Page images
PDF
EPUB

transition from the old to revised, tighter wheat standards in 1957, wheat sold under the revised standards at higher prices even when falling in the same numerical grade.

Inspection records show that most wheat moving through the domestic market channels is well within the proposed revised tolerances. Therefore, tightening the standards as proposed will adversely affect (1) only those lots of wheat which were at or near the bottom of the grade and were clearly below normally acceptable levels of quality and were, therefore, objectionable even though they were technically "within grade" and (2) that small minority of persons who are abusing or misusing the existing wide tolerances which were originally established to allow for naturally occurring defects and not for the purpose of "blending down" lots of wheat to include the official maximum of non-millable or other undesirable material.

Allegations that tightening the wheat standards will simply result in shifting a greater percentage of the wheat into lower numerical grades are refuted by the experience when standards were tightened on soybeans in 1955 as revealed in the following data:

[blocks in formation]

For the reasons set forth above, it is concluded that such changes can only prove to be beneficial-not detrimental-to the best interests of wheat growers and other segments of the industry.

With respect to the specific issues, it was proposed to:

(a) Delete the subclasses Red Winter Wheat and Western Red Wheat in the class Soft Red Winter Wheat. Red Winter Wheat and Western Red Wheat heretofore have been designated as subclasses of the class Soft Red Winter Wheat. Very little Soft Red Winter Wheat is produced west of the Great Plains area; therefore, the subclass Western Red Wheat of the class Soft Red Winter Wheat should be deleted. This would eliminate any need for the subclass designation Red Winter Wheat and all wheat of the class Soft Red Winter Wheat would be designated by the class name. No objections have been made to this proposed change and it should be adopted.

(b) Change the subclass Western White to Mixed White and require that the percentages of White Club and Common White Wheat be made a part of the grade designation. The subclass Western White is White Club Wheat and Common White Wheat mixed in varying proportions, but until recent years wheat of this subclass was about 40 percent Club Wheat. The official grade standards for wheat heretofore have not required such composition determination to be made and shown as a part of the grade for the subclass Western White Wheat.

Information submitted at the hearings and otherwise available to this Department has established that the subclass Western White Wheat has become a designation with good acceptance in foreign markets. Changing the name of this subclass to Mixed White Wheat would be confusing and detrimental to trade in these markets, unless club wheat were available in adequate amounts as a substitute. New rust-resistant varieties are expected to result in increased production of White Club Wheat within a few years. Therefore, the proposal to change the subclass name should not be adopted at this time. However, the percentage of White Club Wheat in Western White Wheat has markedly declined in the past two years and this percentage is an important element in determining the value and usability of Western White Wheat. A statement of the percentages of White Club Wheat and of Common White Wheat in Western White Wheat on the inspection certificates should be required.

(c) Express dockage to the nearest whole and half percent (e.g., 0.3 to 0.7 would be called 0.5) or, as an alternative, disregard other fractions and express dockage in half percent, whole percent, or whole and half percent (e.g., 0.4 would be disregarded and 0.9 would be called 0.5). In the past, dockage when equal to

1 percent or more was recorded on inspection certificates in whole percent and when less than 1 percent was not recorded. A fraction of a percent was disregarded. Dockage is not a grade determining factor. The amount of dockage is established before the official grade is determined. Dockage enters into the estimate of the value of a given lot of wheat, however, since it composes a proportion of the non-millable material.

The effect of the standards in the past has been to conceal the presence of dockage in quantities up to 0.9 percent. Ignoring dockage content up to 0.9 percent does not provide adequate information concerning the extent of the nonmillable material in the wheat. There have been many proposals that the determination and recording of dockage be refined to smaller fractions of a percent.

To define dockage in one-half percent intervals gives greater precision in describing wheat than heretofore was provided by the standards. The proposal would encourage producers to deliver cleaner wheat to the first buyer and would discourage the blending of high-dockage wheat with cleaner wheat throughout the marketing process. The amount of dockage can be controlled through proper binning and cleaning.

There is little reason to believe that expressing dockage in more precise terms, as proposed, would decrease aggregate farm income to those producers who are producing quality wheat. In fact, the marketing system should be more responsive to quality at the farm level with subsequent improvement in quality throughout the marketing system.

The argument was made that the past system was satisfactory, but that showing dockage in increments of one-half percent would result in price discounts to producers. This argument breaks down of its own weight. In the first place, most wheat purchased by domestic millers contains considerably less than 0.9 percent dockage.. In the second place, if it were true that wheat containing 0.9 percent dockage is readily acceptable to the trade, then a premium-not a discount should be forthcoming for wheat that is recorded as having only 0.5 percent dockage. It is concluded that the alternate proposal should be adopted. (d) Provide maximum limits for total defects (damaged kernels, foreign material, and shrunken and broken kernels) in the numerical grades. In the past, no limitation on total defects was set other than that which results from a summation of the limits for each defect. In other words. 2 percent of damaged kernels, 0.5 percent of foreign material and 5 percent of shrunken and broken kernels each separately had the same significance as the total of the three factors; i.e., the maximum for grade No. 1. Total defects for grade No. 1 would be reduced from 7.5 percent to 3 percent and grade No. 2 from 10 percent to 5 percent.

Data were obtained from more than 2,500 composite samples of farm-stored wheat in five major wheat States. In every State, "total defects" was less than in the proposed standards for the grade. This indicates that the proposed factor of "total defects" would not have an adverse effect on the grade of the wheat delivered by most farmers.

Exports of wheat surveyed in 1962-63 showed a different picture. Total defects exceed the proposed limit for the grade in every one of 33 cargoes of No. 1 Hard Red Spring Wheat. About one-third of the 46 cargoes of No. 2 Hard Red Spring Wheat exceeded the 5 percent maximum limit proposed. In exports of Hard Red Winter Wheat, 85 percent of No. 1 grade and 13 percent of No. 2 grade cargoes exceeded the proposed maximum on total defects. A factor of "total defects" should contribute to the reduction of the amount of nonmillable material in exports and will provide for a more accurate description of wheat shipped in foreign and domestic trade.

It is reasonable and realistic to establish a combined total tolerance for a group of defects which is less than the sum of the individual tolerances established for each defect. In fact this approach is a common one in grade standards and is incorporated in the U.S. grades for oats, barley, and many other products. This approach recognizes that the incidence of total defects and the composition of these defects are both important features in determining value and usability. In developing grade standards, it is quite customary to determine first what total content of defective units or other undesirable material is commercially acceptable and reasonable for a designated grade. Then, within this total limitation, individual tolerances or "stoppers" are specified for important factors. Establishing a total defect limit would make each numerical grade more meaningful because it will reduce the amount of variation of quality within each grade.

It is concluded that the adoption of this proposal will result in less nonmillable material in top grades of wheat and will facilitate trade.

(e) Change the limits of shrunken and broken kernels from 5 percent to 3 percent for grade No. 1, and establish maximum limits of 12 percent and 20 percent, respectively, for grades No. 4 and No. 5. The findings clearly show that shrunken and broken kernels influence the value by reducing the quantity of whole millablekernels of wheat.

The problem of shrunken and broken kernels is most acute in Durum wheat, but the proposal to set the maximum limit for No. 1 grade at 3.0 percent would still permit almost 90 percent of the Durum wheat inspected to grade No. 1 on this factor. For the other classes the percent grading No. 1 on the factor shrunken and broken kernels would be even higher.

This proposed change should be adopted.

(f) Combine the tables of grade requirements for all classes of wheat. Heretofore 5 tables of grade requirements were given for the separate classes. Since the grades and grade requirements are practically the same for all classes of wheat the tables for all classes should be combined for the purpose of simplification.

(g) Change the minimum and maximum moisture limits for tough wheat. In the past, depending on the class, wheat with over 14 percent or 14.5 percent moisture was graded "tough" and if over 15.5 percent or 16 percent moisture was graded "Sample grade." The minimum moisture content for "tough" would be reduced to 13.5 percent for all classes, the maximum limit would be deleted, and the application of "Sample grade" based on moisture content would be discontinued.

The keeping quality of wheat depends on various factors-moisture content, temperature, amount and kinds of micro-organisms present, and the initial soundness of the wheat. At moisture levels above about 12 percent, the rate of respiration in storage wheat increases and small differences in moisture content may account for large differences in keeping quality. At temperatures prevailing in summer in most of the wheat-producing areas of the U.S. wheat stored at moisture levels exceeding 13.5 percent will increase in fat acidity, will decrease in viability, and is in danger of developing germ damage characteristic of “sick" wheat. Musty odors will frequently develop after extended storage periods.

Scientific data indicate that the moisture limits heretofore provided for tough wheat in the standards are too high to assure safe storage or foreign shipment of wheat during the warm seasons of the year. A reduction of the maximum moisture limit to 13.5 percent for all classes of wheat would materially increase the safety with which wheat not grading "tough" can be stored or shipped.

Wheat storage is not confined to any geographical area and the danger of deterioration from high moisture should be recorded regardless of location. All wheat with more than 13.5 percent moisture should be graded "Tough wheat." (h) Delete the provision for making smut dockage determinations on smutty wheat. This item is involved in the Pacific Northwest where for many years smutty wheat was scoured to remove the smut spores adhering to the surface of the wheat kernels. The material removed was called smut dockage. Varieties of wheat have now been developed that are practically smut free. In addition, the commerical practice of scouring to remove smut spores has been replaced by a washing process. Therefore, the smut-dockage method of appraising the quantity of smut in a lot of wheat should be discontinued.

(i) Provide a special grade of "Heavy Wheat" for all classes of wheat. In the past, the wheat standards defined only the minimum test weights permitted per grade and did not recognize superior test weights for any grade, except No. 1 Heavy Hard Red Spring Wheat. From the inception of grain grading, test weight has been recognized as an indicator of quality. It is concluded that the influence of superior test weight on quality should be recognized for grades 1, 2, and 3 for all classes of wheat.

(j) Except for the class Red Durum, change the maximum limit for wheat of other classes for grade No. 1 from 5 percent to 3 percent and provide limits for contrasting classes. In the past, the standards provided maximum limits (e.g. 0.5 percent, 1 percent, and 2 percent) for certain classes depending on the end use and ability to distinguish the classes on visual examination. The mixing of "wheat of other classes" into a specific lot tends to lower the value and usability of that lot of wheat.

The kernels of some classes of wheat are readily distinguishable from other classes and, therefore, are "contrasting classes." The proposal would make uniform maximum limits for contrasting classes in all grades. There was serious

objection to this restriction as applied to Soft Red Winter Wheat and White Wheat since the end use is similar. The proposal should be adopted with modifications so that (1) Soft Red Winter Wheat is not listed with the classes considered contrasting in White Wheat and (2) White Wheat is not listed with the classes considered contrasting in Soft Red Winter Wheat.

(k) Renumber or otherwise redesignate the sections and paragraphs of the standards in the interest of clarity and make other minor changes as proposed. One of the proposed minor changes would have redefined "Mixed Wheat". Modification of this proposed definition appears to be desirable in the interest of clarity and this definition should be adopted with such modification. The proposal to redesignate the sections and paragraphs of the standards and to make the other minor changes proposed are appropriate and should be adopted.

(1) Provide for determination by AMS of equipment and procedure to be used in making moisture tests. (In the past, the standards have provided by reference for the use of an air-oven test or "any method which gives equivalent results.")

The air-oven moisture test is accurate, but is so time consuming as to be impractical for routine inspection and has not been so used. The selection of a "method which gives equivalent results" as provided for in the past cannot be left to the judgment of individual licensed inspectors if uniformity of inspection results is to be achieved, and they are generally not informed of the availability and characteristics of moisture testing devices. The development of moisture testing devices capable of making quicker and more accurate moisture readings is constant, requiring continuing study and observation on the part of the Department, resulting in modification and change from time to time. This procedure is consistent with that followed in regard to other equipment used under the Act. This proposal should be adopted.

Therefore, under the authority of section 2 of the United States Grain Standards Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 74) the Official Grain Standards of the United States for Wheat are revised to read as hereinafter set forth. Insofar as the revision differs from the proposals in the notice of rule-making, the differences are due to changes made as a result of comments of interested persons pursuant to the notice. It appears that public rule-making procedure with respect to such changes would not make additional information available to this Department. Therefore under section 4 of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 1003) it is found upon good cause that notice and other public rule-making procedure with respect to the changes are unnecessary and impracticable. The revised standards are as follows:

[blocks in formation]

26.127

26.128

26.129

26.101

Grades.

Numerical grades and Sample grade and grade requirements.

Special grades, special grade requirements, and special grade designations.
Grade designations for all classes and subclasses of wheat.

Terms defined.

For the purposes of the Official Grain Standards of the United States for Wheat, the terms specified in § 26.102 through § 26.112 shall have the meanings stated in said sections respectively.

26.102 Wheat.

Wheat shall be the grain of common wheat, club wheat, and durum wheat which, before the removal of the dockage, consists of 50 percent or more of one or more of these wheats and not more than 10.0 percent of other grains for which standards have been established under the United States Grain Standards Act and which, after the removal of the dockage, contains 50 percent or more of whole kernels of one or more of these wheats.

26.103 Dockage.

Dockage shall be weed seeds, weed stems, chaff, straw, grain other than wheat, sand, dirt, and any other material other than wheat, which can be removed readily from the wheat by the use of appropriate sieves and cleaning devices; also underdeveloped, shriveled, and small pieces of wheat kernels removed in properly separating the material other than wheat and which cannot be recovered by properly rescreening or recleaning. (See also §§ 26.115 and 26.129.) § 26.104 Foreign material.

Foreign material shall be all matter other than wheat which is not separated from the wheat in the proper determination of dockage.

26.105 Other grains.

Other grains shall be rye, oats, corn, grain sorghum, barley, hull-less barley, flaxseed, ommer, spelt, einkorn, Polish wheat, poulard wheat, cultivated buckwheat, and soybeans.

§ 26.106 Damaged kernels.

Damaged kernels shall be kernels and pieces of kernels of wheat and other grains which are heat damaged, sprouted, frosted, badly ground damaged, badly weather damaged, moldy, diseased, or otherwise materially damaged.

§ 26.107 Heat-damaged kernels.

Heat-damaged kernels shall be kernels and pieces of kernels of wheat and other grains which have been materially discolored and damaged by heat. § 26.108 Contrasting classes.

Contrasting classes shall be (a) Durum Wheat, Red Durum Wheat, and White Wheat in the classes Hard Red Spring Wheat and Hard Red Winter Wheat; (b) Hard Red Spring Wheat, Red Durum Wheat, Hard Red Winter Wheat, Soft Red Winter Wheat, and White Wheat in the class Durum Wheat; (c) Durum Wheat and Red Durum Wheat in the class Soft Red Winter Wheat; and (d) Durum Wheat, Red Durum Wheat, Hard Red Spring Wheat, and Hard Red Winter Wheat in the class White Wheat.

§ 26.109 Shrunken and broken kernels.

Shrunken and broken kernels shall be all kernels and pieces of kernels of wheat and other matter that will pass readily through a 0.064 x % oblong hole sieve.

[blocks in formation]

A 0.064 x % oblong hole sieve shall be a metal sieve 0.0319 inch thick perforated with oblong holes 0.064 inch wide by % (0.375) inch long which are % (0.1250) inch from center to center and with 0.0525 inch end bridges. The perforations shall be staggered in relation to the adjacent rows.

[blocks in formation]

Stones shall be concreted earthy or mineral matter and other substances of similar hardness that do not disintegrate readily in water.

[blocks in formation]

Defects shall include damaged kernels, foreign material, and shrunken and broken kernels.

§ 26.113 Principles governing application of standards.

The principles stated in § 24.114 through § 26.117 shall apply in the determination of the classes and grades of wheat.

§ 26.114 Basis of determination.

Each determination of dockage, moisture, temperature, odor, garlic, live weevils or other insects injurious to stored grain, and distinctly low quality shall be upon the basis of the grain as a whole. All other determinations shall be upon the basis of the grain when free from dockage.

« PreviousContinue »