[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 6 (Thursday, January 9, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1239-1246]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-449]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 6 / Thursday, January 9, 1997 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 1239]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Parts 932 and 944
[Docket No. FV96-932-2 FR]
Olives Grown in California and Imported Olives; Establishment of
Minimum Quality Requirements for California and Imported Olives, and
Revision of Outgoing Inspection Requirements and Procedures for
California Olives
AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule establishes minimum quality requirements for
California olives under Marketing Order 932 and imported olives by
replacing grade requirements which have been based on the U.S.
Standards for Grades of Canned Ripe Olives (standards). This final rule
also revises outgoing inspection requirements and procedures for
California olives. This action is expected to result in reduced
handling costs, especially inspection costs, and improved consumer
satisfaction.
EFFECTIVE DATES: This final rule becomes effective January 13, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Vawter, Marketing Specialist,
California Marketing Field Office, Marketing Order Administration
Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street, suite 102B, Fresno,
California 93721; telephone (209) 487-5901; Fax # (209) 487-5906; or
Caroline Thorpe, Marketing Specialist, Marketing Order Administration
Branch, F&V, AMS, USDA, room 2522-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC.
20090-6456; telephone (202) 720-8139; Fax # (202) 720-5698. Small
businesses may request information on compliance with this regulation
by contacting: Jay Guerber, Marketing Order Administration Branch,
Fruit and Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 96456, room 2525-S,
Washington, DC 20090-6456; telephone (202) 720-2491; Fax # (202) 720-
5698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule is issued under Marketing Order
No. 932 (7 CFR part 932), as amended, regulating the handling of olives
grown in California, hereinafter referred to as the ``order.'' The
order is effective under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of
1937, as amended (7 U.S.C 601-674), hereinafter referred to as the
``Act.''
This final rule is also issued under section 8e of the Act, which
provides that whenever certain specified commodities, including olives,
are regulated under a Federal marketing order, imports of these
commodities into the United States are prohibited unless they meet the
same or comparable grade, size, quality, or maturity requirements as
those in effect for the domestically-produced commodities.
The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this final
rule in conformance with Executive Order 12866.
This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not intended to have retroactive
effect. This rule will not preempt any State or local laws,
regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable
conflict with this rule.
The Act provides that administrative proceedings must be exhausted
before parties may file suit in court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the
Act, any handler subject to an order may file with the Secretary a
petition stating that the order, any provision of the order, or any
obligation imposed in connection with the order is not in accordance
with law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted
therefrom. A handler is afforded the opportunity for a hearing on the
petition. After the hearing the Secretary would rule on the petition.
The Act provides that the district court of the United States in any
district in which the handler is an inhabitant, or has his or her
principal place of business, has jurisdiction to review the Secretary's
ruling on the petition, provided an action is filed not later than 20
days after the date of the entry of the ruling.
There are no administrative procedures which must be exhausted
prior to any judicial challenge to the provisions of import regulations
issued under section 8e of the Act.
Pursuant to requirements set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA), the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has considered the
economic impact of this action on small entities.
The purpose of the RFA is to fit regulatory actions to the scale of
business subject to such actions in order that small businesses will
not be unduly or disproportionately burdened. Marketing orders issued
pursuant to the Act, and rules issued thereunder, are unique in that
they are brought about through group action of essentially small
entities acting on their own behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
entity orientation and compatibility. Import regulations issued under
the Act are based on those established under Federal marketing orders.
There are 4 handlers of olives who are subject to regulation under
the order, and approximately 1,350 producers of olives in the regulated
area. There are approximately 25 importers of olives subject to the
olive import regulation. Small agricultural service firms, which
includes handlers and importers, have been defined by the Small
Business Administration (13 CFR 121.601) as those having annual
receipts of less than $5,000,000, and small agricultural producers are
defined as those having annual receipts of less than $500,000. None of
the handlers is considered a small entity, but the majority of olive
producers and some of the importers may be classified as small
entities.
The California Olive Committee (committee) met on March 27, 1996,
and unanimously recommended establishing minimum quality requirements
to be incorporated within the rules and regulations of the order and
revising outgoing inspection requirements and procedures. At a meeting
on July 10, 1996, the committee recommended a change in their
recommendations of March 27, 1996, with regard to an outgoing
inspection requirement.
Incoming inspection requirements at Sec. 932.51 require handlers to
weigh and size-grade olives prior to processing, and dispose of non-
canning size (undersized) olives into appropriate non-canning outlets.
Such weighing and size-grading is done under the
[[Page 1240]]
supervision of the Federal or Federal-State Inspection Service. These
requirements provide the basis for handler payments to producers, and
ensure that olives are properly sized into the various canning and non-
canning size categories.
Once the olives have been size-graded, they are stored in tanks,
ensuring that the various sizes of olives remain segregated. Non-
canning size olives are disposed of into appropriate outlets, such as
in frozen or acidified forms, or crushed for oil.
Outgoing inspection requirements at Sec. 932.52 and Sec. 932.149
specify the minimum quality of canned ripe olives as a modified U.S.
Grade C as certified by inspectors of the USDA, Processed Products
Branch (PPB). Certification as to grade provides handlers and their
customers with a uniform level of quality familiar to both parties. The
outgoing inspection requirements also ensure that canned ripe olives
meet applicable size designations prior to shipment. Two methods of
outgoing inspection are authorized: A Quality Assurance Program (QAP)
approved by the PPB or in-line inspection.
This rule adds the option of lot inspection to assist handlers in
reducing inspection costs. Currently, during in-line inspection, an
inspector is required to be present any time olives are in the final
stage of processing prior to packaging. The current cost for an
inspector ranges from $31.50 per hour for handlers in California under
the marketing order to $42.00 per hour depending on the contract. For
an 8-hour day, the cost of one inspector ranges from $252.00 to
$328.00. Because of this, handlers may benefit from economies of scale:
the more canned olives packaged, the lower the cost per can of olives.
In 1994, QAPs were added as an option to reduce inspection costs.
Under QAPs, savings are more likely to accrue to larger-volume
handlers, who are more likely to have sufficient olives to operate
year-round and realize savings by employing trained quality-control
personnel. When there is a large crop, more handlers may benefit from
QAPs for similar reasons.
Adding lot inspection offers handlers a less-costly inspection
option. During lot inspection, an inspector does not need to be present
during the final processing, unlike in-line inspection. However, an
inspector will inspect a statistical percentage of a lot of olives
whether the lot is large or small. Thus, there is less benefit of
economies of scale because for large lots more olives will be inspected
and for small lots fewer olives will be inspected.
The committee recommended changes in some of the inspection
requirements to reduce handlers' costs, especially the costs of
inspection, and to address the concerns of consumers of canned ripe
olives. The changes simplify the inspection process by eliminating
steps which have been made unnecessary by modern olive processing and
pitting equipment. This can reduce handling costs, including inspection
costs, thereby improving returns to California producers and handlers.
The changes address consumer concerns, as identified through a 1995
consumer survey which the committee undertook. Surveyed consumers
indicated that flavor, color, and character are quality criteria most
important to them. The term ``character'' is used to include olive
firmness, tenderness and texture. The changes address consumer concerns
by evaluating quality based upon those criteria. This will help ensure
that consumer satisfaction is met, benefitting the California olive
industry, importers, and consumers.
Therefore, the AMS has determined that this action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Interested persons are invited to submit information on the regulatory
and informational impacts of this action on small businesses.
Establishment of Minimum Quality Requirements
Currently, Sec. 932.149 specifies that canned olives meet a minimum
grade requirement of a modified U.S. Grade C. Additional specific
requirements are established for the various styles of canned ripe
olives, including whole, pitted, broken pitted, halved, segmented
(wedged), sliced, and chopped styles. Section 932.149 references
various definitions from the standards.
In place of these grades and definitions, the committee recommended
a set of minimum quality requirements for four styles of canned olives:
(1) Whole and pitted style olives; (2) sliced, segmented (wedged), and
halved style olives; (3) chopped style olives; and (4) broken pitted
olives. These quality requirements include criteria pertaining to
flavor, saltiness, color, character, uniformity of size and freedom
from defects. These factors are similar to those currently specified in
the standards and handling regulations, and have been determined to be
of importance to consumers through the committee's consumer survey.
Olives are currently graded based upon five factors: flavor,
saltiness, color, character, and defects. Currently, Table I in
Sec. 932.149 only sets limits for defects of canned ripe olives. Limits
for the other four factors, flavor, saltiness, color, and character,
are defined in the standards. In place of Table I, based upon
information from the 1995 consumer survey, the committee recommended
establishing four new tables which would specify the limits for defects
for each of the canned ripe olive styles (whole and pitted styles;
sliced, segmented (wedged), and halved styles; chopped style; and
broken pitted style). The new tables also define the limits of the four
characteristics (flavor, saltiness, color, and character) currently
defined in the standards. The four new tables provide all the
definitions and tolerances necessary to establish minimum quality
requirements in place of grade requirements.
To effectuate the establishment of minimum quality requirements,
references to ``grade'' in Sec. 932.149 will be replaced with
``quality'', canned broken pitted olives will be defined separately in
a new paragraph designated as (a)(4), and four new tables depicting
minimum quality requirements for (1) canned whole and pitted olives;
(2) canned sliced, segmented (wedged), and halved olives; (3) canned
chopped style olives; and (4) canned broken pitted style olives will be
added to Sec. 932.149, replacing the current Table 1.
In conforming changes, the word ``grade'' will be replaced with the
words ``minimum quality'' or ``minimum quality requirements,'' as
necessary, in Sec. 932.150,Sec. 932.152, Sec. 932.153, and
Sec. 932.155.
Section 932.149(a)(2) currently sets the tolerance for identifiable
pieces of pit caps, end slices, and slices at 5 percent, by weight, for
canned chopped style olives. The committee recommended a relaxed
tolerance of 10 percent, by weight, in an effort to encourage handlers
to cut olives of the chopped style in larger pieces. The committee was
concerned that canned chopped style olives are currently chopped too
finely, rendering the product nearly an olive ``flour'' rather than
identifiable pieces of olives consumers indicated they preferred. This
change will reduce the costs of packing canned chopped style olives.
The committee recommended that the definition of ``broken pitted''
olives be modified from the definition provided in the standards. To
accomplish this, the committee proposed a modified definition in
Sec. 932.149 of the regulations. The current definition is considered
too restrictive by the committee. Under the current definition, broken
pitted olives are
[[Page 1241]]
defined as ``olives [which] consist substantially of large pieces that
may have been broken in pitting but have not been sliced or cut.''
Currently, each handler packing broken pitted olives is prohibited from
using olives which have been improperly pitted but unbroken because the
olives have not been ``broken'' in the pitting process. (Improperly
pitted olives do not contain pits or pit fragments.) Each such handler,
therefore, pays an employee to ``break'' the unbroken, improperly
pitted olives so that such olives meet the requirement for broken
pitted olives. As recommended by the committee, the definition for
broken pitted olives deletes the word ``substantially,'' thereby
permitting a greater percentage of unbroken, improperly pitted olives
to be included in the broken pitted style category. Such change is
intended to reduce the costs of packing broken pitted olives while
maintaining the quality of the product.
The committee further recommended basing outgoing inspections on a
pass-fail basis, eliminating the requirement that the inspection
service certify that canned ripe olives are either Grade A, Grade B, or
Grade C. Under a pass-fail outgoing inspection, canned ripe olives
either meet the minimum quality requirements and pass inspection, or
fail to meet the minimum quality requirements and not pass inspection.
There will be no need to calculate the grade of each sample in order to
assign Grade A, Grade B, or Grade C. Elimination of the requirement to
certify to a grade will simplify the inspection of such olives, thereby
reducing inspection time and overall inspection costs.
Authorized Methods of Outgoing Inspection
Pursuant to Sec. 932.52 of the order and Sec. 932.152 of the
current outgoing regulations, handlers are required to maintain
continuous in-line outgoing inspection or a certified QAP. Under
continuous in-line outgoing inspection, at least one inspector must be
present at all times when a plant is in operation to make in-process
checks on the preparation, processing, packing, and warehousing of all
products. The current cost for an inspector ranges from $31.50 for
handlers under the marketing order to $42.00 per hour depending on the
contract. For an 8-hour day the cost of one inspector ranges from
$252.00 to $328.00.
By contrast, under a QAP, each certified plant has trained quality-
control personnel who perform most of the same functions as a PPB
inspector. The PPB inspectors continue to issue certificates of
inspection based upon the outgoing inspection records maintained by the
certified quality-control personnel. These records are verified through
spot-checks and samples taken by PPB inspectors.
A QAP may decrease outgoing inspection costs for a handler compared
to inspection costs under continuous in-line outgoing inspection.
However, cost savings under a QAP accrue more to larger-volume
handlers, who are more likely to have sufficient olives to operate
year-round and realize savings by employing trained quality-control
personnel. When there is a large crop, more handlers may benefit from a
QAP for similar reasons. However, olive crop sizes may vary
substantially from one year to the next due to the alternate-bearing
characteristics. This variability further reduces the efficiency of
operations at most of the olive processing plants and the cost-savings
of QAP, since handlers' fixed costs must be paid independent of the
size of the crop.
To enable handlers to minimize their inspection costs, the
committee recommended that handlers be allowed to utilize any
inspection method permitted by PPB, so that each may choose the method
most economical for their operations. Thus, in addition to a QAP and
in-line inspection, lot inspection will also be authorized for meeting
outgoing inspection requirements. Under lot inspection, a specified
number of containers of the same size and type, containing olives of
the same type and style, at the same location, are inspected. Lot
inspection occurs after processing, rather than during processing.
Inspecting by lot has the potential to reduce costs for handlers
because lot inspection does not require the presence of an inspector at
all times while olives are being processed.
To effectuate this change, paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of
Sec. 932.152, Outgoing regulations, are revised to add authority for
handlers to use either continuous in-line outgoing inspection, QAP, or
lot inspection. Because lot inspection does not require the presence of
an inspector at all times during the processing of olives, paragraph
(b)(1) is revised by deleting the final sentence, thereby removing the
requirement that an inspector be present when olives are processed.
This change is expected to reduce overall inspection costs by
eliminating overtime hours which accrue when an inspector is required
to remain in an olive processing plant at all times while processing is
underway.
Outgoing Inspection for Size of Canning-Size Olives
The committee also recommended revising the current requirements
that canning-size olives, which have been sized and stored in tanks
prior to pitting, be inspected for size prior to packaging. Currently,
such olives are required under incoming inspection requirements to be
weighed and size-graded. Olives are then stored in tanks prior to
processing. The outgoing requirements mandate that such olives be
submitted for size inspection prior to packaging. However, handlers
size olives upon receipt and keep the sizes separate throughout the
packaging process because doing so facilitates more efficient operation
of modern processing and pitting equipment. Eliminating the requirement
for inspection for size prior to packaging will simplify the inspection
process and reduce overall inspection costs while maintaining the
integrity and quality of canned ripe olives.
To effectuate this change, paragraph (b)(2) of Sec. 932.152 is
deleted. This deletion necessitates the redesignation of paragraph
(b)(1) as (b).
However, olives which are smaller than authorized for use as canned
ripe olives (undersized olives) will still be held under surveillance
by the inspection service, as required in the incoming inspection
requirements and specified in paragraph (e)(2) of Sec. 932.151, since
handlers must dispose of such olives into appropriate outlets, such as
in frozen or acidified forms, or crushed for oil.
Outgoing Inspection for Size of Limited-Use Olives
Section 932.152, paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2), of the current
outgoing regulations specify that olives used in the production of
limited-use styles are not required to be submitted for an outgoing
inspection for size prior to packaging if they were size-graded by the
inspection service during the incoming inspection process. Limited-use
styles include halved, segmented (wedged), sliced, or chopped styles.
Typically, smaller olives may be used for limited-use styles rather
than for whole styles.
According to the requirements of Sec. 932.51(a)(ii) of the order,
canning size olives are sized by the inspection service during the
incoming inspection process. The olives are then either placed in
storage tanks or sent immediately to processing.
Olives process more efficiently when all the olives in the
processing tank are uniform in size. Modern, high-speed
[[Page 1242]]
pitting equipment produces higher yields and inflicts less damage to
olives when the sizes being pitted are uniform. This is especially true
for the smaller canning sizes. Currently, over 95 percent of all olives
are pitted prior to packaging.
Olive handlers have an additional incentive to maintain strict
control over various sizes of olives--retail customers' demands for
uniform size and quality.
For those reasons, the committee recommended changes in
Sec. 932.152, paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) to eliminate the requirement
for inspection for size prior to packaging.
To effectuate the change, the words ``without an outgoing
inspection for size designation'' are deleted from Sec. 932.152,
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2).
These changes establish minimum quality requirements of flavor,
saltiness, color, character, and defects for whole and pitted style
olives; sliced, segmented (wedged), and halved style olives; chopped
style olives; and broken pitted style olives. They also revise outgoing
inspection requirements and procedures under the marketing order by
eliminating requirements that sized and stored olives be submitted for
sizing prior to packaging, and permitting lot inspection. These
revisions eliminate requirements no longer deemed necessary, thereby
reducing handling costs, while maintaining quality and size
requirements needed to ensure customer satisfaction.
This rule also changes Sec. 932.153 (as amended in the Federal
Register on August 5, 1996, 61 FR 40507), which specifies current
minimum grade and size requirements for limited use olives. All
references to ``grade'' in that section are replaced by the words
``minimum quality'' or ``minimum quality requirements,'' as necessary.
Olive Import Requirements
Section 8e of the Act requires that whenever grade, size, quality,
or maturity requirements are in effect for olives under a domestic
marketing order, imported olives must meet the same or comparable
requirements. This rule establishes minimum quality requirements to
replace current minimum grade requirements for California olives under
the marketing order. Therefore, a corresponding change is made in the
olive import regulation.
This rule modifies paragraphs (a)(8), (b)(1), (g), and (j) of
Sec. 944.401 by deleting certain references to the standards and adding
specific quality criteria for imported olives which are the same as
those for California olives.
The proposed rule concerning this action was published in the
November 8, 1996, Federal Register (61 FR 57782), with a 15-day comment
period ending November 25, 1996. No comments were received.
Although no comments were received, the Department is making
several changes in the regulatory text that appeared in the proposed
rule for purposes of clarification.
In tables 1 through 4 of sections 932.149 and 944.401, with respect
to color criteria, the proposed rule stated, in part, that olives must
have ``a color equal or darker than the comparator.'' This rule
replaces the word ``comparator'' with the term ``USDA Composite Color
Standard.'' This is a more precise term for the standard used to
determine the appropriate color of olives, and does not materially
affect the color requirement. In table 1 of those same two sections,
with respect to pits and pit fragments, the allowance of ``Not more
than 1.3 average by count'' is changed to read ``Not more than 1.3% by
count.'' This is a clarifying change.
In section 932.152(c)(2)(xi), the word ``standard'' is replaced by
the word ``quality.'' This is a more accurate word.
Finally, a paragraph (5) is added to section 932.149(a) and a
paragraph (v) is added to section 944.401(b) to provide a tolerance for
olives that do not meet the quality criteria set forth in those
sections. Absent such tolerances, one failed unit would result in an
entire lot failing to meet the specified quality requirements. The
tolerances specified are those that appear in the standards and that
are currently used by the olive industry. The proposed rule did not
contain such tolerances. Adding these provisions to the final rule
corrects this oversight.
In accordance with section 8e of the Act, the U.S. Trade
Representative has concurred with the issuance of this proposed rule.
After consideration of all relevant matter presented, including the
information and recommendations submitted by the Committee and other
available information, it is hereby found that this rule, as
hereinafter set forth, will tend to effectuate the declared policy of
the Act.
It is further found that good cause exists for not postponing the
effective date of this rule until 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register (5 U.S.C. 553) because this rule should be implemented
as soon as possible since the crop year for olives grown in California
began on August 1, 1996, and olives from the 1996 crop are already
being processed and shipped. Further, handlers are aware of this rule,
which was recommended at two public meetings. Additionally, interested
parties had the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule, and no
comments were received.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 932
Marketing agreements, Olives, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
7 CFR Part 944
Avocados, Food grades and standards, Grapefruit, Grapes, Imports,
Kiwifruit, Limes, Olives, Oranges.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR parts 932 and 944
are amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for 7 CFR parts 932 and 944 continues to
read as follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601-674.
PART 932--OLIVES GROWN IN CALIFORNIA
2. Section 932.149 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 932.149 Modified minimum quality requirements for specified
styles of canned olives of the ripe type.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the minimum
quality requirements prescribed in Sec. 932.52(a)(1) are modified as
follows, for specified styles of canned olives of the ripe type:
(1) Canned whole and pitted olives of the ripe type shall meet the
minimum quality requirements as prescribed in Table 1 of this section;
(2) Canned sliced, segmented (wedged), and halved olives of the
ripe type shall meet the minimum quality requirements as prescribed in
Table 2 of this section;
(3) Canned chopped olives of the ripe type shall meet the minimum
quality requirements as prescribed in Table 3 of this section; and
shall be practically free from identifiable units of pit caps, end
slices, and slices (``practically free from identifiable units'' means
that not more than 10 percent, by weight, of the unit of chopped style
olives may be identifiable pit caps, end slices, or slices); and,
(4) Canned broken pitted olives of the ripe type shall meet the
minimum quality requirements as prescribed in Table 4 of this section;
(5) A lot of canned ripe olives is considered to meet the
requirements of this section if all or most of the sample units meet
the requirements specified in Tables 1 through 4 of this section:
Provided, That the number of sample units which do not meet the
[[Page 1243]]
requirements specified in Tables 1 through 4 of this section does not
exceed the acceptance number prescribed for in the sample size provided
in Table I of 7 CFR 52.38: Provided further, That there is no off
flavor in any sample unit.
Table 1.--Whole and Pitted Style
[Defects by count per 50 olives]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
FLAVOR (Green Ripe Type) Free from objectionable flavors of any
kind.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable Range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with not less than 60%
having a color equal or darker than the
USDA Composite Color Standard for Ripe
Type.
CHARACTER.................... Not more than 5 soft units or 2
excessively soft units.
UNIFORMITY OF SIZE 60%, by visual inspection, of the most
uniform in size. The diameter of the
largest does not exceed the smallest by
more than 4mm.
DEFECTS:
Pitter Damage (Pitted 15.
Style Only).
Major Blemishes.......... 5.
Major Wrinkles........... 5.
Pits and Pit Fragments Not more than 1.3 % average by count.
(Pitted Style Only).
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 1 unit per sample.
Mutilated................ Not more than 3.
Mechanical Damage........ Not more than 5.
Split Pits or Misshapen.. Not more than 5.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2.--Sliced, Segmented (Wedged), and Halved Styles
[Defects by count per 255 grams]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable Range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with no units lighter
than the USDA Composite Color Standard
for Ripe Type.
CHARACTER.................... Not more than 13 grams excessively soft.
DEFECTS:
Pits and Pit Fragments... Average of not more than 1 by count per
300 grams.
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 2 units per sample.
Broken Pieces and End Not more than 125 grams by weight.
Caps.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3.--Chopped Style
[Defects by count per 255 grams]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable Range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with no units lighter
than the USDA Composite Color Standard
for Ripe Type.
DEFECTS:
Pits and Pit Fragments... Average of not more than 1 by count per
300 grams.
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 2 units per sample.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.--Broken Pitted Style
[Defects by count per 255 grams]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable Range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with no units lighter
than the USDA Composite Color Standard
for Ripe Type.
CHARACTER.................... Not more than 13 grams excessively soft.
DEFECTS:
Pits and Pit Fragments... Average of not more than 1 by count per
300 grams.
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 2 units per sample.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Terms used in this section shall have the same meaning as are
given to the respective terms in the current U.S. Standards for Grades
of Canned Ripe Olives (7 CFR part 52): Provided, That the definition of
``broken pitted olives'' is as follows: ``Broken pitted olives''
consist of large pieces that may have
[[Page 1244]]
been broken in pitting but have not been sliced or cut.
3. Section 932.150 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 932.150 Modified minimum quality requirements for canned green
ripe olives.
The minimum quality requirements prescribed in Sec. 932.52 (a)(1)
of this part are hereby modified with respect to canned green ripe
olives so that no requirements shall be applicable with respect to
color and blemishes of such olives.
4. In section 932.152, paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(2), the heading of
paragraph (d), (d)(1), (g)(1) introductory text (table remains
unchanged), and (g)(2) introductory text (table remains unchanged) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 932.152 Outgoing regulations.
(a) Inspection stations. Processed olives shall be sampled and
inspected only at an inspection station which shall be any olive
processing plant having facilities for in-line or lot inspection which
are satisfactory to the Inspection Service and the Committee; or an
olive processing plant which has an approved Quality Assurance Program
in effect.
(b) Inspection--General. Inspection of packaged olives for
conformance with Sec. 932.52 shall be by a Quality Assurance Program
approved by the Processed Products Branch (PPB), USDA; or by in- line
or lot inspection. A PPB approved Quality Assurance Program shall be
pursuant to a Quality Assurance contract as referred to in Sec. 52.2.
(c) * * *
(2) The Inspection Service shall issue for each day's pack a signed
certificate covering the quantities of such packaged olives which meet
all applicable minimum quality and size requirements. Each such
certificate shall contain at least the following:
(i) Date;
(ii) Place of inspection;
(iii) Name and address of handler;
(iv) Can code;
(v) Variety;
(vi) Fruit size;
(vii) Can size;
(viii) Style;
(ix) Total number of cases;
(x) Number of cans per case;
(xi) And statement that packaged olives meet the effective minimum
quality requirements for canned ripe olives as warranted by the facts.
(d) Olives which fail to meet minimum quality and size
requirements. (1) Whenever any portion of a handler's daily pack of
packaged olives fails to meet all applicable minimum quality and size
requirements, the Inspection Service shall issue a signed report
covering such olives. Each such report shall contain at least the
following:
(i) Date;
(ii) Place of inspection;
(iii) Name and address of handler;
(iv) Can code;
(v) Variety;
(vi) Fruit size;
(vii) Can size;
(viii) Style;
(ix) Total number of cases;
(x) Number of cans per case; and
(xi) Reason why the applicable requirements were not met.
* * * * *
(g) Size Certification. (1) When limited-use size olives for
limited-use styles are authorized during a crop year and a handler
elects to have olives sized pursuant to Sec. 932.51(a)(2)(i), any lot
of limited-use size olives may be used in the production of packaged
olives for limited-use styles if such olives are within the average
count range in Table II contained herein for that variety group, and
meet such further mid-point or acceptable count requirements for the
average count range in each size as approved by the committee.
* * * * *
(2) When limited-use size olives are not authorized for limited-use
styles during a crop year and a handler elects to have olives sized
pursuant to Sec. 932.51(a)(2)(ii), any lot of canning-sized olives may
be used in the production of packaged olives for whole, pitted, or
limited-use styles if such olives are within the average count range in
Table III contained herein for that variety group, and meet such
further mid-point or acceptable count requirements for the average
count range in each size as approved by the committee.
* * * * *
5. In Sec. 932.153, the section heading and paragraph (a) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 932.153 Establishment of minimum quality and size requirements
for processed olives for limited uses.
(a) Minimum quality requirements. On or after August 1, 1996, any
handler may use processed olives of the respective variety group in the
production of limited use styles of canned ripe olives if such olives
were processed after July 31, 1996, and meet the minimum quality
requirements specified in Sec. 932.52(a)(1) as modified by
Sec. 932.149.
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 932.155, paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 932.155 Special purpose shipments.
* * * * *
(c) In accordance with the provisions of Sec. 932.55(b), any
handler may use processed olives in the production of packaged olives
for repackaging, and ship packaged olives for repackaging, if the
packaged olives meet the minimum quality requirements, except for the
requirement that the packaged olives possess a reasonably good flavor:
Provided, That the failure to possess a reasonably good flavor is due
only to excessive sodium chloride.
PART 944--FRUITS; IMPORT REGULATIONS
7. In Sec. 944.401, paragraphs (a)(8), (b)(1), (g), and (j) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 944.401 Olive Regulation 1.
(a) * * *
(8) Terms used in this section shall have the same meaning as are
given to the respective terms in the current U.S. Standards for Grades
of Canned Ripe Olives (7 CFR part 52) including the terms ``size'',
``character'', ``defects'' and ``ripe type'': Provided, That the
definition of ``broken pitted olives'' is as follows: ``Broken pitted
olives'' consist of large pieces that may have been broken in pitting
but have not been sliced or cut.
(b) * * *
(1) Minimum quality requirements. Canned ripe olives shall meet the
following quality requirements, except that no requirements shall be
applicable with respect to color and blemishes for canned green ripe
olives:
(i) Canned whole and pitted olives of the ripe type shall meet the
minimum quality requirements prescribed in Table 1 of this section;
(ii) Canned sliced, segmented (wedged), and halved olives of the
ripe type shall meet the minimum quality requirements prescribed in
Table 2 of this section;
(iii) Canned chopped olives of the ripe type shall meet the minimum
quality requirements prescribed in Table 3 of this section and shall be
practically free from identifiable units of pit caps, end slices, and
slices (``practically free from identifiable units'' means that not
more than 10 percent, by weight, of the unit of chopped style olives
may be identifiable pit caps, end slices, or slices); and
(iv) Canned broken pitted olives of the ripe type shall meet the
minimum quality requirements prescribed in Table 4 of this section,
Provided, That broken pitted olives consist of large
[[Page 1245]]
pieces that may have been broken in pitting but have not been sliced or
cut.
(v) A lot of canned ripe olives is considered to meet the
requirements of this section if all or most of the sample units meet
the requirements specified in Tables 1 through 4 of this section:
Provided, That the number of sample units which do not meet the
requirements specified in Tables 1 through 4 of this section does not
exceed the acceptance number prescribed for in the sample size provided
in Table I of 7 CFR 52.38: Provided further, That there is no off
flavor in any sample unit.
Table 1.--Whole and Pitted Style
[Defects by count per 50 olives]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
FLAVOR (Green Ripe Type)..... Free from objectionable flavors of any
kind.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with not less than 60%
having a color equal or darker than the
USDA Composite Color Standard for Ripe
Type.
CHARACTER.................... Not more than 5 soft units or 2
excessively soft units.
UNIFORMITY OF SIZE........... 60%, by visual inspection, of the most
uniform in size. The diameter of the
largest does not exceed the smallest by
more than 4mm.
DEFECTS:.....................
Pitter Damage (Pitted 15.
Style Only).
Major Blemishes.......... 5.
Major Wrinkles........... 5.
Pits and Pit Fragments Not more than 1.3% average by count.
(Pitted Style Only).
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 1 unit per sample.
Mutilated................ Not more than 3.
Mechanical Damage........ Not more than 5.
Split Pits or Misshapen.. Not more than 5.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2.--Sliced, Segmented (Wedged), and Halved Styles
[Defects by count per 255]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with no units lighter
than the USDA Composite Color Standard
for Ripe Type.
CHARACTER.................... Not more than 13 grams excessively soft.
DEFECTS:
Pits and Pit Fragments... Average of not more than 1 by count per
300 grams.
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 2 units per sample.
Broken Pieces and End Not more than 125 grams by weight.
Caps.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3.--Chopped Style
[Defects by count per 255 grams]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with no units lighter
than the USDA Composite Color Standard
for Ripe Type.
DEFECTS:
Pits and Pit Fragments... Average of not more than 1 by count per
300 grams.
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 2 units per sample.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.--Broken Pitted Style
[Defects by count per 255 grams]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FLAVOR....................... Reasonably good; no ``off'' flavor.
SALOMETER.................... Acceptable range in degrees: 3.0 to 14.0.
COLOR........................ Reasonably uniform with no units lighter
than the USDA Composite Color Standard
for Ripe Type.
CHARACTER.................... Not more than 13 grams excessively soft.
DEFECTS:
Pits and Pit Fragments... Average of not more than 1 by count per
300 grams.
Major Stems.............. Not more than 3.
HEVM..................... Not more than 2 units per sample.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 1246]]
* * * * *
(g) It is hereby determined, on the basis of the information
currently available, that the minimum quality requirements and size
requirements set forth in this part are comparable to those applicable
to California canned ripe olives.
* * * * *
(j) The minimum quality, size, and maturity requirements of this
section shall not be applicable to olives imported for charitable
organizations or processing for oil, but shall be subject to the
safeguard provisions contained in Sec. 944.350.
Dated: December 31, 1996.
Robert C. Keeney,
Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
[FR Doc. 97-449 Filed 1-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-02-P
