### 51750 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Notices

project, supporting documentation of an administrative and budgetary nature also must be provided. This information is obtained via applications through the use of federal-wide standard grant application forms and NIFA specific application forms. Because competitive applications are submitted, many of which necessitate review by peer panelists, it is particularly important that applicants provide the information in a standardized fashion to ensure equitable treatment for all.

Need and Use of the Information: The fundamental purpose of the information requested is for USDA proposal evaluation, award, management, reporting, and recordkeeping, as part of the overall administration of the research, education, and extension programs administered by NIFA. In addition to federal-wide standard grant application forms, NIFA will use the following program and agency specific components as part of its application package: Supplemental Information Form; Application Type Form; Application Modification Form; Form NIFA–2008, Assurance Statement(s); Form NIFA–2010, Fellowships/ Scholarships Entry/Annual Update/Exit
Form.

Description of Respondents: Not-forprofit institutions; Business or other forprofit; Individuals or household; Federal Government; State, Local or Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents: 6,150. Frequency of Responses: Reporting: On occasion.

Total Burden Hours: 14,388.

Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 2012–21003 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–09–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Agricultural Marketing Service**

**[Document No. AMS–FV–11–0050, FV–12– 328]** 

**United States Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice** 

**AGENCY :**  Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has revised the United States Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice. The grade standards for grapefruit juice have been changed to remove the parameters for maximum ‘‘free and suspended pulp’’ to account for advances in industry processing technology.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: September 26,

2012.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Brian E. Griffin, Inspection and Standardization Branch, Processed Products Division, Fruit and Vegetable Program, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Room 0709, South Building; STOP 0247, Washington, DC 20250; fax: (202) 690– 1527; or Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov. The U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice are available through the address cited above and on the AMS Web site at http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ processedinspection

. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Section 203(c) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1624–1627), as amended, directs and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture ‘‘to develop and improve standards of quality, condition, quantity, grade, and packaging, and 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 makes copies of official grade standards available upon request. Those voluntary U.S. Standards for Grades of Fruits and Vegetables no longer appear in the Code of Federal Regulations, 7 CFR part 52, but are maintained by USDA, AMS, Fruit and Vegetable Programs. AMS is revising the U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice using the procedures that appear in part 36 of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR part 36).
Background

AMS received a petition from the Florida Citrus Processors Association, an association of citrus producers, requesting revisions to the U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice. The petitioner requested the removal of the maximum limit for ‘‘free and suspended pulp’’ (referred to in the industry as ‘‘sinking pulp’’) from the U.S. grade standards for all forms of grapefruit juice.

The grade standards, effective since September 12, 1983, provided that grapefruit juice from concentrate, grapefruit juice, and frozen concentrated grapefruit juice establish limits for maximum free and suspended pulp as follows: ‘‘Grade A’’—10 percent by volume, and ‘‘Grade B’’—15 percent by volume. Concentrated grapefruit juice for manufacturing requirements for maximum free and suspended pulp are as follows: ‘‘Grade A’’—10 percent by volume, and ‘‘Grade B’’—12 percent by volume.

The petitioner believes that, with respect to maximum values for ‘‘free and suspended pulp’’, the existing U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice do not take into account modern extraction and finishing technologies, nor are they supported by evidence of a correlation between these criteria and acceptable flavor. The petitioner also believes that removing the ‘‘free and suspended pulp’’ values from the grade standards would allow processors to process the entire grapefruit crop without resorting to expensive technologies that increase the cost of juice with no concomitant benefit. More mature grapefruit tends to be sweeter, but when juiced, tends to cause the product to exceed maximum free and suspended pulp values.

Processing technologies used in the early 1940s were considerably different than the technologies in place today. In the developmental stages of the citrus industry, the amount of sinking pulp was an indication of excessive pressures used in extraction and finishing of citrus juice, resulting in bitter flavor. It was noted that sinking pulp levels could be correlated to bitter flavor. The bitter flavors are due to the naturally occurring naringin and limonin components found in grapefruit juice. Although bitterness is an inherent contributor to what we know as ‘‘grapefruit flavor,’’ an excessive amount of bitterness can be objectionable to

some consumers.

Current industry practices have shown us that sinking pulp levels can be greatly influenced by modern processing techniques, which eliminate the correlation between sinking pulp and excessive bitterness.

The petitioner submitted research data covering a six season period which illustrates levels of sinking pulp vs. naringin, and levels of sinking pulp vs. limonin using variations in extractor settings. The petitioner also submitted data on a sensory evaluation performed by the University of Florida on consumer acceptability of grapefruit juice with two free and suspended pulp levels. The petitioner’s research data supports the premise that modern extraction and finishing technologies produce a product where there is no correlation between grapefruit juice flavor components associated with bitter and off flavor i.e., naringin and limonin, and free and suspended pulp levels.

Prior to undertaking research and other work associated with revising the


### 51751 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Notices

grade standards, AMS sought public comments on the petition (see 76 FR 51343).

Two comments were received regarding this petition. One comment was from a trade association with international membership; and one comment was from a trade association in the U.S. representing over 8,000 citrus growers. Both comments were in support of the petition to remove the maximum limit for ‘‘free and suspended pulp’’ from the U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice.

AMS sought public comments a second time on the petition (see 77 FR 6773). One comment was received regarding this petition from a trade association with international membership in support of the petition to remove the maximum limit for ‘‘free and suspended pulp’’ from the U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice.

This revision of the U.S. Standards for Grades of Grapefruit Juice better reflects the current industry processing technology for grapefruit juice.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621–1627. Dated: August 21, 2012. David R. Shipman, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.

[FR Doc. 2012–21054 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Farm Service Agency**

**Information Collection Request; Farm Loan Programs, Direct Loan Making** 

**AGENCY :**  Farm Service Agency, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice; request for comments.

**SUMMARY :**  In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Farm Service Agency (FSA) is requesting comments from all interested individuals and organizations on an extension and a revision of a currently approved information collection that supports Direct Loan Making programs. The information collection is in support of 7 CFR part 764, which sets forth the manner for a person may apply to FSA for Direct Loan Assistance. A new form is being added to this request to streamline the loan process.

**DATES :**  We will consider comments that we receive by October 26, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  We invite you to submit comments on this notice. In your comments, include the date, volume, and page number of this issue of the Federal Register, the OMB control number and the title of the information collection. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting

comments.

Mail: Michael Moore, Senior Loan Officer, USDA, FSA, LMD, STOP 0522, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20250–0522.

Email: michael.moore@wdc.usda.gov.
Fax: (202) 720–6797 You may also send comments to the Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Copies of the information collection may be requested by contacting Michael Moore at the above address.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Michael Moore, Senior Loan Officer, Farm Service Agency (202) 690–0651. Persons with disabilities who require alternative mean for communication (Braille, large print, audio tape, etc.) should contact the USDA’s TARGET Center at (202)720–2600 (Voice and TDD).

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Title: Farm Loan Programs Direct Loan Making.

OMB Control Number: 0560–0237. Expiration Date of Approval: February 28, 2014.

Type of Request: Revision and extension of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: FSA’s Farm Loan Programs provide loans to family farmers to buy real estate and equipment, and finance agricultural production. Direct Loan Making, as specified in 7 CFR part 764, provides the requirements associated with direct loans. FSA is required to actively supervise its borrowers and provide credit counseling, management advice, and financial guidance. Additionally, FSA must document that credit is not available to the borrower from commercial credit sources in order to maintain eligibility for assistance. Direct loan making information collection requirements include financial and production records of the operation to ensure that cash flow projections are based on actual production history, a loan is adequately secured, the applicant meets established eligibility requirements, and assignments on income and sales can be obtained when appropriate.

FSA is adding a new form to this information collection request. The new form is the FSA–2314 Streamlined Request for Direct OL Assistance. The new form is a streamlined version of a current form that will be used by some respondents. The burden hours have decreased due to lower number of responses by the current participants.

Estimate of Respondent Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 48 minutes per response. The average travel time, which is included in the total burden, is estimated to be 1 hour per respondent.

Respondents: Producers. Estimated Number of Respondents: 181,922.

Estimated Annual Number of Forms per Person: 3.6.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 667,543.

Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 320,891.

We are requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection to help us to:

(1) Determine whether the continued collection of information is still necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the FSA, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(2) Assess the accuracy of the FSA’s estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) Enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission for the Office of Management and Budget approval.

Signed on August 7, 2012. Carolyn B. Cooksie, Acting Administrator, Farm Service Agency.

[FR Doc. 2012–20950 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–05–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Foreign Agricultural Service**

**Assessment of Fees for Dairy Import Licenses for the 2013 Tariff-Rate**  **Import Quota Year**

**AGENCY :**  Foreign Agricultural Service,
USDA.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces a fee of$170 to be charged for the 2013 tariffVerDate Mar<15>2010 15:04 Aug 24, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27AUN1.SGM 27AUN1pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES