[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 83 (Tuesday, May 1, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23775-23777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8291]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

7 CFR Part 810

RIN 0580-AA96


Request for Public Comment on the United States Standards for 
Soybeans

AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, USDA.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: We are initiating a review of the United States Standards for 
Soybeans to determine their effectiveness and responsiveness to current 
grain industry needs. Numerous changes have occurred in the breeding 
and production practices of soybeans as well as in the technology used 
to harvest, process, and test soybeans, and in the marketing practices 
of soybeans. As a result, soybean producer groups have asked us to 
initiate a review of the soybean standards. In order to ensure that the 
standards and subsequent grading practices remain relevant, we invite 
interested persons to submit comments and supporting information to 
assist in the evaluation of current standards and grading practices for 
soybeans and in the development of any recommendations for change.

DATES: We will consider comments that we receive by July 2, 2007.

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on this advance notice of 
proposed rulemaking. You may submit comments by any of the following 
methods:
    <bullet> E-Mail: Send comments via electronic mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d4b7bbb9b9b1baa0a7fab3bda4a7b594a1a7b0b5fab3bba2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="11727e7c7c747f65623f767861627051646275703f767e67">[email protected]</span></a>.
    <bullet> Mail: Send hardcopy written comments to Tess Butler, 
GIPSA, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 1647-S, Washington, DC 
20250-3604.
    <bullet> Fax: Send comments by facsimile transmission to: (202) 
690-2755.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver comments to: Tess 
Butler, GIPSA, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 1647-S, 
Washington, DC 20250-3604.
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
    <bullet> Instructions: All comments should make reference to the 
date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register.
    <bullet> Read Comments: All comments will be available for public 
inspection in the above office during regular business hours (7 CFR 
1.27(b)).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Riese at GIPSA, USDA, 1400 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-3630; Telephone (202) 
720-4116; Fax Number (202) 720-7883; e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5e0c3b3c3b3d3d3f701f700c373b2d3b1e2b2d3a3f70393128"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="87d5e2e5e2e4e4e6a9c6a9d5eee2f4e2c7f2f4e3e6a9e0e8f1">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

    This rule has been determined to be exempt from the purpose of 
Executive Order 12866, and therefore has not been reviewed by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    We established the U.S. soybean standards on November 20, 1940, 
under the authority of the United States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 
76). To further facilitate the marketing of U.S. soybeans, we revised 
the standards in 1994 and 2006. The 2006 revision becomes effective 
September 1, 2007.
    In 1994, we revised the reporting requirements of splits (broken 
soybeans where more than one fourth of the soybean removed and that are 
not damaged), reduced the U.S. Sample Grade criteria for stones and 
glass, established a special grade Purple Mottled or Stained, 
eliminated the grade limitation on materially weathered soybeans, 
clarified references to Mixed soybeans, and established a cumulative 
total for U.S. Sample Grade factors. In 2006, we published a Final Rule 
(71 FR 52403-52406), to be effective September 1, 2007, that changes 
the minimum test weight per bushel (TW) from a grade determining factor 
to an informational factor. Various factors are identified for soybeans 
and are used to determine the level of the grade of the shipment of 
soybeans. TW will continue to be measured, but no longer used to 
determine grade; it will be provided as additional information on the 
certificate unless the applicant for inspection service for the 
soybeans indicates that the information is not needed. As an 
informational factor TW may continue to be of interest and specified in 
contracts for soybean shipments.
    The standards serve as the fundamental starting point to define 
U.S. soybean quality in the global marketplace. They include 
definitions, the basic principles governing application of standards, 
such as the type of sample used for a particular quality analysis, 
grades and grade requirements, and special grades and special grade 
requirements, such as for Garlicky soybeans and Purple Mottled or 
Stained soybeans. Official procedures for how the various grading 
factors are determined are provided in the Grain Inspection Handbook, 
Book II, Chapter 10, ``Soybeans.'' Official procedures may be viewed 
and printed from the GIPSA Web site at: http://archive.gipsa.usda.gov/reference-library/handbooks/grain-insp/grbook2/soybean.pdf.) Also 
included are standardized procedures for additional soybean quality 
attributes not used to determine grade, such as oil and protein 
content. Together, the grading and testing standards allow buyers and 
sellers to communicate quality requirements for trade, compare soybean 
quality using equivalent forms of measurement, and assist in the 
establishment of price.
    GIPSA's grading and inspection services, as provided through a 
network of federal, state, and private laboratories, determine the 
quality and condition of soybeans. These determinations are performed 
in accordance with applicable standards using approved methodologies, 
and can be applied at any point in the marketing chain. The current 
testing technology for quality attributes, such as oil and protein 
content, is rapid and reliable, yielding consistent results. In 
addition, GIPSA issues certificates describing the quality and 
condition of the graded soybeans that are accepted as evidence in all 
Federal courts. U.S. soybean standards, and the affiliated grading and 
testing services offered by GIPSA, verify that the seller's commodity 
meets specified requirements, and that customers receive the quality 
they expect.
    Over time, numerous changes have occurred in the breeding and 
production practices of soybeans as well as in the technology used to 
harvest, process, and test soybeans, and in the marketing practices of 
soybeans. In this rapidly evolving market, we need to ensure that the 
U.S. soybean standards and associated grading procedures remain 
relevant. Therefore, we are issuing this advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking to invite comments from all interested persons for input and 
suggestions for

[[Page 23776]]

amendments to the soybean standards and associated grading procedures 
so that the standards remain applicable and best facilitate the 
marketing of U.S. soybeans. We are requesting comments, supporting 
data, and other information in response to questions on the following 
topics, as well as about all aspects of the soybean standards and 
inspection procedures. This information may be viewed and printed from 
the GIPSA Web site at: http://archive.gipsa.usda.gov/reference-library/handbooks/grain-insp/grbook2/soybean.pdf.

Foreign Material

    The soybean standards currently define foreign material (FM) as: 
``All matter that passes through an 8/64 round-hole sieve and all 
matter other than soybeans remaining in the sieved sample after sieving 
according to procedures prescribed in FGIS instructions.''
    When separating FM (impurities) from soybeans, inspectors follow a 
process that entails using a combined mechanical (sieve) and manual 
separation procedure. Specifically, inspectors first handpick the 1,000 
to 1,050-gram soybean sample for coarse foreign material (e.g., whole 
kernels of corn, cockleburs, sticks, and pods). Next, inspectors cut 
down the sample (free of coarse FM) to a portion of 125 grams. Using an 
approved shaker or hand sieve, the inspector sieves the sample with an 
8/64'' round-hole sieve. The inspector must handpick the material other 
than soybeans from the material remaining on top of the sieve and add 
it to the material that passed through the sieve (fine FM).
    It is important to note that when inspectors see soybean pods in 
the sample, they remove the soybeans from the pods and only the pod is 
considered as foreign material. Further, soybean hulls which remain on 
top of the sieve are not considered FM; whereas small broken pieces of 
soybeans, which pass through the sieve, are considered as FM.
    Finally, inspectors calculate the total amount of FM by adding the 
percentage of coarse FM to the percentage of fine FM. (This procedure 
may be viewed and printed from the GIPSA Web site at: http://archive.gipsa.usda.gov/reference-library/handbooks/grain-insp/grbook2/soybean.pdf.)
    The following is a series of questions about the FM definition and 
procedure:
    1. Is the definition of FM, as provided in the soybean standards, 
still sufficient for current marketing practices?
    2. How does our method for separating FM from soybeans compare to 
the commercial cleaning process? Please provide as much detail as 
possible as to how FM is determined in the market or for the segment of 
the market that you represent.
    3. In order to provide a better representation of actual market 
value of soybeans, should we consider developing and adopting a fully-
automated process to better reflect commercial cleaning capabilities? 
Please elaborate on the type of equipment (and sieves, if applicable) 
necessary for using such a procedure for separating FM from soybeans.
    4. Do small broken pieces of soybeans have processing value? Should 
the procedure be amended so that brokens are not considered as FM?
    5. Do processors have a method for removing soybeans from the pod? 
If not, should the procedure be amended so that pods, with or without 
soybeans in them, will be considered as FM?
    6. In light of changes in the production practices of soybeans 
brought about by various technological developments, farm programs, and 
other factors, should the grading limits for FM be amended? What should 
the new grade limits be? Please provide a rationale for any changes, 
and if possible, project the quantifiable costs and benefits for the 
U.S. soybean market if the grade limits were amended.

Damage

    According to our current inspection procedures, inspectors cross 
section soybeans and pieces of soybeans that are immature and have a 
thin, flat, wrinkled, or wafer-like appearance to determine if there is 
``meat'' in the kernel. If there is ``meat'' in the kernel and the 
``meat'' is not otherwise damaged, the inspector considers the soybean 
to be sound.
    7. Do wafered kernels (wafers) containing minimal amounts of 
``meat'' have processing value? If not, or if the value is appreciably 
reduced, should the procedure be amended so that wafers, to include 
soybeans with minimal amounts of meat, are considered damaged for 
inspection and grading purposes?

Other Factors

    In the Official Inspection and Weighing System, we currently offer 
analyses or determinations for a number of official criteria factors 
for soybeans.
    8. Are there other factors for which we should offer analyses/
determinations that would provide better or more complete information 
to facilitate the marketing and/or processing of soybeans?
    9. Since oil and protein content are considered to be the true 
determinants of value for soybean processing, should analysis of oil 
and protein content be mandatory, nongrade-determining factors that 
would be determined and reported on all official certificates for 
grade?
    10. Are there certain aspects about the oil and protein content 
that would provide more meaningful information? For example, should we 
offer not only protein content, but also the amino acid profile of the 
protein?
    11. Considering the rapid growth in biodiesel production, would the 
information exchange between sellers and buyers of soybeans be 
facilitated if standardized tests existed for attributes, such as fatty 
acids?
    a. Please list the specific attributes.
    b. Should we have a role in standardizing tests for the attributes 
listed? Should we assist only in the standardization of the tests 
(e.g., develop reference methods or improve existing reference methods) 
or should we make tests for these attributes available throughout the 
official system?
    GIPSA has been working with life science companies in the pursuit 
of a standardized, rapid test for the determination of linolenic acid 
content in soybeans. Acres currently devoted to production of low 
linolenic acid soybean varieties are lower than previously anticipated. 
In 2006, these acres totaled approximately 750,000 out of the 72 
million total planted soybean acres, less than 1 percent. However, seed 
distributors project acres devoted to production of low linolenic acid 
soybean varieties in 2007 to triple.
    12. Should GIPSA continue to pursue a standardized, rapid test for 
the determination of linolenic acid content and, if so, why?

Visual Reference Images

    In the determination of the grading factor total damage, inspectors 
look for a number of types of damage, including badly ground-damaged, 
badly weathered-damaged, diseased, frost-damaged, germ-damaged, heat-
damaged, insect-bored, mold-damaged, sprout-damaged, stinkbug-stung, or 
otherwise materially damaged.
    13. Are these the right types of damage, and are visual reference 
images/interpretive lines that are currently used to determine the 
various types of damages reflective of the level of quality desired in 
the marketplace? (Visual reference images/interpretive lines may be 
viewed on the GIPSA Web site at: http://www.gipsa.usda.gov/GIPSA/webapp?area=home&subject=grpi&topic=sq-isd-soybeans.)
    Inspectors also rely on visual reference images to determine 
whether

[[Page 23777]]

a sample meets the general appearance criteria for the special grade 
designation ``Purple Mottled or Stained.''
    14. In consideration of the fact that the overall appearance of the 
product is an important consideration for some customers, should we 
create other general appearance images? What appearance factors are of 
greatest interest? (Visual reference images/general appearance factors 
may be viewed on the GIPSA Web site at: http://www.gipsa.usda.gov/GIPSA/webapp?area=home&subject=grpi&topic=sq-isd.)

Basis of Determination

    As provided in 9 CFR 810.1603, Basis of determination, ``each 
determination of class, heat-damaged kernels, damaged kernels, splits, 
and soybeans of other colors is made on the basis of the grain when 
free from foreign material. Inspectors make other determinations not 
specifically provided for under the general provisions on the basis of 
the grain as a whole.'' For example, inspectors determine moisture 
content on the sample as a whole.
    15. What basis of determination is used in the marketplace for the 
various factors? Why does the marketplace use that basis?
    16. Would there be any positive or detrimental consequences if we 
were to determine all factors on the basis of a sample when free from 
foreign matter?

Food Grade Soybeans

    17. Should we establish a separate standard, for example, U.S. 
Standards for Food Grade Soybeans or a separate grade level, class, or 
special grade within the existing soybeans standards for food-grade 
soybeans? Please provide as much detail as possible as to:
    a. Explain why.
    b. What would a new standard look like or what would the grade 
limits be for a new grade level?
    We are committed to provide market-relevant soybean standards. We 
welcome your comments on these issues as well as any comments or 
suggestions on changes to the soybean standards and grading procedures.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71-87.

James E. Link,
Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-8291 Filed 4-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-KD-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>