USDA Produce Grading and Inspection

When a crate of apples is labeled "U.S. Extra Fancy" or a bag of potatoes carries "U.S. No. 1," those marks come from a federal grading system that has been running since 1946. The USDA Agricultural Marketing Service sets official grade standards for hundreds of fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts, and other agricultural products under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. §§ 1621–1627), implemented through 7 CFR Part 51. Unlike tobacco, produce grading is generally voluntary — shippers, receivers, and importers request it when they need a certified grade for a sales contract, a customs entry, or a dispute under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA). The certificate issued by an AMS inspector is the legal record of what the product was when inspected. For certain imported commodities subject to Section 8e import inspection, however, the inspection is mandatory at the port of entry — imported produce must meet the same grade minimums as domestically marketed product.

Current Law (2026)

Legal Authority

• 7 U.S.C. § 1621 — Policy declaration: facilitating orderly, efficient, and equitable marketing of agricultural products through grading, standardization, and inspection services
• 7 U.S.C. § 1622 — Core program authority: authorizes USDA to develop grade standards and inspection and certification services for agricultural commodities; AMS may inspect, certify, and identify quality, grade, quantity, and condition of agricultural products moving in commerce
• 7 U.S.C. §§ 1623–1627 — Program mechanics: cooperative agreements with states and other agencies for inspection services; licensing of inspectors; fee collection; authority to prohibit false or misleading grade markings
• 7 CFR § 51.3 — Federal crime provision: falsifying or misusing official inspection certificates or the devices that produce them is a federal crime under the Agricultural Marketing Act
• 7 CFR §§ 51.13–51.16 — Inspection standards: inspectors apply the applicable USDA grade standard, state standard, or other government agency standard as the applicant selects; PACA complaint lots take scheduling priority; inspectors may not inspect product in which they have a financial interest; inspectors postpone when hidden damage makes quality assessment impossible
• 7 CFR §§ 51.24–51.31 — Appeal process: any party with a financial interest may request an appeal inspection before the lot changes condition; appeal certificate supersedes the original; if a material error is found in the original grade, the appeal fee is waived
• 7 CFR §§ 51.37–51.44 — Fees: set annually by AMS based on hourly cost plus benefits, overhead, and bad-debt allowance; import inspection billed per pound at 1/40,000 of the carlot fee
• 7 CFR §§ 51.300–51.3695 — Grade standards subparts: define minimum requirements, tolerances, size specifications, and defect thresholds for each specific commodity

How It Works

Grade standards set both a minimum quality threshold and a tolerance — the maximum percentage of a lot that may fall below the stated grade. A U.S. No. 1 lot of apples, for example, may have no more than 10% below grade and no more than 1% seriously damaged; tolerance percentages vary by commodity and tier. The grade is not a judgment about nutritional value — it's a standardized description of external appearance, size, and obvious defects. Most commodities follow a three-tier structure:

Some commodities also have consumer-grade standards (e.g., U.S. Consumer Grade for potatoes and tomatoes) designed for retail sale labeling rather than wholesale contract use.

Growers and packers request shipping-point certificates to document product condition at origin — essential if a receiver later claims the product arrived in poor condition. Importers need certificates to clear certain commodities through customs under Section 8e of the Agricultural Marketing Act. Buyers use destination-market certificates to establish condition on arrival; comparing a destination certificate to the shipping-point certificate determines whether deterioration occurred in transit (a carrier claim) or was already present when the seller loaded it (a seller's problem). PACA arbitration — the industry's informal dispute resolution system — relies heavily on AMS certificates as the evidentiary record; without a certificate, a shipper's or receiver's claim has no independent documentary support.

Inspectors cannot examine products in which they have a direct or indirect financial interest. Service is provided in order of application receipt, with PACA complaint lots taking priority. Inspections are performed in the lighting the inspector determines appropriate; when hidden transit damage makes accurate assessment impossible, the inspector postpones rather than certify an inaccurate grade.

How It Affects You

If you're a grower or packer shipping fresh produce: Requesting a USDA grade certificate at the shipping point before loading is the single best protection against destination-market disputes. If a buyer later claims the product arrived below grade, your certificate establishes what the grade was when it left your facility. The cost varies by commodity and carlot size — typically $75–$200 per lot — but it can prevent disputes worth many times that amount. The certificate is also required for export documentation in many markets and for certain domestic contracts that specify "grade on arrival" guarantees.

If you're an importer of fresh produce: Commodities subject to Section 8e mandatory import inspection cannot clear U.S. customs without an AMS certificate confirming the product meets the applicable grade minimum. Shipments that fail inspection must be regraded, reconditioned, or exported — they cannot enter U.S. commerce below the floor. Section 8e applies to imported commodities that are covered by domestic federal marketing orders — including certain tomatoes, avocados, mangoes, limes, grapefruit, kiwifruit, dates, dried prunes, raisins, olives, and walnuts. Check with your customs broker to identify which of your specific import categories are Section 8e regulated.

If you're a buyer or receiver disputing a produce shipment: When your contract specifies "U.S. No. 1," that is a legally defined standard backed by this federal grading system — not a marketing claim. If a shipment arrives below grade, request an AMS destination-market inspection immediately, before the product deteriorates further. That certificate is your documentation for a PACA claim, and it establishes whether the deterioration happened before or during transit. PACA license revocation — the ultimate sanction for dealers who repeatedly fail to pay on produce claims — can only be pursued if you have proper documentation, including inspection certificates.

If you work in food retail or food service procurement: USDA grade standards drive what ends up in the supply chain. Product that cannot meet U.S. No. 2 typically goes to processing (juice, frozen, canned) rather than fresh sale. Grade floors also set minimum size standards — certain apple varieties must meet minimum diameter requirements to carry the U.S. Extra Fancy label, which is why retail produce tends to be more uniform in size than small-farm or farmers market produce. When writing produce specifications for contracts, specifying the USDA grade rather than a custom description ensures the standard is enforceable and independently verifiable.

State Variations

Federal and state produce inspection systems are designed to work together:

• California, Florida, and Washington — the three largest fresh produce states — each operate their own state inspection programs that are approved by AMS for equivalence; an inspection certificate from a California Department of Food and Agriculture inspector carries the same legal weight as an AMS certificate for most purposes
• Cooperative agreements between AMS and state departments of agriculture allow state inspectors to perform federal inspections and issue federal certificates, giving growers and shippers access to inspection services even in areas where AMS doesn't have field offices
• Some states have additional produce labeling requirements (California Proposition 65, state-specific pesticide residue disclosure) that go beyond federal grade standards
• State marketing orders may set minimum size or quality standards for certain state-grown commodities, which interact with the federal grade standard

Implementing Regulations

• 7 CFR Part 51 — Inspection, certification, and grade standards for fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts, and other products: application procedures, inspector licensing, fee schedules, appeal process, and grade standards for dozens of fresh commodities
• 7 CFR Part 52 — Processed Fruits and Vegetables, Processed Products Thereof, and Certain Other Processed Food Products (142 sections across 7 subparts — the companion to Part 51 for manufactured/processed products):
  • Subpart A — Requirements Governing Inspection and Certification (64 sections — largest): the procedural framework for requesting, conducting, and issuing certificates for processed products; § 52.1 places administration under AMS; § 52.10 application rejection grounds (outstanding fees, prior misconduct, inability to sample); inspector access requirements; sampling protocols for lot inspection; certificate contents (product name, grade, score, inspector identity, date/location); certificate validity; appeal inspection rights (any financially interested party may request re-inspection before condition changes); fee schedule based on service type (lot inspection, partial lot, contract-compliance inspection, export certification); AMS sets fees annually to recover program costs
  • Subpart B — U.S. Standards for Canned Red Tart Pitted Cherries (14 sections): grades (U.S. Grade A / Fancy, U.S. Grade B / Choice, U.S. Grade C / Standard, Sub-standard); 100-point scoring system covering color (max 40 points), absence of defects (max 30 points), character (max 30 points); net weight, fill, and syrup requirements; color must be bright red to dark red for Grade A; defects include unpitted cherries, cap stems, leaves, and pits
  • Subpart C — U.S. Standards for Frozen Red Tart Pitted Cherries (12 sections): same Grade A/B/C structure; score factors differ for frozen product (color 25 points, defects 35 points, character 40 points); character evaluation assesses texture after thawing — "practically firm" required for Grade A
  • Subpart D — U.S. Standards for Grades of Dates (11 sections): styles (whole/pitted/pieces/chopped); grades (U.S. Fancy, U.S. Choice, U.S. Standard); evaluation of color (golden amber to dark reddish brown acceptable range), moisture content (18–35%), defects (fermented, shriveled, broken), character (soft and moist texture); dry dates for processing have separate standards
  • Subpart E — U.S. Standards for Grades of Processed Raisins (18 sections): natural seedless raisins, golden seedless, muscat raisins, dried currants, and other varieties each have their own grade standards; moisture content limits (14–18% depending on variety); defect tolerances for cap stems, pieces, sugared raisins, and other conditions; lot sampling protocols for bulk raisin shipments
  • Subpart F — U.S. Standards for Dried Prunes (9 sections): grades based on size (count per pound), moisture (18–35%), and defects; size is the primary commercial quality indicator for prunes — "Extra Large" through "Large," "Medium," "Small," and "Midget" sizes; color, condition, and character score supplements size classification
  • Subpart G — U.S. Standards for Canned Ripe Olives (14 sections): styles (whole, pitted, halved, sliced, chopped, broken pitted); grades (U.S. Grade A, B, C, Sub-standard); color factor (uniform black to dark brown for ripe olives); defect tolerances for spots, blemishes, broken or crushed olives; net weight and drained weight requirements by can size
• 7 CFR Part 868 — General Regulations and Standards for Certain Agricultural Commodities (95 sections — the dry commodity counterpart to Parts 51 and 52, administered by the Federal Grain Inspection Service within AMS):
  • Subpart A — Regulations (49 sections): inspection service framework for dry beans, grain, hops, lentils, oilseeds, dry peas, split peas, and rice; defines authorized inspectors, cooperators (state agencies that perform federal inspections under agreement), and official sampling and testing procedures; certificates issued under Part 868 cover kind, class, grade, quality, quantity, or condition; appeal inspection rights parallel Part 51 — any party with a financial interest may request re-inspection; cooperator inspection services allow state agencies to issue federal certificates under AMS supervision; FOIA procedures and inspector ID requirements (§§ 868.11–868.12); these regulations explicitly do not cover grain inspections under the U.S. Grain Standards Act (which applies to corn, wheat, soybeans) or warehouse inspections under the U.S. Warehouse Act — Part 868 fills the gap for specialty dry commodities not covered by those programs
  • Subpart B — Marketing Standards (3 sections): AMS authority to create, revise, suspend, or end voluntary grade standards for dry beans, whole dry peas, split peas, and lentils; any interested party (growers, processors, trade associations, state agencies) may petition for new or revised standards; AMS publishes proposed changes in the Federal Register, collects public comments, and incorporates technical and market data before finalizing; approved standards are published and made available in print and online; this is a voluntary grading program — standards exist so buyers and sellers use consistent quality descriptions, but use of USDA grade marks requires certified inspection
  • Subpart C — U.S. Standards for Rough Rice (13 sections): grades (U.S. No. 1 through U.S. No. 6 and U.S. Sample Grade) for rice as harvested before milling; quality factors include moisture content, heat damage, red rice content, chalky kernels, and foreign material; rough rice grade determines the potential milling yield and head rice percentage
  • Subpart D — U.S. Standards for Brown Rice for Processing (14 sections): standards for rice after the hull is removed but before whitening; grades based on moisture, milling yield, damaged kernels, and objectionable seeds; brown rice for processing is an intermediate product that mills purchase before final milling to white rice
  • Subpart E — U.S. Standards for Milled Rice (16 sections): grades for white rice after complete milling; types include long grain, medium grain, short grain, and mixed; quality factors include milling degree (well-milled, reasonably well-milled), broken kernels, chalky kernels, red and damaged kernels; the "head rice" percentage (whole or nearly whole kernels) is the most commercially significant quality factor — premium long-grain head rice commands substantially higher prices than broken rice

Part 868 inspection services are available on request through AMS field offices and cooperating state agencies. Fees are set annually. The Federal Grain Inspection Service (within AMS) maintains the program, which covers the specialty dry commodities that fall outside the grain inspection system (7 U.S.C. §§ 71–87k) but require the same type of federal quality certification for domestic and export commerce.

• 7 CFR Part 54 — Meats, Prepared Meats, and Meat Products — Grading, Certification, and Standards (56 sections across 2 subparts — AMS's voluntary grading and equipment certification programs for meat and meat processing):

  • Subpart A — Grading of Meats, Prepared Meats, and Meat Products (22 sections): AMS provides voluntary, fee-for-service grading of beef, veal, calf, lamb, yearling mutton, mutton, and pork products against official U.S. grade standards; grading is entirely separate from FSIS mandatory inspection (which certifies safety) — grading certifies quality and yield; applicants request grading services through AMS field offices; official graders are authorized to issue grade certificates and apply USDA shields; representative authority allows agents to apply for grading on behalf of plant operators; inspectors may require documentation proving applicant authority; the AMS Administrator and Chief administer the program jointly
  • Subpart C — Certification of Sanitary Design and Fabrication of Equipment (34 sections): AMS's Dairy Grading Branch evaluates and certifies, on request, that equipment and utensils used to slaughter, process, or package livestock and poultry meet sanitary design and construction standards (§ 1006); the program covers designers, manufacturers, and users of processing equipment; service is performed only when a qualified design review specialist is available (§ 1007); applications must be submitted by any person with a financial interest in the equipment; if equipment is at a location the applicant does not operate, written consent from the operator is required; certified equipment meets standards for cleanability, corrosion resistance, and construction materials that prevent contamination of meat products

• 7 CFR Part 56 — Voluntary Grading of Shell Eggs (67 sections, Subpart A): AMS's program for grading and certifying shell eggs of domesticated chickens against the U.S. Standards, Grades, and Weight Classes for Shell Eggs (AMS 56). Service is entirely voluntary — egg producers and packers request grading to use official USDA grade marks on their packaging. Consumer grades are U.S. Grade AA (freshest, cleanest, highest interior quality with a thick white that spreads minimally when broken), U.S. Grade A (slightly lower interior quality, still suitable for all retail purposes), and U.S. Grade B (visible defects or quality below Grade A, typically used in liquid egg products). Nest run eggs — eggs packed as they come from production without full quality candling — may be sold but cannot carry a grade mark. Official graders are licensed by the Secretary after passing a competency exam; both federal and cooperating state agency employees may hold licenses (§ 56.10); graders may not have financial interests in the eggs they grade (§ 56.11). Applicants hosting official graders must provide a dark candling booth near the work area, calibrated scales for eggs and containers, and lockable storage space for official supplies (§ 56.17). The official grademark shield may only appear on packages graded in an approved official plant under continuous grader oversight; plant employees may be authorized as quality-assurance inspectors to candle and sort eggs, but their work must be checked by a licensed grader who issues the official certificate (§ 56.10). Origin grading (grading at the point where eggs are packed) is the standard; regrading is available for interstate lots. Grading certificates for shell eggs are official instruments under the Agricultural Marketing Act — fraudulent alteration or counterfeiting is a federal crime.

• 7 CFR Part 70 — Voluntary Grading of Poultry Products and Rabbit Products (67 sections, Subpart A — with parallel appeal provisions): AMS's grading program for ready-to-cook poultry (broilers, roasters, turkeys, ducks, geese, capons), rabbit products, squabs, and domesticated game birds. A critical prerequisite: poultry and rabbit products must first pass USDA poultry inspection before they can receive a USDA grade mark (§ 70.13) — grading certifies quality (conformation, fleshing, fat covering, freedom from defects), while inspection certifies that the product is wholesome and free of disease. Grades follow the U.S. Classes, Standards, and Grades for Poultry and Rabbits: U.S. Grade A (well-fleshed, well-finished, free of defects — the retail standard for whole birds, parts, and branded products), U.S. Grade B (minor defects, used in commercial food processing), and U.S. Grade C (significant defects, used in further-processed products where appearance is irrelevant). Graders must be licensed, may not have financial interests in graded product (§ 70.24), and must carry USDA identification at all times (§ 70.23). Appeal grading is a two-tier process: the grader's immediate supervisor performs the first appeal; a second appeal goes to the regional director (§ 70.104); appeal certificates replace (do not supplement) the original certificate and state whether the original grade was upheld (§ 70.106). Official plants must maintain a minimum of 100 foot-candles of light in grading areas (§ 70.110). Squabs and domesticated game birds (pheasants, quail, guinea fowl) must pass the same inspection prerequisite before grading (§ 70.14); separate USDA standards exist for each game bird species.

• 7 CFR Part 91 — Services and General Information (48 sections across 10 subparts — AMS's rules governing its Science and Technology laboratory testing services: how to apply, how samples are handled, what methods are used, certificate requirements, appeals, official identification symbols, and fee structures for all AMS analytical laboratory work):

  • Subpart A — Administration / Subpart B — General Services: the AMS Science and Technology Program runs analytical testing labs and provides accreditation/approval services for other laboratories; orders of government work may be prioritized above private applicants; scientists must not test products in which they have a financial interest (§ 91.18)
  • Subpart C — Application for Services (8 sections): applications may be submitted in person, by phone, in writing, or by fax; oral applications may require written confirmation at the lab's request; applications are officially filed on the day received (§ 91.12); the Administrator may reject an application if it does not follow the rules, if prior-session fees are unpaid, if the sample is unsuitable, or if service is not practicable (§ 91.13); applicants may withdraw before testing begins but must pay any time already charged (§ 91.14)
  • Subpart D — Laboratory Service: test methods must follow USDA standards, state laws where the product is produced, or approved international standards (such as AOAC Official Methods) as specified in AMS method manuals; labs must use approved methods for most analyses and cannot substitute equivalent methods without a cooperative agreement (§ 91.23); lab work is performed in the order received (FIFO) except that government work and appeal inspections receive priority (§ 91.16)
  • Subpart E — Samples (4 sections): samples must be representative of the lot and large enough for all requested tests; each sample must be labeled with product type, lot number, production date, requested analyses, and applicant identification (§ 91.19); shipping requirements: samples must be in sealed, leakproof containers; refrigerated samples must be accompanied by ice or ice packs to maintain 0°C to 5°C during transit (§ 91.20); lab staff must protect samples from tampering, swapping, or careless handling from receipt through disposal (§ 91.21); leftover analyzed sample retained for up to 30 days after reporting results (§ 91.22)
  • Subpart G — Reporting: results are sent to the applicant in writing or electronically (fax, email); results apply only to the specific samples tested (§ 91.24); certificates must use Secretary-approved printed forms, be in English, and have results typed or computer-generated (not handwritten in ink); the signing scientist or authorized lab technician validates each certificate (§§ 91.25–91.26)
  • Subpart H — Appeal of Laboratory Services (6 sections): any person with a financial interest in the test results may appeal; the appeal goes to a different AMS laboratory than the one that performed the original test; fee charged unless the original result contained significant error
  • Subpart I — Fees and Charges (9 sections): AMS charges fees for laboratory services at rates published by the program; fees are set to recover program costs; failure to pay prior fees is grounds for rejecting future applications
  • Subpart J — Designation of Approved Symbols (3 sections): two official AMS shield symbols may be used on products or labels to show official testing — "USDA AMS TESTED" and "USDA LABORATORY TESTED FOR EXPORT" (§ 91.100); using these marks on untested products or without AMS authorization is prohibited; marks are available to any product that has passed official AMS laboratory analysis

The AMS Science and Technology lab service covers a wide range of analyses for agricultural commodities — pesticide residues, nutrient content, species identification, product composition, and contaminant testing — and serves both domestic compliance (quality programs, Food Safety programs) and export markets that require third-party USDA-backed test certificates. The "USDA AMS TESTED" shield gives importers and foreign buyers official verification that a product has been analytically tested to a U.S. federal standard, a common requirement in export markets for grains, oilseeds, processed foods, and specialty crops.

• 7 CFR Part 42 — Standards for Condition of Food Containers (29 sections across 3 subparts — AMS's statistical sampling procedures for inspecting the physical condition of filled food containers in stationary lots; used when inspectors need to decide whether a lot of packaged product should be accepted or rejected based on container defects rather than product quality):

  • § 42.102 — Definitions: Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) is the maximum defects per hundred units (DHU) a lot may have while still being accepted; major defects include container failures that could render product harmful or unmarketable; minor defects affect appearance or label compliance but not safety or usability
  • § 42.104 — Sampling plans: lot size determines the sample size code (CA through CE); acceptance (Ac) and rejection (Re) numbers from tables tell inspectors how many defects trigger a pass or fail; three modes are available — normal (default), tightened (applied after consecutive failures), and reduced (allowed after a consistent compliance history)
  • § 42.106 — Classifying defects: defects from a common cause are "related" and counted as one; inspectors classify any unlisted defect by judging its effect on container integrity; interior container defects (rust, corrosion, swells) may be evaluated on request under § 42.114
  • § 42.112 — Defects by container type: separate defect tables (Tables IV–X) cover metal cans, composite containers (fiberboard with metal or plastic ends), glass containers, plastic containers, rigid fiberboard/wooden containers, and flexible pouches; each container type has its own list of what constitutes a major vs. minor defect (e.g., a serious dent on a critical seam of a metal can is a major defect; a cosmetic scratch on a glass jar is minor)
  • § 42.113 — Label and marking defects: label problems (rubbed-off lot codes, missing required marks, unreadable text) are classified separately as major or minor and tracked in parallel with container condition defects
  • § 42.120–42.123 — Skip-lot inspection: a formal program allowing inspectors to check only ½ or ¼ of lots presented by a consistent supplier; requires 10 consecutive passing lots before reduced frequency begins; any failing lot reverts the supplier to 100% normal inspection
  • § 42.130–42.131 — On-line sampling: for high-speed packing lines where waiting to inspect completed lots is impractical; samples are drawn at equal time or count intervals during production using cumulative-sum plans; requires pre-production estimation of daily output and portioning

  Part 42 provides the statistical backbone for USDA container inspection services — particularly relevant when a shipment dispute involves packaging damage, container integrity failures (leaking seams, broken glass), or labeling defects rather than product quality. The AQL sampling framework is the same methodology used by military procurement and international food trade, ensuring that USDA container inspection certificates are technically consistent with private industry and export-market standards.

• 7 CFR Part 53 — Livestock, Meats, and Other Agricultural Commodities — Grading, Certification, and Standards: AMS's voluntary grading and acceptance certification program for livestock (cattle, hogs, sheep, and other species), providing market-neutral quality verification for buyers and sellers at auctions, markets, and packing plants. Key provisions:

  • § 53.10 — Request timing: a service request is officially recorded when the AMS market news office receives it; the office keeps records of date and time for each request — important for prioritizing service delivery and resolving timing disputes
  • § 53.11 — Withdrawal: an applicant may withdraw a service request any time before it is approved or completed, but must pay any costs already incurred by AMS; this allows buyers who change their mind before grading begins to avoid unnecessary fees
  • § 53.12 — Authority to act for another: if a person applies on behalf of a livestock owner or seller, AMS may ask for written proof that the applicant has authority to act — protecting against unauthorized commitments on another party's behalf
  • § 53.13 — Service denial for misconduct: AMS may deny or revoke service access if an applicant falsifies information, cheats on an application, attempts to bribe a grader, or otherwise commits misconduct in connection with the program; denial is a serious consequence that effectively bars a market participant from official USDA quality certification
  • § 53.14 — Grader conflict of interest: official graders and their close relatives may not grade or certify livestock in which they have a financial interest; this independence requirement is the foundation of the program's market credibility — buyers rely on official grades because they know the grader has no stake in the outcome
  • § 53.15 — Access requirements: when grading is requested, the party must make animals accessible for examination — placing livestock where inspectors can observe them and providing adequate lighting, equipment, and assistance for safe inspection
  • § 53.16 — Livestock acceptance certificates: the official grader must prepare, sign, and issue a livestock acceptance certificate for animals found to be in compliance with specified requirements; the certificate is the official document of grade or class determination, usable in trade and dispute resolution
  • § 53.17 — Certificate communication: certificate details and notices about class, grade, quality, or compliance can be transmitted by telegraph, telephone, or other electronic means at the applicant's request and expense — a practical accommodation for markets where paper delivery is too slow
  • § 53.18 — Fee calculation: fees must match the actual cost of service; time is charged to the nearest 15 minutes including travel time to and from the inspection location; this cost-recovery structure ensures the program is not subsidizing particular market participants
  • § 53.2 — Criminal penalties: willful violations of the livestock grading rules — including falsifying grading applications or results — carry criminal penalties under Section 203(h) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended; the criminal backstop deters manipulation of official grade certifications

  The AMS livestock grading program under Part 53 is the quality-verification layer on top of the price-reporting requirements of Part 59 (Livestock Mandatory Reporting). While Part 59 captures the price at which livestock traded, Part 53 certifies the quality characteristics — grade, class, weight conformance — that justified that price. Together, they give both the seller and the buyer an independent USDA verification of what the animals were and what they sold for, reducing disputes in transactions where the seller delivers livestock before final grading and the buyer pays based on certified grade out of the packing plant.

• 7 CFR Part 62 — Agricultural Marketing Service Audit Verification and Accreditation Programs (voluntary, fee-based audit and verification services provided by AMS staff to domestic and international clients for agricultural supply chains and products):

  • § 62.200 — Scope of services: AMS offers third-party audit and verification services following federal law, USDA rules, state law, government agency requirements, or voluntary industry standards; eligible applicants include international and domestic government agencies, private agricultural businesses, and any person with a financial interest; this makes Part 62 the regulatory basis for USDA's commercial audit business — serving food companies, exporters, importers, and foreign governments seeking credible U.S. federal verification of agricultural supply chain claims
  • § 62.201–62.203 — Application and withdrawal: applicants contact the AMS office to request a specific service; applications may be withdrawn at any time before service begins, but AMS charges for expenses already incurred; the program accepts applications from entities that are not U.S. domestic — foreign government agencies and international businesses routinely request USDA audit services for export certification purposes
  • § 62.206 — Access requirements: applicants must provide AMS auditors access to all products, records, and facilities covered by the application; AMS auditors may enter all areas of a facility at any time during normal business hours; without this access requirement, voluntary audit certificates would have no independent verification value
  • § 62.207–62.208 — Suspension and denial of service: AMS may suspend or deny service if a participant fails to cooperate, provides false information, or repeatedly violates audit conditions; denial is a meaningful sanction because it removes access to USDA-backed certification that many export markets require
  • § 62.300 — Accreditation of other labs/certifiers: AMS may accredit non-USDA laboratories and certification bodies to conduct specific types of audits and testing under AMS oversight; accredited bodies must demonstrate technical competence, independence, and compliance with the applicable AMS program requirements; accreditation may be withdrawn for failure to maintain standards

  Part 62 is the enabling framework for USDA's role as a third-party auditor in agricultural commerce. Food companies use AMS audit services for supply chain verifications — documenting that beef came from non-hormone-treated cattle, that seafood was sustainably harvested, or that produce was grown under Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) standards. Foreign governments require AMS certificates as a condition of importing certain U.S. products. The program is fully fee-supported — no appropriation funds the audit work itself — making it a self-sustaining commercial service built on the credibility of the USDA brand. Recent rulemakings: 77 FR 30236 (May 2012) consolidated and updated the AMS audit program framework.

• 7 CFR Part 94 — Poultry and Egg Products — Lab Analyses (mandatory and voluntary laboratory testing of egg products and processed poultry products under the Egg Products Inspection Act and AMS grading authorities):

  • § 94.1–94.3 — Egg product testing framework: AMS inspectors collect samples of liquid, frozen, and dried egg products from processing plants and submit them to AMS Science and Technology labs for microbiological, chemical, and physical quality analysis; results go back to the processing plant's USDA inspector to support mandatory compliance determinations under the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 1031–1056)
  • § 94.100–94.104 — Voluntary certification samples: any party may submit egg product samples for voluntary testing; AMS tests for product composition (protein, fat, moisture), microbiological safety (Salmonella, coliform counts, standard plate count), and physical quality (pH, solids content); a fee schedule applies; the resulting certification confirms that the tested sample meets specified standards — used for export documentation, private purchaser requirements, and product quality disputes
  • § 94.300–94.303 — Processed poultry testing: AMS labs test processed poultry products (chicken parts, turkey breast, ground poultry) for physical and chemical quality — measuring fat, moisture, protein, and other compositional parameters against buyer specifications; these tests support acceptance/rejection decisions in government procurement (school meals, military contracts) and retail procurement contracts; the testing methodology follows standard AOAC analytical methods

  Part 94 sits at the intersection of mandatory federal inspection (FSIS enforces safety; USDA/AMS inspectors collect samples) and voluntary commercial testing (AMS labs provide the analysis). The mandatory egg product surveillance testing is a background function of the Egg Products Inspection Act — plants may not know exactly when surveillance samples will be submitted. The voluntary certification program serves exporters who need USDA-backed analysis certificates, food companies doing supplier qualification, and procurement agencies verifying product specifications. Because laboratory certification carries USDA authority, it is widely accepted in foreign import systems that might otherwise require time-consuming domestic testing by the importing country. Recent rulemakings: No major amendments since the program's establishment under the Egg Products Inspection Act framework.

• 7 CFR Part 93 — Processed Fruits and Vegetables — Chemical and Physical Analysis: AMS laboratory testing rules for citrus products, peanuts, tree nuts, corn, and oilseeds (implements 7 U.S.C. § 1622 — AMS testing authority under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946):

  • Subpart A — Citrus Juices and Citrus Products: U.S.-grown and imported citrus products (orange juice, grapefruit juice, lemon juice, and related products) are tested to verify they meet grade and quality standards in the Florida Citrus Code; AMS testing serves as an independent check that imported citrus products meet the same standards applied to domestic products, leveling the competitive field and protecting domestic producers from below-standard imports

  • Subpart B — Peanuts, Tree Nuts, Corn and Other Oilseeds: AMS labs conduct two types of analysis — (1) aflatoxin testing: chemical detection of aflatoxins produced by the molds Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus parasiticus, and Aspergillus nomius; covered aflatoxins (B1, B2, G1, G2, M1, M2, and related compounds) are potent carcinogens and are regulated by FDA in food for human and animal consumption; testing applies to shelled peanuts, peanut products, tree nuts, and grains; and (2) proximate analyses: chemical measurement of protein, fat, moisture, and other compositional parameters in oilseeds — used to determine commodity quality and verify contract specifications

  Part 93 is the laboratory backbone of AMS's commodity testing programs for processed and high-risk products. Aflatoxin testing is the most consequential function: peanut butter, nut-based foods, and corn products that exceed FDA's aflatoxin action levels (20 ppb for food, 20 ppb for animal feed except dairy cattle feed at 0.5 ppb) must be diverted or destroyed. AMS testing certificates carry independent credibility for domestic procurement and export customers who require verified aflatoxin clearance before accepting shipments. Recent rulemakings: 65 FR 64317 (October 2000) last major update.

• 9 CFR Part 592 — Voluntary Inspection of Egg Products: the fee-for-service USDA grading and inspection program for processed egg products — dried eggs (whole, whites, yolks), frozen liquid eggs, and other commercially manufactured egg products. While mandatory safety inspection of egg products is administered by FSIS under the Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 1031–1056), Part 592 is a separate voluntary quality certification program under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. §§ 1621–1627) that allows processors to obtain USDA grade marks attesting to product quality beyond minimum safety standards. Key provisions:

  • §§ 592.100–592.120 — Applications for service: any interested person — processor, exporter, buyer, government agency — may apply for voluntary inspection service for a lot of egg products; applications may be made on a fee basis (for individual lot inspection) or continuous basis (for ongoing plant inspection); AMS may require proof of the applicant's authority to have the product inspected (§ 592.120); application may be made to the nearest inspection program office
  • § 592.130 — Application procedures: for fee basis inspection, the application is submitted with the lot and inspectors assigned based on proximity; for continuous inspection, the applicant applies in advance and AMS assigns a full-time or roving inspector to the plant; continuous basis inspection is required for plants that want to use the USDA inspection mark on their product packaging
  • § 592.140 — Approval of official egg products plants: any processor desiring to operate under continuous USDA inspection must have the plant approved as an "official egg products plant"; approval requires that plant facilities, equipment, water supply, and sanitation meet AMS standards; the AMS inspector assigned to the plant may reject product lots that fail to meet grade standards even if the plant itself is approved; approval is revoked if a plant consistently fails to maintain standards
  • §§ 592.150–592.160 — Certificates and grade marks: after inspection, the USDA inspector issues a certificate attesting to the grade, quantity, and condition of the inspected lot; grade designations for egg products include U.S. Grade AA, A, and B for whole eggs and specific grade designations for whites and yolks; the USDA inspection mark (the official USDA shield) may only appear on product covered by a current certificate from an approved plant; using the USDA mark on uninspected product is a federal violation
  • § 592.190 — Fees: inspection fees are charged on a fee-for-service basis; rates are set by AMS to recover the costs of providing the service; continuous plant inspection fees include a base fee plus per-hour charges; AMS publishes fee schedules; the cost of voluntary inspection is borne entirely by the processor (or requester), not USDA

  The voluntary egg products inspection program serves three commercial functions: (1) export documentation — many importing countries require USDA certificates for egg products; (2) government procurement — USDA school lunch, military, and institutional purchasing specifications frequently require USDA-inspected egg products; and (3) premium branding — retail buyers and food manufacturers purchasing industrial quantities of dried or frozen eggs prefer USDA-certified product for quality assurance. Recent rulemakings: 71 FR 2143 (January 13, 2006) and 69 FR 1648 (January 12, 2004) — fee schedule updates.

Pending Legislation

No major 119th Congress legislation is pending to restructure the produce grading system. AMS continues its commodity-by-commodity grade standard modernization, updated through notice-and-comment rulemaking as industry petitions are processed. The PACA modernization discussions — focused on broker licensing, trust protections, and dispute resolution — are adjacent to but separate from the 7 CFR Part 51 inspection framework.

Recent Developments

• 89 FR 106234 (December 2024): Most recent major amendment, updating grade standards for approximately 26 sections across multiple commodity subparts. AMS's ongoing modernization effort adjusts tolerances and quality factor descriptions as industry practices and consumer expectations evolve.
• Section 8e import inspection expansion: As trade agreements and import volumes have grown, USDA has periodically added commodity categories to the Section 8e mandatory import inspection list. The goal is to prevent imported produce from undercutting domestic price-support programs that have minimum grade floors.
• 85 FR 68424 (2020): Earlier modernization round updated 7 sections, with adjustments to grade factor descriptions to align with modern packing and sorting technology that has made some defect categories less common.
• The core inspection procedures in Subpart A (§§ 51.1–51.45) have been stable since the 1980s. AMS periodically reviews whether fee structures adequately cover program costs, with fee updates published annually in the Federal Register.