Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Notices 38235

Total Burden Hours: 14,812.

William McAndrew,

Departmental Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 00–15468 Filed 6–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

[Docket No. DA–98–03]

United States Standards for Dry Whey

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing

Service (AMS) of the Department of

Agriculture (USDA) is soliciting

comments on its proposal to change the

United States Standards for Dry Whey.

AMS is proposing changes that would

lower the bacterial estimate of not more

than 50,000 per gram to not more than

30,000 per gram, incorporate maximum

scorched particle content as a

requirement for U.S. grade, and expand

the Test Methods section to allow

product evaluation using the latest

methods included in Standard Methods

for Examination of Dairy Products, in

the Official Methods of Analysis of the

Association of Official Analytical

Chemists, and in standards developed

by the International Dairy Federation.

These changes are being proposed to

strengthen the quality requirements of

this Standard to reflect improvements

that have occurred in dry whey quality

since the Standards were last reviewed.

AMS is also proposing editorial changes

to provide consistency with other dry

milk standards. USDA grade standards

are voluntary standards. Manufacturers

of dairy products are free to choose

whether or not to use these voluntary

grade standards. USDA grade standards

have been developed to identify degrees

of quality in various dairy products.

Quality in general refers to usefulness,

desirability, and value of the product or

its marketability as a commodity.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before August 21, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be

submitted to Duane R. Spomer, Chief,

Dairy Standardization Branch, Dairy

Programs, Agricultural Marketing

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Room 2746, South Building, Stop 0230,

P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090–

6456; faxed to (202) 720–2643; or emailed to Duane.Spomer@usda.gov.

Comments should reference the date

and page number of this issue of the

Federal Register. All comments

received will be made available for

public inspection at the above address

during regular business hours. The

current United States Standards for Dry

Whey, along with proposed changes, are

available either through the above

addresses or by accessing AMS’’ Home

Page on the Internet at

www.ams.usda.gov/dairy/stand.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Duane R. Spomer, Chief, Dairy

Standardization Branch, AMS/USDA/

Dairy Programs, Room 2746-S, P.O. Box

96956, Washington, DC, 20090–6456,

(202) 720–7473.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

203 (c) of the Agricultural Marketing

Act of 1946, as amended, directs and

authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture

‘‘to develop and improve standards of

quality, condition, quantity, grade, and

packaging and to recommend and

demonstrate such standards in order to

encourage uniformity and consistency

in commercial practices * * *’’. AMS is

committed to carrying out this authority

in a manner that facilitates the

marketing of agricultural commodities

and will make copies of official

standards available upon request. The

United States Standards for Dry Whey

no longer appear in the Code of Federal

Regulations but are maintained by

USDA/AMS/Dairy Program.

When dry whey is officially graded,

the USDA regulations (7 CFR Part 58)

governing the grading of manufactured

or processed dairy products are used.

These regulations require a charge for

the grading service provided by USDA.

The Agency believes this proposal

would accurately identify quality

characteristics in dry whey.

AMS is proposing to change the

United States Standards for Dry Whey

using the procedures that appear in part

36 of title 7 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (7 CFR Part 36).

The current United States Standards

for Dry Whey have been in effect since

October 1, 1990. AMS initiated a review

of this Standard and discussed possible

changes with the dairy industry. The

American Dairy Products Institute, a

trade association representing the dry

whey industry, provided specific

suggestions, including a

recommendation to lower the maximum

bacterial content.

Proposed by the American Dairy

Products Institute

The American Dairy Products

Institute provided suggestions to:

• Lower the maximum bacterial

content; and

• Reference a color guide to identify

the color of dry whey.

Proposed by Dairy Programs,

Agricultural Marketing Service

AMS is proposing to:

• Lower the maximum bacterial

content requirement as suggested by the

American Dairy Products Institute;

• Incorporate scorched particle

content in the determination of U.S.

grade;

• Reference additional test methods

that may be used to determine U.S.

grade;

• Reference the Food and Drug

Administration’s requirements for dry

whey; and

• Make editorial changes that would

provide consistency with other U.S.

grade standards for dairy products.

Concerning the suggestion by the

American Dairy Products Association to

reference a color guide, AMS agrees that

color is an important attribute in the

marketing of dry whey. However, since

color is not a grade-determining factor,

AMS is recommending that a color

identification guide be considered

separately from the standard in a

manner consistent with color

determination in other dairy products.

This notice provides for a 60-day

comment period for interested parties to

comment on proposed revisions to the

standards. The following is an outline of

these changes.

UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR DRY WHEY1

Current standard Proposed Discussion

Definitions ................................................... No change ................................................ N/A.

Whey .......................................................... No change ................................................ N/A.

‘‘Whey is the fluid obtained by separating

the coagulum from milk, cream, and/or

skim milk in cheesemaking.

No change ................................................ N/A.

38236 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Notices

UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR DRY WHEY1—Continued

Current standard Proposed Discussion

It shall conform to the applicable provisions of 21 CFR 184.1979.We propose to include a reference to the Food and

Drug Administration regulations concerning this product.

The acidity of the whey may be adjusted

by the addition of safe and suitable pH

adjusting ingredients. Mositure removed

from cheese curd as a result of salting

may be collected for further processing

as whey if the collection of the moisture

and the removal of the salt from the

moisture are conducted in accordance

with procedures approved by the Administrator.

No change ................................................ N/A.

Dry Whey .................................................... No change ................................................ N/A.

‘‘Dry Whey’’ is the product resulting from

drying fresh whey which has been pasteurized and to which nothing has been

added as a preservative..

‘‘Dry Whey’’ is the product resulting from

drying fresh whey which has been pasteurized and to which nothing has been

added as a preservative. It shall conform to the applicable provisions of 21

CFR 184.1979.

We propose to include a reference to the Food and

Drug Administration regulations concerning this product.

It contains all constituents, except moisture, in the same relative proportions as

in the whey.

No change ................................................ N/A.

U.S. Grade Nomenclature of U.S. grade.

The nomenclature of the U.S. grade is

U.S. Extra Grade.

No change ................................................ N/A.

Basis for determination of U.S. grade ........ No change ................................................ N/A.

The U.S. grade of dry whey is determined

on the basis of flavor, physical appearance, bacterial estimate, coliform,

milkfat content, and moisture.

No change ................................................ N/A.

Coliform count, milk fat content, moisture

and scorched particle content.

We propose to include count following coliform to be

consistent with other dairy products standards. We

propose to relocate the requirement for scorched particle content from the ‘‘Optional tests’’ section of this

standard and include it as a required test for assignment of U.S. grade. Test methods have improved so

that consistently accurate results are now attainable.

Requirements for U.S. grade ..................... No change ................................................ N/A.

(a) U.S. Extra. U.S. Extra Grade dry whey

conforms to the following requirements:

No change ................................................ N/A.

(1) Flavor. (applies to the reliquefied form).

Shall have a normal whey flavor free

from undesirable flavors, but may possess the following flavors to a.

(1) Flavor. Reconstituted whey shall have

a normal whey flavor free from undesirable flavors, but may possess the following flavors to a slight degree: Bitter,

fermented, storage, and utensil; and

the following to a definite degree: feed

and.

We propose to change ‘‘reliquefied’’ to ‘‘reconstituted’’

to more accurately describe the process of converting dry whey to a liquid product. We propose to

provide a Table 1 that includes the allowed flavors

and their

(2) Physical appearance ............................ No change ................................................ N/A.

Has a uniform color, and is free flowing,

free from lumps that do not break up

under slight pressure, and is practically

free from visible dark particles.

Dry whey shall possess uniform color. It

shall be reasonably free flowing, be

free from lumps except those that readily break up with slight pressure and be

practically free from visible dark particles. See Table II of this section.

We propose changes that would provide consistency

with other dairy products standards and more clearly

describe product meeting this grade requirement. We

also propose to provide a Table II that includes the

allowed physical appearance attributes and their intensities. This would allow the reader to quickly identify physical appearance characteristics and intensities included in this standard.

(3) Bacterial estimate. Not more than

50,000 per gram standard plate count.

(3) Bacterial estimate. Not more than

30,000 per gram standard plate count.

See table III of this section.

We propose to reduce the bacterial estimate from not

more than 50,000 per gram to not more than 30,000

per gram to reflect improvements in the quality of dry

whey currently produced. We also propose to provide

a Table III that includes information concerning

microbiological and compositional requirements. This

would allow the reader to quickly identify microbiological, compositional, and scorched particle requirements.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Notices 38237

UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR DRY WHEY1—Continued

Current standard Proposed Discussion

(4) Coliform. Not more than 10 per gram .. (4) Coliform count not more than 10 per

gram. See table III of this section.

We propose to include count following coliform to be

consistent with other dairy products Standards. We

also propose to provide a Table III that includes information concerning microbiological and compositional

requirements. This would allow the reader to quickly

identify microbiological, compositional, and scorched

particle requirements.

(5) Milkfat content. Not more than 1.50

percent.

(5) Milkfat content. Not more than 1.50

percent. See Table III of this section.

We propose to provide a Table III that includes information concerning microbiological and compositional

requirements. This would allow the reader to quickly

identify microbiological, compositional, and scorched

particle requirements.

(6) Moisture content. Not more than 5.0

percent.

(6) Moisture content. Not more than 5.0

percent. See table III of this section.

We propose to provide a Table III that includes information concerning microbiological and compositional

requirements. This would allow the reader to quickly

identify microbiological, compositional, and scorched

particle requirements.

(7) Scorched particles content. Not more

than 15.0 mg. See table III of this section.

We propose to relocate the requirement for scorched

particle content from the ‘‘Optional tests’’ section of

this standard and include it as a required test for assignment of U.S. Grade. Test methods have improved so that consistently accurate results are now

attainable. We also propose to provide a Table III

that includes information concerning microbiological

and compositional requirements. This would allow the

reader to quickly identify microbiological,

compositional, and scorched particle requirements.

Table 1.—Classification of Flavor .............

Flavor Characteristics—U.S. Extra Grade

Bitter—Slight

Feed—Definite

Fermented—Slight

Storage—Slight

Utensil—Slight

Weedy—Definite

We proposed to provide a Table I that includes the allowed flavors and their intensities. This would allow

the reader to quickly identify flavor characteristics

and intensities included in this standard.

Table II.—Classification of Physical Appearance.

Physical Appearance Characteristics—

U.S. Extra Grade.

Color—Uniform

Free flowing—Reasonably

Lumpy—Slight pressure

Visible dark particles—Practically free

We proposed to provide a Table II that includes the allowed physical appearance attributes. This would

allow the reader to quickly identify physical appearance characteristics and intensities included in this

standard.

Table III.—Classification According to

Laboratory Analysis.

Laboratory tests—U.S. Extra Grade .........

Bacterial estimate; Standard plate

count; per gram (max)—30,000

Coliform count; per gram (max)—10

Milkfat content; percent (max)—1.5

Moisture content; percent (max)—5.0

Scorched particle content mg (max)—

15.0

We propose to provide a Table III that includes information concerning microbial, compositional, and

scorched particle requirements. This would allow the

reader to quickly identify microbial, compositional,

and scorched particle requirements included in this

standard.

Basis for acidity classification .................... No change ................................................ N/A.

Acidity classification is not a U.S. grade

requirement. Acidity classification will be

made available only upon U.S. graded

product and the results will be shown on

the grading certificate.

No change ................................................ N/A.

The dry whey will be classified for acidity

as follows:

(a) Dry sweet-type whey. Dry whey

not over 0.16 percent titratable

acidity on a reconstituted basis.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(b) Dry whey % titratable acidity. Dry

whey over 0.16 percent, but below

0.35 percent titratable acidity on a

reconstituted basis. The blank being

filled with the actual acidity.

No change ................................................ N/A.

38238 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Notices

UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR DRY WHEY1—Continued

Current standard Proposed Discussion

(c) Dry acid-type whey. Dry whey with

0.35 percent or higher titratable

acidity on a reconstituted basis.

No change ................................................ N/A.

Reserved .................................................... No change ................................................ N/A.

Optional tests ............................................. No change ................................................ N/A.

There are certain optional requirements in

addition to those specified in section,

§ 58.2605.

There are certain optional requirements

in addition to those required for U.S.

Grade assignment.

When U.S. Grade Standards were removed from the

Code of Federal Regulations, it was no longer appropriate to reference particular sections of the Code.

We proposed to modify this sentence accordingly.

Tests for these requirements may be run

occasionally at the option of the Department and will be run whenever they are

requested by an interested party.

No change ................................................ N/A.

These optional requirements are as follows:

(a) Protein content (N × 6.38). Not

less than 11 percent.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(b) Alkalinity of ash (sweet-type whey

only). Not more than 225 ml. of

0.1N HCI per 100 grams.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(c) Scorched particle content. Not

more than 15.0 mg.

Relocated .................................................. We propose to relocate the requirement for scorched

particle content from the ‘‘Optional Tests’’ section of

this standard and include it as a required test for assignment of U.S. Grade. Test methods have improved so that consistently accurate results are now

attainable.

U.S. grade not assignable .......................... No change ................................................ N/A.

Dry whey shall not be assigned the U.S.

grade for one or more of the following

reasons:.

We propose to provide a preamble to this section that

is consistent with other dairy product standards.

(a) Dry whey which fails to meet the requirements of U.S. Extra Grade shall

not be assigned a U.S. grade.

(a) The dry whey fails to meet the requirements of U.S. Extra Grade.We propose editorial changes to provide consistency

with other dairy product standards.

(b) Dry whey which fails to meet the requirements of any optional test, when

tests have been made, shall not be assigned a U.S. grade.

(b) The dry whey fails to meet the requirements of any optional test, when

tests have been made.

We propose editorial changes to provide consistency

with other dairy product standards.

(c) Dry whey produced in a plant found on

inspection to be using unsatisfactory

manufacturing practice, equipment, or

facilities or to be operating under unsanitary plant conditions shall not be assigned a U.S. grade.

(c) The dry whey is produced in a plant

found on inspection to be using unsatisfactory manufacturing practice, equipment, or facilities, or to be operating

under unsanitary plant conditions.

We propose editorial changes to provide consistency

with other dairy product standards.

Test Methods .............................................. No change ................................................ N/A.

All required tests, and optional tests when

specified, shall be performed in accordance with the following methods:.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(a) ‘‘Methods of laboratory Analysis,’’ DA

instruction series 918–103–2, 918–103–

5, 918–109–2, and 918–109–3, Dairy

Grading Branch, Poultry and Dairy Quality Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Washington, DC 20250, or the latest revision thereof.

(a) Scorched particle content shall be determined by the method contained in

the latest revision of 918–RL, Laboratory Methods and Procedures, USDA/

AMS/Dairy Programs, Dairy Grading

Branch, Room 2746–S, 14th and Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC

20250–0230.

We propose to limit the use of USDA specific test

methods contained in 918–RL to the evaluation of

scorched particle content only. This is necessary because a test method for scorched particles is not provided by the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, the Standard Methods for the Examination of

Dairy Products, or the International Dairy Federation.

We also propose to identify three sources of test

methods that can be used to analyze dry whey for

determination of U.S. grade. Reference to these

sources will eliminate the need for USDA to maintain

a separate document to provide this test method information.

(b) All other tests shall be performed by

the methods contained in the latest edition of the ‘‘Official Methods of Analysis

of the Association of Official Analytical

Chemists’’, published by the Association of Official Analytical Chemists

International, 481 North Frederick Avenue, Suite 500, Gaithersburg, MD

20877–2504; by the methods provided

in the latest edition of the ‘‘Standard

Methods for the Examination of Dairy..

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 20, 2000 / Notices 38239

UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR DRY WHEY1—Continued

Current standard Proposed Discussion

Explanation of Terms ................................. No change ................................................ N/A.

Explanation of Terms ................................. No change ................................................ N/A.

With respect to flavor.—(1) Slight .............. No change ................................................ N/A.

An attribute barely identifiable and present

only to a small degree.

Detectable only upon critical examination We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

(2) Definite. An attribute readily identifiable

and present to a substantial degree.

(2) Definite. Not intense but detectable. ... We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

(3) Undesirable. Identifiable flavors ........... (3) Undesirable. those flavors. ................. We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

in excess of the intensity permitted, or

those flavors not otherwise listed.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(4) Bitter. Distasteful, similar to taste of

quinine.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(5) Feed. Feed flavors such as alfalfa,

sweet clover, silage, or similar feed.

(5) Feed. Feed flavors (such as alfalfa,

sweet clover, silage, or similar feed) in

milk carried through into dry whey.

We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

(6) Fermented. Flavors such as fruity or

yeasty, produced through unwanted

chemical changes brought about by

microorganisms or their enzyme systems.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(7) Storage. Lacking in freshness and imparting a ‘‘rough’’ or ‘‘harsh’’ aftertaste.(7) Storage. Lacking in freshness and imparting a ‘‘stale’’ aftertaste.We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

(8) Utensil. A flavor that is suggestive of

improper or inadequate washing and.

No change ................................................ N/A

sterilization of utensils or factory equipment.sanitation of utensils or manufacturing

equipment.

We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

(9) Weedy. Aromatic flavor characteristic

of the weeds eaten by cows carried

through into the dry whey.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(b) With respect to physical appearance:

(1) Slight pressure. Only sufficient pressure to readily disintegrate the lumps.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(2) Practically free. Present only upon very

critical examination.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(3) Free flowing. Capable of being poured

continuously without interruption.

(3) Reasonably free flowing. Pours in a

fairly constant, uniform stream from the

open end of a tilted container or scoop.

We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

(4) Lumps. Loss of powdery consistency

but not caked into hard chunks.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(5) Uniform color. Free from variation in

shades or color.

No change ................................................ N/A.

(6) Visible dark particles. The presence of

scorched or discolored specks capable

of being seen by the eye.

(6) Visible dark particles. The presence of

scorched or discolored specks readily

visible to the eye.

We propose to change the wording to provide consistency with other U.S. Grade Standards for dry milk

products.

1 Compliance with these standards does not excuse failure to comply with the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621–1627.

Dated: June 13, 2000.

Kathleen A. Merrigan,

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing

Service.

[FR Doc. 00–15446 Filed 6–19–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

[PY–99–005]

United States Grade Standards for

Shell Eggs

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service,

USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing

Service (AMS) is changing the United

States Grade Standards for Shell Eggs.

Specifically, the changes delete the

general term ‘‘Inedible eggs’’ and its

definition, revise the definition of the

general term ‘‘Loss’’ eggs by including

examples of inedible eggs, revise the

term descriptive of an A quality white,

and delete specifications for packaging

materials. These changes will simplify

and clarify the terminology used and

will remove information that is no

longer of value to the industry.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 20, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth S. Crosby, Acting Chief,

Standardization Branch, Poultry

Program, Agricultural Marketing

Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,