Participants

Present	Name	Company
X	Brent Kemp	AgGateway
X	kristi.block (Unlicensed)	AgGateway
X	Dan Berne (Unlicensed)	AgGateway
	Jim Wilson	AgGateway
X	Joe Tevis	Vis 4 Ag
X	Dan Brimberry (Unlicensed)	Red Wing
X	Greg Fish	GROWMARK
X	Francis Adanza	Vector
X	Greg Baldwin (Unlicensed)	EFC Systems
X	Steve Oberlander	CHS
	Julia Eberhart	Bushel
X	Philip Kubesh	Vita Plus
X	Scott Nieman	Land O'Lakes
X	Bill Vary (Deactivated)	Syngenta
X	Todd Meyer	DTN
X	Evan Wallace	NIST
X	Jeff White	New BOS
X	Jessica Trites Rolle	NCIS
X	Andrew Bove	AgData
X	Dennis Daggett	Enterprise Ag
X	kaleb.kromann	Cultura

Terms:

MSA = Moved, Seconded & Approved

Meeting Information

Date	2021-09-20
Time	1:00 pm Chicago
Web
Phone
Access Code

Purpose of meeting: The Grain and Feed meet up will kick off discussion on a potential grain delivery ticket use case and data standardization effort. Desired outcome is a path toward a working group or working groups to document user stories, data needs and message implementation.

Participants will benefit through increased understanding of industry capability and readiness to act; opportunity to offer input and provide direction on active and anticipated collaborative efforts.

Documents:

AgGateway Antitrust Guidelines

Agenda/Minutes

	Topic (Leader)	Desired Outcome Sub-topics, supporting documentation, additional resources	Meeting Minutes
1	Welcome, Antitrust and Introduction () 5 min.	Welcome the group - review Antitrust statement In all of AgGateway's operations and activities, it must avoid discussions or conduct that might violate applicable antitrust laws, or even appear to do so. To that end, AgGateway has established Antitrust Guidelines, which it has provided to each participant in this meeting. While it is your ultimate responsibility to ensure that your actions comply with applicable antitrust laws, your participation in this meeting is affirmation that you will abide by AgGateway's guidelines.	Brent Kemp welcomed everyone to the call, recapped antitrust statement and discussed guidelines at a very high level.
2	Minutes Taker () 1 min.	A meeting taker has been selected.	Brent Kemp will capture notes
3	Introductions ()	The group has the opportunity to introduce themselves to each other if needed
4	Work Overview	The group begins discussion on issues surrounding proof of delivery/scale ticket/delivery ticket data.	Scott Nieman shared some slides, shared background on the work done in the grain and feed council; CART project. Scope is really the receipt for the farmer of proof of delivery of grain to the elevator; proof of transfer of ownership. Noted that today there is a lot of paper still, potentially used heavily downstream for traceability, stewardship. Feel this has a place to play in traceability Would like to see this in the electronic B2B space Used in many industries with many different product types/commodities Sale sometimes takes place across the scale; other times just about product storage Standardizing the data is key Many kinds of data Many representations, many different ways of describing the same data elements Scott showed AgXML as a base for work done in the past Suggests that changes would be needed Some enhancements requested but not completed as yet Use cases shared Bi-directional Grower, elevator as the actors Other actors? Receipt is missing - actual delivery, proof of delivery, transfer of ownership/custody Assumptions Some tickets in load out could be out of scope for this work Disparity of APIs - would like to align to a single API MVP - what is it? Definitions and data elements needed to communicate Identifiers, dates, parties, products, transport type (asset, container type), weights, measures, grades, price Pit location? Suggest looking at AgXML but some additional, modern syntax as well Value Minimize impact, exposure Minimize recall time Improve awareness of source, downstream locations General agreement that this is a valid use case, think its probably well scoped to this point Q: This seems to align to circular ag - is that an accurate assessment? Seems to, but additional research needed. Reference ASABE call of also week. Discussion on how WG 09 (Data Linking) is preparing to align in this area. Q: Any other use cases that any one wants to bring to the table related to delivery ticket, grain ticket? Opened for the floor - any other work effort, any other organization trying to do this? Greg Baldwin (Unlicensed) observes this is a viable use case. Feels there are many players in the industry who have gone their own way providing updates to the grower via portals. Feel that settlement information coming back in a timely manner is another use case - grain leaving the farm, going to the processor, and final weights and grades being applied back to their account. Grower may not know until the big packet of paper comes back. Steve Oberlander concurs: Applies to ethanol, any cross-plant processor, flour, etc. Any time you're not in control of the movement of the product; coming off-farm maybe by farmer, maybe by hired hauler. Very time consuming for the retailer. Jeff White - when the MVP says unique identifier, what does that mean? Receipt ID for the load at the location. Notes that where he sees the confusion is alignment of document identifiers across messages. How to cross reference; at some point the load itself loses unique identify. Scott Nieman observes that is why this process focuses on the shipping information content itself. Subordinate stuff is correlated after the fact so that cross reference can happen in a backend. Auto ID data capture tools discussed - bar code, GUID plus something. In the context of CART, played around with bluetooth beacons for tying movement to activity: seeing that the truck has arrived, product is offloaded, noted, etc. Observed that this is related more to storage than delivery. Matching process remains the key. Joe Tevis offers a different view: brother has delivered grain which was ultimately received incorrectly in the name of another grower, resulting in misapplied payment to the tune of several thousand dollars. Using first and last name as a grower identifier is unsatisfactory. Todd Meyer notes that balance remaining to deliver on the sales contract could be a useful data element. Jessica Trites Rolle observes that as this is built out, crop insurance and other programs really need the "where it came from" on the scale ticket. The more and more field operations and precision records are used, tying the delivery scale ticket to the where is important. Q: do you need to get to the field/sub-field level? In a perfect world sure, but not needed there today. Greg Baldwin (Unlicensed) observes this would be helpful for a landlord as well. Lots of additional parties that would find this interesting. Joe Tevis - didn't AgXML have an element for Field Source? Dunno. If it was present, may not have been very useful.
5	Ideation - Industry issues and challenges	The group has identified areas where additional conversation and work can benefit the segment.	Mondays at 1 pm CT OCT 4, OCT 18 Deliverable is a charter and MVP scope for call for participation
6	Next Steps	Group identifies specific actions that will follow this meet-up.	Next Meetings: Brent Kemp and member services to schedule follow up meetings. Scott Nieman, Todd Meyer, Dennis Daggett, Greg Baldwind, Kaleb Kromann, Steve Oberlander, Chuck Bohanon, Jessica Trites-Rolle, Evan Wallace signed up to support MVP development.
7	Other items ()	Discuss any additional items that came up during the meeting that need to be addressed in another meet-up	Covered above
8	Next Meeting ()	Is there a need for another Meet-Up	Scheduled as above.
9	Adjournment ()	Adjourn	Meeting adjourned at 01:57 pm Chicago time

Tasks/Action Items

Who	When Assigned	What	Deadline	Status

Browser not supported