[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-5067]


  Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 1994 /
  
[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 7, 1994]


                                                    VOL. 59, NO. 44

                                              Monday, March 7, 1994
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Federal Grain Inspection Service

7 CFR Part 810

RIN 0580-AA14

 

United States Standards for Soybeans

AGENCY: Federal Grain Inspection Service, Agriculture.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS) is revising the 
U.S. Standards for Soybeans to: report the percentage of splits in 
tenths percent; reduce the U.S. Sample grade criteria for stones from 
eight or more to four or more and reduce the U.S. Sample grade 
aggregate weight criteria for stones from more than 0.2 percent by 
weight to more than 0.1 percent by weight; reduce the U.S. Sample grade 
criteria for pieces of glass from 2 to 0; eliminate the grade 
limitation on purple mottled or stained soybeans and establish a 
special grade, Purple Mottled or Stained, in the standards; eliminate 
the grade limitation on soybeans that are materially weathered; clarify 
the reference to Mixed soybeans in the standards; and establish a 
cumulative total for factors which may cause a sample to grade U.S. 
Sample grade.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 1, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Wollam, Federal Grain 
Inspection Service, USDA, room 0624-S, Box 96454, Washington, DC 20090-
6454. Telephone (202) 720-0292.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Order 12866

    The Department is issuing this rule in conformance with Executive 
Order 12866. This rule has been determined to be not-significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866 and therefore has not been reviewed 
by OMB.

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 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 final 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

    David R. Galliart, Acting Administrator, FGIS, has determined that 
this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because those persons who apply 
the standards and most users of the inspection service do not meet the 
requirements for small entities as defined in the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Further, the standards are 
applied equally to all entities.

Information Collection and Recordkeeping Requirements

    In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 
chapter 35), the information collection and recordkeeping requirements 
contained in this rule have been approved by OMB and assigned OMB No. 
0580-0013.

Background

    On July 2, 1991, FGIS proposed in the Federal Register (56 FR 
30342) to revise the U.S. Standards for Soybeans by (1) changing 
minimum test weight per bushel from a grade determining factor to a 
nongrade determining factor; (2) reducing the foreign material limits 
for grades U.S. Nos. 1 and 2 to 0.5 and 1.0 percent, respectively; (3) 
reducing the grade limits for splits to 5.0, 10.0, 15.0, and 20.0 
percent for U.S. Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 soybeans, respectively; (4) 
reporting the percentage of splits in tenths percent; (5) reducing the 
tolerance for stones from eight to four and eliminating the aggregate 
weight option; (6) reducing the tolerance for pieces of glass from two 
to zero; (7) eliminating the grade limitation on purple mottled or 
stained soybeans and establishing a special grade, Purple Mottled or 
Stained, in the standards; (8) eliminating the grade limitation on 
soybeans that are materially weathered; (9) creating a new grade and 
associated grade limits for U.S. Choice soybeans; (10) clarifying the 
reference to Mixed soybeans in the standards; (11) establishing a 
cumulative total for factors which may cause a sample to grade U.S. 
Sample grade; and (12) reporting the oil and protein content on all 
official lot inspection certificates for export soybean shipments. FGIS 
further proposed to revise inspection plan tolerances for soybeans 
based on the proposed changes.

Comment Review

    FGIS received 1,770 comments during the 60-day comment period: 
1,418 from soybean producers, 236 from grain handlers, 35 from foreign 
firms and associations, 5 from university researchers, 1 from Congress, 
and 75 from miscellaneous sources.
    FGIS also received 99 comments after the close of the comment 
period: 69 from soybean producers, 20 from grain handlers, 1 from a 
foreign association, 4 from Congress, and 5 from miscellaneous sources.
    On the basis of comments received during the comment period and 
other available information, FGIS is implementing seven of the proposed 
changes in the soybean standards. The following paragraphs address 
comments received regarding the proposed changes.

Minimum Test Weight Per Bushel (TW)

    FGIS received 84 comments (64 supporting and 20 opposing) on the 
proposal to change TW from a grade determining factor to a nongrade 
determining factor.
    Those supporting the proposal commented that TW is not a good 
indicator of the oil and meal yield of processed soybeans. They 
contended that other factors adequately reflect the quality of soybeans 
for grade purposes. Those opposing the proposal, however, indicated 
that they rely upon TW in making volume determinations and as a rough 
indicator of overall soybean quality. One commentor representing an 
association of grain handlers opposing the proposal stated that:

    Grade determining factors should not be limited only to end-use 
values. Grain handlers depend on soybean grades to reflect other 
issues including storability. We believe that test weight is an 
important overall quality factor to both handlers and processors. 
Deleting test weight as a grade factor would be inappropriate and 
misleading.

    Furthermore, those opposed contended that a change in the status of 
TW will create confusion among soybean importers given present trading 
and marketing practices.
    While, as stated in the proposal, some question the value of TW as 
a grade determining factor (Refs. 1 and 2), it is evident from the 
comments that many in the industry do rely upon its grade determining 
status, especially in view of present trading and marketing practices. 
Considering its important use within the soybean industry, FGIS has 
determined that TW should be retained as a grade determining factor to 
facilitate trade. Since the status of TW will remain unchanged, it will 
be unnecessary to move TW from table 17 to table 18 of Sec. 800.86 of 
the regulations as proposed. If, at a later date, more information is 
presented and/or the importance of TW as a grade determining factor 
diminishes, FGIS will reconsider the status of TW.

Foreign Material (FM)

    The majority of commentors chose only to comment on the proposal to 
reduce the FM limits for grades U.S. Nos. 1 and 2 to 0.5 and 1.0 
percent, respectively. Of the total 1,770 comments received, 1,763 or 
99.6 percent commented on the FM proposal. Of these comments, 1,654 or 
93.8 percent opposed the proposal with 1,312 or nearly 80 percent of 
the opposition coming from the State of Illinois. The vast majority of 
comments in opposition came in a form letter which claimed that:

    (1) Under the proposed standards 88 percent of the 1988 soybean 
crop and 80 percent of the 1989 soybean crop would have been graded 
lower than U.S. No. 1;
    (2) The proposed FM change will reduce the amount of money 
soybean growers will receive for their soybeans;
    (3) Foreign buyers should use contract specifications to 
communicate their need for FM levels other than those specified in 
the standards;
    (4) Domestic processors have not complained about FM levels; and
    (5) It would be ``wise'' to await the results of the grain 
cleaning study before the FM levels are changed.

    Individual producer comments from other States did not reflect 
similar opposition. In fact, producer comments from other States 
totaled 103 with 66 supporting and 37 opposing the proposal. 
Furthermore, individual views of some Illinois farmers appeared to 
contradict the claims of the form letter. Several farmers commented 
that increased FM levels occur during handling after the farmer 
delivers the soybeans to market.
    The American Farm Bureau Federation, the nation's largest general 
farm organization, and the American Soybean Association, representing 
approximately 31,000 soybean farmers in 29 States, supported the 
reduced foreign material limits proposed for grades 1 and 2. In 
general, they contend lower FM limits will (1) make U.S. soybeans more 
competitive in the export market and (2) promote incentives to improve 
quality.
    Two hundred thirty-three of the two hundred thirty-six comments 
received from grain handlers, individuals, and large trade associations 
opposed the proposal regarding FM. Three grain handlers did not address 
the FM proposal. Grain handlers contended that the United States' 
declining share of the world soybean market is directly related to U.S. 
farm and trade policies which have discouraged domestic soybean 
production and encouraged foreign buyers to diversify their soybean 
sources. They further contend that if the price is competitive and the 
intrinsic quality meets the customer's specifications, then the soybean 
FM level can be negotiated as part of the contract terms. These 
commenters contend that revising the FM limits in the soybean standards 
will not necessarily result in cleaner exported soybeans. Rather, they 
believe economic market forces will determine whether lower FM limits 
are shipped. Thus, grain handlers conclude that lowering FM limits will 
increase handling costs resulting in lower bids to farmers while doing 
nothing to increase the U.S. share of the soybean export market.
    In contrast to grain handlers, all 35 comments received from 
foreign buyers of U.S. soybeans supported the proposed FM grade limits. 
These foreign buyers represent more than 60 percent of the U.S. export 
soybean market. The Japan Oilseed Processors Association (JOPA) and the 
EC Seed Crushers' and Oil Processors' Federation (FEDIOL), which 
represent the major foreign users of U.S. soybeans, stated that a FM 
reduction in U.S. soybeans is necessary to prevent further weakening of 
the U.S. export soybean market share. As stated in the proposal, when 
asked what guarantees would be given to increase exports if the FM 
limits were lowered, a FEDIOL representative responded: ``The only 
guarantee is that the EEC will buy fewer soybeans from the U.S. if FM 
content remains at current levels.'' This opinion was reaffirmed in the 
written FEDIOL comment on the proposal and during the testimony of a 
FEDIOL representative at an October 29, 1991, Senate hearing on 
``Reducing Foreign Material Limits in Official Soybean Standards: 
Economic and Competitive Impacts.'' The concerns of the foreign buyers 
have also been expressed through foreign complaints filed with FGIS. 
Over the past decade, foreign material has been a steady source of 
complaints by foreign buyers of U.S. soybeans.
    In summary, producers have expressed differing opinions regarding 
the FM proposal; elevator operators and others merchandizing and 
handling soybeans have voiced strong opposition to the proposal; and 
foreign buyers of U.S. soybeans have just as strongly supported the 
proposal. A similar mixed opinion was expressed by the FGIS Advisory 
Committee which voted eight to six to support the proposed FM change 
during a September 1991 meeting.
    Due to the mixed opinions expressed both in the comments received 
and by the FGIS Advisory Committee, FGIS has decided not to finalize 
the FM limits.
    Further, in June 1990, FGIS funded a 3-year study through the USDA 
Economic Research Service to determine the costs and benefits of 
marketing cleaner wheat, corn, barley, sorghum, and soybeans. In 
addition to identifying and quantifying the benefits and costs of 
cleaning grain, the study will assess the need to establish new or 
revise current factors, including FM, as related to grain cleanliness. 
After the study is completed, FGIS will review this matter to determine 
whether further changes to the standards should be proposed.

Splits

    FGIS received 97 comments (16 supporting and 81 opposing) on the 
proposal to reduce the grade limits for splits. Those supporting the 
proposal indicated that the current limits for splits are rarely met, 
and, therefore, the grade limits are of little value. Those opposed 
stated that:
    (1) Research/data is lacking to justify a reduction of the 
magnitude proposed;
    (2) Splits are not a discount factor in the domestic soybean 
market;
    (3) The level of split soybeans has never been a major cause for 
complaints about U.S. soybean exports; and
    (4) The inverse relationship of moisture and splits could give 
incentive to increase moisture in order to reduce breakage.
    As originally stated in the proposed rule, FGIS believes that 
storability and oil quality may be enhanced by a reduction in the 
amount of splits in a lot of soybeans. FGIS, however, does not want to 
encourage an increase in moisture of soybeans to inhibit splitting. 
Accordingly, FGIS will not change the grade limits for splits.
    Finally, the percentage of splits in soybeans has traditionally 
been reported in whole percents with fractions of a percent being 
disregarded. Consequently, a soybean sample with 10.9 percent splits 
would be reported as 10.0 percent. FGIS proposed that the percentage of 
splits in soybeans be reported to the nearest tenth percent in 
accordance with procedures set forth in section 810.104 of the 
standards to better reflect normal rounding procedures. Those opposed 
(12 comments) offered no reason for their opposition. Those in favor 
(35 comments) of the proposal generally agreed with FGIS' reasoning. 
Therefore, in accordance with the rationale set forth in the proposal, 
FGIS will revise the soybean standards to report the percentage of 
splits in soybeans to the nearest tenth percent.

Stones

    FGIS received 45 comments (29 supporting and 16 opposing) on the 
proposal to reduce the U.S. Sample grade criteria for stones from eight 
or more to four or more and to eliminate the U.S. Sample grade 
aggregate weight criteria. Those opposing the proposal offered no 
justification for their opposition. Of the 29 commenters who supported 
the proposal, 16 supported the proposal as stated and 13 supported the 
proposal in part. Those who partially supported the proposal suggested 
that the number of stones be reduced and that the aggregate weight 
criteria be maintained and reduced. They indicated that aggregate 
weight must be maintained so that size is qualified. One commenter 
summarized this position by stating:


    * * * We request that an aggregate weight limit for stones (0.1 
percent) be retained to prevent minuscule, inconsequential stone 
particles from adversely affecting grade determinations.


    The following definition for stones is given in Sec. 810.102(c) of 
the Official United States Standards for Grain.


    Concreted earthy or mineral matter and other substances of 
similar hardness that do not disintegrate in water.


    The definition of stones prevents the potential for sand or other 
similar particles from being classified as stones. Based on the 
comments received, however, FGIS believes that sufficient concern 
exists that a soybean lot could be downgraded due to the presence of a 
few minuscule stones. At processing facilities, minuscule stones are 
typically removed prior to crushing. FGIS believes, therefore, that the 
presence of a few minuscule stones should not function as a downgrading 
factor. A reduced weight limitation in combination with a count 
limitation will serve to prevent a few small stones from affecting the 
grade. FGIS, therefore, is revising the soybean standards to reduce the 
U.S. Sample grade criteria for stones from eight or more to four or 
more and reduce the aggregate weight option from more than 0.2 percent 
by weight to more than 0.1 percent by weight.

Glass

    FGIS received 69 comments (53 supporting and 16 opposing) on the 
proposal to reduce the U.S. Sample grade criteria for pieces of glass 
from 2 to 0. One commentor effectively summarized the views of those 
who opposed the proposal to reduce the tolerance for pieces of glass 
from 2 to 0. He stated that he had:


    * * * A philosophical problem specifying a zero tolerance for 
factors not considered dangerous to human health and safety.


    Glass has a harmful effect on a soybean quality and processing. One 
commentor supporting the proposal contended that:


    There is no reason for glass to be in soybeans, and if it is 
there, it should be identified at any level.


    FGIS agrees that glass may adversely affect soybean quality and 
processing. Furthermore, pieces of glass are rarely found in soybeans 
and rarely cause a sample to grade U.S. Sample grade. FGIS believes 
that this change will create an incentive to maintain the current 
quality of soybeans in the future while having minimal economic impact 
on the current market. Accordingly, FGIS is revising the soybeans 
standards to reduce the U.S. Sample grade criteria for pieces of glass 
from 2 to 0.

Purple Mottled or Stained Soybeans

    FGIS received 75 comments (52 supporting and 23 opposing) on the 
proposal to eliminate the grade limitation on purple mottled or stained 
soybeans and establish a special grade, Purple Mottled or Stained. Most 
of the opposing commentors offered no rationale for their opposition. 
One commentor suggested that purple mottled or stained soybeans affect 
both the free fatty acid content of the oil and the dehulling process. 
FGIS has found no data or any other source supporting this statement. 
Rather, those who supported FGIS' proposal generally agreed with the 
justification as presented in the proposed rule. FGIS stated therein 
that the fungus that causes purple mottling or staining colonizes only 
the seed coat of the soybean. Neither the fungus nor the resultant 
discoloration reduces kernel, oil, or feed quality. As a result of this 
information and the comments received, FGIS will revise the soybean 
standards to eliminate the grade limitation for purple mottled or 
stained soybeans.
    Those who supported the FGIS proposal to eliminate the grade 
limitation also supported the proposal to establish a special grade, 
Purple Mottled or Stained, in the soybean standards. FGIS and these 
commenters are in agreement that aesthetic factors, such as purple 
mottled or stained, are important to some customers and, therefore, 
have an associated economic value. Therefore, to satisfy the needs of 
these specific customers, FGIS will revised the soybean standards to 
include a special grade, Purple Mottled or Stained.

Materially Weathered Soybeans

    FGIS received 70 comments (53 supporting and 17 opposing) on the 
proposal to eliminate the grade limitation on soybeans that are 
materially weathered. Most of those opposed to the proposal offered no 
rationale for their opposition. One commentor, however, stated the 
following:

    We feel you are sending out the wrong message here. What you 
appear to be saying is that FGIS is not concerned about the 
appearance of our beans. Granted it doesn't come into play very 
often but when it does it is a very descriptive and meaningful term.

    FGIS disagrees with the above statement for two reasons: (1) FGIS 
is concerned about both the quality and appearance of U.S. soybeans, 
and (2) since the last soybean standards review in 1985, FGIS has 
rarely found the need to limit the grade due to the amount of 
materially weathered soybeans. The limitation on damaged kernels 
appears to be an adequate control on overall damage so as to nullify 
the use for the materially weathered grade limitation. Therefore, FGIS 
does not view ``materially weathered'' as a meaningful and descriptive 
term. As stated in the proposed rule and by many of the supporting 
commentors, the factor limits for the other damages adequately convey 
quality. FGIS is therefore revising the standards to eliminate the 
grade limitation on soybeans that are materially weathered.

Edible Grade Soybeans

    FGIS received 69 comments (33 supporting and 36 opposing) on the 
proposal to create a new grade and associated grade limits for U.S. 
Choice soybeans. Those supporting the proposal either generally 
supported all changes or stated that they were not opposed to the 
proposed change. One commenter stated that a new grade for edible 
soybeans may satisfy a specific niche within the market. Those opposed 
generally stated that the edible soybean market is small and that each 
purchaser has very specific needs. One commenter who opposed the 
proposal specifically stated the following:

    * * * I do not believe that consensus exists on what factors or 
factor limits best describe ``edible-grade'' soybeans. Variability 
of current contract specifications for food-grade soybeans suggests 
that reaching consensus on a single grade is unlikely or even 
impossible. Because food-grade soybean buyers and processors are 
currently able to purchase soybeans meeting their specific needs 
through their contract specifications, we suggest that a separate 
grade is unnecessary and perhaps even misleading and confusing.

    FGIS agrees that the edible soybean market is very specialized. 
Since specific needs vary, not only from country to country, but from 
buyer to buyer within a country, FGIS agrees that the market can be 
best served through contractual specifications. FGIS, therefore, will 
not revise the standards to offer a new grade for edible soybeans.

Mixed Soybeans

    FGIS received 64 comments (49 supporting and 15 opposing) on the 
proposal to clarify the reference to Mixed soybeans in the standards. 
Those opposing the proposal were generally opposed to many or all of 
the proposed changes without offering specific reasons. Those who were 
in favor of the proposed change agreed with FGIS that the reference to 
Mixed soybeans is simply to clarify the soybean standards. As a result, 
FGIS will amend Sec. 810.1604, Grades and grade requirements for 
soybeans, to include a reference to Mixed soybeans. ``Soybeans of other 
colors'' have been and will continue to be disregarded as a factor in 
Mixed soybeans.

Cumulative Sample Grade Factors

    FGIS received 71 comments (56 supporting and 15 opposing) on the 
proposal to establish a cumulative total for factors which may cause a 
sample to grade U.S. Sample grade. Those opposing the proposal did not 
offer any specific rationale for their position. Many of the supporters 
simply stated that they did not oppose the proposal. As stated in the 
proposal, FGIS believes that a cumulative total limit will better 
identify quality by designating a combination of deleterious material, 
animal filth, and toxic substances as U.S. Sample grade. Accordingly, 
FGIS is revising the soybean standards to establish the cumulative 
total Sample grade criteria as proposed.
    FGIS will also revise the third footnote of the grade chart in 
Sec. 810.1604, Grades and grade requirements for soybeans, as proposed 
for clarity. The revision states that only the number of stones, and 
not the weight of stones, will be considered in calculating the 
cumulative total for factors which may cause a sample to grade U.S. 
Sample grade. The third footnote is revised to read as follows:

    Includes any combination of animal filth, castor beans, 
crotalaria seeds, glass, stones, and unknown foreign substances. The 
weight of stones is not applicable for total other material.

Oil and Protein

    FGIS received 86 comments (58 supporting and 28 opposing) on the 
proposal to report the oil and protein content on all official lot 
inspection certificates for export soybean shipments. Those opposing 
the proposal generally commented that any cost associated with 
mandatory oil and protein testing should be borne by those who request 
the service. The commenters further stated that mandatory testing would 
result in an unwarranted cost for all in the marketing system. One 
commenter opposing the proposal stated that:

    Buyers and sellers should have the marketing flexibility to 
determine through contract, if, which and how soybean oil and 
protein determinations should be made.

    Another commenter stated that in the first quarter of the 1990/91 
marketing year, 37 percent of foreign buyers had not requested oil and 
protein testing by FGIS. ``Thus, the market is responding to the 
availability of the service, which FGIS appropriately provides.'' Yet 
another commenter suggested that mandating tests for oil and protein at 
export would create dual standards for domestic and export sales of 
soybeans.
    Those who supported the proposal, however, contended that the 
current method of reporting oil and protein only upon request puts the 
burden upon the buyer. One commenter supporting the proposal stated 
that:

    I believe we can increase our competitive advantage in world 
markets by providing this information automatically.

    Another commenter stated that not only could the U.S. improve its 
competitive position, but mandatory reporting will generate market 
signals that will help improve the composition of U.S. soybeans and 
thus make them more competitive.
    While, as stated in the proposal, FGIS recognizes that oil and 
protein tests provide important information regarding soybean quality, 
it is evident that many in the industry are satisfied with the upon-
request status of the tests. For the first half of the 1992/93 
marketing year, FGIS inspected 66 percent of export soybeans for oil 
and protein content. The number of requests indicates that foreign 
purchasers and/or exporters are effectively requesting oil and protein 
tests, as needed, within the framework of the current inspection 
system. Therefore, at this time, FGIS believes that mandatory testing 
would place an unnecessary burden on the inspection system and would 
provide some foreign purchasers with unnecessary information. If, at a 
later date, more information is presented which indicates that 
mandatory oil and protein testing at export would facilitate marketing, 
FGIS will reconsider the status of oil and protein testing.
    The proposed revisions of Sec. 810.102, Definition of other terms 
to add sections (c) oil and (d) protein and redesignate sections (c), 
(d), and (e) as (e), (f), and (g) will be unnecessary because FGIS will 
not report oil and protein content on all official lot inspection 
certificates for export soybean shipments.

Miscellaneous Changes

    FGIS proposed to revise the format of the grade chart in 
Sec. 810.1604, Grades and grade requirements for soybeans, to improve 
the readability of the grade chart. FGIS also proposed to revise the 
authority citation for part 810. No comments were received on these 
proposals and, as a result FGIS will revise the soybean standards in 
this regard as proposed.

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. No changes in the breakpoints as proposed 
will be necessary because FGIS will not revise the FM grade limits for 
U.S. Nos. 1 and 2 soybeans, establish a new grade for U.S. Choice 
soybeans, nor revise the grade limits for splits.

Final Action

    On the basis of these comments and other available information, 
FGIS has decided to revise the soybean standards as proposed with the 
exception of the reduction in the FM grade limits for U.S. Nos. 1 and 
2, the change in TW from a grade determining factor to a nongrade 
determining factor, the reduction in the grade limits for splits, the 
elimination of the aggregate weight option for stones, the creation of 
a new grade for U.S. Choice soybeans, and the reporting of oil and 
protein content on all official lot inspection certificates for export 
soybean shipments.
    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 
September 1, 1994. This effective date will coincide with the beginning 
of the 1994 crop year and facilitate domestic and export marketing of 
soybeans.

References

    (1) Hill, L.D., ``Changes in the Grain Standards Act,'' Grain 
Grades and Standards, 113-184.
    (2) West, V.I., ``How Good Are Soybean Grades?,'' Illinois Farm 
Economics, No. 192, Extension Service in Agriculture and Home 
Economics, College of Agriculture, University of Illinois, May 1951, 
p. 1166.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 810

    Exports, Grain.

    For reasons set out in the preamble, 7 CFR part 810 is amended as 
follows:

PART 810--OFFICIAL UNITED STATES STANDARDS FOR GRAIN

    1. 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.)

Subpart I--United States Standards for Soybeans

    2. In Sec. 810.104 the first sentence of paragraph (b) is revised 
to read as follows:


Sec. 810.104  Percentages.

* * * * *
    (b) Recording. The percentage of dockage in barley, flaxseed, rye, 
and sorghum are reported in whole percents with fractions of a percent 
being disregarded. * * *
* * * * *
    3. Section 810.1604 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 810.1604  Grades and grade requirements for soybeans.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Grades U.S. Nos.                 
  Grading factors    ---------------------------------------------------
                           1            2            3            4     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Minimum pound limits of:             
                                                                        
                     ---------------------------------------------------
Minimum test weight                                                     
 per bushel.........         56.0         54.0         52.0         49.0
                                                                        
                     ---------------------------------------------------
                                  Maximum percent limits of:            
                                                                        
                     ---------------------------------------------------
Damaged kernels:                                                        
    Heat (part of                                                       
     total).........          0.2          0.5          1.0          3.0
    Total...........          2.0          3.0          5.0          8.0
    Foreign material          1.0          2.0          3.0          5.0
    Splits..........         10.0         20.0         30.0         40.0
    Soybeans of                                                         
     other colors\1\          1.0          2.0          5.0         10.0
                                                                        
                     ---------------------------------------------------
                                   Maximum count limits of:             
                                                                        
                     ---------------------------------------------------
Other material:                                                         
    Animal filth....            9            9            9            9
    Castor beans....            1            1            1            1
    Crotalaria seeds            2            2            2            2
    Glass...........            0            0            0            0
    Stones\2\.......            3            3            3            3
    Unknown foreign                                                     
     substance......            3            3            3            3
    Total\3\........           10           10           10          10 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Sample grade Soybeans that:                                        
(a) Do not meet the requirements for U.S. Nos. 1, 2, 3, or 4; or        
(b) Have a musty, sour, or commercially objectionable foreign odor      
  (except garlic odor); or                                              
(c) Are heating or of distinctly low quality.                           
\1\Disregard for Mixed soybeans.                                        
\2\In addition to the maximum count limit, stones must exceed 0.1       
  percent of the sample weight.                                         
\3\Includes any combination of animal filth, castor beans, crotalaria   
  seeds, glass, stones, and unknown foreign substances. The weight of   
  stones is not applicable for total other material.                    

    4. Section 810.1605 is amended by designating the text as paragraph 
(a) and by adding paragraph (b).


Sec. 810.1605  Special grades and special grade requirements.

    (a) Garlicky soybeans. * * *
    (b) Purple mottled or stained soybeans. Soybeans with pink or 
purple seed coats as determined on a portion of approximately 400 grams 
with the use of an FGIS Interpretive Line Photograph.

    Dated: February 28, 1994.
David R. Galliart,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-5067 Filed 3-4-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-EN-M