This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

41096 

Vol. 87, No. 131 

Monday, July 11, 2022 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

[Doc. No. AMS–FGIS–22–0019] 

Process for the Evaluation of 

Technology for Official Grain 

Inspection 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS) currently evaluates and 

approves technology for use in official 

grain inspection on a case-by-case basis. 

AMS proposes a new internal process 

that is meant to facilitate the 

introduction of new and improved 

inspection technology that promotes 

competition and transparency. AMS is 

seeking public comment on the 

proposed process. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

September 9, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Additional technical 

information on the evaluation process 

can be found in the ‘‘Procedure and 

Submission Guidelines for the 

Evaluation of Technology for Official 

Grain Inspection’’ at https://

www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ 

media/FGISUserGuidefor

Manufacturers.pdf. 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written comments concerning 

this Notice using either of the following 

procedures: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

You can access this Notice and 

instructions for submitting public 

comments by searching for document 

number, AMS–FGIS–22–0019. 

• Mail: Dr. Timothy D. Norden, 

National Grain Center, 10383 N. 

Ambassador Drive, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64153. 

All submissions received must 

include the docket number AMS–FGIS– 

22–0019. All comments received will be 

included in the record and will be 

posted without change, including any 

personal information provided. 

Comments will be made available for 

public inspection at the above address 

during regular business hours or via the 

at https://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Timothy D. Norden, Chief Scientist, 

Technology and Science Division, 

Federal Grain Inspection Service, AMS, 

USDA; Telephone: (816) 702–3803, or 

Email: Timothy.D.Norden@usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AMS 

provides grain inspection services under 

the authority of the United States Grain 

Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 71–87k) 

(USGSA), as amended, and the 

Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 

U.S.C. 1621–1627), as amended. USGSA 

at 7 U.S.C. 74 states that the primary 

objective of the United States standards 

for grain is to certify the quality of grain 

as accurately as practicable and to 

accommodate scientific advances in 

testing and new knowledge concerning 

factors related to, or highly correlated 

with, the end-use performance of grain. 

The primary focus of the proposed 

Inspection Technology Evaluation (ITE) 

Process is on the need and suitability of 

the technology for official grain 

inspection. Below is a description of the 

proposed ITE Process. 

‘‘Technology’’ refers to 

instrumentation, equipment, and the 

associated methods for measuring grain 

quality factors. ‘‘Factor’’ means a 

measurable grain quality attribute. This 

evaluation process does not apply to the 

research and development effort before 

the technology is deemed fit-forpurpose; that is, the instrument or 

method has already been developed so 

that it generates factor-specific results 

with sufficient accuracy for official 

grain inspection. 

ITE Process Description 

The ITE process starts with the 

submission of a written proposal by a 

manufacturer of technology for a 

specific inspection factor. 

Manufacturers provide an overview of 

the technology for which they seek 

approval. This overview should 

describe the technology solution, 

indicate to which grains and inspection 

factor, or factors the technology applies, 

and the steps the technology uses to 

analyze a sample. The proposal should 

address six criteria, which will form the 

basis of the initial evaluation. These 

criteria are: (1) need; (2) accuracy; (3) 

quality control; (4) automation; (5) 

testing time; and (6) testing cost. 

An AMS review team conducts an 

initial evaluation of the proposal to 

determine if it meets these criteria. 

When the review team completes the 

initial evaluation, AMS decides whether 

to accept the proposal. This decision is 

documented and communicated to the 

manufacturer. If a proposal is not 

accepted, the manufacturer is informed 

of the specific deficiencies and the 

requirements for resubmission. If 

accepted, the proposal enters a queue, 

and the manufacturer is notified and 

provided with an estimate for the start 

date along with various factors that may 

affect the length of the evaluation 

process. 

The remaining steps of the evaluation 

process focus on validating the 

performance of the submitted 

technology using AMS’ developed 

criteria or specifications for the specific 

inspection factor. This allows for 

refinement of the initial review criteria 

to account for specific inspection needs 

and for a statistically sound evaluation 

of accuracy of the technology. If not 

already established, AMS develops 

performance criteria and specifications 

and determines whether a Federal 

Register notice is needed to finalize the 

criteria. 

With established performance criteria 

and specifications, AMS requests that 

the manufacturer provides information 

and data supporting the criteria and 

specifications. When all requested 

information has been submitted and 

accepted, AMS conducts an 

independent verification that focuses on 

accuracy. AMS will also determine if 

the submitted technology delivers 

results that are equivalent to currently 

approved technology. If this process 

shows that the technology is accurate 

and it passes the equivalence test, AMS 

notifies stakeholders and provides them 

with the implementation plan. If AMS 

is unable to verify the accuracy or the 

technology is not equivalent, the 

manufacturer is notified of the 

deficiencies and the requirements for 

resubmission. 

If AMS approves the technology, an 

AMS certificate of conformance (COC) is 

issued that allows for use in official 

grain inspection. If any alterations to the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 131 / Monday, July 11, 2022 / Notices 41097 

technology are made that could affect 

measurement results, the manufacturer 

should inform AMS in writing to 

determine the significance. In addition, 

if the manufacturer finds that the 

technology is not meeting AMS 

performance criteria, they should 

immediately inform AMS. Failure to 

inform AMS, may result in cancellation 

of the COC. 

Evaluation Criteria 

Need. AMS assesses the need 

criterion through a review of the 

manufacturer-provided information, 

input from stakeholders including the 

Grain Inspection Advisory Committee, 

and from internal information. AMS 

evaluates the demand for the testing 

technology from AMS customers and 

stakeholders and compares the demand 

to the costs of providing the testing 

service, including standardization, 

calibration, and quality control efforts. 

AMS recommends that manufacturers 

provide information from a market 

assessment of the technology that 

supports this demand. For existing 

inspection factors, a successful 

technology should be compatible with 

existing official procedures such as 

subsample size requirements. For a test 

factor with an existing single approved 

instrument model, a successful new 

instrument should offer an added 

benefit to official inspection and 

provide results in terms of accuracy that 

are equivalent to, or better than the 

currently approved instrument model. If 

pertinent, manufacturers should provide 

national or international regulatory 

requirements the technology addresses. 

This may include, but is not limited to, 

maximum levels for toxic substances. 

Accuracy and Quality Control. 

Manufacturers should provide relevant 

data that support both the accuracy and 

quality control criteria. Manufacturers 

and other interested parties are 

encouraged to review the specific 

requirements and additional technical 

information at [insert hyperlink to 

technical document]. 

Automation. If the technology 

generates an electronic result, the 

manufacturer should provide 

procedures for automatic data capture 

and the method to modify the output. 

Testing Time. Manufacturers should 

provide the estimated testing time 

required from sample receipt to final 

result. The testing time will be assessed 

by comparison to existing or similar 

technologies. Longer testing times 

should be justified by providing a 

significant advantage over existing 

technology. 

Testing Cost. The manufacturer 

should provide itemized cost estimates 

for the technology, maintenance, 

consumables, and all materials and 

equipment needed to perform the test. 

AMS evaluates the estimated costs of 

the recommended quality control, 

calibration, and standardization 

procedures. The testing cost is 

compared to existing or similar 

technologies. Higher testing costs 

should provide significant advantages 

over existing technologies. 

Melissa R. Bailey, 

Associate Administrator, Agricultural 

Marketing Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14671 Filed 7–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

The Department of Agriculture will 

submit the following information 

collection requirement(s) to OMB for 

review and clearance under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13 on or after the date 

of publication of this notice. Comments 

are requested regarding: (1) whether the 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of burden including 

the validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (4) 

ways to 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. 

Comments regarding these 

information collections are best assured 

of having their full effect if received by 

August 10, 2022. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be 

submitted, identified by docket number 

0535–0264, within 30 days of the 

publication of this notice by any of the 

following methods: 

• Email: ombofficer@nass.usda.gov. 

Include docket number above in the 

subject line of the message. 

• E-fax: 855–838–6382. 

• Mail: Mail any paper, disk, or CD– 

ROM submissions to: Richard Hopper, 

NASS Clearance Officer, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Room 5336 

South Building, 1400 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250– 

2024. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Hand 

deliver to: Richard Hopper, NASS 

Clearance Officer, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Room 5336 South Building, 

1400 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20250–2024. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor a collection of information 

unless the collection of information 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number and the agency informs 

potential persons who are to respond to 

the collection of information that such 

persons are not required to respond to 

the collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

National Agricultural Statistics Service 

(NASS) 

Title: Land Leasing Survey in 

Oklahoma. 

OMB Control Number: 0535–0264. 

Summary of Collection: The primary 

objectives of the National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS) are to prepare 

and issue official State and national 

estimates of crop and livestock 

production, disposition and prices, 

economic statistics, and environmental 

statistics related to agriculture and to 

conduct the Census of Agriculture and 

its follow-on surveys. NASS will 

conduct a survey of agricultural 

operations in Oklahoma. Selected 

farmers will be asked to provide data on 

rent & acreage as well as form of the 

lease agreement for operations with the 

following lease agreements: (1) cash rent 

for selected crops, (2) share rent, (3) 

pasture leases, winter grazing, and 

recreational leases. General authority for 

these data collection activities is granted 

under U.S.C. Title 7, Section 2204. 

Need and Use of the Information: 

Oklahoma State University, as well as 

many farmers and ranchers in 

Oklahoma, have been interested in land 

rental rates for agricultural operations in 

greater detail than what is provided in 

the Cash Rents and Leases Survey used 

to satisfy the requirement originally 

specified in the 2008 Farm Bill and 

conducted under Office of Management 

and Budget approval number 0535– 

0002. 

To assist producers with this data 

need, the Oklahoma State University, 

Department of Agricultural Economics 

(OSU–DAE), has been collecting and 

publishing statistical estimates 

biennially for more than 30 years— 

before USDA–NASS was tasked with 

the Cash Rents County Estimates. The 

OSU–DAE obtained statistics to assist 

producers in making sound rental 

agreements. Due to the diverse nature of 

the state, OSU–DAE felt it necessary to 

provide more descriptive land breakouts 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES