United States Standards for Barley, 43281-43284 [2014-17258]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
43281
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 79, No. 143
Friday, July 25, 2014
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.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration
7 CFR Part 810
United States Standards for Barley
Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Grain Inspection, Packers
and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA)
is proposing to revise the U.S. Standards
for Barley (barley standards) under the
U.S. Grain Standards Act (USGSA) by
revising the Definitions of Other Terms
to remove Blue Malting barley and the
reference to kernels with white aleurone
layers. Further GIPSA will revise the
standards to add the factors injured-bymold and mold-damaged kernels. The
proposal also recommends revisions to
the grade and grade requirements for
Two-rowed Malting Barley, Six-rowed
Malting barley, and Six-rowed Blue
Malting barley. These proposed changes
will help to facilitate the marketing of
barley.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before September 23, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written or
electronic comments on this proposed
rule to:
• Mail: Irene Omade, GIPSA, USDA,
STOP 3642, 1400 Independence Avenue
SW., Room 2530–B, Washington, DC
20250–3604.
• Fax: (202) 690–2173.
• Internet: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the online instruction for submitting
comments.
All comments will become a matter of
public record and should be identified
as ‘‘U.S. barley standards proposed rule
comments,’’ making reference to the
date and page number of this issue of
the Federal Register. All comments
received become the property of the
Federal government, are a part of the
public record, and will generally be
posted to www.regulations.gov without
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:28 Jul 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
change. If you send an email comment
directly to GIPSA without going through
www.regulations.gov, or you submit a
comment to GIPSA via fax, the
originating email address or telephone
number will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. Also, all
personal identifying information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit confidential business
information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
Electronic submissions should avoid
the use of special characters, avoid any
form of encryption, and be free of any
defects or viruses, since these may
prevent GIPSA from being able to read
and understand, and thus consider your
comment.
GIPSA will post a transcript or report
summarizing each substantive oral
comment that we receive about this
proposed rule. This would include
comments about this rule made at any
public meetings hosted by GIPSA
during the comment period, unless
GIPSA publically announces otherwise.
All comments will also be available
for public inspection at the above
address during regular business hours (7
CFR 1.27(b)). Please call the GIPSA
Management and Budget Services
support staff (202) 720–8479 for an
appointment to view the comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick McCluskey at GIPSA, USDA,
10383 N. Ambassador Drive, Kansas
City, MO, 64153; Telephone (816) 659–
8403; Fax Number (816) 872–1258;
email Patrick.J.McCluskey@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Barley is defined in the U.S.
Standards for Barley as grain that, before
the removal of dockage, consists of 50
percent or more of whole kernels of
cultivated barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)
and not more than 25 percent of other
grains for which standards have been
established under the USGSA. The term
‘‘barley’’ as used in these standards does
not include hull-less barley or black
barley.
In 2012, U.S. barley producers
harvested 3.2 million acres of barley
producing 220.3 million bushels of the
grain. Of all the barley planted, more
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
than 60 percent were malting barley
types. Beer production in the United
States (U.S.) accounts for approximately
55 percent of total domestic use (2008–
2012 average), feed and industrial uses
account for about 40 percent of
domestic use (2008–2012 average),
while whiskey, food and seed account
for about 6 percent of domestic use
(2008–2012 average). Barley is exported
for feed and malting purposes, typically
accounting for less than five percent of
total barley usage.
Under the USGSA (7 U.S.C. 76),
GIPSA is authorized to establish and
maintain the standards for barley and
other grains regarding kind, class,
quality, and condition. The barley
standards facilitate the marketing of
barley, define U.S. barley quality, and
define commonly used industry terms
in the domestic and global marketplace.
Also, the barley standards contain basic
principles such as the basis of
determination used for a particular
quality factor analysis, as well as
specifying grades, grade requirements,
special grades, and special grade
requirements. The barley standards,
which were established on August 24,
1926, were last revised in 1997, and
appear in the USGSA regulations at 7
CFR 810.201 through 810.207.
Discussion of Comments and Proposed
Action
On October 4, 2011, GIPSA published
an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR) in the Federal
Register (76 FR 61287) requesting
public comment on what revisions, if
any, are needed to the current barley
standards. GIPSA received four
comments from two barley producer
associations, one malting industry
association, and one beer brewing
company. The malting industry
association provided a comment stating
that two-rowed and six-rowed malting
barley are used interchangeably by the
malting industry, thus the grades and
grade standards should be harmonized
for most factors, excluding test weight
and thin barley. The comment from a
beer brewing company stated that
malting quality specifications which are
currently applicable only to two-rowed
malting barley should be extended to
six-rowed malting barley, because the
brewing industry uses both types.
Additionally, the brewing company
stated that they fully supported the
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
43282
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules
comments of the malting barley industry
association. Comments from two North
Dakota barley producers groups
mirrored the comments of the malting
barley industry association with regard
to harmonizing the standards, and
addressed other issues which will be
discussed herein.
The malting barley industry
association stated that distinctions
between two- and six-rowed varieties
are not generally warranted, but that
distinctions for test weight and percent
thin barley are warranted. Two-rowed
and six-rowed malting barley have
different test weight patterns that are
under genetic control and influenced by
environment.
All commenters recommended that
grade limits for two-rowed and sixrowed malting barley be identical for all
grade determining factors except test
weight and thin barley, which should
remain unchanged. U.S. malting barley
manufacturers and users do not
distinguish between two-rowed and sixrowed malting barley based on the
current barley standards, but view both
two-rowed and six-rowed malting barley
as functionally equivalent.
All commenters stated that Wild Oats
should be included as a grade
determining factor for Six-rowed
Malting barley. Likewise all commenters
stated that Damaged kernels, as well as
Other grains, should be included as a
grade determining factor for Two-rowed
Malting barley. All commenters stated
that the grade factors Suitable malting
type, Sound barley, and Skinned and
broken kernels should all be
harmonized for Two-rowed and Sixrowed Malting barley. Further, all
commenters agreed that these specific
changes are needed in the barley
standards.
GIPSA believes that stakeholders in
the malting barley industry are wellinformed with respect to production,
functionality, and quality issues related
to malting barley. GIPSA believes the
recommended revisions will facilitate
the marketing of barley and accordingly,
will propose amendments to the malting
barley standards to make the
recommended revisions. To harmonize
two-rowed and six-rowed malting barley
grade factors and grade limits, GIPSA
recognizes the definitions of Six-rowed
Malting barley and Two-rowed Malting
barley must be also be consistent.
Accordingly, GIPSA will propose
revising the definition of Six-rowed
Malting barley to mirror the definition
of Two-rowed Malting barley, with the
exception of test weight and percent
thins.
All commenters recommended
removing Six-rowed Blue Malting barley
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:28 Jul 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
as a subclass of malting barley because
(1) blue aleurone barley is no longer
used by the malting and brewing
industry in the U.S. and (2) no blue
aleurone malting varieties are being
grown for export, and (3) U.S.
production of blue aleurone malting
barley is minimal. GIPSA agrees and
will propose revising the malting barley
standards to remove Six-rowed Blue
Malting barley as a subclass of malting
barley.
GIPSA received identical comments
from two North Dakota barley producer
groups. Both producer groups
questioned why the definitions of Frostdamaged kernels, Heat-damaged
kernels, and Mold-damaged kernels
included the words ‘‘other grains, and
wild oats’’ in their definitions, while the
definitions of Injured-by-frost, Injuredby-heat, and Injured-by-mold do not
include other grains and wild oats. Both
commenters stated that the terminology
utilized in malting factors is quasiredundant and can initiate
misunderstanding. They recommended
removing other grains and wild oats
from all damage definitions, so as to
focus attention on heat, frost, or mold
damage to barley kernels rather than
damage to components other than barley
(i.e., other grains and wild oats). Barley
is unique in that it is the only grain
which has a definition for frost-damaged
kernels and mold-damaged kernels in
the standard. (In other grains, these
damages are determined based on
Visual Reference Images.)
The inclusion of ‘‘other grains’’ in the
definition of heat-damaged kernels in
barley is consistent with the definition
of heat-damaged kernels in oats, rye,
sorghum, triticale, and wheat. The
purpose of including of ‘‘other grains’’
in the damage definition of certain grain
standards is to hinder blending of
inferior quality grains into the primary
grain being presented for inspection.
Some grains were more likely to have
‘‘other grains’’ blended into them,
which explains why not all grains for
which standards exist include ‘‘other
grains’’ in the damage definition. The
standards should promote increasing
quality. Accordingly, GIPSA will not
propose any revisions to the barley
standards based on the two comments.
GIPSA received comments from the
two producer groups recommending
that consideration should be given to
establishing specific grades for hull-less
barley. Hull-less barley is a specialized
plant wherein the hull does not adhere
to the grain. In the regulations at
810.201, the definition of barley states,
‘‘The term ‘‘barley’’ as used in these
standards does not include hull-less
barley or black barley.’’ Hull-less barley
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
is considered Not Standardized Grain,
counted as ‘‘other grain’’ when
encountered in barley, and counted
against ‘‘sound barley’’.
In a comment unrelated to hull-less
barley, the malting industry association
pointed out that the production of malt
for brewing requires barley that is
sound, and with an intact hull. The
malting and brewing industries are the
largest users of U.S. barley. The hull of
the barley kernel plays a critical role in
the malting process. The malt
manufacturing industry would
encounter processing problems if hullless barley was counted as barley, even
if only a small percentage of hull-less
barley kernels were comingled with
malting types. This commenter also
addressed ‘‘malting factors’’ that are not
part of this rulemaking.
GIPSA’s Program Directive 9180.65
provides inspection and certification
procedures for hull-less barley, so
applicants for service can receive
certified results on factors of interest.
Given these facts, and absent a market
signal from end-users, GIPSA will not
propose revisions to the barley
standards establishing grades for hullless barley.
All commenters stated that certain
revisions were needed in the inspection
instructions in the Barley chapter of
Grain Inspection Handbook 2. While
inspection instructions are not included
in the regulations, GIPSA will review
the inspection instructions in Handbook
2, in consideration of the comments,
separately from this rulemaking.
GIPSA is issuing this proposed rule to
invite comments from all interested
persons on how GIPSA can further
enhance the barley standards to better
facilitate the marketing of barley.
GIPSA proposes to revise Section
810.202 Definition of other terms (c)(1)
by amending (i) Six-rowed Malting
barley to remove the reference to kernels
with white aleurone layers and adding
maximum percentages for injured-bymold and mold-damage kernels,
removing (ii) Six-rowed Blue Malting
barley, and renumbering (iii) Tworowed Malting barley to become (ii).
GIPSA proposes to revise Section
810.204 Grade and Grade Requirements
for Six-rowed Malting barley and Sixrowed Blue Malting barley by removing
references to Six-rowed Blue malting
barley, adding Wild Oats as a grade
determining factor, increasing the
minimum percent of suitable malting
type at grades 1 and 2, and increasing
the minimum percent of sound barley at
all grades.
GIPSA proposes to revise Section
810.205 Grade and Grade Requirements
for Two-rowed Malting barley by adding
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Damaged kernels as a grade determining
factor, adding Other grains as a grade
determining factor, and reducing the
maximum percent of Skinned and
broken kernels at grades 1, 2, and 3.
Pursuant to section 4(b)(1) of the
USGSA, as amended (7 U.S.C. 76(b)(1)),
no standards established, or
amendments or revocations of the
standards, are to become effective less
than 1 calendar year after promulgation
unless, in the judgment of the Secretary
of Agriculture, the public health,
interest, or safety require that they
become effective sooner.
Executive Order 12866, 13563, and
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been determined to be
exempt for the purposes of Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, and therefore
has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
Pursuant to the requirements set forth
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), GIPSA 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 businesses subject to such
actions in order that small businesses
will not be unduly or disproportionately
burdened.
The Small Business Administration
(SBA) defines small businesses by their
North American Industry Classification
System Codes (NAICS).1 This proposed
rule affects customers of GIPSA’s
official inspection and weighing
services in the domestic and export
grain markets such as grain elevators/
merchants (NAICS 424510), those in the
malt manufacturing industry (NAICS
311213), and official grain inspection
agencies.
GIPSA is proposing to revise the
barley standards in the Definitions of
Other Terms by removing Six-rowed
Blue Malting barley and the reference to
kernels with white aleurone layers. In
addition, the proposed change will add
injured-by-mold and mold-damaged
kernels to the definition of Six-rowed
Malting barley. The definition change
also revises the grade and grade
requirements for Two-rowed Malting
barley. Further, the grade and grade
requirements for Six-rowed Malting
barley and Six-rowed Blue Malting
barley will be revised.
Under the provisions of the USGSA,
grain exported from the U.S. must be
officially inspected and weighed.
Mandatory inspection and weighing
services are provided by GIPSA at 40
export facilities, by delegated States at
1 See: https://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/
documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:28 Jul 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
11 facilities, and seven facilities for U.S.
grain transshipped through Canadian
ports. 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 SBA. Further,
the regulations are applied equally to all
entities. The 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 persons who handle,
weigh, or transport grain for sale in
foreign commerce must also register.
Section 800.30 of 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 129 registrants registered to export
grain. All are considered to be large
businesses.
GIPSA also provides domestic and
miscellaneous inspection and weighing
services at other than export locations.
Such services are provided by 53 official
state and private agencies.
Approximately 217 different applicants
receive domestic inspection services
each year and approximately 150
different locations receive track scale
tests as a miscellaneous service each
year.
Most users of the official inspection
and weighing services do not meet the
requirements for small entities nor are
the agencies that provide such services.
Further, GIPSA is required by statute to
make services available and to recover,
as nearly as practicable, the costs of
providing such services. There would be
no additional reporting, record keeping,
or other compliance requirements
imposed upon small entities as a result
of this proposed rule. Further, GIPSA
has not identified any other Federal
rules which may duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this proposed rule. 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 RFA.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed
under Executive Order 12988, Civil
Justice Reform. This action is not
intended to have retroactive effect. The
USGSA provides in section 87g that no
subdivision may require or impose any
requirements or restrictions concerning
the inspection, weighing, or description
of grain under the USGSA. Otherwise,
this rule would not preempt any State
or local laws, or regulations, or policies
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43283
unless they present an irreconcilable
conflict with this rule. There are no
administrative procedures which must
be exhausted prior to any judicial
challenge to the provisions of this rule.
Executive Order 13175
This proposed rule has been reviewed
with the requirements of Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. GIPSA has received no
requests for official services for barley
from any Tribal Government. Therefore,
GIPSA believes that this rule would not
have substantial and direct effects on
Tribal governments and would not have
significant Tribal implications.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the information collection
and recordkeeping requirements
included in this proposed rule
previously has been approved by the
OMB under control number 0580–0013.
GIPSA is committed to complying
with the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act, which requires
Government agencies in general to
provide the public the option of
submitting information or transacting
business electronically to maximum
extent possible.
E-Government Compliance
GIPSA 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.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 810
Export, Grain.
For reasons set out in the preamble,
GIPSA proposes to amend 7 CFR part
810 as follows:
PART 810—OFFICIAL UNITED STATES
STANDARDS FOR GRAIN
1. The authority citation for part 810
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71–87k.
2. In § 810.202, revise paragraph (c)(1)
to read as follows:
■
§ 810.202
Definition of other terms.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Classes. There are two classes of
barley: Malting barley and Barley.
(1) Malting barley. Barley of a sixrowed or two-rowed malting type. The
class Malting barley is divided into the
following two subclasses:
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
43284
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(i) Six-rowed Malting barley. Barley
that has a minimum of 95.0 percent of
a six-rowed suitable malting type that
contains not more than 1.9 percent
injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent
frost-damaged kernels, 0.2 percent
injured-by-heat kernels, and 0.1 percent
heat-damaged kernels, 1.9 percent
injured-by-mold kernels, and 0.4
percent mold-damaged kernels. Sixrowed Malting barley shall not be
infested, blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or
smutty as defined in § 810.107(b) and
§ 810.206.
(ii) Two-rowed Malting barley. Barley
that has a minimum of 95.0 percent of
a two-rowed suitable malting type that
contains not more than 1.9 percent
injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent
frost-damaged kernels, 0.2 percent
injured-by-heat kernels, 0.1 percent
heat-damaged kernels, 1.9 percent
injured-by-mold kernels, and 0.4
percent mold-damaged kernels. Two-
Minimum limits of—
Grade
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Test weight
per bushel
(pounds)
1
2
3
4
§ 810.204
[Amended]
3. Section 810.204 is revised to read
as follows:
■
§ 810.204 Grades and grade requirements
for Six-rowed Malting barley.
Maximum limits of—
Suitable
malting
types
(percent)
47.0
45.0
43.0
43.0
rowed Malting barley shall not be
infested, blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or
smutty as defined in § 810.107(b) and
§ 810.206.
*
*
*
*
*
Sound
barley 1
(percent)
97.0
97.0
95.0
95.0
Damaged
kernels 1
(percent)
98.0
98.0
96.0
93.0
Wild oats
(percent)
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Foreign
material
(percent)
1.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
Other grains
(percent)
Skinned and
broken
kernels
(percent)
Thin barley
(percent)
2.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
7.0
10.0
15.0
15.0
0.5
1.0
2.0
3.0
1 Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.
Note: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with § 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined in § 810.206.
Six-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section shall be graded in accordance with standards established for the
class Barley.
§ 810.205
[Amended]
§ 810.205 Grades and grade requirements
for Two-rowed Malting barley.
4. Section 810.205 is revised to read
as follows:
■
Minimum limits of—
Grade
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Test weight
per bushel
(pounds)
1
2
3
4
50.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
Maximum limits of—
Suitable
malting
types
(percent)
Sound
barley 1
(percent)
97.0
97.0
95.0
95.0
Damaged
kernels 1
(percent)
98.0
98.0
96.0
93.0
Wild Oats
(percent)
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Foreign
material
(percent)
1.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
Other grains
(percent)
Skinned and
broken
kernels
(percent)
Thin barley
(percent)
2.0
3.0
5.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
5.0
7.0
10.0
10.0
0.5
1.0
2.0
3.0
1 Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.
Note: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with § 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined in § 810.206.
Two-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section shall be graded in accordance with standards established for the
class Barley.
Larry Mitchell,
Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and
Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014–17258 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
10 CFR Part 20
[NRC–2009–0279]
RIN 3150–AJ29
Radiation Protection
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; request for comments.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:28 Jul 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing this
advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPR) to obtain input from
stakeholders on the development of a
draft regulatory basis. The draft
regulatory basis would support potential
changes to the NRC’s current radiation
protection regulations. The goal of this
effort is to achieve greater alignment
between the NRC’s radiation protection
regulations and the 2007
recommendations of the International
Commission on Radiological Protection
(ICRP) contained in ICRP Publication
103 (2007). Through this ANPR, the
NRC has identified specific questions
and issues with respect to a possible
revision of the NRC’s radiation
protection requirements. Stakeholder
comments, including responses to the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
specific questions, will be considered by
the NRC staff when it develops the draft
regulatory basis. In a separate and
related activity, the NRC staff will be
preparing an ANPR concerning the
NRC’s design objectives governing dose
assessments for radioactive effluents
from light-water-cooled nuclear power
reactors, which should be published for
public comment during the public
comment period for this ANPR. The
NRC plans to hold a series of public
meetings to promote full understanding
of the contemplated action and facilitate
public comment.
DATES: Submit comments by November
24, 2014. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical
to do so, but the NRC is only able to
ensure consideration of comments
received on or before this date.
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43281-43284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17258]
========================================================================
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. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 43281]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
7 CFR Part 810
United States Standards for Barley
AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
(GIPSA) is proposing to revise the U.S. Standards for Barley (barley
standards) under the U.S. Grain Standards Act (USGSA) by revising the
Definitions of Other Terms to remove Blue Malting barley and the
reference to kernels with white aleurone layers. Further GIPSA will
revise the standards to add the factors injured-by-mold and mold-
damaged kernels. The proposal also recommends revisions to the grade
and grade requirements for Two-rowed Malting Barley, Six-rowed Malting
barley, and Six-rowed Blue Malting barley. These proposed changes will
help to facilitate the marketing of barley.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 23, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written or electronic comments on this
proposed rule to:
Mail: Irene Omade, GIPSA, USDA, STOP 3642, 1400
Independence Avenue SW., Room 2530-B, Washington, DC 20250-3604.
Fax: (202) 690-2173.
Internet: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the
on-line instruction for submitting comments.
All comments will become a matter of public record and should be
identified as ``U.S. barley standards proposed rule comments,'' making
reference to the date and page number of this issue of the Federal
Register. All comments received become the property of the Federal
government, are a part of the public record, and will generally be
posted to www.regulations.gov without change. If you send an email
comment directly to GIPSA without going through www.regulations.gov, or
you submit a comment to GIPSA via fax, the originating email address or
telephone number will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. Also, all personal identifying information (for example,
name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or
otherwise sensitive or protected information.
Electronic submissions should avoid the use of special characters,
avoid any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses,
since these may prevent GIPSA from being able to read and understand,
and thus consider your comment.
GIPSA will post a transcript or report summarizing each substantive
oral comment that we receive about this proposed rule. This would
include comments about this rule made at any public meetings hosted by
GIPSA during the comment period, unless GIPSA publically announces
otherwise.
All comments will also be available for public inspection at the
above address during regular business hours (7 CFR 1.27(b)). Please
call the GIPSA Management and Budget Services support staff (202) 720-
8479 for an appointment to view the comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick McCluskey at GIPSA, USDA,
10383 N. Ambassador Drive, Kansas City, MO, 64153; Telephone (816) 659-
8403; Fax Number (816) 872-1258; email Patrick.J.McCluskey@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Barley is defined in the U.S. Standards for Barley as grain that,
before the removal of dockage, consists of 50 percent or more of whole
kernels of cultivated barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and not more than 25
percent of other grains for which standards have been established under
the USGSA. The term ``barley'' as used in these standards does not
include hull-less barley or black barley.
In 2012, U.S. barley producers harvested 3.2 million acres of
barley producing 220.3 million bushels of the grain. Of all the barley
planted, more than 60 percent were malting barley types. Beer
production in the United States (U.S.) accounts for approximately 55
percent of total domestic use (2008-2012 average), feed and industrial
uses account for about 40 percent of domestic use (2008-2012 average),
while whiskey, food and seed account for about 6 percent of domestic
use (2008-2012 average). Barley is exported for feed and malting
purposes, typically accounting for less than five percent of total
barley usage.
Under the USGSA (7 U.S.C. 76), GIPSA is authorized to establish and
maintain the standards for barley and other grains regarding kind,
class, quality, and condition. The barley standards facilitate the
marketing of barley, define U.S. barley quality, and define commonly
used industry terms in the domestic and global marketplace. Also, the
barley standards contain basic principles such as the basis of
determination used for a particular quality factor analysis, as well as
specifying grades, grade requirements, special grades, and special
grade requirements. The barley standards, which were established on
August 24, 1926, were last revised in 1997, and appear in the USGSA
regulations at 7 CFR 810.201 through 810.207.
Discussion of Comments and Proposed Action
On October 4, 2011, GIPSA published an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR) in the Federal Register (76 FR 61287) requesting
public comment on what revisions, if any, are needed to the current
barley standards. GIPSA received four comments from two barley producer
associations, one malting industry association, and one beer brewing
company. The malting industry association provided a comment stating
that two-rowed and six-rowed malting barley are used interchangeably by
the malting industry, thus the grades and grade standards should be
harmonized for most factors, excluding test weight and thin barley. The
comment from a beer brewing company stated that malting quality
specifications which are currently applicable only to two-rowed malting
barley should be extended to six-rowed malting barley, because the
brewing industry uses both types. Additionally, the brewing company
stated that they fully supported the
[[Page 43282]]
comments of the malting barley industry association. Comments from two
North Dakota barley producers groups mirrored the comments of the
malting barley industry association with regard to harmonizing the
standards, and addressed other issues which will be discussed herein.
The malting barley industry association stated that distinctions
between two- and six-rowed varieties are not generally warranted, but
that distinctions for test weight and percent thin barley are
warranted. Two-rowed and six-rowed malting barley have different test
weight patterns that are under genetic control and influenced by
environment.
All commenters recommended that grade limits for two-rowed and six-
rowed malting barley be identical for all grade determining factors
except test weight and thin barley, which should remain unchanged. U.S.
malting barley manufacturers and users do not distinguish between two-
rowed and six-rowed malting barley based on the current barley
standards, but view both two-rowed and six-rowed malting barley as
functionally equivalent.
All commenters stated that Wild Oats should be included as a grade
determining factor for Six-rowed Malting barley. Likewise all
commenters stated that Damaged kernels, as well as Other grains, should
be included as a grade determining factor for Two-rowed Malting barley.
All commenters stated that the grade factors Suitable malting type,
Sound barley, and Skinned and broken kernels should all be harmonized
for Two-rowed and Six-rowed Malting barley. Further, all commenters
agreed that these specific changes are needed in the barley standards.
GIPSA believes that stakeholders in the malting barley industry are
well-informed with respect to production, functionality, and quality
issues related to malting barley. GIPSA believes the recommended
revisions will facilitate the marketing of barley and accordingly, will
propose amendments to the malting barley standards to make the
recommended revisions. To harmonize two-rowed and six-rowed malting
barley grade factors and grade limits, GIPSA recognizes the definitions
of Six-rowed Malting barley and Two-rowed Malting barley must be also
be consistent. Accordingly, GIPSA will propose revising the definition
of Six-rowed Malting barley to mirror the definition of Two-rowed
Malting barley, with the exception of test weight and percent thins.
All commenters recommended removing Six-rowed Blue Malting barley
as a subclass of malting barley because (1) blue aleurone barley is no
longer used by the malting and brewing industry in the U.S. and (2) no
blue aleurone malting varieties are being grown for export, and (3)
U.S. production of blue aleurone malting barley is minimal. GIPSA
agrees and will propose revising the malting barley standards to remove
Six-rowed Blue Malting barley as a subclass of malting barley.
GIPSA received identical comments from two North Dakota barley
producer groups. Both producer groups questioned why the definitions of
Frost-damaged kernels, Heat-damaged kernels, and Mold-damaged kernels
included the words ``other grains, and wild oats'' in their
definitions, while the definitions of Injured-by-frost, Injured-by-
heat, and Injured-by-mold do not include other grains and wild oats.
Both commenters stated that the terminology utilized in malting factors
is quasi-redundant and can initiate misunderstanding. They recommended
removing other grains and wild oats from all damage definitions, so as
to focus attention on heat, frost, or mold damage to barley kernels
rather than damage to components other than barley (i.e., other grains
and wild oats). Barley is unique in that it is the only grain which has
a definition for frost-damaged kernels and mold-damaged kernels in the
standard. (In other grains, these damages are determined based on
Visual Reference Images.)
The inclusion of ``other grains'' in the definition of heat-damaged
kernels in barley is consistent with the definition of heat-damaged
kernels in oats, rye, sorghum, triticale, and wheat. The purpose of
including of ``other grains'' in the damage definition of certain grain
standards is to hinder blending of inferior quality grains into the
primary grain being presented for inspection. Some grains were more
likely to have ``other grains'' blended into them, which explains why
not all grains for which standards exist include ``other grains'' in
the damage definition. The standards should promote increasing quality.
Accordingly, GIPSA will not propose any revisions to the barley
standards based on the two comments.
GIPSA received comments from the two producer groups recommending
that consideration should be given to establishing specific grades for
hull-less barley. Hull-less barley is a specialized plant wherein the
hull does not adhere to the grain. In the regulations at 810.201, the
definition of barley states, ``The term ``barley'' as used in these
standards does not include hull-less barley or black barley.'' Hull-
less barley is considered Not Standardized Grain, counted as ``other
grain'' when encountered in barley, and counted against ``sound
barley''.
In a comment unrelated to hull-less barley, the malting industry
association pointed out that the production of malt for brewing
requires barley that is sound, and with an intact hull. The malting and
brewing industries are the largest users of U.S. barley. The hull of
the barley kernel plays a critical role in the malting process. The
malt manufacturing industry would encounter processing problems if
hull-less barley was counted as barley, even if only a small percentage
of hull-less barley kernels were comingled with malting types. This
commenter also addressed ``malting factors'' that are not part of this
rulemaking.
GIPSA's Program Directive 9180.65 provides inspection and
certification procedures for hull-less barley, so applicants for
service can receive certified results on factors of interest. Given
these facts, and absent a market signal from end-users, GIPSA will not
propose revisions to the barley standards establishing grades for hull-
less barley.
All commenters stated that certain revisions were needed in the
inspection instructions in the Barley chapter of Grain Inspection
Handbook 2. While inspection instructions are not included in the
regulations, GIPSA will review the inspection instructions in Handbook
2, in consideration of the comments, separately from this rulemaking.
GIPSA is issuing this proposed rule to invite comments from all
interested persons on how GIPSA can further enhance the barley
standards to better facilitate the marketing of barley.
GIPSA proposes to revise Section 810.202 Definition of other terms
(c)(1) by amending (i) Six-rowed Malting barley to remove the reference
to kernels with white aleurone layers and adding maximum percentages
for injured-by-mold and mold-damage kernels, removing (ii) Six-rowed
Blue Malting barley, and renumbering (iii) Two-rowed Malting barley to
become (ii).
GIPSA proposes to revise Section 810.204 Grade and Grade
Requirements for Six-rowed Malting barley and Six-rowed Blue Malting
barley by removing references to Six-rowed Blue malting barley, adding
Wild Oats as a grade determining factor, increasing the minimum percent
of suitable malting type at grades 1 and 2, and increasing the minimum
percent of sound barley at all grades.
GIPSA proposes to revise Section 810.205 Grade and Grade
Requirements for Two-rowed Malting barley by adding
[[Page 43283]]
Damaged kernels as a grade determining factor, adding Other grains as a
grade determining factor, and reducing the maximum percent of Skinned
and broken kernels at grades 1, 2, and 3.
Pursuant to section 4(b)(1) of the USGSA, as amended (7 U.S.C.
76(b)(1)), no standards established, or amendments or revocations of
the standards, are to become effective less than 1 calendar year after
promulgation unless, in the judgment of the Secretary of Agriculture,
the public health, interest, or safety require that they become
effective sooner.
Executive Order 12866, 13563, and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been determined to be exempt for the purposes of
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, and therefore has not been reviewed
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), GIPSA 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 businesses subject to
such actions in order that small businesses will not be unduly or
disproportionately burdened.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines small businesses by
their North American Industry Classification System Codes (NAICS).\1\
This proposed rule affects customers of GIPSA's official inspection and
weighing services in the domestic and export grain markets such as
grain elevators/merchants (NAICS 424510), those in the malt
manufacturing industry (NAICS 311213), and official grain inspection
agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See: https://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GIPSA is proposing to revise the barley standards in the
Definitions of Other Terms by removing Six-rowed Blue Malting barley
and the reference to kernels with white aleurone layers. In addition,
the proposed change will add injured-by-mold and mold-damaged kernels
to the definition of Six-rowed Malting barley. The definition change
also revises the grade and grade requirements for Two-rowed Malting
barley. Further, the grade and grade requirements for Six-rowed Malting
barley and Six-rowed Blue Malting barley will be revised.
Under the provisions of the USGSA, grain exported from the U.S.
must be officially inspected and weighed. Mandatory inspection and
weighing services are provided by GIPSA at 40 export facilities, by
delegated States at 11 facilities, and seven facilities for U.S. grain
transshipped through Canadian ports. 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
SBA. Further, the regulations are applied equally to all entities. The
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 persons who handle, weigh, or transport grain for sale
in foreign commerce must also register. Section 800.30 of 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 129
registrants registered to export grain. All are considered to be large
businesses.
GIPSA also provides domestic and miscellaneous inspection and
weighing services at other than export locations. Such services are
provided by 53 official state and private agencies. Approximately 217
different applicants receive domestic inspection services each year and
approximately 150 different locations receive track scale tests as a
miscellaneous service each year.
Most users of the official inspection and weighing services do not
meet the requirements for small entities nor are the agencies that
provide such services. Further, GIPSA is required by statute to make
services available and to recover, as nearly as practicable, the costs
of providing such services. There would be no additional reporting,
record keeping, or other compliance requirements imposed upon small
entities as a result of this proposed rule. Further, GIPSA has not
identified any other Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap or
conflict with this proposed rule. 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 RFA.
Executive Order 12988
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This action is not intended to have retroactive
effect. The USGSA provides in section 87g that no subdivision may
require or impose any requirements or restrictions concerning the
inspection, weighing, or description of grain under the USGSA.
Otherwise, this rule would not preempt any State or local laws, or
regulations, or policies unless they present an irreconcilable conflict
with this rule. There are no administrative procedures which must be
exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of this
rule.
Executive Order 13175
This proposed rule has been reviewed with the requirements of
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments. GIPSA has received no requests for official services for
barley from any Tribal Government. Therefore, GIPSA believes that this
rule would not have substantial and direct effects on Tribal
governments and would not have significant Tribal implications.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the information collection and recordkeeping requirements
included in this proposed rule previously has been approved by the OMB
under control number 0580-0013.
GIPSA is committed to complying with the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act, which requires Government agencies in general to
provide the public the option of submitting information or transacting
business electronically to maximum extent possible.
E-Government Compliance
GIPSA 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.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 810
Export, Grain.
For reasons set out in the preamble, GIPSA proposes to amend 7 CFR
part 810 as follows:
PART 810--OFFICIAL UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR GRAIN
0
1. The authority citation for part 810 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71-87k.
0
2. In Sec. 810.202, revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 810.202 Definition of other terms.
* * * * *
(c) Classes. There are two classes of barley: Malting barley and
Barley.
(1) Malting barley. Barley of a six-rowed or two-rowed malting
type. The class Malting barley is divided into the following two
subclasses:
[[Page 43284]]
(i) Six-rowed Malting barley. Barley that has a minimum of 95.0
percent of a six-rowed suitable malting type that contains not more
than 1.9 percent injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent frost-damaged
kernels, 0.2 percent injured-by-heat kernels, and 0.1 percent heat-
damaged kernels, 1.9 percent injured-by-mold kernels, and 0.4 percent
mold-damaged kernels. Six-rowed Malting barley shall not be infested,
blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or smutty as defined in Sec. 810.107(b)
and Sec. 810.206.
(ii) Two-rowed Malting barley. Barley that has a minimum of 95.0
percent of a two-rowed suitable malting type that contains not more
than 1.9 percent injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent frost-damaged
kernels, 0.2 percent injured-by-heat kernels, 0.1 percent heat-damaged
kernels, 1.9 percent injured-by-mold kernels, and 0.4 percent mold-
damaged kernels. Two-rowed Malting barley shall not be infested,
blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or smutty as defined in Sec. 810.107(b)
and Sec. 810.206.
* * * * *
Sec. 810.204 [Amended]
0
3. Section 810.204 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 810.204 Grades and grade requirements for Six-rowed Malting
barley.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suitable Skinned and
Grade Test weight malting Sound Damaged Wild oats Foreign Other broken Thin barley
per bushel types barley \1\ kernels \1\ (percent) material grains kernels (percent)
(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. No. 1......................... 47.0 97.0 98.0 2.0 1.0 0.5 2.0 4.0 7.0
U.S. No. 2......................... 45.0 97.0 98.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 6.0 10.0
U.S. No. 3......................... 43.0 95.0 96.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 8.0 15.0
U.S. No. 4......................... 43.0 95.0 93.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 10.0 15.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.
Note: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with Sec. 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined in Sec. 810.206.
Six-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section shall be graded in accordance with standards established for the class
Barley.
Sec. 810.205 [Amended]
0
4. Section 810.205 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 810.205 Grades and grade requirements for Two-rowed Malting
barley.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suitable Skinned and
Grade Test weight malting Sound Damaged Wild Oats Foreign Other broken Thin barley
per bushel types barley \1\ kernels \1\ (percent) material grains kernels (percent)
(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. No. 1......................... 50.0 97.0 98.0 2.0 1.0 0.5 2.0 4.0 5.0
U.S. No. 2......................... 48.0 97.0 98.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 6.0 7.0
U.S. No. 3......................... 48.0 95.0 96.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 8.0 10.0
U.S. No. 4......................... 48.0 95.0 93.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 10.0 10.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.
Note: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with Sec. 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined in Sec. 810.206.
Two-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this section shall be graded in accordance with standards established for the class
Barley.
Larry Mitchell,
Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-17258 Filed 7-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-KD-P
