NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 

FEDERAL GRAIN INSPECTION SERVICE 

+ + + + + 

 GRAIN INSPECTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (GIAC) 

MEETING 

+ + + + + 

THURSDAY 

DECEMBER 15, 2022 

+ + + + + 

The Advisory Committee met at the AMS 

National Grain Center, 10383 North Ambassador Drive, 

Kansas City, Missouri, at 8:30 a.m., Barbara Grove, 

Chairman, presiding. 

PRESENT: 

BARBARA GROVE, Chairperson, Central Valley Ag 

ARTHUR NEAL, Deputy Administrator, Federal Grain 

Inspection Service 

JANICE COOPER, Managing Director, Wheat Marketing 

Center 

CHRISTOPHER FREDERKING, General Manager, Zen-Noh 

Grain Corporation 

PHILIP GARCIA, Grain Inspection Program Manager, 

Washington State Department of Agriculture 

JOHN MORGAN, Supreme Rice, Crowley, Louisiana 

CURTIS ENGEL, Senior Vice President, The Scoular 

Company 

CHARLES BIRD, Senior Director of Product 

Management, Neogen Corporation 

ROBERT SINNER, President, North Dakota SB&B Foods, 

Incorporated 

JIMMY WILLIAMS, Secretary, Missouri Department of 

Agriculture 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

ALSO PRESENT: 

BRIAN ADAM, USDA 

ANUJ CHOPRA, ESQPLUS 

NICHOLAS FRIANT, Vice Chair, Cargill, Incorporated 

ANTHONY GOODEMAN, USDA 

ED JHEE, USDA 

BYRON REILLY, USDA 

DR. KURT ROSENTRATER,Professor, Iowa State University 

DENISE RUGGLES, USDA 

PAUL VICINANZO, USAID 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S

Call to Order......................................4

Public Comments....................................4

Discussion Recommendations.........................5

Finalize Recommendations..........................29

Discuss Agenda Items for Next Meeting.............31

Closing Remarks...................................56

Adjourn
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

(8:30 a.m.)

CHAIR GROVE: Good morning, everybody. 

Thank you for your patience as we got ourselves a 

little re-organized here to be able to do some editing 

and some business this morning. Again, thank you for 

everybody who is attending today, both in the live 

gallery and on our virtual gallery.

Much appreciated that you are here 

listening to what we are doing and working on and 

also to be able to possibly add to things that we may 

be looking for in the future and to think of again 

aspects that we as a Committee may not think of, so 

thank you again for coming.

Again, Committee, thank you for the work 

you did yesterday and last night in working on some 

of our industry issues and I think we will go ahead 

and call this to order. I will ask in the discussion 

that we had yesterday of our industry issues of 

destination, origin grade, variances, technology 

prioritizations.

Are there any public comments that 

somebody would like to add to us before we start so 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

that we may take into consideration for resolutions?

I don't see any in the chat in our virtual 

meeting attendees. Okay, if not, I think we're going 

to go ahead and discuss the resolutions that we worked 

on yesterday with the input again from everybody here 

within the group and people in the room, again, thank 

you. 

And thank you to FGIS for helping us with 

a few of the regulatory and technological pieces on 

the backside to help us out. If we go ahead and 

let's put the first resolution up on the screen. And 

Nick is going to go ahead and read this for us. And 

this was over destination to origin grades variances 

with the thought that it may also tie into some of 

the technology piece.

So, that resolution has pieces in it. It 

may not seem relevant to this individually, but I 

think they tie us together.

MR. FRIANT: The GIAC Committee 

encourages FGIS have a continued communications with 

the Ag industry for consistency in grade standard 

application where concerns for origin to destination 

grade or weight variances may be observed. As part 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

of this approach, FGIS should continue engagement 

with Ag industry stakeholders for improved rail 

service, continued education and awareness of origin 

and destination request rights within the standard 

for re-inspection and sample retention.

FGIS to provide the GIAC with data from 

the last 12 months between origin and destination 

official grades to compare results, engage product 

industry to encourage a consistent standardization of 

data for all SAAS technology software as a service 

for a future use of IT and data-driven technology 

efficiency within data efficiency, research data, 

security, privacy, and sanitization.

The findings should be reported at the 

next GIAC meeting for further discussion and 

recommendations.

CHAIR GROVE: Thank you, that was a good 

mouthful there. And, again, I think this resolution 

while looking at it as variances between agencies, 

variations between grades, we felt there was multiple 

factors. It wasn't necessarily about somebody doing 

something wrong on one end or another, that there 

were many things that could contribute to this.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

The first one again, time in transit, was 

discussed yesterday. A continued engagement as 

Arthur, you updated us to yesterday, in continued 

talks and FGIS being a part of those talks is still 

very important to help with concerns out of this 

committee continue to be heard, time in transit if 

rail service improves, may take that piece out of the 

issue.

Again, continued education and 

awareness. Tony brought up some things yesterday 

that could be done. Again, sample retention time, 

asking for an extended retention time for us to 

possibly get data in comparison and re-inspection 

between the grades on the front side and on the back 

side and see where those are.

Again, it could be machine factors such 

as moisture, things that are considered subjective 

factors like an odor, everybody has a different 

sensitivity, is it the time in transit or is it just 

the recognition. Items such as color, can that reach 

back to the technology piece or is it a training 

piece.

Then we did also feel because it didn't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

come with the issue yesterday, look at the true data 

between origin and destination. Does FGIS have that 

ability to look at I'll say individual and want to 

call them lots or a unit train on one end versus a 

unit train on one end or a barge on one end to where 

it is to destination so we can get a true feel on how 

often this is happening. Is it particular areas so 

we can bring down that focus?

And then the last had to do with as, you 

know, Chris talked about, efficiency sometime in 

getting that information in a quicker manner, more 

efficient for both loading, unloading. But to 

continue to encourage and how can we use shared data 

from our contracts or your service companies that we 

can standardized that flow of information 

considering, as Curt brought up yesterday, keeping 

that security piece in mind, how can official agency 

and either loader, unloader, the technology and the 

data talk to each other so that we have a more 

efficient and more timely view.

Any thoughts from the Committee? Again, 

this was late yesterday evening in kind of going back 

and forth and putting this together now that we're 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

looking at it again and we hear it in the daytime.

DR. ROSENTRATER: Just a quick question, 

maybe clarification, the last bullet point, what is 

product industry? Maybe we could think about adding 

some more clarity to that statement.

CHAIR GROVE: I would agree to that. 

That needs some clarification, product industry, 

whether it is a testing service, equipment programs, 

how they communicate.

Do you have a suggestion?

MR. SINNER: Barb, maybe just remove the 

word product.

MR. FRIANT: Does that clarify it? What 

I think I heard was I feel like we need, for example 

added, for example --

MR. SINNER: Yeah, I agree.

MR. FRIANT: -- equipment, suppliers.

CHAIR GROVE: Manufacturer, sorry, 

manufacturer of, either of equipment or technology 

equipment, yeah, there we go.

MS. NEAL: So, you're really talking 

about technology, you know, those technology 

platforms that could help us communicate results to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

the customers? This is just a question.

CHAIR GROVE: Yes.

MS. NEAL: Are you talking about all of 

it? Equipment, I mean, that's fine, equipment, 

manufacturer's technology platforms and the like, 

that's all fine. I just want to make sure we got 

clarity. Is that what you're all thinking of?

CHAIR GROVE: I also think of ways to 

unify the communication between programs, yes, not 

just machines but also the data stream, yes.

MR. SINNER: Barb, I'm trying to get my 

head around the first part and whether we're 

encouraging and FGIS to be I guess proactive or 

reactive? Are we asking them to --

CHAIR GROVE: Well, first is you consider 

it, since it's been turned in and as issue, it first 

starts as reactive and we do want it to be a proactive 

approach to reaching out but two different 

stakeholders, so yes.

MR. SINNER: And that was my question. 

Is this intended to be in a proactive way we're asking 

FGIS to improve their communications to the industry?

CHAIR GROVE: Yes, improving 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

communication and I think again it ties back to where 

we're going to have a technology section. Again, 

this does tie in with that and some of those 

recommendations, so maybe as we switch over, we might 

come back to this one. But, yes, we would like FGIS 

to be communicative with the different stakeholders 

and/or manufacturers that we are using for inspection 

or the possibility of using, as Curt pointed out, we 

do need to look a little into the future into the 

fact of what it's going to do.

So, Bob, where do you see a change in 

wording for this?

MR. SINNER: Well, I do think that that, 

sorry, I do think that that first sentence or that 

first paragraph needs some work to bring a little 

more clarity. I think what we're asking is FGIS, and 

if we're asking them to be proactive, I think we're 

asking them to engage of the industry to discuss 

variances and grade standards between origin and 

destination.

That may occur, right? Because we're 

learning that there has been some issues and I think 

that's, I think it could be re-worded a little bit. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

As long as I'm clear that's what we want, and I think 

that's what we want, right?

CHAIR GROVE: Yes, that is what we want.

MR. MORGAN: I would say vanity great 

standards; it's just a variance in the grades from 

origin to destination.

MR. SINNER: Just a difference in 

results.

MR. MORGAN: Difference in results, 

perfect.

CHAIR GROVE: Correct, it's not 

disputing the standard in itself.

MR. MORGAN: Correct.

CHAIR GROVE: But maybe the application 

to the results.

MR. ENGEL: Madam Chairman, I'm not sure 

that it's even disputing the grades. It's just 

there's a difference and where does the difference 

come from. I'd love to see a heat map of where this 

occurs.

CHAIR GROVE: Do you feel in bullet point 

number three that talks about what you're asking, 

let's see that map of where this occurs, so, looking 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

at the data within at least the last 12 months?

MR. ENGEL: Yes,

CHAIR GROVE: Do you feel that covers 

that?

MR. ENGEL: Well, I mean, it's having on 

some set of origins and at some set of destinations.

CHAIR GROVE: Right. Okay, do you feel 

there's -- okay, thank you.

MR. ENGEL: Does that make sense?

CHAIR GROVE: Yes, uh-huh.

John, can I go back, go back to you

and --

MR. ENGEL: Excuse me, one other thing. 

And it's some set of products, it's likely more skewed 

towards, and I'm going to make things up, but milo 

and wheat as opposed to corn and soybeans.

CHAIR GROVE: You made a statement and I 

don't feel I heard it, all of which we're talking 

about to make sure we --

MR. MORGAN: Yeah, I think these guys 

back me up. It's basically a difference in results

from, in grades from origin to destination. And the 

grade may not be, like you said, the grade may stay 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

at two but there may be some factors involved that 

affect contracts.

CHAIR GROVE: So, do you feel the 

confusion is, for consistence in grade standard

application?

MR. MORGAN: Correct, I don't think we're 

saying that we think that the origin grader and the 

decimation grade are applying the standards 

differently. I think they're just coming up with 

different results.

MR. FRIANT: Okay, so if we strike what 

I have highlighted, does that get to what you're 

saying?

MR. MORGAN: I think it should say 

consistency in grading results.

MR. FRIANT: Do you want to say 

inspection results, because grades doesn't

include --

CHAIR GROVE: Yeah, grade --

MR. FRIANT: So, grade is a specific, you 

know, term and might make the inspection results what 

you may want.

MR. MORGAN: And now I would say 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

inspection results between the origin and destination 

grading agencies or however you want to put that. 

There may not be a certificate involved.

MR. SINNER: Why don't you just call it 

the origin decimation inspection results and 

appearances might be observed. Just drop grade out. 

Origin to decimation inspection results where you 

have grade. Getting there Nick, you type like me.

MR. SINNER: That's a lot better.

CHAIR GROVE: From the first half of the 

line to the second is a duplicate.

MR. SINNER: The question is whether we 

put consistency inspection results after we address 

the origin of destination. In other words, continue 

communication Ag industry over concerns with, maybe 

it's okay the way it is.

MR. FRIANT: Even though in front of 

inspection, why don't we put official inspection so 

it's very clear that it's officially --

MR. SINNER: Huh? Both of them.

MR. FRIANT: Yeah, and weight, but I 

think inspection results or weight, official -- yeah, 

for both of them. That too, yeah.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

MR. GARCIA: You know what, you're right, 

results or official weight variances. There you go, 

thank you.

MR. FRIANT: I would suggest maybe the 

very first line striking the word A because of the 

plural of communications.

MR. SINNER: Also strike the word 

committee, so I think C and GASC is committee.

MR. NEAL: I have a question for the 

first bullet point. Are you meaning that we should 

engage with the industry for improved rail service or 

improved rail inspection, grain inspection service 

that's occurring, you know, for rail loading.

CHAIR GROVE: In discussion yesterday, 

one of the variables that was discussed as the 

possibility for variances was transit time. Could 

that be contributing to some of the variations that 

we're seeing. It could, so until you start ruling 

some things out and seeing where it is, so I think 

it's, the feeling, you know, we have a resolution in 

play from last, our last meeting and there are 

continued meetings, I know, that FGIS is a part of 

about rail service.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

So, while that isn't about a variation of 

grades per se, could it be a contributing factor? 

So, if we continue to engage to improve rail service, 

could this be a factor that takes out some degradation 

of the grain between origin and destination. Could 

that be what's happening?

MR. GARCIA: So, maybe instead of 

improved, maybe educate the rail?

MR. NEAL: I think from what I'm hearing, 

you're wanting us to, and I'm going to ask Lee to 

come up because I'm not quite sure some of this data 

even exists. But you want us to assess whether or 

not rail delays have any impact on grade result 

variation from destination, from origin to 

destination, that's what I'm hearing. And I'm going 

to ask Lee to just kind of speak to some of the data 

elements captured in this particular recommendation 

as currently drafted.

MR. CAPPER: Lee Capper at Chariots, 

thank you.

So, some things to consider in our 

processes, we deal with the products in front of us. 

We deal with and provide an official result for that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

product. As was stated yesterday, once it's left, 

we're no longer linking that result to a future result 

in our current processes or strings.

Those in the industry who seal that 

railcar and then move it know it wasn't opened, have 

it re-inspected, you know it's the same grain, but we 

don't. So, we don't currently have data elements 

that establish links but it's part of our request for 

service between origin and destination to easily draw 

a report. The way we would work to do that would be 

to use carrier identification where we would have it.

But in that, we use our visual 

documentation of deserving the carrier to document it 

and as you can all appreciate, railcars, containers, 

are often multiply marked or marked different on 

different sides. I heard last week, a barge was 

complained about for having a B at the end of the 

letter, and yet that's what our person deserved. You 

know, is it the correct document with a B or without 

a B.

So, there's some challenges around what 

these data standards that are being recommended. 

Improving carrier identification consistency, do you 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

want FGIS to establish a mechanism for having a link 

between an origin and destination grade, where the 

destination receiver provides some type of 

information to the provider about the previous or 

previous inspection.

But there are some, there are some 

challenges in producing this kind of heat map, I do 

see the value in it. I would offer that the 

inspection data warehouse which is part of our FGIS 

online portfolio captures all the official inspection 

results and those results are available to the 

customers at their request and all interested parties 

of that customer.

And so, there is data available even 

today to those parties to come get their results and 

work with their partners to, you know, examine 

specific results about specific clots that would be 

certified.

MR. NEAL: So, you all, to continue to 

move forward, you know, crafting your recommendation, 

and we will evaluate ability to do what you recommend 

and update accordingly at the next meeting.

CHAIR GROVE: So, in looking at point 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

number three in providing statistics, does that, I'll 

say, does point number two tie into a little bit about 

the awareness of what is available. Yesterday, 

again, a few items were listed or, you know, were 

mentioned about the ability to ask for a different 

sample retention.

So, also you would have data, it would be 

the request for you to pull that data or tie it 

tougher. Do those two points in a sense go together? 

If we knew more about the rights of what we have 

available to us, would that help to pull that data 

together? I don't think in general people know some 

of this is available to them. How do we help with 

that?

MR. CAPPER: Yeah, so the re-inspection 

result, the appeal result, the Board appeal result, 

you have rights to three levels of review for most 

USGSI inspections. Those results are all linked 

together, available for review. And again, it would 

then be the party that knows the lot that was 

inspected on destination has that data sting 

available to them for doing that comparison and has

the personal knowledge that the identity matches to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

that other certificate.

A word of caution, though, some of our 

domestic movements, there is multiple inspection 

plans available to you, so there's a lot of composite 

sampling that goes on and so railcar numbers might be 

part of a set of railcars in this particular data 

packet and so depending on the nature of what the 

inspection, of how the inspection was performed, 

there may or may not be an easy data string that 

particularly relates to an individual car or an 

individual container.

MR. NEAL: And correct me if I'm wrong, 

Lee and Tony and Andy, typically in a situation like 

this, if we become aware of it, it's because someone 

has said that, hey, we have a shipment that's coming 

from, you know, from Missouri and tested XYZ at origin 

but is testing, you know, LMNOP at destination, you 

know. We have to have, I think we have to have the 

input from the customer to tie everything together 

for us to even know what's going on because that's a 

lot of data moving across, you know, a lot of grain 

moving across the country and a lot of data associated 

with it.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

We're not going to know that that 

problem's occurring between origin and destination 

without a customer raising it as a concern; is that 

correct?

MR. CAPPER: Yeah, I mean, that's 

correct. We're getting, you know, on average, five 

to 10 thousand transmissions of data to us a day. I 

know we do five plus million inspections a year, so 

we're happy to facilitate what we can, but without a 

change to a data standard, to more actively link this 

type of data, it's going to be challenging going 

forward even.

MR. NEAL: Could you identify at least 

the re-inspection and I guess, what do we call it, 

re-inspection or appeals, can you identify if it's a 

re-inspection or appeal at least?

MR. CAPPER: Yes, we have inspection 

appeals separately noted and they're directly linked 

to the original results.

MR. NEAL: I think that's, at least you 

start with, if we understand at least how many reinspection appeals are being asked for.

CHAIR GROVE: How much of that 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

information is proprietary versus available for us to 

review in an aggregate form?

MR. CAPPER: It's not currently 

published in an aggregate form aside from our total 

quantities which we publish in the annual report and 

are now updating quarterly where we advertise the 

number of re-inspections appeals and Board appeals in 

aggregate that were conducted. But I think we're 

talking specifically about particular modes of 

conveyance here and so right now it's not publicly 

released.

CHAIR GROVE: Tony, if you would go 

ahead.

MR. GOODEMAN: Thanks. Can you hear me?

So, just a couple examples. Like if you 

loaded a train at Central Valley in Iowa and then 

sent it out to Calaman (phonetic), for example, eight 

days later, we have the carrier IDs and we can look 

in our system to say, okay, car ABC123 was loaded in 

in Iowa and then eight days later it shows up in 

Calaman, was officially inspected, ABC123, that's 

kind of an easy example, it's probably a fair 

inference, it's probably the same car. We don't 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

know, it could have been dumped and reloaded, it could 

have been.

Also, like Lee was talking about a lot of 

our customers will request five-car composites or 

maybe some type of average composite grading at 

origin, and that might not, might have a certificate 

for five cars, you have a certificate for, if you 

combine them together, for 100 cars. So, when it 

gets to the destination, it depends on how it's 

inspected there, too.

So, it might be a little bit more 

challenging to search in our system and that's even 

on the easier cases. So, what we might end up with, 

if you just said okay, we're only going to find, you 

know, single car lots or single barges that were done 

within, you know, 10 or 20-days, something like that, 

it might be a pretty narrow set of results that you 

had actual official inspection at origin, official 

inspection destination of those single cars.

And so, I wouldn't, you know, I don't 

know if that would be a good representation of what's 

going on or not, I don't know. On the barge side, 

kind of the same thing. It depends how much of a gap 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

in time there is and how much that might factor in, 

you know, if you did a barge that was loaded in 

Illinois and then sent down to, you know, Convent, 

you know, 20-days apart or whatever it is. May be a 

fair assumption, but again, we don't know.

What if there's 40-days between loading 

and, when I say loading, the origin grade and the 

destination grade. Is it even the same barge, that's 

the piece where the data that we have isn't perfect, 

because it doesn't say, okay, this barge was never 

unloaded again. It might be a piece where the 

industry could provide some insight.

Because those might be the most important 

ones that we want to look at, too, the ones where 

there is a gap of time. So, just kind of echoing 

what Lee was saying.

MR. FRIANT: I can find some information 

but I don't know if it's going to be exactly a 

bullseye of what we're looking for.

MR. NEAL: So, for the purposes of the 

work that's before you, I just want to make sure that 

you understood that right now the data is not 

necessarily crystal clear. You can continue moving 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

forward, we just will probably have to evaluate the 

recommendation, you know, see what's possible. It 

may be future work that we'll have to continue to do 

on this item.

MR. FRIANT: And ask you think about 

bullet point four to what Tony spoke to, many of these 

initial results that get average star on paper, and 

don't turn into electronic until post-averaging, so 

if there is a feeling that we should be more focused 

on ensuring we have electronic capture of every 

sample and the ability to do comparisons between 

those samples, maybe that's something to consider.

CHAIR GROVE: So, Nick and Committee, I 

think taking into account again right now, we don't 

know what data is available or again how it can be 

found if in changing this or updating this into, isn't 

necessarily we want data provided at this time or at 

our next meeting, but in, research isn't the correct 

word because research always thinks, you know, you're 

huffing to go out and, you know --

MR. NEAL: Evaluate the ability.

CHAIR GROVE: Yes, evaluate the ability, 

thank you. Sort of evaluate the ability to provide 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

this, to find this data.

MR. FRIANT: Does that read better?

MR. SINNER: Madam Chairman, I think that 

gets it because to Tony's point, this is going to be 

dealing with exceptions, masses of information.

MR. ENGEL: I also think we need to fix 

this last sentence here. I believe the intention is 

to ensure that security, privacy, and sanitation are 

taken into account when looking at the data 

efficiency.

CHAIR GROVE: Yes, I think the beginning 

of the sentence isn't a good tie-in.

MR. FRIANT: So, is it more about within 

that efficiency ensure that security, privacy, and 

sanitization --

CHAIR GROVE: I think because, you know, 

definitely as we talked yesterday, and as Lee just 

mentioned right now, it's a paper copy, not necessary 

in the system, but isn't necessary just on the FGIS 

side or an official side because our industry 

organizations also have their own sets of security 

that they may be saying, no, we don't want to allow 

that data flow.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

But I think, again, looking at what is 

that we could start looking at or even those 

technology, some people that are way better at 

technology, and Lee, I had to call somebody for some 

terms last night. I'm like, it's in my head, help 

me, give me some terms. There's other people that 

know better of what we're trying to do.

And if that's engaging talks with that 

group of people, that IT internet security groups 

within FGIS and also some industry stakeholders, what 

would that take, what would that entail? Would that 

be a beneficial piece to that last, what would be all 

need to do to be able to have this communication more 

efficiently.

As again, as Lee just stated, until 

possibly that retention period is up, we won't have 

those electronic records. If you want to state that 

again, what you said, sometimes again between the 

origin and destination, we don't necessarily have 

that electronic record until the end is offloaded, 

right?

MR. CAPPER: In many cases currently, 

there's not an electronic record at all is what I was 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

trying to say. So, there might be 20 paper pan 

tickets put in front of an inspector who uses a 

calculator to mathematically obtain the average 

result and then that average set of results becomes 

the electronic record.

But the individual railcar D would never 

have an electronic, currently an electronic data 

string with a specific set of results. I guess I 

would offer, since we've spent so much energy on this 

topic this morning, is it worthwhile to consider some 

type of further Committee discussion on our current 

data standards, future data standards, other needs in 

the space in a formal setting.

CHAIR GROVE: And instead of addressing 

it here, it may tie back to again the next resolution 

as part of the entire technology piece.

MR. NEAL: The world is bigger, so I 

could interpret this a couple of ways based on 

conversations having been held here yesterday and 

today. In the context of this particular 

recommendation, we're talking about origin and 

destination. In some context from yesterday, we're 

talking about service that FGIS provides directly to 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

customers. FGIS, our own personnel. In this aspect, 

though the recommendation is crafted as talking about 

the entire official system.

So, we're talking about all of our 

official agencies in addition. So, this conversation 

is extremely extensive and will have to extend far 

beyond just FGIS but will have to engage official 

agencies because baseline expectations, baseline 

needs will have to be established, I believe, for us 

to even probably get to a point where we can do this.

And that's what Lee's talking about, data 

standards, because every official agency, they don't 

operate the same. They don't have the same 

capacities. And so, that has to be taken into 

consideration as well.

MR. FRIANT: So, to that point, Arthur, 

I think what I'm hearing is a good agenda item for 

the next Committee meeting would be something around 

data standards, what they are, what they should be, 

what gaps there are. And I think probably, Lee, I 

would leave it to your discretion on what, I would 

see you as being the person to talk about that and 

somewhat to your discretion on what that type of 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

presentation and who would be included in that.

MR. CAPPER: Yeah, that sounds 

appropriate and what the necessary pre-work with the 

Committee to work that out.

CHAIR GROVE: So, would we suggest 

leaving this here as it is something for you to start 

discussing internally for a future agenda item 

knowing that we're bringing it into the stream 

already but the greater discussion would be you 

bringing something to the next meeting as part of the 

agenda.

MR. NEAL: So, from my perspective 

looking at it as crafted, because you've got multiple 

recommendations within this one recommendation, I 

think the GIAC will have to acknowledge the fact that 

this is a long-term type of recommendation, it's not 

going to be addressed fully within, you know, a year 

even.

This is going to be a process on many 

fronts; it's going to engage a number of 

stakeholders; it's a long-term goal that's set before 

us. And that's, you know, the type of work we're 

supposed to be doing. I've got no issue with that. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

Just, you know, I think open and, you know, frank 

dialog around the issues, what we have to make sure 

we all have the proper perspective around the 

recommendation as it's being made.

CHAIR GROVE: In this room, I think we 

can probably acknowledge that we understand this is 

long-term as this will be a public document. It will 

need clarification to add this is for future longterm. I want to make, you know, as a public document, 

for people to read into this, do we need to clarify 

this isn't something we are expecting back. Because 

we talk about the very last line, to provide it back 

at the next meeting, that's not what we're 

necessarily, but again, possibly reporting on where 

we're at.

MR. FRIANT: We just simply change it to 

subsequent GIAC meetings from the next, does that 

help, we recognize it won't just be the next meeting, 

it could be the next 18 meetings.

MR. NEAL: I'll be honest with you, you 

can delete the last line and it would be fine. 

Because you know we're going to update every meeting 

anyway and it establishes the recommendation as a 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

goal.

MR. SINNER: Madam Chair, just a point

of clarification on the first bullet on the first 

bullet. Should that really be related to transit 

time rather than service? Because we're talking 

about a variance in origin versus destination. And 

so, maybe it just simply states continue engagement 

with Ag industry stakeholders for improved transit 

times. Because we're talking about rail and barge.

CHAIR GROVE: Correct. Apologize, too, 

and that is something Chris brought up yesterday that 

they're seeing it on barges also, so yeah, I think 

that is a good recommendation.

MR. FRIANT: On the second bullet, reinspection probably should be considered as review 

inspection, the review inspections include a reinspection appeal board, you know.

CHAIR GROVE: I think we've made a lot 

of good changes in here and again with the idea that 

we know the goal is about the long term results. 

It's not going to be an immediate result, something 

we can continue working on. I do feel comfortable 

with where this is at.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

Any other?

All right, Nick, would you hit save?

All right, do we have a motion to accept 

it?

MR. FRIANT: Second.

CHAIR GROVE: Say any nays?

All right, thank you. Thank you for the 

work on this this morning.

Nick, if you could go ahead and bring up 

our next one. All right, will you go ahead and read 

this for us?

MR. FRIANT: GIAC endorses recent 

progress by FGIS to establish a process for 

evaluating and certifying new technologies for use in 

the official grain grading system. GIAC encourages 

FGIS to develop an organized approach for identifying 

the appropriate technologies. In consideration of 

the need and efficiency for new technology, FGIS 

should survey FGIS and official agency personnel to 

identify priority issues, communicate with grain 

industry stakeholders to invite feedback, engage 

other industries and government agencies to learn how 

technology is being deployed to address challenges 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

that may have relevance to grain grading. The 

findings should be reported at the next GIAC meeting 

for further discussion and recommendations.

CHAIR GROVE: To pick up one of the 

comments from the last resolution, maybe instead of 

official grain grading system, official inspections 

system?

MR. FRIANT: This is nit-picky, but 

should it the GIAC endorses --

CHAIR GROVE: Sure.

MR. FRIANT: Endorses the GIAC?

DR. ROSENTRATER: I'm curious, should we 

not just state in the third line down, identifying 

but maybe implementing or something along those lines 

so that it's not just here's the laundry list of 

technologies but it would be more proactive in moving 

forward. You know, whether it's implementing or a 

different synonym, perhaps we should say identifying 

and, I'm not sure of the right word, but maybe 

implementing is the right word.

MR. ENGEL: Kurt, is your point about 

identifying what's possible and then what's practical 

or what's doable?
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

DR. ROSENTRATER: Yeah.

CHAIR GROVE: Restate that. Are you 

wanting it re-worded or just to --

MR. ENGEL: My question was whether about 

identifying and then implementing was the basis of 

this comment about identifying everything is possible 

but then the implementation piece being what is 

practically, what's doable so to speak.

MR. NEAL: You don't think appropriate 

addresses that, or is there another legal term for it 

that I'm not aware of, which is quite possible.

CHAIR GROVE: Can you restate that?

MR. NEAL: I said it doesn't 

appropriately address that, what's practical and 

doable.

MR. FRIANT: Yeah, I think so.

CHAIR GROVE: I was catching up to where 

it was.

MR. NEAL: And just one comment on the 

first bullet point. I would suggest we use 

collaborate instead of survey, collaborate with 

because survey will require us to go through O&B 

approval to do a survey.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

MR. FRIANT: And I know sometimes we get 

hung up on words. Is official agency the right term 

to use here?

MR. FRIANT: Or official personnel.

DR. ROSENTRATER: I'm just curious, 

what's the difference between official agency 

personnel and just regular agency personnel?

MR. NEAL: The way that it is currently 

crafted, they have FGIS personnel and then official 

agency personnel, which would be those agencies that 

provide service under a designation or delegation.

MR. GARCIA: What's their reason they put 

organized approach, is organized, does that need to 

be there? It's confusing, because what's the 

difference? It seems a little too descriptive.

CHAIR GROVE: Unorganized?

MR. GARCIA: Well, just say, just 

approach, because I think organized is not setting 

them up for success. It's too much interpretation, 

I think.

MR. ENGEL: Should we replace that with 

prioritized rather than organized?

CHAIR GROVE: I use that term because 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

Arthur actually used that specific term that what he 

saw was needed was an organized approach and that 

meant something to him, so I was reflecting that 

statement.

MR. NEAL: And just for clarity, and I 

understand where it's coming from and it, because 

there are many commodities, many options, many 

equipment manufacturers, many technologies that 

exist, we have to have a strategy for even identifying 

how to address some of the possibilities because we 

can be all over the place trying to find a way to 

modernize and become more efficient in leveraging 

technology.

And so, I think an organized approach is 

encompassing that work, developing a strategy, you 

know, that we can agree around to attempt this 

progressive movement. I don't have an issue with it 

one way or the other. I understand where you're all 

coming from.

MR. GARCIA: Well, I think I'd feel more 

comfortable with a strategic approach because I think 

unorganized is a little too open-ended for 

interpretation. I might be going in the woods, but 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

I think strategic sounds better than organized.

CHAIR GROVE: How about develop a 

strategy?

MR. GARCIA: That works, good.

CHAIR GROVE: Thank you for those; that's 

always a term, it's like we're not just out here, we 

want to know what is our goal. Because if you don't 

have that goal what you're reaching for, then you 

aren't being organized in your approach. So, we'd 

like to develop that strategy ahead of time, what do 

we want out of this.

DR. ROSENTRATER: I'm curious about the 

fourth sentence, first paragraph. In consideration 

of the need and efficiency for new technology, I'm 

getting hung up on efficiency for new technology. I 

think maybe we need more clarity.

What does that really mean?

CHAIR GROVE: More moving where the and 

is in consideration of the need for, the need for 

technology for efficient, I mean, if it's moved out 

of that spot, you're right. You would assume 

technology is part of efficient, so I think we're 

looking at efficiency or technology to make us 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

efficient.

MR. SINNER: So, personally, I added that 

myself and I thought it clarified that we need to 

collaborate, communicate with stakeholders and 

understand, number one, the need by collaborating 

with our personnel. But also we need to understand 

the efficiency of that new technology, is it going to 

be feasible? Is it going to do what we need it to 

do?

DR. ROSENTRATER: Maybe we could say in 

consideration of the need for new and more efficient 

technology or something like that.

CHAIR GROVE: And, Arthur, I certainly 

understand that that last sentence is probably also 

not needed but what that was meant to convey is that 

we really want to see this move along as quickly as 

possible, so we're asking for some progress to be 

made by the next meeting and we know you always report 

back very thoroughly, but there was an intent for 

including that last sentence. While this may be a 

long-term strategy, an urgency is felt for more 

immediate results.

MR. SINNER: Madam Chair, I thought the 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

discussion yesterday was really good on this topic 

and I think this resolution is really good, well done,

certainly by the three people that were involved in 

this. I'll move to adopt this resolution.

DR. ROSENTRATER: I second.

CHAIR GROVE: All right, do I hear any 

need for further discussion or nays in this?

All right, I feel we have a resolution 

that's passed. Thank you, Robert.

So, we made good work of this this 

morning, thank you for the discussion. Again, thank 

you to the subcommittee who worked on the 

technologies piece. Again, the fact that you brought 

with you a wide array, you already engaged many parts 

of the industry for thought, so that is very 

important.

With that, we are scheduled to have a 

break in between this next section, but I think to 

expedite and move on to looking at discussing items 

for our next meeting. And we would also engage the

public and our FGIS group to feel free to offer 

recommendations for agenda items for the next 

meeting.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

Obviously, technologies will continue to 

be on there, the destination versus origin grades as 

an update, within your updates piece doesn't 

necessary need to be a new with an active resolution 

is always part of updates, doesn't need to be a new 

agenda item, correct. Because that's already an 

active, will be an active resolution so can be 

discussed at any time?

MR. NEAL: I would suggest for, well, and 

the agenda will be, is a live document, so you'll all 

be discussing this before the next meeting anyway. 

So, yeah, that's fine, we'll clarify. We'll probably 

end up adding it on the agenda, it should probably be 

on there for us to have the discussions, and if 

anything is going to come out of it as a 

recommendation, to be added on to what you've already 

done, it will already be there.

I think the data standards is a component 

that's connected to it but is very specific and Tom 

would have to be dedicated just to that, yeah.

CHAIR GROVE: And I do think the 

subcommittee, technology's group, had discussed 

yesterday that you would like to keep technologies as 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

an ongoing agenda item, so thank you for that 

recommendation yesterday. Adding, again, the data 

standards definitely is an agenda item and I do think 

-- go ahead.

MR. VICINANZO: Paul Vicinanzo with 

USAID. We are a government agency that exports many 

of the commodities that are talked about in this 

organization. One of the issues that we've been 

having over the last several years is the container, 

quality of containers in the four exports in the 

supply chain. And FGIS does perform container 

reviews for our programs. We've continued to have 

problems with those containers. For example, they 

will do a container exam at a marine terminal for us 

and then when that box is brought to the load 

facility, we have a surveyor oversee the loading and 

quality of the container.

And I would say 25 up to sometimes 40 

percent of those containers are rejected at the door, 

due to poor quality. And we're specifically using 

20-footers, and we realize that's a more difficult 

part of the fleet, the container fleets, than the 

40's, but we are having large inequities I guess 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

between when it's originally surveyed and by the time 

it's actually loaded.

And we'd like to see if we could sit down 

and understand the surveying process that's performed 

now. And we feel that it's a little bit to the, you 

know, the process is a little bit too subjective, 

we'd want to probably tighten it up. As well, we 

would consider or we would ask that it be considered 

that a food grade criteria actually be codified, 

which today, when you ask a carrier, Amerisc and MSC 

or whomever your ocean carrier is, they all have their 

own criteria as to how they define food grade 

containers.

We would consider defining that for our 

own purposes, not let individual entities do that, 

because we get different products when we do that.

The second concern that we have seen over 

the last couple of years is the fumigation. Because 

of the poor quality containers and various other 

reasons, fumigation has not been as effective in our 

programs. And our programs tend to be a little bit 

longer in the supply chain period than your 

commercial.
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

We're going to, not necessarily, but 

oftentimes more difficult locations or further 

locations which include oftentimes inlands in more 

difficult places. And we're having infestation 

problems due to the, we would say, you know, possibly 

unprepared commodity container fumigation, all that 

protocol.

So, we would also ask that, we've done 

and looked in our own system and we are upgrading our 

fumigation protocols, but we would ask that then that 

be conveyed into the FGIS fumigation handbook. So, 

we'd like to bring that up as well, all right?

CHAIR GROVE: Any questions for this 

recommendation?

I do thank you for the detail onto 

helping us understand that issue that you are having 

as part of the trade in our industry.

MR. MORGAN: Is it a similar procedure 

FGIS uses for approving --

MR. CHOPRA: Yes, contract to the USID. 

Yes, that's FGIS Document 9180, which looks at all 

modes of transportation and Identifies them and has 

the requirements, this was last revised in 2009. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

That's the document we referring to containers, just 

one page of that booklet, but it looks at all modes 

of transport. And as correctly mentioned, it is very 

subjective, so two people could have completely 

different opinions reading the same booklet, 

depending whether they were coming from.

So, to be good to make it more objective, 

transparent, and easily visible so that the supply 

chain can move, the goods can move and quality can be 

maintained. Thank you.

MS. COOPER: I think we talked about 

putting the quorum issue on the agenda for next time. 

And just to understand maybe some of the options that 

are before us, we have a 15-member committee 

currently. Our rules are two-thirds of the 15, 

whether or not we have 15 members appointed. So, it 

seems to me that we, and please let us know what those 

options are, but it seems like we could look at twothirds of appointed members or a simple majority or, 

you know, I think there are multiple options.

But clearly, that two-thirds of the full 

15 has caused us challenges in the, in the recent 

past, especially with a delay in making appointments 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

that is being encountered. So, let's put that on the 

agenda and maybe we can flush out what options we 

have before the meeting.

CHAIR GROVE: Thank you, and it took me 

second for my brain to connect to quorum, because I 

kept thinking, what, corn issue.

MR. FRIANT: Arthur, for the next 

meeting, let me back up a second, we heard from Denise 

yesterday that the annual fee review and a more in 

depth fee review in the next calendar year. Do we 

need to have a specific agenda item to get a more in 

depth review and explanation to this committee of, 

you know, maybe first of all, just what the process 

is annually. Because I suspect we've got a lot of 

members on the committee that aren't familiar with 

that process.

And then depending on where the progress 

is with, assuming the annual review is a somewhat 

more in depth review, do we need to have that as a 

specific agenda item to basically go over that review 

with this group, or is it taken for granted that that 

will be part of the FGIS updates.

MR. NEAL: So, I think we can walk 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

through the process, we can put that -- we can plan 

for that. Depending on where we are with the more 

in depth review in-house, we'll determine what we can 

share here. So, the objective is once we get our 

internal reviews conducted, we'll start engaging with 

industry around the more in depth review.

It may be before the meeting, it could 

be, you know, we can start the conversation at the 

meeting, maybe after the meeting. It just depends 

on the timeline. So, I think for us, what we'll do 

is just make sure that we have a budget discussion, 

a to be prepared, just walking you through how the 

fee review is conducted and the like.

And then we can update you on status and 

if we're at a point where we can kind of talk about 

the more in depth review, we'll make sure we're 

prepared to do that. And if we're not, we'll let you 

know that then.

MS. COOPER: We'd also like to request 

that you explore the options for a different venue 

for the next meeting. Specifically, we'd be very 

interested in going to the Louisiana Gulf so that we 

could also include a tour of export facilities there. 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

We understand there are many challenges because of 

the high bred requirement, the budget restraint, the 

charter renewal is a potential issue if you can't 

work on these items during that until the charter is 

renewed.

But we just wanted to request that 

there'd be a lot of value to the committee to seeing 

something like that instead of just this room. So, 

we'd like you to at least take a look at that.

MR. FRIANT: And, Janice, I appreciate 

you bringing that up and I would add onto that that 

it's pretty customary for NGFA and NAGA and FGIS to 

hold an industry workshop in the May timeframe in New 

Orleans. And so, I would suggest that that might be 

a good time to holding the meeting in conjunction 

because, A, staff will be there quite commonly for 

that meeting, it will have other industry 

stakeholders that will be there and then it also does 

give us that chance, as you mentioned, to get a 

facility tour and help some folks understand more 

about the industry in general.

MR. SINNER: Excellent idea.

CHAIR GROVE: Obviously, today does not 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

limit what agenda items that we have. We take them 

in consideration roughly up until a little before a 

month before the meeting, so we have that timeframe. 

But we've got a good start and I will go ahead and 

open the floor back up to you.

MS. CHOPRA: On ESG plus, we thought two 

issues may be worthwhile bringing up. One is methyl 

bromide, fumigation with methyl bromide. As you may 

know, the Montreal protocol banned the use of methyl 

bromide due to greenhouse gas emissions and the 

challenges with it. USDA has a program on this and 

basically the summer after 2005, it was to be 

completely phased out.

It's unfortunate that it's been given use 

today in the industry and maybe it's for FGIS to 

ensure that they do not give approvals or whenever 

they become aware this methyl bromide usage for 

fumigation, that it is, you know, it's stopped. 

Because it is, our assessment is in the field that 

it's rampantly being used and not being reported, 

documented.

Two sides to it, one, it's sort of 

ineffective for food cargos, or food cargos 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

especially because of high dense organic material, it 

does not penetrate. And second, of course, the 

effect it has as a greenhouse gas. It's rated at 

somewhere about 150 times more potent than carbon

dioxide. So, its impact is huge compared to the 

volume it gets used.

The second thing we thought we would use 

is, you know, all of you use fumigators who are 

carrying out instructions and carrying out the 

fumigation as per your requirement. However, that 

licensing of fumigators is still a gray area where a 

lot of them are unqualified or do not have the 

knowledge and experience and requirements to do that.

It may be something for your group to 

consider having some sort of guidelines in that 

place, either with them, the FGIS group, or as an 

intergroup or interagency. Something to be 

considered for your working group. Thank you.

CHAIR GROVE: All right, thank you for 

that addition and to look into that.

MR. WILLIAMS: Arthur, something I'd

like to ask of you and Lee for the next meeting, just 

a consideration. Is it, when we're talking about 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

data standards, if we could provide the committee 

with some information or an overview of how official 

agencies currently use various platforms to do their 

certification and just explain how, you know, just 

explain the differences with some of those platforms 

and how some agencies use the Federal certification 

program. I just think it would be helpful for 

everyone to better understand how the data is coming 

in.

CHAIR GROVE: Jimmy, are you 

specifically talking about individual inspector 

certification process?

MR. WILLIAMS: I'm talking about the 

actual platform, data platform or software program 

that they're using to provide the certification. I 

don't know how many different programs there are, but 

there's several.

PUBLIC: Can you give an example, because 

I'm completely in the dark.

MR. GARCIA: Well, okay, so there's a 

company called AdTracks that some official agencies 

use to provide their certifications. And, you know, 

again, they all work a little different but, and Lee 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

could probably speak to this better than I could, but 

basically, some of these programs, I mean, they have 

to be able to interact with the Federal database, 

correct?

Lee, feel free to come up and help me out 

a little bit here.

MR. CAPPER: FGIS requires official 

agencies to provide official certificates to their 

applicants. FGIS requires official agencies to per 

our IDW directive, which is 9180 I believe, .16, 

Inspection Data Warehouse, to provide us with a 

summary inspection packet that reflects much of the 

contents of that certificate. Those are our 

requirements --

MR. GARCIA: Well, it matters what we're 

certifying, so if we're certifying export, we're 

using their database. If we're doing domestic, we're 

using ag tracks or whatever, third party, yeah. And 

then sending those in for verification, they can be 

valid or rejected. So, it just matters what we're 

doing, what the service provider wants. So, the 

State of Washington does CRT for our export and then 

AdTracks for the domestic, so --
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

MR. NEAL: So, what I'm hearing, Jimmy, 

and I think this should be part of the update that we 

provide, provide background on kind of what we know 

that exists out there. Because I think Lee's done 

extensive research years prior to my coming onboard, 

when they were looking at the Epic initiative with 

FGIS, which platform, you know, which platforms exist 

and how they can be leverage within USDA and currently 

being used by, you know the official system.

We can provide background on what's been 

done as we also look forward on how we plan to develop 

this strategy to consider technology. We've talked 

about data sharing and things like that, too.

CHAIR GROVE: One last call for the 

public gallery. As a committee, again, we know we 

have some time. Good discussion today to give 

thought on what was want to do here in the future.

You know, Arthur, if you have any closing 

you'd like to say to the Committee?

MR. NEAL: Well, I think you've all done 

some great work. I think you've given some 

thoughtful consideration to some significant issues. 

You've planted a seed that's going to take some 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

nurturing, going to take some cultivation, take some 

fertilizer. And now it's going to take some love and 

care, so we've got some good work ahead of us. But 

I'm pleased to be doing it with you, you know. I 

think next meeting, we'll definitely have new 

members.

So, before we get together for the next 

meeting, we'll probably be welcoming them on some 

type of call, so I look forward to that. But I just 

want to say thank you all for the way that you've 

engaged to work, how you've approached it, how you've 

been open, respectful with one another, contributing.

You know, that's a major deals. So, 

we're just thankful to have you here serving USDA, 

the grain industry, the way that you are. We very 

much appreciate you.

CHAIR GROVE: Thank you. And I do want 

to echo that. I mentioned to some last night the 

appreciation that we come from many different sides 

of the industry and a lot of different experience and 

that is what makes what we are doing here I think so 

important because we have the different points of 

view and we all have the same goal, is that we want 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

to make this better. We are wanting to make the 

grain industry better. We are wanting to make trade 

better.

So, again, I appreciate the ability in a 

sense we know this is a safe place, a good place for 

our discussions and everybody has contributed to that 

with respect and that is an important piece. Because 

obviously, one of the topics, it can be considered a 

me against you, us against them, finding fault, and 

it was about finding fault, it was about better 

understanding. And that's the importance, better 

understanding.

I appreciate FGIS in being here and 

helping us to understand. Sometimes we don't know 

what's all available to us and what information that 

we could be getting and asking for and I think that 

goes a long way and then, you know, we can rectify 

some of these with understanding.

Thank you again for everything everybody 

has done today, for being here. Again, it was 

important that all of you were here. We couldn't 

have done the work today without everybody having 

been here. So, I appreciate that and again, 
NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com

hopefully with new members and working on a new core, 

I mean, charter, that will help us not feel a little 

bit of that pressure, especially with possible travel 

issues that we ran into coming here.

So, again, thank you for everything 

you've done today and again, any agenda topics, feel 

free at any time. Again, those present, we welcome 

those also. Submit those to us. Thank you and have 

a good and safe day.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter 

went off the record at 9:57 a.m.)