Report of the

44th NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 1959

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION 228
SELECTED WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

PUBLICATIONS OF THE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

NBS Handbook 37 Testing of Weighing Equipment $2. 50

NBS Handbook 44r-2d Edition—1955 Specifications, Tolerances, and Begulations for Commercial Weighing and

Measuring Devices

Loose Leaf (does not include binder) 1.

0

NBS Handbook 45 Testing of Measuring Equipment 1.

5

NBS Handbook 67 Checking Prepackaged Commodities . 3

NBS Circular 501 Federal and State Weights and Measures

Laws 6. 5

NBS Circular 540 Weights and Measures Case Eeference

Book 1. £

NBS Circular 547 Precision Laboratory Standards of Mass

and Laboratory Weights . 3

NBS Circular 572 Calibration of Line Standards of Length

and Measuring Tapes at the National Bureau of Standards— . 1

NBS Circular 593 The Federal Basis for Weights and Measures .3

Miscellaneous Publication 214 Units of Weight and Measure—Definitions and Tables of Equivalents . 4

AVAILABLE KEPOKTS OF THE

NATIONAL CONFEEENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE

1947 Miscellaneous Publication 189 400

1953 Miscellaneous Publication 209 400

1954 Miscellaneous Publication 212 500

1955 Miscellaneous Publication 216 700

1956 Miscellaneous Publication 219 700

1957 Miscellaneous Publication 222 550

1958 Miscellaneous Publication 225 650

Index to the Eeports of the National Conference on Weights and Measures from the

First to the Thirty-sixth, 1905 to 1951, Miscellaneous Publication 203 200

ORDER ALL PUBLICATIONS, WITH REMITTANCE, FROM THE

SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE,

WASHINGTON 25, D.C.


Report of the

44th National Conference on

Weights and Measures 1959

Sponsored by the National Bureau of Standards

Attended by Officials From the Various

States, Counties, and Cities, and

Representatives From U.S. Government,

Industry, and Consumer Organizations.

Washington, B.C., June 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 1959

United States Department of Commerce

Frederick H. Mueller, Secretary

National Bureau of Standards

A. V. Astin, Director

National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publication 228

Issued December 18, 1959

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. - Price 65 cents


CONTENTS

Page

Officers and Committees iv

Committee Meetings vi

FIRST SESSION—MORNING OF TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 1959

Address, by Hon. Lewis L. Strauss, Secretary of Commerce 1 Presentation of Honor Awards 4

Address of Conference Chairman, by C. M. Fuller, County Sealer of

Weights and Measures, Los Angeles County, California 5

Address of Conference President and Appointments to Standing Committees, by A. V. Astin, Director, National Bureau of Standards 7

Address, by Hon. Genevieve Blatt, Secretary, Department of Internal

Affairs, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 12

Announcements by the Secretary 18

SECOND SESSION—AFTERNOON OF TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 1959

The Second Annual National Weights and Measures Week, by J. L.

O'Neill, State Inspector, Division of Weights and Measures, State

Board of Agriculture, State of Kansas 19

Report of Committee on Education, Presented by W. A. Kerlin, Chairman, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Alameda County,

California 24

Report of Special Flour Committee, Presented by R. E. Meek, Chairman,

Director, Division of Weights and Measures, State Board of Health,

State of Indiana - 26

THIRD SESSION—MORNING OF WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 1959

Report of Executive Committee, Presented by C. M. Fuller, Chairman,

County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Los Angeles County, California- 39

Communications in Weights and Measures Enforcement, by W. C. Boyd,

Chief, Sanitary Bedding Section, Division of Weights and Measures,

State Board of Health, State of Indiana 41

Moisture Measurement in the Grain Industry, by Lawrence Zeleny, Chief,

Standardization and Testing Branch, Grain Division, Agricultural

Marketing Service, U.S. Department (presented by M. H. Neustadt)__ 47

Report of the Chairman of the Weights and Measures Advisory Committee, by A. T. McPherson, Associate Director for Engineering, National Bureau of Standards 62

FOURTH SESSION—MORNING OF THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 1959

Report of Special Committee on Trading in Grains by Weight, Presented

by G. L. Johnson, Chairman, Director, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, State of Kentucky 66

Report of the Committee on Nominations and Election of Officers, Presented by R. E. Meek, Chairman, Director, Division of Weights and

Measures, State Board of Health, State of Indiana 68

Weights and Measures in Alaska—the 49th State, by R. A. Findlay, Inspector, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of State

Police, State of Alaska 69

Full Measure, by Hon. B. J. Butler, Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, State of Kentucky 73

Weights and Measures Administration in France, by Louis Krach, Chief

Engineer, Service of Instruments of Measure, Ministry of Industry and

Commerce, Republic of France 77

Report of Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, Presented by J. E. Brenton, Chairman, Chief, Bureau of Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, State of California 80

(ii)
FIFTH SESSION—AFTERNOON OF THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 1959

Page

The Federal Trade Commission, Its Authority, Its Activities, by C. R.

Moore, Legal Adviser on Deceptive Practices, Bureau of Investigation,

Federal Trade Commission 93

From John Quincy Adams to Madison Avenue, U.S.A., by Dexter W.

Masters, Director, Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., Mount Vernon,

New York 99

Working Together for the Consumer's Protection, by J. L. Harvey, Deputy

Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Department of Health, Education,

and Welfare 105

Report of Committee on Laws and Regulations, Presented by G. L.

Johnson, Acting Chairman, Director, Division of Weights and Measures,

Department of Agriculture, State of Kentucky 111

Report of Committee on Resolutions, Presented by H. E. Crawford, Chairman, Inspector of Weights and Measures, Jacksonville, Florida 114

BREAKFAST MEETING OF THE INCOMING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE

CONFERENCE, FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1959

SIXTH SESSION—MORNING OF FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1959

Open Forum—Weights and Measures Administration:

Coordination of State, County, and City Activities, by W. I. Thompson,

County Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Monmouth County,

New Jersey : 117

Supervision of Food Package Weights in Wisconsin, by C. L. Jackson,

Chief, Division of Economic Practices, Department of Agriculture,

State of Wisconsin 121

Scales Under Expanded Packers and Stockyards Jurisdiction, by D. L.

Bowman, Chief, Packers and Stockyards Branch, Livestock Division,

Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 125

Report of the Treasurer, Presented by C. C. Morgan, Treasurer, City

Sealer of Weights and Measures, Gary, Indiana 129

Report of Auditing Committee, Presented by Paul DeVries, Chairman,

Municipal Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Passaic, New

Jersey - 130

Persons Attending the Conference 131

Map Showing Official Promulgation by States of National Conference

Specifications, Tolerances, and Regulations for Commercial Weighing

and Measuring Devices as Published in National Bureau of Standards

Handbook 44—2d Edition 144

III
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES

OFFICERS

(As elected by the Forty-third National Conference to serve during the

Forty-fourth National Conference)

President: A. V. Astin, Director, National Bureau of Standards.]

Secretary: W. S. Bussey, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, > Ex officio

National Bureau of Standards. J Chairman : C. M. Fuller, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Los Angeles County,

California.

Vice Chairmen

H. C. Hulshoff, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Niagara County, New

York.

C. H. Stender, Assistant to the Commissioner, Department of Agriculture,

State of South Carolina.

H. M. Turrell, Director, Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures, Department of Internal Affairs, State of Pennsylvania.

E. C. Westwood, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Salt Lake City,

Utah.

Treasurer : C. C. Morgan, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Gary, Indiana.

Chaplain : J. H. Meek, Director, Division of Markets, Department of Agriculture and Immigration, State of Virginia.

(As elected by the Forty-fourth National Conference for the ensuing year)

President: A. V. Astin, Director, National Bureau of Standards.]

Secretary: W. S. Bussey, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures,^ Ex officio

National Bureau of Standards. J Chairman : H. E. Crawford, Inspector of Weights and Measures, Jacksonville,

Florida.

Vice Chairmen

R. M. Bodenweiser, County Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Mercer County, New Jersey.

H. N. Duff, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Section, Department of

Agriculture, State of Colorado.

J. I. Moore, Field Supervisor, Weights and Measures Division,. Department

of Agriculture, State of North Carolina.

W. E. Sheehy, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Fairfield County,

Connecticut.

Treasurer : C. C. Morgan, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Gary, Indiana.

Chaplain: Ralph Magoffin, Director, Bureau of Inspection, Department of

Agriculture, State of South Carolina.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

(As elected by the Forty-fourth National Conference)

A. V. Astin

W. S. Bussey

H. E. Crawford

R. M. Bodenweiser

H. N. Duff } Ex officio J. I. Moore

W. E. Sheehy

C. C. Morgan

Ralph Magoffin

A. T. Anderson, of Cambridge, Massachusetts.

G. W. Bay, of Missouri.

J. M. Boucher, of the District of Columbia.

R. A. Findlay, of Alaska.

J. W. D. Harvey, of Georgia.

J. F. Madden, of New York.

M. L. Rice, of Richmond, Virginia.

H. D. Robinson, of Maine.

A. D. Rose, of Kern County, California.

J'. D. Walton, of Dallas, Texas.

IV
STANDING COMMITTEES

(As constituted at the conclusion of the Forty-fourth National Conference,

the personnel and organization of each of the standing committees of the Conference are as listed. As reported, the membership of each committee reflects

the appointments made by the President of the Conference to fill vacancies that

have occurred from expiration of term, and the elections by the several committees of chairmen for the ensuing year. The remaining term of office for

each committee member, in years, is shown by the figure in parentheses following each entry.)

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION*

J. F. True, of Kansas, Chairman. (4)

I. M. Levy, of Chicago, Illinois. (1)

T. C. Harris, Jr., of Virginia. (2)

W. A. Kerlin, of Alameda County, California. (3)

J. E. Bowen, of Newton, Massachusetts. (5)

COMMITTEE ON LAWS AND REGULATIONS*

G. L. Johnson, of Kentucky, Chairman. (2)

J. T. Kennedy, of the District of Columbia. (1)

Robert Williams, of Nassau County, New York. (3)

J. G. Gustafson, of Minneapolis, Minnesota. (4)

H. M. Turrell, of Pennsylvania. (5)

committee on specifications and tolerances*

C. L. Jackson, of Wisconsin, Chairman. (3)

C. O. Cottom, of Michigan. (1)

D. M. Turnbull, of Seattle, Washington. (2)

R. W. Searles, of Medina County, Ohio. (4)

A. H. Dittrich, of New Hampshire. (5)

COMMITTEES ACTING ONLY DURING THE FORTY-FOURTH

NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Committee on Nominations : R. E. Meek, of Indiana, Chairman; J'. P. Leonard,

of Paterson, New Jersey ; A. J. Mayer, of Louisiana ; H. J. McDade, of San

Diego County, California; R. W. Searles, of Medina County, Ohio; Robert

Williams, of Nassau County, New York ; C. J. Wills, Jr., of Portland,

Maine.

Committee on Resolutions: H. E. Crawford, of Jacksonville, Florida, Chairman ; A. E. Diaz, of Puerto Rico ; J. W. D. Harvey, of Georgia ; W. C.

Hughes, of Massachusetts ; H. R. Kennell, of West Virginia ; W. M. Saxton,

of Lansing, Michigan ; V. D. Rogers, of Memphis, Tennessee.

Auditing Committee: Paul DeVries, of Passaic, New Jersey, Chairman; H. H.

Houston, of Colorado ; F. F. Thompson, of Louisiana.

IN CHARGE OF LADIES' PROGRAM

Mrs. W. S. Bussey, Mrs. M. W. Jensen, Mrs. H. F. Wollin.

IN CHARGE OF REGISTRATIONS

Mrs. F. C. Bell, Mrs. E. L. Brueckner, Mrs. M. M. Brodmerkel, Miss Dorothy

Bell, Miss Eleanor Anderson.

PRESS REPRESENTATIVES

P. E. Walsh, J. F. Reilly.

*W. S. Bussey, Secretary of the Conference, is ex officio nonvoting Secretary to each

committee.

V
COMMITTEE MEETINGS, MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1959

Monday was set aside for meetings, both open and executive, of

the Conference committees. Announcements of the meetings on

Monday were carried in all invitations, all pre- Conference publicity,

and in the tentative and printed programs.

A large number of delegates took advantage of the committee

meetings, and, as a result, attendance and participation were exceptionally good.

The Conference committees that met on Monday were the Executive Committee, Committee on Laws and Regulations, Committee

on Specifications and Tolerances, Committee on Education, Special

Flour Committee, and Special Committee on Trading in Grains by

Weight.

VI
REPORT OF THE FORTY-FOURTH NATIONAL

CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 1

FIRST SESSION—MORNING OF TUESDAY, JUNE 9, 1959

(C. M. Fuller, Chairman, Presiding)

The invocation was delivered and the memorial service for departed

members was conducted by the Conference Chaplain, Mr. J. H. Meek,

Director, Division of Markets, State of Virginia.

ADDRESS BY HON. LEWIS L. STRAUSS, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE

It is a great pleasure to be here today and to extend to you the

greetings of the Department of Commerce. I do not feel a complete

stranger in addressing you, since I had the pleasure, just 3 months

ago, of presenting a set of measurement standards to the State of

Alaska when she joined the Nation's measurement family. It now

appears that a similar ceremony will be held in the near future for

our newest member, the State of Hawaii. My interest in the subject

which concerns you might be attested by the fact that when I took

the oath of office on November 13th, I had asked that the Bible be

opened to Leviticus 19 : 36 : "Just balances, just weights, a just ephah,

and a just hin, shall ye have : I am the Lord your God, which brought

you out of the land of Egypt."

The National Conference on Weights and Measures will soon be

approaching its fiftieth milestone in its distinguished and productive

history. Measured against the long span of centuries in which

weights and measures have played an important role in men's lives,

your organization might appear to be only a recent arrival on the

scene. But when we consider the great strides which have been made

in those 44 years in the direction of an equitable system of honest

standards in commerce and trade, it is surprising that so much could

have been accomplished in such a brief period of time.

Quite apart from the substance of the job you are doing, there is

another aspect of the National Conference on Weights and Measures

which I believe deserves attention. There is an ideal type of relationship between the States and the Federal Government to which

I am sure we would all subscribe. This ideal relationship would

involve certain distinct responsibilities, cooperation, discussion, and

mutual contributions, all directed toward serving the people. I

believe that the National Conference is as close to that ideal as any

other organization in the country.

State, local, and municipal officials are charged with responsibility

for regulating and controlling commercial transactions involving

quantity. The Federal Government, through the National Bureau

of Standards, provides reference standards, calibration services, and

technical advice.

1 With the exception of formal papers and committee reports, the record of the 44th

National Conference on Weights and Measures has been rearranged, consolidated, con- densed, and, in some cases, comments have been eliminated wherever necessary to reduce

it to essentials for future reference.

1
Many of the problems of local enforcement officials fall into the

categories of legislation, administration, and cooperation among officials and representatives of commerce and industry. There are many

other problems, however, which could be solved by greater research

activities. Here, the measurement programs of the National Bureau

of Standards can make significant contributions to the important

job you are doing in your States. The Department of Commerce in

recent years has consistently strengthened the program of the National

Bureau of Standards. This is not only a recognition of the excellent

work of the Bureau's scientific staff, but also an acknowledgment of

the pressing demands for the Bureau's services by science, industry,

and such groups as yours.

Some of the Bureau's research programs have obvious applications

to your problems. For example, there is a current effort in the field

of metallurgy to develop a stainless steel with some rather unique

properties. Among other characteristics, it must have a certain hardness, machine workability, corrosion-resistance, nonmagnetic properties, we](lability at low temperatures. Such a stainless steel would

be utilized in the manufacture of State reference standards of mass.

Other research projects might appear to be of interest only in the

highly sophisticated and refined applications of scientific laboratories.

Here I am referring to research on atomic standards of length. The

accuracies which are possible with this technique are far greater than

those currently required in the operations with which you are most

concerned. However, who is there among us to say that we have

already reached the ultimate in accuracies and tolerances for the commercial exchange of goods? Ours is a dynamic technology. Progress in one area inevitably has ramifications for other areas.

The National Bureau of Standards scientific research programs provide the broad base for its technological competence to serve as

advisers to you in the specialized problems of weights and measures

administration. To the extent that this research effort is strong and

vibrant, you in the National Conference on Weights and Measures

will derive the benefits of drawing upon a high level of scientific

achievement.

As your activities become more complex and refined in the future,

and this is surely the direction of things, the Bureau will thus be in

a position to assist you in this transition. To mention just one area,

it does not require great foresight or imagination to see the time

coming when electronic equipment plays a greater part in your work.

This is a trend which is to be accepted, and welcomed, for the greater

services which you can offer to the public. It is also, however, a step

which requires much preparation and planning. I am certain that

this challenging development will come about in the same spirit as

in your past relationships.

I turn now to a subject which is of major interest to all—the

business situation.

A year has passed since the recession of 1957-58 hit bottom. We

have had a broad and sustained recovery which is continuing at

the present time. Both output and purchasing power have advanced

to new highs, with the current quarter giving strong evidence of being

another record breaker.

By the end of this year's first quarter, economic activity was above

the 1957 peak from which the downturn started. It is too early to

2
calculate the value of output in the second quarter, but the annual

rate of gross national product will be substantially above the $467

billion figure for the first 3 months of this year.

When measured in dollars of constant purchasing power—to re- move the effect of price changes—real gross national product showed

an advance of about 8 percent in the first year of recovery. This is

substantially the same increase as occurred in comparable periods

after the low points were reached in 1949 and 1954.

Recovery has been general, although a few lines of business have

been lagging. Merchandise exports continue as a weak spot in the

picture. On the other hand, as domestic business activity forged

ahead, the rising demand for both industrial materials and consumer

goods has been reflected in a steady increase in our merchandise imports since the middle of last year. Hence, our balance of payments

has worsened to a degree.

A most encouraging sign is the evidence that our businessmen are

once again raising their sights on their programs for new capital

investment. A few months ago the Department of Commerce announced that American business was scheduling a moderate increase

in capital investment from 1958 to 1959. Since that time sales and

production have reached new high ground. With earnings and

sales prospects favorable, businessmen have stepped up their orders

for new equipment and have been placing an increased volume of

contracts for new plant construction. Thus, there is every indication

that the modest recovery in investment that began late last year will

be extended and augmented as the year progresses.

The improvement in plant and equipment investment is mos<

marked in manufacturing, which was in the forefront of the

1957-58 decline. The railroads have planned a sharp recovery in

equipment purchases from their recession low points, and the large

jet aircraft procurement of the airlines is expected to produce a rising

trend of deliveries throughout this year. The high rate of new home

construction has spurred increased spending on new shopping centers,

and the Government's highway construction program and the con- tinued high rate of overall construction activity have been responsible

for a sizable pickup on purchases of new equipment by construction

contractors.

Business has decided to invest more in 1959 because for many

months sales have been trending upward, and high consumer purchasing power suggests that demand will continue to rise.

Manufacturing and trade sales are now considerably above their

levels of this time last year, and a steady process of inventory re- building has been evident in 1959. Yet the manufacturing and trade

inventory total at the end of April—when book values were estimated

at $88 billion—was about the same as a year ago. The overall stocksales ratio for trade and manufacturing combined was in April 1.4,

as against 1.7 in April 1958.

The impetus to buying has come primarily from a high rate of disposable personal income, that is, personal income after taxes. At an

annual rate of $321 billion in the first quarter of 1959, disposable

income showed a rise of $5 billion from the previous quarter, and

$15 billion from the first quarter of 1958. We may expect another

rise in this measure of consumer purchasing power in the current

quarter.

3
Personal consumption expenditures have risen with the advance in

income. More consumer credit is being used to finance the recent

step-up in auto buying, a segment no longer in the lagging class.

Consumer purchases of other durable goods are also improved; for

example, the high rate of residential construction has contributed

to the rise in demand for major household goods. The larger dollar

expenditures for food represent a rise in real consumption, since prices

have not increased.

Some of you here in this room were present at the 15th Conference on Weights and Measures, in 1922. At that time, Secretary of

Commerce Herbert Hoover, fulfilling the same pleasant role that I

fill today, said to the Conference : "If we would advance the welfare of

our country, if we would perfect the processes of business and commerce, it must be by unity of action on the part of great numbers

of men. It is only by organization, conference, and the establishment of standards and methods that these things may be brought

about."

It is this spirit of cooperation which characterizes our mutual efforts.

We here in this Conference have an opportunity to demonstrate that

a free political system and a free economic system offer the greatest

good for all men. Let us resolve to set an example for all the world.

PRESENTATION OF HONOR AWARDS

Dr. Astin presented "Honor Awards" to 36 members of the Conference who, by attending the 43d Conference in 1958, reached one

of the four attendance categories for which recognition is made

that is, attendance at 10, 15, 20, and 25 meetings.

HONOR AWARD RECIPIENTS

25-Year Certificates

C. M. Fuller, E. Kent Lawrence.

20-Year Certificates

C. E>. Baucom, H. S. Bean, R. M. Bodenweiser, H. E. Crawford,

G. H. Leithauser, J. P. McBride, J. H. Meek.

15-Year Certificates

Nails Berryman, Leonard DeRienzo, J. M. Dietz, E. R. Eyler,

E. R. Fisher, L. L. Kennedy, J. P. Leonard, Alfred Lirio, William

Miller.

10-year Certificates

K. C. Allen, W. A. Baerwolf,* E. E. Dawson, P. R. Fishburn,

R. M. Holmes, E. D. Hubble, M. W. Jensen, Nathan Kalechman, W. A.

Kerlin, J. I. Moore, C. F. Rosica, M. J. Santimauro, J. J. Seres,

W. E. Sheehy, Jr., J. F. Sullivan, J. Fred True, C. J. Wills, Jr.,

Mrs. C. G. Woodland.

*Deceased.
ADDRESS OF CONFERENCE CHAIRMAN

By C. M. Fuller, Conference Chairman, County Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Los Angeles County, California

Looking over this great assembly of men and women, dedicated

to the cause of honest weights and measures, I am reminded of

another meeting, similar in character but smaller in numbers. This

was the 13th National Conference, held in 1920. While there were

not so many in attendance, there was the same deep interest and

enthusiasm that exists today in being part of an organization that

affects the welfare of all people throughout the Nation. It made

a deep impression on a young man from California who was there

for the first time. He decided right then that this would be his

lifetime career.

I have never had occasion to regret that decision.

As a preface to this somewhat informal talk, I would like to share

with you recollections about two outstanding men in our work.

A young delegate at this same 1920 Conference was Ralph W.

Smith, Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures for the State of

Wisconsin. He took an active part in discussing specifications and

tolerances for liquid-measuring devices which were studied and

adopted for the first time at that meeting. Later on that year, Mr.

Smith resigned from his State job to join the staff at the National

Bureau of Standards. During the years that followed he continued

to work on specifications and tolerances, and wrote a number of

handbooks that are held in high regard as standard texts on weights

and measures subjects. He is here today as a valued consultant to

the Bureau.

A new arrival at the 26th National Conference in 1936 was W. S.

Bussey, Chief, Division of Weights and Measures for the State of

Texas, who came with a bodyguard of four comely young ladies, one

of whom, I hasten to add, was his wife. He displayed real showmanship when, on behalf of the Governor of Texas, he presented Doctor

Briggs, Director of the National Bureau of Standards, and President

of the Conference, with a commission as honorary Texas Ranger and,

as badge of office, a ranger's "ten-gallon" hat.

Not satisfied with that, the following year he brought back three

of his coworkers, all big Texans, wearing enormous Mexican straw

hats with tassels around the brims, and loud serapes thrown nonchalantly over their shoulders to complete the outfits. From that

time on, everybody knew Bill Bussey.

As we look back on it, inspection and enforcement was comparatively simple in those days. Liquefied petroleum gas, farm milk

tanks, prepackaging scales, electronics, and other developments had

not yet come into being to complicate the work. The first book of

specifications and tolerances was a small manual. But remember

this—those pioneers had to start from scratch. Every item was the

result of painstaking study and consultation, for they could not afford

to be wrong. Those early regulations represented days and nights

of constant endeavor. And the result? They were basic and they

were right. They provided the foundation on which to build the

standards and rules of future years.

I would like to leave a few thoughts with you this morning.

Having served on the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances

5
for 25 years, from 1923 to 1948, and on the Advisory Committee to

the Director of the National Bureau of Standards for the last 5

years, I have had an unusual opportunity to make a study of people

and things. I have been able to arrive at some well-considered

conclusions as a result of my own observations.

Now, it is not surprising that some delegates on the occasion of

their first participation in National Conferences are liable to make

mistakes. It is easy to form opinions that are in the nature of snap

judgments. We have all been guilty of this at one time or another.

Such opinions can be both dangerous and embarrassing because,

when more complete information is obtained, the speaker will realize

that the first opinion, which he so vigorously set forth or defended,

was entirely wrong.

Take plenty of time to study all sides of a question before making

a decision.

From the first National Conference to this one, the prime objective

has been uniformity—uniformity throughout all the States and local

jurisdictions with respect to laws, regulations, specifications and

tolerances, methods of test, and administration.

This requires the cooperation of many—weights and measures

officials, manufacturers of weighing and measuring equipment, the

users of this equipment, in fact industry in general. By meeting together and discussing mutual problems as we are doing here, conclusions can be attained that are fair and equitable to all.

In addition to cooperation, there must be a spirit of tolerance and

an open mind that is willing to listen to the other fellow. There

must be some merit to his proposition for he is not lacking in intelligence. Do not be so bigoted that you refuse, either inwardly or outwardly, to consider his proposition.

Take the codes of specifications and tolerances, for example.

There was a time when a manufacturer of weighing or measuring

equipment Avas compelled to go to the expense of making numerous

small changes to comply with the different requirements of officials

in each of the several States. A merchant might find that, in moving

from one State to another, the scale that had been sealed correct for

use in the first location would now be turned down. What a ridiculous situation that was.

That has now been corrected by a uniform code that has been

officially adopted in the majority of States. I hope that the time is

not far away when it will be universal.

Suppose you do conceive some new idea that is a deviation or

change from the code. You are enthusiastic. It becomes a pet

project. All right ! Don't take arbitrary action and proceed to put

it into effect, right now, in your jurisdiction, thus creating a break

in uniformity. It cannot be that important.

Go about it the right way. Take it up with the delegated Conference committee. They will set the time for a hearing. Of course there

may be some arguments and debate, for we do not all look at things

alike. But a majority opinion will finally emerge. This will be

submitted to the entire Conference for a final decision, and that

decision should prevail.

There is strength in unity. Individual action away from uniformity can only tend to weaken our entire structure. As members

of this Conference, we should be willing to abide by majority rule.

6
How fortunate we are that back in 1005 Dr. St ration, Director of

the Bureau, and Louis Fischer, Chief of the Weights and MeasureDivision, decided to invite a group of State officials to meet at the

National Bureau of Standards. There were only 11 present at that

meeting, but the purpose then, as it is today, was to bring about

uniformity and to effect a close cooperation between State and local

jurisdictions and the National Bureau of Standards.

It is important to remember this. There has never been any

thought or effort on the part of the National Bureau to dominate or

dictate to the Conference.

The Advisory Committee was created in 1954 to aid the Director

by informing him regarding conditions in the field, and by recommending ways and means for improving the services of the Bureau

to weights and measures.

Director Astin, Associate Director McPherson, all members of

their staffs and the Office of Weights and Measures have been most

cooperative and receptive to our suggestions. It has been a real

pleasure to work with them. Much good has been and will continue

to be accomplished by this cordial spirit of teamwork.

The future looks bright for weights and measures. There is a growing realization on the part of the public that this is an essential

service that must be maintained at a high level. Public officials are

more ready than ever before to authorize budgets for necessary men

and equipment, for they know that the savings accomplished are real

dividends to the taxpayers. Constructive publicity like that of National Weights and Measures Week is beginning to pay off.

So let's continue to keep up the good work, with a heart full of

thankfulness that we can be part of a great necessary service to our

fellow men.

ADDRESS OF THE CONFERENCE PRESIDENT AND APPOINTMENTS

TO STANDING COMMITTEES

By A. V. Astin, Director, National Bureau of Standards

It is a real pleasure for me to be here again with you in my eighth

successive year in this capacity. I still have a way to go before I can

qualify for one of the Honor Award Certificates.

I would like, as has been my custom on prior occasions in this

capacity, to report to you briefly on the status of activities of the

National Bureau of Standards, and also to make certain appointments

which it is my responsibility to make under the new Charter of the

National Conference.

This year, five appointments to standing committees are to be made.

Three of these are for a full term of 5 years and two are to fill unexpired terms and are for 4 years' duration.

To the Committee on Education, to succeed John E. Mahoney of

Maryland, whose term is expiring, I appoint Mr. J. E. Bowen of

Newton, Massachusetts, for a full term of 5 years.

To the Committee on Laws and Regulations, to succeed Mr. F. M.

Greene of Connecticut, whose term is expiring, I appoint Mr. H. M.

Turrell of Pennsylvania for a full term of 5 years.

Because of an approaching change in employment by Mr. E. L.

Randall of Nevada, he has found it necessary to resign from this

committee after only 1 year's service. To fill this vacancy I appoint
Mr. J. G. Gustafson of Minneapolis, Minnesota, to a term of 4 years.

To the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, and to succeed

Mr. J. E. Brenton of California, whose term is expiring, I appoint

Mr. A. H. Dittrich of New Hampshire for a full 5 -year term. As

there is to be a change in the administrative status of the Ohio Division

of Weights and Measures, Mr. V. D. Campbell has considered it

necessary to resign his position on this committee. To fill the vacancy

created by Mr. Campbell's resignation, I appoint Mr. R. W. Searles of

Medina County, Ohio, to a term of 4 years.

There are two vacancies occurring on the Advisory Committee to the

National Bureau of Standards on Weights and Measures this year

one by the expiration of the term of Mr. William A. Scheurer, President of the Exact Weight Scale Company, Columbus, Ohio, and the

other by the expiration of the term of our esteemed Chairman, Mr.

Fuller. Mr. Fuller has served in this capacity for a full 5 years, and

it has been a great pleasure to me to have had the opportunity of working with him. I value this association very, very highly and I regret

to see his term coming to an end.

Mr. Fuller, as Conference Chairman, has made excellent recommendations to fill the vacancies of the two retiring members of the

Weights and Measures Advisory Committee and I am glad to accept

his recommendation. First, Mr. James E. Moss, Director, Division of

Transportation, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D.C.

Next, Mr. E. C. Westwood, City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Salt Lake City, Utah. These two gentlemen will be appointed to

3-year terms on the Weights and Measures Advisory Committee to the

National Bureau of Standards.

All five of the retiring members of the standing committees and the

two retiring members of the Advisory Committee have performed outstanding service to the National Conference on Weights and

Measures, to weights and measures nationally, and to the National

Bureau of Standards.

I am sure that this Conference will wish to express its appreciation

to those outgoing committee members by a standing vote of thanks at

this time.

I would now like to proceed to my report on the status of activities

at the National Bureau of Standards.

We have made, during the past year, substantial progress in a

number of areas, particularly in developing new standards, measurement techniques, and in accurate determination on the properties of

material. As a part of the improvement of our calibration services

program to the nation, we formally dedicated during the past year

an Electronic Calibration Center at Boulder, Colorado. This Center

was set up at the instigation of the Department of Defense, largely

to provide a means whereby it could refer its testing and calibration

instruments to the national standards on a systematic schedule, and

thus bring about a greater degree of reliability and uniformity in the

complex electronic equipment which is used in so many of our modem

weapons systems. We are very pleased that we are now in a position

to begin fulfilling some of the more essential needs in this area.

However, the opening of the Center is just a beginning in this area

;

as a further means of strengthening our calibration services to the

Defense Department, we have set up a special committee in cooperation with the Air Force under the chairmanship of Dr. McPherson

8
to work with defense contractors throughout the country to attempt

to determine what additional calibration and measurement services

are needed to improve the efficiency and reliability of equipment used

in many of our present weapons systems and other military materiel

items.

In the general field of standards a number of improvements have

been made. We have devised improved techniques for providing calibration services on vibration equipment, and have provided improved

calibration services for measuring both very high and very low

pressures, and a host of other types of activities.

In an area of somewhat direct concern to you people, we have improved substantially our ability to provide precise length calibration.

Acting under the impetus several years ago of an urgent request

from the machine tool industry, we set about to provide calibration

services which would be accurate to one ten-millionth of an inch,

This required a dual development, both on measurement techniques

and on gage block materials, which would be stable to this limit of

accuracy, and we are beginning to see the end of this activity. Equipment to make measurements with this accuracy has been designed

and is in the course of construction and will be ready for operation

this fall.

In addition, we have succeeded through metallurgical research in

developing new gage block materials, some of which have shown

changes of only about two ten-millionths of an inch in a year's time.

This is beginning to get in the region of stability which we must have

to meet this modern industrial requirement.

Also, there has been substantial progress in terms of our long range

objective of redefining our national and international standard of

length, namely, the international meter. As you knowT our national

standards in the customary units of yards, inches, pounds, and ounces

are based on metric standards, and our national metric standards,

the meter and kilogram, are merely prototypes of international standards which are kept in Paris.

Since 1889, the meter has been designated as the distance between

two particular lines on the platinum iridium bar which is maintained

in the vaults of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures

in Paris. The International Committee of Weights and Measures,

which is the guiding committee for the International Bureau of

Weights and Measures, agreed at its meeting last fall to recommend

to the General Conference of Weights and Measures, which convenes

in the fall of 1960, that the old definition of the meter be abrogated

and we define the meter in terms of a specific number of wave lengths

of a particular color of light emitted by the atom, krypton 86. This

decision was agreed to unanimously by the members of the International Committee last fall and will be voted on in 1960 by the formally

designated representatives of the nations which adhere to the Treaty

of the Meter. It is anticipated that that recommendation will be

approved and that we will then have a completely new definition of

the meter, a definition based on a neutral constant, and will provide

the standard which can be made accessible anywhere in the world

and which will be indestructible.

In another somewhat related area we made also considerable progress during the past year in reaching an agreement to resolve the

small but troublesome differences in the various values of the yard

0
and the pound. As I mentioned earlier, our yard and pound are

based on the meter and kilogram by ratios established by the Office

of Standard Weights and Measures, the predecessor agency of the

National Bureau of Standards, in 1893 and 1894. The ratios, however, which we use are different from the ratios the Canadians use,

who also base their yard and pound on metric units, and different

still from the values for the yard and pound in England, who base

their yard and pound on an imperial yard and an imperial pound.

These three countries, together with representatives from other

English-speaking and inch-using countries, namely, Australia and

New Zealand and South Africa, agreed on a single ratio relating the

yard to the meter and a single ratio relating the pound to the kilogram. And necessary agreed-upon ratios will be used in our calibration services beginning this coming July 1.

The value of the yard under this agreement is defined as equal to

0.9144 meter, which gives an inch exactly equal to 2.54 centimeters.

The value for the pound is defined as equal to 0.45359237 kilogram.

These changes will have no effect at all upon the sort of work that you

gentlemen are doing. That is, the changes involved here are a

shortening of our standard yard by about two parts in a million.

This will mean that numbers used to express measurement in terms

of yards will be larger by about two parts in a million. The change

in the pound is decreasing its value by about one part in ten million.

This will cause an increase in the numbers used to express weights in

terms of pounds by about one part in ten million.

Those small differences are beyond the accuracy with which we are

able to determine the standards which we certify to the State governments. So the small change will have no effect at all on your own

activities. It will, however, have a very important effect in a number

of precise metrological determinations, the sort of things that are

encountered in the precision instrument industry involved in making

highly accurate instruments and devices which must mesh together

on exceedingly close tolerance. The fact that our inch has been different from the British inch has led to a number of difficulties and

confusion in the interchangeability of instruments between these two

countries. The resolution of these differences by these small adjustments will assure greater interchangeability. and at the same time

greater cooperation among the nations which use the inch and the

pound.

I would like now to talk about the area of activity in the National

Bureau of Standards of more direct concern to the Weights and

Measures Conference, namely, changes in the program of our Office

of Weights and Measures. In order that our weights and measures

activity can carry out some of its expanding activities, we have just

recently completed relocation of the Office in another building at the

Bureau and in substantially larger and much more useful quarters.

We will in these new quarters give particular attention to a weights

and measures library and to a new training facility. It is our plan

to equip the training laboratory and then to offer to the States, counties, and cities concentrated courses and instructions for supervisory

personnel. We hope to design such courses so as to cover the various

technical aspects of weights and measures supervision and, through

the supervisors and training officers who will avail themselves of these

courses, to extend greatly the effectiveness of our contribution in this

10
important area. This training program will be planned to provide

maximum individual instruction, and to achieve this we will plan

normally to limit the classes to 12 or less. An announcement of the

dates and contents of the courses will be made just as soon as our

plans are completed.

I mentioned that an enlarged weights and measures library is one

of the important things we are planning in this new location of the

Office of Weights and Measures. This is a project which has been

shaping up under the direction of Ralph Smith over the past year.

He is developing first a collection of weights and measures documents, books and manuscripts of historical importance to students

and researchers in this special area. Some of the material dates

back to the early 1800's. Supplementing the archival collection is a

reference collection consisting of some duplicates of historical items

and in addition many items of current weights and measures interest

and usefulness but not of archival importance. Together these collections already comprise many hundred items. There is a possibility

of ultimately consolidating these collections with the weights and

measures volumes of our main library.

In addition to providing better quarters for our Office of Weights

and Measures, we have also strengthened its staff by two important

additions. The first of these became effective about 3 months ago

when Dr. Lewis V. Judson was transferred from the Length Section

to the Office of Weights and Measures. He had been a member of

the Length Section of the Bureau for approximately 41 years. All

during this time he has shown an active interest in the weights and

measures work of the States and has had an active part in instructing

State officials in their calibration work. He has visited many State

offices during the past few years to study the needs of the States in

connection with our consideration of new standards of weights and

measures.

With his knowledge of both precision and practical measurement,

not only in this country but abroad, we are anticipating that he will

do much to strengthen the scientific aspects of the Office of Weights

and Measures in many practical ways. His duties will be quite

varied, and he will be concerned with preparation of publications,

consultations, classroom instruction, and correspondence. I hope

that, if you have problems in which Dr. Judson's special talents can

be of help to you, you will certainly make known your requests or

wants to us. The second addition to the Office of Weights and Measures is a very

recent one, made just last week. Ronald Steiger, a mechanical engineering graduate of the University of Louisville, who is also seeking

a master's degree in business administration at American University,

was transferred from our Mechanics Division to the Office of Weights

and Measures. Mr. Steiger is a young man with a great potential,

whom all of you will want to get to know. He will be working

throughout the area of weights and measures supervision and specifically in the design of testing equipment and procedures and in the

technical training program.

Also in this area we are proceeding on a number of fronts in terms

of our study of possible new standards for the States. Mr. Strauss,

in his talk, referred to the work of our Metallurgy Division aimed at

519003—59 2

11
improved materials for possible new State standards. It appears

that if our study shows a justifiable need for new standards to be

furnished to the States, then we will very likely use some of our

metallurgical research in order to have improved materials for the

fabrication of these standards. For example, it appears much more

likely that stainless steel standard weights would be much more

serviceable than the brass weights which are now employed.

I also want, before concluding the report on the activities of the

Office of Weights and Measures, to call your attention to the fact

that we have released within the last few months a new Handbook 67

on weights and measures activities. This deals with problems involving packaged commodities and it is one of a series of handbooks which

we hope will help make your work easier and more effective.

All of the previous speakers have pointed to the desirability of

cooperation in terms of achieving our mutual goals. Here of course

we look to you people who represent the weights and measures community in the States and local areas as one of our most effective

means of bringing to public beneficial fruition the important activities of the National Bureau of Standards. To the extent that our

liaison and cooperation with you is effective, our own efforts will

really justify then the existence of a Federal establishment set up to

provide assistance to the public.

We sincerely solicit your suggestions and recommendations as to

how we can make our work more effective. Of course, we do have

the assistance of the Weights and Measures Advisory Committee, and

from that committee we get a number of useful and detailed recommendations. But this is a small committee. It works hard, but it

cannot possibly encompass all of your requests or desires. Therefore,

I extend to all of you an invitation at any time, where there are

problems where you think the National Bureau of Standards might

be helpful, to make your requests known to us. By thus working together I am sure that we can all do a much better job at achieving

our common goal of having an honest, efficient weights and measures

administration.

ADDRESS

By Hox. Genevieve Blatt, Secretary, Department of Internal

Affairs, 0ommomoealth of Pennsylvania

If an invitation to come back and speak again is the highest compliment which can be paid to a speaker—and I feel sure it is—then I

have been indeed greatly honored by the National Conference on

Weights and Measures. I have always remembered how much I

enjoyed my first visit with you in 1956, and so I was tremendously

pleased to receive the invitation to join you again today, and to discuss with you some of the problems which all of us have been facing

in the enforcement of standard weights and measures.

When I was here before, I had been in charge of the enforcement

of standard weights and measures in Pennsylvania for just about 1

year, and I told you about some of the difficulties I had encountered

and the progress I felt had been made. As I look back now, I realize

how much of a novice I was then and how much more I have still

to learn about how to do this work most effectively. I am gratified,

however, by the progress which has been made—progress in which

the National Bureau has played an important part, by the way—and

12
I welcome this opportunity to discuss our current situation with you.

Our chief problem in Pennsylvania, and I venture to say a considerable problem anywhere, is a lack of funds, and a consequent lack

of modern equipment and staff to carry out a really effective enforcement program.

I am a frugal sort of person, especially when public money is concerned, and I do not like to spend a dollar more than is necessary

to get the job done. Still I know that, in weights and measures enforcement as in anything else, we cannot get very much done for

nothing.

Our legislative leaders in Pennsylvania have always indicated considerable interest in having an effective enforcement program carried

out, but the rising costs of State government and the consequent need

for more State taxes, coupled with partisan differences about the kind

of taxes which should be levied, have made them unable or unwilling

to increase our very modest appropriation. We are making every

dollar stretch just as far as it will go, and I am proud to say that we

are actually rendering more service per tax dollar than we ever have

before. Still we do need more money to fulfill our obligations in

these times of modern merchandising methods and techniques. We

need more inspectors and more equipment. And we are trying hard

to get the necessary funds. Time alone will tell how successful we are

in this endeavor.

In attempting to persuade the members of the legislature of our

need for funds to carry out standard weights and measures enforcement, and also in attempting to educate the public regarding the importance of this function of the State government and the necessity

for their cooperation with our inspectors, we have tried to place as

much emphasis as possible on our educational program.

First of all, we have tried to educate our own men, both the inspectors we hire in the State government and the local inspectors with

whom we cooperate throughout the State. We have had regular

schools for instruction in which the National Bureau has been of

immense help. We have sent our State inspectors out to instruct

local inspectors and to give them every service possible. As a result,

we feel that all of the inspectors—both State and local—are doing a

better job because of this inservice training, and are much better

able to explain to anyone who wants to know just how important

weights and measures enforcement is and how such enforcement is

carried out. We consider these inspectors our "frontline troops" in

the job of public education, and we want them, themselves, to be as

well educated as possible in the work we all have to do.

In addition, we have carried on an extensive program of educating

the public in weights and measures practices and in soliciting their

assistance in weights and measures enforcement. It has been our

feeling that we could have thousands of volunteer helpers in our work,

if the public knew what we are trying to do. So we have been trying

to tell them.

All of our fieldmen, our Director, our Assistant Director, and I

have made frequent radio talks about the various problems of weights

and measures enforcement. In addition, we have appeared as often

as we could on television programs. We have released numerous

stories and articles to the newspapers. And we have spoken to

hundreds of civic groups throughout the State. In short, we have

13
tried to tell the weights and measures story wherever we could get an

opportunity to tell it.

ne have found that, unlike news of an epidemic or a choice bit of

scandal, news about weights and measures enforcement is slow in

-spreading. But it can be spread

!

Particularly encouraging to us in the last year was the sizable

amount of publicity attained during our observance of National

Weights and Measures Week. Several weeks in advance, I directed

a personal letter to every Mayor and County Commission Chairman

in Pennsylvania asking that he join in a proclamation of National

Weights and Measures Week in his own community. I also secured

a promise from the Governor to designate this as a statewide week

of observance of weights and measures problems. The publicity

attendant upon these proclamations alone was considerable. In addition, we arranged for a month-long exhibit in the rotunda of the State

Capitol, which featured the display of a set of standard weights and

measures, pictures of our testing equipment in use, samples of our

printed leaflets and brochures for distribution, and the Toledo "talking scale."' We have no way to measure how many people examined

the exhibit during the month it was on view, but we do know that the

talking scale registered 3,198 weighings in just 1 week, and we would

conservatively estimate that at least 15,000 people saw the exhibit.

Included among these were the members of the legislature, who were

attending sessions in the Capitol during this period. We prepared a

special little brochure entitled "Weights and Measures—and You,"

which went "like hot cakes." We found it practically impossible to

keep enough copies on hand for the people who wanted them.

One other phase of our educational program has been concerned

with working with manufacturers and producers of equipment and

helping them to understand not only what our requirements are but

the purposes for these requirements. We have held many meetings

with representatives of the various industries to discuss problems of

mutual concern, and we have found them almost universally willing to

cooperate when they understood what we were trying to clo.

And, all the while we were trying to educate the public and the

members of the legislature and the manufacturers, we have been doing

our best to keep up with the new problems which arise constantly.

Indeed, it has seemed that we have never solved one problem of

enforcement before another has been brought to our attention. I

suppose that the very speed with which new weighing and measuring

devices are manufactured and put on the market would make this

inevitable.

For example, many more Pennsylvanians are beginning to use oil for

home heating and industrial purposes. With this increased use of

fuel oil, vehicles to transport and deliver it have increased in number.

So have demands for testing of fuel oil meters. When the need to

expand our service in this respect became apparent, we had at our

disposal but one mobile testing unit, and it was in such a deteriorated

state that its use was inadvisable other than in the immediate area of

the State Capitol. We felt very strongly that we ought to have several

mobile testing units in operation, but there simply was not the money

to buy them. We decided, therefore, to install several check stations,

and we set up three in various parts of the State, and asked that meters

be brought to these stations for checking. Our laws, however, do not

14
give us the authority to order dealers to bring their equipment into

these test points, and many of them resisted making long trips for this

purpose. Consequently, our checking has been substantially limited

to those dealers who were complying on a voluntary basis. So now we

are asking the legislature again for funds for more mobile testing units

and also for authority to order dealers to bring their equipment to

testing stations.

Another problem we faced was concerned with the use of one-third

quart containers for milk. Milk dealers, especially those who used

automatic vending machines, claimed that there was a demand for

one-third quart containers, and when our Attorney General finally

ruled that we could amend our regulations to permit such containers,

this amendment was made. Then, of course, we began using a new

standard for liquid measure, the one-third quart.

Another problem we faced had to do with the use of the word "net"

on packaged items. Our requirement that the net contents be clearly

stated on each package was questioned, but we took a firm stand,

clarified our regulations to be perfectly sure that there could be no

mistake about the requirement, and have had no further trouble in

this respect.

We had another problem in connection with weight declarations on

meats processed in food freezer plants for home consumption. In

this case, we obtained an opinion from the Attorney General to the

effect that our laws required individually wrapped cuts to be considered as packages, and, as such, to be clearly marked as to net

weight.

A similar ruling was obtained in connection with the sale of

wrapped meats, such as bologna, ham butts, etc., which we also considered to be packaged items requiring the net weight declaration.

The same ruling was applied to packaged barbecued chicken.

Another problem we faced had to do with the use of the word "net"

of you as well, is that regarding short-weight packages of flour. We

have had many conferences with millers and dealers regarding this

problem, and we have found them all anxious to be as cooperative as

possible in our program to keep short-weight flour packages off the

shelves. When we have found any such packages we have immediately stamped them "condemned" and ordered them removed from

sale. From present indications, it would appear that our strict enforcement program is already bringing about the desired results,

and more care is being exercised to make sure that the packages

meet the standards when put on the shelves and continue to meet the

standards as long as they remain on the shelves.

As I look back over my first 4 years in office, it seems to me that

the biggest problem Ave had was to build up our staff and to train

it, and the next biggest was to prescribe enforceable regulations which

were both modern and understandable. In this latter connection,

the most important step we took was to adopt the National Bureau

of Standards Handbook 44. In so doing, we brought Pennsylvania's

enforcement practices into conformity with those of most other States

without relaxing our own enforcement standards to any degree. In

addition, by distributing this Handbook to all of the local weights

and measures enforcement officers in Pennsylvania, we have brought

about a much greater degree of uniformity in practices and procedures

than we ever had before.

15
Following our adoption of the National Bureau's Handbook in

1956, we established a new policy for checking farm milk tanks, which

may be of interest to you. We required that the responsibility for the

initial calibration should be assumed by the manufacturer, with a

recheck to be made by an inspector from our weights and measures

at a later date. This enabled the farmer to make immediate use of

his tank, rather than wait until the weights and measures inspector

could get around to check it. Further progress was realized the

following year, when we put three panel trucks into service, each

carrying special equipment for testing these tanks. At that time, we

divided the State into three territories, with one of these units

assigned to each, and now our men schedule their work dairy by dairy,

checking all tanks serviced by each dairy before starting with the

next. In this way, we have greatly expedited the checking of farm

milk tanks and have also permitted our inspectors to devote some

of the time which they were previously spending in this work to

the other phases of weights and measures enforcement.

Considerable progress has also been made in our program for testing heavy-duty scales. We initiated a new system in 1957, wherein

we again divided the State into three territories with a heavy-duty

truck testing unit in each. In testing these scales, our inspectors

worked county by comity, assisted by the local inspectors, and remaining in each county until all of its scales had been tested. This

system replaced the former method of working on a "request for

services" basis, which was a time-consuming method leaving much to

be desired in the way of accomplishment. In some of the counties,

which we visited in this program, we found that no one could remember when these heavy-duty scales had ever been checked before. In

many other counties, there had been no testing done during the past

10 years. Our Director talked about this program in considerable

detail at the Indiana State Conference in March, and many of you

undoubtedly heard what he had to say at that time. It has been an

outstandingly successful program, and we are all very proud of it.

Thus far, I have discussed with you the problems as we see them

in Pennsylvania in relation to the need for enforcement funds, the

necessity for the continuing education of our own inspectors, our

legislative leaders and the public in general, and certain specific enforcement questions.

Now I would like to tell you a little about what we have in mind

for the future.

We have three major bills now pending before our legislature, which

will be of considerable importance to our future plans.

One would authorize the licensing of public weighmasters. At

present, our State laws authorize the licensing of public weighmasters

only for solid fuels, principally coal, but there are many other commodities, in the weighing of which their services are required. So

we are trying to have the legislation changed to make it more inclusve.

Another will authorize the registration of people engaged in the

business of selling, tracling-in, receiving, installing, or repairing

condemned, rebuilt, or used weighing and measuring devices. We

think this legislation will give us a very valuable check on persons

who do this sort of work, and will prevent abuses in the future.

And the third will regulate the deliveries of light fuel oil to domestic

consumers and require the furnishing of immediate receipts. This is

16
something for which the present law does not provide, but which is

urgently needed now that so much fuel oil is being used for home

heating.

Besides this legislation, we are asking for funds which we think

are urgently needed to expand our enforcement program. We want

to buy another heavy-duty truck for use in testing large type scales

and another panel truck for use in the farm milk tank program,

and three more mobile fuel oil meter-testing units. We want to establish a liquefied petroleum gas program and obtain a mobile unit for

checking liquefied petroleum gas meters. Last, but far from least,

we want to provide our field staff with portable scales and volumetric

equipment. In addition, we want to establish a visual aids program

for use in training our own inspectors and in furthering our public

education program. We feel sure that our legislators agree with us

that these things are necessary. Our hope now is that they will also

be able to find the funds to provide them.

And now I would like to say a word about the two things I consider to be absolutely essential for any State enforcement program,

two things which we have been most fortunate to have in Pennsylvania : An able and devoted staff, and the cooperation of the National

Bureau of Standards.

You may recall that, when I spoke to you some years ago, I mentioned that I had almost no staff to work with when I took office in

May of 1955. I said then that, although the situation had some

advantageous aspects in that I could select staff members in whom

I had complete confidence and "start from scratch," I had considerable worry as to whether or not I could build up a staff and train

it fast enough to keep abreast of the enforcement problem.

I am glad to say now that, insofar as I have been able to do this,

it has been due to the wonderful people who have joined our staff

and the unfailing advice and assistance of the men in the National

Bureau. I think most of you have met our Director and our Assistant Director. And some of you have met others on our staff. All of

them are devoted, dedicated public servants, who have done their

utmost to learn as much as they could about their jobs and to do

them as well as humanly possible. I am proud of each and every one

of them, and I feel that the people of Pennsylvania owe all of them a

debt of thanks for their splendid service.

To the National Bureau, we can never properly express our gratitude. They have checked our equipment. They briefed our staff

when we first took over enforcement responsibilities. And, ever since,

they have always been at hand to help in every way they could. We

are particularly grateful to them for sending their own staff members to conduct our training schools, and, if I might make any suggestion here today, it would be that such training schools be provided

for every State on an annual basis. I can not think of anything

which would be more helpful to State inspectors than to have an

annual period of instruction, given by these outstanding national

experts.

This would keep all of us up to date on new weighing and measuring devices and new enforcement problems.

I suppose it can be said that every good public servant regards

the work he does for his government as of the utmost importance.

The soldier, the sailor, the statistician, the tax collector, the mine

17
inspector, the soil conservation expert—every single one of them—

can justifiably claim that his services are essential to his government, and can take great pride in the work he does.

The weights and measures inspector can and rightfully does take

the same attitude.

His work is all too seldom recognized, the results of his activity

very infrequently considered, but it does not take much reflection on

the complexities of modern life to realize that, without standard

weights and measures on which we can all rely, we would be headed

for intolerable confusion.

That is why I am so proud to have something to do Avith standard

weights and measures enforcement.

That is why I am so glad to know you people who share my concern

that this work be done well.

You are important to your government.

Your work is important to every man, woman, and child in

America.

Be proud of it. Talk about it. And I pray that God will give

each of you the strength to give it the very best that is in you

!

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SECRETARY

Mr. Bussey: I should like to report to you on some of the State

legislative activities during this year. Some of you already know that

the States of Washington, Missouri, and New Mexico have enacted

the Model State Law on Weights and Measures. This is the first time

that the State of New Mexico has had a comprehensive weights and

measures law. In the cases of Washington and Missouri it was a

modernization and improvement of existing statutes.

Mr. John Lewis is the new Chief of the Washington Division of

Weights and Measures, which is in the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. George Bay is in charge of the Missouri activity. Mr. Dallas

Rierson is the Director of Agriculture in New Mexico and strongly

supported the new weights and measures bill. The New Mexico law

goes into effect on July 1.

Other States that have reported on weights and measures legislation this year are Connecticut, Ohio, and Vermont. Major regulations were adopted in Kentucky and California during the year. The

Model Law was introduced in the legislatures of Delaware and in

Arkansas. The Arkansas legislature unfortunately killed the bill,

but the bill in Delaware is still pending.

18
SECOND SESSION—AFTERNOON OF TUESDAY,

JUNE 9, 1959

(E. O. Westwood, Vice Chairman, Presiding)

THE SECOND ANNUAL NATIONAL WEIGHTS AND MEASURES WEEK

By J. L. O'Neill, State Inspector, Division of Weights and Measures,

State Board of Agriculture3 State of Kansas

The Committee on Education for the 44th National Conference is

to be congratulated for its fine efforts in the nationwide participation

of the second annual National Weights and Measures Week. The

interest was high over the country, and I am sure most of us were

surprised at the great success of the Week. This project turned out

to be one of the most united projects that has ever come from the

committee. Reports from the various member jurisdictions reveal

that much more was accomplished than had been anticipated. Thirtyone States, the District, and Puerto Rico have reported taking part

in the second annual National Weights and Measures Week.

Publicity angles were secured in many ways this year. Ideas from

the first Week, celebrated last year, were elaborated on and many fine

pieces of work completed by the members of this Conference. Many

of you have shown that you are not amateurs in the public relations

field, but are real publicity agents. Many hours of work were contributed to the effort.

The Week had a very good sendoff here in Washington with the

presentation of the new State standards to our 49th State—Alaska.

This was one of the best things probably that happened to trigger the

Week into motion and on to a final conclusion. This year 20 Governors proclaimed the Week and gave us the lead for many stories in

our Nation's newspapers. Along with this, 74 mayors, county boards,

or other local governing authorities issued proclamations that brought

the Week down to the grassroots and gave the officials in their immediate jurisdictions the spirit and initiative for their various programs. These proclamations probably were principally responsible

for the some 400 newspaper stories, feature articles, and editorials

that we saw. Some jurisdictions got complete pages of pictures and

stories. Editorials are the hardest part of the newspaper to invade,

but many fine editorials resulted from the second annual Week. One

that I will mention came from the home county of our Chairman

of the Conference, Morris Fuller. May I quote a few lines from this

editorial—"This paper has found much fault with overcostly, overloaded, power-grabbing, and redtape-encased government bureaucracy. And we still do, for that is one factor which makes our taxes

too high. But now and then the bright sunshine peeks through and

we see a governmental department which lives up to its duties and

obligations, which does not overstep its authority, which serves the

public well, and all at a minimum, reasonable cost to the taxpayers.

Such a unit is the department of the Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Los Angeles County, which has been directed for the past 43 years

since its inception by Charles Morris Fuller." This is a very fine

tribute to one of our sealers and may well be the tribute to many other

sealers across our land. This is just one sample of the fine articles

19
that have come forth in the Week's efforts. We will not attempt to

quote the many other fine tributes to the weight watchers that were

printed in our newspapers during National Weights and Measures

Week.

In radio coverage, some 175 radio stations beamed messages during the Week to all corners of our land. Some programs were several minutes long and others were spot announcements. Some of

these programs were personal appearances. Television, the highpriced means of reaching the public, also had an exceptional coverage in many of the States. Some were spot announcements and

others personal appearances and public service programs dedicated

to the Week. Some 70 TV stations went on the air in our behalf.

It was also noted that a nationwide network picked up the Week

and carried on a discussion on its morning program, which has for

its audience housewives that buy the everyday things that weights

and measures officials are so vitally interested in. This interesting

discussion was carried on by Peter Lind Hayes and his wife on their

variety show. The show originated in Florida during the Week.

This program was the result of efforts of the Scale Manufacturers

Association to list the Week in Chase's Trade Promotion Planning

Calendar and Standard Bate and Data Services. Many other

announcements were picked up and used through this means. TV

time, as you know, is a high-priced item which many of you secured

through your efforts. The total amount of time, estimated in dollars

and cents, would be high, and this is evidence of what can be done

with the effort that was put forth during the Week.

The Committee on Education distributed to the various jurisdictions some 4,000 mat emblems of the seal of National Weights and

Measures Week. These were used to a great extent and probably

used by jurisdictions more than any other means of announcing the

Week. The cooperation by the chain and independent stores and

others was 100 percent in some jurisdictions and less in other jurisdictions. Our wholehearted thanks must go forth to the many

thousands of advertisers who carried the weights and measures

emblems.

Public appearances numbered about 90 at our latest count, and

the use of the films produced by the Bureau was high again this

year. Many fine displays took place in different parts of the country, and I think this form of publicity for the Week could be stressed

more next year. Many signs and window and bumper stickers

appeared as a special means to advertise the Week. Howard Crawford's rubber stamp emblem was used on many pieces of correspondence over the country. This one original idea paid off and spread

over the States as a means of publicizing the Week. Those mentioned

are but the highlights that gave a special amount of publicity for

the Week.

I am sure that you will all agree that extension of participation

to many groups and weights and measures jurisdictions that did not

take part is the concern and hopes of those who did such a wonderful

job in the second Week promotion. It would be a miracle to have

100-percent cooperation in any united effort. This sets before us

the challenge as to how many more jurisdictions, industries, and

companies might, with the proper encouragement, bring into play

their talent and professional guidance to this program. This pro20
gram will need all the support that it can get to keep it alive and

progressing from year to year. Some of the reasons for nonparticipation in some of our jurisdictions might be the lack of personnel

and time to promote some form of project or the lack of a working

committee. If one will take a good look at the areas that did not

carry on a program, he will find that most of those have been missing

in attendance at past National Conferences and may be missing at

this Conference. This may not be the case exactly, but the whole

aim of this Conference is to bring about uniformity and participation

in a model weights and measures program. Jurisdictions that have

not had the proper educational work and that have not been successful in bringing about their programs in weights and measures are

generally not in attendance. If nothing else, the Week may be the

means of a little missionary work into the jurisdictions that may

need a boost, and this alone will make the project well worth while.

The program that this second annual Week projected cannot help

but be heard in the jurisdictions that are not represented here or do

not carry on the type of weights and measures program that they

can be proud of. Weights and measures divisions that have up-andcoming programs have for public relations uses many stories that can

be told to benefit their causes.

Some of the jurisdictions tried unsuccessfully to have proclamations

issued. Many jurisdictions were in the midst of legislative sessions.

Some were met with a flat "no" from newspapers because everybody

seems to be asking for a "week" to publicize his work or his product.

Others were reluctant to be put in a position of getting the law enforcement agency into promotional work where, if a favor is granted, one

is expected in return. Most weights and measures departments are

supported by tax money to enforce laws passed by the legislature.

Law enforcement is their primary function. When time, effort, and

supplies are turned to promotional efforts, they are, in a sense, operating out of bounds. This has been frowned upon. For instance, an

Agriculture Department may have several divisions of law enforcement assigned to it. If each of these divisions were to ask the Governor for a proclamation, or if each were to ask for radio or TV

time or for space in advertisement columns, the department might

be put in an embarrassing situation. The use of the mat emblem

met some of this opposition. I think that in future promotions these

differences must be guarded against. Barriers must not be built up

that might become harmful rather than helpful to the divisions.

Larger participation by industry other than weights and measures

can be the answer to most of the problems stated. The weights and

measures department can be educational to an extent, but must be

careful of an all-out promotion. This point is brought out as a word

of caution.

Much of the weights and measures promotion was done by industry

through its fine ideas and leadership in getting the publicity across. First I will mention that the Scale Manufacturers Association contributed a great deal of time and effort to this project. Arthur

Sanders was a pillar in the promotion of Weights and Measures

Week. The National Association of Food Chains, the American

Petroleum Institute, the Glass Containers Manufacturers Institute,

and many others should be mentioned here. Many States had very

good working committees, and State associations took active parts

21
in the promotion of the Week. The Committee on Education of the

Southern Weights and Measures Association took united action, and

83y2 percent of member State jurisdictions took active part. Many

cities, counties, and joint jurisdictions within the States were very

active in the promotion of the Week.

Weights and Measures Week can be an every-week project for many

areas. Not a week goes by that something interesting does not happen that should be publicized. Many of the members of this Conference take advantage of these situations and obtain very good

publicity and public relations for their programs. Now many more

of us have found out how this can be done, and we should employ

these means more frequently in our local weights and measures programs. Grassroot publicity has been the key all the way through the

Week's promotion, and this will be true for the Weeks to come. I

know well the value of organization for the promotion of such a project. It has been brought to our attention that a central guiding

organization might make the effort more successful. I believe there

is a need for a central organization for this project—a central clearinghouse where the many promotional ideas and experiences may be

considered and then passed on to all the local people. The many fine

ideas that came forth this year could be distributed next year. In

other words, the fine things that were used to advantage in one locality

could be used elsewhere. Such a central organization might be

formed within the framework of the National Conference. But it

must be remembered that such a promotion as a National Week is

also the responsibility of representatives of industries associated with

weights and measures administration. A joint effort will lend harmony and will be the best way to encourage wider participation and

develop needed publicity material.

Now is the time to plan. Name your active committees in your

various jurisdictions. You may or should use your State association

or regional organization to start with. Put the responsibility on a

committee that you know will work. Start the wheels for the third

annual Week on an organized basis and keep in mind improvements

over last year's project. Right timing with careful project planning

in advance is the effort that pays off. Above all, have a responsible

committee within each jurisdiction for reporting the results. The

record is vitally important and is the only way to give to the Conference an accurate and full report.

Let us all set our aims high in our promotion for 1960. We can encourage the establishment of weights and measures programs in areas

that need this most necessary work. Let the third annual Week be

a Week of many new ideas and let it spread the words of our work

to many more millions of our citizens. The 1959 Week has been an

inspiration. It has been hard work, but we have enjoyed it, and the

results have made the work well worth while.

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Sanders: I sat in with the Education Committee yesterday,

and I think the committee has a very good recommendation on National Weights and Measures Week. I should like to ask the opinion of Mr. O'Neill as to what is the real purpose of Weights and

Measures Week, and what can the local weights and measures jurisdiction and the local interests, including the commercial interests like

22
scalemen and so forth, expect from the promotion of Weights and

Measures Week?

Mr. O'Neill: Results one can expect include a better support to

do a better job. Our purpose should be clear to everyone. We are

trying to enlighten all people as to weights and measures supervision.

Many do not know what it is all about. They do not know what we

are doing or how we are spending tax money. That is probably

our main purpose, to let the public that has not had the chance to

know about weights and measures learn something about it and better understand it so that they will support our program.

Mr. Leithauser : I would like to ask Mr. Arthur Sanders if lie has

any ideas on the further development of National Weights and Measures Week.

Mr. Sanders : I have been in this business for some 14 years now,

and every year, and at every weights and measures meeting, including

the National Conference, there is always a discussion of the problem

of recognition of the essentiality of weights and measures. There is

not recognition budget-wise, manpower-wise, and equipment-wise, and

there is need for that. You cannot perforin the service unless you

do have the manpower, and you cannot have the manpower unless you

have the budget.

We are weights and measures associates. We did not ask for it,

but we in the scale industry are controlled by weights and measures

officials. We think it is a good thing. The scale people recognize

that scales must be inspected. We think that a real need of weights

and measures is to educate the public to realize that there must be

public support for weights and measures. This is the philosophy

behind National Weights and Measures Week.

Dr. Gordon : When I made my survey of State laws and their administration and enforcement in 1956, one of the questions I asked

each State director was, "Do you have a public information program?" And as I reported to this Conference in June 1957, only

seven men answered that question affirmatively. I think some were

overly modest, but nonetheless, that was an amazing response. Consequently I laid great stress—I would as an educator—on the need for

informing the public of the work, the very important work which is

being done by weights and measures officials across the country.

This "Week" effort is largely due to Arthur Sanders and his association. This program has gotten off to an impressive beginning.

This strikes me as being very auspicious because one of the things

that stands out in weights and measures administration is the mutuality of interests.

However, if I may throw out a word of caution, I do not think

that we should let ourselves be overly impressed with the one-shot

1-week type of performance. Not only have I glanced around at the

publicity exhibit here, but I have read the reports and the Kansas

Weights and Measures Newsletter, and others, and I draw the uneasy

feeling that maybe we are getting overly impressed with the extent

of the coverage without asking ourselves the question which has been

asked here this afternoon, not only what is the purpose but also

what are the results.

A public information program ought to be reaching the constituency in each jurisdiction so that those people will become sufficiently

aware of the work which is being done that they will insist, through

23
their actions as voters, upon providing adequate funds to carry on

that work. Consequently, I would think of this Weights and Measures Week as perhaps the starting point, the kickoff week for a year

of public information. I simply wish to emphasize particularly the

importance of working with groups like the Parent-Teachers Association and the other local groups, League of Women Voters, for example, American Association of University Women, organizations of

that kind.

And finally, as was suggested yesterday in the Education Committee hearing, I believe there is a very real need for a coordinating committee, so that a good deal of duplication might be avoided.

Mr. Saxders : One point Mr. O'Neill raised is the question as to

the propriety of a weights and measures official devoting time to this

promotion; and essentially to the education of the public about the

weights and measures work. In my opinion this is a valid effort of a

weights and measures official.

Mr. Fuller: We have always taken the position that our work

consists of protecting the public. It goes far beyond the testing of

pumps and scales and making sure they are accurate. So much of the

success of it depends on the cooperation of the public who must be

taught a few things about what to observe, what to look out for, how

to help protect themselves, and, if they find something that is not

right, who to call on.

Our governing board expects us to get out and make public talks,

because they know that the success of the work depends on this

cooperation of the public, and that the public must know what they are

receiving for what they pay; and that they are really getting big

dividends for what it costs for weights and measures work.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Presented by W. A. Kerlin, Chairman, County Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Alameda County, California.

The Committee on Education has had five major projects under

consideration during the past year. They were (1) public education,

(2) self-education for officials, (3) technical training, (4) weights and

measures periodical, and (5) National Weights and Measures Week

1960. For the purpose of open committee discussion, items (1) and

(5) were combined.

1. Public Education and National Weights and Measures Week.—

During the committee meeting it was suggested that either a separate

standing committee or a subcommittee of the Committee on Education

be formed to organize, control, and direct all affairs associated with

the National Weights and Measures Week. Such a committee would

also take under consideration such other matters that pertain to

public relations. The committee recommends that, since this subject

matter pertains to activities normally associated with the Committee

on Education, a special subcommittee be established within this committee. The subcommittee would comprise one member of the

Committee on Education who would serve as its chairman, three

weights and measures officials, and three associate members representing the industry—all members to be appointed to 1-year terms by the

chairman of the Committee on Education.

24
The committee received several suggestions to establish permanent

dates for the observance of National Weights and Measures Week. It

is therefore recommended by the committee to fix the dates of March

1 to 7 for all future observances of National Weights and Measures

Week.

2. Self-Education.—It is the feeling of the committee that selfeducation for weights and measures officials is highly desirable and is

a matter that should be taken advantage of; however, it must be

practiced by the official himself. The committee recommends that all

weights and measures officials take advantage of the many National

Bureau of Standards publications, as well as other publications in

the field of weights and measures administration. In order to be of

assistance in this endeavor, the Committee on Education plans to

compile and distribute a list of publications that are available.

3. Technical Training.—It is the recommendation of the committee

that weights and measures officials should also endeavor to take advantage of the technical training programs offered by the Office of

Weights and Measures of the National Bureau of Standards. One

training program that is already in existence offers training schools

of short duration which are conducted by members of the staff of

the Office of Weights and Measures within a jurisdiction. A second

program, involving a new technical training laboratory, is soon to be

established at the National Bureau of Standards. This program is

to be directed to supervisors and training officers from a jurisdiction,

as described earlier in the meeting by Dr. Astin.

4. Weights and Measures Periodical.—During the past year the

Committee on Education has diligently explored the possibility of

obtaining a publisher for a national weights and measures periodical.

Due to the limited circulation that would be involved, it was found

that none of the recognized publishers that were contacted were interested in undertaking such a publication. There is now before the

committee a suggestion to find someone within the ranks of weights

and measures who has writing and editorial ability and an intimate

knowledge of weights and measures administration to undertake this

project. The committee hopes to find such a person who may be

interested and available. It is recommended, therefore, that the

possibility of publishing a national weights and measures periodical

be pursued during the following year with the hope that by next

year a definite recommendation may be made.

5. Other Matters.—The committee has been advised that the Scale

Manufacturers Association is preparing a small illustrated booklet

of suggestions on the selection, installation, and maintenance of

motortruck scales. Since this booklet contains information of interest to weights and measures officials, it was suggested that the National

Conference on Weights and Measures give its endorsement to the

contents of this booklet. A statement to this effect would appear on

the cover of the booklet. It is the consensus of the committee that

such a booklet is in the best interests of weights and measures, and

that it would be perfectly proper for the Conference to give its

endorsement. It is so recommended.

Dr. Leland J. Gordon has informed the committee that he has

compiled a national directory of weights and measures officials. This

directory is now available at a nominal charge. Inquiries may be

25
directed to Dr. Lelancl J. Gordon, Director, Weights and Measures

Eesearch Center, Denison University, Granville, Ohio.

The Committee on Education solicits all members to bring to the

attention of the committee any matter that may be considered during

the following year which would be of interest to the members of

this Conference.

W. A. Kerlix, Chairman

T. C. Harris, Jr.

I. M. Levy

J. E. Mahoxey

J. F. True

(On motion of the committee chairman, seconded from the floor, the report

of the Conference Committee on Education was adopted by a show of hands.)

REPORT OF SPECIAL FLOUR COMMITTEE

Presented by R. E. Meek, Chairman, Director, Division of Weights and Measures,

State Board of Health, State of Indiana

During his address to the 43d National Conference on Weights and

Measures, Conference President A. V. Astin, Director of the Xational

Bureau of Standards, suggested the establishment of a committee of

the Conference to study further the matter of quantity control, under

appropriate State laws, of packages of flour. In response to this suggestion, the report of the Executive Committee of the Conference included the following item

In line with the suggestion of the Conference President, the Executive Committee recommends that the President appoint a special committee, for a term

not to exceed 2 years, to further study the packaged-flour situation and report

its findings to the Conference.

In accordance with the President's further suggestion, the Executive Committee recommended that such a new Flour Committee seek

the assistance of, and work closely with, the Association of Food and

Drug Officials of the United States, the Federal Food and Drug

Administration, and the National Bureau of Standards.

The recommendations of the Executive Committee were adopted by

the Conference, and a special Flour Committee was set up. One of

the members appointed to this committee was Mr. E. L. Randall of

Xevada, who is currently President of the Association of Food and

Drug Officials of the United States. Technical consultation from

the Federal Food and Drug Administration has been supplied by Mr.

Lowrie M. Beacham, Assistant Director, Division of Food, Bureau of

Biological and Physical Sciences, and from the Xational Bureau of

Standards by Dr. A. T. McPherson, Associate Director for

Engineering.

The Executive Committee, in its report to the Conference, noted

that—

The committee desires that the record be clear with respect to the 1955 action

of the National Conference that resulted from an exhaustive study in an honest

attempt to devise a solution to the problem by the first Special Flour Committee.

The Executive Committee emphasizes that its present recommendation is in no

way intended to weaken that action of the National Conference on Weights

and Measures.

The present Special Flour Committee met in Washington on February 24 and 25 for the purpose of again studying the entire problem.

In accordance with the recommendation of the Executive Committee,

26
a committee representing the Millers' National Federation was invited to meet with this committee on February 25. The Federation

committee comprised Mr. Oswald A. Oudal, Chairman, Director,

Products Control, General Mills, Inc.; Mr. Charles E. Joyce, General

Claims Manager, Pillsbury Mills, Inc. ; Mr. John T. Lynch, General

Sales Manager, International Milling Co.; Mr. Samuel H. Eogers,

Jr., Wilkins-Eogers Milling Co., Inc.; Mr. J. J. Sherlock and Mr.

C. L. Mast, Jr., of the Federation's Chicago office; and Mr. Fred

Mewhinney of the Washington office of the Millers' National Federation. This Federation committee participated in an informative discussion, and submitted orally the following definite recommendations

of the milling industry, later confirming them in writing

1. Weights and measures officials should periodically check the weight of

flour at the mill, where packages must be packed full net weight regardless of

moisture content and where shrinkage due to evaporation is not a factor.

2. Beyond the mill the only satisfactory solution to the flour package weight

problem must embrace giving recognition to the effect that change in the moisture content of flour has on the package weight.

Therefore : At any point beyond the mill, moisture content of flour must be

taken into consideration and made a part of the checking procedure whenever

flour packages are checkweighed.

The consensus of the Special Flour Committee is as follows

The matter of correct weights in packages of flour has been a troublesome problem to weights and measures officials for many years.

Flour is one of the many commodities that tend to lose moisture

through evaporation under normal conditions of storage and thus may

be expected to lose weight after leaving the manufacturer or packer.

Obviously the moisture content of flour at the time of packaging and

weighing has a definite effect on the tendency of the product to lose

moisture in storage. The moisture content of flour at time of

packaging may vary from a legal high of 15 percent to a low of about

10 percent.

To afford a reasonable legal control over the accuracy of the quantity

statement on packages of flour, it seems necessary to establish either

(1) a specified standard moisture content at which a package shall

contain full labeled weight, or (2) a definite time at which a package

shall contain full labeled weight. The second of these alternatives

is that accepted in the Federal Food and Drug regulations and in

most State regulations. The committee knows of no instance where

alternative (1) has been placed into effect. The definite time specified

in the Federal Food and Drug regulation is the time that the package

is "introduced into interstate commerce."

Official action with respect to the quantity of contents in packages

of flour has been taken by the National Conference on Weights and

Measures on two previous occasions. In. 1941 the Conference Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities recommended, and the

31st National Conference adopted, a motion to the effect that packaged flour should be full "net weight at the time sold to the retail

merchant." Observance of this same principle was recommended by

the first Special Flour Committee in 1955 and was adopted unanimously by the 40th National Conference.

Although the present Special Flour Committee is in agreement with

the actions of the Conference on these two previous occasions, it recognizes that the action in 1955 was based on what had been assumed by

519003—59 3

27
the committee and the Conference to be a practical and acceptable

working agreement between enforcement officials and the milling industry, and that there might be a legal question as to the statutory

authority of many States, under weights and measures and food laws

currently in effect, to enforce this principle. (This doubt respecting

legal authority was recognized also by the first Special Flour Committee in 1955.

The present committee considers it extremely unfortunate that a

fair trial was not given to the procedure adopted in 1955, based on

the principle of full weight when delivered to the retailer. ^ That

agreement has been repudiated by representatives of the milling industry; therefore, the recommendations of this committee will be

based not on an agreement, but on what is believed to be a firm legal

foundation for a State and local enforcement program.

In order to develop data for study by the committee, the Federal

Food and Drug Administration conducted a comprehensive survey of

flour packages at the mills during the months of November and December 1958. A summary of the results of that survey as prepared

and distributed by the Food and Drug Administration, follows

SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF SURVEY OF FLOUR MILLS

CONDUCTED BY FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION,

NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1958

Total number of mills inspected . 68

Total number of lots of flour weighed 94

(Approx. 50 pkgs. weighed per lot)

Total number of lots found slightly short weight 19

Total number of lots found definitely short weight 1

Results of Inspectors' Weighings (by package size)

Size of package, lbs 25 10 5 2

Number of lots weighed 4_ 9 66 14

Average net wt/pkg. (All 25 lbs, 5.8oz__ 160.88oz__ 80.62 oz__ 32.74 oz. packages)

.

Average of minimum 25 lbs, 0.9 oz__ 159.63 oz__ 79.53 oz__ 32.24 oz. net wt found, each

lot.

Average of maximum 25 lbs, 10.8 oz_ 161.77 oz__ 81.83 oz__ 33.79 oz. net wt found, each

lot.

Number lots short weight 0_ 3 15 1 Average shortage of short

wt lots, percent.

0.36 0.31 1.03

Maximum shortage, percent.

Minimum shortage, percent.

0.87 0.73 1.03

0.10 0.02

SUMMARY OF MILLS' MOISTURE DETERMINATIONS

Percent

Average moisture of flour being packaged 13. 7

Average of minimum moistures reported by mills 12. 8

Average of maximum moistures reported by mills 14.

1

Minimum moisture reported 10. 6

Maximum moisture reported 14. 8

28
The one definitely short-weight lot found in the survey is not included in the above tabulation. This was a lot of 5-lb cloth bags

which was weighed on the same day packed. The average net weight

was 76.02 oz or 5% short weight.

Most of the lots were weighed the same day as packed; approximately 80% had been packed not longer than two days prior to weighing. The two oldest lots (of known age) were 22 and 24 days old.

Both of these lots were up to declared net weight.

The short-weight lots were:

Size package Shortages Size package Shortages

(51b 1 cloth) 4.97 (51b) 0.73

(5 lb 1 paper) 0.15 (51b) 0.16 (0 clays)

(101b 1 cloth) 0.87 0.44 (7 days)

(10 lb) 0.10 (51b) 0.50

(10 lb) 0.10 (51b) 0.35

(51b) 0.07 (51b) 0.24

(21b) 1.03 (51b) 0.09

(51b) 0.07 (51b) 0.02

(51b) 0.40 (51b) 0.62

(51b) 0.66 (51b) 0.09

Approximately 10 percent of the flour mills in the United States have

been covered by this survey. Mills of all sizes were covered. Twenty-four

different States were represented in the sample.

The committee points out that all of the packages of flour weighed

in this survey were weighed at the mill and before the flour had been

introduced into interstate commerce. ]STo allowance for moisture

loss is permitted under the Federal Food and Drug Law and Regulations until "after" the package "is introduced into interstate commerce." It seems evident, based on the data developed in this survey,

that certain flour mills have not been complying fully with the re- quirements of the Federal law. (The committee makes note of the

fact that the results of this survey conform very closely to the results

of the survey made by weights and measures officials for the first

Special Flour Committee in 1955.)

After careful consideration and lengthy discussion of the two

recommendations made by the milling industry and of all other

suggestions, the committee has arrived at two tentative conclusions.

(1) It would not be practical at this time to attempt to establish a

"specified" standard moisture content for flour—a standard to serve

as the reference basis for net-weight statements. (Such a step undoubtedly would require changes in the Federal Food and Drug Law

and Regulations and in many State laws and regulations.) (2) State

and local weights and measures officials cannot properly recognize a

loss in weight of prepackaged flour before the package is introduced

into intrastate commerce—that is, before the package comes under

the jurisdiction of the State law—even though such loss in weight

may have been caused by ordinary and customary exposure of the

package prior to the time of introduction into intrastate commerce.

The present Special Flour Committee submits for the consideration

of the 44th National Conference on Weights and Measures two basic

recommendations and seven specific recommendations. The two basic

recommendations are as follows

1. It is recommended that no action be taken relative to a standard moisture

content for flour, but that weights and measures officials continue to give this

suggested solution their careful consideration, not only for flour, but for the

many other commodities posing similar moisture-loss problems.

29
2. It is recommended that the 44th National Conference on Weights and

Measures endorse and encourage the States to adopt a program of enforcement,

relative to prepackaged flour in particular and all prepackaged items in general,

based on the Model State Law on Weights and Measures, the Model Regulation

for Package Marking Requirements, and the Uniform State Food, Drug and

Cosmetic Bill.

To assist in the implementation of the second basic recommendation,

and to assure complete legality of the program in any given jurisdiction, the committee urges that all State and local weights and

measures and food and drug officials examine thoroughly and completely their laws, ordinances, and regulations. Whenever it is determined that such laws, ordinances, or regulations are not thoroughly

appropriate to provide adequate legal support for the recommended

action, it is strongly recommended that necessary amendments be

prepared, offered, and supported without delay.

In order to further clarify the intended meaning of the Model Law

and Model Regulation, and in order to be of maximum assistance to

the enforcement official in expediting the placing in effect of the

program, the present Special Flour Committee has offered, for the

consideration of the Conference Committee on Laws and Regulations

and ultimate adoption by the 44th National Conference on Weights

and Measures, the following proposed amendments to the Model Law

and Model Package Marking Regulation : Section 19, of the Model State Law on Weights and Measures (Form

2) currently reads as follows : SEC. 19. SAME: DECLARATIONS ON PACKAGES.—That except as otherwise provided in this Act, any commodity in package form shall bear on the

outside of the package a definite, plain, and conspicuous declaration of (1) the

net quantity of the contents in terms of weight, measure, or count, and (2) in

the case of any package not sold on the premises where packed, the name and

place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor : Provided, That

the qualifying term "when packed" or words of similar import, shall not be

used in connection with the declaration required under clause (1) : And provided further, That under clause (1) the superintendent shall by regulation,

establish reasonable variations or tolerances to be allowed, and also exemptions

as to small packages.

The current Special Flour Committee recommends that Section

26 of the revised version be made to read essentially as follows

SEC. 26. SAME: DECLARATIONS OF QUANTITY AND ORIGIN ON

PACKAGES; TOLERANCES; EXEMPTIONS.—That except as otherwise provided in this Act, any commodity in package form introduced or delivered for

introduction into or received in intrastate commerce, kept for the purpose of

sale or offered or exposed for sale in intrastate commerce, shall bear on the

outside of the package a definite, plain, and conspicuous declaration of (1)

the net quantity of the contents in terms of weight, measure, or count, and

(2) in the case of any package not sold on the premises where packed, the

name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor : Provided, That in connection with the declaration required under clause (1),

neither the qualifying term "when packed" or any words of similar import,

nor any term qualifying a unit of weight, measure, or count (for example,

"jumbo," "giant," "full," and the like) that tends to exaggerate the amount

of commodity in a package, shall be used : And provided further, That under

clause (1) the superintendent shall, by regulation, establish (a) reasonable

variations or tolerances to be allowed, which may include variations below the

declared weight or measure caused by ordinary and customary exposure, only

after the commodity is introduced into intrastate commerce, to conditions that

normally occur in good distribution practice and that unavoidably result in

decreased weight or measure, (b) exemptions as to small packages, and (c)

exemptions as to commodities put up in variable weights or sizes for sale to

the consumer intact and either customarily not sold as individual units or customarily weighed or measured at time of sale to the consumer.

30
The committee also recommends that a new section be added to

the Model Law, to be appropriately placed and numbered, to read

as follows : [Note : See Sec. 1 (7) of the revised version.]

SEC.—. The term "intrastate commerce" shall be construed to mean any

and all commerce or trade that is begun, carried on, and completed wholly

within the limits of the State. [This definition conforms to that given in

Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition.]

Paragraphs (i) and (j) (1) of the Model State Regulation for

Package Marking Requirements currently read as follows:

(i) Where the statement expresses the minimum quantity, no variation below

the stated minimum shall be permitted except variations below the stated

weight or measure caused by ordinary and customary exposure, after the commodity is sold and delivered by the manufacturer, packer, or distributor, to

conditions which normally occur in good distribution practice and which

unavoidably result in decreased weight or measure. Variations above the

stated minimum shall not be unreasonably large.

(j) Where the statement does not express the minimum quantity

(1) variations from the stated weight or measure shall be permitted when

caused by ordinary and customary exposure, after the commodity is sold and

delivered by the manufacturer, packer, or distributor, to conditions which nor- mally occur in good distribution practice and which unavoidably result in

change of weight or measure.

The committee recommends that paragraphs (i) and (j)(l) of

the Model State Regulation for Package Marking Requirements be

amended to read as follows

(i) Where the statement expresses the minimum quantity, no variation below

the stated minimum shall be permitted except variations below the stated

weight or measure caused by ordinary and customary exposure, after the

commodity is introduced into intrastate commerce, to conditions that normally

occur in good distribution practice and that unavoidably result in decreased

weight or measure. Variations above the stated minimum shall not be

unreasonably large.

(j) Where the statement does not express the minimum quantity

(1) Variations from the stated weight or measure shall be permitted when

caused by ordinary and customary exposure, after the commodity is introduced

into intrastate commerce, to conditions that normally occur in good distribution

practice and that unavoidably result in change of weight or measure.

The seven specific recommendations of the committee are as follows : —It is recommended that

1. Every State and local jurisdiction initiate and maintain a comprehensive

enforcement program based on the principle that packages of flour shall contain

full net weight when introduced into intrastate commerce.

2. Flour packages shall be so packed that at any time prior to, and at the time

of introduction into, intrastate commerce, the packages will be full net weight

as defined in paragraph (j) (2) of the Model Regulation for Package Marking

Requirements.

3. Weights and measures officers shall recognize as reasonable and proper any

shortage from declared weight that results from the unavoidable loss of moisture

from flour packages stored under reasonable conditions after introduction into

intrastate commerce.

4. Where possible, weights and measures officers, as a practical enforcement

procedure, concentrate their check-weighing of flour packages largely at the

31
distributor level—that is, at the warehouses of mills, jobbers, distributors, and

store chains. In a majority of instances this will be prior to introduction into

intrastate commerce and moisture content is not a matter for consideration.

When check-weighing at retail outlets, any shortages found are to be considered

in relation to average warehouse weights for similar packages of the same brand

of flour before the packages are introduced into intrastate commerce, and, if

the magnitudes of the shortages do not exceed what the weights and measures

official determines to be a reasonable moisture loss, the packages should be

treated as satisfactory for sale. Moisture determinations can be resorted to

if required, but usually should be unnecessary. (If moisture determinations

are made, these should be made in accordance with the standard procedure

established by the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.

)

5. If and when short-weight packages of flour are discovered prior to or at

the time of introduction into intrastate commerce, or when unreasonably large

shortages are found after introduction into intrastate commerce, appropriate

legal action should be taken. ( Such legal action may take the form of ordering

the packages off sale, prosecution, or both.

)

6. For use in the check-weighing program, a series of average tare weights

should be determined for each brand and each package size, and these should

be verified from time to time. In setting up such a list of average tare

weights, it is suggested that the mean of the actual tare weights of the lightest

and heaviest packages of a sample representing a lot be used if these two tare

weights are found to be in good agreement; otherwise, a greater number of

actual tare weights should be determined to arrive at an acceptable average.

7. Local officials should work as closely as possible with their State office in

effectuating this program.

[A practical step-by-step guide for a package control program will

be found in National Bureau of Standards Handbook 67, Checking

Prepackaged Commodities.]

It will be noted that the recommendations of this committee and

those of the first Special Flour Committee differ in only minor

respects. Under normal progress in commerce, the actual time of

introduction into intrastate commerce will coincide generally with

delivery to the retail outlet. Only in special circumstances will there

be any differences, and these normally will not be significant. The

committee is convinced that the procedures recommended by the first

Special Flour Committee and adopted by the 40th National Conference on Weights and Measures were realistic, practical, workable,

and fair to the producers, marketers, and consumers of flour.

There is offered below a bibliography of recent National Conference

on Weights and Measures consideration of the flour package problem.

The committee recommends that weights and measures officials study

carefully each of the items listed.

Report of Conference Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, by

Alex Pisciotta, Chairman, page 121 NBS Miscellaneous Publications 170, Report

of the 31st National Conference on Weights and Measures.

Flour Weights, by Herman Fakler, Vice President, Millers' National Federation, page 32 NBS Miscellaneous Publication 209, Report of the 38th National

Conference on Weights and Measures.

Report of Special Flour Committee, by J. P. McBride, Chairman, page 58

NBS Miscellaneous Publication 212, Report of the 39th National Conference on

Weights and Measures.

Report of Special Flour Committee, by J. P. McBride, Chairman, page 87

NBS Miscellaneous Publication 216, Report of the 40th National Conference

on Weights and Measures.

32
The committee reiterates that its recommendations are based on

the legal concept that the authority of State and local weights and

measures officials, under the police power of the State, extends only

to the borders of the State and that the States do have the authority

to exercise control over commodities in package form in intrastate

commerce. Any enforcement program designed for the control of

quantity in prepackaged merchandise must, therefore, be such as to

require compliance with law after such commodities come within

the jurisdiction of the State, and the person responsible for introducing a commodity into intrastate commerce is liable to the State.

The committee is convinced that its recommendations are in harmony with the Federal laws and regulations in this field and that

they are reasonable and acceptable within the intended meaning of a

large majority of existing State weights and measures and food and

drug laws and regulations.

It is the unanimous conviction of the committee that, should State

and local weights and measures officers recognize moisture loss in

prepackaged commodities when such moisture loss occurs before the

packages enter the jurisdiction of the State, the entire package-control program of the State would collapse.

The committee met in open session at the headquarters hotel, as

scheduled, and is appreciative of the many contributions during that

meeting.

Prior to the scheduled open meeting, the committee received from

the Millers' National Federation Flour Committee a series of recommendations, as follows

1. The flour milling industry will pack flour so as to assure full average net

weight at the time and place of first delivery from the mill.

2. At any time and place after this first delivery, recognition shall be given to

and tolerance allowed for moisture loss.

It is the consensus of the committee that these suggestions of the

industry must be rejected, and it is so recommended. Any such

"agreement" would be without basis of legal substantiation and would

not provide a satisfactory solution to the problem at hand.

The committee has discussed the language of the regulations pertaining to quantities of packages that have been promulgated under

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and is of the unanimous

opinion that these should be amended by the Federal Government

in order to bring about better Federal-State cooperation on packages

shipped in interstate commerce. The regulations presently allow

variations in quantity of contents of packages such as are caused by

losses of moisture and consequent losses of quantity after the packages have been introduced into interstate commerce.

The authority of the Federal act generally applies any time after

introduction of packages into interstate commerce. Accordingly, the

committee urges that the Federal Food and Drug Administration

take immediate steps to amend "quantity" regulations so as to bring

then into line with the concepts presented in the tentative report of

the Special Flour Committee.

The committee further urges that the Commissioner of Food and

Drugs keep the State and local weights and measures officials fully

informed of progress of this nature, particularly of any hearings that

have been or are to be scheduled.

33
The Special Flour Committee feels that it has discharged its obligation and fulfilled its responsibilities and recommends that the

committee be abolished.

R. E. Meek, Chairman

T. C. Harris, Jr.

C. L. Jackson

J. P. McBride

E. L. Randall

L. M. Beacham, Consultant

A. T. McPherson, Consultant

W. S. Bussey, Secretary

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING REPORT

Mr. Oudal: Mr. Chairman, members of the National Conference

on Weights and Measures. As indicated, I am appearing in the

capacity of Chairman of the Millers' National Federation Flour

Committee. First of all, let me express to your Chairman and also

to you my appreciation, both personally and on behalf of our committee, for the opportunity to appear.

Our committee met with your Special Flour Committee the latter

part of February of this year. At that time we presented certain

proposals. About a month ago we received a copy of the tentative

report, which indicated that the proposals we had presented were

declined. Subsequent to that, we have submitted an additional proposal, and in addition have submitted to your committee a report of

our review of the tentative report and of our most recent suggestions.

We have requested this audience in order that this Conference be

kept fully informed as to all aspects of this difficult problem and so

that you are fully aware of the very recent proposals made by the

milling industry in the hope of assisting in resolving this problem.

I should like, therefore, at this time to read to you verbatim a copy

of our reply to the tentative report which was placed in the hands of

your committee very recently—within the past week to 10 days : The flour milling industry requested the 43d National Conference on Weights

and Measures held in June of 1958 to reconsider the flour weight problem.

This new request was made principally because there was good reason to

believe that moisture content of flour could be made a part of the package

check-weighing consideration. This hope received further stimulus in the

address made to the Conference last year by President Dr. A. V. Astin, Director of the National Bureau of Standards.

In his address Dr. Astin commented, "I am recommending that the Conference restudy this situation specifically with respect to the still unsolved

matter of flour packaging and more generally with respect to all problems

where a change in moisture content is of importance." He indicated that

much of the confusion that now exists is due to inadequate techniques of

instrumentation for establishing moisture test methods. He further stated,

"This condition will continue to exist until we quit guessing about moisture

content and actually measure moisture content. The National Bureau of

Standards would be happy to provide technical assistance in resolving the

measurement aspects of this problem, if it is the desire of the Conference."

Your Special Flour Committee has considered this problem and formulated

a tentative report. Our Millers' National Federation Flour Committee has

reviewed this report carefully. "We are disappointed in that our request that

moisture content of flour be made a part of the check-weighing procedure was

declined. However, it is encouraging to note that the matter will continue to

receive consideration by weights and measures officials.

After carefully considered thought covering all aspects of the flour weight

problem, our committee is prepared to suggest a new approach which hope34
fully could lead to a satisfactory solution. This proposal is made with the

request that the present tentative report be delayed, or that it be amended

before it is sent to the Conference floor. In addition, we suggest that the change

proposed in section 26 of the tentative report of the Committee on Laws and

Regulations be deleted or amended.

Before outlining our proposal we shall take the liberty of commenting on

the more significant items in the tentative report of your committee as we

view them. These comments are admittedly critical but outline our reasons

for suggesting the delay or amending of the report in its present form.

1. The report states that it is "extremely unfortunate that a fair trial was

not given to the procedure adopted in 1955 based on the principle of full weight

when delivered to the retailer." This is not borne out by the record. The

experience of but one of the major milling companies in this country shows

otherwise. Since the Special Flour Report of 1955 was made, this one mill has

been exposed to over a hundred separate incidents in a dozen or more States

throughout the country where flour was condemned for short weight at retail

level. These incidents involved only retail stores and there was no evidence

that any attempt was made to determine if the flour was full weight when

delivered to the retailer, neither was there any allowance for tolerances due

to moisture loss after delivery to the retail store as recommended in the 1955

report. Combining similar experiences of other mills provides ample evidence

that the flour milling industry had given the whole matter a "fair trial" but

could not begin to comply with certain of the recommendations in the original

report.

2. The report indicates that State weights and measures officials cannot

properly recognize a loss in weight of prepackaged flour before the package

is introduced into intrastate commerce—that is, before the package comes under

the jurisdiction of State law.

If our interpretation is correct, this would mean that the State weight inspector could not check flour, or take legal action, if weight discrepancies were

noted at warehouse or jobber level where flour usually would not have entered

the intrastate commerce phase. We doubt that such restriction would be valid,

nor is intended. If it were, this would then be in conflict with recommendation

No. 4 which suggests concentration of check-weighing at warehouse level where

again in many, perhaps most, instances the intrastate commerce phase would

not have become applicable.

3. It is indicated that after flour enters the intrastate commerce phase

weights and measures officers shall recognize as reasonable and proper any

shortage from declared weight that results from the unavoidable loss of moisture from flour packages stored under reasonable conditions. It is also indicated that, if necessary, moisture determinations could be made to establish the

validity of these shortages, although it would be generally unnecessary to

do so. It is usually claimed that it is not practical or possible for weight inspectors

to arrange for moisture determinations. We realize that this is difficult to

do and may be impractical in some jurisdictions, yet it is indicated that such

analyses could be made after flour enters the intrastate commerce phase, if

necessary to do so. If this information can be obtained at this point, it should

be equally possible to make similar determinations at other points such as

the wholesale or jobber level. In addition, the National Bureau of Standards

has offered its assistance in devising ways and means of taking moisture content

into consideration.

4. The Special Flour Committee urges that amendments be made to the Model

Law to incorporate the intrastate commerce approach and to provide what

has been construed to be the "intended" meaning of the Model Law. It is

further recommended that existing State laws and regulations be changed to

be in harmony with the suggested modifications for the Model Law.

We believe that this recommendation is inconsistent with one of the major

objectives of the National Conference, which is to promote uniformity and

standardization of weights and measures practices.

Of greater import is the question of the legality of this approach. It is the

opinion of our industry and corporate counsel that this recommended change

is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and therefore unconstitutional and void in that

1. The recommended measures would violate the due process and equal

protection provisions of the 14th amendment, and

35
2. The recommended measures would impose an undue burden on interstate

commerce.

This could well mean that unless this reference in the tentative report is

amended, it might ultimately require a court opinion for final solution. This

is not the preferred procedure by the milling industry, and we feel certain it

is equally undesirable to weights and measures officials. We would therefore

like to offer a new proposal that we believe will better serve our own and

weights and measures interests.

Our proposal involves commitments and obligations on the part of both the

milling industry and by weights and measures officials. We propose the following : 1. The flour milling industry will package flour so as to assure full average

net weight at the time and place of first delivery from the mill.

2. At any time and place after this first delivery recognition shall be given

to and tolerance allowed for moisture loss.

We have assurances from the leaders in the flour milling industry that this

obligation and agreement will be honored on the premise that weights and

measures officials will likewise abide by this agreement and honor their obligations involved.

It would be expected that this proposal will be made effective when and if

it is formally approved and adopted by the National Conference on Weights

and Measures officials.

We respectfully urge and request favorable consideration and action by your

Special Flour Committee and subsequently by the National Conference.

The Millers' National Federation Flour Committee is ready to discuss this

proposal further if desired and will be at your disposal.

That concludes the formal report or letter of communications as it

was addressed to your Flour Committee.

We sincerely regret that in their report to this Conference your

committee recommends that our proposal be declined. In fairness

to your committee it should be said that the proposal has been in

their hands for consideration for a very short time—approximately

a week. It is entirely possible, therefore, that lack of time has not

permitted adequate study of the significance and the potential advantages of the proposal. We can see no valid reason for rejecting

our proposal. We have been told by many of you on occasions in

the past that the whole flour problem could be resolved if the mills

would, and I might say, "put a little more flour in the bag." This in

effect is what is now offered, not because we feel it is obligatory on

the part of the milling industry ; it is done entirely in the spirit of

cooperative effort. By establishing a reference point that has a rea- sonable chance of being practical, everyone concerned could benefit.

There is really nothing for weights and measures officials particularly to lose. We do not make any reference to nor recommendation

toward changing any existing laws in any way.

We urge that this Conference give very careful thought to the

reports submitted and avoid any hasty action, and we would respectfully suggest that the report be delayed until such time as each of

you individually and collectively has had an opportunity to study

the import of both the tentative and the final reports of your Special

Flour Committee, as well as to carefully review the potential benefits

indicated in the proposal made. We think it could go a long way

toward resolving the present problem.

Mr. R. E. Meek : Gentlemen, first I want to express my appreciation

to the representative of the Millers' National Federation. Over a week

ago Mr. Oudal called me from Minnesota and asked me for an appointment in Indianapolis to discuss the proposal. Mr. Oudal, Mr. Joyce,

and Mr. Sherlock, representing the Federation, came to discuss this

36
problem. We did discuss it at some length. My personal thinking

was that they had made a concession.

Immediately upon their return to Minnesota they prepared the

statement Mr. Oudal just read. I received copies of their statement

on Friday morning a week ago. I had it in the mail, special delivery

to the committee within 15 or 20 minutes. And the committee has

had it since that time, and has given very careful consideration to

the suggestions proposed.

The committee did decline to accept the proposals on several, Ave

think, very good grounds, one of which was that it was an agreement

somewhat similar to what we thought was in effect in 1955 when

the original Flour Committee's report was accepted by the Conference ; it was an agreement that they were in no position to assure us

that all flour millers of the United States would comply with. After

all, not all millers belong to the Federation. So we felt that it was

necessary that we recommend a procedure that could be backed by

law.

The second reason wT as that, since it was a concession in that it did

offer an assurance of full- weight flour to the first point of delivery,

the committee felt that, if the flour millers of this country could go

that far, they could go all the way and assure full weight at the

time the flour is introduced into intrastate commerce.

So for two very good reasons, the committee felt that we could

not accept the proposals.

It is to be admitted by this committee that moisture in flour is

a problem. It also is a problem in many, many other food products.

If the principle espoused by the Federation is true, and if the rights

and the privileges they ask under the proposal were to be granted,

we see no reason why weights and measures officials should not give

to all packagers and processors of food the same privileges. The

committee felt very strongly on this point and felt that to go along

with it would mean that we would lose control over the weights of

prepacked merchandise at the time—particularly foods—that these

enter intrastate commerce.

The committee also recognizes that there is a question as to the legality of this particular recommendation. On the other hand, our

attorneys could not find a specific case which has ever been tried

before the higher courts of this country where the decision would

contradict our recommendations. Cases have been cited pro and con

which would seem to substantiate or reject this position, so that Ave,

no more than the Millers' Federation, know for sure whether this is

sound.

There is a possibility that the Federal Food and Drug Administration will at least consider changing its regulations so that the Federal Government will then require what the committee recommends

the State require. We do not know, of course, what attitude the

Federal Food and Drug Administration will take, but they do have

that right, because after all the point at issue is a regulation adopted

by the Federal Food and Drug Administration and is not an enactment of our Congress.

Again I should like to repeat, the flour millers have agreed in their

alternate report of suggested recommendations that ^ they would put

more flour in the bags to assure delivery of full weight flour at the

first point of delivery, and we as a committee believe that, if they do

37
that, they will largely eliminate the problem. Very little, if any,

more flour, In our opinion, would have to be added to assure the delivery of full- weight flour at the time it enters intrastate commerce.

We know there are exceptions. For instance, if flour millers ship

flour from Minnesota to Indiana, we know there will be a little loss,

but I am informed rather reliably that the greater loss in moisture

in flour occurs in the earliest exposure; so I do not believe that the

problem is as great as is being made out here.

I would again like to support the committee's recommendations.

Mr. Leithauser: Mr. Meek, if I understand you right, you said

you do not know whether this recommendation is on sound ground

or not. Is that true ? Mr. Meek: In our opinion, the committee recommendation definitely is sound, but there is a division of thinking between the weights

and measures officials, on the one hand, and the millers, on the other

hand, as to whether or not it is. The committee feels that it is on

sound ground.

Mr. Leithauser : Has the committee consulted competent authority

to determine whether the recommendation is legally sound?

Mr. Meek: The commitee would not have made this recommendation had it not thought it was on sound ground. We respect the

views of the Federation. They think we are not. But our committee

does think we are on sound ground. And I will assure you that we

have discussed this with competent attorneys, legal staffs, and we

believe, on the basis of information we have received, that we are on

sound gromid, and it is equally true that the millers have consulted

their attorneys and they think we are not. But the committee feels

that we are on sound ground and so recommends.

(On motion of the committee chairman, seconded from the floor, the report

of the Special Flour Committee was adopted by voice vote.)

38
THIRD SESSION—MORNING OF WEDNESDAY,

JUNE 10, 1959

(H. M. Turrell, Vice Chairman, Presiding)

REPORT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Presented by C. M. FULLER, Chairman, County Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Los Angeles County, California

The Executive Committee held an open meeting during the morning of Monday, June 8, to supplement the correspondence carried on

since the last National Conference. Items presented as recommendations of the committee to the Conference are listed below.

1. International Yard and Pound.—The Executive Committee notes

with wholehearted approval the agreement by the Director of the

National Bureau of Standards with the heads of the National Laboratories of other English-speaking nations to establish an international

yard and an international pound and thus to take a definite step

toward international uniformity in units of weights and measures.

The committee congratulates the Conference President on this action

and is requesting the Conference Committee on Resolutions to present

a resolution urging the Congress of the United States to take forthright action in compliance with Constitutional provision and fix by

statute these and other national standards of weights and measures.

2. Conference Registration Fees.—As has been the custom for

many years, the Executive Committee, at its Friday morning session

during the 43d National Conference, voted unanimously to establish

the registration fee for the 44th Conference at $10. A question was

raised concerning the authority of the Executive Committee to take

such action, since the Conference Organization and Procedure adopted

in 1957 does not specifically charge the Executive Committee with

this responsibility. It is the opinion of the committee that it does

have such authority. However, since the Organization and Procedure does not deal specifically with this important point, your committee feels that it should be made specific by a vote of the Conference.

The committee recommends, therefore, that the following motion be

adopted

The incoming Executive Committee elected at any National Conference is

specifically authorized to hold a business session before the adjournment of

that Conference. This meeting may be held at mealtime, and the Conference

Treasurer is authorized to pay for said meal. In addition to the duties and

authority outlined in the Conference Organization and Procedure, the Executive

Committee is specifically authorized to establish the amount of the registration

fee for the Conference for which it has been elected to serve.

DISCUSSION ON ITEM 2

Mr. Kennedy: The committee reports that a question was raised

concerning the authority of the Executive Committee to establish

the registration fee for the Conference. That question was raised

by me. It is my opinion that, since the Conference's Organization

and Procedure adopted in 1957 is silent on the point of registration

fees, that document should be amended to include such provision. I

would have no objection to an amendment charging the Executive

39
Committee with the responsibility, but I do not feel that a simple

action by the Conference is adequate. The Organization and Procedure specifies that "proposals for changes in organization or procedure of the Conference are not acted upon until the meeting of

the Conference following the meeting at which such proposal is

made."

I am opposed to the authorization by the Conference for the

payment of meals for the members of the Executive Committee.

Mr. Fuller: The reference to the meal in the committee recommendation is to a breakfast that has been held customarily the morning of the last day of the Conference. This is about the only time

that the newly elected Executive Committee can be gotten together

to discuss the plans for the succeeding Conference and is in my

opinion proper and appropriate. As to the authority of the Executive Committee to establish the amount of the registration fee for

the Conference for which it has been elected to serve, this has been

accepted as the responsibility of the Executive Committee for many,

many years. Since the Organization and Procedure is silent on this

point, it certainly appears that precedent should prevail and the

group elected to make plans for a Conference be authorized to establish the fees to cover the expenses of the Conference. That is the

recommendation of the Executive Committee.

Mr. Kennedy : Would you accept as an amendment to your motion

that the 44th National Conference ratify the action of the Executive

Committee which met in 1958 and established the registration fee of

$10 and, further, that the following amendment be made to the

Organization and Procedure of the Conference? "The incoming

Executive Committee elected at any National Conference is specifically authorized to hold a business session before the adjournment

of that Conference."

Mr. Fuller: I cannot accept such an amendment because this is

a report of the committee and I am not authorized to change that

report, and further it would not in my mind be proper to confuse

the committee report by a proposed amendment to the Organization

and Procedure.

(On a voice vote, the Chair ruled that item 2 had been adopted by the Conference. At the request of a delegate, a standing vote was called for and the

recommendation of the committee carried by the vote 59 to 0.

)

3. New States.—The committee expresses its pleasure that the National Bureau of Standards presented in impressive ceremony a set

of weights and measures standards to the new State, Alaska, and commends the Bureau for this act. The committee recommends that the

Bureau plan to make a like presentation to the new State, Hawaii, and

that this ceremony of presentation be held during the 45th National

Conference on Weights and Measures in order than many State

and local weights and measures officials and their associates in business and industry may attend. A resolution to this effect has been

transmitted to the Conference Committee on Resolutions for

consideration.

4. Official Conference Travel.—The Executive Committee has explored the matter of necessary travel of certain of its committees on

behalf of the Conference. For example, it occasionally is necessary

for a standing or special committee of the Conference to meet on a

40
matter that cannot be otherwise resolved. The Executive Committee

has established a plan whereby the chairman, four vice chairmen,

and treasurer make up a Travel Finance Committee. This committee

may authorize and approve in advance the payment of travel costs,

including transportation and per diem at the Federal Government

rate, for necessary travel and only to the limit of funds available.

The Executive Committee recommends approval by the Conference

body of this Executive Committee action.

5. Publication Policy of the National Bureau of Standards regarding Weights and Measures Publications.—The committee is of the

unanimous opinion that the splendid progress made toward achieving

the desired uniformity in State laws, administration, and inspection

methods during the last half century has been largely due to the cooperative program developed by the National Bureau of Standards.

The Bureau's employees have been and are recognized authorities in

the many phases of weights and measures supervision and administration. Their publications, which have always had the unqualified

recommendation of the Bureau and the endorsement of this Conference, serve as vital guides to State and local weights and measures

officials. Handbook 11, Weights and Measures Administration, for

example, was first issued in 1927, reissued as Handbook 26 in 1941,

and a new edition is now being prepared.

The methods of administration as recommended in this handbook

are basic and right. They have never been questioned. They have

withstood the test of time.

The committee unaimously recommends that the publications policy

of the Office of Weights and Measures continue on the same basis that

has proved so very effective in the past and that the revision of Handbook 26 be prepared and published as soon as practicable.

The committee appreciates the opportunity to serve the Conference

and is grateful for the cooperation of Dr. Astin and Dr. McPherson

of the National Bureau of Standards and of the members of the Conference who have aided in its deliberations.

(On motion of the committee chairman, seconded from the floor, the report

of the Executive Committee was adopted by voice vote.

)

COMMUNICATIONS IN WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ENFORCEMENT

By W. C. Boyd, Chief, Sanitary Bedding Section, Division of Weights

and Measures, State Board of Health, State of Indiana

Communication is an art as old as mankind, but unfortunately it is

becoming a "lost art" in our modern business world. The world

grows smaller each day through the magic of electronics, and yet

people working for the same organization are strangers to the organization's purposes, procedures, and goals. Management lias come

to the realization that an organization cannot become more effective

than the communications skill that coordinates its efforts. As a result, American business and industry spent an estimated $112 million in the past year to learn how to communicate more efficiently.

What is communication? One author has said, "Communication

is 'saying' dressed up in its Sunday best." The dictionary gives

several meanings : "To share in" ; "To give to another" ; "The exchange

41
of thoughts, opinion and ide*as." In Social Science, communication

is the transmission of a message—a message that carries ideas, information, and other values. The basic problem in communication is

to convey the message in such a maimer that it will be understood

precisely as intended.

In all, there are 27 methods of exchanging information. Most of

these are limited substitutes for face-to- face discussion. In the early

days of American business, individual enterprises were small enough

to permit man-to-man discussion of personal and administrative

problems. Today, due to business and industrial expansion, these

personal discussions are not usually practical. Consequently, communications now involve more time and people than does any other

single administrative activity. In fact, the average administrator

spends 90 percent of his time talking, writing, or listening, all of

which are a part of the communication process.

Weights and measures administration in the United States has,

through the years, kept pace with business and industrial growth.

This fact is adequately illustrated by the attendance records of the

National Conference. In 1905, an organization, now known as the

National Conference on Weights and Measures, met at the National

Bureau of Standards. This first meeting was attended by 11 delegates, one of whom was an equipment manufacturer. Last year, the

National Conference had a total registered attendance of 424. Of

this number, 178 associate members represented manufacturers of

weighing and measuring equipment, trade associations, business and

industry. Operating as we do, with the Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards, providing technical services,

information and advice, and with State and local officials engaged in

enforcement work, it is essential that we maintain a uniformity of

purpose, procedure, and program. To this end, we too use communications, and, like business and industry, we have turned to< social

science to learn more about effective communication.

You will recall that our basic problem is to convey our ideas,

thoughts, and information in such a way that our message will be

understood precisely as intended. In personal discussions of a mutual

problem, we not only hear the message, but we can depend on the

speaker's tone of voice, inflections, and actions to convey his intent.

If misunderstanding or misperception occur, we can continue the

discussion until a mutual understanding exists.

Conversely, written communications are similar to the telegraph.

Once transmitted, the message is beyond the sender's control. What

the message means to the person receiving it, the attention he gives

it, and his response to it will depend on the effectiveness of the content and the method of transmission. The effectiveness of our dayto-day communications can be improved simply by applying certain

practical principles that are the result of extensive research in the

field of human motivation.

Every individual is the center of a communication network.

People and things constantly seek his attention. You want him to

pay attention to your message, but you can't make him if he doesn't

want to ; not even if you pay him. Plenty of people go to sleep or

day-dream on company time. There has to be a reason for the person

to pay attention—an incentive—and there can be if you will create it.

42
Social scientists have proven conclusively that every individual,

regardless of his station in life, is motivated by four basic urges or

"rewards." These are:

(1) Social Response: The desire to belong; to be a member of the team.

(2) Security: A job, a pay check, freedom from fear, doubt, or want.

(3) Recognition: Self-esteem, pride, the desire to be "somebody" ; also called

"ego."

(4) New Experience: A desire for learning or knowledge, a chance to stimulate his interests or abilities.

If your message appeals to one or more of these motivations, it will

get attention.

People need to understand a message before they can give it their

best efforts. They need to know the "why" as well as the "what."

The old idea of "do-this-or-else" went out of existence with the realization that people are different from machines. Correspondence is

a substitute for a personal meeting. When you write a letter, a memorandum or a bulletin, you want it to do what you would do if you

called in person.

If your correspondence is to represent you in a favorable, advantageous manner, it must be : (a) Correct: In form and content. An inaccurate message does real harm

and it gives official status to error

;

(b) Definite: To the degree that the reader will get the intended meaning,

and no other

;

(c) Complete: In that it includes every essential point, and does the job

thoroughly ; and

(d) Courteous: In that it reveals, by word and tone, true friendliness and a

desire to understand the other person's viewpoint.

I have been discussing communication as a means of exchanging

information, but it has another important function—that of reporting to interested parties what has been done. The reporting fimction

is, in general, not as well understood as the exchange of information.

The majority of reports are written out of sheer compulsion, usually

because of a legal or moral obligation to count up the score to satisfy

a supervisor, a budget committee, or perhaps the general public.

The best that can be said for such reports is that they fulfill the

limited purpose of setting out in print a bare record of facts.

Business and governmental organizations have grown so large

that there are few if airy of us who do not have supervisors and

associates to whom we must report our activities. Keeping these

people informed does not mean that we are to be a substitute for the

daily newspaper; neither are we expected to be the secret agent of the

organization "grapevine," It does mean that our supervisor should

hear about our success or about any unusual service we have been

able to give to associates, the organization, or to the public. It also

means that he should hear about our errors directly from us and not

from some other source.

Oral reports have only one real advantage. This is the opportunity for all persons concerned to discuss the problem personally.

The principal objections to oral reports are that they do not provide

a permanent record and that it is difficult to correctly relay the report

to others.

On the other hand, a well-written report that includes both statistics and an interesting narrative can teach new and important facts

519003—59 4 43
about conditions that give your office a reason for existing. It can

help you gain the support of your supervisors and the public. Your

report can become a fighting document—a chance to point out your

needs as facts reveal them. Finally, it is your best opportunity to

tell all about your work, to appraise its accomplishments, and to

study the reason for its failures. Properly prepared, reports become

not an end to themselves, but a powerful means toward the objectives

we wish to attain.

How well a message accomplishes its purpose is a true test of the

effectiveness of the content. Words can be either an aid or a barrier

to understanding. Words that are exact, appropriate, simple, clear,

and direct promote a better understanding of the message.

Technical words have infiltrated the common language of society

until people are finding it next to impossible to express their thoughts

in a simple, effective, and understandable manner. In our work,

technical words and phrases should be avoided unless the subject

or occasion warrants their use. When such words or phrases must be

used, they should be defined unless their meanings are well known.

Our communications can be more effective if we (a) select words

that call attention to ideas; if we (b) select words that fit the subject, purpose, and tone of the message: if we (c) employ figures of

speech appropriate to the context in which they are used; and if we

(d) avoid stilted, freakish expressions such as the so-called gobbleclygook that has infested our mother tongue.

Good communication is not "a one-way street." It has three dimensions—up, down, and across. The "downward" path is, in general,

well used, but unfortunately the "upward" and "across" paths are

relatively untrodden. Effective coordination of any organization's

efforts depends on information traveling up and down the administrative lines as well as across lines of authority. An established pattern or plan for the exchange of information will permit the message

to move step by step through the organization until it reaches the

person or persons who can take the necessary action or make the

necessary decision. Such a plan will help pinpoint individual re- sponsibility, reduce error, and prevent misunderstanding. Furthermore, it will give each individual an improved picture of the work,

accomplishments, and problems of those with whom he works.

Let us not forget that, actually, there is not such a thing as a "oneway" communication. An unanswered letter, failure to supply re- quested information, or failure to follow instructions, each send

"silent messages." These "silent messages" may be due to lack of

interest, skill, or knowledge, failure to take time to understand the

message, or other interests that distort the message. All of these

"blocks" to good communications can be eliminated by willingness to

learn, attention to the subject, and by applying one's self to the task.

Group communications are important to bolster our understanding

of mutual problems. These group activities, such as semiannual and

annual conferences, committee projects, and training schools, may be

utilized to pass along new information concerning developments in

our chosen field ; to discuss changes in existing policies and plans ; or

for the pooling of ideas to meet a common problem. To be effective,

these conferences or group actions should be designed to draw equally

from the ability and experiences of all participants. However, cer44
tain control must be exercised to prevent the discussions wandering

too far from the established purpose of the meeting.

Here again, we can employ another medium of communication that

is fast becoming popular in business and industry. There is an old

adage that proclaims, "A picture is worth 10,000 words." Animated

cartoons, film strips, and motion pictures have proven their effectiveness in business and industrial training programs. These can be used

equally well in the field of weights and measures education.

Our discussion of communications would not be complete if mention

was not made of the opportunity afforded us to inform those outside

our organization of our activities. Newspaper articles, radio talks,

TV appearances, addresses to school groups and business and professional clubs can aid us immeasurably in promoting public awareness

of our responsibilities. Remember that people are most interested in

things that concern them personally. Tell the story of your work in

terms of public interest.

I can think of no better or easier method of "selling" weights and

measures enforcement than to use the excellent films made available

to us by the Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of

Standards. These films in color and sound, emphasize the important

role the weights and measures officials play in the economic life of the

family and the community. We can and should take advantage of

every opportunity to foster a better understanding of our work and to

create respect for our office.

In conclusion, may I summarize briefly the primary principles of

effective communications

(1) Secure attention to your message by creating incentive—appeal to the

four basic urges or "rewards" : (a) social response, (b) security, (c) recognition,

and (d) new experience ; (2) Have your message correct, definite, complete, and courteous ; (3) Use well-written reports as a means toward the objectives you wish to

attain

;

(4) Employ words that promote a better understanding of the message;

(5) Pay attention to the direction of your message. Remember the three

dimensions—up, down, across ; (6) Eliminate the "silent messages," the unanswered request—the failure

to "follow through"

;

(7) Avail yourself of the opportunities afforded by the group activities to develop a better understanding of mutual problems

;

(8) Use every available opportunity to inform the public of your activities

and to foster a better understanding of your role in the economic life of the

community ; and last, but probably most important,

(9) Never say or do anything that detracts from the sense of personal dignity

that each individual possesses.

Good communications can lead us to a better understanding of our

mutual interests, a uniform solution of our common problems, and can

advance the cause of weights and measures enforcement beyond our

fondest hopes.

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Sanders: I think you implied that weights and measures

officials, State, city and county, could profitably devote a part of their

time to publicity and to other forms of public relations. Could you

give us a little of the justification that a weights and measures official

might be able to give to his superiors for devoting a part of his time

to publicity ? Mr. Boyd: I do not think that I can give you a complete answer.

I might point out that in Indiana the Division of Weights and Meas45
ures is a part of the State Board of Health. The State Board of

Health has cooperated with our Division in authorizing the purchase

of the various weights and measures films. We have them in our

Public Health Library. They are available on loan without charge,

and use of them is sought. To the best of my knowledge, we have

never been criticized for giving talks to groups. We have many

school children and adults who visit the State Board of Health. We

devote a part of our time to explain what each division does to protect the public, whether it be health, weights and measures, whatever

it might be.

It takes very little time for a city or county official to appear at

a Rotary Club or Kiwanis Club. I know of no time that we in Indiana have been criticized for our public education effort. We do not

have a budget to cover such publicity, but we do have the complete

cooperation of the Departments of Health and Education.

Mr. Sanders : You think, then, that this public relations effort

makes better weights and measures by educating the public that you

are dealing with and whom you are trying to protect ? Mr. Boyd: There is no doubt about that. I think the more that

the public knows about your work, the more they will appreciate

you and the more they will respect you. I think it is part of your

job to keep the public informed. All people are interested in weights

and measures enforcement when they are told that the activity is for

their protection.

Recently I read that the average American family might lose as

much as $100 a year through short weight. The public is interested

in that sort of thing. Many organizations would welcome talks from

a weights and measures official, but if they are not informed of your

existence, they cannot come to you.

Mr. Fuller: I want to add a couple of thoughts. I thought

that talk of Mr. Boyd's was one of the best I ever heard on this subject. I want to mention a few methods we have found so very effective

in getting ideas over to the public.

One is in connection with our county fair exhibit, which is authorized by our board of supervisors and which we make entertaining

with colored slides and other things. But in connection with that the

board authorizes the publishing of a little manual which we call

"Weights and Measures for the Consumer, Are You a Smart Buyer,"

comprising about 10 pages, with illustrations on some of the pages.

We have copies of this booklet at the Fair for the public to see, and

everyone who is interested in it and would like to have a copy of it

signs his name and address on a sheet. You would be surprised at

the thousands of names and addresses we get that way. The booklets

are mailed out to them afterwards. They go to the homes, where we

know they are put to good use. We also utilize at the Fair the device that many of you do—a free

person-weighing scale. That is about the best way to get the public

into the exhibit. While they are waiting in line to get weighed, they

are bound to look over some of your exhibits. When they get their

official weight, we give them a little slip, giving the weight, and on

the back of the slip is printed a lot of information about the work

of the department and how it is protecting them.

You might think most people who would get that little slip with

their weight on it would glance at it and throw it away. During

46
one fair we weighed 70,000 people, gave out that many slips, and I

do not believe we picked up a hundred of them around the grounds

or outside. They took them home.

Mr. Beck : Do you advocate, or do your weights and measures officials go out and give talks at Chambers of Commerce, Rotary Clubs,

and so forth ? Most of my sealers would balk at something like that,

because most of them are just about as timid about making a speech

as I would be. I wonder what your thinking is on that.

Mr. Boyd: Mr. Meek prepared a series of papers on weights and

measures that could be used by the city and county officials to work

out their own talks before local groups. We highly recommend that

they do make such talks. However, as you say, some of them are rather

timid and they prefer not to do it. But we in the State office, particularly Mr. Meek, have had many requests for talks before coal dealers,

before store managers, and similar groups. We would, of course,

like to have more of these.

We have several folders that have been put out, one for scale owners,

telling them how to care for their equipment, what to do, and what

not to do. Our city and county men pass those out, as do our State

men. It gives the retailer help. At any time that a local inspector

would have a request to give a talk, we in the State division would

certainly see that he would receive all possible assistance.

Mr. Sanders : On the matter of material for talks, I would like to

remind the group that the Education Committee of the Conference

has prepared a very excellent article which you could use as a paper,

whatever portion you wanted, called "The Weights and Measures

Story." We have them available. My association agreed with the

Education Committee to reproduce the paper and make it available.

If you want copies and write me, we will be glad to supply them.

MOISTURE MEASUREMENT IN THE GRAIN INDUSTRY

By Lawrence Zeleny, Chief, Standardization and Testing Branch,

Grain Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department

of Agriculture

(Presented by M. H. Neustadt, Head, Standardization Section, Standardization and Testing Branch, Grain Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S.

Department of Agriculture.)

Moisture content is one of the most important factors affecting the

quality of grain. Since the amount of dry matter in grain is inversely

related to the amount of moisture it contains, moisture content is

of direct economic importance. A carload of wheat of 14 percent

moisture content contains about 1,850 gallons of water. Much of

the wheat marketed in the United States contains about 14 percent

of moisture, although in the drier areas or in dry seasons the moisture

content may be as low as 8 percent. At current prices the intrinsic

value of a 55-ton carload of wheat of 8 percent moisture content

would be about $250 greater than that of a carload of the same weight

of similar wheat containing 14 percent moisture. Unfortunately,

such differences in intrinsic value are seldom reflected in actual market prices. Thus farmers and others may be tempted to water their

dry grain to increase its weight.

Of even greater significance, however, is the effect of moisture on

the keeping quality of grain. Dry, sound grain may be kept for

47
years if properly stored, but wet grain may spoil completely within

a few days. It is not possible, however, to set precise moisture limits

for the safe storage of grain or to predict accurately how rapidly

it will deteriorate at any given moisture content, because various

factors other than moisture have marked effects on storage behavior.

Nevertheless, under practical storage conditions, moisture content is

usually the principal factor governing the keeping quality of grain.

Near the critical moisture levels small differences in moisture content

make large differences in keeping quality. Suitable methods for

determining moisture content are therefore of considerable practical

importance.

BASIC METHODS

Methods for determining grain moisture content which are generally classified as basic or primary methods are relatively accurate,

but in general are too time-consuming for most practical purposes.

Oven Methods

The most widely recognized methods for determining moisture in

grain are based on drying known weights of grain in various types

of ovens and calculating moisture content from the weight lost in the

drying operation. These methods appear to be rather simple and

direct and usually constitute the "basic" methods against which rapid,

practical moisture-testing equipment is calibrated. Actually, however, all oven methods for determining moisture in grain are more or

less empirical in nature, the results depending on the degree of subdivision of the material being tested, the time of drying, and the

temperature and atmospheric pressure under which the drying is

accomplished. In most biological materials, including grain, it is

difficult if not impossible to remove all moisture by the application

of heat without at the same time driving off small amounts of other

volatile substances or causing decomposition of some of the constituents with the formation and release of moisture not initially present

at such.

The difficulty encountered in removing all moisture from biological

material, even when it is finely ground, seems to be due principally

to the fact that the water is present in different forms. When an inorganic material such as wet sand is heated at 100° C. or higher

at atmospheric pressure, the moisture is lost at a rapid and essentially

uniform rate until the material is completely dry. In drying finely

ground grain, however, a much longer time is required to remove the

moisture, the rate of moisture loss decreases rapidly as the drying

progresses, and the ultimate loss in weight differs with different

temperatures employed for drying.

In biological materials such as grain, part of the moisture present

appears to be tightly held or "bound" by powerful physical forces

to proteins, high molecular weight carbohydrates, and perhaps other

colloidal substances. This moisture, sometimes spoken of as "bound"

water is much more difficult to remove than the "free" water. The

tenacity with which water may be held to colloidal substances probably varies with the nature of the colloidal material and with the

amount of water so held. Thus in the case of wet grain there are

probably encountered all gradations between "free" water that is

removed by heat as readily as the water from wet sand, and water

48
that is so tightly held that it can be removed only under conditions

of temperature and pressure that may permit volatilization or decomposition of other constituents. For these reasons oven methods as

well as most other "basic" methods for determining moisture in grain

are actually empirical, and to obtain comparable results standard

procedures that have been usually rather arbitrarily established must

be followed precisely.

Air-Oven Methods

A method in which a weighed portion of finely ground grain is

heated in an air oven for 1 hour at 130° C, and the loss of weight

determined is widely used for determining moisture in cereal grains

and is the basic method specified for grains other than corn in the

official grain standards of the United States (22).1 If the initial

moisture content of the grain is in excess of 13 percent, a two-stage

procedure is used in which a weighed portion of grain is partially

dried to a moisture content of less than 13 percent before grinding,

and the loss of weight in this preliminary drying is determined. The

partially dried grain is then ground and a weighed portion of the

ground material is dried for 1 hour at 130° C. In calculating the

moisture content the moisture losses in both stages of the procedure

must be taken into consideration.

Another commonly used air-oven method for determining moisture

in grain provides for heating a weighed portion of the finely ground

grain for 2 hours at 135° C. This method gives slightly higher

results than the previously described method and is an official method

of analysis for grain of the Association of Official Agricultural

Chemists (1).

In addition to the conventional types of air oven, special types of

air ovens are available which have built-in balances for weighingdried samples while they are still hot and without removing them

from the oven. In some instances the balances may be used also for

the initial weighings and are calibrated directly in terms of moisture

percentage so that when the proper weight of sample is used no

calculation is required.

Water-Oven Method

Under the official grain standards of the United States a wateroven method (22) is specified as the official basic method for the

determination of moisture in corn. A weighted quantity of whole

corn is dried for 96 hours at a temperature of 99° to 100° C. in a

water-jacketed oven in which the water is maintained at the boilingtemperature. The water oven is essentially an air oven except that

it is heated by means of boiling water. Effective October 1, 1959, the

water-oven method for corn will be replaced by an air-oven method

(23).

Vacuum-Oven Method

One of the most widely accepted methods for determining the

moisture content of grain is based on drying the finely ground grain

at a temperature of 98° to 100° C. in an oven chamber maintained at

a pressure of 25 mm. or less of mercury. Heating is continued until

no appreciable further loss of weight occurs (usually about 5 hours).

1 Numbers in parentheses refer to the appended references.

49
This method is one of the official methods of the Association of

Official Agricultural Chemists for grain (1) and gives results in

reasonably good agreement with the 1-hour, 130° C. air-oven method.

Drying With Desiccants

The moisture content of grain and other materials may be determined by placing a weighed portion of the finely ground material in

a closed container with a relatively large quantity of an efficient

desiccant. The desiccant chosen must have a lower vapor tension

than the material being dried. The moisture in the material is

gradually vaporized, and is then absorbed by the desiccant. Moisture

content is determined by the loss in weight of the original material

after it finally attains constant weight. Reducing and maintaining

the atmospheric pressure in the container to a low level will greatly

reduce the time required to complete the operation, but even when

this is done the time required is too great for most practical purposes. However, in one of the official methods of the Association of

Official Agricultural Chemists for determining moisture in grain,

the finely ground material is held under vacuum in the presence of

anhydrous sulfuric acid until constant weight is attained (1). One

advantage of the method is that it does not involve the hazard of

possible decomposition of organic material by heat. However, grain

of high moisture content may decompose as a result of the action of

molds and bacteria before the moisture content is reduced sufficiently

to inhibit the growth of these organisms.

Toluene Distillation Method

One of the official methods of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists ( 1 ) provides for boiling the finely ground grain in

toluene in an apparatus that condenses the volatilized materials, collects the condensed water in a graduated tube and returns the condensed toluene to the boiling flask. The boiling is continued as long

as any water accumulates in the graduated tube, and the moisture

content of the grain is calculated from the volume of water condensed.

Since the boiling point of toluene is 111° C, all substances that boil

at or below this temperature, including all water that will be released

at this temperature, are distilled. Also, since the water is measured

volumetrically, no water-insoluble volatile material can be measured

as moisture. A modification of this method has been adopted for

corn by the wet corn milling industry.

Karl Fischer Method

In recent years considerable attention has been given to the method

of Karl Fischer (8) for determining the moisture content of a wide

variety of materials. The method depends upon the reaction of

iodine with water in the presence of sulfur dioxide and pyridine to

form hydriodic acid and sulfuric acid. Since the method is strictly

stoichiometric, it is, theoretically at least, one of the most accurate

methods for determining moisture. In applying the method to grain,

the grain must first be finely ground and the moisture extracted with

anhydrous methyl alcohol. Because of certain practical difficulties

in its application, the Karl Fischer method has been used but little in

50
determining moisture in grain, although Fosnot and Hamon (9) have

applied the method to wheat and barley. More recently Hart and

Neustadt (11) have successfully adapted the method to all cereal

grains and have used it to test the accuracy of official oven methods.

Because of the technical skill required and the time-consuming nature

of this analytical method, its usefulness is likely to remain quite

limited, even though it is probably the most accurate method available.

PRACTICAL METHODS

Practical methods designed for the rapid routine determination of

grain moisture content are for the most part secondary or indirect

methods which must be standardized against one of the basic or

primary methods.

Brown-Duvel Distillation Method

For many years moisture content was determined in the routine inspection of grain by heating a weighed portion of unground grain in

oil. The moisture volatilized by this heating is condensed, then

collected and measured in a graduated cylinder. The apparatus used

for this purpose must be standardized to provide a definite amount of

heat in a definite period of time. The method is highly arbitrary and

the exact procedure to be followed must be established for each kind

of grain in order to obtain results equivalent to those obtained by

the applicable official oven method. The method was first proposed

by Brown and Duvel (3) and the procedure to be followed for each

kind of grain is described in detail in U.S. Department of Agriculture Department Bulletin No. 1375 (5).

The Brown-Duvel method has been largely replaced by electric

moisture meters in the routine inspection of grain in the United

States, but it is still used under various conditions of testing in which

electric meters cannot be depended upon to give reliable results.

Direct Heating Methods

Various modified air-oven methods using special heating equipment have been devised to shorten the time required as compared with

standard oven methods. In general these methods provide for heating the material to considerably higher temperatures than those

employed in the usual oven methods. Heating may be accomplished

by ordinary electric heating coils, by radiation from infrared radiators, or by means of a high-frequency, high-voltage field (4). In

employing these methods and devices, it is customary to determine in

advance the time of heating and the temperature or other adjustment

of the equipment required for each type of material to be tested, in

order to obtain results in reasonably good agreement with those obtained by one of the more basic methods.

Calcium Carbide Methods

Calcium carbide reacts readily and completely with water to form

calcium hydroxide and acetylene gas. Parks (16) was the first to

utilize this reaction as a basis for determining the moisture content

of plant materials. An excess of calcium carbide is mixed with a

definite weight of plant material. The moisture in the material being

tested reacts with the calcium carbide and the acetylene gas formed

escapes from the mixture. The moisture content of the material is

51
then calculated from the weight lost as a result of the escaped gas.

A special balance for making the weighings was devised with which

the final reading is made directly in terms of percent moisture. Although the method is theoretically sound, practical difficulties appear

to have prevented any extensive use of it in the testing of grain.

A moisture-testing device is available in which the material to be

tested is mixed with calcium carbide in a tightly sealed, heavy metal

container equipped with a pressure gage. For any given type of plant

material the pressure developed by the evolution of acetylene gas

should be proportional to the moisture content of the material. This

method and equipment is said to be in limited use for measuring the

moisture content of grain.

Dicliromate Method

A method for measuring the moisture content of fruits and vegetables based on oxidation of the organic material by potassium dicliromate has been proposed by Launer and Tomimatsu (14) . An excess of dicliromate is used in the reaction and the part that remains

after the oxidation is complete is determined by titration. A "dicliromate factor" is established for each type of product to be tested and is

based on results obtained by a standard oven method for determining

moisture. Although the method is intended primarily for products

of high moisture content, it was shown to be applicable to rice containing from 10 to 15 percent moisture (21) . Presumably it could be used

for other grains.

Methods Based on Relative Humidity Measurement

When grain is freely exposed to the air it will gradually lose or

gain in moisture content until it reaches a moisture content level in

equilibrium with the relative humidity of the air to which it is exposed.

Likewise the interstitial air in unventilated stored grain will tend to

become stabilized at a relative humidity in equilibrium with the moisture content of the grain. Thus after this equilibrium is established

a measurement of the relative humidity of the interstitial air may be

used as an index of the moisture content of the grain. Actually such

relative humidity measurements may be better indexes of the keeping

quality of grain than direct moisture-content measurements, since the

activity of molds and other micro-organisms that develop on the surfaces of grain kernels and that are largely responsible for grain spoilage is probably more closely dependent upon the relative humidity of

the surrounding air than upon the moisture content of the grain. It

has been shown by Milner and Geddes (15), that the rate of mold

development on grain is quite slow when the relative humidity is

below 75 percent, but that rapid deterioration as a result of mold

growth is likely to occur at ordinary temperatures if the relative

humidity of the interstitial air is greater than 75 percent. For long

storage the moisture content should be low enough so that the relative humidity is considerably below 75 percent, probably below 65

percent.

Wet- and dry-bulb thermometers have been used by Gaus, Shaw,

and Kliever (10), to determine the moisture content of seed cotton

prior to ginning by measuring the relative humidity of air drawn by

suction from bulk lots of the product. Dexter (7) has applied the

wet- and dry-bulb technique to small samples of grain and other agri52
cultural products, using saturated salt solutions rather than water on

the bulb of the wet-bulb thermometer. Manufacturers of electric

hygrometers are investigating the application of these devices to the

measurement of moisture in grain and other products.

Ives (13) has made ingenious use of dew-point depression as a

measure of relative humidity in a closed jar of grain and hence of the

moisture content of the grain.

Certain inorganic salts, notably those of cobalt, undergo marked

changes in color at different relative humidity levels as a result of

differing degrees of hydration. Practical use of this phenomenon has

been made by Solomon (19, 20) in estimating the relative humidity

of air in small spaces and by Dexter (6) in estimating the moisture

content and keeping quality of grain and other farm products. Although the accuracy of any such method is not high, its simplicity

may make it valuable for farm use. In order to translate relative humidity measurements into terms of

grain moisture content, it is obviously necessary to know the relationship between relative humidity and grain moisture. This relationship differs for different kinds of grain, and to some extent among

different lots of the same kind of grain probably because of the effect

of hysteresis and of differences in the tenacity with which part of the

water is held by colloidal constituents. Although various investigators have published data in respect to these relationships, there is a

considerable amount of disagreement among the published reports.

Perhaps the most thorough study of this subject is that of Hubbard,

Earle, and Senti (12).

Electric Moisture Meters

Certain electrical properties of grain depend largely on its moisture

content and have been used as the basis for a considerable number of

devices for determining moisture content.

The possibility of determining the moisture content of grain by re- sistance measurements was first demonstrated by Briggs in 1908 (2).

Using as electrodes 12-inch brass rods inserted into a jar of wheat,

and measuring with a Wheatstone bridge the resistance of the wheat

to the flow of current from an electromotive force of 17 volts, he found

a linear relationship between the moisture content of the wheat and

the logarithm of its resistance over the moisture range of about 11

to 16 percent. He also showed the effect of temperature on the electrical resistance of wheat.

In 1909 Zeleny (24) devised an electrical instrument for determining the moisture content of corn. Electrodes in the form of spaced

metal points were pressed into the germs of individual kernels of

corn. The two electrodes were of dissimilar metals so that with the

corn kernels they formed a simple voltaic battery. The current produced depended upon the moisture content of the corn and was registered on a sensitive galvanometer. Thus no battery or other external

source of current was required. In a later modification of the instrument a battery was added to the circuit and the electrodes were both

made of the same metal, so that the galvanometer deflection became

essentially a measure of conductivity of the corn kernel.

Although neither the Briggs nor the Zeleny devices were used extensively for practical purposes, they stimulated interest in electric

grain moisture testing and were the forerunners of a considerable

number of electric moisture meters that are now widely used in the

53
grain trade. Most of the modern meters are based on conductance

or capacitance measurements.2

Conductance-Type Moisture Meters

In conductance-type moisture meters the grain is pressed between

two electrodes connected in series with a suitable source of current

and a galvanometer. A series of fixed resistors may be introduced

individually into the circuit so that the full range of the galvanometer

may be utilized for separate relatively narrow ranges in moisture

content.

In one style of conductivity meter a weighed or measured portion

of grain is pressed to a standard thickness between two electrodes in

a small cylinder. In another style of meter, widely used in the inspection of grain under the official grain standards of the United

States, the electrodes are in the form of corrugated steel rolls, one of

which is motor driven. The grain, which need not be weighed or

measured, is simply poured between the two rolls, which are accurately spaced with respect to each other, and which then rotate

in opposite directions and subject the grain passing between them to

high pressure.

Conductance-type moisture meters are relatively easy to keep in

proper adjustment and to maintain in satisfactory alignment with

one another. They are likewise very rapid in operation, particularly

the style of meter using motor-driven electrodes. One of the principal disadvantages of conductance meters is that their accuracy is

dependent in large measure upon a normal distribution of moisture

within the kernels of grain. Grain that has recently been dried artificially gives low readings since the surfaces of the kernels are abnormally dry in respect to the moisture content of the grain as a

whole. Likewise freshly tempered (moistened) grain gives high

readings because of an excess of surface moisture. Mixtures of wet

and dry grain and grain that is musty or sour also often fail to give

correct readings with conductance-type meters. Furthermore, conductance meters are quite limited in the range in grain moisture content they will measure. At moisture levels below about 7 percent,

moisture in grain appears to be so tightly "bound" that it contributes

very little to the conductivity, hence no satisfactory readings may be

obtained at such levels. At moisture levels above about 23 percent,

grain conductivity is so great it increases but little with further increase in moisture content. At these moisture levels, therefore, conductance meters are subject to serious errors.

In spite of the many shortcomings of conductance-type grain moisture meters, they will, if properly calibrated and operated, give very

satisfactory results with the normal run of commercial grain.

Capacitance-Type Moisture Meters

Since the dielectric properties of grain depend largely on its moisture content, the capacity of a condenser in which grain is the dielectric will vary in accordance with the moisture content of the grain.

This principle has been utilized in the development of a number of

different grain moisture meters. In some of them the circuits are so

2 A partial list of moisture-testing devices for grain and related commodities is maintained by the author and can be obtained upon request.

54
designed as to utilize the change in impedance resulting from the

change in capacitance as a means of measuring the moisture content.

Impedance decreases with increasing grain moisture content as a re- sult of the effect of the moisture on the dielectric properties of the

grain.

Moisture meters of this type have certain inherent advantages

over conductance-type meters. They are less subject than conductance

meters to errors resulting from uneven moisture distribution within

or among the kernels of the grain being tested, and to errors associated with mustiness or sourness of grain. They are also capable of

testing grain over a wider range of moisture content than are conductance meters. In spite of these advantages, it has never been conclusively proved that capacitance-type moisture meters are capable of

greater overall accuracy in testing the normal run of commercial

grain than are conductance meters. Capacitance meters should be

particularly useful, however, in testing freshly dried or tempered

grain, mixtures of wet and dry grain, out-of-condition grain, and

grain of very high or low moisture content.

Good replicability of results is somewhat more difficult to obtain

with capacitance meters than with conductance meters, particularly

in the higher moisture ranges. This appears to be due to a degree

of nonuniformity in the packing and orientation of the grain kernels

when they are dropped into position between the plates of the condenser. Another serious practical disadvantage encountered with

many capacitance moisture meters is the difficulty in keeping them in

proper adjustment, particularly in maintaining accurate alignment

among individual instruments. Uniformity of results obtained among

many different inspection offices is of paramount importance in routine

grain inspection work. Satisfactory uniformity has been more easily

attained with conductance than with capacitance meters. Marked

improvements, however, are being made in capacitance meters both

in respect to precision in manufacture and to means for maintaining

proper adjustment and alignment.

Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Method

A relatively recent development is the observation of Shaw and

Elsken (18) that the magnetic resonance absorption due to hydrogen

nuclei can be used to measure the moisture content of various materials. Equipment for determining moisture content by means of this

principle is described by Rubin (17) . Although this method is rapid

and may be the most accurate of the various secondary methods for

determining grain moisture content, the present cost of the essential

equipment would prohibit its adoption for most routine use. MAINTAINING ACCURACY IN PRACTICAL MOISTURE TESTING

Since moisture content is an important factor in the marketing of

grain, it is necessary that the greatest possible accuracy be maintained,

consistent with practical operations, in the determination of moisture.

Failure to maintain reasonable accuracy may result in injustices in

grain marketing transactions and in spoilage of grain during shipment and storage. Several State governments are exercising or are

planning to exercise some degree of control within their respective

States over all grain moisture-testing operations performed in connection with the marketing of grain. The basic plan usually con55
templated is to check periodically the accuracy of all moisture-testing

devices used within the State for this purpose and to approve or license the use of only those that meet or that are adjusted to meet

certain standards of accuracy. For reasons that will be outlined

below a program of this kind is much more complicated than it might

seem to be. It cannot be considered comparable with the task of

checking the accuracy of scales for determining weight or of containers for measuring volume.

Nearly all practical grain moisture-testing devices are calibrated

against basic oven methods, usually those prescribed by the Official

Grain Standards of the United States. It might seem, therefore, that

a logical system for a State to use in checking the accuracy of practical moisture-testing devices would consist simply of using samples

of the different grains, the moisture contents of which have been established accurately by official oven methods. Under such a system those

devices, and only those, giving results in agreement with the established moisture content within a specified tolerance would be acceptable. This system should prove to be reliable when it is applied to

the numerous devices available for determining the moisture content

of grain by distilling the moisture and measuring the volume of condensed water so obtained, or by evaporating the moisture rapidly by

heat produced by heating coils, infrared radiation, or high-frequency,

high-voltage fields, and then determining the weight loss. All of these

devices are potentially capable of yielding fairly accurate results consistently, and failure of the devices to yield results checking quite

closely with official oven methods is immediately indicative of mechanical, electrical, calibrational, or operational defects. Devices falling into this category, however, are not widely used in practical grain

operations because they are much slower and less convenient to use

than electric meters.

Electric grain moisture meters are, and will no doubt continue to

be, widely used because of their great convenience, regardless of the

fact that they are at times somewhat inaccurate. These meters do

not in reality measure grain moisture content directly but, rather,

measure certain electrical properties of grain that are related to

moisture content. Since many variable factors other than moisture

content affect these electrical properties, electric meters are subject

to certain inherent inaccuracies which are sometimes much greater

than is generally realized. Reliable calibration of any make and

model of electric meter must therefore be based on tests made on large

numbers of samples of each kind and sometimes each class of each

kind of grain covering wide ranges in moisture content and area of

production, and produced during several crop years. Each sample

must be tested by the appropriate basic method and the corresponding

meter reading ascertained. From the data so obtained the best possible calibration is derived. Although the resulting calibration chart,

table, or scale should make it possible to determine grain moisture

content accurately on the average, tests on individual samples of grain

may be in error by considerable amounts. Frequently all samples of

one kind of grain from a particular limited area of production during

a particular season or part of a season will show uniformly high or

low test results when tested by a particular kind of moisture meter,

even though the meter is properly calibrated for the crop as a whole

and properly operated. The unknown variable factors which are

56
responsible for this phenomenon might not affect the readings of other

types of electric meters in the same way.

In any program that may be developed for checking the accuracy

of electric grain moisture meters, the above-mentioned types of apparently unavoidable and unpredictable errors in moisture determination must be considered. If check tests are to be based on grain

samples of known moisture content, it would be necessary to use very

large numbers of samples to minimize the possibility of arriving at

false conclusions resulting from abnormal characteristics of the

samples chosen. Checking moisture meters by means of grain samples

of known moisture content should provide the most reliable meter

inspection system if the agency performing this inspection is prepared

to use a sufficiently large and diversified group of grain samples for

this purpose. If only a small number of samples is used, the chances

of arriving at false conclusions in respect to the reliability of meters

are relatively great.

Although the task of inspecting meters properly by the use of

samples of known moisture content would usually be considered impractical for the reasons stated above, we believe that there may be

a more practical approach to the problem which would utilize, as far

as possible, information already known about many of the meters as

well as certain facilities that could be made available by the manufacturers or distributors of the meters. The suggested plan would be

broken down into the following five phases

1. Ascertain which makes and models of meters are potentially capable of

determining grain moisture content within the tolerances desired. No other

makes or models would be considered acceptable until suitable evidence of

their reliability could be obtained.

2. Make certain that reliable conversion charts, tables, or scales for these

meters have been provided and that they are actually being used.

3. Obtain for use by the State agency responsible for the meter inspection one

meter of each make and model that is considered acceptable and that is actually

being used in the State.

4. Make sure that these "standard" instruments maintained by the State will

give readings essentially identical with those of "master" instruments of the

same makes and models that are usually maintained by the manufacturers or

distributors. This can be accomplished only through an exchange of grain

samples between the State and the firms or agency maintaining the "master"

instruments. A few samples of each kind of grain will usually suffice for this

purpose and no knowledge of the actual moisture content of the samples is necessary. Checks of this kind should be made at rather frequent intervals.

5. Perform the inspection of moisture meters throughout the State by checking

the moisture content readings obtained by these meters against those obtained

by the "standard" meters of the same makes and models maintained by the State

agency. Here again a few samples of grain are sufficient and no knowledge of

the exact moisture content of the grain is necessary. Each "standard" meter

must be used only for checking other meters of the same make and model. In

each instance comparative tests with the two meters should be made on the same

day if possible.

The above-described plan, if properly put into effect, should make

it possible to maintain within a State a reasonable degree of accuracy

in electric grain moisture testing. It should provide a high degree of

uniformity of results among meters of the same make and model. It

should also provide for satisfactory average agreement among all approved makes and models of meters. The plan cannot be expected,

however, to eliminate occasional fairly wide differences in results obtained among different makes or models of meters or occasional rather

serious inaccuracies in results obtained by any make or model of meter.

57
This method of maintaining grain moisture-testing uniformity as

well as a reasonable degree of accuracy is essentially that used by the

U.S. Department of Agriculture. A single make of conductance-type

moisture meter is used almost exclusively by licensed grain inspectors

in the inspection of grain under the Official Grain Standards of the

United States. By means of frequent exchanges of samples the meters

in 47 grain supervision offices and suboffices of the Department are

kept in almost perfect alinement with a "master" instrument maintained at Chicago. In a similar manner the meters used by licensed inspectors at 325 grain inspection points throughout the country are kept

in alinement with the meters at their respective supervision offices.

Thus all of the meters are kept in alinement with the master machines

at Chicago. This phase of the program maintains good uniformity in

moisture testing throughout the country but has little to do with insuring the accuracy of the moisture values obtained.

To insure the greatest possible accuracy the conversion tables that

have been established to convert meter readings into moisture percentages are under constant surveillance by the Department through a

carefully planned and continuous system of checking meter readings

for all grains against moisture percentages obtained by the official

basic oven methods. In many instances the relation between moisture

content and electric properties is found to undergo a progressive

change from year to year as a result of the introduction of new varieties of grain and new methods of harvesting and handling. These

changes must be carefully followed in order that the conversion tables

may be revised when necessary.

This two-phase procedure used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture provides a satisfactory degree of uniformity in electric grain

moisture testing among licensed grain inspectors and as great a

degree of accuracy as can be attained with the type of equipment used.

Greater accuracy in practical work can be attained only through the

further perfection of electric meters or the use of other more accurate

methods of testing. Manufacturers of electric grain moisture meters

are making considerable progress in improving their equipment but

the extent to which the accuracy of electric meters can be improved

may be limited by inherent sources of error that may be very difficult

to eliminate.

LITERATURE CITED

(1) Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.

1955. Official Methods of Analysis. Published by the Association of

Official Agricultural Chemists, P.O. Box 540, Benjamin Franklin Station, Washington 4, D.C. 8th Edition.

(2) Briggs, Lyman J. 1908. An Electrical Resistance Method for the Rapid Determination of

the Moisture Content of Grain. U.S. Dept. of Agric. Bureau of Plant

Industry Circular No. 20, 8 pp.

(3) Brown, Edgar, and Duvel, J. W. T.

1907. A Quick Method for the Determination of Moisture in Grain.

U.S. Dept. of Agric. Bureau of Plant Industry Bull. 99.

(4) Christie, Alfred.

1944. High Frequency Desiccator. U.S. Patent No. 2,360,108.

(5) Coleman, D. A. and Boerner, E. G.

1936. The Brown-Duvel Moisture Tester and How to Operate It. U.S.

Dept. of Agric. Dept. Bull. No. 1375 (revised), 44 pp., illus.

(6) Dexter, S. T.

1948. A Colorimetric Test for Estimating the Percentage Moisture or the Storage Quality of Farm Products or Other Dry Materials. Mich.

Agr. Exp. Sta. Quarterly Bull. 30, 422-426.

58
Dexter, S. T.

1949. A Modified Wet and Dry-Bulb Thermometer Technique for Determining the Moisture Content or Storage Qualities of So-Called Dry

Materials. Mich. Agr. Exp. Sta. Quarterly Bull. 31, 275-286.

Fischer, Karl.

1935. A New Method for the Analytical Determination of the Water

Content of Liquids and Solids. Angew. Chem. 48, 394-396.

Fosnot, Richard H. and Hamon, Robert W.

1945. A Preliminary Investigation of the Application of the Karl Fischer

Reagent to the Determination of Moisture in Cereals and Cereal Products. Cereal Chem. 22, 41-49.

Gaus, George E. ; Shaw, Charles S. ; and Kliever, Waldo H.

1941. A Practical Seed-Cotton Moisture Tester for Use at Gins. U.S.

Dept. Agric. Circular 621, 26 pp., illus.

Hart, Joe R. and Neustadt, M. H.

1957. Application of the Karl Fischer Method to Grain Moisture

Determination. Cereal Chem. 34, 26-37.

Hubbard, J. E., Earle, F. R., and Senti, F. R.

1957. Moisture Relations in Wheat and Corn. Cereal Chem. 34,

422-433.

Ives, Norton C.

1952. A Dew-Point Moisture Indicator. Agricultural Engineering 33,

85-87.

Launer, Herbert F. and Tomimatsu, Yoshio.

1952. Rapid Method for Moisture in Fruits and Vegetables by Oxidation with Dichromate. I. Potatoes and Peas. Food Technology

6(2) : 59-64.

Milner, Max, and Geddes, W. F.

1946. Grain Storage Studies III. The Relation Between Moisture

Content, Mold Growth, and Respiration of Soybeans. Cereal

Chem. 23, 225-247.

Parks, R. Q.

1941. A Rapid and Simple Method for Determining Moisture in

Forages and Grains. Jour. Am. Soc. Agron. 33, 325-335.

Rubin, Herbert.

1958. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance. Cereal Science Today 3(9) : 240-243.

Shaw, T. M. and Elsken, R. H.

1950. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Absorption in Hydroscopic Materials. J. Chem. Physics 18, 1113-1114.

Solomon, M. E.

1945. The Use of Cobalt Salts as Indicators of Humidity and Moisture. Annals of Applied Biology 32, 75-78.

Solomon, M. E.

1957. Estimation of Humidity with Cobalt Thiocyanate Papers and

Permanent Color Standards. Bull. Ent. Res. 48, 489-506.

Tomimatsu, Yoshio and Launer, Herbert F.

1952. Rapid Method for Moisture in Fruits and Vegetables by Oxidation with Dichromate. II. Pineapple-Rice Pudding, Rice, Prunes,

and Corn. Food Technology 6(8) : 281-285.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service.

1941. Air-Oven and Water-Oven Methods Specified in the Official Grain

Standards of the United States for Determining the Moisture Content

of Grain. Service and Regulatory Announcements No. 147 (revised).

3 PP.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service.

1959. Methods for Determining Moisture Content as Specified in the

Official Grain Standards of the United States and in the United States

Standards for Beans, Peas, Lentils, and Rice. Service and Regulatory

Announcements No. 147 (revised). 3 pp.

Zeleny, Anthony.

1909. An Electrical Method for the Measurement of the Amount of Moisture in Grain and Other Materials. The Minnesota Engineer, 17,

163-170.

519003—59—5

59
DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Harris : In the use of the moisture meters, is it sufficient to run

a moisture test on a single sample of grain, or should several samples

be run and the result be the average of the readings thus obtained ? Mr. Neustadt: If a conductivity-type machine is being used, a

single sample should be adequate; if a capacitance-type (dielectric) is

being utilized, we would suggest that several samples be run through

the machine.

Mr. Harris : We have noticed that, when a sample of grain is tested

in a moisture meter one day and then sealed and tested again a day

later, a difference of as much as % percent in the moisture content

is indicated, with the percentage normally lower for the later reading.

Which is correct ? Mr. Neustadt : That would be difficult to answer. As you know,

the standards provided by the Grain Division of the U.S. Department

of Agriculture are based on determinations by the air-oven method

or any other method that gives equivalent results. Unless the results

you described are checked against the oven method, you would have

no basis for determining which is correct.

Mr. Harris : Then is it possible that the farmers are being paid for

their grain on the basis of a moisture test in which there exist several

assumptions ? Mr. Neustadt : Electric moisture meters are simply rapid, practical

methods of measuring moisture. The results from such methods

cannot be absolutely relied upon.

Mr. Harris: I noticed a press release from the U.S. Department

of Agriculture dated April 10 that announced certain changes in the

conversion charts for a particular type moisture determining machine.

Not quite one month later I read where the Department had postponed the use of the new charts. Can you explain this for us ? Mr. Neustadt: Yes. Although scientifically it had been proven

that the conversion charts should be altered, pressures were brought

to bear on the Department of Agriculture to rescind the published

change. The pressures emanated generally from the producers of

grain.

Mr. Harris : You undoubtedly are aware that this Conference has

gone on record requesting the U.S. Department of Agriculture and

the National Bureau of Standards to cooperate in the development

of accurate moisture measuring devices and techniques and also of

equipment and procedures for testing such devices. This position

also has been taken by the National Association of State Departments

of Agriculture. Could you inform us of any developments or plans

for developments along these lines ? Mr. Neustadt: I think Mr. Jensen of the National Bureau of

Standards has been working along these lines and is in a better

position to answer that question.

Mr. Jensen : It has been the position of the National Bureau of

Standards that the measurement of moisture in grains is an area of

authority of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The National

Bureau of Standards might be able to make technical contributions

60
in the area, but will await an official request from the Department of

Agriculture. It must be made clear that the effort of the Bureau

will be limited by the funds that are available for that purpose.

Mr. K. E. Meek : I should like to emphasize the importance of this

matter to the States. In Indiana a bill has been introduced in the

General Assembly on at least two occasions that would place the

burden of responsibility for the accuracy of moisture-measuring machines on the Division of Weights and Measures. Because of our

lack of technical information, I have felt that such responsibility

could not be properly met and discouraged the enactment of the legislation. We are hopeful that the Federal Government will be able

to develop and make available to us such devices and techniques as are

necessary.

I have been concerned that perhaps too much emphasis is being

placed on the moisture-measuring devices and too little on the method

of obtaining the samples of the grain that are being tested. Would

you please give us your opinion on the subject of sampling?

Mr. Neustadt : Undoubtedly proper sampling is an important consideration in moisture testing. However, discrepancies can and do

occur when the same sample is tested over and over again. You can

take a 250-gram portion of a sample of wheat and measure the moisture content of that on one of the dielectric-type meters several times

over a period of several weeks, keeping the sample secured in a sealed

can between tests, and find substantially different readings.

Mr. Meek: My point was that the improper taking of samples

from a shipment of grain could cause definite inaccuracies as to the

moisture content of the entire shipment. I am wondering if those in

the grain trade are actually aware of the importance of proper sampling techniques.

Mr. Neustadt : If sampling is done by licensed inspectors who are

supervised by the Department of Agriculture as to the manner in

which they take samples, I believe the sampling will be proper.

Mr. Meek. I am concerned with moisture measurement at buying

stations throughout the country, where I believe the inspectors are

not licensed by the Department.

Mr. Neustadt: You are quite right. Substantial deviations in

sampling and measuring techniques may occur at such elevators.

Mr. Harris : This point I should like to make clear. Not all of

the grain traders or grain inspectors come under the supervision of

the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Our primary interest is in

the accuracy of sampling and of moisture measurement. We presently

do not have satisfactory means for checking either, and we know that

both affect the dollars paid the farmer for his grain.

Mr. F. F. Thompson : If grain is shipped from California through

the Midwest and to the East Coast, and samples are taken along \ he

route, how much difference would occur in the moisture measurement

of those samples ? Mr. Neustadt: If the samples are properly taken and truly representative, the measurement should net deviate by more than twotenths percent when tested by the official method, provided that the

lot itself has not changed in moisture content in transit.

61
REPORT OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

ADVISORY COMMITTEE

By A. T. McPherson, Associate Director for Engineering,

National Bureau of Standards

The Weights and Measures Advisory Committee met at the National Bureau of Standards in Washington, D.C., on February 26,

1959. The Committee now includes the following individuals : P. C.

Brinkley of Virginia; C. M. Fuller of Los Angeles County, California; Dr. L. J. Gordon of Denison University; L. T. Gustafson,

Creamery Package Manufacturing Company; E. E. Meek of Indiana;

and W. A. Scheurer, Exact Weight Scale Company. All members

were present for the meeting. Dr. A. T. McPherson, Associate Director for Engineering of the National Bureau of Standards, served

as chairman. The committee's report to the Director of the Bureau

included comments and recommendations on the following matters:

1. Publication Policy of the Office of Weights and Measures

The committee was asked to consider the possible need for modification of the publication policy of the National Bureau of Standards

Office of Weights and Measures to provide for the review and endorsement of some of its publications by the National Conference

prior to their issuance by the Bureau. Extensive discussion of the

feasibility of such an arrangement and of its possible advantages and

disadvantages led to a unanimous recommendation that the Office of

Weights and Measures publication continue as in the past.

This recommendation was discussed by the Director with the Executive Committee at its meeting on Monday.

2. NBS Training Program

The committee was pleased to learn that good progress has been

made toward establishment of a weights and measures training

facility at the Bureau as recommended in its last report. Appreciation was expressed for the excellent assistance of Office of Weights

and Measures staff members in the planning and conduct of State

and local training programs. The committee indicated that these

training programs have become an important and effective tool in

weights and measures administration. Continued strengthening of

all OWM training activities was urged and the hope was expressed

that participation in State programs will continue insofar as feasible

after completion of the new training facility at the Bureau.

Since the meeting of the committee I am pleased to report that

the Bureau's Office of Weights and Measures has been relocated on

the Bureau grounds, and space for a training laboratory has been

provided. This facility will be used principally for the training of

supervisors and training officers and thus will extend the effectiveness

of this phase of Bureau assistance. On-the-spot technical training

schools will continue to be held to the limit of staff availability.

3. Motion Picture Program

The committee reported that the motion picture film "Assignment—Weights and Measures," which was produced by the Bureau

62
in cooperation with the National Conference, has been well received

and is an effective device for informing the public concerning weights

and measures activities. The committee urged the Bureau to continue its film production program and recommended that public information films and those directed toward the training of weights and

measures officials receive equal emphasis. In particular, the committee suggested that a public information-type film be produced to

show a typical weights and measures official at his work including the

detection of offenders as well as the more pleasant aspects of the work.

Pursuant to this recommendation, plans for motion picture production have been included in the program of the Office of Weights

and Measures for the new fiscal year beginning July 1.

4. State Standards

The committee was pleased to learn that progress has been made

toward the development of prototypes of the new State Standards

which the Bureau proposes to recommend and perhaps furnish to the

States if funds are made available. Hope was expressed that this

program can go forward as planned. It was the opinion of the committee that the States should be required to indicate their intention

and ability to utilize the new standards effectively. For this purpose,

the committee suggested that the Office of Weights and Measures develop a set of minimum requirements to be met by State offices before

receiving the new standards.

Since the meeting of the committee, good progress has been made in

the selection of a suitable alloy for mass standards and in the development of specifications for the construction of these and other standards.

5. National Conference

Members of the committee were invited by Mr. Bussey to offer suggestions for improvement of the National Conference program. In

discussing this subject, the committee called particular attention to

the value of NBS sponsorship of the Conference and commended the

Office of Weights and Measures for the continuing high quality of the

programs which have been arranged. It was the expressed opinion

of the committee that much of the effectiveness and stability of the

National Conference has resulted from the leadership and guidance

provided by the Office of Weights and Measures.

6. Consumer Information

The chairman reviewed for the committee the changing and expanding scientific requirements upon the National Bureau of Standards

which have necessitated a gradual curtailment of the Bureau's direct

services to the general public. Members of the committee indicated

their understanding of the many demands upon the Bureau, but urged

that its withdrawal from the consumer information field not extend

to the area of weights and measures. It was noted that the committee

considers consumer education to be vital in securing uniformity in

weights and measures laws and methods of inspection.

The chairman emphasized that the Bureau renders many services

to the consumer through its services to science and industry. These

services, though indirect, are nonetheless real. Some of the standards

63
issued by the Bureau which touch nearly every household and community are the standards for fading, the standards for kitchen and

bathroom furniture, the familiar standard yellow color for school

buses, and the standard colors for signal lights.

7. Technical Matters

The committee visited the laboratories of the NBS Mass and Scale

Section and heard an interesting account of the section's current activities. Mr. H. S. Peiser, the recently appointed Chief of the Mass

and Scale Section, was commended for Ms stimulating discussion of

the work which is under way and planned.

Discussion by the committee reaffirmed the need for NBS assistance

on certain technical problems which have been reported previously,

such as axle load weighing and commercial measurement of liquid

fertilizers. The committee was advised that priority work associated

with the Nation's missile program has limited the effort which can

be devoted to these problems, but that it is the intention of the Bureau

to initiate suitable studies when additional staff and funds can be

obtained.

The committee expressed its concern with the apparent scope and

financial implications of the problem of determining the moisture

content of agricultural commodities. It urged the Bureau to offer

all appropriate assistance to the Department of Agriculture in a

study of equipment and procedures for determination of moisture

content of grains and other commodities. In addition, the committee

suggested that this matter be brought to the attention of the Association of State Departments of Agriculture by Commissioner Brinkley.

Mr. Brinkley has reported that this matter has been taken up by

that association. Activities of the U.S. Department of Agriculture

have just been reported to you by Mr. Neustadt.

The recently announced agreement to adopt an international yard

and pound was reviewed with the committee. The members were gratified to learn that both technical and legal implications with respect

to commercial standards have been studied b}^ the Office of Weights

and Measures.

8. Other Items

The committee was favorably impressed with the work being done

by Mr. R. W. Smith on the Weights and Measures Archival Library.

It was noted that the Bureau is most fortunate in this undertaking

to have the benefit of Mr. Smith's extensive knowledge of the field.

The committee welcomed the opportunity to meet briefly with Mr.

George Morrow and to learn of the study of scientific activities of

the National Bureau of Standards being made by a Special Advisory

Committee to the Department of Commerce. It also enjoyed a short

discussion with Dr. A. V. Astin, Director of the Bureau, concerning

some of the matters considered during the meeting.

In submitting its report, the Weights and Measures Advisory Committee expresses appreciation for the opportunity to present its views

on the various matters which were discussed. All members indicated

their willingness to meet with the Director of the Bureau for additional consultation if needed.

64
DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING REPORT

Mr. Scheurer : I should like to go on record, as a member of the

Weights and Measures Advisory Committee, that I sincerely do hope

that no change will be made in the publication policy of the National

Bureau of Standards as it relates to weights and measures publications.

Dr. Gordon : I think it should be made clear that the members of

the Advisory Committee were not opposed to the additional imprint

of the National Conference on Weights and Measures on weights and

measures publications of the Bureau. The committee was very strong

in its recommendations that Bureau sanction of such publications be

continued. As far as I know, there have been no complaints from

any representatives of States, counties, and cities that the Bureau was

operating in an area that should be reserved to them. It has been

their feeling that the publications of the Bureau have been very

helpful and very desirable.

Dr. McPherson: I should like to make it quite clear that the

recommendation in question was that publications dealing with matters

outside the field of measurement be treated just the same as are series

of publications on protection from the hazards of radiation. These

publications are printed by the Government Printing Office as circulars

of the National Bureau of Standards. The title page bears the statement "Recommendations of the National Committee on Radiation

Protection" and the preface carries a statement as to the makeup of

the national committee. We are proposing similar treatment for

publications dealing with weights and measures administration as

distinguished from those dealing with weights and measures technology. The former would be issued as publications of the Bureau

and, in addition, would carry the caption "Recommendations of the

National Conference on Weights and Measures" and the preface

would contain appropriate acknowledgments and a description of the

means by which the document became a recommendation of the

Conference.

As I understand the recommendations of the Advisory Committee

and the recommendations of this Conference as indicated by its support of the report of the Executive Committee, it is the unanimous

opinion of the committee and of the Conference that weights and

measures publications be issued as publications of the National Bureau

of Standards without reference to the National Conference. This is

a matter which the Director of the Bureau has instructed me to discuss

with the Director of Publications at the Department of Commerce.

Our decision must be based on the enabling statute of the Bureau,

Public Law 619, passed in 1950, and interpretations of this statute by

the Department of Commerce.

I can assure you that your unanimous recommendation will be

reported and will be given serious consideration.

AFTERNOON OF WEDNESDAY, JUNE 10, 1959 —NO BUSINESS SESSION—

Tours of the Agricultural Research Laboratories, U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Beltsville, Md., and of the laboratories of the National

Bureau of Standards were conducted during the afternoon for many

of the delegates of the Conference.

65
FOURTH SESSION—MORNING OF THURSDAY,

JUNE 11, 1959

(J. P. McBride Presiding)

REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON TRADING IN GRAINS BY

WEIGHT

Presented by G. L. Johnson, Chairman, Director, Division of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture, State of Kentucky

The National Conference on Weights and Measures has for many

years fostered a move that would abolish the unit "bushel" as the

basic unit in the trading of grains. This is a logical and economical

move, since the real dry measure bushel has not been used in the

grain trade since the advent of multiple lever scales. For many years

there existed a standing committee of the Conference to which was

assigned this particular responsibility. That standing committee

made its final report and recommendations, which were adopted by

the Conference, and was abolished in 1957. The responsibilities of

the committee were reassigned to the Conference Committee on Laws

and Regulations.

In 1958, on recommendation of the Committee on Laws and Regulations, the Conference established a new special committee in this

area with directions that the special committee "consider and develop

ways and means to expedite the transition" to changing over to the

hundredweight as the basic unit of measurement in the grain industry.

During its annual meeting, held in Madison, Wis., September 29

to October 3, 1958, the National Association of State Departments

of Agriculture adopted the following resolution on the subject "Standard Weight for Grain"

Whereas, all commercial feed is formulated on the basis of hundredweight;

and

Whereas, flour and meal are milled on the basis of pounds of hundredweight

;

and

Whereas, the substitution of one grain for another on a pound-for-pound

basis is used in the formulating of feeds and the feeding of animals ; and

Whereas, grain is weighed in hundredweights and converted mathematically

to bushels for purposes of making payment in normal channels of trade ; and

Whereas, all transportation charges on grain are made in terms of hundredweight ; Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, assembled at its 40th Annual Convention at Madison, Wis.,

September 29 to October 3, 1958, through its Executive Committee, should

encourage the grain trade, as well as the State and Federal Governments,

to adopt the hundredweight as the basic unit for trading in grains ; and

Be it further resolved, that a National Committee for Trading in Weight

be formed to coordinate all of the various groups' efforts in achieving this

objective of a proposed standard.

Your special committee endorses this action by the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture and is in agreement that

this is the proper national body to pursue the transition.

Your committee recommends that the National Conference on

Weights and Measures keep in touch with the situation through its

Committee on Laws and Regulations and that the Conference offer

its facilities in aid of the transition.

66
The committee recommends that the Special Committee on Trading

in Grains by Weight be abolished.

This majority report was not unanimously agreed to, one member

dissenting ; therefore, in accordance with the provisions of the "Organization and Procedure" of the Conference, a minority report has been

prepared by Mr. Erling Hansen of Minnesota and is appended.

G. L. Johnson, Chairman

G. W. Bay

Ralph Magoffin

R. C. Hungate, Consultant

A. T. McPherson, Consultant

W. S. Bussey, Secretary

MINORITY REPORT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON TRADING IN GRAINS BY WEIGHT

As a member of this committee I would like to submit a minority

report. Minnesota has the largest cash grain market in the

world, the Minneapolis Grain Exchange, and is the headquarters of

some of the largest grain and milling firms in the United States.

The bushel is favored by the Minneapolis Grain Exchange and by

the great majority of its members. Many large firms, such as Cargill,

Inc., General Mills, Inc., Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. and F. H.

Peavey & Co., have gone on record favoring the bushel. Surely, they

would not have done so without good reason.

Most grain companies admit accounting procedures should be more

simplified under the hundredweight system. HowT ever, other considerations overshadow the savings in time and effort of the accountants.

The bushel is two things—a measure of volume and a measure of

weight. The "volume" bushel is defined as a dry measure containing

2150.42 cu in. The "weight" bushel has been so designated by the

United States Government in establishing the per bushel weights of

grain—wheat, 60 lbs; barley, 48 lbs; oats, 34 lbs, and rye and

corn, 56 lbs.

A bushel of grain at the specified test weight will occupy approximately a bushel of space. Changes in test weight will cause slight

variations in the amount of space grain will occupy. However, even

taking into consideration the variations caused by test weight, there is

a close correlation between bushels and space requirements, regardless

of what grain is being considered. In other words, the bushel is the

common denominator for all grains.

The "hundredweight" is a measure of weight only and has no relation to volume. Since elevator operation is a business dealing in space

or volume the trade objects vigorously to all attempts to change from

the "bushel" system, which gives both volume and weight, to a "hundredweight" system which gives weight only.

An elevator has a definite volume capacity or storage space. Space

is essentially what an elevator operator is selling when he issues a

storage receipt. The use of the "bushel" in handling and stori ingrain facilitates charging the same amount for a given amount of

space whether the space is used for wheat or corn or oats. Use of the

"bushel" also facilitates figuring storage requirements and available

capacities.

The Minnesota Railroad and Warehouse Commission has gone on

record opposing any legislation or directives that would make this

change mandatory. The heart of the northwest grain country has four

67
States—Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota with

laws relating to the handling of grain by the bushel, and in each State

new laws would have to be passed by each legislature to accomplish

this proposed change.

Erling Hansen,

Member Special Committee on Trading In Grains by Weight

(On motion of the committee chairman, seconded from the floor the majority

report of the Special Committee on Trading in Grains by Weight was adopted by

voice vote.)

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON NOMINATIONS AND ELECTION

OF OFFICERS

Presented by R. E. Meek, Chairman, Director, Division of Weights

and Measures, State Board of Health, State of Indiana

The Nominating Committee submits the following report, including nominations for office in the National Conference on Weights and

Measures to serve during the ensuing year or until such time as their

successors are elected.

Consideration was given by the committee to several factors in the

selecting of nominees for office. Such considerations were geographical distribution, attendance records, Conference participation, and

interest in promoting weights and measures.

The Nominating Committee now submits to the Conference the

following nominations for office in the National Conference for the

ensuing year

For Chairman: H. E. Crawford, of Jacksonville, Fla.

For Vice Chairmen: R. M. Bodenweiser, of Mercer County, N.J.

;

H. N. Dufe, of Colorado; J. I. Moore, of North Carolina; W. E.

Sheehy, of Fairfield County, Conn.

For Treasurer: C. C. Morgan, of Gary, Ind.

For Chaplain: Ralph Magoffin, of South Carolina.

For members of the Executive Committee: The officers, ex officio, and

A. T. Anderson, of Cambridge, Mass.; G. W. Bay, of Missouri;

J. M. Boucher, of the District of Columbia; R. A. Findlay, of

Alaska; J. W. D. Harvey, of Georgia; J. F. Madden, of New

York ; M. L. Rice, of Richmond, Va. ; H. D. Robinson, of Maine

;

A. D. Rose, of Kern County, Calif. ; J. D. Walton, of Dallas, Tex.

R. E. Meek, Chairman

J. P. Leonard

A. J. Mayer

H. J. McDade

R. W. Searles

C. J. Willis, Jr.

(The report of the Committee on Nominations was adopted by the Conference and the officers were elected by (1) a motion, adopted unanimously by

voice vote, to close the nominations, and (2) the unanimous adoption, by voice

vote, of a motion by Mr. Powers to the effect that the Conference Secretary be

instructed to cast a single ballot for the nominees selected by the committee.)

68
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES IN ALASKA—THE 49TH STATE

By R. A. Findlay, Inspector, Division of Weights and Measures, Department

of State Police, State of Alaska

To understand the problems of weights and measures enforcement

in Alaska as it differs from those of the other 48 States—or I should

say 49 now that Hawaii has been admitted to the Union—one must

first have a general knowledge of Alaska in relation to its size, population, and transportation. First then, I will give you a brief outline

of our State and the conditions we encounter in enforcing weights

and measures supervision.

Alaska is a vast territory which covers an area of 546,400 square

miles with a coastline of 33,904 miles. This area is more than twice

the size of the largest State in the Continental United States, and

our coastline exceeds the combined total of all the States. The southern tip of the State's panhandle is 750 miles north of Seattle ; the

State adjoins Canada on the east and extends north to the Arctic

Ocean and west to the Bering Sea—at one point only 2% miles

separates Big Diomede Island of Alaska from Little Diomede Island

off the coast of Siberia, a part of Russia. If you were to fly by commercial airline from Ketchikan, the southernmost part of the State,

to Point Barrow on the coastline of the Arctic Sea or to Wales on the

Bering Straits, actual flying time would exceed 8 hours. You would

experience climatic conditions from a possible 60° above zero to a

possible 40°-50° below zero during the winter months. Contrary to

popular belief, Alaska is not a field of ice and snow. In the interior

and southern parts of the State we experience conditions very similar

to those you would find in your own State. Around the Fairbanks

area, in the summer months the temperature rises to 90° and daylight lasts for 19 to 23 hours.

Alaska's population is estimated at 210,000, figuring a little more

than 2 square miles for each resident. In summer months construction

workers, fishermen, and tourists increase the population by another

100,000.

Costs of living are much higher than those in the other States. The

latest figures show Juneau prices 21.4 percent and Anchorage prices

35.2 percent higher than Seattle prices, Fairbanks was rated 45.4

percent and Nome 49.9 percent above Seattle. With the cost of living

at such a high peak, weights and measures officials and representatives

of industry can readily understand the importance of weights and

measures supervision in Alaska to protect the public against unfair

practices.

Our weights and measures supervision has been a division of the

State Police with just one inspector to handle all the work of testing,

supervision, and enforcement of regulations. As you look at the map

of Alaska you may wonder how just one man is able to travel over

this vast area and still control and enforce the regulations required

of us. First then, our police force is made up of some 50 officers stationed in headquarters of the larger cities or in outposts in the lesspopulated areas. This personnel, in effect, has supplied the weights

and measures inspector with 50 or more deputies to assist in weights

and measures enforcement. The officers do no actual testing of equipment but do help by handling preliminary complaints of violations,

which are forwarded to the inspector for investigation. They advise

69
merchants and the public of the weights and measures regulations

and in many instances have witnessed the breaking and resealing of

equipment that needed repair. Phone service, office equipment, and

transportation are provided in many cases when the inspector is in

the locality of a headquarters station or outpost.

In order to visit the many cities and towns, particularly in the

southeastern part of the State, which is accessible only by plane,

testing equipment must be readily available. It would be impractical

and expensive to transport test weights and measuring equipment on

each trip. To solve this problem, we have purchased a number of

test weight kits, 50-pound weights, and 5-gallon test measures and

have placed them in most of the cities scattered throughout the State

for the inspector's use when visiting these localities. Westward or

Interior Alaska, as we call it, differs from the southeastern part of

the State in that there are some 5,000 miles of highways. I wish to

point out that our cities are unlike some of the larger cities in your

States where you have populations of 200,000 to over a million in a

concentrated area. Anchorage, our largest city, has an estimated

population of 60,000, and other cities and towns range from 20,000 to

less than 1,000 persons. Such populations, of course, reduce the number of markets, gas stations, and other establishments that the inspector must visit in each city. In some cases it is necessary only to

spend a day or two in one of the smaller towns and to then travel

to the next city or village.

In 1957 we placed in service a weights and measures truck, complete

with test weights, standard measures, and a 100-gallon meter prover

equipped with a power-take-off pump for checking vehicle tank and

bulk-plant meters. This equipment is stored in Anchorage, some 800

miles from the Juneau headquarters of our weights and measures

activity. The equipment is used to cover most of the locations within

a radius of 500 to 800 miles of Anchorage, as well as all of the highway system.

If you were to travel with me on a field trip of inspections, we

would leave our Juneau headquarters by plane and fly 4 hours to

Anchorage, where we would work that city for a period of 3 to 4

weeks. We would then travel by truck the loop route to Fairbanks,

456 miles distant, checking all the gas stations, combination lodges,

grocery stores and small towns on the way. In about 6 days we

would arrive in Fairbanks, remaining there for a period of 2 to 3

weeks. We would then take a different highway, working to the

Canada-Alaska border, then driving through 500 miles of the Yukon

Territorv and back to the southern border of the Yukon-British

Columbia and Alaska borders. We would work the Alaska Highway

again to the small town of Haines, where we would ferry our truck

and equipment to Juneau, a trip of 6 hours by water, and enjoy the

scenery of the most beautiful mountans and glaciers in the world.

By this time we would have spent about 50 days in the field and inspected some 400 pieces of equipment.

After a couple of weeks working around Juneau with our truck,

we would take the ferry again and drive through the Yukon Territory

to the Alaskan border, then take another route to several of the sea- coast towns, mountain villages, and highways, eventually returning

to our starting point of Anchorage. From here we would fly to Nome

and several other cities that are inaccessible by road. There we

TO
j would find conditions very different from those in the larger cities

that we had just left. Living conditions and prices are much higher,

for every item of food, clothing, and fuel must be transported by

boat or plane. The people in these remote areas are mostly native

Indian or Eskimo. The meat markets instead of selling all beef, have

their cases filled with reindeer meat from the local herds of reindeer,

which are under strict control of the Federal Government.

The native Eskimo is a herder (better known to you as a cowboy)

except that the Eskimo walks with his herd instead of using a horse

as most cowboys do. Also, the methods of buying and selling are

different from the larger cities. For many years the buying and selling

of fish has been exchanged on a size basis instead of the customary

weight basis that is practiced in the southern part of the State. This

makes it difficult, in some respects, to promulgate weights and measures

regulations to be uniform for the entire State. Bread is another

item that would be difficult to control to a uniform weight and size,

as you have in your States. In a number of the remote towns, the

local baker may have three or four dozen bread pans that may vary

in size and shape—resulting in the product being offered for sale in

sizes ranging from one pound to one pound 4 or 5 ounces, all selling

for the same price. If we put out a regulation that bread for the

entire State must be sold in a one-pound or l^-pound loaf with the

generally accepted tolerances, we would probably force these small

bakers out of business and have the local population run us out of

town. I do not wish to give the impression that we in Alaska do not

have uniformity in our regulations; however, there are exceptions

like those I have just stated that must be considered when drafting

regulations to be enforced over the entire State.

Other regulations that we do enforce are those covering the sale

and repair of weighing and measuring devices. The salesman or

repairman must report to the Department within 10 days the location

and type of equipment sold or of the major repair work performed

on scales, gas pumps, or other equipment. Before any repairman

may break a seal that has been placed on a piece of equipment by the

inspector, he must first obtain a permit issued by our office. These

permits are issued on a yearly basis to repairmen who are properly

qualified both as to experience and as to general knowledge of weights

and measures regulations.

Regulations concerning mechanics of equipment were promulgated

in order to control to some extent the practice of salesmen who come

to Alaska with an order book to sell scales and ship them to the

customer without any followup to see that the equipment is properly

installed for use. One section of our regulations reads, in part

"Any person who . . . sells . . . offers for sale ... or exposes for

sale ... a false weight or measure ... is guilty of a misdemeanor

and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $500

or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both." We have notified

all known dealers and salesmen doing business in Alaska concerning

these regulations. They have accepted these regulations and are

willing to cooperate in the enforcement of our weights and measures

regulations.

Prior to 1956, Alaska had very little weights and measures enforcement and packers shipped into the State packages having no

declaration of the net quantity of the commodity. The merchants

71
were openly selling products on a gross weight basis although the

law concerning net weight sales had been in effect since 1939. This

irregularity stresses the importance of education, enforcement, and

publicity. Unless the merchants and packers were informed of the

regulations and the weights and measures official continually made

routine inspections, this habit could have developed into serious

complications which would have been difficult to correct. A drive

was immediately started to notify all violators of the requirements.

Within a very short time this practice was corrected.

Concerning our future plans on weights and measures administration as a State, we, like a great many of our sister States and

jurisdictions, desire to enact the Model State Law, promulgate the

rules and regulations as recommended by the National Conference on

Weights and Measures, and follow the specifications and tolerances

contained in Handbook 44, with a view to some day having complete

uniformity within all the 50 States of our Nation.

We, in Alaska, feel that we will obtain this goal in the not-toodistant future by keeping before the public our educational program,

showing the film, "Assignment—Weights and Measures" to as many

clubs and service groups as possible, thus keeping in contact with

those officials responsible for appropriations and equipment. Besides

the publicity received during our recent Weights and Measures Week,

we also received the State Standards of Weight and Measure. These

were presented to the State of Alaska by the Secretary of Commerce

at the National Bureau of Standards in Washington, D.C. These

Standards,, comprising a yard and meter bar, gold plated weights

from 50 pounds down to %2 ounce, volumetric measures from 5

gallons to 2-ounce graduates, and mahogany-finished glass cases to

display the equipment, were gratefully received, and they stressed

the importance of weights and measures administration to our State

officials.

On March 17 of this year, our legislature saw fit to transfer the

Weights and Measures Division from the Department of State Police

to the Department of Commerce. The Governor has 6 months to

make transfers under the State Reorganization Bill. How this transfer will affect our Division is difficult to determine at this time.

However, I feel confident that our operations in the Department of

Commerce will work out very well and, in some respects, much better

than in the Department of State Police. Later this year we intend

to draft an entirely new weights and measures code, modeled on the

recommendations of this National Conference. We trust that we

may call on the National Bureau of Standards to help develop a

future program of weights and measures administration for our State.

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Sanders : I was particularly interested in your reference to a

registration plan for scale servicemen. You called it a permit

arrangement. Could you tell us what brought about the installation

of such a plan in Alaska and expand, perhaps, on how it works ? Mr. Findlay : I have been a salesman myself and realize fully that

sometimes a piece of equipment is sold and no adequate provisions

for its service are provided. In weights and measures, this can be

disastrous, because not only does the equipment require approval by

competent State authority, but also it may very well control the profit

72
or loss of its owner. Our plan is simply that, on application, permit

cards are issued to those who by their experience seem qualified to

undertake repair of devices. It is necessary that we authorize registered servicemen to remove rejection tags and return to service devices

that have been repaired, because it obviously would be impossible for

an inspector to return to some remote location on call of the proprietor

of a place of business that his rejected device had been repaired.

Mr. Sanders : The Scale Manufacturers Association, which I represent, highly endorses such a plan of registration for scale servicemen.

Dr. Gordon : I noted your reference to the need for lack of uniformity in sizes of loaves of bread. How much time do you expect

to transpire before it will be possible to bring about uniformity in this

commodity ? Mr. Findlay : Because of the circumstances that I explained in my

paper, I camiot predict uniformity in sizes of loaves of bread in the

foreseeable future.

FULL MEASURE

By Hon. B. J. Butler, Commissioner, Department of Agriculture.

State of Kentucky

The importance of weights and measures work in any State, province, or city, cannot be overemphasized. In Kentucky, as in many

other States, this work is placed in the Department of Agriculture.

During my 4-year term as commissioner, which now nears its termination, I have exerted every effort to support your work.

First, I had to learn something of the activities, procedures, and

problems which are yours. Having done this, I attempted in my

meager way to lend a hand. During my first year in office it was my

privilege to attend the National Conference on Weights and Measures.

To say the least, this was an enlightening and challenging experience.

Enlightening, because of the vast new horizons it opened to me and

the insight it provided in your endeavors ; challenging, because of the

opportunities I saw for greater participation of the so-called higher

echelon.

If my memory serves me correctly, I was the only commissioner

or director of agriculture at that meeting. For a moment I wondered

if I was a carpetbagger in the Holy Land ! Then the great warmth

of your friendship penetrated me and I felt as if I were somewhat a

real part of your group. But to merely belong is of no real value

and to do so is of no challenge to a restless person. The problem

now was what could those in similar capacities to mine do to further

your efforts. After all, this was a part of our work, too ! Like so many other good intentions, mine were soon absorbed by

other things—I became so engrossed with the urgent that I neglected

the important. Another year passed and another Weights and

Measures Conference rolled around. An invitation was placed neatly

on my desk and underscored in red so I would not miss it. But I

found some reason to avoid this one. But in a few weeks the proceedings of that session were placed in a conspicuous place on my

desk. There was also a polite note that suggested that there was

important material in this document that would be helpful to me.

I moved it about from one side of the desk to the other for several

days. Then one morning my secretary suggested, or in fact insisted,

that I clean the desk up a bit. The weights and measures document

73
was the last thing left—I would just have to browse through it so I

could at least let on that I knew what it was about. But as I got into

the thing I got real interested and learned a whole lot. Then an

idea struck me—why not try to get some others of my same category

interested. At the Xational Meeting of Commissioners that fall,

there was much discussion of the matter and I found Parke Brinkley,

of Virginia, was most active and interested and had already planned

some in this direction.

We have had, from that day to this, a Committee on Weights and

Measures. This group has been showing increasing interest and ac- tivity in each succeeding year. It has been my privilege to be a member since its formation and this year I am honored to be its chairman.

At this juncture I invite each and every one of you to give us the

benefit of your thinking, ideas, and suggestions as to what this committee might do to further the weights and measures program. Go

home and talk it over with those in your State who will come to our

annual meeting of State Departments of Agriculture this fall. If

this is not possible or interest is not there, correspond directly with

me. Other members of the committee are Roy Freeland, Kansas;

William L. Harrelson, South Carolina; Robert H. Terhune, Ohio;

P. I. Fitts, Xew Hampshire ; and S. E. Corley, Mississippi.

Last year it was my privilege and honor to have the opportunity

to address this group. Then last October it was my good fortune

to speak to the California Association of Weights and Measures annual meeting in Monterey. To you Californians I can say you almost

gained a citizen ! And now I am back with you for a third session.

Pretty soon you will think I am an important weights and measures

man and not just some beat up politician and commissioner of

agriculture.

This reminds me of a story told in our State. Up near Jackson,

which is the county seat of "Bloody" Breathitt County, there is a

road that winds up the mountain. It has a series of hairpin turns

on it which are separated by perhaps a half-mile linear distance

but very close together vertically.

A hitchhiker in this vicinity threw up his thumb at a passing truck,

but the driver paid no heed. As the truck roared on down hill and

made his turn, the hitchhiker merely stepped down over the bank

and onto the road at the next bend. Again, the thumb went up, but

ao-ain the truck showed no sign of stopping. Once more our hero

climbs down to a lower level of the road and hoists his thumb again

as the truck approached. This time the driver applied the brakes

and came to a halt. "Hop in buddy," he said, "You know I ain't supposed to pick up hitchhikers, but your face looked so familiar, I'm

just sure I know you from some place !"

Let us review briefly the action of the Weights and Measures Committee. At the last annual meeting of the Xational Association of

Departments of Agriculture there were some three resolutions passed.

In addition to the resolution previously reported by the Special Committee on Trading in Grains by Weight, the following two were

adopted

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

Whereas, most Weights and Measures laws are enforced by Departments of

Agriculture ; and

Whereas, uniformity is the essence of good weights and measures laws ; and

74
Whereas, uniformity of specifications and tolerances is an important factor

in the manufacturing of commercial equipment ; and

Whereas, the National Conference on Weights and Measures, in cooperation

with the National Bureau of Standards, has published a code on Weights and

Measures Regulations covering specifications and tolerances; and

Whereas, in order for States to render this all-important service to their

citizens, it is necessary to have standardization and coordination of laws and

regulations with other States and the United States Government;

Noio therefore he it Resolved, that the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, in convention assembled at Madison, Wis., September 29

through October 3, 1958, encourage and promote the adoption of Handbook 44, as adopted by the National Conference on Weights and Measures and recommended by the National Bureau of Standards, in order to bring about uniform

laws, and regulatory requirements in all States ; and

Be it further Resolved, that the association urge its members to examine the

individual Weights and Measures program for the purpose of modernizing and

standardizing their testing equipment and enforcement practices, taking full

advantage of the assistance that may be obtained from the National Bureau of

Standards.

MOISTURE DETERMINATIONS FOR GRAINS

Whereas, the accurate determination of the moisture contents of grains and

other agricultural products is of great economical importance because moisture

is a factor in determining the prices at which such products are marketed ; and

Whereas, an inaccurate grain moisture meter may cost a farmer as much as 30 to 35 cents per bushel in the price received for his grain ; and

Whereas, a plurality of instruments and methods are currently used in determining the moisture content of grains ; Therefore oe it Resolved, that the National Association of State Departments

of Agriculture assembled at Annual Convention in Madison, Wis., September

29—October 3, 1958, request the United States Department of Agriculture and

the National Bureau of Standards, working jointly, to investigate the subject

of moisture determinations of grains to the end that accurate means and

methods for this purpose be developed, and that uniform specifications, tolerances and testing methods be established for the instruments involved in such

determinations, and recommend them to the States for adoption.

Some of us were not fully satisfied with all elements of these, but at

least they are a start in the right direction. And even more important, this represents another group that has begun to think about

the work which you do and the problems that are yours. And the

more you get to doing this, the greater will be your progress.

The challenge to improve and expand our efforts faces us all each

day. Did you ever stop to wonder why you got into weights and

measures work and then ponder on why you didn't get out after you

found yourself in ? There are no doubt many easier ways to make a

more prosperous living and all of you could qualify in some of these

endeavors. Yet you remain for you have come upon one of life's

challenges—you have found a thing to do which gives you satisfaction

in doing it.

Speaking of easier things to do reminds me of one of my experiences when I was county agent in Fayette County. One dismal February afternoon, I was passing the large Veterans Hospital just outside Lexington when the notion struck me to stop by and call on an

old friend who was there taking treatment for a nervous breakdown.

You see, all the patients in that hospital are there from mental disturbances with the exception of a few emergency cases. As I walked down a long corridor I came upon one of the patients in

his dark red robe. He gazed intently out the window and his eyes

seemed to see beyond the landscape and steadily falling cold February

rain. As I went by I almost automatically said, "Hi, pardner, how

519003—5» 6

75
are you?" Quickly lie turned about and his eyes lit up like he had

discovered a long lost friend. Being in no hurry, I decided to pass

the time of day with him. Our conversation brought out the fact that

I was a county agent and that he at one time had farmed on a small

farm in the eastern and mountainous part of our State.

He spoke with a high degree of intelligence, so by now I was sure

he was one of the emergency cases. Boldly I came forth with this

question, "What are you in here for?" And quickly, with a cunning

grin, came his reply, "They think I'm crazy, but ain't this a darn

sight easier than farming in Eastern Kentucky !" For a moment I

pondered his remark then said, "Buddy, have you got another bed in

your ward?"

It is my impression that your work is being more readily accepted

and appreciated each succeeding year. In Kentucky we have reached

a point where we can almost always get a court to decide in our favor

a few years ago we were generally afraid to take a case to court,

for we almost knew the outcome before going. When you get juries

to seeing it the right way you can be assured the public is sold on

the correctness and importance of the law involved.

The road to this point has not been easy. There has had to be much

sweat, effort, patience, and even force. Sometimes when we have a

tough case to deal with, our patience is tried beyond the breaking point

and we must resort to stern measures. This is, of course, the difficult

portion of any assignment, but an important one. Indecision is the

prelude to disaster and so we must decide our course and stay on it.

To deal sternly with people reminds me of the story of the little

boy in the toy department of a large store. He had mounted himself

upon a rocking horse and would not get off. His mother tried, then

father, but to no avail. The saleslady now talked patiently to the

young man, but he only shook his head and clung on tighter. The

floor manager now tried his hand, but he, too, failed. Then along

came the janitor and he saw the problem. He stepped up beside the

lad and said something to him and the boy quickly dismounted, took

his mother's hand and departed.

The amazed saleslady and manager were astounded. "What did you

say to him to get him off so easily?" queried the manager. Quickly

the janitor replied, "I said, get off that horse or I'll break your damn

neck !"

I fear the watchdog service which you provide is taken for granted

by too many of our citizens. Perhaps you need a good slogan to focus

attention to your efforts. Your ideas on this would far outweigh

mine.

I wonder how quickly those who use corner cutting tactics would

move in if you moved out. This not only is unfair to the consumer,

but also to the legitimate operator. The strategic placement of the

weapon which you hold is of more than significant consequence.

I recall a war story that illustrates this to a degree. While in one

of our static positions in the Apennine Mountains we were continually

harassed by an enemy machine gun. Finally, we located its position

but we could not hit it with mortar or artillery fire because of its

protected location. We planned to send a patrol that night to eliminate this obnoxious fellow.

Shortly after dark the sergeant in charge moved out with his carefully selected patrol. All was quiet until about midnight. The

76
silence was broken by the distinctive sound of a burst of German

machine gun fire. Following this, a few American carbine shots rang

out. Then one more burst from the "Jerry" and all was again silent.

Some 2 hours later the sergeant reported to me in a most military

manner. "Did you get that machine gun, Sergeant?" I asked. To

which he replied in his Georgia accent, "No suh, they was still

using it !"

I'm sure that as long as we are still using your services our position

will be much more stable and less easily invaded.

Now, in true tradition of most speakers, I have talked much and said

little. If you people could find some way of getting full measure from

speeches, or better still, getting the speeches cut to where the audience

gets full measure for their time, I'm certain your popularity and

complete acceptance by the public would be assured.

It has been my great pleasure to meet with you for my third time.

As I depart this session I full well realize that it will perhaps be my

last with you. My term as Commissioner expires at the end of the

calendar year. In Kentucky we are not permitted to succeed ourselves.

Maybe somewhere down life's road we shall meet again—I certainly

hope so and trust you feel the same.

For your many courtesies I am grateful; for your kindness, I am

deeply appreciative. I only hope that our association has meant as

much to you as it has to me. Continue the good work and seek always

to improve yourself and your profession.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ADMINISTRATION IN FRANCE

By Louis Krach, Chief Engineer, Service of Instruments of Measure, Ministry of Industry arid Commerce, Republic of France

I am highly honored and it is a very great pleasure for me to be

here. I wish to thank very much Mr. Bussey, the Secretary, and all

the staff of the 44th National Conference on Weights and Measures

for their very kind invitation. I am going to try to give you a

general view of the French weights and measures service.

A preliminary remark is necessary. France is a completely centralized State. We do not have local laws. All the laws, regulations,

and even instructions are enacted in Paris and are applicable everywhere. The departments or districts into which France is divided

are only administrative divisions.

The role of the inspectors of weights and measures is defined by

the law of July 4, 1837, article 7

The inspectors of weights and measures shall determine and report infractions

of the laws and regulations relative to the metric system of weights and measures. They may impound such weighing and measuring instruments when their use is prohibited by the laws and regulations. Their reports shall be accepted

by the courts in the absence of proof of the contrary. The inspectors shall be

sworn by the competent court of their area. The law of April 2, 1919, further extends the duties of the inspectors

by entrusting them with the verification and inspection of all other

instruments for measuring units legal in France, including those of

length, surface, volume, and angle; mass and density (never translated by "densite" but by "masse volumique") ; time, force, energy,

power, pressure, electric resistance, intensity, potential and quantity,

77
temperature and quantity of heat and cold; luminous intensity and

flux, degree of illumination, magnifying power of optical lenses, etc.

For more than 120 years, the metric system has been the only one

lawful.

The problems of organization and control are regulated by the

decree of November 30, 1944.

General Organization

The control of measuring instruments embraces the following fields

1. The examination and testing of prototypes (models) for approval of design

and construction.

2. The initial verification of new and repaired instruments for conformity with

the approved model and compliance with official specifications.

3. The periodic verification of instruments in current use for determining

whether such instruments underwent initial verification and for ordering adjustment or withdrawal from service of those no longer conforming to official

regulations.

4. The supervision of instruments in current use for compliance with legislative provisions, proper operating conditions, and correct and honest utilization

by their owners and users. Who is entrusted with this task, the intent of which is well known

by you ? They are the Office of Weights and Measures.

The country is divided into 10 regional districts, grouping 35 division offices and 160 subordinate offices. Each office is equipped with

standards calibrated in terms of the international standards.

Approval of Models

One of the primary tasks of the Office of Weights and Measures is

the examination of instrument models designed by the various manufacturers. This is an important mission because, if instruments

manufactured to conform with the submitted and approved model

fail to function properly, only the initial verification of new instruments conforming with the model can result in a decision for revocation of approval.

Verification of Instruments

Obviously, two kinds of verification are required—the so-called

initial verification which certifies that the new instruments conform

to the approved model, and the periodic verification which determines

whether the instruments function properly and accurately. Both

verifications are certified by the application of stamps. Periodic

verification takes place once a year in principle.

The sworn agents are given extensive powers to carry out periodic

verifications and cannot be refused, for instance, entry into rooms in

which the instruments to be examined are kept. Any infraction of

the regulations is made into a report which is transmitted to the judicial authorities and may result in a fine or in imprisonment.

The sworn agents have also to carry out surprise inspections to

detect and prosecute the users of deliberately altered or nonstandard

devices or instruments, and those defrauding on the quantity of merchandise sold. Article 27 of the decree of November 30, 1944, further

states

:

If posters, advertisements, catalogs, journals, labels, or packaging indicate

units of measure other than the denominations for the respective values listed

in the table attached to the decree, police officers and the agents of weights and

measures are required to report such infractions . . .

78
The intent of this article is to provide for compliance with the

decimal metric system.

Activities of Offices

In a rather vast and modern country like France, numerous measuring instruments of all kinds are constantly used. However, the personnel of the service is quite restricted and consists of only about 350

people, secretary girls included.

In 1957, the service performed initial verification of

4,275,000 linear measures

250,000 liquid measures

1,500,000 weights

250,000 scales (ranging from fractions of a carat to over 100

metric tons and more)

40,000 petrol pumps

400,000 gas meters

1,300,000 electric meters

In addition, the service calibrated during the same year : 6,600 containers of various types with a total volume of 1,400,000

cubic meters, which included

4,200 vehicle tanks

1,650 storage tanks

200 barge tanks and tankers for river and high seas shipping

We have to test 5,500 railway car scales and 30,000 truck scales.

For this purpose, we have designed test trucks especially adapted

which differ from yours on this point: The calibrated weights are

cylindrical and can roll, and an electrical crane permits them to move

out of and into the truck.

We have a total of 305 technical personnel, as follows : two general

engineers, assuring the general management, and six chief engineers

who are the managers of the six technical divisions, all of whom

reside in Paris ; five chief engineers and five engineers who reside in

10 important towns and each of whom manages about one-tenth of

all the metropolitan territory; 25 engineers divided between Paris

and several other towns according to the needs ; 32 divisionary inspectors, 200 ordinary inspectors; and 30 technical assistants.

The tolerances, the specifications, and even the procedures are generally not very different from yours. For example, in the case of

liquid meters, for a delivery of 5 gallons of gasoline, your tolerance is

7 cubic inches, or 7/1155 = 0.45 percent. In France, the tolerance in

this case is 0.5 percent. However, regarding some points, the differences are substantially the following : The most general one is that,

in France, all weighing and measuring devices must, without exception, be tested and sealed in the plant of the manufacturer. Nothing submitted to the State control can be sold and delivered to the

purchaser before it has been tested and sealed. The manufacturers

must put to our disposal all the necessary testing apparatus.

A second difference is that sometimes we request supplementary

mechanisms in order to make the fraud more difficult or even completely impossible.

A third difference concerns liquid-measuring devices. The aireliminator must be so efficient that in any case it lets pass not more than

half percent of gas (air or vapor) with the liquid. All the air-elimi79
nators are tested and sealed. On the contrary, we have never required

visigages.

I think you know that, on the proposal of France, an international

organization (a convention between states) has been created in order

to standardize progressively the laws and regulations in the different

states of the world. This project is ambitious indeed, but I believe it

must be supported with tenacity for as long a time as necessary.

I desire to draw your attention to one question, and this is my personal point of view. Have you in mind how much the metric system

shall be used in the future after Continental Europe, Russia, South

America, and all the new or newly reorganized states, India, Japan,

Indonesia, China, and the greatest part of Africa have adopted the

metric system ? You also use it for electrical units. Think what the

situation will be in two or three decades. Check the number of men

using the metric system or not.

I am convinced it is to your interest to consider this unavoidable

problem. To find a solution is your concern, and it is a most difficult

one. In spite of all the difficulties, I am sure all weights and measures

men of all countries of the world can understand one another. I know

many of them in Europe and now know many in the United States.

We all have the same spirit, the same aim, the same difficulties. All

the occasions for a better understanding are useful. For this reason

my government decided to send me here. We, weights and measures

men, scale men, can in our particular field, which is so important in

the daily life of all persons in all countries, help the efforts of the

numerous men who work for peace and a better world by all possible

means.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON SPECIFICATIONS AND TOLERANCES

Presented by J. E. Brenton, Chairman, Chief, Bureau of Weights

and, Measures, Department of Agriculture, State of California

Because of the relatively few items before the committee on Specifications and Tolerances, it was deemed unnecessary to hold an interim

meeting. Consultation among committee members and between the

committee and weights and measures officials, industry representatives,

and others, has been carried on by correspondence.

Presented below are the recommendations of the committee, together

with appropriate comments, grouped under the code headings as found

in Handbook 44—2d edition, as amended through the 43d National

Conference.

GENERAL CODE

The importance of selecting commercial weighing and measuring

equipment that is suitable for the service in which it is to be used

cannot be overemphasized. This fact has been recognized for many

years; but with the ever increasing complexities in commerce and

trade, its importance is constantly increasing. The specific paragraph

in Handbook 44 relating to this important matter is general-regulation

paragraph G-E.3. SUITABILITY OF EQUIPMENT, which will

be found on page 39 and which now reads

G-R.3 SUITABILITY OF EQUIPMENT.—Commercial equipment shall be

suitable as to design and capacity for the service in which it is used.

It has been suggested that this paragraph be expanded so as to make

its meaning more readily understandable and to increase its usefulness

80
to the enforcement official. Accordingly, the committee offers for consideration the following

Amend general-regulation paragraph G-R.3. SUITABILITY OF

EQUIPMENT to read:

G-R.3. SUITABILITY OF EQUIPMENT —Commercial equipment shall be

suitable for the service in which it is used with respect to all elements of its

design, including but not limited to its weighing capacity (for weighing devices)

,

its rate of flow (for liquid-measuring devices), the character, number, size, and

location of its indicating or recording elements, and the value of its minimum

graduated interval.

(The item on SUITABILITY OF EQUIPMENT was adopted by voice vote.)

SCALE CODE

1. The committee has given continuous attention since 1955 to the

matter of producing a regulation, or regulations, that would properly

and adequately control the maximum value of minimum graduated

intervals on large-capacity scales of all classes other than those now

controlled by specific regulations. The Scale Manufacturers Association has also been studying this matter extensively and has rendered

valuable assistance to the committee. Many meetings, conferences,

and discussions on this subject have been held.

It is recognized by all of those who have been working on this problem that many complexities are involved. It is exceedingly difficult to

include all desirable details in a single regulation applying to a very

wide variety of types, capacities, and classes of large-capacity scales.

In the preparation of regulations having such broad application,

unnecessary restrictions that might handicap manufacturing processes,

and unwarranted discrimination between classes of devices must be

avoided. The committee feels that the Conference will be well advised

to maintain a somewhat liberal position in its adoption of requirements

having such wide application.

After much study, many discussions, and lengthy hearings, the

following regulations were submitted to and adopted by the 42d

National Conference in 1957.

R.4.6. ON CRANE SCALES.

R.4.6.1. WEIGHBEAM TYPE.—The value of the minimum graduated interval

on the weighbeam elements of a weighbeam-type crane scale shall be not greater

than 0.05 percent of the nominal capacity of the scale.

R.4.6.2. AUTOMATIC-INDICATING TYPE.—The value of the minimum graduated interval on the reading-face elements of an automatic-indicating type

crane scale shall be not greater than 0.2 percent of the reading-face capacity.

R.4.7. ON LARGE-CAPACITY SCALES OTHER THAN LIVESTOCK, ANIMAL, VEHICLE, WHEEL-LOAD, AXLE-LOAD, HAND-OPERATED GRAIN

HOPPER, AND CRANE SCALES.

R.4.7.1. WEIGHBEAM TYPE.—The value of the minimum graduated interval

on the main weighbeam elements and on the tare weighbeam elements of largecapacity scales other than livestock, animal, vehicle, wheel-load, axle-load, handoperated grain hopper, and crane scales shall be not greater than 0.05 percent

of the nominal capacity of the scale, or one-fourth pound, whichever is greater,

and in any case not greater than 50 pounds.

R.4.7.2. AUTOMATIC-INDICATING TYPE.—The value of the minimum

graduated interval on the reading-face elements of large-capacity automaticindicating scales other than livestock, animal, vehicle, wheel-load, axle-load,

hand-operated grain hopper, and crane scales shall be not greater than 0.1

percent of the nominal capacity of the scale, or one-fourth pound, whichever is

greater, and in any case not greater than 50 pounds.

It was recognized during the presentation and discussions of these

regulations in 1957 that they were not perfect and that further revision

would be required. (See KBS Miscellaneous Publication 222, Keport

81
of the 42d National Conference on Weights and Measures, 1957, page

77. ) Study by the committee and by the Scale Manufacturers Association has continued since that time, and a further report was made to

the 43d National Conference in 1958. (See NBS Miscellaneous Publication 225, Eeport of the 43d National Conference on Weights and

Measures, 1958, pages 63 and 64.)

These code requirements as they now stand are those adopted in

1957. The committee feels that the discrimination between "weighbeam-type" and "automatic-indicating type" scales as now set up in

regulation paragraphs R.4.6.1. and R.4.6.2., and R.4.7.1. and R.4.7.2.,

is undesirable and unnecessary. The committee feels there is no justification for requiring smaller graduations on a "weighbeam-type"

scale than on an "automatic-indicating type" scale of the same size and

capacity, and used for identical purposes. It is, therefore, the opinion

of the committee that the R.4.6. and R.4.7. paragraphs of the Scale

Code should be amended. Based on this conclusion, on February 12,

1959, the committee secretary mailed to approximately 88 weights and

measures officials and the Scale Manufacturers Association advance

copies of proposed amendments to the previously mentioned sections

of the Scale Code. The proposed amendments are as follows:

To correct obvious inconsistencies in the present requirements concerning maximum value of minimum graduated interval on certain

large-capacity scales, delete regulation paragraphs R.4.6., R.4.6.1.,

R.4.6.2., R.4.7., R.4.7.1., and R.4.7.2., and replace these with the follow nonretroactive regulation paragraphs

:

R.4.6. ON CRANE SCALES.—The value of the minimum graduated interval

on the main weighbeam elements, on the tare weighbeam elements, and on the

reading-face elements of a crane scale shall not be greater than 0.1 percent of

the nominal capacity of the scale. ( See also G-R.3.

)

R.4.7. ON LARGE-CAPACITY SCALES OTHER THAN LIVESTOCK, ANIMAL, VEHICLE, WHEEL-LOAD, AXLE-LOAD, HAND-OPERATED GRAIN

HOPPER, CRANE, AND RAILWAY TRACK SCALES.—The value of the minimum graduated interval on the main weighbeam elements, on the tare weighbeam

elements, and on the reading-face elements of large-capacity scales other than

livestock, animal, vehicle, wheel-load, axle-load, hand-operated grain hopper,

crane, and railway track scales shall not be greater than the values shown in

table 9. ( See also G-R.3.

)

TABLE 9.—MAXIMUM VALUE OF MINIMUM GRADUATED INTERVAL ON

THE MAIN WEIGHBEAM ELEMENTS, ON THE TARE WEIGHBEAM ELEMENTS, AND ON THE READING-FACE ELEMENTS OF LARGECAPACITY SCALES OTHER THAN LIVESTOCK, ANIMAL, VEHICLE,

WHEEL-LOAD, AXLE-LOAD, HAND-OPERATED GRAIN HOPPER, CRANE,

AND RAILWAY TRACK SCALES

Nominal capacity of scale

Maximum value

of minimum

graduated interval on main and

tare weighbeam

and reading-face

elements

Pounds

500 or ]ess

501 to 5,500, incl

5,501 to 25,000, incl

25,001 to 45,000, incl

45,001 to 110,000, incl

Over 110,000

Pounds

y*i5

10

20

50

82
Keplies were received from approximately 25 weights and measures

officials. Of this number, only two officials expressed any disapproval of the proposal as submitted. A reply was received from the

Scale Manufacturers Association on March 24, 1959, expressing rather

complete disagreement with all proposals made.

Now, after more than 3 years of study, and with extensive and

helpful counsel, advice, and assistance from the Scale Manufacurers

Association and its member companies, and based upon its keen

desire to avoid unnecessarily restrictive requirements that might re- sult in undesirable handicaps to manufacturers, and to avoid ambiguities and possible discrimination, your committee has reached the

tentative conclusion that the following amendment to the Scale Code is

necessary, practical, and desirable. It is offered for the careful consideration and detail comments of all who have interest.

Amend the Scale Code by deleting paragraphs K.4.6., E.4.6.I.,

R.4.6.2., E.4.7., R.4.7.I., and R.4.7.2., and by inserting in lieu thereof

the following paragraph to be numbered R.4.6. to read

R.4.6 ON LARGE-CAPACITY SCALES OTHER THAN LIVESTOCK, ANIMAL, VEHICLE, WHEEL-LOAD, AXLE-LOAD, HAND-OPERATED GRAIN

HOPPER, AND RAILWAY TRACK SCALES.—The value of the minimum

graduated interval on the main weighbeam elements, on the tare weighbeam

elements, and on the reading-face elements of large-capacity scales other than

livestock, animal, vehicle, wheel-load, axle-load, hand-operated grain hopper,

and railway track scales, shall be not greater than 0.1 percent of the nominal

capacity of the scale, or one-fourth pound, whichever is greater, and in any

case not greater than 50 pounds.

The committee believes that the adoption of this recommended

amendment, together with the adoption of the recommended amendment to general regulation paragraph G-R.3. of the General Code,

should serve adequately in this area to the satisfaction of manufacturers, users, and weights and measures officials alike.

DISCUSSION ON THE FOREGOING ITEM

Mr. Sanders: The Scale Manufacturers Association, representing

some 85 percent of the total scale manufacturing industry and probably even a larger percentage of the manufacturers of large-capacity

scales, has been studying the matter of maximum value of minimum

graduated intervals on large-capacity scales for at least 5 years. We

are opposed to the amendment recommended by the committee and we

recommend that it be not adopted and that this item be returned to

the committee for further consideration.

The committee proposal is approximately what was recommended

in 1955 and we believe to adopt it at this time would be a backward

step rather a progressive step. The proposed language would create

serious hardship with respect to crane scales. On automatic crane

scales the committee recommendation is a reduction in the maximum

value of the graduated interval from the present 2/10 percent to 1/10

percent. A crane scale is in a special service and must be of special

design. As I interpret the committee recommendation, it would re- quire that crane scales used in commerce be limited in capacity to

1,000 pounds.

With respect to beam scales, this recommendation increases the allowable graduation from 1/20 percent to 1/10 percent. In our opinion, that is a decrease in accuracy. In effect all large scales could be

put in the same category insofar as maximum values of minimum

83
graduated intervals are concerned. No beam scale manufacturer has

objected to the 1/20 percent requirement; they all recommend it.

Under date of March 13, 1958, my association made a recommendation to the Specifications and Tolerances Committee which would

require smaller graduations than are presently being proposed by the

committee. Our recommendation is the most realistic suggestion

that could be developed by the scale industry. This was rejected by

the committee last year. This past March a draft proposal was made

and was included in the tentative report of the committee which in

our opinion was too restrictive and was not practical or realistic. We

objected to that proposal and we feel that the present recommendation of the committee also should be rejected.

Mr. R. V. Miller : If I correctly interpret the recommendation of

the committee, it would be possible for me to sell for commercial use

a scale with a 1,000-pound dial and with nine drop weights, making a

nominal capacity of 10,000 pounds with 10-pound graduations on the

dial. If this recommendation is adopted, it will be possible for a scale

manufacturer to produce and sell for commercial use any largecapacity scales other than livestock, animal, vehicle, wheel-load, handoperated grain hopper, and railway scales with 50-pound graduations.

Mr. Brenton : Although the committee and the Conference did not

accept the recommendation of the scale industry that 50-pound graduations be allowed on axle-load scales, the door is not closed. The

committee has held this item on its agenda and will continue to study

it. I should like the Conference not to lose sight of the adopted language of paragraph G-R.3. of the General Code, which was specifically designed to serve as a caution to purchasers of scales,

manufacturers, and to weights and measures officials with respect to

appropriate equipment in commercial service. The requirement rec- ommended by the committee relating to these large-capacity scales is

not the only precaution afforded under Handbook 44.

Mr. Hansen: Because it appears to me that the recommendation

of the committee would allow lesser accuracy requirements in largecapacity scales, I suggest that this matter be postponed for further

study.

(Scale Code—Item 1, MAXIMUM VALUE OF MINIMUM GRADUATED

INTERVAL, was voted down by voice vote.)

The committee notes that a suggestion was made during the open

session that wheel-load and axle-load scales be separately treated and

that a minimum graduation of 50 pounds be considered for these

devices. No action in this regard is recommended at this time.

2. To clarify the regulation pertaining to the use of prepackaging

scales (see item 3, page 90 of this report), amend regulation paragraph R.18. to read:

R.18. PREPACKAGING SCALE.—A scale marked with the words "For Prepackaging Use Only" or with a statement of similar meaning shall be used only

for putting up packages and shall not be used for direct sales of commodities

not in package form to retail customers.

( Scale Code—Item 2 was adopted by voice vote.)

LIQUID-MEASURING DEVICE CODE

In its final report to the 43d Conference, the committee included

in the section relative to the Liquid-Measuring Device Code an item

84
relative to the elapsed-time test for liquid-measuring devices. (See

NBS Miscellaneous Publication 225, Report of the 43d National Conference on Weights and Measures, 1958, pages 65 and 66.) During the

year, with the assistance of cooperating weights and measures officials,

the Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association conducted an extensive

survey, including elapsed-time tests, on more than 100 pumps of various makes and ages. These tests were conducted in widely separated

areas of the country, using both 4-hour and overnight periods between

the first and second tests. Based on the data obtained from this survey

and from other sources available to them, the Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association has made the following definite recommendation

to the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances pertaining to retail liquid-measuring devices. The Gasoline Pump Manufacturers

Association made no recommendation relative to wholesale liquidmeasuring devices.

1) Maintenance tolerances on elapsed time tests of liquid measuring devices

shall be 2 cubic inches for the first hour for a retail device and % cubic inch

per hour thereafter, but in no case shall the tolerance be in excess of 6 cubic

inches.

2) The maximum period of nonuse for any elapsed time test shall be 24

hours.

3) No change is recommended in paragraph N.I.4., Temperature Correction,

since the recommended allowance of 0.6 percent per 10° F. change of temperature

appears adequate.

Your committee concurs in principle in the recommendations of the

Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association. It is recommended,

therefore, that notes paragraph N.1.4. be amended to read

N.1.4. ELAPSED-TIME TESTS.

N.l.4.1. DURATION.—The duration of an elapsed-time test on a liquid-measuring device shall in no case exceed 24 hours.

N.l.4.2. TEMPERATURE CORRECTION.—In an elapsed-time test, the observed error on the delivery made after the device has stood unused shall be

"corrected", if necessary, by allowing for the unavoidable volume change of the

liquid in the device (approximately iy2 gallons in a retail meter-type device,

and varying volumes in a wholesale device, depending on the installation)

resulting from changes in temperature occurring during the period of nonuse

of the device. In the case of motor fuels this temperature-volume change may be

computed at 0.6 percent per 10° F., and 1.1 percent per 10° C, change of temperature.

and that tolerance paragraph T.2. be amended to read

T.2. ON ELAPSED-TIME TEST.—Maintenance tolerances on elapsed-time

tests of liquid-measuring devices shall be as follows : For a retail device, 2 cubic

inches on a test extending over a period of 1 hour or less, plus an additional y2

cubic inch for each hour or fractional part thereof beyond the first hour, but in

no case more than 6 cubic inches. For a wholesale device, 5 cubic inches per

hour. Acceptance tolerances shall be one-half the maintenance tolerances. ( The

error to which these tolerances are applied is the leakage error (see D.13.).)

(See also D.12., N.l.4.1., and N.l.4.2.)

The committee emphasizes that the tolerances allowed in paragraph T.2. are for "leakage error" only (see paragraphs D.12. and

D.13., page 82, NBS Handbook 44). This error should be considered

completely separate from the normal operating errors in a device, as

are provided for in table 1 of the code. Also, the committee is convinced that 24 hours is a sufficient period for any elapsed-time test,

85
and since a maximum leakage error is being recommended, it is essential that the maximum elapsed time be also fixed.

(The items on ELAPSED-TIME TESTS were adopted by voice vote.)

LIQUID-MEASURING DEVICE AIVD VEHICLE-TAXK CODES

In the same mailing that included the proposed revisions pertaining

to maximum values for mhiimum graduated intervals on large-capacity scales, the following changes in tolerances for wholesale liquidmeasuring devices and vehicle-tank meters were included.

Liquid-Measuring Device Code

To correct what appears to be an inequitable situation with respect

to the conduct of special tests on wholesale liquid-measuring devices

with provers of capacities of less than 100 gallons, and to establish

tolerances on both "normal*' tests and "special" tests on a straight

line curve representing approximately 0.15 percent of the indicated

delivery for "norniaF tests and 0.25 percent of the indicated delivery

on "special" tests, amend table 1 to read as follows

:

Table 1.—MAINTENANCE TOLERANCES, ON UNDERREGISTRATION AND

ON OVERREGISTRATION, FOR LIQUID-MEASURING DEVICES, EXCEPT

ON ELAPSED-TIME TESTS

For retail devices

Indication Tolerance

[No change from present requirements]

For wholesale devices

Indication

Tolerance

On "normal" tests On "special" tests

Gallons

125 or less.

Cubic inches

50

Cubic inches

100

125

150

200

300

450

575

0.25 percent of indicated delivery.

126 to 225__ _ 75 _____ __

226 to 325_ __ _ 100

326 to 425 _ _ 125 _ . 426 to 525 _ __ 175_ _ 526 to 775 _ _ 250

776 to 1050 ___ 350

Over 1050 0.15 percent of indicated deliverv.

Vehicle-Tank Code

For the same reasons as are given in the proposed change to the

tolerance table in the Code for Liquid-Measuring Devices, amend

table 2, tolerances for vehicle-tank meters, to read as follows

86
Table 2.—MAINTENANCE TOLERANCES, ON UNDERREGISTRATION AND

ON OVERREGISTRATION, FOR VEHICLE-TANK METERS

Indication

Tolerance

On "normal" tests On " special" tests

Gallons

125 or less _ _ Cubic inches

50

Cubic inches

100

125

150

200

300

450

575

0.25 percent of indicated delivery.

126 to 225 _ __ _ 75 _____

226 to 325 _ 100

326 to 425. 125___ _ 4Zt> tO OZO _ 175

526 to 775 250

776 to 1050 350

Over 1050 0.15 percent of indicated delivery.

Of approximately 25 replies received from weights and measures

officials, only 3 registered any opposition to these proposed changes.

On the other hand, the Weights and Measures Subcommittee of the

Operations and Engineering Committee of the American Petroleum

Institute informed the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances

that it is the unanimous opinion of that group that none of the proposed changes should be adopted and that the tolerances for wholesale

liquid-measuring devices and vehicle-tank meters should remain as

they now stand.

Although the committee feels that the proposed changes have much

merit, in view of the fact that the suggested changes and refinements

are not of appreciable magnitude and importance, the fact that the

committee of the American Petroleum Institute opposed the proposed

changes, and the fact that the replies from weights and measures

officials displayed a noticeable lack of enthusiasm for or interest in

these proposed changes, it is the conclusion of the committee that

no changes in tolerance table 1 of the Liquid-Measuring Device Code

and tolerance table 2 of the Vehicle-Tank Code should be recommended to the 44th National Conference on Weights and Measures.

Tolerances—Retail Liquid-Measuring Devices

In the reply from one weights and measures official the recommendation was made that the tolerances for retail liquid-measuring

devices as shown in table 1 "be given consideration with a view to

lowering the tolerance on gasoline pumps." The committee has no

recommendation to make on this point.

LINEAR MEASURES CODE

To specifically prohibit the use of cloth tapes for commercial purposes and to consolidate material, design, and finish requirements

for linear measures, the committee recommends that specification

paragraph S.2. be amended to read

S.2. MATERIAL, DESIGN, AND FINISH.

A flexible tape shall be made of

metal. If an end measure is made of material softer than brass, the ends of

87
the measure shall be protected by brass (or other metal at least equally hard)

securely attached. A rigid measure shall be straight. A folding measure shall

open to a definite stop, and when so opened shall be straight. Measures shall

be smoothly finished.

Delete paragraph S.3. and renumber paragraph S.4. to S.3.

(This item was adopted by voice vote.)

FABRIC-MEASURING DEVICE CODE

To provide for the use of newly developed materials in testing

tapes for fabric-measuring devices, the committee recommends that

notes paragraph N.l. be amended to read

:

N.l. TESTING MEDIUM.—A fabric-measuring device shall be tested with

a suitable nonmetallic testing tape approximately 3 inches wide and with a

graduated length of at least 12 yards, made from such material and having such

surface finish as to provide dimensional stability and reduce slippage to the

practicable minimum.

(This item was adopted by voice vote.

)

LIQUID FERTILIZERS

The committee has continued its studies of liquid-measuring devices

used commercially to determine quantities of liquid fertilizers. An

extensive survey of such devices in use was made by members of the

committee. The committee has also maintained continuing correspondence with industry on this subject. Based on the facts that

only a limited number of fluid meters are currently employed in this

service and that no meter manufacturer, within the knowledge of the

committee, is currently producing and marketing a meter designed

and manufactured for this particular use, it is felt that any effort to

produce a specific code to cover such devices would be premature. It

is recommended, therefore, that this matter be continued on the agenda

of the committee for further study and that no action on this subject

be taken by the 44th National Conference on Weights and Measures.

It is further recommended that, during the interim before such a

specific code is adopted by the Conference, when weights and measures officials are called on to inspect and test fluid meters used for

the commercial measurement of liquid fertilizer, they apply, in general, the provisions, including tolerances, of the Code for Liquefied

Petroleum Gas Liquid-Measuring Devices insofar as they are clearly

applicable and are deemed satisfactory for use as a guide.

RECOMMENDATIONS OF SCALE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

The committee has received seven definite recommendations from

the Scale Manufacturers Association. These recommendations and

the comments of the committee follow

1. H44 Interpretations and Their Publication.—It was recommended that

official committee interpretations of H44 provisions should be published as an

addendum to the handbook. This would provide easy and ready access to these

interpretations at all times.

The committee agrees with this recommendation. A complete

study and necessary revision of appropriate official committee interpretations will be made for this purpose. The committee proposes

that the 44th National Conference recommend to the National Bu88
reau of Standards that consideration be given to publishing official

interpretations of the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances as

Appendix II, National Bureau of Standards Handbook 44—2d

Edition.

The committee desires to make clear that interpretations of Handbook 44 material will be submitted to the National Conference and

considered for publication only if the matters questioned are not

clarified in the codes and if the interpretations are considered to be of

permanent value.

2. Local Exceptions to H44.—It was recommended that, in the interest of

uniformity of requirements throughout the Nation, there be a conference

sponsored campaign for the elimination of local variations from the H44 codes.

The committee wishes to express full appreciation for the com

ments and presentation of the Scale Manufacturers Association on

this subject. It has been the continuous policy of the committee and

the National Conference on Weights and Measures, for a good many

years, to encourage adoption by State and local jurisdictions of National Conference recommendations, particularly codes of specifications, tolerances, and regulations for commercial weighing and

measuring devices. The committee also wishes to call the attention of

Conference delegates to the fact that the National Association of

State Departments of Agriculture adopted the following resolution

during their 1958 convention

Whereas, most weights and measures laws are enforced by Departments of

Agriculture ; and

Whereas, uniformity is the essence of good weights and measures laws ; and

Whereas, uniformity of specifications and tolerances is an important factor

in the manufacturing of commercial equipment ; and

Whereas the National Conference on Weights and Measures, in cooperation

with the National Bureau of Standards, has published a code on weights and

measures regulations covering specifications and tolerances ; and

Whereas, in order for States to render this all-important service to their

citizens, it is necessary to have standardization and coordination of laws and

regulations with other States and the United States Government

;

Now therefore oe it Resolved, that the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, in convention assembled at Madison, Wis., September 29

through October 3, 1958, encourage and promote the adoption of Handbook 44, as adopted by the National Conference on Weights and Measures and recommended by the National Bureau of Standards, in order to bring about uniform

laws, and regulatory requirements in all States ; and

Be it further Resolved, that the Association urge its members to examine the

individual weights and measures program for the purpose of modernizing and

standardizing their testing equipment and enforcement practices, taking full advantage of the assistance that may be obtained from the National Bureau of

Standards.

The committee will welcome suggestions as to how it or the National Conference can improve and make more effective the present

activity in this area.

3. Permitted Use of Prepackaging Scales.—It was recommended that effort be

made to clarify in the minds of all weights and measures officials that it is proper

to use a prepackaging scale, to put up properly labeled packages, while a customer

is in the store. The Scale Manufacturers Association has pointed out that some

89
jurisdictions have interpreted regulation paragraph R.18. of the Scale Code as prohibiting the use of a prepackaging scale to weigh and compute the price on a properly labeled package ordered by the customer while in the store.

It is the opinion of the committee that this is a proper use of a prepackaging scale, so long as the package is properly labeled to meet all

legal requirements for commodity in package form. In order to further clarify the intended meaning of regulation paragraph R.18., the

committee has recommended an amendment to regulation paragraph

E.18. (see item 2, page 84 of this report).

4. Money-Value Tolerance on Computing Scales.—It was recommended that

this problem be further clarified. The Scale Manufacturers Association advises

the committee that some jurisdictions continue to demand that, even though there

be a weighing error in a computing scale that is within allowable tolerance limitations, the money-value graduations be required to give correct value indication.

This, it was pointed out, is a physical impossibility owing to the design and

construction of conventional computing scales.

This matter was called to the attention of the committee in 1951.

At the committee's suggestion, the secretary of the committee prepared

an article explaining the proper procedure for checking the moneyvalue graduations on a computing scale. This article follows, as a part

of this report.

It has been disclosed that in some instances a misunderstanding exists among

weights and measures inspectors as to the proper method of checking the moneyvalue graduations on a computing scale chart.

In order to establish proper and uniform test procedures, weights and

measures officials should follow National Bureau of Standards Handbook H37,

entitled TESTING OF WEIGHING EQUIPMENT. On page 147 of this handbook, under the heading "Computing Type," is found the following:

Note:—The weighing portion of a computing scale is to be tested in the

same way as has been outlined for a noncomputing scale of similar type

of construction.

The money-value graduations on a computing-scale chart are fixed in

relation to the weight graduations when the chart is made. As part of

the routine test of a scale it is practicable to check only a few out of the

hundreds or thousands of value graduations on the chart. It is advisable,

however, at least to check the zero-load indications for both weight and

money values and to check the money values at some one load (representing half-capacity or more) clear across the chart, to make certain that

the computed money values agree with the prices-per-pound which are shown, and that the chart is mounted in proper alinement.

It should be understood that the money-value graduations are not independent of the weight graduations and, therefore, cannot be tested independently.

The weight graduations should be tested with known weights placed on the

load-receiving element of the scale. The money-value graduations should be

checked against the indicated weight graduations. It is improper to place a

known weight on the scale and expect all money-value indications to be correct

without regard to any weighing error which might exist. Specifically, to

check value graduations, first establish exact coincidence between the indicator

and some even-pound weight graduation—for example, the 10-pound graduation.

Then check the correctness of the value indications in the several columns of

value graduations ; in the example, each value indication should be precisely

10 times the unit price-per-pound for the column in which it is found.

The committee recommends that all weights and measures officers

adopt this test procedure for use in their jurisdictions.

90
5. Tolerance at Zero.—It was recommended that a tolerance at zero be

recognized.

The matter of a "tolerance at zero" for scales has been brought up

from time to time over the years for committee and Conference consideration. It has never been deemed necessary or advisable to allow

a special tolerance at zero for weighing scales. The committee has

never observed a need for tolerance at zero because (1) a regulation

of the Scale Code directs that the operator of a scale shall maintain

the scale in balance, and (2) properly designed weighing devices will

repeat their zero indication to readable limits.

The committee wishes to retain this item on the committee agenda

for further study.

6. Tare Graduations back of Zero on Prepackaging Scales.—It was recommended that graduations back of zero on prepackaging scales, distinctly different

from the graduations forward of zero, be permitted.

The Committee on Specifications and Tolerances issued an interpretation on this subject in 1951. The interpretation was rendered in

response to the recommendations received from the Southern Weights

and Measures Association and was included in the committee's final

report to and was adopted by the 36th National Conference on

Weights and Measures. It is recorded, beginning on page 106 of

National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publication 202, Report

of the 36th National Conference on Weights and Measures, 1951. In

substance, this interpretation was that graduations "back of the zero

graduation" must be uniform with those "forward of the zero

graduation."

The committee wishes to retain this item on the committee agenda

for further study.

7. Larger Price Values for Computing Scales.—It was recommended that

money-value graduations of 5 cents for prices in excess of $1.50 per pound be

allowed on computing scales.

The committee feels that such a liberalization of requirements would

be a step backward. It would result in larger errors in price computations. Commodities selling from $1.50 to $3.50 per pound are usually sold in small quantities. To meet fully the demand for proper

weighing and price computation in this area, scales of relatively small

capacity, good readability, and high sensitiveness are necessary. It

is the opinion of the committee that serious effort should be made by

representatives of the scale industry to provide proper scales for this

important service. This should be done rather than to relinquish

requirements on devices that were not originally designed for this

specialized use. It is the committee consensus that present requirements are reasonable, adequate, and proper, and it is recommended

that the 44th National Conference take no action on this

recommendation.

The Conference Committee on Specifications and Tolerances

acknowledges, with gratitude, the splendid cooperation of active mem519003—59 7

91
bers, advisory members, and associate members of the National Conference. It is the aim of the committee to represent honestly the

Conference body. This aim can be fulfilled only with the full assistance of all parties at interest.

J. E. Brenton, Chairman

V. D. Campbell

C. O. Cottom

C. L. Jackson

D. M. TuRXBULL

W. S. Busset, Secretary

(On motion of the committee chairman, seconded, from the floor, the report of

the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, as amended on the floor, was

adopted by voice vote.

)

[Note: Following the adoption by the Conference on Thursday afternoon of

the revised Model Law as recommended by the Conference Committee on Laws

and Regulations, which law included the provision for an additional size con- tainer for milk and other fluid dairy products, Mr. Brenton, Chairman of the

Conference Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, moved that that committee be authorized to make appropriate entries to the Milk Bottle Code and

thus provide performance requirements for the 10-ounce milk bottle. This

motion was adopted by voice vote.]

92
FIFTH SESSION—AFTERNOON OF THURSDAY, JUNE 11, 1959

(C. H. Stender, Vice Chairman, Presiding)

THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, ITS AUTHORITY, ITS

ACTIVITIES

By C. R. Moore, Legal Adviser on Deceptive Practices, Bureau of

Investigation, Federal Trade Commission.

GENERAL

In my comments this afternoon I shall be expressing my personal

views and shall not be speaking or expressing the official views of the

Federal Trade Commission.

The Federal Trade Commission was created by the Federal Trade

Commission Act in 1914:. It consists of five members, not over three

of which can be of one political party. It is headed by a chairman,

who not only presides over Commission meetings and votes as a Commissioner, but bears primary responsibility for managing the operations of the agency. Commissioners are appointed by the President

of the United States and are confirmed by the Senate. Appointments

are for T-year terms and are so staggered that most of the body are at

all times experienced members. Experience is important because in

performing its statutory functions the Commission has wide jurisdiction and profound effects on the economy of the Nation. The

Commission not only rules on the law but the organic Act provides

that if the Commission's findings as to the facts are "supported by

evidence" they are conclusive, i.e., the courts cannot change them.

The Commission is a quasi-judicial, administrative body. In its

judicial functions, the Commission serves somewhat as a specialized

United States District Court. Therefore, appeals are directly to the

U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Commission now has about 720 employees. It has highly

specialized staffs. There are about 300 lawyers, a sizable staff of

economists, accountants and statisticians, a small but very efficient

scientific staff of physicians and chemists, and other personnel that

serve ancillary purposes. The agency's annual appropriation runs

in the neighborhood of $6 million. There are nine branch offices

strategically located throughout the continental United States and

textile inspectors are located in various other States.

LAWS IT ADMINISTERS

The Commission's regulatory efforts are broadly divided into two

fields, i.e., monopoly and deceptive practices. Since my comments

will deal principally with the latter, I will here touch very lightly on

the monopoly field in order that you may more fully appreciate the

Commission's authority and activities. It is in the monopoly field

that the greatest expenditures of funds and efforts are made. The

agency's jurisdiction in that area derives from section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act. Section 5 of the

F.T.C. Act has been held to generally prohibit conspiracies in restraint

of trade.

CLAYTON ACT (1914). The amended Clayton Act prohibits

certain practices that may substantially lessen competition or tend to

93
create a monopoly, such as discriminations in price, services, commissions and allowances granted by individual sellers of commodities that

are not justified by differences in cost and manufacture, sale or delivery resulting from different methods or quantities in which such

commodities are sold or delivered. This Act also prohibits corporations from merging where the effects of such merger may substantially

lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.

Monopoly cases require more investigative effort than do deceptive

practice cases. For this reason, and the fact there are more violations

in the deceptive practice area, by far the greater number of corrective

actions are in the deceptive field.

Now, let us revert to the principal subject of deceptive practice

regulations for I believe it is there that your interests principally lie.

A greater appreciation of the regulatory efforts of the Commission

in this area is to be had if you keep in mind a few major principles.

First, the Commission is empowered to proceed only when it appears

that the interest of the general public, as distinguished from private

interests, will be served. It therefore follows that the Commission

does not have the authority to attempt settlements of private controversies or, generally speaking, to inhibit practices affecting only a few.

Second, that in any formal proceeding, the Commission being the

moving party, must bear the burden of proof. Third, that the practice

in question must be engaged in interstate commerce. The Commission does not have jurisdiction over matters merely affecting intrastate commerce.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT (1914). Sections 5

and 12 of the F.T.C. Act are the chief weapons with which the Commission endeavors to prohibit ( 1

) unfair methods of competition between business concerns and (2) deception of the public by business

firms.

Section 5 states that "Unfair methods of competition in commerce,

and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce, are hereby declared unlawful." As originally enacted, in 1914, the law prohibited

only unfair methods of competition. The remainder of this section,

which is the direct public protective portion, was not enacted until

1938.

Congress wisely left to the Commission, a body of experts, the task

of defining unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive

practices, based on continuing experience and the changing phases of

business endeavor. Human ingenuity, strongly inspired over a long

period of time by the profit motive, has been productive of good that

exceeded the world's imagination, but with this has also come many

ingenious, unethical plans of promotion. As these situations arise, it

is the duty of the Commission to proceed to protect ethical business

and the general public.

Section 12 has specific application only to foods, drugs, devices and

cosmetics and its purpose is to extend jurisdiction of the Commission

where those products are involved. Motivation for this enlargement

was a consciousness on the part of Congress of the need for greater

health protection in advertising. Roughly speaking, it may be stated

jurisdiction over advertising of these classes of products exists where

either the advertisement or the product is disseminated in commerce.

This section relates only to advertising, not to labeling. The broad

provisions of section 5 of the F.T.C. Act cover both labeling and ad94
vertising of commodities generally, including foods, drugs, devices and

cosmetics. However, in the interest of avoiding duplication of effort,

regulation of labeling of these four classes are, through liaison ar- rangement, generally left to the Food and Drug Administration, which

has primary responsibility in that area.

Sections 13 and 14 of the Act provide injunctive and criminal

remedies in certain types of advertising of foods, drugs, devices and

cosmetics. Section 15 is essentially a declaratory section.

A few examples of numerous unfair and deceptive practices inhibited by the Commission under the FTC Act are

(1) Misrepresentation of second hand goods as new, imitations as genuine,

goods that are charged for as being free, the terms of offers or guarantees, composition of goods, business status, the origin of goods, the value of correspondence school courses, fictitious prices and quality of merchandise, disparagement

of competitors and their products, palming off the goods of one as the goods of

another, etc. (2) Misrepresenting the purity, remedial, cosmetic or nutritional properties of

foods, drugs, devices or cosmetics.

False and misleading advertising is, of course, covered by these sec- tions and the regulation of that alone requires much effort. It is

estimated that there is over $9 billion spent annually in advertising.

A special unit of the Bureau of Investigation constantly studies radio,

television and other advertising in an effort to detect and stop the more

obvious false advertising in its incipiency. Other staff members are

also instructed to be on the alert for and report any apparent violations

they may observe in their reading of newspapers and magazines and

listening to radio and television. I might add here that the falsity of

some advertisements is not apparent on their face and some that appear false are not false, or scientific evidence is not available to demonstrate their falsity.

Time does not permit of much elaboration on these broad classifications but I can mention a few recent cases that may be of interest

to you. A leading sewing machine manufacturer was recently found

selling used sewing machines as new machines. We had a series of

cases involving the sale of reprocessed, used motor oil as new oil.

Hundreds of thousands of radio and TV tubes that were below standard, or used tubes, were either removed from the market or properly

labeled. Fictitious pricing has been a major problem and the source

of much staff and Commission effort in the past several months. The

Commission has issued guides to its staff dealing with this subject

and those guides have had very wide circulation in the business community. The Commission is using all methods at its command in an

effort to deal with this problem. There have been over 450 corrective

actions by the Commission involving misrepresentations and deceptions by correspondence schools alone. Every time corrective action

is taken involving such schools, State and Federal educational authorities, the Veterans Administration, which administers the so- called "GT Bill of Rights'' educational program, and other interested

persons and authorities are provided with orders of stipulations evidencing the action taken.

"Slack filling" is occasionally involved. That is where the package, either through appearance or otherwise, misrepresents the amount

of contents thereof. One instance I recall involved a distributor of

children's color crayons placing two less crayons in the box than was

stated on the outside thereof. A year or so ago, a distributor of cans

95
of artificial snow was enjoined from using cans of a size or capacity

in excess of that reasonably required for packaging the quantity of

product actually contained therein. It has been noted the contents of

some packages shake down considerably and although they may

appear to have been incompletely filled, the package was full when it

left the packaging machine.

In the second category mentioned above (sec. 12, foods, drugs, devices and cosmetics) , there is intense promotion. In the cosmetic field,

appeal is to vanity and in the food, drug and therapeutic device area,

appeal is to concern for health. The power of suggestion is very effectively employed in all advertising media.

The case that most impressed me in this area involved a man, who

held the degrees of doctor of medicine and Ph. D. in chemistry, selling

two products that were found, on analysis, to consist of distilled

water, at $15 and $25 a cc for treatment of the so-called incurables,

i.e., diabetes, cancer, epilepsy, etc. A shot was to be taken and the

patient was to wait a year for the cure. Results of such delay are

obvious.

In another instance a concern in California was engaged in the

business of selling filtered sea water as a treatment for 56 diseases

and symptoms, including Bright's disease, heart trouble, poor eyesight, bowlegs, diabetes and cancer.

LANHAM ACT (1946). The Lanham Trademark Act has one

provision in section 14 which confers authority on the Commission

to apply for cancellation of trademarks from the principal register

of the Patent Office for some 12 grounds specified in subsections c and d of that Act. Briefly stated, this section provides that when a

trademark has been obtained by a fraud or has been abandoned or

has become restricted and therefore, for these reasons, should not

remain on the register with the right of exclusive use in the register,

the Commission may ask that the mark be removed.

McGARRAN ACT (1945). The McCarran Act confers on the

Commission very limited jurisdiction to regulate the advertising of

insurance in interstate commerce.

TRUTH IN FABRIC STATUTES

WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACT ( 1941 ) . This Act makes

specific provisions regarding the disclosure, on labels, of the contents

of wool products or products represented to be wool products. This

is an example of a statute that might, roughly speaking, be said to

have arisen as a result of the giving of short weights and measures.

Wool content of wearing apparel and other products were being substantially misrepresented and the Federal Trade Commission Act did

not appear to be adequate to deal with all phases of this practice.

First, there was the representation that a product which contained a

small amount of wool was principally or entirely made of wool.

There was also the practice of misrepresenting reprocessed and reused

wool as virgin wool. Later fabrics consisting of manmade fibers came

on the market and they bore such a resemblance to wool that they could

easily be passed off as wool. The Wool Act provides that every wool

product introduced into or manufactured for introduction into interstate commerce must bear a label which fully states the composition of

the product, in percentages, and identify the manufacturer or other

person or concern that has shipped the product in interstate com96
merce. This tag or label must accompany the product until it is sold

to the customer. A very large portion of our cases in the deceptive

practice field still involve misbranded wool products.

FLAMMABLE FABRICS ACT (1954). I am sure you will recall that a few years ago a number of instances arose where children's cowboy suits, scarves and the like were found to be highly

flammable. The Flammable Fabrics Act, in effect, prohibits the introduction into commerce of fabrics that do not meet with certain standards as to flammability. The standards of flammability are defined

in Commercial Standards 191-53 and 192-53, promulgated by the

Secretary of Commerce in January and May, 1953, respectively. Now,

there is constant surveillance of fabrics and plastics by the Commission's staff.

TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDENTIFICATION ACT

(1958). This law has specific provisions regarding misbranding and

false advertising of fabrics generally. It was passed on January 7,

1958, and takes effect March 3, 1960. Rules and Regulations under

this statute are to be promulgated on or about June 3, 1959.

FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACT (1952). A situation developed in the fur products industry similar to that just outlined in the

Wool Products Labeling Act. While the Federal Trade Commission

Act was of considerable assistance in dealing with the forms of deception in this industry, it was not the complete answer. Prior to the

passage of the Fur Act fur garments made of hundreds of small pieces

were skillfully sewed together and otherwise finished to present the

appearance of having been made from whole pelts. There was no

disclosure of this fact. The only sure way for a prospective buyer to

learn this was to rip open the lining and look at the back surface of

the fur. Of course, that was not generally permitted. A garment

made from inexpensive pelts was often passed off as having been made

from a more expensive fur. An example was the labeling of coats

made from muskrat pelts as seal coats. Even wool and rayon fabrics

were finished to look like furs and passed off under names that suggested they were genuine furs. This Act relates to labeling and advertising but the Wool Act covers only labeling. A substantial number of violations yet arise involving furs but the more flagrant

violations do not often occur.

PROCEDURES. The Commission employs several procedures

in enforcing these statutes.

Where the most serious violations are involved, or the less stringent

procedures would not appear to be effective, formal complaints and

orders to cease and desist are utilized. The Commission has had approximately 7,480 formal proceedings of this type. Orders to cease

and desist are enforceable by civil penalty. Where the gravity of the

violation does not necessitate formal proceedings and the business

concern under investigation is cooperative, stipulations to cease and

desist are accepted from the alleged violator. The Commission has

accepted approximately 9,167 such stipulations. Orders to cease

and desist and the substance of stipulations are made public. A

larger number of lesser matters, in recent years, have been settled by

the acceptance of a letter or affidavit in which the concern involved

stated it had discontinued the practice without intention to resume

same and furnished proper evidence thereof. Of course, investigation is necessary before any proceeding of a corrective nature is initi97
atecl. The Commission's Bureau of Investigation normally has a case

load of some 1,200 to 1,400 cases. Another procedure employed is trade practice conferences. One

hundred and sixty-two (162) industries have come together under

Commission auspices and adopted trade practice rules for their industry. These rules purport to incorporate the substance of the

above-mentioned laws as they apply to these industries.

A related method of proceeding has recently arisen called "Guides".

The Commission promulgates Guides for the guidance of its staff

in dealing with a particular practice or industry and these Guides are

given wide circulation in affected industries.

A Small Business Division of the Commission's Bureau of Consultation is set up to render staff opinions on the legality of specific business practices. A concern wishing to receive advice regarding the

legality of practices it contemplates employing can call on this Division for its opinion. Of course, such opinions are not binding upon

the Commission. This is another service that is provided in an effort

to obtain compliance with the laws administered by the Commission.

Hoiv Invoked. Corrective actions by the Commission, on matters of

merit, may be set in operation by the Commission's own motion or

upon informal complaint filed by an individual, or concern. This

protection is open to all, without cost, need for counsel, or even public

disclosure of the identity of complaining parties.

In conclusion, it should be pointed out that the Commission probably bears the greatest responsibility of any agency of the Federal

Government for affording protection in the market place to the consuming public and to legitimate enterprises. These are not laissez

faire statutes. That philosophy is inconsistent with their purposes.

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Leithauser: Would you please distinguish between the term

"the general public" and what is categorized as "a few people" as to

the protection afforded by the Federal Trade Commission?

Mr. Moore: That has been clearly defined by a Circuit Court of

Appeals, not in specific number, but in approximately this language.

The Court said that the public interest must be clear and substantial—that is, a substantial number of the public must be affected.

There is no clear line of demarcation. If a product is being sold that

is injurious to health, obviously the adverse effect upon a few would

constitute the requisite public interest.

An example might be that, if an advertisement is misunderstood by,

say, 50 of the millions of people who read it, it would probably not

constitute "public interest," because one cannot absolutely eradicate

misunderstanding.

In business, if one person is unfairly competed with by others in

interstate commerce, the public would be adversely affected.

Mr. Leithauser: Would you construe a price war in a single locality as affecting the public interest ? Mr. Moore: There would probably be sufficient public interest;

however, let me make it clear that our jurisdiction covers only those

areas of business and commerce that are in interstate commerce.

Mr. Jackson : I am interested in your method of control of fictitious comparative pricing. What effect will your enforcement have

on the whole empire of discount houses that give comparative prices ?

98
Mr. Moore : Comparative prices per se are not actionable, but deceptive comparative prices are. We are devoting considerable attention to this matter at this time.

Mr. Levy: I have been concerned with what appears to be slack

filling by certain concerns of food items. For example, a popular

item on grocery shelves is thai of chicken and broth marked "3%

pounds." I know from actual tests that the chicken averages around

I14 pounds, the remainder being liquid filler. We have encountered

this same situation in other foods, including a number of types of

vegetables. Would you consider this proper labeling of canned foods ? Mr. Moore : First, I would say that under section 5 of our Act, the

Federal Trade Commission does have jurisdiction over matters of this

kind, but, under license arrangements with the Food and Drug Administration, which has primary responsibility in this area, we do not

regulate, generally speaking, the labeling of a food, drug, device, or

cosmetic, Complaints in these areas would be more appropriately

addressed to the Food and Drug Administration.

Mr. Levy: We were recently called in on a complaint regarding

bed sheets. It seems that sheets are labeled as to size—that is, length

and width—before the sheets are hemmed. This causes an actual delivered size considerably shorter than the labeled size. We are informed this is a general practice. Would such a matter come under

your jurisdiction?

Mr. Moore : Any practice which constitutes a misrepresentation of

goods in interstate commerce would come within our jurisdiction.

There is one question—is this a generally recognized practice, recognized by both suppliers and purchasers of sheets ? If it is, such as,

for example, lumber, where a 2 by 4 board actually measures considerably less than 2 inches by 4 inches, we probably would not rule it

misrepresentation.

FROM JOHN QUINCY ADAMS TO MADISON AVENUE, U.S.A.

By Dexter W. Masters, Director, Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., Mount Vernon,

New York

There are times when it must seem to most of you, as I confess it

sometimes does to me, that working in the field of consumer problems

and consumer education is pretty dull business. Even when we do

achieve a goal it most often comes by the old tortoise technique

putting one patient foot in front of the other. In the meantime, the

high-living, fast-talking hares—by which I mean sellers—have had

all the fun, filling their pockets with fast bucks. Even when we do

win a victory on the consumer front, our achievement is not always

welcomed with wild applause and loud acclaim from a grateful public.

But it is not frustrations that I want to talk about here. What I

want to do is to ask you to take, for a few moments, a mountain range

view of the work you people are doing and of what may be ahead in

your special field of responsibility. I want to touch very briefly on

how, over a long span of years, the point of view—the philosophy

that underlies the whole weights and measures administration may be

taking on a deeper significance. And I want to indicate how much I

feel is now at stake in preserving that philosophy through the rapid

changes that are taking place in the consumer goods market today.

The daily chores of administering a regulatory program—the need

for putting one foot patiently in front of the other—tends to keep one's

99
eyes turned downward. And it is not only in the performance of

administrative tasks that blinders can operate to conceal reality.

There is an interesting and instructive example from history to guide

us here. I am sure you all remember reading about the European merchants who clipped, chipped and filed down the gold coins that crossed

their counters some 200 to 400 years ago. I doubt that any of them

was aware of all that he was up to. He undoubtedly knew that what

he was doing might be called—if you wanted to be harsh about it

stealing. He also probably knew that nearly everybody else was doing

it. But it is not likely that he was aware that he was contributing to

an economic chaos that all but wrecked the economy of his country.

And it took a long time for the society of that time to realize what had

happened and to sum up the effect of these small, individual thefts in

what we know today as Gresham's Law—the dictum that bad money

drives out good. What I want to dwell on today is the possibility that

we may be facing a kind of Gresham's Law in the weights and measures

field.

The big trouble with attempting to evaluate accurately the practices

of men in the market place is that the vast majority of commercial

transactions take place at a single pinpoint of contact—between a

buyer and a seller. In the multiplication of these myriads of actions,

however, there lie great consequences. You might say that each of

these millions of small transactions is a kind of economic atom. And

like some other atoms they can produce a chain reaction, not always

easy to predict or to assess. Sometimes the assessment comes too late

for controls to be applied.

I think it is urgent at this particular moment in history to project

into the near future some practices that are developing rapidly—practices which may propel you who are working the field of weights and

measures into much bigger and much more difficult problems soon.

In the best tradition of public speakers, let us move forward by looking backward—in this instance to the year 1821. That was when John

Quincy Adams was Secretary of State, and that year he gave his classic

"Report Upon Weights and Measures" to the Congress. I am sure

you are all familiar with his words, but let me quote you a fragment

from them. John Quincy Adams said : "Weights and measures may

be ranked among the necessities of life to every individual of human

society. They enter into the economic arrangements and daily concerns of every family . . . The knowledge of them as established in

use"—(and I want to emphasize that phrase "as established in use") —

"is among the first elements of education, and is often learned by those

who learn nothing else, not even to read or write. This knowledge is

riveted in the habitual application of it to the employment of men

throughout life."

With John Quincy Adams' evaluation of weights and measures as

"among the necessities of life" we can all here agree. But, unfortunately, it is no longer true that "knowledge of them as established in

use is among the first elements of education." Nor is it any longer

true that this knowledge is riveted in practice or is held by those who

cannot even read or write. Today, unfortunately, knowledge of

weights and measures is all but lost to many consumers—consumers

who can read and hear—who read the slogans of advertising, or the

big type on a gaudy package, and who read and hear the commercials

over television.

100
Back in 1821 the relationship between producers and consumers was

more intimate. Furthermore, as a seller of his own farm produce or

a vendor of products of his special handicraft—which he usually

was—the consumer of those days carried over into the marketplace

his producer's knowledge of, and concern for, weights and measures.

Thus an understanding of the consumer's right to honest measurements of quantity was underwritten by the producer's dependence

on these measurements as established in use for both consumer and

producer. Not that all was sweetness and light in those days. Tricks

of the trade are as old as trade itself. But the consumer was more

aware of the trickery and better able to use his knowledge of standard

measurements as a tool of defense.

In the very first paragraph of the official history of the administration of weights and measures of this country—a book written some 30

years ago, with which I am sure you are all more familiar than I

there appears a one-sentence summation of what, at bottom, the

weights and measures effort is all about. Those few words struck

me forceably. I want to repeat the sentence to you : "The primary

function of the weights and measures official," it reads, "is to see

to it that equity prevails in all commercial transactions involving

determinations of quantity"—equity, equal opportunity to know, equal

opportunity to bargain, equal rights to fair dealings in commercial

transactions involving "determinations of quantity." Obviously,

without equity in this basic area of exchange, the door is wide open

to chicanery. And this is what I was referring to when I emphasized

how much is now at stake in preserving throughout commercial transactions the philosophy that underlies the whole weights and measures

effort. That philosophy of equity, which must have seemed in Adam's

time like an elaboration of the obvious, falls with a fresh ring on our

ears today.

The philosophy of equity with regard to quantity was formulated

before the packaging of goods had become a selling device. In John

Quincy Adams' day, packaging was utilitarian. In fact, the great

majority of goods was not packaged—that is, it was not prepackaged

at all. It was carried home in tailor-made quantities that had been

measured to the individual's demand, as expressed in those weights

and measures terms which, as John Quincy Adams said, were known

from daily use. But today's goods are increasingly prepackaged.

And packaging has left its work-a-day function to become a Madison

Avenue darling. The promoter, not the weigher or the measurer, now

packages most of our goods. The determination of quantity in transactions involving the consumer has been removed from the scales on

the retail counter to the merchandising department of a brander.

There is no longer a face-to-face relationship in quantity determination between ultimate purchaser and seller. Instead, there is the

package. As one commentator in the magazine Industrial Design

so succinctly put it : "The package designer makes the consumer an

easier mark."

Out of the trade literature in what is now referred to as the field

of scientific packaging, I could quote to you for hours from advertisers, package designers, or merchandisers, expressions of opinion

which emphasize that, from the commercial point of view, equity in

determinations of quantity today is an almost forgotten precept.

101
There is neither time nor need for many references to such statements

here, but they are illuminating. Let me give you a few examples

Listen to this from the advertising trade paper Printer's Ink. The

quote, attributed to a member of a Printer's Ink Packaging Panel,

reads : "If merchandising in 1968 is to avoid taking on frightening

shades of Orwell's 1984, the package designer will" more than ever

have to concentrate on reaching the consumer through her emotions."

(The fears refer, I gather, to the possibility of standardization of

package sizes.)

Here is another comment, this one from a large food advertiser:

"We are not selling products these days as much as we are selling

packaging."

Here is another from a package designer as quoted in a recent

Wall Street Journal: "Thousands of packages that silently scream

for the customer's attention do the selling in today's supermarkets."

The Journal led off the story which included this quote with the

statement that : "Boxes, bottles, and bags rapidly are replacing more

and more salesmen in United States stores."

An official of the Container Corporation summed up the matter by

saying : "I think it is necessary to stress that package design cannot

be conceived of in any other way than as a part of the total advertising

strategy." And Business Week carries that view further: "Change

your package as often as you switch your advertising copy."

To what end is this total advertising strategy directed—the strategy

that is now to dominate the packaging upon which we must depend

for equity in determination of quantity ? Advertising as we have known it abundantly over the past quarter

of a century has dealt primarily with the qualities of goods. Its

reiterations have drummed on words like "best," "newest," "whitest,"

"latest," "freshest," and so on. There was a time, just after the first

World "War, when the theory of the function of advertising was that

it reduced the cost of goods by creating the mass market necessary to

low-cost mass production. But that is no longer the theory of the

function of advertising. The accepted theory today, accepted by the

advertising profession, was enunciated fairly recently in a book titled

"Madison Avenue U.S.A.," written by Martin Mayer and hailed in the

advertising trade press as the intelligent answer to the growing

criticisms of their profession. Here is how Mr. Mayer defines advertising's economic raison d'etre : "The function of advertising," he

writes, "is to add new value to the existing values of a product." He

elaborates his view with an example that leaves no possible doubt of

what he means. He says: "This added value (the value added by

advertising) is most obviously apparent in the case of a soda pill, a

placebo, which is advertised as a headache cure. The pill itself has

virtually no value ; but it will actually cure the headaches of a number

of people who take it. The suggestion power of advertising has

created a value for a worthless product."

Now, it is within this strategy of creating value through the power

of suggestion, that the practitioners of the new packaging science are

proclaiming their competence. And, as you men in the weights and

measures program have known for many years, it is no idle boast they

are now making. It is all too easy to create false illusions through

packaging. That is why our weights and measures laws have long

contained such provisions as this one : "It shall be unlawful ... to

102
offer for sale any commodity in package form if its container is so

made, formed, or filled, as to mislead the purchaser as to the quantity

of its contents." And that is also why these laws have long stipulated

that it shall be unlawful to offer any packaged commodity for sale

"unless the net quantity of the contents be plainly and conspicuously

marked on the outside of the package."

The clearest evidence that the new science of packaging is, indeed,

what its practitioners so openly proclaim it to be—an intent to evade

existing law—is found in the way in which this latter and unambiguous requirement in the law is honored by today's packages. I do not

have to tell you here that it is rare to find a package, no matter how

large, on which the net contents information is in a type larger than 6

point—about the size of a telephone book listing. Many packages use

even smaller type for this information. And, not only are the net

contents on many of the newest packages in type too small to be seen,

but frequently even this tiny type is hidden—printed in black on dark

blue or dark red, or put on box top flaps. But the same package

designers who thus minimize this information vital to equity in determination of quantity proclaim the need for new packaging on the

grounds that, as one spokesman at a packaging symposium put it:

"A total of 34,000,000 women either don't have glasses and should, or

have them and won't wear them in public."

What bothered this particular spokesman was, as he lamented:

"This has not been considered in many package designs which carry

lengthy sales messages in small type."

A proposal has recently been made by the Canadian Food and Drug

Administration that the net contents must be placed on every package

just beneath the brand name and in a type no smaller than half the size

used for the brand designation. Needless to say, this suggestion has

stirred up outraged protests from branders. But until some such

further definition of "plain and conspicuous" is written into the law,

it appears that the lawyers available to the packagers will be able to

continue to obtain court immunity for violators. The package designers apparently don't tell the legal defenders about their research

into the subject of women's eyesight; or anyway, this information

apparently does not reach the ears of the courts of the land. Court

decisions on slack fill or misleading packaging have about nullified

the law on these points.

Obviously, in the light of existing law and court decisions, the problem of fraudulent packaging is not new. What is new is the rapidity

with which nearly all goods are being sold in prepackaged form, on the

one hand ; and, on the other, the open defiance of law on a wholesale

scale by the packagers. And just ahead of us, practically upon us,

is the prospect that any remaining vestiges of shopping experience

by which a consumer may be guided through this new land of package

illusion may be destroyed.

Id addition to paper, tin and glass, food, for example, is available

now in plastics,- glassine wraps, foil, lustre finishes, scented paper,

water glasses, aluminum, vacuum pouches, boil-in-the-bags, baking

tins, fibre containers, flour sifters and pressure cans—to name just a

few of the materials and shapes. As for sizes, instead of the old,

established in use fractions of the pound or pint, the sizes now range

from such designations as 1 and % ounces to such nonsense quantities

as: 6 and ounces to (simulate the half pound) through 19 and %

103
ounces (to simulate the pound and a half) up to the giants among

detergents with ridiculous net weights ranging from 256 to 368 ounces

and with the slack fill of these marketing monsters given over to

dinner ware and bath towels.

What would John Quincy Adams say today? Where would he

find "established in use" those necessaries of life that enter into "the

economical arrangements and daily concerns of family life"?

And what has become of the idea that equity should prevail in

all commercial transactions involving determinations of quantity ? Moreover, however difficult the immediate, present situation seems,

we must brace ourselves for a worse one. If the trade press predictions are to be trusted, within less than a few years w^e will be inundated with aerosol products. Already available in aerosol form are

such goods as: toothpaste, chocolate topping, perfume, toilet water,

vitamins, coffee, paint, detergents, insecticides, and whipped cream.

Soon to be marketed in aerosol form are baby foods, salad dressings,

mayonnaise, jams, cheese dips, meat spreads, starch, hair shampoos

and maple syrup. I need not detail for this sophisticated group the

problems raised with respect to the philosophy of equity by this influx

of aerosol products.

But I don't want to close on a hand-wringing note. The very chaos

that seems to lie just ahead has brought in some allies for those of us

who are still concerned about equity in determinations of quantity.

Even within advertising there are a few voices, like that of a marketing specialist who was quoted in Advertising Age as saying: "I just

don't believe it . . . that packaging is advertising. People still want

the best possible food for the lowest possible price and the suspicion

that over-packaging is jumping the price of food unnecessarily is

voiced by more and more people today."

You and I here know that that suspicion is well-founded when a

new package can, for example, better than double the price of sale

raise it from % cent an ounce to over 1 cent an ounce as happened

recently when Leslie Salt brought out its new shaker-container

package. And there are other ways in which this packaging mania

is costly, as the supermarket operators know. One of the most valuable assets to merchandising is shelf space. And the needless variety

of packages, together with the slack filled packages, is undoubtedly

stealing millions of dollars worth of shelf space from other products

whose producers are unable to raise the capital to allow them to spend

$10,000,000 to market an illusion as well as a product. Here is another ally for equity in determinations of quantity—the smallerbusiness man.

As for the farmer, whether he knows it yet or not, this packaging

revolution has had a good deal to do with his rapidly shrinking share

of the consumer's food dollar.

Let me urge you here to take a more vigorous lead in a drive for

legislation to establish standardized sizes for all food containers—

a

proposal that, I know, has been dear to you for some time. And also

let me urge that you give serious consideration to legislation requiring

something along the line of the Canadian proposals to clarify the

meaning of clear and conspicuous declarations of net weight contents.

For if this tide of deceptive packaging is not stemmed, then, as in

Gresham's Law for debased currency, the bad packaging will surely

drive out what remains of the good.

104
DISCUSSION OF THE FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Slough : I have long been a subscriber to Consumer Reports

and have found very little reference to quantity as it affects the consumer. Do you plan to include "weights and measures" items in your

publication in the future ? Mr. Masters : Yes. We are making firm plans to give more

weights and measures information to our readers.

Mr. Morton: With respect to your comment about the loss of

shelf space to a retailer that is brought about by packages larger

than necessary for the contents, do you know whether the various

chain and independent grocery associations have considered this?

Mr. Masters : I believe some store operators have expressed a concern. The retail trade papers have editorialized about false packaging, but the individual operator apparently has felt that he has no

choice but to handle brand products, and, when such products are in

oversized packages, he must accept and display them.

Mr. Grassi: The State of Connecticut has recently established a

department for consumer protection. I am wondering whether other

States are showing interest in such agencies.

Mr. Masters: I am very much m favor of such departments of

State government. A similar law has been passed in California,

and I understand that interest is developing in Minnesota, Michigan,

and Massachusetts. As you may know, a bill has been introduced in

the Congress of the United States that has as its objective a department for consumers.

WORKING TOGETHER FOR THE CONSUMER'S PROTECTION

By J. L. Harvey, Deputy Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare

It is a pleasure for me to attend this 44th National Conference on

Weights and Measures and to have this opportunity to talk to you.

Without the conscientious, painstaking day-by-day efforts of State

and city officials to insure, at the local level, that merchandise comes

up to the weight or measure claimed for it, the problems of our Administration in enforcing the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug,

and Cosmetic Act would be much greater and more difficult than they

are. If we are to protect the interests of the consumer, it is not only

essential that we maintain a day-by-day working relationship but we

should get together from time to time as we do on this occasion to

take counsel how to make our efforts more efficient, more effective,

and more responsive to the requirements for consumer protection.

The Annual Conferences on Weights and Measures have made outstanding contributions toward this goal.

However, the task before us is one that continues to grow in magnitude and complexity. With the phenomenal growth in population

that has taken place in our country in the last 50 years, not only has

the absolute volume of food and other commodities coming within our

jurisdiction increased in a most spectacular fashion, but, as we all

know, methods of distribution have been revolutionized. From the

dawn of commerce until our own time practically all weighing and

measuring took place at the time of sale in the presence of both the

buyer and the seller. Each had the opportunity to assure himself

105
that the quantity of material bought, or sold, was exactly that agreed

upon, assuming the accuracy of the balance and weights or of the

measuring cup used. It is true that these were not always accurate

and it has long been the primary duty of sealers of weights and

measures to detect and eliminate from the marketplace such faulty

devices. But today when practically every food, as well as most other

merchandise, is sold in prepackaged form the retail purchaser is not

present when the article he or she buys is weighed. On the contrary,

this operation may take place a continent's breadth away in space

and a season before in time. There is no one present at the time to

furnish the searching scrutiny, that the buyer used to give, to see that

the scales do balance or that the measure is full. So it becomes increasingly an obligation of control officials to make sure that the consumer's interest in the transaction is safeguarded.

The revolution in the distribution of food has brought other changes

also. It has brought mass production, with giant manufacturing and

distributing agencies ; it has brought fierce competition where only the

most efficient may hope to survive ; and with the efficiency have come

the most searching cost accounting methods. These have revealed

and have emphasized that if the package contains a quantity, however small, above that declared on the label, the resulting economic

loss, when multiplied by the astronomical figures that represent the

volume of modern production, becomes a truly substantial sum of

money. By the same token, if the package contains a quantity that

is much less than the declared amount the consumer stands to have

that substantial sum taken from him wrongfully. Industry is constantly under competitive pressure to work as close to the declared

weight as possible. This is understandable, but with no margin for

error it inevitably increases the chance for short weight and short

volume to occur. That this is more than a possibility is a demonstrated fact, as I will illustrate.

From time to time over the past year or so we have had reports

from some of you as well as from other sources that short weight and

low volume products were being encountered on the market. These

reports have been of concern to us and we are attempting to develop

further information for an overall evaluation of the problem and at

the same time take whatever regulatory action is indicated as we discover violations.

Last fall, at the request of the Special Flour Committee established

on the recommendation of the 43d Xational Conference on Weights

and Measures, we conducted a nationwide survey of the net weight

of packaged flour. We checked the weights of 94 different lots of

flour in 68 separate mills. In most instances weighings were made at

the time of packaging or within a day or so thereafter. We found 19

of the lots to be slightly short weight and one to be definitely so. It is

a disturbing situation to find a staple food that lends itself to easily

controlled packaging practices with this very unsatisfactory picture.

Following the flour survey we issued instructions to our field offices

to conduct similar surveys on more than 30 other categories of packaged foods. These surveys are in progress at the present time. One

district has completed its survey with the following results

Three to six lots were examined in each of 35 different food products, each lot

within a group being from a different packer, for a total of 206 lots. Thirty-nine

lots, or 19 percent, were short weight. Twenty-five of the shortages fell in the

106
range of 0.01 to 0.99 percent ; seven in the range of 1 to 1.99 percent ; three in the

range of 2 to 2.99 percent; and four (all in ground spices) in the range of

3 to 9.33 percent.

Five of the six lots of coffee were short weight, four of these in the less than

1 percent range. One firm's 1-pound pack showed an average of 15.87 oz. net

weight (0.8 percent short) with every one of the 50 packages weighed being

short. The difference between maximum and minimum net weights was 0.15 oz. This indicates excellent weight control by the firm, but on the wrong side of

declared weight.

Seven of the eighteen lots of cereal flours, meals, or mixes were short weight.

Four of the six lots of ground spices were short and exhibited the largest shortages found.

Over the past year we have seized some 19 consignments of a variety

of foods on charges of short weight or low volume. The shortages

have ranged as high as 27 percent on a lot of frozen shrimp and 21

percent on black pepper. Other items found violative were tea, coffee,

macaroni products, olives, vegetable oil, peanut butter, corn chips,

flour, pimentos, pies, and candy.

It is our intention to follow up all of these surveys and to take appropriate action wherever indicated. It will be our purpose to keep

you informed of developments.

We will also welcome any additional information that you can give

us when you encounter what appear to be violative shipments in interstate commerce. Let me urge that you bring these matters to our attention promptly as you encounter them, not waiting until the time of

the Annual Conference or of some scheduled meeting of area officials.

You may advise us at our headquarters here in Washington or at any

one of our 17 district headquarters. In addition, we have resident

inspectors permanently located in many cities where we do not have

district headquarters. We invite each of you to become better ac- quainted with the members of our staff operating in your vicinity. If

you do not have their addresses, we will be most happy to supply them

to you. Because you and we, who are concerned with this area of consumer protection are so few, and the tasks that confront us are obviously of some magnitude it is essential that we work together closely

if we are to achieve worthwhile results. We assure you that we stand

ready to work with you to the full extent of our facilities that can be

devoted to this area of enforcement.

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Harvey: In addition to the prepared remarks, I should like

to comment on a matter of which I have become aware since this

meeting started—that is, of the very considerable concern on the

part of many State and local food and drug and weights and measures

enforcement officials over the principle or doctrine of preemption that

applies with respect to certain Federal laws and regulations in the

fields of laws of the various States. Under the general doctrine of

preemption, the Federal laws are controlling if the laws of the States

are at variance from them.

I understand that this concern over the preemption doctrine and

its application to your duties as weights and measures officials arises

because of the fact that under existing Federal law and regulations,

and with particular reference to flour, variations are allowed for unavoidable shrinkage arising because of loss of moisture that occurs

after the product is introduced into interstate commerce. Obvi519003—59 8

107
ously, this may result in packages containing a lesser quantity of flour

than was the case at the time that they were packaged, and there is

created the difficulty of an accurate ascertaining of just how much

flour was put in the package in the beginning.

Of course, this phenomenon of moisture loss due to change in atmospheric conditions is a characteristic of all foods, of all substance,

as a matter of fact, which contain water as a component, and most all

foods do. I think we must recognize that a majority of our foodstuffs are susceptible of changes in weight due to changes in moisture

content unless they are hermetically sealed.

We are not unaware of the problem presented—I might say the old,

old problem presented—by this natural phenomenon. We are aware,

I think, of the inherent difficulties that would arise if an undertaking

were made to change the law so that it required all moisture-bearing

foods to be hermetically sealed. I think we would have difficulty

with many things, for example sacks of potatoes. That perhaps is

not the logical solution to the difficulty.

What the difficulties would be if a requirement were to impose upon

the manufacturer of the package the burden of putting an additional

quantity of his foodstuff in his package beyond that that he declared,

in order to allow for shrinkage and thus inevitably have a legal package at any time thereafter, are unknown to us. What the effect would

be of allowing the manufacturer to put in a little more water, in order

that the moisture could evaporate and still leave the quantity declared on the label, and what advantage that would be to the consumer, I also cannot speculate upon. I think it is a matter of speculation as to the absolute advantage to the consumer to pay a greater

price to insure full weight, including the water, when the difference

may well be evaporation as in the case of flour, when in most of the

instances that I have any knowledge of the first thing that the consumer does with flour when he buys it is to add water.

I say none of these things in derision to the problem. I say them

in enumeration of the complexities and difficulties of this simple yet

age-old problem of dealing with characteristics of weight changing

incident to moisture changes.

We really do have a problem here. I can only say that we are

studying the matter quite thoroughly and from every angle. I do not

know at this time on what basis, equitable and legal, the rules or the

regulations could be changed. Indeed I do not know that they can

be changed. I do have a full appreciation of what the problem is,

and I realize that in many instances the present situation defies effective enforcement. What the consumer thinks about it, we do not

know, and his opinion is important.

We are conscious of the problem, and we recognize that it is a mutual problem. We will be glad to let you hear from us later as to

what we may conclude, and we will be glad to entertain your suggestions at all times on this and on any other problems that we share.

Mr. R. E. Meek: Mr. Harvey, as the chairman of the now discharged Special Flour Committee, I was very sincerely interested in

your remarks. I was particularly intrigued by your expression that

we are all working together for the consumer's protection, because

that indicated to me that you had in mind the weights and measures

officials and the food and drug officials of this country working closely

together in this important phase of government.
It strikes me that you have rather well demonstrated some of the

concern of the Special Flour Committee when you mentioned that

some 30 or more surveys of food products conducted by the Food and

Drug Administration indicated a very high percentage of shortages.

All these I am assuming were either at the time of introduction into

interstate commerce or prior thereto. So I think that emphasizes

why the Special Flour Committee of the Conference was very

deeply concerned with this problem and why we made the specific

recommendations.

I have attended many weights and measures meetings, not only of

the National Conference, but pretty much throughout the United

States. I have known many food and drug officials, Federal and

State, and I heard them on various occasions indicate they did not believe that the Federal Food and Drug Law preempts the field insofar

as quantity is concerned. I wonder if you would care to make an

expression on that at this time. Do you feel that the States do have

jurisdiction over this matter of shortages in our jurisdiction after a

commodity has been introduced into intrastate commerce ? Mr. Harvey: It is my opinion from examination of the cases decided on the question of preemption that the weight provisions of the

Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act applicable to interstate shipments

would preempt any State law that is at variance with the Federal

statute or in conflict therewith. That is an opinion in law and not an

expression of philosophy on my part.

Mr. Meek : Is it not a fact that food and drug officials depend to a

considerable extent on weights and measures officials to assure ac- curacy of net content statements on prepackaged commodities ? Mr. Harvey : I am quite sure that it is a teamwork operation, yes,

sir.

Mr. Meek : If that is true, do you not believe that it is the responsibility of the Federal Food and Drug Administration to consider very

carefully the recommendations made in the report of the Special

Flour Committee to the effect that every consideration be given to

changing the regulations adopted under the Act in order to give us,

the weights and measures officials of the States, counties, and cities,

the opportunity to give you our maximum cooperation to assure the

public—those who have a right to believe in the soundness of a declaration of net content on a package—the protection that we think the

law intended they should have ? Mr. Harvey: I will go further than that, Mr. Meek. It is the

obligation of the Food and Drug Administration to consider any

serious recommendation of any responsible group on any question that

bears on the public interest. I certainly agree with you that the problems in this area are mutual problems and that whatever views,

recommendations, and facts the Weights and Measures Conference

has should be considered thoroughly by the Food and Drug

Administration.

That is not, as you indicated, a commitment as to what we will do,

nor is it an answer as to our ability under the law to adopt the recommendations of this Conference. But I certainly agree that it is our

duty to listen, to consider all of the recommendations that we receive

from your group—I would say particularly from your group—in this

area.

109
I would comment at the same time that the Food and Drug Administration, in spite of the awesome amount of power that is sometimes attributed to it, is itself a creature of law, and the rule-making

authority that we possess is strictly within the framework of the statute

itself. However, I may feel personally, whatever my own philosophy

may be, that any participation in rule making that I may give in my

official capacity is bound by the confines of the law. I get a great

many worthwhile recommendations from groups that cannot be placed

in effect because of the limitations of the law.

Let me remind you that, in dealing with the problem of the regulation of the net weight of foods where moisture changes create the

problem, that which is applicable to flour must also be applicable to

other commodities, including butter and cheese and anything else that

you want to name. I mention that because some of the suggestions

that are received are to center the variations around a uniform moisture content, something of that kind. I think it is to be remembered

that that might work with some commodities. It might not work

with others. That kind of approach presents a vast program of

standardization. I do not know, for example, quite what the moisture

standard would be for a candy bar, but candy bars are substances

that contain moisture and lose it.

Mr. Meek: May I assure you then that our request was a most

sincere one and that this National Conference on Weights and Measures is a well-established and responsible organization and represents

the weights and measures officials of the United States.

Mr. Turnbull: Mr. Harvey, what in your opinion is the point

at which you lose control of an interstate shipment, and where does

intrastate or local control of that commodity begin ? Mr. Harvey : The intent of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic

Act is to extend the Federal jurisdiction over a product that enters

into interstate commerce so long as the product is identifiable as the

product that entered interstate commerce. Obviously, if it should

become so commingled with an intrastate product as not to be identifiable at all, then jurisdiction could not be proven. So long as it can

be established that it is an article of interstate commerce, it comes

within that authority granted by the Constitution to the Federal Government to regulate the commerce among the several States.

Mr. Lewis : You mention the reports that are made to you of shortweight packages and say this information is used - to evaluate the

situation as a whole. I am wondering if there is any possibility that

the information which is thus developed, particularly concerning

brands that may be consistent violators, might be made available to

the various State jurisdictions so that we might be alerted.

Mr. Harvey : I think it is entirely possible that we can alert officials

in particular cases. Certainly when we establish as a matter of evidence that violations have been committed and those are adjudicated,

that information is always published. You have reference to something prior to that state of development of the case. Certainly we

will include that among the matters that we shall be giving thought

to as to how we can best work together.

Mr. Levy : Mr. Harvey, I listened with a great deal of interest and

profit to your remarks on food where there is a moisture loss. Let

us reverse the subject. In many important foods on the market today

in cans—canned chicken and canned vegetables, for example—the net

110
content includes the necessary added water. In the instance of

canned chicken which is marked 3% pounds net weight chicken and

broth, where by test the chicken weighs 114 pounds, and of green

beans marked 13 ounces, where the drained weight is 8 ounces, do you

believe that the labels are true reflections of quantity or informative

enough to the consumer who buys on the information on the label ? Mr. Harvey : That is the real question. If it is an amount of packing medium that is beyond what is reasonable in the preparation of

the product, then it becomes ordinary adulteration by the substitution

of water for something else.

I have to divide the subject, because beans are subject directly to

the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, whereas chicken is subject to the

Poultry Products Inspection Act of the Department of Agriculture

as well as to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Both of the problems

are to be met primarily by standards of identity for the particular

commodities. Otherwise you have a very difficult situation in the

prosecution of cases where you go into court and assert that the

proportion between the water and the other ingredients is improper.

If you are going to proceed effectively about that kind of thing—of

too much packing medium—you first must establish by some public

authority a standard to plead against. Then when the amount of

water exceeds that provided for in the standard, the violation is clear.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON LAWS AND REGULATIONS

Presented by G. L. Johnson,* Director, Division of Weights and

Measures, Department of Agriculture, State of Kentucky

The Conference Committee on Laws and Regulations, having previously distributed a tentative report and having held open hearings

on items included therein, now submits for the consideration and

action of this National Conference, its final report.

1. Peat and Peat Moss.—A firm recommendation was offered by

the committee to the Conference a year ago, but was voted down by

the Conference. After an additional year of study, the committee

makes the same recommendation with an added parenthetical note.

Peat and peat moss shall be offered for sale or sold by volumetric measurement, in which case the volume shall be stated in cubic yards, cubic feet, or cubic inches, or by net weight, in which case the quantity shall be stated in

avoirdupois pounds and ounces. {Note. Certain States may prohibit, by

statute or regulation, the sale of commodities by any system of dry measure.

In such States peat and peat moss shall be sold by net weight.)

(On motion and second from the floor, the words "peat and" were inserted

in the title and in the body of the committee recommendation before the

words "peat moss" by voice vote.)

2. Method of Sale of Fluid Dairy Products—Units.—Through the

years there seems to have developed an increase in the sale of units

of milk between the pint and half-pint sizes—units such as 10 fluid

ounces, ys quart, and 12 fluid ounces. Such units usually are sold

for consumption on the premises where sold. The committee recommended last year that the Conference amend the Model Law to provide for the sale of fluid dairy products in the 12-ounce unit (exactly

half-way between the pint and half-pint). The Conference voted

*The Committee Chairman. Mr. F. M. Greene, became ill during- the Conference and was

unable to remain at the Conference.

Ill
down this proposal. The committee believes it unrealistic for State

officials to vote at the National Conference to prohibit something and

then to go back to their respective jurisdictions and allow it. A

letter has been received by many weights and measures officials, including the members of this committee, from the Glass Container

Manufacturers Institute, Inc., that pointed out certain inequities

that have been created in jurisdictions that have allowed the use of

odd size paper containers for fluid dairy products and disallowed the

use of the same size glass containers. The basic purpose of the

National Conference on Weights and Measures is uniformity.

Uniformity—interstate and intrastate. Such laws, regulations, or

enforcement interpretations as are referred to above are not, in the

opinion of the committee, uniform.

Because of further representations from the glass bottle industry and from

weights and measures officials, the committee recommends that Section 34 of

the revised Model State Law on Weights and Measures be amended to provide

for the unit 10 fluid ounces. (Item 2 was adopted by voice vote.)

3. Aerosol Bomb-Type Containers.—Several officials have raised

the point as to the proper method of quantity declaration for liquids

and semisolids sold in aerosol bomb-type dispensers. The committee

has observed that most such containers are labeled as to net weight,

even though they dispense commodities such as paint, oil, insecticides,

and the like, that normally are sold by liquid measure. The committee has no recommendation to make at this time, but suggests that the

Conference solicit the technical assistance of the National Bureau of

Standards and the several national organizations representing manufacturers of such commodities, to the end that meaningful statements

of quantity may be arrived at and reasonable methods of checking

such statements may be developed.

(Item 3 was adopted by voice vote.)

4. Meats, Poultry, Fish, and Cheese in Plastic Wrappings and Casings.—The 37th National Conference in 1952 adopted a recommendation of the then standing Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities to the effect that "Meats, poultry, fish, and cheese in plastic

wrappings and casings shall be exempt from net quantity declarations at packing sources and shall be sold on the basis of actual net

weight at time of sale, provided that each item of meat or poultry

so wrapped or contained shall be plainly and conspicuously marked

with the legend: 'To Be Weighed at Time of Sale,' and, where the

weight of the wrapping or casing exceeds % ounce, the tare weight

shall be plainly and conspicuously marked for deduction to determine

the net weight."

The committee has looked into this matter seriously and is of the

opinion that the action of the 37th Conference is contrary to the Federal Food and Drug Law, most State food and drug statutes, and

many State and local weights and measures laws. The committee

is of the further opinion that such laws are reasonable and that they

can be complied with.

Accordingly, the committee recommends that the action of the 37th National

Conference hereinbefore quoted be rescinded.

(Item 4 was adopted by voice vote.)

112
5. The Word "Net" in Declarations of Quantity on Packaged Commodities.—The committee has had brought to its attention that at least

two States are requiring that the word "net" be included as a part of

the quantity declaration on packages ; thus a statement "Contents 12

ounces avoir." and "Contents 1 pint fluid" would be deemed unsatisfactory and would be required to be replaced with "Net weight 12

ounces avoir." or "12 ounces avoir, net" and "Net contents 1 pint fluid".

Canners, label manufacturers, packagers, and carton manufacturers

have estimated that alteration of markings on the thousands of packages not now including the word "net" in the quantity statement would

run into hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they question the benefit to the consumer. Uniformity of legal requirements is one of the

prime aims of the National Conference on Weights and Measures and

is accepted by the committee as its principal charge.

The committee is unanimous in its opinion that the word "net" serves

no real purpose in quantity statements of packages. Through the

years, weights and measures officials have been building public confidence in quantity statements on packages. It is felt that consumers

generally feel that all declarations of quantity are in terms of net quan

tity. Although the use of the word "net" is not discouraged, the committee urges that all States pursue the traditional role and accept such

statements as are required in The Model Law and Model Regulation

for Package Marking Requirements and not require a supplemental

"net" in quantity declarations on packages. Such is the direction

toward the desired uniformity.

(Item 5 was adopted by a standing vote of 37 to 22.)

6. The Model State Law on Weights and Measures.—The last revision of the Model State Law on Weights and Measures was adopted by

the 36th National Conference in 1951. Since that time much legislative and court experience has been gained. With the assistance of the

Office of Weights and Measures of the National Bureau of Standards,

the committee includes as a part of its report a complete revision of

the Model Law.

[A completely revised version of the Model State Law on Weights and Measures was presented by the committee ; after an amendment from the floor relating to the sale and delivery of liquid fuels, the recommendation of the committee was adopted by a voice vote. Copies of the Model Law are available without

charge from the Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards,

Washington, D.C.I

[During the presentation of the Model Law, considerable discussion about the

section on presumptive evidence and the section on method of sale of commodities took place. Major participants in these discussions were Mr. Sanders, Mr.

Straw, Mr. F. F. Thompson, and the acting chairman of the committee. The rec- ommendations of the committee prevailed.]

(Item 6 as amended was adopted by voice vote.)

7. Model Package Regulation.—With the adoption by the Conference of the revised Model Law, the committee recommends that the

Conference request the Office of Weights and Measures of the National Bureau of Standards to study the Model Regulation for Package Marking Requirements and bring to the Conference through this

committee a revision of that document, said revisions to be in conformance with the revised Model Law. The committee recommends

further that the Office of Weights and Measures negotiate with the

Federal Food and Drug Administration toward the modernization of

113
the quantity regulations issued under the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act.

(Item 7 was adopted by voice vote.)

F. M. Greene, Chairman

G. L. Johnson

J. T. Kennedy

E. L. Kandall

Robert Williams

W. S. Bussey, Secretary

(On motion of Mr. Johnson, acting committee chairman, seconded from the

floor, the report of the Committee on Laws and Regulations as amended was

adopted by voice vote.

)

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON RESOLUTIONS

Presented by H. E. Crawford, Chairman, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Jacksonville, Florida

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES STANDARDS FOR NEW STATES

Whereas, the action of the National Bureau of Standards in presenting, in a formal ceremony, standards of length, mass, and capacity to

the newly admitted State of Alaska has been noted with much satisfaction by the membership of the National Conference on Weights

and Measures ; and

Whereas, it is believed that action such as this has an important

bearing on the establishment of weights and measures controls in the

recipient State and on uniformity in weights and measures standards

and administration among all of the States : Therefore be it

Resolved, That this 44th National Conference on Weights and

Measures recommend to the National Bureau of Standards that,

after Statehood for Hawaii becomes an accomplished fact, the Bureau

present to the new State of Hawaii standards of length, mass, and

capacity that may be adopted as the reference standards of that State

;

and be it further

Resolved, That this Conference request the National Bureau of

Standards to schedule the formal ceremony of presentation of the

Hawaiian standards during a meeting of the National Conference, to

permit members of the Conference to attend and participate in that

ceremony.

INTERNATIONAL YARD AND POUND

Whereas, the Director of the National Bureau of Standards has

informed the Conference of the recently announced agreement among

the directors of the national standardizing laboratories of the Englishspeaking countries of the world with respect to an international yard

and international pound : Therefore be it

Resolved, That this 44th National Conference on Weights and

Measures express its approbation of that agreement ; and be it further

Resolved, That this Conference express the earnest hope that the

Congress of the United States, under its constitutional power to fix

the standard of weights and measures of the United States, will, after

consultation with the Director, National Bureau of Standards, fix

by statute these and other national standards of weights and measures.

114
NATIONAL WEIGHTS AND MEASURES WEEK

Whereas, the enthusiasm and support brought to bear on the celebration of National Weights and Measures Week in 1959 by weights

and measures officers, equipment manufacturers, and commercial business interests have demonstrated the widespread interest in this means

of educating the public in the principles of weights and measures

supervision ; and

Whereas, it is believed that a National Weights and Measures Week

will become a factor of increasing value and importance in raising

the efficiency level and in realizing the objectives of State and local

programs of weights and measures administration: Therefore be it

Resolved, That this 44th National Conference on Weights and

Measures record its recommendation that a National Weights and

Measures Week be celebrated each year hereafter; and be it further

Resolved, That the Committee on Education of the National Conference be given the continuing assignment of promoting an annual

National Weights and Measures Week.

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS HANDBOOK 67

Whereas, there is now available in National Bureau of Standards

Handbook 67, entitled "Checking Prepackaged Commodities," a detailed guide for weights and measures procedures in this area : Therefore be it

Resolved, That this 44th National Conference on Weights and

Measures adopt NBS Handbook 67 as the official manual of the Conference for the checking of prepackaged commodities, and recommend its use to all weights and measures officials.

Resolutions of appreciation were adopted as follows

1. To Honorable Lewis L. Strauss, Secretary of Commerce, for his interest in

the National Conference, his constructive contribution to its meeting, and his

sympathetic understanding of the problems and objectives of the weights

and measures officer.

2. To the personnel of the Beltsville Experimental Station of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, who made possible a visit to the Station and supplied

interesting and constructive information to the members of the delegation re- garding the activities carried on at Beltsville.

3. To governing agencies for their cooperation in facilitating attendance at

the Conference.

4. To business and industry for cooperating with the Conference, for attending

and participating in its activities, and for hospitality extended.

5. To program speakers.

6. To the Director and staff of the National Bureau of Standards for the

assistance in planning and administering the program and other details of the

meeting.

7. To recently retired officials.

(On motion of the committee chairman, seconded from the floor, the report of the

Committee on Resolutions was adoDted by voice vote.)

[The committee chairman noted that two resolutions were submitted to the

Committee on Resolutions by the Connecticut Sealers Association, one of which

suggested that "National Weights and Measures Week" be changed to "Consumers' Protection Week" and the other of which suggested that the Conference

endorse the legislative action of the State of Connecticut that established a Consumer Protection Department. The committee recommended no action on these

resolutions. Subsequent to the adoption of the report of the Committee on Resolutions, there was a considerable amount of discussion by Mr. Albanese, Mr.

Grassi, and Mr. Marcotte of Connecticut, and others regarding the terms

115
"Weights and Measures" and "Consumers' Protection." On motion of Mr. Crawford, and seconded by Mr. Grassi, the resolutions of the Connecticut Sealers

Association were referred for further study to the Conference Committee on

Education to be reported on at the 45th National Conference. This motion was

adopted by voice vote.]

BREAKFAST MEETING OF THE INCOMING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE CONFERENCE, FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1959

On Friday morning, June 12, the newly elected Executive Committee, the chairmen of the standing committees, and the weights and

measures members of the Advisory Committee met to study and reach

decisions regarding the 45th Conference. Present at the meeting were

8 of the 9 officers, 8 of the 10 members of the Executive Committee,

the chairmen of the 3 standing committees, and the chairman and 2

weights and measures representatives of the Advisory Committee.

The meeting was presided over by the newly elected Conference Chairman, Mr. H. E. Crawford, City of Jacksonville, Fla. The following

decisions were reached regarding the 45th National Conference on

Weights and Measures, 1960

1. Place: Sheraton-Park Hotel, Washington, D.C.

2. Date: June 6-10, 1960.

3. Duration: Open committee meetings on Monday (also Monday evening

and Tuesday morning if deemed necessary by the Secretary) ; opening session

Tuesday morning or Tuesday afternoon, depending on duration of committee

meetings ; Wednesday afternoon free of any scheduled business session ; business

sessions Thursday and Friday according to program plans.

4. Registration fee: $10.

5. Entertainment: Left to the discretion of the Secretary.

116
SIXTH SESSION—MORNING OF FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1959

(C. M. Fuller, Chairman, Presiding)

OPEN FORUM—WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ADMINISTRATION

COORDINATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND CITY ACTIVITIES

By W. I. Thompson, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Monmouth County, New Jersey

When Mr. Bussey honored me a few weeks ago with this opportunity

to talk to you on the subject of the correlation of the activities and

efforts of the weights and measures endeavors in State jurisdictions in

which there are State, county, and municipal weights and measures

agencies, I am certain that I was designated to present this topic

because I am from New Jersey, a State that operates with such

a system.

New Jersey operates under what is known as the Form 2 Weights and

Measures Law. I am certain that authorities could point out many

advantages, as well as disadvantages, in this method of enforcement,

which dates back many, many years in New Jersey. I feel that a few

moments devoted to a brief resume of some facts discovered by re- search on this topic will be of assistance in explaining just how New

J ersey arrived at its present mode of operation. It is entirely possible

that many of the men from this State will be as surprised as I was to

learn some of the facts.

In the first place, New Jersey is what is known as a "Common Law

State." This simply means that our basic laws were lifted from those

of England and that our "temporary" constitutional provisions accepted the Common Laws of England as our modus operandi for such

a period of time as they are not replaced, altered, or repealed by a

specific act passed by the legislature of the State. Truthfully, most of

our laws are direct derivations in principle from the Magna Carta,

and even in that document we find references of a sort to weights and

measures. Of course, these are basic in concept and were of such a

type as to provide uniformity of methods of dealing among trades

peoples. Fair trade practices actually became one of the first of civil

rights guarantees.

New Jersey in the early days was an important seaport State.

Among our larger ports were Perth Amboy, Elizabethtown, and

Bridgetown. It was at these main ports that most application of the

existing tables of weights was evidenced, at a time when purchasers

compared the measurements of merchandise received against the measurements used in the trade and shipping practices of the world. Actually, only one basic standard of weight existed, but, with poor means

of transportation, lack of facilities, and lack of enforcement policies,

you can imagine the wide variations that possibly existed between the

standard and its actual values in use. When Congress received the authority to coin metal into money,

it also received the power to establish acceptable standards of weights

and measurements, and in 1836 a joint resolution by Congress provided for the furnishing of certain standards of measurement to the

various States then in the Union. In 1846, New Jersey established a

State Office of Weights and Measures and provided that this office

should accept the standards offered by the Federal Government and

117
place them for safekeeping in either the State House or an institution of higher learning. This action taken by the State insured the

merchants of a means of comparison by use of proper and accurate

standards.

We find that this State enacted laws for weights and measures

operations as early as 1844 and revised them in 1846. In 1872 the

legislature of the State repealed all previous laws relating to this subject, established new laws governing the sale of some commodities, and

accepted other standards for certain trade practices. In that year

the legislature also established the position of State Superintendent of

the Department of Weights and Measures, and appropriated the then

fabulous salary of $2,500 per year to pay the gentleman.

The State Superintendent's tasks included the setting up of uniform

methods for the comparison of standards used within the confines of

the State, as well as with those used in world trade. It is quite evident that his position was one of importance, as shown by the large

salary in comparison with the smaller salaries paid to others. In

1875 further provisions were added to the laws and some deletions

were made. It seems that this process has been taking place continuously from that time to the very present as far as weights and

measures laws are concerned, with changes being made to solve new

problems and to correct errors.

The State Superintendent of the Department of Weights and

Measures, as established in the acts of 1872, stipulated that the clerk

of each county in the State should be the recognized weights and

measures official of his county. He also declared that each merchant

would have to submit his weights and his measures that were used in

trade to the clerk for the purpose of comparison. While there can be

no quarrel with this ruling, unfortunately it was never too practical

and not the least successful in its operation. Poor transportation

and the sometimes great distances from the county seat prevented

many merchants from doing as required, and there were many others,

self employed, who simply refused to take the loss of a day's work in

order to comply. Part of the failure of the function of this requirement was due to a lack of any provision for punishment for a failure

to follow the rules.

Thus we find a gradual deterioration of the function of the office of

the State Superintendent of Weights and Measures, and by 1880 it

was commonly felt that the rules caused no particular inconvenience

they simply were ignored. Due to this ineffectiveness of the laws, it

was suggested that the legislature stipulate that the clerks of the

various counties be permitted to deputize their assistants and their

clerks to assist in this program, and that these deputies be sent out

into the field to seek out and test the various pieces of weighing

equipment in use. Further, these men were to be given full authority

to test these measures and to give approval to those found to be ac- curate. These methods and ideas were adopted by the legislature,

and in 1881 the office of State Superintendent was abolished as an

economy measure. A further impetus to the abolishment of this post

was the release of a Federal survey which proved that even poor enforcement at the local level was far superior to the consistent failures

of the State Departments to function properly.

In the meantime, in spite of the efforts made by a few of the county

clerks to do a good job in this area, there apparently still was a grad118
ual deterioration in weights and measures activities throughout the

State. Some cities like Paterson, N.J., had a weights and measures

office provided for in the town charter, and they did fine work at the

local level. Most of the clerks, however, still refused to have any

part of the business and would not be bothered or inconvenienced

with any of the details of enforcement. This attitude, coupled with

a lack of laws to punish offenders, led to complaints against merchants being filed with the legal staff of the State. Subsequent investigation carried out along these lines proved terrific neglect in the

following of the provisions of the act. Very little control over trade

practices actually existed. In fact, a search of the State facilities

failed to disclose the presence of the weights and measures accepted

from the Congress that were supposed to be the State standards.

Late in the year 1872, arrangements were made with the Congress

to get a duplicate set of standards, and these were received and deposited at Raritan Arsenal for safekeeping. Copies of these State

standards were fabricated and were distributed to various counties

of the State. (I am very proud to be able to report here that 9 of

the original 10 dated 50-pound standard weights given to Monmouth

County in 1872 are still in active use by this department.) During

this same period, all local offices were made aware of the new provisions of section 9 of the weights and measures laws which set up

new general methods and details of the enforcement provisions.

A continuing laxity on the part of the clerks in many counties to

follow the provisions of the law prompted the legislature to enact

new language in 1875 which made it mandatory on the part of the

representatives of the county clerks' offices to present their standards

of weights and measurements to the State Department for test and

approval and then to go out into the field and perform their functions.

For the next 30 years or so, this was the established policy, and the

matter rested, many areas getting fine enforcement and others

practically nothing.

In 1908 Mrs. Robert L. Stevens, widow of the founder of Stevens

Institute of Technology, joined in a cooperative move with other

women and financed an investigation of the retail trade practices in

existence. This survey left little doubt that most buyers in New Jersey were being handsomely defrauded and that the retail practices

were deplorable. Most every merchant followed the old adage, "Let

the buyer beware." The survey pointed out, among other things, that

many more incorrect weights were used in trade than were correct

ones. Not all of the cases of incorrect weights were in the favor of

the seller, but a great majority of them seemed to be. The survey

served its purpose and provoked a legislative investigation which

conclusively proved the survey to be correct.

President Woodrow Wilson, then Governor of the State of New

Jersey, sparked the efforts of the legislature to make sound and just

laws covering all phases of the weights and measures field. After a

year of labor, in 1911 the legislature of New Jersey adopted the

present laws of this State relating to weights and measures. Of

course, amendments have been made and new laws have been added,

but basically this State now operates under the laws made effective

January 1, 1912.

The position of State Superintendent was again established in 1908,

but he now had the backing of very complete and forceful laws gov119
erning sales methods and means of prosecuting violators. Provisions

were established which set up the offices of Assistant State Superintendents and which authorized both county and municipal superintendents and their assistants. Procedures were adopted which gave

the State Superintendent more authority than he previously enjoyed

and also made that office responsible for the State Standards and

for their accuracy and safekeeping. He was empowered to establish

uniform containers for farm produce, to fix tolerances for commercial

devices, and to make rules governing the sale of commodities. Many

other powers were given to the State Superintendent at that time.

While these powers were not all new, they were clearly and specifically

spelled out in the law for the first time. The law listed not only the

responsibilities of the Superintendent, but also those of each other

group engaged in weights and measures enforcement. These new

provisions restored the power and responsibility of the State Superintendent that were held previously from 1838 until 1881.

Today the State office in New Jersey bears the burden of responsibility for general supervision and administration of the weights and

measures program of New Jersey, while the mechanical and other

phases of enforcement are left mainly to the local or "on-the-spot"

officials. The State Department provides men and some equipment

to care for matters on the State level, and also1 provides the means

of aiding the smaller local departments who find ownership of the

needed equipment an economic impossibility. In the same way, topics

or problems that arise widespread over the entire State are often

referred to the local officials for handling, because it is felt that they

enjoy a closer relationship with both the buyer and the seller on a

daily basis. Because of this close relationship, some evidence is often

produced that would not be available to an investigator from the

State. The success of New Jersey's weights and measures operation

lies in this very arrangement. It is at the local level that the pulse

of the entire merchandising program is read, and the results of the

reading are forwarded to the State for interpretation.

While each local department in New Jersey enjoys its own autonomous empire so long as it functions properly, the State Department

must by law supersede the local authority whenever the need arises.

Under warranted conditions the State could take over control and

remain until proper local controls are reestablished. However, it is

understood that such action will be taken only under conditions of

emergency or gross neglect of duties. Generally speaking, the "live

and let live" policy is followed with the closest cooperation so long

as the job is done properly. But, as previously stated, the general

administration of the State program is the responsibility of the State

Department of Weights and Measures.

Since the establishment of these laws in 1911, a fine spirit of cooperation has existed between all levels of enforcement. Each department

recognizes and respects the others and the parts that they play in

the general picture. It is this feeling of working together to solve

mutual problems and of working to a common end that makes this

type plan successful. When the policies are sound, the individuals

earnest and competent in their work, and a spirit of cooperation exists

among all, a program will succeed. For proof, I point to the record

of the State of New Jersey in the weights and measures field.

120
DISCUSSION ON FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Daniel : Mr. Thompson, you mentioned that New Jersey operates under what is known as a "Form 2" weights and measures law.

Could you tell us if there are other forms and, if so, how they differ

from Form 2 ? Mr. Thompson : The other two forms are known as "Form 1" and

"Form 3." I would like Mr. Bussey to describe the differences.

Mr. Bussey: Form 1 of the Model Law provides for a State

weights and measures organization that carries out all supervisory

and enforcement programs within the State. Under this form no

local weights and measures jurisdictions exist.

Form 2 is, as Mr. Thompson has described, the statute that provides

for both State and local jurisdictions and for concurrent authority.

Under the Form 3 statute, the State acts only in a supervisory

capacity and has no enforcement officials.

Dr. Gordon: You made a point, Mr. Thompson, that supervision

at the local level provides a closer contact with the general public and

with the people who are being regulated. Do you think this closer

relationship is really desirable ? Mr. Thompson: Perhaps the best example is in the gathering of

evidence for a case that is to be pursued in the court. It seems to

me that the inspectors at the local level are more familiar with local

problems and with local people and are better able to determine

precisely where a fault actually lies. We have been very successful,

for example, in obtaining full confessions from violators who might

well be reluctant to speak to a State official not known by them on a

personal basis.

Mr. Crawford: I should like to expand on that point. We certainly do not doubt the technical competence of the State enforcement

officials; however, we do feel that, being very close to the business

transactions in our community, we can act much faster to the benefit

of both the sellers and buyers of commodities.

Mr. A. T. Smith : The viewpoint of the State office in New Jersey

in this regard is that the Form 2 statute provides an excellent foundation for weights and measures regulation. We are able to be of as- sistance to the local officials not only in the preparation of cases for

prosecution, but also in the many technical areas of weights and measures supervision.

SUPERVISION OF FOOD PACKAGE WEIGHTS IN WISCONSIN

By C. L. Jackson, Chief, Division of Economic Practices, Department of Agriculture, State of Wisconsin

Nearly every weights and measures program administrator in the

United States, whether he be county, city, or State employed, will tell

you readily and honestly, if asked, that he is woefully short of funds.

Very few dedicated, creative administrators will ever find the time, in

a field as basic and as complex as weights and measures inspection,

when his needs for funds are wholly met. Any serious student of

government can verify the public interest value in stepping up

weights and measures programs. But we as public administrators

do not live in a purely idealistic world. We live in a reality of tremendous pressures for public funds.

121
The weights and measures administrator acknowledges this shortage of funds first of all because he wholeheartedly believes in what

he is doing. From real results he understands the economic protection this work affords the public. He honestly believes that the small

amount of investment which is currently being put into weights and

measures administration is the most needed and the wisest of public

expenditures. He admits to a shortage of funds also because this

condition is not totally his responsibility. The full and final re- sponsibility for allocating funds lies in a State legislature, a city

council, or a county board. These bodies must collect this money and

be fully accountable to the general public. So you see, the average

weights and measures administrator can "pass the buck" as to the

blame for the current shortage of funds for this work to a large

extent.

But this same administrator can not "pass the buck" on the question of how efficiently and how effectively he uses the funds made

available to him. This responsibility is primarily and almost entirely his. This responsibility has had those of us in Wisconsin who

direct the weights and measures work concerned for some time.

Frankly, I think we must admit that we have only a partial answer

as to how best our job should be done today.

In the past decade we have seen a package evolution. It is reported

that today the package and container industry has grown larger than

the mighty automobile industry. Since this emergence of the package

into the format of what we now call "modern merchandising," we

can look back at our basic weights and measures inspection programs and see that we have failed to keep pace. In our case in Wisconsin, it has been a mad scramble to keep pace in the mechanical

testing prescribed by statute. Only in the past few years, and particularly in the past year since we have employed a full time package

specialist, have we been in a position to take a close and intelligent

look at the package weight problem.

After months of study of food package problems, of our laws and

regulations in this field, and of a development of package weighing

procedures, we launched out on a statewide month-long survey of

store packaged items just before "Weights and Measures Week,"

March 1-7. This survey was conducted in 318 stores in 114 cities.

Twenty-eight city and State inspectors weighed 16,181 store-packaged fresh and smoked meats, poultry, and potatoes. A uniform

procedure of weighing and of recording results was followed as rec- ommended in the latest NBS publication, Handbook 67, Checking

Prepackaged Commodities. The program was explained in full to

all inspectors. Our package weighing specialist worked personally

with most of the men to make certain that uniform procedures would

be followed and that the results would be comparable.

In a news story released statewide following the survey, we pointed

out that this survey was being conducted ( 1

) to inform food retailers

of legal weight requirements, (2) to determine the level of compliance, and (3) to gain experience for the development of a longrange commodity check-weighing program.

When the results of the survey had been summarized and evaluated,

we found that on a package basis 44 percent of the fresh and smoked

meat packages, 48 percent of the poultry, and 37 percent of the potatoes were found to be short weight. On a lot basis, 72.8 percent of

122
t lie lots of smoked meats, 76.6 percent of the lots of fresh meats and

poultry, and 31.2 percent of the lots of potatoes were legally short

weight in considering the average weight of the lot.

In analyzing the significance of this survey, several factors must be

considered

(1) Shrink': In most cases these packages were weighed within a

few hours or at most a day after they were packaged. In weighing the

packages, tare weight was determined by weighing dry containers so

that any moisture in the wrapper was included in the net weight. We

did not feel, therefore, that shrink would be a significant contributing

factor to the shortages found.

(2) Scale accuracy: All prepackaging scales used were checked

and were found to be accurate. Any small inaccuracies found were,

in our judgment, not significant,

(3) Tare ideight : Allowance for proper tare weight, on the other

hand, was an important factor in the shortage in quite a number of

stores. This failure to allow for tare weight has been shown in package-weight studies made by the city of West Allis and by other people

over the past few years.

(4) 'Weighing policies: We must conclude that failure to have

stringent weighing policies in operation in store packaging was an important contributing factor.

On 11,339 packages of fresh meats Aveighed, for example, 5,030 were

correct, 6,309 packages weighing over or under. On a pure chance

random basis, 3,155 packages should have been underweight and 3,155

overweight. Actually, there Avere 4,949 packages (43.6 percent) underweight and only 1,360 packages (12 percent) over the declared net

weight,

As previously mentioned, this work was carried on primarily as an

informational survey. Corrections were made in all cases where the

lots were short weight, but no prosecutions were recommended. Prior

to this survey, six cases had been prosecuted for short weight. Many

conferences have been held with store executives. Our packageweighing specialist worked with technical personnel of many food

retailers. Management of retail markets went all out to correct the

situation. Attitudes toward and respect for our inspectors improved.

We received many requests from food packers to work with them in

their package weighing problems and to help them meet the new

demands on package weight made by retail organizations.

A further analysis was made of 4,636 packages of fresh meats and

poultry. We compared the total of the sale prices of these packages

with the computed package price based on the correct weight of the

package multiplied by the price per pound. The sale price of these

packages was $5,286.41 ; the computed total value of the packages was

$5,227.08. This represented a difference of slightly over 1 percent.

This meant that consumers purchasing these packages were obtaining

1 percent less than they thought they were purchasing. This 1 percent difference was due partly to weight and partly to pricing computations and policies.

We believe the full significance of this difference could be verified

and amplified in any careful statistical analysis. It would show the

economic importance of seemingly small errors on package weight

and price computation in terms of dollars and cents to consumers. It

519003—59——

9

123
would show the impact of these differences as a matter of competition.

For these reasons we in Wisconsin are led to the conclusion that an

expanded package-weighing program of the right type is the right

direction to turn in improving the efficiency and effectiveness of

weights and measures funds in Wisconsin.

DISCUSSION OF FOREGOING PAPER

Mr. Crawford : Mr. Jackson, do you feel, as many of us are beginning to feel, that the checking of prepackaged commodities is of at

least equal importance to the mechanical operations of a weights and

measures activity ? Mr. Jackson : We very definitely are of that opinion. I believe

furthermore that, if we clo a really comprehensive job in package

control at the city, State, regional, and national levels, we will, to a

considerable extent, be providing an almost automatic check on

weighing and measuring devices.

Mr. Slough: Your idea of employing a packaging specialist intrigues me. At approximately what level would such an individual

work ? Mr. Jackson : We have had an individual specializing in package

control principally in the area of field operations. As we now see it,

we need a very high level individual headquartered in the State office.

His responsibilities will include the development of a year-around

program of package and commodity control and a continuing study

of packaging problems, including working with the business and industrial firms that have problems in this area. He also will conduct

special investigations, analyze reports, and prepare publications for

the trade.

Mr. Albanese : Could yon describe briefly how your inspectors decide what packages in a food store are to be checked and how many of

each ? Mr. Jackson : We operate on what we consider to be both statistically sound and logical principles. We attempt to sample the many

different types of packages in a market and then sample each of the

lots selected.

Mr. True : I should like to call the attention of the delegates to this

Conference to the fact that the checking of price computations on

packages is of equal importance to the checking of weight or measure.

We have found instances of packers indicating less weight on a label

than the package actually contained, but indicating a total price that

was more than the labeled weight times the price per pound.

Mr. Jackson : I agree with Mr. True, but I suggest that weights

and measures officials discuss with their legal counsel the fine points

of their laws in this regard. In some jurisdictions it may properly

be determined to be short weight, while in others it may be simply

perpetration of fraud.

Mr. Cichowucz : In the checkweighing of frozen poultry and other

frozen items, is it proper to compare the weight indicated on the label

with the weight of the frozen article, or should the article be thawed

prior to weighing ? Mr. G. P. Smith: We have found many instances where frozen

poultry contained an abnormal amount of ice. In snch cases it seems

proper to me to weigh the poultry after it has thawed.

124
Mr. J. H. Lewis: We have been studying this matter in the State

of Washington for some time. We have checkweighed turkeys, for

example, immediately after their preparation for freezings after the

freezing operation, after the normal storage period, and again after

the poultry has thawed. Poultry definitely does absorb certain

amounts of water in what is called the "blooming" process, and this

is necessary in the preparation of the birds for the market. In one

instance we carefully weighed 20 turkeys with an average weight of

21 pounds and found that in the normal blooming process the average

increase in weight was 12 ounces. We are continuing to study this

matter and feel that it will be possible to arrive at a satisfactory

solution.

Dr. Gordox : What has been done in Wisconsin is very significant

and I hope will be repeated before this year is over in many other

States. One reason for the significance is that, as far as I am aware,

it is the first statewide survey in which use has been made of the new

package control procedure published in NBS Handbook 67. This,

from the standpoint of those of us who need to make comparisons, is

very important.

I would like to suggest that during the coming year as many State

and local jurisdictions as can possibly do so should plan and conduct

surveys based on the procedures as outlined in Handbook 67 and then

prepare the data resulting from such surveys for release to the public

during National Weights and Measures Week.

SCALES UNDER EXPANDED PACKERS AND STOCKYARDS

JURISDICTION

By D. L. Bowman, Chief, Packers and Stockyards Branch, Livestock

Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of

Agriculture

It is a pleasure for me to be here today and meet with you gentlemen for the purpose of discussing the expansion of our jurisdiction

over the livestock marketing industry, since the amendment to the

Packers and Stockyards Act on September 2, 1958. Since you have

been meeting all week and this is your last session I know you will

want me to be brief. While you are principally interested in scales

and weighing problems I would first like to discuss the recent amendment to the Packers and Stockyards Act and mention the other phases

of our regulatory program. Prior to the amendment, only livestock

markets meeting the following requirements were subject to the Act:

1. A public market operated for compensation.

2. Engaged in business in interstate commerce.

3. A used and useful area for handling livestock in excess of 20,000 square feet.

The amendment to the Act eliminated the area requirement, thereincausing all public livestock markets operated for compensation or

profit and engaged in business in interstate commerce to be subject

to the Act and regulations. The amendment also included all livestock dealers and market agencies or commission firms eilgaged in

interstate commerce.

Briefly, the amendment extends our jurisdiction in the livestock

marketing industry to cover all stockyards, market agencies, and

dealers engaged in business in interstate commerce, and divides the

125
jurisdiction between the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Agriculture with respect to meat packers. This division

gives the Federal Trade Commission jurisdiction over retail sales,

manufacture and merchandising by packers of nonmeat and nonpoultry items.

As a result of the recent amendment, there are approximately 2,300

livestock markets subject to the Act as compared to approximately

600 markets which were posted prior to the amendment. We are

presently engaged in a stepped-up posting program to post all markets meeting the requirements and as of July 1, we will have approximately 1,100 markets posted. It is obvious that as a result of the

recent amendment to the Act, the number of livestock and packer

scales subject to our requirements will be increased quite considerably.

I would like to tell you briefly something about the Packers and

Stockyards Act, and the Branch of the Livestock Division which is

responsible for its enforcement.

The primary purpose of the Act is to assure that livestock producers will receive the true market value for their product. The

Act was passed in 1921, after lengthy investigations had revealed

that major packers maintained monopolistic control over operations

at large terminal stockyards. These investigations disclosed that

yardage charges, commission rates, and feed costs at such markets

were, in many instances, unreasonably high and were being applied

on a discriminatory basis ; that facilities and services being furnished

at many markets were inadequate, and that consignors were not receiving complete and accurate accounting from their selling agents.

Stockyard companies, commission firms, dealers and packers operating at the markets, were engaged in practices detrimental to the

interests of livestock producers. Prior to the passage of the Act,

few States had legislation that provided for any form of regulation

of public livestock markets.

The Act provides, in substance, that the facilities and services furnished to producers who ship livestock to public markets, shall be

adequate; and buying services, shall be reasonable and nondiscriminatory; that all consigned livestock shall be sold on the basis of its

merits under conditions of open competitive bidding; that the weighing of such livestock shall be accurate; that full and correct accountings shall be furnished consignors and buyers for whom the commission firms act as selling or buying agents; and that the stockyard

companies, market agencies, dealers, and packers subject to the Act,

shall not engage in unfair, deceptive, or discriminatory practices.

The Act also requires that market agencies and dealers operating

at supervised markets, furnish bonds to assure performance of the

financial obligations they incur. The reparation provision of the

Act affords livestock producers and other patrons of public markets

a more expeditious and less expensive method of prosecuting claims

against stockyard companies, market agencies, and dealers than were

the remedies previously available to them at common law or by statute.

To carry out the provisions of the Act, the Packers and Stockyards

Branch now maintains district offices at major livestock markets

throughout the United States. Working from these offices, Branch

personnel exercise general supervision over the operations of numerous commission firms, dealers, and packers engaged in buying and

126
selling at terminal stockyards and livestock auction markets which are

subject to the Act.

This supervision includes the investigation of numerous unfair

trade "practice complaints, including short tveights; the registration

and bonding of market agencies, including auction markets and

dealers subject to the Act ; the establishment of rates charged by

stockyard companies and commission firms and the supervision of

the test and inspection of scales at posted livestock markets and dealer

and packer buying stations.

In summation, it may be said that the Packers and Stockyards

Act is a "Fair Trade Act" to regulate the purchase and sale of livestock as it passes through the terminal stockyards and posted livestock

auction markets. The Act also extends to all meat packers in interstate commerce and as amended would also cover country transactions

of meat packers and livestock dealers.

The portion of the Act and regulations which is of most interest to

you is that pertaining to livestock scales and weighing practices

which is actually one of the most important sections of the Act.

Regulations 201.71 through 201.78 deal entirely with scales and

weighing. The basic requirements being that all livestock and live

poultry scales subject to supervision under the Act shall be installed,

maintained, and operated in such a manner as to insure accurate

weights. Further, it is required that the scale owners shall cause

their scales to be tested properly by competent testing agencies at

least twice a year and a copy of the test report filed with this Branch.

In addition to these basic requirements, the Act makes it a felony for

anyone to make or cause to be made false scale tickets in the purchase

or sale of livestock. It is our belief that only through the proper

selection, installation, and maintenance of those scale facilities, best

adapted to the particular need, can dependable weighing results be

obtained. In order that accuracy may be assured, the scale owner

must see that his scales are tested at regular intervals and that the

weighing is done by competent persons who fully understand their

responsibilities and discharge them accordingly.

In order that these objectives may be accomplished the Branch attempts to promote a three- fold program.

1. To see that the scales are tested in accordance with the

regulations.

2. To inform the weighmasters through instructions as to the

proper weighing practices and as to their responsibilities.

3. To conduct investigations to determine if false weight practices

exist.

The Scale Testing Program has been operating for a number of

years and, in most instances quite efficiently, due in part, to the

cooperation which we receive from a number of State weights and

measures officials. No doubt many of you will now receive a number

of requests to test livestock scales from scale owners who were formerly not subject to our supervision. It is realized that this will place

an additional burden on you, and that you are faced with appropriation problems, with which we are familiar. We do feel, however,

that in many States this may aid you in acquiring the equipment and

personnel needed to perform the service. Many State 1 i vestock auction

associations would support such a program.

127
You will be interested to know that Mr. R. D. Thompson, who

heads our Scale Section, and who is known to many of you, has

recently revised our Scale Test Report Form in such a manner that

the Inspection Report, LS-213 (pink sheet) formerly used has been

eliminated and LS-212 (green sheet) has been simplified. We have

also obtained permission to have this form reproduced bearing the

name of the State agency doing the testing, in those instances where

this is desired by the State. Mr. Thompson will contact you individually on this matter.

Many of you are familiar with the official instructions for weighing

livestock which are furnished to all livestock weighers subject to the

Packers and Stockyards supervision. In addition to this, an abbreviated instruction listing 12 important points in short concise sentences is being posted at all livestock scales which are subject. By

this manner we hope to fully inform the weighers and the general

public as to proper weighing practices. The testing of scales and the

instruction of the weighers as steps Nos. 1 and 2 are basic to the

program.

Xow we turn to the matter of investigation of weighing practices.

In the latter part of the past decade the Department realized that

in the enforcement of the Act more scientific methods must be employed to detect false weighing, and has successfully used these

methods in a number of investigations in recent }

7 ears. We intend to

continue using all devices which may be developed by scale technologists, which are practical, and which may be used to detect false

weighing. We have learned that in order to prepare a case which

will stand up in court that much time, effort and forethought must go

into its preparation. The very nature of the industry and the commodity makes successful prosecution of false weight cases difficult,

but it can be done if sufficient interest and effort are expended.

From Bible times down to the present day, civilization has been

plagued with individuals who cheat at the scale. Frequently Government authorities and the general public have failed to realize

the extent to which these practices exist. An old statute in the Illinois Code deals with this problem and states that anyone who shall

be convicted of false weighing in the buying or selling of livestock

shall be fined a specified amount and thereafter deemed to be a "common cheat." We believe that in view of the importance of accurate

weights to the livestock industry that the Department of Agriculture

and both State and local weights and measures officials should expend

an extra effort to see that a better enforcement program is initiated

and followed consistently. If in our enforcement of the Act we

encounter violations which do not come under our jurisdiction, we

expect to refer them to the proper State authorities and will assist

them in the prosecution of such cases. In turn, we will be glad to

have you report violations to us, which we will investigate thoroughly.

In closing, I wish to again express my appreciation for the opportunity to meet with you and thank you personally for your past

cooperation and solicit an even closer working relationship in the

future. All of us have a job to do. Let's do it together.

128
REPORT OF THE TREASURER

Presented by C. C. Morgan, Treasurer, City Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Gary, Indiana

Balance on hand June 1, 1958 $2, 744. 20

Receipts : Registration fees—195S Conference, 304 at $5 $1, 820. 00

Interest accrued 76. 15

Subtotal $1, 896. 15

1, 896. 1.")

Total $4, 640. 35

Disbursements : Expenses of 43d National Conference

Conference party

Sheraton Hall, reception and dance, sandwiches,

sodas, punch, and waiters $658. 15

Music, Jack Morton Productions 125. 00

Ladies' entertainment

Fashion show and tea 150. 00

Embassy tour and tea 100. 00

Bus transportation, embassy tour 84. 00

Executive Committee breakfast 69. 60

Bus transportation of delegates for tours of the

Federal Food and Drug Laboratories and the

National Bureau of Standards 74. 00

Other Conference expenses

Rubber stamp, Gary Office Equipment Co 6. 35

Receipt books, Robert James Co 12. 66

Contribution toward expenses of Dr. W. Muhe,

Braunschweig, Germany 50. 00

Miscellaneous hotel and Conference expenses 241. 76

Expenses of Conference subsequent to June 9, 1958

National Weights and Measures Week : Emblem artwork and cut 50. 00

3,000 mats 91.80

1,000 mats 30.60

Honor award certificates 14. 80

Conference stationery, George W. Allen Co 37. 81

Travel expense of Special Flour Committee members 740. 16

Bank charges 4. 80

Subtotal .$2, 541. 49

2, 541. 49

Total balance on hand June 1, 1959 $2, 098. 86

Depository :Gary Trust and Savings Bank, Gary, Indiana

First Federal Savings and Loan Association, Gary, Indiana

(Signed) C. C. Morgan,

Treasurer

(On motion and second from the floor, the report of the Treasurer was adopted

by voice vote.

)

129
REPORT OF AUDITING COMMITTEE

Presented by Paul DeVries, Chairman, Municipal Superintendent of

Weights and Measures, Passaic, Neio Jersey

As of June 12 the Auditing Committee examined the financial records of the

Conference and found the same to be in order and correct in every detail.

Paul DeVries, Chairman

H. H. Houston

F. F. Thompson

(On motion of the Conference Chairman, seconded from the floor, the report

of the Auditing Committee was adopted by voice vote.)

Mr. Jackson : Mr. Chairman, I move that the Conference authorize the

Treasurer to pay the costs of the Conference incurred during this meeting and

until the Treasurer's report is submitted at the next National Conference.

(This motion was seconded and adopted by voice vote.)

(The benediction was delivered by the newly elected Conference Chaplain,

Mr. Ralph Magoffin. Thereupon at 11 :27 a.m. the 44th National Conference

was adjourned sine die.)

130
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE

Delegates—State, City, and County Officials

ALASKA

State R. A. Findlay, Inspector, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of State Police, Box 2719, Juneau.

ARIZONA

State J. J. O'Donnell, Deputy State Inspector, Department of

Weights and Measures, 103 State Office Building,

Phoenix.

CALIFORNIA

J. E. Brenton, Chief, Bureau of Weights and Measures,

Department of Agriculture, 1220 N St., Sacramento.

W. A. Kerlin, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

333 Fifth St., Oakland.

A. D. Rose, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, 1116

East California Ave., Bakersfield.

C. M. Fuller, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

3200 North Main St., Los Angeles.

H. J. McDade, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

1480 F St., San Diego.

COLORADO

State H. N. Duff, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Section,

Department of Agriculture, 3130 Zuni St., Denver.

H. H. Houston, Director, Oil Inspection Department, 1024

Speer Blvd., Denver.

CONNECTICUT

State F. M. Greene, Chief, Division of Weights and Measures,

Food and Drug Commission, State Office Building, Hartford.

County

Fairfield W. E. Sheehy, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

County Court House, Bridgeport.

Hartford R. J. Marcotte, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

County Building, 95 Washington St., Hartford.

V. J. Argento, Assistant Sealer.

H. J. Rojeski, Assistant Sealer.

City:

Hartford Nathan Kalechman, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Municipal Building.

Middletown Peter Grassi, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Post

Office Box 223.

New Britain A. J. Albanese, City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Room 327 Municipal Building.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Weights, Measures, and Markets Branch, Department of Licenses and Inspection,

Room 227 Esso Bldg., 261 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, D.C.

District J. T. Kennedy, Chief.

J. M. Boucher, Supervisor.

J. T. Bennick, Inspector and Investigator.

W. R. Cornelius, Inspector and Investigator.

F. C. Harbour, Inspector and Investigator.

Kenneth Hayden, Inspector and Investigator.

H. P. Hutchinson, Inspector and Investigator.

W. H. Jennings, Inspector and Investigator.

G. P. Kosmos, Inspector and Investigator.

T. B. Middleton, Inspector and Investigator.

I. L. Wagner, Jr., Inspector and Investigator.

W. W. Wells, Inspector and Investigator.

131

519003—59 S

State

County

Alameda

Kern

Los Angeles

San Diego_.
FLORIDA

State Xalls Berryman, Director, Weights and Measures Division, Department of Agriculture, Room 107 Nathan

Mayo Bldg., Tallahassee.

City:

Jacksonville H. E. Crawford. Inspector of Weights and Measures, 431

W. Eighth St.

Miami H. E. Howard, Supervisor, Division of Trade Standards,

Coconut Grove Station, Post Office Box 708.

GEORGIA

State P. I. Morris, Jr., Director, Weights and Measures Division, Department of Agriculture, 19 Hunter St. SW.,

Atlanta.

J. W. D. Harvey, State Oil Chemist, State Oil Laboratory,

Department of Revenue, 264 Capitol PL, Atlanta.

ILLINOIS

I. M. Levy, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Room

302 Central Office Building, 320 North Clark St.

R. J. Fahy, Chief Deputy.

INDIANA

R. E. Meek. Director, Division of Weights and Measures,

State Board of Health, 1330 W. Michigan St., Indianapolis.

W. C. Boyd, State Inspector.

W. R. Sevier, County Inspector of Weights and Measures,

County Jail, Princeton.

J. F. Gittings, County Inspector of Weights and Measures,

Court House, LaPorte.

S. C. Grzeskowiak, County Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Room 14 Court House, South Bend.

R. J. Silcock, County Inspector of Weights and Measures,

Room 5 Court House, Terre Haute.

J. A. Hilgemann, City Inspector of Weights and Measures,

301 South Clinton St.

C. C. Morgan, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Room

204 City Hall.

M. A. Steinert, City Inspector of Weights and Measures,

37 West Fifth St.

B. S. Cichowicz, City Inspector of Weights and Measures.

City Hall.

J. T. Harper. City Inspector of Weights and Measures.

Room 205 City Hall.

KANSAS

State J. F. True, State Sealer, Division of Weights and Measures, State Board of Agriculture, State Office Bldg.,

Topeka.

J. L. O'Neill, State Inspector of Weights and Measures,

Williamsburg.

KENTUCKY

State B. J. Butler, Commissioner, State Department of Agriculture, Frankfort.

G. L. Johnsox, Director, Division of Weights and Measures, Capitol Annex.

City:

Louisville W. H. Ising, Supervisor, Division of Weights and Measures, City Hall.

132

City:

Chicago

State

County

:

Gibson . LaPorte

St. Joseph

Vigo

City:

Fort Wayne

Gary

New Albany

South Bend

Terre Haute
LOUISIANA

State A. J. Mayer, Director, Division of Weights and Measures,

State Department of Agriculture and Immigration, Capitol Station, Post Office Box 4292, Baton Rouge.

F. F. Thompson, Chief Chemist, Petroleum Products Tax

Division, Department of Revenue, University Station,

Post Office Box 8374.

MAINE

State H. D. Robinson, Deputy State Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Department of Agriculture, Capitol Building,

Augusta.

City : Portland C. J. Wils, Jr., City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Room 16, 389 Congress St.

MARYLAND

State J. E. Mahoney, State Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Department of Markets, State Board of Agriculture, University of Maryland—Room 247 Symons

Hall, College Park.

R. N. Smith, Assistant Superintendent.

J. D. Maher, State Inspector, Midland.

County

Montgomery E. W. Bucklin, Director, Department of Inspections and

Licenses, County Office Bldg., Rockville.

S. W. Parrish, Chief, Division of Zoning, Permits, and

Licenses.

L. B. Morton, County Inspector of Weights and Measures.

J. P. Soltysiah, County Inspector of Weights and Measures. Prince George's— R. J. Cord, Chief Inspector, Department of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Upper Marlboro.

City : Baltimore G. H. Leithausee, Chief Inspector, Division of Weights

and Measures, Room 1106 Municipal Bldg.

MASSACHUSETTS

State W. C. Hughes, Chief Administrative Assistant, Division

of Standards and Necessaries of Life, Department of Labor and Industries, State House, Boston.

City:

Boston J. F. McCarthy, City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Room 105 City Hall Annex.

Brockton J. F. Coyne, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

Brookline N. A. Sacknoff, Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Town Hall.

Cambridge A. T. Anderson, City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Municipal Bldg.

Everett L. L. Elliott, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

Fitchburg W. T. Deloge, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

Newton J. E. Bowen, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall, 1000 Commonwealth Ave.. Newton Centre.

Salem B. A. Kotulak, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

Somerville J. F. Casey, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Public

Works Bldg.

MICHIGAN

State J. L. Littlefield, Chief, Foods and Standards Division,

State Department of Agriculture, Room 607 Lewis Cass

Bldg., Lansing.

C. O. Cotton, Supervisor, Weights and Measures.

L. K. Rice, State Inspector, Post Office Box 43, St. Johns.

County : Washtenaw_ G. P. Smith, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

County Bldg., Ann Arbor.

133
Dearborn J. A. Hughes, Superintendent, Department of Licenses,

Weights, and Measures, 13030 Hemlock Ave.

Detroit J. T. Daniell, Deputy Sealer, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, 740 Elmwood Ave.

Highland Park__ J. F. Baker, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Police

Department.

Lansing W. M. Saxtox, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 333

North Cedar St.

MINNESOTA

State Erlixg Haxsex, Supervisor, Department of Weights and

Measures, Railroad and Warehouse Commission, One

Flour Exchange, Minneapolis.

H. F. Kiekow, State Inspector, Mora.

City : Minneapolis J. G. Gustafsox, Chief Inspector, Department of Licenses,

Weights, and Measures, Room 101A Court House.

MISSISSIPPI

State W. G. Sellers, State Inspector of Weights and Measures,

Route 1, Laurel.

MISSOURI

State G. XV. Bay, Chief Inspector, Weights and Measures Division, Department of Agriculture. Jefferson City.

E. H. McAdams, State Inspector, 917 South Fourth St.,

Moberly.

NEVADA

State Raymond Rebuffo, Assistant Director, Division of Plant

Industry, State Department of Agriculture, Post Office

Box 1209, Reno.

E. L. Randall, Chief Chemist.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

State A. H. Dittrich, Chief Inspector, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, Division of Markets and Standards, Department of Agriculture, State Office Bldg., Concord.

Frederick Young, State Inspector.

NEW JERSEY

State W. L. Boyan, Deputy Attorney General, Department of

Law and Public Safety, Room 210 State House Annex,

Trenton.

W. H. Cramer, State Superintendent, Division of Weights

and Measures, 187 W. Hanover St., Trenton.

S. H. Christie, Jr., Deputy State Superintendent.

R. K. Bodenweiser, Assistant Superintendent.

A. T. Smith, Assistant Superintendent.

J. R. Bird, Senior Inspector.

E. N. Colgan, State Inspector.

County

:

Atlantic J. E. Myers, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, 350 South Egg Harbor Rd., Hammonton.

Bergen M. J. Santimauro, County Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, 66 Zabriskie St., Hackensack.

E. E. Dawson, Assistant Superintendent.

Burlington P. F. Nunn, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures. County Office Bldg., 49 Water St., Mount

Holly.

D. F. Hummel, Assistant County Superintendent.

Cumberland Alfred Lirio, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Post Office Box 369, Yineland.

G. S. Franks, Assistant County Superintendent, Court

House, Bridgeton.

134
Essex W. H. Senneidewind, County Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, 278 New St., Newark.

Gloucester R. J. Morris, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Post Office Box 377, Woodbury.

Mercer R. M. Bodenweiser, County Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, Court House, Trenton.

Monmouth W. I. Thompson, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Post Office Box 74, Allenhurst.

J. A. J. Bovie, Assistant County Superintendent, 82 West

Wall St., Neptune City.

Passaic William Miller, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, County Service Bldg., Pennsylvania Ave.,

Paterson.

Union J. M. Dietz, County Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Court House, Elizabeth.

Warren G. E. Connolly, County Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Belvidere.

City

Bayonne J. G. Vayda, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Municipal Bldg., 26th St. and Avenue C.

Englewood Leonard DeRienzo, Municipal Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall.

Fair Lawn Oscar Haug, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Plaza Bldg.

Garfield Charles Benantl Municipal Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, Police Bldg., 101 Somerset St.

Jersey City H. J. Myers, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, City Hall.

Linden L. T. Reagan, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Room 20G, City Hall.

Passaic Paul DeVries, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, City Hall.

Paterson J. P. Leonard, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, 115 Van Houten St.

W. J. Keiioe, Assistant Municipal Superintendent.

Trenton R. J. Boney, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, 485 Hamilton Ave.

Union City A. O. Oslund, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, City Hall, 3715 Palisade Ave.

^ NEW MEXICO

State Dallas Rierson, Director, Department of Agriculture,

University Park.

NEW YORK

State- J. H. Stone, Assistant Commissioner, State Department

of Agriculture and Markets, State Office Bldg., Albany.

J. F. Madden, Director, Bureau of Weights and Measures.

J. F. Tucker, State Inspector, 24 Cornish Ave., Binghamton.

County

Allegany George Derx, County Sealer of Weights and Measures.

130 Olean St., Angelica.

Monroe E. D. Hubble, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

1400 South Ave., Rochester.

Richard Veness, Deputy County Sealer.

Nassau Robert Williams, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Old County Court House Annex, Mineola.

A. W. Weidner, Jr., Assistant County Sealer.

Ontario R. F. Ben ham, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Court House, Canada igua.

Steuben W. F. Chapelle, County Sealer of Weights and Measures,

R.D. No. 1, Rathbone.

Wayne IT. H. Wright, County Sealer of Weights and Measures.

30 Catherine St., Lyons.

135
City:

Binghamton H. A. Lason, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 60

Robinson St.

Ithaca E. P. Nedrow, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 318

Columbia St.

Lackawanna J. J. Seres, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 84

Rosary Ave.

Rochester A. C. Samenfink, City Sealer of Weights and Measures.

Rochester Public Markets.

White Plains T. E. Latimore, City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Department of Public Safety, 279 Hamilton Ave.

Yonkers John Dimase, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

NORTH CAROLINA

State J. I. Moore, Field Supervisor, Weights and Measures Division, Department of Agriculture, Room 415, Agriculture

Bldg., Raleigh.

NORTH DAKOTA

State J. C. Goll, Chief Inspector, Weights and Measures Department, Public Service Commission, Capitol Bldg.,

Bismarck.

Allen Otterman, State Inspector.

OHIO

V. D. Camprell, Chief, Division of Weights and Measures,

Department of Agriculture, Reynoldsburg.

A. D. Elliott, County Auditor and Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Defiance.

R. W. Searles, Deputy County Sealer of Weights and

Measures, County Board of Education Bldg., Medina.

Rudolph Starkloff, Deputy County Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Post Office Box 208, Port Clinton.

C. E. Kerr, Deputy County Sealer of Weights and Measures, c/o County Auditor, Mansfield.

R. K. Slough, Superintendent, Weights and Measures,

Municipal Bldg.

W. E. G. Rhein, Superintendent, Markets, Weights, and

Measures, Department of Safety, Sixth Street Market

House.

Walter Hall, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

F. B. Jones, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

OKLAHOMA

State T. C. Beck. Assistant Director, Marketing Division, State

Board of Agriculture, Room 122 State Capitol Bldg.,

Oklahoma City.

PENNSYLVANIA

State Miss Genevieve Blatt, Secretary, Department of Internal

Affairs, Capitol Bldg., Harrisburg.

H. M. Turrell, Director, Bureau of Standard W

Teights

and Measures.

J. A. Green, Assistant Director.

County

:

Centre G. N. Haupt, County Inspector of Weights and Measures,

148 N. Prospect Ave., State College.

Philadelphia J. J. Powers, Chief Supervisor, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, Room 306 City Hall, Philadelphia.

State

County

:

Defiance--

Medina

Ottawa

Richland

City:

Akron

Cincinnati

Springfield

Youngstown

136
City:

Altoona R. I. Cummings, City Inspector of Weights and Measures,

City Hall.

Erie P. F. Watson, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

PUERTO RICO

Commonwealth A. E. Diaz, Head, Division of Weights and Measures, Economic Stabilization Administration, Tost Office Box

4183, San Juan.

RHODE ISLAND

State E. R. Fisher, State Sealer of Weights and Measures, Department of Labor, Veterans Memorial Building, 83

Park St., Providence.

City : Warwick B. F. Taylor, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 35

Titus Lane.

SOUTH CAROLINA

State C. H. Stender, Assistant to Commissioner, Department of

Agriculture, Post Office Box 1080, Columbia.

R. M. Magoffin, Director, Bureau of Inspection.

E. E. Richardson, State Inspector, 212 Elm Street, Conway.

TENNESSEE

City : Memphis V. D. Rogers, City Inspector of Weights and Measures, 590

Washington Ave.

TEXAS

State Russell Koontz, Chief, Division of Weights and Measures,

State Department of Agriculture, Capitol Station,

Austin.

City:

Dallas J. D. Walton, Supervisor, Weights, Measures, and Markets, Room 303 City Hall.

Houston R. O. DeVillier, Chief, Weights and Measures Division,

Department of Public Works, City Hall.

UTAH

City : Salt Lake City- E. C. Westwood, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 118

East First, South.

VIRGINIA

State , J. H. Meek, Director, Division of Markets, Department of

Agriculture and Immigration, 1200 East Main St., Richmond.

T. C. Harris, Jr., Supervisor, Weights and Measures

Section.

.T. A. Rosen, Assistant Supervisor.

J. E. Michaux, State Inspector.

R. H. Shelton, State Inspector.

City

Alexandria C. B. Tate, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, 405

Cameron St.

Danville C. H. Wrenn, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Curb

Market Bldg., Spring St.

Norfolk W. F. Bradley, Chief, Bureau of Weights and Measures,

Department of Public Safety, City Hall.

Petersburg C. R. Branch, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

Richmond M. L. Rice, Senior Inspector, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, The Mosque Bldg., Laurel and Main Streets.

Roanoke J. M. Hudgins, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Market Bldg.

187
WASHINGTON

J. H. Lewis, Chief, Weights and Measures Division, State

Department of Agriculture, Post Office Box 120, Olympia.

D. M. Turnbull, Director, Division of Licenses and Standards, Office of the Comptroller, Room 100 County-City

Bldg.

WEST VIRGINIA

H. R. Kennell, Commissioner, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, Department of Labor, Room 643, State Office

Bldg., 1800 E. Washington St., Charleston.

Mrs. Beatrice Lanham, County Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Bristol.

WISCONSIN

C. L. Jackson, Chief, Division of Economic Practices, Department of Agriculture, State Capitol, Madison.

N. E. Kirschbatjm, Supervisor, Weights and Measures

Section.

L. W. Raymond, City Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Municipal Center.

N. P. Tilleman, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

P. E. Krainik, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City

Hall.

J. J. Persak, Assistant City Sealer of Weights and Measures, City Hall.

WYOMING

State E. R. Leeman, Director, Division of Weights, Measures,

and Petroleum, State Department of Agriculture, Room

308, Capitol Bldg., Cheyenne.

Advisory Members

U.S. Department of Commerce:

L. L. Strauss, Secretary of Commerce.

National Bureau of Standards

:

Director's Office

:

A. V. Astin, Director.

A. T. McPi-ierson, Associate Director for Engineering.

L C. Schoonover, Associate Director for Planning.

Wilmer Souder, Consultant.

Office of Weights and Measures : W. S. Bussey, Chief.

M. W. Jensen, Assistant Chief.

L. V. Judson, Physicist.

R. W. Smith, Consultant (Honorary Life Member).

H. F. Wollin, Engineer.

R. L. Steiger, Engineer.

Mrs. F. C. Bell, Administrative Assistant.

Mrs. E. L. Brueckner, SecretaryMrs. M. M. Brodmerkel. SecretaryOffice of Technical Information

:

W. R. Tilley, Chief.

P. E. Walsh, Publications Editor.

J. F. Reilly, Publications Editor.

P. L. Reid, Publications Editor.

Miss Dorothy Bell, Editorial Clerk.

Mechanics Division

:

J. C. Hughes, Supervisory Physicist, Capacity, Density, and Fluid

Meters Section.

B. C. Keysar, Physical Science Technician, Capacity, Density, and

Fluid Meters Section.

H. S. Peiser, Chief, Mass and Scale Section.

State

City: Seattle

State

County : Harrison

State

City:

Beloit

Green Bay

Manitowoc

West Allis

138
L. B. Macukdy, Chief, Mass Unit, Mass and Scale Section.

H. E. Almer, Physicist, Mass Unit, Mass and Scale Section.

A. P. K. Johnson, Physicist, Mass Unit, Mass and Scale Section.

C. W. Atweix, Laboratory Mechanic, Mass Unit, Mass and Scale

Section.

G. T. Backus, Physical Science Technician, Mass Unit, Mass and

Scale Section.

C. L. Carroll. Jr., Mechanical Engineer, Mass Unit, Mass and Scale

Section.

Miss Eleanor Anderson, Student Trainee, Mass Unit, Mass and

Scale Section.

P. S. Siioenfeld, Student Trainee, Mass Unit, Mass and Scale Section.

H. H. Russell, Chief, Scale Unit, Mass and Scale Section.

H. L. Badger, Physicist, Scale Unit, Mass and Scale Section.

J. F. Saunders, Student Trainee, Scale Unit, Mass and Scale Section,

Optics and Metrology Division : Ii. W. Crouch, Jr., Technologist. Photometry and Colorinietry

Section.

U.S. Department of Agriculture : D. L. Bowman, Chief, Packers and Stockyards Branch, Livestock Division,

Agricultural Marketing Service, Washington, D.C.

R. D. Thompson, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing, Packers and Stockyards Branch, Livestock Division. Agricultural Marketing Service,

Washington, D.C.

M. H. Neustadt, Head, Standardization Section, Standardization and Testing Branch, Grain Division, Agricultural Marketing Service, Beltsville,

Md.

C. R. Adair, Research Agronomist, Crops Research Division, Agricultural

Research Service, Belrsville, Md.

Federal Trade Commission

C. R. Moore, Legal Advisor on Deceptive Practices, Bureau of Investigation,

Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare:

J. L. Harvey, Deputy Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Washington, D.C.

J. C. Pearson, Director, Division of Federal-State Relations, Food and

Drug Administration, Washington, D.C.

L. M. Beacham, Deputy Director, Food Division, Bureau of Biological and

Physical Sciences, Food and Drug Administration, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of the Treasury : E. W. Teagarden, Engineering Specialist, Division of Technical Services,

Bureau of Customs, Washington, D.C.

Associate Members—Manufacturers of Weighing and Measuring Devices

American Meter Company : W. V. Stockton, Jr., Product Manager, 13500 Philmont Ave., Philadelphia, Pa.

Badger Meter Manufacturing Company : M. E. Hartz, Director of Engineering,

4545 West Brown Deer Rd., Milwaukee, Wis.

C. E. Kohl, Industrial Sales Manager.

Bloomer Brothers Company: R. M. Holmes, Product Development Manager,

Newark, N.Y.

Powser, Inc.

A. E. Spitzberg, Alee President in Charge of Engineering, Fort Wayne, Ind.

E. J. Rein hart, Service Manager.

Brodie, Ralph N., Company : C. J. McCaffrey, Vice President, 550 South Columbus Ave., Mount Vernon, N.Y.

D. W. Kingsley, Eastern Manager.

H. E. Sierold, Sales Engineer, 528 Chrysler Bldg., New York, N.Y.

Ghatillon, John, & Sons: G. C. Reiley, Vice President, Sales, 89 Cliff St., New

York, N.Y.

Detecto Scales, Inc.

Mack Rapp, Vice President, 540 Park Ave., Brooklyn, N.Y.

Mrs. C. G. AVoodland, Representative, Tamiami Station, Post Office Box 398,

Miami, Fla.

139
Dixie Cup Co.

:

C. G. McBride, Assistant to the Vice President and General Manager, Easton,

Pa.

J. G. Rogers, Consultant, Weights and Measures, 4730 Stevens Dr., Sarasota,

Fla.

P. A. Stokes, Manager, Field Research Department, Easton, Pa.

Exact Weight Scale Co.

:

W. A. Scheurer, President, 538 E. Town St., Columbus, Ohio.

W. J. Schieser, Vice President, Product Development.

J. F. Sullivan, Chief Engineer.

O. H. Watson, Manager, Midwest Division, 60S South Dearborn St., Chicago, 111. Fairbanks, Morse and Co.

C. G. Gehringer, Manager, Scale Division, 600 South Michigan Ave., Chicago,

111. J. C. Kenney, Field Engineer, 731 Charing Cross Rd., Baltimore, Md.

J. S. Peterson, Sales Manager. Electronic Scales, East Moline, 111. Richard Wasniak, National Manager, Service, 600 South Michigan Ave., Chicago, 111. Farrell Manufacturing Co. : M. F. Denick, Chief Engineer, 804 Cass St., Joliet,

111. Gilbert & Barker Manufacturing Co. : William Keay, Manager, Sales Service,

West Springfield, Mass.

Gilsen Co., Inc. : L. R. Olsen, President, 3200 West 22d St., Erie, Pa.

Granberg Corp. : W. M. Milligan, Eastern Division Sales Manager, 489 Fifth

Ave., New York, N.Y.

Gurley, W. & L. E. : F. G. Williams, Washington Representative, 5514 Nevada

Ave. NW., -Washington, D.C.

Hobart Manufacturing Co.

:

K. C. Allen, Vice President of Scale Operations, 448 Huffman Ave., Dayton,

Ohio.

M. E. Bone, Weights and Measures Representative.

E. A. Reussenzehn, Chief Scale Engineer, Dayton Scale Division.

Hodgson, A. E., Scale Dealer, 46 Garrett Rd., Upper Darby, Pa.

Howe Scale Co.

:

R. F. Straw, Vice President, 385 Stewart St. SW., Atlanta, Ga.

M. J. Kauffman, District Manager, 1910 West Atlantic St., Philadelphia, Pa.

C. E. Roessler, Director of Engineering, 2941 Scale Ave., Rutland, Vt.

G. D. Wilkinson, National Service Manager.

Kanawha Valley Scale Service Co. : P. E. Bradbury, Dunbar, W. Va.

Lilly, Eli, & Co. : E. V. Meith, Supervisor, Instrument Department, 740 S. Alabama St., Indianapolis, Ind.

Liquid Controls Corp.

:

H. O. Link, 14 South Calverton Rd., Baltimore, Md.

G. B. Richards, North Chicago, 111. Mclntyre, John J., Sons: F. L. McIntyre, Owner, 514-16 Knorr St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Measuregraph Co. : F. L. Wall, Washington Representative, Apt. 202, 6603

Arlington Blvd., Falls Church, Va.

Miller, Byron & Associates : B. D. Miller, Owner, 7712 Georgia Ave. NW., Washington, D.C.

Neptune Meter Company: E. F. Wehmann, Chief Development Engineer, 22-42

Jackson Ave., Long Island City, N.Y.

Nicol Scales, Inc. : W. F. Nicol, President, 1315 South Akard St., Dallas, Tex.

Owens-Illinois Glass Co. : F. B. Busch, Engineer, Toledo, Ohio.

Penn Scale Manufacturing Co., Inc. : Sydney Black, President, 150 W. Berks

St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Revere Corp. of America : J. D. Craig, Colony Road, Wallingford, Conn.

C. W. Silver, Sales Manager, 845 North Colony Rd., Wallingford, Conn.

H. L. Zupp, Field Engineer, 3525 Guilford Ave., NW., Canton, Ohio.

Richardson Scale Co. : C. S. Graham, Service Manager, 668 Van Houten Ave.,

Clifton, N.J.

Rockwell Manufacturing Co. : A. J. Komich, Product Manager, 400 No. Lexington

Ave., Pittsburgh, Pa.

Sanitary Scale Co. : E. C. Karp, Vice President, Manufacturing and Engineering, 910 E. Lincoln Ave., Belvidere, 111.

140
Sauter, August, of New York, Inc.

H. G. Shimp, Jr., Manager, 866 Willis Ave., Albertson, Long Island, N.Y.

M. U. Wirz, Salesman.

Seraphin Test Measure Co. : T. A. Seraphin, General Manager, 1314 N. Seventh

St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Smith, A. O., Corp. : H. D. Leisenring, General Sales Manager, Smith-Erie

Division, 250 Park Ave., New York, N.Y.

Spinks Scale Co. : D. F. Laird, Manager, 836 Stewart Ave., S\V., Atlanta, Ga.

Stewart-Warner Corp. : H. T. Dinkelkamp, Chief Engineer, Alemite Division,

1828 West Diversey Parkway, Chicago, 111. Streeter-Amet Co. : R. T. Isham, Vice President, Grayslake, 111. Symington Wayne Corp.

C. F. Bateman, Vice President, College Ave., Salisbury, Md.

W. J. Dubsky, Manager of Engineering.

W. O. Howland, Service Manager.

F. W. Love, Engineering Department.

Thatcher Glass Manufacturing Company : A. C. Thomas, Quality Control Representative, Grand Central Ave., Elmira, N.Y.

Tokheim Corporation : William Louthan, Manager, Field Service, 1600 Wabash

Ave., Fort Wayne, Ind.

Toledo Scale Corp.

W. H. Hem, Senior Engineer, 5225 Telegraph Rd., Toledo, Ohio.

R. V. Miller, Manager, Weights and Measures, and Sanitary Standards.

J. G. Lewis, Manager, Government Division, 3329 Eighth St., NE., Washington, D.C.

R. E. Lenox, Resident Manager.

Troemner, Henry, Inc. : C. F. Rosica, Sales Manager, 22d and Master Sts.,

Philadelphia, Pa.

U. S. Slicing Machine Co. : W. H. Tough, General Sales Manager, 333 Larson

St., La Porte, Ind.

Veeder-Root, Inc.

A. E. McKeever, Sales Manager, Master Meter Duplicator Division, 70 Sargeant St., Hartford, Conn.

II. W. Barnes, Assistant Sales Manager, Computer Division.

Washington Scale and Equipment Co., Inc. : Aaron Yociielson, President, 1107

New Jersey Ave., NW., Washington, D.C.

Wood, John, Co.

W. M. Hoxie, Service Manager, Bennett Pump Division, Broadway and Lethen

Sts., Muskegon, Mich.

L. G. Close, District Manager, Bennett Pump Division, 2127 North Charles

St., Baltimore, Md.

Associate Members—Associations, Business and Industry, and Railroads

American Meat Institute : A. D. Bond, Washington Representative, 727 National Press Bldg., Washington, D.C.

American Petroleum Institute

J. E. Moss, Director, Division of Transportation, 1625 K St., NW., Washington, D.C.

P. W. Engels, Consultant, 50 W. 50th St., New York, N.Y.

American Seed Trade Association : D. L. James, Washington Representative1

, 725 15th St., NW., Washington, D.C.

American Standards Association, Inc. : A. C. Hutton, Washington Representative, 4721 Industrial Bldg., National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C.

Association of American Soap and Glycerine Producers, Inc. : R. W. Peet,

Manager, 295 Madison Ave., New York, N.Y.

Atkins and Durbrow : J. O. Fletcher, Sales Manager, Post Office Box 55, Port

Colborne, Ontario, Canada.

Atlantic Refining Co. : M. G. Davis, Manager, Regional Marketing Department.

260 South Broad St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Consumers Union: D. W. Masters, Director, Mount Vernon, N.Y.

Continental Can Co., Inc. : T. P. McGlynn, Manager, Product and Market Development, 49 Oraton St., Post Office Box 1159, Newark, N.J.

Cooperative League of the U.S.A.: J. T. Jennings, Assistant Director, 1025

Vermont Ave., NW., Washington, D.C.

Cooperative News Service : W. K. McCandless, Association Editor, 825 Vermont

Ave., Washington, D.C.

141
Dairy Industries Supply Association : D. H. Williams, Technical Director, 114.5

19th St., NW, Washington, D.C.

Federal- State Publication : Miss A. O. Nicoll, Director and Owner, Rosslyn

Station, Post Office Box 9833, Arlington, Ya.

Fruit Dispatch Co. : R. B. Tewksbury, Assistant Traffic Manager, United Fruit

Interchange Terminal, Weehauken, N.J.

Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association : G. T. Wright, Managing Director,

551 Fifth Ave., New York, NY.

General Foods Corporation : C. A. Clark, Weights and Measures Coordinator,

250 North Street, White Plains, N.Y.

General Mills, Inc. : O. A. Oudal, Director, Products Control, 9200 Wayzata

Blvd., Minneapolis, Minn.

Glass Container Manufacturers Institute, Inc. : C. E. AVagner, Development

Engineer, 99 Park Ave., New York, N.Y.

Grain and Feed Dealers National Association : II. L. Sharp, Secretarv-Treasurer, 725 15th St., NW., Washington, D.C.

Grand Union Co. : T. J. Streithorst, Executive Vice President, 2060 West Virginia Ave., Washington, D.C.

International Association of Ice Cream Manufacturers : R. H. North, Executive Secretary, 1105 Barr Blclg., Washington, D.C.

Kraft Foods

:

G. M. BuRDiTT, Counsel, Snyder, Chadwell, Fagerburg, and Keck, 135 South

La Salle St., Chicago, 111. W. H. Fltjry, National Products Sales Manager, 500 Peshtigo Ct., Chicago, 111. Kroger Co. : R. N. Johnson, Chief Chemist, 1240 State Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio.

Label Manufacturers National Association : T. J. Cl'Rran, Executive Director,

1700 Eye St., NW., Washington, D.C.

Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association, Inc. : A. C. Kreutzer, Vice President and

Counsel, 11 South La Salle St., Chicago, 111. Mayer, Oscar, & Co. : J. C. Bard. General Products Controller, 910 Mayer Ave.,

Madison, Wis.

Millers' National Federation

:

C. L. Mast, Jr., Executive Vice President, 309 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago,

111. F. H. Mewhinney, Washington Representative, 847 National Press Bldg.,

Washington, D.C.

Mobil Oil Co. : L. E. Reed, Manager of Motor Vehicles, 150 East 42d St., New

York, N.Y.

National Association of Dairy Equipment Manufacturers : John Marshall,

Executive Vice President, 1012 14th St., NW., Washington, D.C.

National Canners Association

:

H. A. Cox, 1133 20th St., NW., Washington, D.C.

H. L. Stier.

National Farmers Union : R. L. Jo'HNson, Coordinator, 1404 New York Ave.,

700 Bond Bldg., Washington, D.C.

National Fisheries Institute : H. W. Magnusson, Director, Technology Division,

1614 20th St., NW., Washington, D.C.

National Milk Producers Federation : R. J. Davis, Staff Member, 1731 Eye St.,

NW., Washington, D.C.

National Pickle Packers Association: M. F. Markel, Legal Counsel, Munsey

Bldg., Washington, D.C,

Paper Can Association : A. W. Howe, Jr., Assistant to Executive Secretary,

Room 1532, Philadelphia National Bank Bldg., Philadelphia, Pa.

Paper Cup and Container Institute, Inc. : R. W. Foster, Assistant to Executive

Director, 250 Park Ave., New York, N.Y.

Paraffined Carton Association: H. Fx. Bobbins, Executive Secretary, 111 West

Washington St., Chicago, 111. Pennsylvania Railroad : G. F. Yeager, Assistant Foreman, Test Department,

Scales, Altoona, Pa.

Pillsbury Company: C. E. Joyce, General Claim Manager, 608 Second Ave.,

South, Pillsbury Bldg., Minneapolis, Minn.

Potomac Coop. Federation : R. R. Pyne, 7014 Braeburn Road, Bethesda, Md.

Miss Doris Rall.

Protane Corp. : J. D. Seltm, Manager, Service Engineering Department, 302

East 131st St., Cleveland, Ohio.

Pure Oil Co. : R. G. Emmett, Assistant Marketing Operations Manager, 35 East

Wacker Dr., Chicago, 111.

142
Reading Railroad Co. : R. C. Thran, Scale Inspector, Locomotive Shops, Sixth

and Perry Sts., Reading- , Pa.

Red Wing Peat Corp. : A. D. Trott, President. 3402 Mercer St., Houston, Tex.

Republic Steel Corp. : D. R. Smith, Corporation AVeighing Supervisor, 410 Oherlin Rd., SW., Massillon, Ohio.

Richard, C. L., Consultant, Industrial Weighing. Measuring, Counting, and

Data Recording Systems, 231 La Paloma Ave., San Clemente, Calif.

Saybolt, J. W., Business Counselor on Weights and Measures Laws, 9209 Carlyle Ave., Surfside, Miami Beach, Fla.

Scale Manufacturers Association, Inc. : Arthur Sanders, Executive Secretary,

One Thomas Circle, Washington, D.C.

Shell Oil Co.

M. H. Deutzman, Senior Engineer, 50 West 50th St., New York, N.Y.

Fred Larson, Project Engineer.

H. C. Packard, Secretary, Loss Control Committee.

Sinclair Refining Co. : K. W. Birkin, Manager, Automotive Department, 600

Fifth Ave., New York, N.Y.

Suburban Propane Gas Corp. : W. S. Bigelow, Assistant Secretary, Post Office

Box 206, Whippany, N.J.

Sun Oil Co. : A. H. Marsh, Manager, Equipment and Station Maintenance, 1600

Walnut St., Philadelphia, Pa.

Swift and Co. : E. G. Spikier, 711 14th St., NW, Washington, D.C.

Thread Institute, Inc.

David Snyder, Executive Director, 11 West 42d St., New York, N.Y.

W. D. Seidler, Member, Legislation Committee, Coats & Clark, Inc., 430

Park Ave., New York, N.Y.

Tissue Association, Inc. : R. A. Fife, Consultant, 122 East 42d St., New York,

N.Y.

Visking Co., Division of Union Carbide Corp.

Elliot Balestier, Manager, Division of Special Services, 210 Main St., Post

Office Box 378, Hackensack, N.J.

W. M. Sawers, Washington Manager, Room 800 Wyatt Bldg., 777 14th St.,

NW., Washington, D.C.

Western Weighing and Inspection Bureau: C. G. Johnson, Supervisor, Weight

Agreements and Weighing, Room 460 Union Station, 517 West Adams St.,

Chicago, 111. Wilkins-Rogers Milling Co., Inc.: S. H. Rogers, Jr., President, 3261 K St.,

NW., Washington, D.C.

Guests

Baker, C. A., 24y2 Ogden St., Binghamton, N.Y.

Bean, H. S., Consultant, Fluid Measurements, 3929 Washington St., Kensington,

Md.

Caulfield, M. J., Almonesson, N.J.

Eiseman, J. H., Fuel Gas Consultant, 4514 Amherst Lane, Bethesda, Md.

Gordon, L. J., Director, Weights and Measures Research Center, Denison University, Granville, Ohio.

Krach, Louis, Ingenieur en Chef des Instruments de Mesure, Ministry of Industry and Commerce, 96 rue de Varenne, Paris 7eme, France.

McBride, J. P., 3 Livermore Road, Belmont, Mass.

143

THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The scope of activities of the National Bureau of Standards at its major laboratories in

Washington, D.C., and Boulder, Colorado, is suggested in the following listing of the

divisions and sections engaged in technical work. In general, each section carries out

specialized research, development, and engineering in the field indicated by its title. A brief description of the activities, and of the resultant publications, appears on

the inside of the front cover. WASHINGTON, D.C.

Electricity and Electronics. Resistance and Reactance. Electron Devices. Electrical Instruments. Magnetic Measurements. Dielectrics. Engineering Electronics.

Electronic Instrumentation. Electrochemistry.

Optics and Metrology. Photometry and Colorimetry. Optical Instruments. Photographic Technology. Length. Engineering Metrology.

Heat. Temperature Physics. Thermodynamics. Cryogenic Physics. Rheology. Molecular Kinetics. Free Radicals Research.

Atomic and Radiation Physics. Spectroscopy. Radiometry. Mass Spectrometry.

Solid State Physics. Electron Physics. Atomic Physics. Neutron Physics. Radiation

Theory. Radioactivity. X-ray. High Energy Radiation. Nucleonic Instrumentation.

Radiological Equipment.

Chemistry. Organic Coatings. Surface Chemistry. Organic Chemistry. Analytical

Chemistry. Inorganic Chemistry. Electrodeposition. Molecular Structure and Properties of Gases. Physical Chemistry. Thermochemistry. Spectrochemistry. Pure

Substances.

Mechanics. Sound. Mechanical Instruments. Fluid Mechanics. Engineering Mechanics. Mass and Scale. Capacity, Density, and Fluid Meters. Combustion Controls.

Organic and Fibrous Materials. Rubber. Textiles. Paper. Leather. Testing and

Specifications. Polymer Structure. Plastics. Dental Research.

Metallurgy. Thermal Metallurgy. Chemical Metallurgy. Mechanical Metallurgy.

Corrosion. Metal Physics.

Mineral Products. Engineering Ceramics. Glass. Refractories. Enameled Metals.

Constitution and Microstructure.

Building Technology. Structural Engineering. Fire Protection. Air Conditioning,

Heating, and Refrigeration. Floor, Roof, and Wall Coverings. Codes and Safety

Standards. Heat Transfer. Concreting Materials.

Applied Mathematics. Numerical Analysis. Computation. Statistical Engineering.

Mathematical Physics.

Data Processing Systems. SEAC Engineering Group. Components and Techniques.

Digital Circuitry. Digital Systems. Analog Systems. Applications Engineering.

• Office of Basic Instrumentation. • Office of Weights and Measures.

BOULDER, COLORADO

Cryogenic Engineering. Cryogenic Equipment. Cryogenic Processes. Properties of

Materials. Gas Liquefaction.

Radio Propagation Physics. Upper Atmosphere Research. Ionosphere Research.

Regular Prediction Services. Sun-Earth Relationships. VHF Research. Radio

Warning Services. Airglow and Aurora. Radio Astronomy and Arctic Propagation.

Radio Propagation Engineering. Data Reduction Instrumentation. Radio Noise.

Tropospheric Measurements. Tropospheric Analysis. Propagation-Terrain Effects.

Radio-Meteorology. Lower Atmosphere Physics.

Radio Standards. High-Frequency Electrical Standards. Radio Broadcast Serrvice.

Radio and Microwave Materials. Electronic Calibration Center. Microwave Circuit

Standards.

Radio Communication and Systems. Low Frequency and Very Low Frequency Research. High Frequency and Very High Frequency Research. Modulation Systems.

Antenna Research. Navigation Systems. Systems Analysis. Field Operations.