[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 24, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66162-66164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-30420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service
[FV-98-305]


United States Standards for Grades of Oranges (California and 
Arizona), United States Standards for Grades of Grapefruit (California 
and Arizona), United States Standards for Grades of Tangerines and the 
United States Standards for Grades of Lemons

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document gives notice of the availability of revisions to 
the United States Standards for Grades of Oranges, Grapefruit, 
Tangerines and Lemons. The changes will provide a minimum 25-count 
sample to be applied to tolerances for defects, revise the grades to 
make them uniform and consistent with each other and other recently 
revised U.S. grade standards, and, delete references to outdated 
industry practices and terminology.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This notice is effective December 27, 1999.

ADDRESSES: The revised standards are available from Kenneth R. Mizelle, 
Fresh Products Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, Agricultural 
Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 2065, South 
Building, STOP 0240, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456; or at 
www.ams.gov/standards/frutmrkt.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth R. Mizelle (202) 720-2185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 203(c) of the Agricultural Marketing 
Act of 1946, as amended, directs and authorizes the Secretary of 
Agriculture ``to develop and improve standards of quality, condition, 
quantity, grade, and packaging and recommend and demonstrate such 
standards in order to encourage uniformity and consistency in 
commercial practices * * *.'' AMS is committed to carrying out this 
authority in a manner that facilitates the marketing of agricultural 
commodities and to making copies of official standards available upon 
request. The United States Standards for Grades of Oranges (California 
and Arizona), United States Standards for Grades of Grapefruit 
(California and Arizona), United States Standards for Grades of 
Tangerines and the United States Standards for Grades of Lemons no 
longer appear in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR); however, they 
are maintained by USDA.
    AMS is revising the United States Standards for Grades of Oranges 
(California and Arizona), United States Standards for Grades of 
Grapefruit (California and Arizona), United States Standards for Grades 
of Tangerines and the United States Standards for Grades of Lemons 
using the procedures it published in the August 13, 1997, Federal 
Register and that appear in Part 36 of Title 7 of the CFR.
    The notice, with a request for comments on the proposed changes, 
was published in the Federal Register on June 17, 1999 (64 FR 32666-
32703).
    The petitioner (Sunkist Growers), which represents the majority of 
citrus growers and packers in California, requested that the standards 
be revised to provide a minimum 25-count sample applied to tolerances 
for defects. In addition, AMS proposed several other changes to promote 
greater uniformity and consistency in application of the standard. 
These standards have not been changed within the last 34 to 50 years, 
depending on the commodity. These changes are needed to bring the 
standards into conformity with current cultural and marketing practices 
and to promote more uniform application of the U.S. grade standards.
    AMS published the notice in the Federal Register with an outline of 
the specific proposed changes and provided for a comment period of 60 
days, which ended August 16, 1999. No comments were received on the 
notice during that time. However, a request from industry to reopen and 
extend the comment period was received on August 16, 1999. The request 
was granted, and the comment period was extended through September 20, 
1999. A total of 2

[[Page 66163]]

comments were received, one from an organization of agricultural 
product receivers and one from the petitioner.
    The receivers comments stated, in summary, that they ``strongly 
oppose the proposed changes.'' They suggested that ``The Department 
shall define the terms `Injury, Damage, Serious Damage and Very Serious 
Damage' but shall not interfere with the actual areas prescribed for 
each defect as it is in the current definitions. The Department shall 
also restrain from changing the terms, `FREE FROM' to `FREE FROM INJURY 
BY BRUISES' in the proposed U.S. Standard for U.S. Fancy Grade of 
Oranges, (California and Arizona).'' It is the receivers' contention 
that the changes will allow 100 percent bruising plus 12 percent damage 
by bruising in lots of U.S. Fancy oranges. AMS disagrees with this 
assertion and feels that there has been some misunderstanding with 
regard to the proposed changes. This portion of the proposal was not 
made at the request of the petitioner, but rather was initiated by AMS 
as part of its efforts to promote greater uniformity and consistency in 
application of the standard. The definitions that were included in the 
proposed standards are the same definitions that are currently used in 
the instructional manuals to provide inspectors with guidelines as to 
what constitutes a bruise. Additionally, these definitions are used in 
other citrus grades. The definitions prevent inspectors from scoring 
fruit with slight skin indentations as bruises when, in fact, there is 
no injury to the skin or flesh of the fruit. Accordingly, AMS believes 
that the proposal should be adopted. The revision also provides 
language that is consistent with other citrus grades.
    The receivers comments stated: ``When one thinks of a `FANCY 
FRUIT,' the mind creates a picture of a perfect fruit, without 
blemishes, free from any injury of any kind and of perfect 
characteristic color an idea of the ultimate description of excellence 
and perfection. This is the FANCY GRADE OF CITRUS that we know and we 
want to keep it that way. Therefore these changes are unnecessary, 
preposterous, not warranted and bias [sic] against the receiving sector 
of the produce industry, and the consumer.'' AMS disagrees with the 
commenter's assertion that Fancy fruit is perfect, without blemishes 
and free from injury of any kind. Every AMS fruit and vegetable grade 
standard provides for degrees of defects, as well as defect tolerances, 
thus allowing for ``less than perfect'' fruit, up to a certain point. 
The purpose of these standards, established by USDA in cooperation with 
the citrus industry in 1948, 1950, 1957 and 1964, is to provide 
attainable grading classifications that can be utilized by the entire 
fruit and vegetable community, not to regulate difficult, if not 
impossible, parameters of perfection.
    The receivers are also ``vigorously opposed to the change for the 
DECAY TOLERANCES at shipping point for each grade listed in the 
notice.'' They note that ``this change would give an extra advantage to 
the packers and growers.'' AMS disagrees with the receivers. The 
proposed change would increase the decay tolerance to a total of 1 
percent at shipping point, from a previous \1/2\ of 1 percent. The 1 
percent shipping point decay tolerance is already widely used in citrus 
and other fruit and vegetable standards. AMS can foresee no impact on 
the receivers or the consumers in this regard because the decay 
tolerance of 3 percent at destination remains unchanged.
    Regarding the grapefruit standard, the receivers recommended that 
allowable skin thickness remain at not more than \3/8\ of an inch to 
meet the ``fairly thin skinned'' requirement and more than \7/16\ inch 
to meet the requirement of ``excessively thick skinned.'' AMS 
recommended a slight increase for skin thickness (\1/2\ inch and \5/8\ 
inch respectively), based on a fruit diameter of 4\1/8\ inch. Smaller 
or larger areas would be allowed, proportionately, for smaller or 
larger fruit. This new scoring guide is consistent with the recently-
revised U.S. standards for Florida grapefruit standard and will remain 
as proposed.
    The receivers stated they did not understand a phrase contained in 
the grapefruit standard on ``Injury, (k),'' pertaining to green spots, 
which reads, ``Green spots * * * which are green and more that \1/4\ in 
number.'' This was a typographical error in the notice and will be 
changed to read, ``Green spots * * * which are green and more than 4 in 
number.''
    The receivers contend that the proposed scoring guidelines for 
creasing of tangerines, in all but the U.S. No. 1 grade, are too 
lenient. AMS, however, believes that there is a distinction between the 
severity of creasing allowed in each grade in addition to the amount of 
area affected by creasing of any degree. In the proposed tangerine 
grade, for each lower grade, a more severe degree of creasing is 
allowed. This is the standard method of scoring for any defect, 
regardless of commodity. Additionally, the proposed scoring criteria 
for creasing also provides that no more than a specified area of any 
visible creasing be allowed. This scoring guide is consistent with the 
U.S. standards for Florida tangerines and provides an objective basis 
for scoring this defect.
    Also concerning the tangerine standard, the receivers contended 
that scoring guidelines in the U.S. No. 3 grade (very serious damage) 
are too lenient for the following defects: skin breakdown, scale, 
sprayburn, buckskin, scab and green spots. The receivers recommended an 
affected area of 20 percent of the surface before scoring. In the 
proposal, AMS considered an affected area of over 25 percent of the 
fruit surface for these defects to be scorable. The original standard 
contained a scoring guide for these defects defined as ``when it very 
seriously detracts from the appearance.'' However, AMS believes that 
the receivers recommendation of 20 percent is too restrictive. Further, 
the new scoring guide, which is consistent with the U.S. standards for 
Florida tangerines with regard to virtually all defects, provides an 
objective method for scoring, as opposed to the subjective method 
contained in the old U.S. standard. Accordingly, AMS is making this 
change as proposed.
    The receivers consider the proposed skin breakdown scoring guide in 
the lemon standard of allowing \1/4\ inch as being ``excessive.'' They 
stated that \1/4\ inch ``represents 12\1/2\% on a fruit 2 inches in 
diameter.'' They suggested an area not exceeding \3/16\ inch for damage 
and not exceeding \1/2\ inch for serious damage. Their recommendation 
was mathematically based on their belief that these averages 
represented 10% and 25%, respectively, of the area of the fruit. These 
percentages appear to have been based on an ``area'' 2 inches in 
diameter as opposed to a ``sphere'' of 2 inches in diameter which has a 
much larger surface area. AMS, when determining areas allowed for 
defects, considers both the mathematical area and the appearance of the 
defect for the commodity in question. AMS has concluded that the 
scoring guideline of \1/4\ inch for damage, based on a lemon 2 inches 
in diameter, does not allow an excessive amount of the defect on the 
fruit, before it is scored as a defect. However, in light of the 
receivers' concern with the serious damage skin breakdown scoring guide 
of not exceeding \5/8\ inch, AMS has concluded that this could be 
considered an excessive amount for this defect. Consequently, AMS 
agrees with the receivers' suggestion of not exceeding \1/2\ inch in 
diameter for serious damage by skin breakdown.
    The receivers agree to the proposed change to create separate 
shipping point

[[Page 66164]]

and en route or at destination tolerances for the commodities appearing 
in the notice.
    The petitioner submitted the only other comment received by AMS. 
They stated, ``We strongly support proposed changes in the procedures 
for sampling fruit to measure against defect tolerances. The new 
standard calling for a minimum 25 count sample promotes greater 
uniformity and consistency within the standards and affords a fairer 
and more realistic evaluation of the arrival quality of fruit 
shipments. Additionally, we view favorably the proposed change in 
tolerance standard for a grapefruit rind thickness; elimination of the 
juice content requirement for lemons; and a change of measurement of 
surface blemishes on fruit as a percentage of the surface area instead 
of a specific size definition of the blemish, allowing for a more 
consistent means of measurement relative to the actual size of the 
fruit. In general, the proposed modifications eliminate many obsolete 
standards and criteria that are not reflective of modern production 
conditions and the realities of the modern marketplace.''
    AMS also discovered several typographical omissions in the lemon 
standard. The section pertaining to standard sizing and fill (a) was 
inadvertently omitted. Also, the letter designations for the defect 
definition sub-paragraphs relating to bruising and skin breakdown under 
damage and serious damage (h, i, j and k respectively) were 
inadvertently omitted. Although the definitions remain unchanged from 
the original notice, to eliminate any confusion, the letter 
designations (h, i, and j) will be included in the final U.S. standard. 
With regard to what should have been designated paragraph ``k'' 
(serious damage by skin breakdown), the definition is being changed 
slightly based on the comments received.
    Accordingly, further changes to the notice revising the United 
States Standards for Grades of Oranges (California and Arizona), United 
States Standards for Grades of Grapefruit (California and Arizona), 
United States Standards for Grades of Tangerines and the United States 
Standards for Grades of Lemons as published in the Federal Register at 
64 FR 32666-32703 on June 17, 1999, are made as described above.
    The revised standards are available either through the above 
address or by accessing AMS's Home Page on the Internet at 
www.ams.usda.gov/standards/frutmrkt.htm.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621-1627.

    Dated: November 16, 1999.
Robert C. Keeney,
Deputy Administrator, Fruit and Vegetable Programs.
[FR Doc. 99-30420 Filed 11-23-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P