United States Standards for Barley

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

7 CFR Parts 800 and 810

RIN 0580-AA14

United States Standards for Barley

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration

(GIPSA) is revising the United States Standards for Barley to: modify

the classification system of barley to better reflect current marketing

practices by establishing two classes, Malting barley and Barley;

revise procedures to permit applicants the option of requesting either

the malting standards or barley standards for malting types; revise the

standards for Two-rowed Malting barley by removing the ``U.S. No 1

Choice'' grade designation; amend the definition for suitable malting

type to include other malting varieties used by private malting and

brewing companies; revise the dockage certification procedure by

reporting results in half and whole percent with a fraction less than

one-half percent being disregarded; amend the definition of thins to

require the use of a single sieve (5/64 x 3/4 slotted-hole) only in

the class Barley; and eliminate the numerical grade restriction for

badly stained and materially weathered from the standards. In addition,

GIPSA is amending the breakpoint for dockage and establishing new

breakpoints for malting barley to conform with standard changes.

The objective of these revisions is to ensure that the barley

standards are serving their intended purpose to facilitate the

marketing of barley.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Wollam, USDA, GIPSA, Room 0623,

South Building, P. O. Box 96454, Washington, D.C. 20090-6454; telephone

(202) 720-0292; FAX (202) 720-4628.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive

Order 12866.

Executive Order 12778

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778,

Civil Justice Reform. This action is not intended to have retroactive

effect. The United States Grain Standards Act (Act) provides in section

87g that no State or subdivision may require or impose any requirements

or restrictions concerning the inspection, weighing, or description of

grain under the Act. Otherwise, this proposed rule will not preempt any

State or local laws, regulations, or policies unless they present an

irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There are no administrative

procedures which must be exhausted prior to any judicial challenge to

the provisions of this rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

James R. Baker, Administrator, GIPSA, has determined that this

proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities as defined in the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) because most users of the

official inspection and weighing services and those entities that

perform these services do not meet the requirements for small entities.

Further, the regulations are applied equally to all entities.

Information Collection Requirements

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35), the information collection requirements contained in the

rule to be amended have been previously approved by the Office of

Management and Budget under control number 0580-0013.

Background

During December 1991, the Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS),

which is now part of GIPSA, distributed a discussion paper concerning

the U.S. Standards for Barley. This paper addressed several issues

relating to the standards and served as a starting point for

discussions with producers, processors, trade associations, maltsters,

handlers, and merchandisers to better understand their views on changes

needed to improve existing standards. FGIS received positive feedback.

In addition, FGIS reviewed the barley discussion paper with the FGIS

Advisory Committee and the Grain Quality Workshops and considered ideas

received during the normal course of business, recommendations from

internal management and program review, and various other sources.

In the March 22, 1995, Federal Register (60 FR 15075), GIPSA

published a proposal to revise the U.S. Standards for Barley by: (1)

Modifying the classification system of barley to better reflect current

marketing practices by establishing two classes, Malting barley and

Barley; (2) revising procedures to permit applicants the option of

requesting either the malting standards or barley standards for malting

types; (3) revising the standards for Two-rowed Malting barley by

removing the ``U.S. No 1 Choice'' grade designation and combining the

grading factors and limits for two- and six-rowed malting types onto a

single grade chart; (4) amending the definition for suitable malting

type to include other proprietary malting varieties used by private

malting and brewing companies; (5) revising the dockage certification

procedure by reporting results in half and whole percent with a

fraction less than one-half percent being disregarded; (6) amending the

definition of thins to require the use of a single sieve (\5/64\ x \3/

4\ slotted-hole) only in the proposed class Barley and remove the

grading limits from the standards; however, the level of thins will

continue to be reported on the inspection certificate; (7) revising the

standards by removing the grading limits for damaged kernels, heat-

damaged kernels, and foreign material in the proposed class Barley; and

(8) eliminating the numerical grade restriction for badly stained and

materially weathered from the standards. GIPSA further proposed to

[[Page 18487]]

amend the inspection plan tolerances based on these changes.

Comment Review

During the 60-day comment period, GIPSA received ten comments: two

from grain handling associations, five from barley producer

organizations, one from a malting barley trade association, one from a

cattle feeding company, and one from a State Department of Agriculture.

On the basis of these comments and other available information,

GIPSA has decided to revise the barley standards as proposed, with the

following exceptions: (1) Combining the grading factors and limits for

two- and six- rowed malting types into one grading chart; (2) removing

the grading limits for thins in the class Barley; (3) removing the

grading limits for damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign

material in the class Barley; (4) applying the current damaged kernels

grade limits in Six-rowed Malting barley to Two-rowed Malting barley;

(5) applying the present limits for injured-by-mold and mold damage in

Two-rowed Malting barley to Six-rowed Malting barley; and (6) applying

the current grade limits for other grains and wild oats to both Six-

and Two-rowed Malting barley.

Rather than combining the grading factors and limits for two- and

six-rowed malting types into one grading chart, GIPSA decided to

maintain a separate grading chart for the two-rowed malting type and

the six-rowed malting type because of their different grade limits and

grading factors. Also, GIPSA decided to retain the grading limits for

thins, damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign material in

the class Barley. In addition, GIPSA will continue to apply the current

grade limits in Six- rowed Malting barley for damaged kernels and other

grains only to Six-rowed Malting barley and continue to apply the

present grade limits in Two-rowed Malting barley for injured-by-mold,

mold damage, and wild oats only to Two-rowed Malting barley.

Barley Classification

GIPSA proposed to amend the barley classification system in section

7 CFR 810.202, paragraph (c), to better reflect current marketing

practices by establishing two classes of barley, specifically, Malting

barley and Barley. The class Malting barley is divided into three

subclasses: Six-rowed Malting barley, Six-rowed Blue Malting barley,

and Two-rowed Malting barley. The class Barley is divided into three

subclasses: Six-rowed barley, Two-rowed barley, and Barley. GIPSA

believes this new classification system will assist in simplifying the

barley standards and facilitate the domestic and export marketing of

barley.

The present barley classification system is based on kernel

physical characteristics. Barley is divided into three classes: Six-

rowed barley, Two-rowed barley, and Barley. The class Six-rowed barley

is divided into three subclasses: Six-rowed Malting barley, Six-rowed

Blue Malting barley, and Six-rowed barley. The class Two-rowed barley

is divided into two subclasses: Two-rowed Malting barley and Two-rowed

barley. The class Barley has no subclasses.

This classification system does not reflect current marketing

practices. That is, barley produced in the United States is used

primarily as livestock feed or for malting. Consequently, the barley

classing system should be structured in a manner consistent with

current trading practices.

All comments received were supportive of the new classification

system.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA is amending the barley classification system in

current section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraph (c), by establishing two

classes of barley, Malting barley and Barley. The class Malting barley

is divided into three subclasses: Six-rowed Malting barley, Six-rowed

Blue Malting barley, and Two-rowed Malting barley. The class Barley is

divided into three subclasses: Six-rowed barley, Two-rowed barley, and

Barley.

Applying the Malting Standards

GIPSA proposed to amend the subclass definitions for Six- and Two-

rowed barley in current section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)

and (c)(2)(ii), by deleting the reference to Malting barley. This

change is needed to provide applicants the option of requesting either

the malting standards or the barley standards for malting types.

The present standards require official personnel initially to apply

the Malting barley requirements and assign grades covered in section 7

CFR 810.206 only if the sample fails to meet the malting criteria. This

requirement is based on the subclass definitions for Six- and Two-rowed

barley. The subclass definitions for Six- and Two-rowed barley state,

in part, that barley not meeting the applicable subclass requirement

for malting shall be graded using the 7 CFR 810.206 grade chart.

Initially applying the malting standard requirements hampers

inspection efficiency and may create market disruptions for malting

varieties used for other purposes. Labeling barley as malting when it

is being marketed for another use causes confusion and could lead to

unnecessary marketing complications.

All comments received were supportive of this revision.

Based on this information, comments received and other available

information, GIPSA is amending the subclass definitions for Six- and

Two-rowed barley in section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraphs (c)(1)(iii) and

(c)(2)(ii), by deleting the reference to Malting barley to provide the

inspection system greater flexibility in meeting the market needs. This

change will also bring existing standards more in line with today's

marketing practices for Malting barley.

U.S. No 1 Choice Grade Designation

GIPSA proposed to revise section 7 CFR 810.205 by removing the

``U.S. No 1 Choice'' grade designation from the grading chart and

retain the factors and limits concerning the Choice grade as U.S. No 1

and redesignating the factors and limits for U.S. Nos. 1, 2, and 3 as

U.S. Nos. 2, 3, and 4, respectively. This revision was sought to bring

more consistency between the standards for Two- and Six-rowed Malting

barley.

The current Two-rowed Malting barley standard includes a ``U.S. No

1 Choice'' grade designation. The Six-rowed Malting barley standard

does not include a similar grade. The differences between ``U.S. No 1

Choice'' Two-rowed Malting barley and U.S. No. 1 Two-rowed Malting

barley are reflected in the test weight, skinned and broken kernels,

and the thin barley grade limits. GIPSA believes that the factors and

limits for the ``U.S. No 1 Choice'' grade designation are important to

producers, maltsters, and brewers. Furthermore, GIPSA believes that the

quality requirements in the standards for Six- and Two-rowed Malting

barley should be more consistent to eliminate confusion in the

marketplace and to provide more meaningful information to our

customers.

All commentors agreed with GIPSA's proposal.

Based on this information, comments received and other available

information, GIPSA is removing the ``U.S. No 1 Choice'' grade

designation from section 800.86(c)(2) Table-2 and section 7 CFR 810.205

for Two-rowed Malting barley. Furthermore, GIPSA is retaining the

factors and limits for the ``U.S. No 1 Choice'' grade as the U.S. No. 1

grade and redesignating the factors and limits for U.S. Nos. 1, 2, and

3 as U.S. Nos. 2, 3, and 4 for the Two- rowed Malting barley,

respectively.

[[Page 18488]]

Malting Barley Grading Charts

GIPSA proposed to revise the grade requirements in section 7 CFR

810.204 and 810.205 by: (1) Combining the factors and limits for Two-

and Six-rowed Malting barley into a single grade chart; (2)

establishing four numerical grades for all Malting barley; (3)

establishing common foreign material grade limits for all Malting

barley; (4) establishing separate grade limits for test weight,

suitable malting types, sound barley, skinned and broken kernels, and

thin barley for two- and six-rowed malting types; (5) applying the

current damaged kernels grade limits in Six-rowed Malting barley to

Two-rowed Malting barley and establishing a new 5.0 percent damaged

kernels limit to correspond with the proposed four grade categories;

(6) applying the present limits for mold damage and injured-by-mold in

Two-rowed Malting barley to Six-rowed Malting barley; and (7) applying

the current grade limits for other grains and wild oats to both Six-

and Two-rowed Malting barley.

In the present standards, separate grade charts exist for two- and

six-rowed malting types. Additionally, the factor requirements differ

based on the barley subclass. For example, the current standards impose

limits for other grains, wild oats, mold damage, and injured-by-mold,

but not consistently for all malting types. These differences reflect

the traditional variances between the production areas and markets

dealing with Six- and Two-rowed Malting barley. In proposing changes to

the standards, GIPSA believed that the malting standards should be

revised to more consistently apply factor requirements between Two- and

Six-rowed barley. GIPSA also believed that the proposed revisions to

combine sections 7 CFR 810.204 and 810.205 simplify the malting

standards and make them more user friendly.

Supporters stated that combining the factors and grade limits for

Six- and Two-rowed Malting barley into one chart will make the malting

barley standards more user friendly, make the standards more compatible

between the Two-rowed and Six-rowed Malting types, and reduce potential

confusion of foreign purchasers.

Several organizations representing producers, handlers, and

maltsters opposed applying the present limits for mold damage and

damaged-by-mold in Two-rowed Malting barley to Six-rowed malting types

and applying the current grade limits for other grains and wild oats to

both Six- and Two-rowed Malting types.

With regard to applying the present limits for mold damage and

injured-by-mold in Two-rowed Malting barley to Six-rowed Malting

barley, the North Dakota Barley Council (NDBC) stated that applying the

present limits for mold damage and damaged-by-mold in Two-rowed Malting

barley to Six-rowed Malting barley is restrictive and causes market

disruption because weather conditions frequently cause mold damage and

damaged-by-mold injury. They also stated that under this proposal a

significant portion of Midwestern crop would not receive malting barley

grades. Furthermore, the NDBC stated that Midwestern Six-rowed Malting

barley is frequently purchased in excess of the proposed limits.

Further, other comments received shared similar views.

Upon review of this issue and because of the expressed concern of

potential market disruption, GIPSA has decided not to adopt this

revision. Consequently, GIPSA will maintain the current limits for

injured-by-mold and mold damage for Two- and Six-rowed Malting barley.

In regard to applying current grade limits for other grains and

wild oats to both Six- and Two-rowed malting types, the current malting

standards impose grade limits for other grains and wild oats but not

consistently for Two- and Six-rowed Malting barley. These differences

reflect the traditional variances between the production areas and

markets dealing with Six- and Two-rowed Malting barley. In proposing to

apply current grade limits for other grains and wild oats to both Six-

and Two-rowed Malting types, GIPSA believed that the malting standards

should be revised to more consistently apply factor requirements

between Two- and Six-rowed Malting types.

GIPSA received no support for this proposed action. A commentor

opposing this proposal stated that while the proposal adds more

uniformity to the grading standards, it fails to consider the impact on

domestic and export markets.

Applying uniform grade limits for other grains and wild oats to

both six- and two-rowed malting types may impact negatively on domestic

and/or export markets. Therefore, GIPSA has decided not to adopt this

proposal. Consequently, GIPSA will continue to apply the current grade

limits for other grains to six-rowed malting type only and the current

grade limits for wild oats to two-rowed malting type only.

In its comment, the NDBC recommended to aggregate wild oats, other

grains, and foreign materials into one category. They stated foreign

buyers perceive other grains, wild oats, and foreign material as non-

barley material in Malting barley. Furthermore, the NDBC proposed

different grade limits for two- and six-rowed malting types as follows:

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

Six-rowed Two-rowed

Grade (percent) (percent)

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

U.S. No. 1........................................ 3.0 1.5

U.S. No. 2........................................ 4.0 2.0

U.S. No. 3........................................ 6.0 3.0

U.S. No. 4........................................ 8.0 5.0

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

NDBC believes that this change would more accurately describe non-

barley material in Malting barley and facilitate marketing in export

channels.

GIPSA believes that this recommendation warrants further evaluation

and has decided more discussions are needed before proposing such a

change. Meanwhile, GIPSA will continue to use the current factors and

limits as applicable.

In proposing to combine the grade charts for two- and six-rowed

malting types, GIPSA believed that adopting the same grading factors

would simplify the malting standards and promote uniformity between

Two- and Six-rowed Malting barley. However, the proposal to apply the

same grading factors to all malting barley were not adopted. A single

grade chart containing different factors and grade limits for two- and

six-rowed malting types would be hard to read or understand. Therefore,

GIPSA has decided not to combine the grade charts for two- and six-

rowed malting types because common grading factors and limits were not

established. Consequently, GIPSA will maintain a separate grading chart

for the Two-rowed Malting barley and the Six-rowed Malting barley

because of their different grade limits and grading factors.

GIPSA received no opposition to establishing four numerical grades

for malting barley; separate grade limits for test weight; percent

suitable malting types, sound barley, skinned and broken kernels, and

thin barley for two- and six-rowed malting types; or establishing

common foreign material grade limits for all Malting barley.

Based on information and suggestions received from individuals

using these grade charts, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA will: (1) Maintain separate grading charts for two-

and six-rowed malting types; (2) establish four numerical grades for

all Malting barley; (3) apply the current grade limits for damaged

kernels and other grains to Six-rowed Malting barley only; (4) apply

the present limits for wild oats, injured-by-mold, and mold

[[Page 18489]]

damage to Two-rowed Malting barley only; (5) apply the proposed foreign

material grade limits to two- and six-rowed malting types; and (6) for

six-rowed malting types adopt the proposed grade limits for test

weight, sound barley, damaged kernels, skinned and broken kernels, and

thin barley.

Suitable Malting Type

GIPSA proposed to amend the definition of suitable malting type in

current section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraph (t), to expand the list of

approved malting varieties. The proposed definition will include other

malting types used by various maltsters and brewers.

Current standards require a specified level of suitable malting

type before the Malting barley designation is assigned. The American

Malting Barley Association (AMBA) identifies which malting varieties

are considered suitable. The AMBA revises its list of approved malting

types annually by adding new varieties and deleting outdated ones.

However, many malting varieties removed from the AMBA list continue to

be produced, marketed, and processed. Under the current malting

standards, a variety that meets all quality requirements for malting

but is not included on the AMBA list could not be classified as Malting

barley. Furthermore, several breweries are actively involved in the

development and production of malting barley types to meet various end-

use specifications. Often, these varietal types are not tested and

approved by AMBA, although such varieties meet all quality requirements

of the brewery. This revision will permit official inspection personnel

to apply the malting grade designation to any of these malting

varieties. Also, it will bring existing standards more in line with

today's processing practices of the malting and brewing industries.

All comments received were supportive of the proposal to revise the

definition of suitable malting type to include varieties recommended by

AMBA and other malting types.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA is revising the suitable malting type definition in

current section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraph (t), to include varieties

recommended by AMBA and other malting types.

Dockage

GIPSA proposed to revise the dockage certification procedure in

section 7 CFR 810.104, paragraph (b), by reporting results in half and

whole percent with a fraction less than one-half percent being

disregarded.

Dockage in barley consists of dust, chaff, small weed seed, very

small pieces of broken barley, and coarse grains larger than barley.

Present standards certify dockage in whole percents with fractions of a

percent being disregarded. GIPSA believes that this method of reporting

often understates dockage levels. GIPSA also believes that reporting

dockage in half and whole percent provides a more accurate description

of non-barley material, by that, enabling handlers and end-users to

decide quality, storability, and end-product yield. Also, providing

actual dockage percentage in the remarks section of the certificate is

currently available upon request.

One commentor supporting this change stated that much of the

commercial trade is done in tenth of percent increments. However, GIPSA

believes that the proposed change best reflects market needs at this

time. Accordingly, no further changes to this provision are needed.

Applicants interested in receiving dockage information in tenth of

percent increments may receive it upon request.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA is revising the dockage certification procedure in

section 7 CFR 810.104, paragraph (b), to report dockage in barley in

half and whole percent with a fraction less than one-half percent being

disregarded.

Thin Barley

GIPSA proposed to revise the sieve requirement for determining thin

barley in current section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraph (u), by requiring

the use of a single sieve (\5/64\ x \3/4\ slotted-hole), in

determining thins in the class Barley. GIPSA also proposed to amend

section 7 CFR 800.162 to delete the factor thins and its corresponding

grade limits for the class Barley and require that the level of thins

be reported on each certificate representing an inspection for grade.

This procedure is similar to the certification procedure for moisture,

which provides the marketplace with the flexibility to establish more

meaningful quality limits for thins based on the specific needs of end-

users.

Present standards define thin barley as Six-rowed barley which

passes through a \5/64\ x \3/4\ slotted-hole sieve or Two-rowed

barley which passes through a 5.\5/64\ x \3/4\ slotted-hole sieve. In

addition, for the class Barley, which consists of a mixture of Six- and

Two-rowed barley, thin barley is barley passing through the \5/64\ x

\3/4\ slotted-hole sieve. Under this requirement, the factor thins in

the standards is a measurement of kernel size more than an indicator of

overall quality in barley.

All commentors were supportive of GIPSA's proposal to use one

standard sieve size (\5/64\ x \3/5\ slotted-hole) to determine thins

for the class Barley.

Several commentors opposed the removal of thins as a grade

determining factor stating: (1) Thins are one of the most important

grading factors, particularly in livestock feed and export markets; (2)

there is correlation between barley quality and the level of thins

because a high level of thins can cause problems in rolling barley and

it will affect the nutritive value of barley; (3) the end-users rely on

the official grading system to determine the level of thins and

corresponding numerical grade; (4) if the end-users contract for a

certain grade of barley, they currently can be assured of a specified

maximum percentage of thin kernels; (5) most of the barley sold into

the feed market is traded on the basis of thins; (6) they feared the

potential for increased blending, which may lower the overall quality;

and (7) they stated that FGIS failed to consider the impacts on export

markets.

GIPSA recognizes that thin barley is a factor used by the industry

to determine market value. Also, that the end-user is in the best

position to determine the appropriate level of thins when arriving at

the market value of the grain. Therefore, GIPSA has decided not to

remove the grade limits for thins in the class barley because there

appears to be a market need to preserve these limits based on comments

received. Consequently, the factor ``thins'' will continue to be a

grade determining factor in the class Barley.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA is revising current section 7 CFR 810.202, paragraph

(u), to require the use of the \5/64\ x \3/4\ slotted-whole sieve for

thin barley determination in the class Barley.

Sound Barley

GIPSA proposed to revise section 7 CFR 810.206 by removing the

factors and limits for damaged kernels, heat- damaged kernels, and

foreign material in the class Barley. In proposing this revision, GIPSA

believed that the standards would rely on the factor ``sound barley''

to relate the overall amount of damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels,

and foreign material. In addition, applicants interested in the

percentage and composition of damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels,

and foreign material may request this

[[Page 18490]]

information be reported on the inspection certificate.

Supporters of this change stated that relying on the factor ``sound

barley'' to determine quality is favorable, providing other information

concerning non-barley material and damaged kernels is available to

interested parties.

Opponents of this proposed change stated: Eliminating the factors

and grade limits for damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign

material and relying on sound barley to relate the overall amount of

damage and non-barley materials will be an incentive to add non-barley

material to barley shipments; while the domestic market likely would

quickly adapt to this change, the export market will be at a serious

disadvantage; and U.S. competitors have much more stringent quality

parameters, and any retrenchment from the current grading system would

cause further concerns by overseas customers and cause reduction in

U.S. exports.

Upon further review of this issue and in view of the comments and

concerns, GIPSA believes that removing the grade limits for damaged

kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign material in the class Barley

and relying on sound barley to relate the overall amount of damage and

non-barley may not reflect domestic and/or export markets need.

Therefore, GIPSA has decided to retain the factors and limits for

damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign material in the

class Barley as grade determining factors because there appears to be a

market need to maintain these factors and their grade limits as grade

determining factors.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA has decided not to revise section 7 CFR 810.206 of

the standards. Consequently, the grade limits for damaged kernels,

heat- damaged kernels, and foreign material in the class Barley will

continue to be grade determining factors.

Badly Stained or Materially Weathered Barley

GIPSA proposed to eliminate the grade limitation for barley that is

badly stained or materially weathered from section 7 CFR 810.206. GIPSA

also proposed to remove the definition for stained barley from 7 CFR

810.202 (s).

The determination of badly stained or materially weathered barley

is seldom made because this condition is generally reflected in other

grading factors including sound barley. Presently, barley that is badly

stained or materially weathered is graded not higher than U.S. No. 4.

Commentors did not oppose GIPSA's proposal to remove the badly

stained or materially weathered criterion from the standards.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA has decided to amend section 7 CFR 810-206 by

eliminating the grade limitation for badly stained or materially

weathered.

Miscellaneous Changes

GIPSA proposed to revise the format of the grade charts in the

standards for Malting barley and Barley. These proposed revisions were

intended to improve the readability of the grading tables. Based on

information and suggestions received from individuals using these

grading charts, GIPSA has decided not to adopt the proposed format.

Consequently, the present format of the grading charts in the standards

for Malting barley and Barley will not be changed.

Inspection Plan Tolerances

Shiplots, unit trains, and lash barge lots are inspected by a

statistically based inspection plan (55 FR 24030, June 13, 1990).

Inspection tolerances, commonly referred to as breakpoints, are used to

determine acceptable quality. GIPSA proposed to amend the breakpoint

for dockage from 0.47 to 0.23 percent. GIPSA also proposed to establish

breakpoints conforming to the proposed changes to the barley standards.

GIPSA received no opposition to amending or establishing

breakpoints as included in the proposal.

Based on this information, comments received, and other available

information, GIPSA is revising section 800.86, Table 4, by changing the

dockage breakpoint to 0.23 percent. GIPSA is also adopting breakpoints

for the changes to the malting barley standards.

Final Action

On the basis of these comments and other available information,

GIPSA has decided to revise the barley standards as proposed, with the

following exceptions: (1) Combining the grading factors and limits for

two- and six- rowed malting types into one grade chart; (2) removing

the grading limits for thins in the class Barley; (3) removing the

grading limits for damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign

material in the class Barley; (4) applying the current damaged kernels

grade limits in Six-rowed Malting barley to Two-rowed Malting barley;

(5) applying the present limits for mold damage and injured-by-mold in

Two-rowed Malting barley to Six-rowed Malting barley; and (6) applying

the current grade limits for other grains and wild oats to both Six-

and Two-rowed Malting barley.

Rather than combining the grading factors and limits for two- and

six-rowed malting types into one grading chart, GIPSA decided to

maintain a separate grading chart for the two-rowed malting type and

the six-rowed malting type because of their different grade limits and

grading factors. Also, GIPSA decided to retain the grading limits for

thins, damaged kernels, heat-damaged kernels, and foreign material in

the class Barley. In addition, GIPSA will continue to apply the current

grade limits in Six- rowed Malting barley for damaged kernels and other

grains only to Six-rowed Malting barley and continue to apply the

present limits in Two-rowed Malting barley for injured-by-mold, wild

oats, and mold damage only to Two-rowed Malting barley.

Pursuant to section 4(b)(1) of the United States Grain Standards

Act (7 U.S.C. 76(b)(1)), no standards established or amendments or

revocations of standards are to become effective less than one calendar

year after promulgation unless, in the judgment of the Administrator,

the public health, interest, or safety requires that they become

effective sooner. Pursuant to that section of the Act, it has been

determined that in the public interest the revision becomes effective

June 1, 1996. This effective date will coincide with the beginning of

the 1996 crop year and facilitate domestic and export marketing of

barley.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Parts 800 and 810

Administrative practice and procedure, Export, Grain.

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR Part 800 and 7 CFR

Part 810 are amended as follows:

PART 800--GENERAL REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for Part 800 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 94-582, 90 Stat. 2867, as amended (7 U.S.C.

71 et seq.).

2. Section 800.86 (c)(2) Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 are revised to read

as follows:

Sec. 800.86 Inspection of shiplot, unit train, and lash barge grain

in single lots.

* * * * *

(2) * * *

[[Page 18491]]

Table 1--Grade Limits (GL) and Breakpoints (BP) for Six-Rowed Malting Barley and Six-Rowed Blue Malting Barley

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

Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--

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

Skinned

Grade Test weight Suitable Sound barley Damaged Foreign Other and broken Thin

per bushel malting types (percent) \1\ kernels material grains kernels barley

(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

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

GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP

U.S. No. 1.................................. 47.0 -0.5 95.0 -1.3 97.0 -1.0 2.0 0.8 0.5 0.1 2.0 0.8 4.0 1.1 7.0 0.6

U.S. No. 2.................................. 45.0 -0.5 95.0 -1.3 94.0 -1.4 3.0 0.9 1.0 0.4 3.0 0.9 6.0 1.4 10.0 0.9

U.S. No. 3.................................. 43.0 -0.5 95.0 -1.3 90.0 -1.6 4.0 1.1 2.0 0.5 5.0 1.3 8.0 1.5 15.0 0.9

U.S. No. 4.................................. 43.0 -0.5 95.0 -1.3 87.0 -1.9 5.0 1.3 3.0 0.6 5.0 1.3 10.0 1.6 15.0 0.9

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

\1\ Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.

Table 2--Grade Limits (GL) and Breakpoints (BP) for Two-Rowed Malting Barley

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

Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--

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

Grade Test weight Suitable Sound barley Foreign Skinned and

per bushel malting types \1\ (percent) Wild oats material broken kernels Thin barley

(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

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

GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP

U.S. No. 1.............................. 50.0 -0.5 97.0 -1.0 98.0 -0.8 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.1 5.0 1.3 5.0 0.4

U.S. No. 2.............................. 48.0 -0.5 97.0 -1.0 98.0 -0.8 1.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 7.0 1.3 7.0 0.5

U.S. No. 3.............................. 48.0 -0.5 95.0 -1.3 96.0 -1.1 2.0 0.8 2.0 0.5 10.0 1.8 10.0 0.9

U.S. No. 4.............................. 48.0 -0.5 95.0 -1.3 93.0 -1.1 3.0 0.9 3.0 0.6 10.0 1.8 10.0 0.9

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

\1\ Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.

Note: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with

Sec. 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined

in Sec. 810.206. Six- and two-rowed barley varieties not meeting the

above requirements shall be graded in accordance with standards

established for the class Barley.

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

Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--

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

Grade Test weight Damaged Heat damaged Foreign

per bushel Sound barley kernels \1\ kernels material Broken kernels Thin barley

(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

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

GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP GL BP

U.S. No. 1.............................. 47.0 -0.5 97.0 -1.1 2.0 0.8 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.4 4.0 1.0 10.0 0.9

U.S. No. 2.............................. 45.0 -0.5 94.0 -1.4 4.0 1.0 0.3 0.1 2.0 0.4 8.0 1.5 15.0 0.9

U.S. No. 3.............................. 43.0 -0.5 90.0 -1.6 6.0 1.4 0.5 0.2 3.0 0.5 12.0 1.8 25.0 1.3

U.S. No. 4.............................. 40.0 -0.5 85.0 -2.2 8.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 4.0 0.5 18.0 1.8 35.0 1.9

U.S. No. 5.............................. 36.0 -0.5 75.0 -2.2 10.0 1.8 3.0 0.6 5.0 0.6 28.0 2.4 75.0 2.3

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

\1\ Includes heat-damaged kernels. Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels.

Table 4-Breakpoints for Barley Special Grades and Factors

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

Special grade or factor Grade or range limit Breakpoint

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

Dockage.................... As specified by contract or 0.23

load order.

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

* * * * *

PART 810--OFFICIAL UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR GRAIN

3. The authority citation for Part 810 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 94-582 90 Stat. 2867, as amended (7 U.S.C. 71

et seq.).

4.-5. Subpart A, section 810.104, paragraph (b), is amended by

revising the first and second sentences to read as follows:

Subpart A--General Provisions

* * * * *

Sec. 810.104 Percentages.

* * * * *

(b) Recording. The percentage of dockage in flaxseed, rye, and

sorghum is reported in whole percent with fractions of a percent being

disregarded. Dockage in barley and triticale is reported in whole and

half percent with a fraction less than one-half percent being

disregarded. * * *

* * * * *

6. Subpart B, section 810.202, paragraph (c), is revised and

paragraph (s), Stained barley, is removed. Paragraph (t), Suitable

malting type, is revised and redesignated as (s). Paragraph (u), Thin

barley, is revised and redesignated as (t). Paragraph (v), Wild oats,

is redesignated as (u) to read as follows:

Subpart B--U.S. Standards for Barley

* * * * *

Sec. 810.202 Definition of other terms.

* * * * *

(c) Classes. There are two classes of barley: Malting barley and

Barley.

(1) Malting barley. Barley of a six-rowed or two-rowed malting

type. The class Malting barley is divided into the following three

subclasses:

(i) Six-rowed Malting barley. Barley that has a minimum of 95.0

percent of a six-rowed suitable malting type that has 90.0 percent or

more of kernels with white aleurone layers that contains not more than

1.9 percent injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent frost-damaged

kernels, 0.2 percent injured-by-heat kernels, and 0.1 percent heat-

damaged kernels. Six-rowed Malting barley shall not be infested,

blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or smutty as defined in Sec. 810.107(b) and

Sec. 810.206.

(ii) Six-rowed Blue Malting barley. Barley that has a minimum of

95.0 percent of a six-rowed suitable malting type that has 90.0 percent

or more of kernels with blue aleurone layers that contains not more

than 1.9 percent injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent frost-damaged

kernels, 0.2 percent injured-by-heat kernels, and 0.1 percent heat-

damaged kernels. Six-rowed Blue Malting barley shall not be infested,

[[Page 18492]]

blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or smutty as defined in Sec. 810.107(b) and

Sec. 810.206.

(iii) Two-rowed Malting barley. Barley that has a minimum of 95.0

percent of a two-rowed suitable malting type that contains not more

than 1.9 percent injured-by-frost kernels, 0.4 percent frost-damaged

kernels, 0.2 percent injured-by-heat kernels, 0.1 percent heat-damaged

kernels, 1.9 percent injured-by-mold kernels, and 0.4 percent mold-

damaged kernels. Two-rowed Malting barley shall not be infested,

blighted, ergoty, garlicky, or smutty as defined in Sec. 810.107(b) and

Sec. 810.206.

(2) Barley. Any barley of a six-rowed or two-rowed type. The class

Barley is divided into the following three subclasses:

(i) Six-rowed barley. Any Six-rowed barley that contains not more

than 10.0 percent of two-rowed varieties.

(ii) Two-rowed barley. Any Two-rowed barley with white hulls that

contains not more than 10.0 percent of six-rowed varieties.

(iii) Barley. Any barley that does not meet the requirements for

the subclasses Six-rowed barley or Two-rowed barley.

* * * * *

(s) Suitable malting type. Varieties of malting barley that are

recommended by the American Malting Barley Association and other

malting type(s) used by the malting and brewing industry. The varieties

are listed in GIPSAs instructions.

(t) Thin barley. Thin barley shall be defined for the appropriate

class as follows:

(1) Malting barley. Six-rowed Malting barley that passes through a

\5/64\ x \3/4\ slotted-hole sieve and Two-rowed Malting barley which

passes through a 5.5/64 x \3/4\ slotted-hole sieve in

accordance with procedures prescribed in GIPSAs instructions.

(2) Barley. Six-rowed barley, Two-rowed barley, or Barley that

passes through a \5/64\ x \3/4\ slotted-hole sieve in accordance with

procedures prescribed in GIPSAs instructions.

* * * * *

7. Section 810.204 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 810.204 Grades and Grade Requirements for Six-rowed Malting

barley and Six-rowed Blue Malting barley.

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

Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--

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

Test Skinned

Grade weight Suitable Sound Damaged Foreign Other and Thin

per malting barley kernels material grains broken barley

bushel types \1\ \1\ (percent) (percent) kernels (percent)

(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

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

U.S. No. 1..................................................... 47.0 95.0 97.0 2.0 0.5 2.0 4.0 7.0

U.S. No. 2..................................................... 45.0 95.0 94.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 6.0 10.0

U.S. No. 3..................................................... 43.0 95.0 90.0 4.0 2.0 5.0 8.0 15.0

U.S. No. 4..................................................... 43.0 95.0 87.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 10.0 15.0

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

\1\ Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.

Notes: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with

Sec. 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined

in Sec. 810.206. Six-rowed Malting barley and Six- rowed Blue

Malting barley varieties not meeting the requirements of this

section shall be graded in accordance with standards established for

the class Barley.

8. Section 810.205 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 810.205 Grades and Grade Requirements for Two-rowed Malting

barley.

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

Minimum limits of-- Maximum limits of--

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

Suitable Skinned and

Grade Test weight malting Sound Wild oats Foreign broken Thin barley

per bushel types barley \1\ (percent) material kernels (percent)

(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

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

U.S. No. 1................................................... 50.0 97.0 98.0 1.0 0.5 5.0 5.0

U.S. No. 2................................................... 48.0 97.0 98.0 1.0 1.0 7.0 7.0

U.S. No. 3................................................... 48.0 95.0 96.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 10.0

U.S. No. 4................................................... 48.0 95.0 93.0 3.0 3.0 10.0 10.0

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

\1\ Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels or considered against sound barley.

Note: Malting barley shall not be infested in accordance with

Sec. 810.107(b) and shall not contain any special grades as defined

in Sec. 810.206. Two-rowed Malting barley varieties not meeting the

requirements of this section shall be graded in accordance with

standards established for the class Barley.

9. Section 810.206 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 810.206 Grades and Grade Requirements for Barley.

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

Minimum limits of-- Maximum Limits of--

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

Heat

Grade Test weight Sound Damaged damaged Foreign Broken Thin barley

per bushel barley kernels \1\ kernels material kernels (percent)

(pounds) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent) (percent)

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

U.S. No. 1................................................... 47.0 97.0 2.0 0.2 1.0 4.0 10.0

U.S. No. 2................................................... 45.0 94.0 4.0 0.3 2.0 8.0 15.0

U.S. No. 3................................................... 43.0 90.0 6.0 0.5 3.0 12.0 25.0

U.S. No. 4................................................... 40.0 85.0 8.0 1.0 4.0 18.0 35.0

[[Page 18493]]

U.S. No. 5................................................... 36.0 75.0 10.0 3.0 5.0 28.0 75.0

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

U.S. Sample Grade:

U.S. Sample grade shall be barley that:

(a) Does not meet the requirements for the grades 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5; or

(b) Contains 8 or more stones or any number of stones which have an aggregate weight in excess of 0.2 percent of the sample weight, 2 or more pieces of

glass, 3 or more crotalaria seeds (Crotalaria spp.), 2 or more caster beans (Ricinus communis L.), 4 or more particles of unknown foreign substance(s)

or commonly recognized harmful or toxic substance(s), 8 or more cocklebur (Xanthium spp.) or similar seeds singly or in combination, 10 or more rodent

pellets, bird droppings, or equivalent quantity of other animal filth per 1\1/8\ to 1\1/4\ quarts of barley; or

(c) Has a musty, sour, or commercially objectionable foreign odor (except smut or garlic odor); or

(d) Is heating or otherwise of distinctly low quality.

\1\ Includes heat-damaged kernels. Injured-by-frost kernels and injured-by-mold kernels are not considered damaged kernels.

Dated: April 8, 1996.

James R. Baker,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96-10305 Filed 4-25-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-EN-P