat and Hard Amber White wheat, for wheat meeting and exceeding
(darker than) the interpretive color line, respectively. These names
descriptively reflect the appearance of the kernel color in the overall
sample. The naming of the subclasses maintains the convention utilized
for Soft White wheat, which includes the subclass Soft White Wheat.
2. Contrasting Classes
Contrasting classes and wheat of other classes are ``grade
determining'' factors. Contrasting classes in wheat essentially means
the presence of wheat of opposite color commingled with the dominant
class, thus white wheat is contrasting in red wheat and red wheat is
contrasting in white wheat. A special case is Durum wheat, which is
contrasting in all other market classes except Unclassed wheat, and all
other classes are contrasting in Durum wheat. Wheat of other classes
essentially means wheat of the same color but of different endosperm
texture or growth habit, thus soft red winter and hard red spring are
both wheat of other classes in the market class Hard Red Winter wheat.
Grade limits for contrasting classes are substantially tighter than
the grade limits for wheat of other classes (2.0 percent vs. 5.0
percent, respectively, at U.S. 2). The tighter grade limit for
contrasting classes is due to the perception that quality is
compromised by the appearance of a contrasting class and the potential
effect on flour color and end product color. In the case of durum
wheat, the reasons are the difference in milling behavior of durum, the
color of flour from durum and the need to make primarily semolina from
Durum wheat.
Commingling of hard white and hard red wheat is problematic
depending on which class is dominant. The presence of red wheat in
white wheat may degrade the visual appearance of the lot and may raise
quality concerns. Since Hard White wheat is a relatively new class, it
is important to keep its quality as high as possible in order to expand
its marketability, both domestically and internationally.
While flour functionality is not compromised, flour color and
enzymatic browning problems may result when these classes are
commingled. For some domestic millers, and most millers overseas, flour
color is more critical than flour ash. For example, millers selling
flour for Asian noodle manufacturing would be highly critical of the
presence of red wheat in white wheat, as final product color would be
jeopardized. These millers typically grind Australian wheat, which has
only white seed coats. While this currently applies primarily to non-
U.S. millers, noodles are growing in popularity globally and will
likely become an opportunity for U.S. millers in the future.
In the second case, red wheat contains the enzyme polyphenol
oxidase (PPO) which when activated, causes the color of a raw noodle to
become darker--a serious defect in noodle making. White wheat has much
lower PPO than red wheat, therefore causes negligible color change in
raw noodles. Minimizing the amount of red wheat in white wheat cargoes
is one way to improve the performance of Hard White wheat.
The presence of white wheat in red wheat is perceived by most as
different from the presence of red wheat in white wheat. It is useful
to examine the situation for classing wheat, especially contrasting
classes in hard red. The current practice is to select only distinct
white and lightly colored kernels as contrasting. Darker kernels are
left in
[[Page 33410]]
the sample and count as red wheat kernels.
Most flour milling companies have little to no concern over the
amount of Hard White wheat in a lot of hard red wheat. For these
millers, there would be no reason to consider hard white as a
contrasting class in hard red wheat. The proposed rule would change the
definition of Contrasting Classes for Hard Red Winter wheat and Hard
Red Spring wheat such that Hard White wheat is not a contrasting class
in these two red wheat classes.
The following tables illustrate the current and proposed changes
for contrasting classes.
Table I (Current)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary class
Minor class --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DU HRS HRW SRW HW SWH UNCL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DU ............. CCL CCL CCL CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
HRS CCL............ WOCL WOCL CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
HRW CCL WOCL ............ WOCL CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
SRW CCL WOCL WOCL ............ CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
HW CCL CCL CCL WOCL ............ WOCL WOCL
--------------
SWH CCL CCL CCL WOCL WOCL ............ WOCL
--------------
UNCL CCL CCL CCL CCL CCL CCL............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCL: Contrasting class.
WOCL: Wheat of other Classes.
Table II (Proposed)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary Class
Minor class --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DU HRS HRW SRW HW SWH UNCL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DU ............. CCL CCL CCL CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
HRS CCL............ WOCL WOCL CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
HRW CCL WOCL ............ WOCL CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
SRW CCL WOCL WOCL ............ CCL CCL WOCL
--------------
HW CCL WOCL WOCL WOCL ............ WOCL WOCL
--------------
SWH CCL CCL CCL WOCL WOCL ............ WOCL
--------------
UNCL CCL CCL CCL CCL CCL CCL............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCL: Contrasting class.
WOCL: Wheat of other Classes.
3. Sample Size for Sample Grade Factors
GIPSA has received inquiries about the portion size of wheat used
to determine Maximum Count Limits of Other Material such as stones,
crotalaria seeds, glass, etc., these being Sample Grade factors. In the
Official United States Standards for Grain (7 CFR part 810), subparts
for certain grains define this portion size. The procedures in the
Grain Inspection Handbook--Book II specify the portion size upon which
the determination of Other Materials is made on wheat. This proposed
change is needed because the standards should transmit this
information. Thus GIPSA proposes to amend subpart M to define this
amount.
Proposed GIPSA Action
GIPSA is issuing this proposed rule to invite comments and
suggestions from all interested persons on how GIPSA can further
enhance and best facilitate the marketing of Hard White wheat by
inserting subclasses. In addition, the proposed rule would also change
the definition of contrasting classes for Hard Red Winter wheat and
Hard Red Spring wheat, and specify the sample size used to determine
sample grade factors.
Subclass Designation
GIPSA is proposing to establish subclasses in Hard White wheat
called Hard White wheat and Hard Amber White wheat. Further, GIPSA will
use the existing interpretive color line as the benchmark for
determining subclass, whereby wheat darker than the interpretive color
line will be classed as Hard Amber White wheat.
To accomplish this, GIPSA proposes to revise Sec. 810.2202(a)(5)
to read: ``Hard White wheat. All hard endosperm white wheat varieties.
This class is divided into the following two subclasses:
(i) Hard White wheat. Wheat which is lighter than or equivalent in
color to the interpretive color line photograph.
(ii) Hard Amber White wheat. Wheat which is darker than the
interpretive color line photograph.''
Contrasting Classes
GIPSA is proposing to amend the grain standards to change the
definition of contrasting classes in Hard Red Winter wheat and Hard Red
Spring wheat such that Hard White wheat and
[[Page 33411]]
its subclasses are not contrasting classes but are considered as wheat
of other classes. The grade limit will remain unchanged. For kernel
identification, Hard White wheat kernels would be determined by visual
assessment and would include the dark colored, amber, white wheat
kernels, per the Grain Inspection Handbook, Book II, Chapter 13,
Section 13.26. In the case where samples challenge the normal visual
inspection process, the alkali test would be utilized to determine
kernel color (FGIS-Program Notice 01-07).
GIPSA proposes to revise Sec. 810.2202(b)(1) Contrasting Classes
to read: ``Durum wheat, Soft White wheat, and Unclassed wheat in the
classes Hard Red Spring wheat and Hard Red Winter wheat.''.
Sample Size
GIPSA is proposing to amend the grain standards for wheat to
specify the amount of wheat upon which sample grade factor
determinations are made. GIPSA proposes to amend Sec. 810.2204 Grade
and grade requirements of wheat to read: ``Other material in one
kilogram:'' under the sub-heading ``Maximum count limits of:''.
Comments, including data, views, and other information are
solicited from interested persons. Pursuant to section 4(b)(1) of the
United States Grain Standards Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 76(b)(1)), upon
request, such information concerning changes to the standards may be
presented orally in an informal manner. Also, pursuant to this section,
no standards established or amendments or revocations of standards are
to become effective less than one calendar year after promulgation
unless, in the judgement of the Secretary, the public health, interest,
or safety require that they become effective sooner.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 810
Export, Grain.
For reasons set out in the preamble 7 CFR Part 810 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 810--OFFICIAL UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR GRAIN
1. The authority citation for Part 810 continues to read as
follows:
Authority : Pub. L. 94-582, 90 Stat. 2867, as amended (7 U.S.C.
71 et seq.)
2. Section 810.2202 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(5) and
(b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 810.2202 Definition of other terms.
* * * * *
(5) Hard White wheat. All hard endosperm white wheat varieties.
This class is divided into the following two subclasses:
(i) Hard White wheat. Wheat which is lighter than or equivalent in
color to the interpretive color line photograph.
(ii) Hard Amber White wheat. Wheat which is darker than the
interpretive color line photograph.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Durum wheat, Soft White wheat, and Unclassed wheat in the
classes Hard Red Spring wheat and Hard Red Winter wheat.
* * * * *
3. Section 810.2204(a) is revised as follows:
Grades and Grade Requirements
Sec. 810.2204 Grades and grade requirements for wheat.
(a) Grades and grade requirements for all classes of wheat, except
Mixed wheat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grades U.S. Nos.
Grading factors -----------------------------------------------------------
1 2 3 4 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum pound limits of:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test weight per bushel:
Hard Red Spring wheat or White Club wheat....... 58.0 57.0 55.0 53.0 50.0
All other classes and subclasses................ 60.0 58.0 56.0 54.0 51.0
-----------------------------------------------------
Maximum percent limits of:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defects:
Damaged kernels:
Heat (part of total)........................ 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.0 3.0
Total....................................... 2.0 4.0 7.0 10.0 15.0
Foreign material................................ 0.4 0.7 1.3 3.0 5.0
Shrunken and broken kernels..................... 3.0 5.0 8.0 12.0 20.0
Total \1\................................... 3.0 5.0 8.0 12.0 20.0
Wheat of other classes: \2\
Contrasting classes............................. 1.0 2.0 3.0 10.0 10.0
Total \3\................................... 3.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
Stones.......................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
-----------------------------------------------------
Maximum count limits of:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other material in one kilogram:
Animal filth.................................... 1 1 1 1 1
Castor beans.................................... 1 1 1 1 1
Crotalaria seeds................................ 2 2 2 2 2
Glass........................................... 0 0 0 0 0
Stones.......................................... 3 3 3 3 3
Unknown foreign substances...................... 3 3 3 3 3
Total \4\................................... 4 4 4 4 4
Insect-damaged kernels in 100 grams................. 31 31 31 31 31
-----------------------------------------------------
U.S. Sample grade is Wheat that:
(a) Does not meet the requirements for U.S. Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5; or
(b) Has a musty, sour, or commercially objectionable foreign odor (except smut or garlic odor) or
[[Page 33412]]
(c) Is heating or of distinctly low quality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes damaged kernels (total), foreign material, shrunken and broken kernels.
\2\ Unclassed wheat of any grade may contain not more than 10.0 percent of wheat of other classes.
\3\ Includes contrasting classes.
\4\ Includes any combination of animal filth, castor beans, crotalaria seeds, glass, stones, or unknown foreign
substance.
* * * * *
Donna Reifschneider,
Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. 03-13772 Filed 6-3-03; 8:45 am]