U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

REPORT OF THE

THIRTY-FIFTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE

ON

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

ATTENDED BY REPRESENTATIVES

FROM VARIOUS STATES

SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

WASHINGTON, D.^C, MAY 23, 24, 25, and 26, 1950

MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION 199
i


U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

CHARLES SAWYER, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

E. U. CONDON. Director

MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION 199

REPORT OF THE

THIRTY-FIFTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE

ON

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

ATTENDED BY REPRESENTATIVES

FROM VARIOUS STATES

SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

WASHINGTON, D. C, MAY 23, 24, 25, and 26, 1950

UNITED STATES

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 1950

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 50 cents


frtr
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES

OFFICERS

(Present and serving during the Thirty-fifth National Conference)

President : E. U. Condon, Director, National Bureau of Standards, Washington,

D. C. Vice Presidents

:

C. A. Baker, Director, State Bureau of Weights and Measures, Department

of Agriculture and Markets, Albany, N. Y.

J. E. Brenton, Chief, State Bureau of Weights and Measures, Department of

Agriculture, Sacramento, Calif. A. J. Jensen, Chief State Inspector of Weights and Measures, Public Service Commission, Jamestown, N. Dak.

J. T. Kennedy, Director, Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets,

District of Columbia, Washington, D. C.

J. P. Leonard, City Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Paterson, N. J. C. C. Mundy, Chief, City Bureau of Weights and Measures, Richmond, Va.

Secretary : R. W. Smith, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau

of Standards, Washington, D. C. Treasurer: G. F. Austin, Jr., Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, Detroit,

Mich.

(As elected by the Thirty-fifth National Conference for the ensuing year)

President : E. U. Condon, Director, National Bureau of Standards, Washington,

D. C. Vice Presidents

:

C. A. Baker, Director, State Bureau of Weights and Mesaures, Department

of Agriculture and Markets, Albany, N. T.

J. E. Brenton, Chief, State Bureau of Weights and Mesaures, Department

of Agriculture, Sacramento, Calif. V. D. Campbell, Deputy State Sealer, Department of Agriculture, Columbus,

Ohio.

J. T. Kennedy, Director, Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets,

District of Columbia, Washington, D. C. H. E. Howard, City Supervisor of Weights and Measures, Miami, Fla.

F. C. Yarbrough, City Inspector of Weights and Measures, Charlotte. N. C. Secretary : R. W. Smith, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau

of Standards, Washington, D. C. Treasurer : G. F. Austin, Jr., Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, Detroit,

Mich.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

(As elected by the Thirty-fifth National Conference)

E. U. Condon

C. A. Baker

J. E. Brenton

V. D. Campbell

J. T. Kennedy }Ex officio. H. E. Howard

F. C. Yarbrough

R. W. Smith

G. F. Austin, Jr.

J. F. Blickley, Director, State Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures,

Harrisburg, Pa.

G. E. Carpenter, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and Measures, Montpelier, Vt. in

"

1

I
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES

F. M. Greene, Deputy Commissioner, State Food and Drug Commission, Hartford,

Conn.

Erling Hansen, Supervisor, State Department of Weights and Measures, Minneapolis, Minn.

J. A. Hilgemann, City Inspector of Weights and Measures, Fort Wayne, Ind.

M. W. Jensen, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Madison, Wis.

G. L. Johnson, Director, State Division of Weights and Measures, Frankfort,

Ky.

J. R. Jones, Commissioner, State Department of Agriculture, Columbia, S. C. O. A. Kirkland, Inspector, State Division of Weights and Measures, Austin, Tex.

J. J. Levitt, State Superintendent of Standards, Springfield, 111. J. P. McBride, State Director of Standards and Necessaries of Life, Boston.

Mass.

M. A. Nelson, Chief, State Bureau of Marketing and Enforcement, Lansing, Mich.

J. G. Rogers, Deputy Superintendent, State Division of Weights and Measures,

Trenton, N. J.

J. F. True, Sealer, State Weights and Measures Division, Topeka, Kan.

C. J. Wills, Jr., City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Portland, Maine.

STANDING COMMITTEES

(As constituted at the conclusion of the 35th National Conference, the personnel

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

appointments made by the President of the Conference, changes which have

occurred from expiration of term or other cause, and the elections by the several

committees of chairmen, and in some cases secretaries, for the ensuing year. The term of office for each committee member, in years, is shown by the figure

in parenthesis following each entry.)

COMMITTEE ON SPECIFICATIONS AND TOLERANCES

J. P. McBeide, State Director of Standards and Necessaries of Life, Boston, Mass.,

Chairman. (3)

W. S. Bussey, Assistant Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau

of Standards, Washington, D. C, Secretary. (5) G. F. Austin, Jr., Deputy City Sealer of Weights and Mesaures, Detroit, Mich. (1)

Nalls Bereyman, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and Measures, Tallahassee, Fla. (2)

L. E. Witt, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Milwaukee, Wis. (4)

COMMITTEE ON METHODS OF SALE OF COMMODITIES

J. G. Rogers, Deputy State Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Trenton,

N. J., Chairman. (5) R. S. Ackerman, Superintendent, City Department of Licenses, Weights and

Measures, Minneapolis, Minn. (2). C. D. Baucom, State Superintendent, Weights and Measures Division, Raleigh,

N. C. (4)

J. F. Blickxey, Director, State Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures, Harrisburg, Pa. (1) L. R. Roper, City Supervisor of Licenses and Standards, Seattle, Wash. (3)

COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION

R. E. Meek, Director, State Division of Weights and Measures, Indianapolis, Ind.,

Chairman. (5)

C. A. Baker, Director, State Bureau of Weights and Measures, Albany, N. T. (3)

J. A. Bernard, City Commissioner of Weights and Measures, St. Louis, Mo. (1)

J. R. Booth, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Haverhill, Mass. (4)

C. H. Oakley, State Inspector of Weights and Measures, Cheyenne, Wyo. (2)

COMMITTEE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES EDUCATION

C. M. Fuller, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Los Angeles, Calif., Chair- man. (5)

J. T. Kennedy, Director, Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets, District of Columbia, Washington, D. C., Secretary. (3)
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES V

G. E. Carpenter, State Supervisor of Weights and Measures, Montpelier, Vt. (4) R. K. Slough, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Akron, Ohio. (2)

Robert Williams, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Mineola, N. Y. (1)

COMMITTEE ON TRADING BY WEIGHT

J. F. True, State Sealer, Weights and Measures Division, Topeka, Kan., Chair- man. (4) F. G. Cesar, Director, State Marketing Division, Oklahoma City, Okla. (1)

Erling Hansen, Supervisor, State Department of Weights and Measures, Minneapolis, Minn. (2)

J. J. Levitt, State Superintendent of Standards, Springfield, 111. (5)

J. H. Meek, Director. State Division of Markets, Richmond, Va. (3)

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM REGULATIONS

R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, State Weights and Measures Section, Richmond,

Va., Chairman.

D. A. Fraser, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Salem, Conn.

C. I. Hoel, Assistant Supervisor, State Department of Weights and Measures,

Minneapolis, Minn.

J. W. Reese, Superintendent, State Weights and Measures Division, Des Moines,

Iowa.

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

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE TESTING OF RAILWAY TRACK SCALES 1

J. P. McBride, State Director of Standards and Necessaries of Life, Boston,

Mass., Chairman.

J. E. Brenton, Chief, State Bureau of Weights and Measures, Sacramento, Calif. Erling Hansen, Supervisor, State Department of Weights and Measures, Minneapolis, Minn.

COMMITTEES ACTING ONLY DURING THE THIRTY-FIFTH NATIONAL

CONFERENCE

Committee on Nominations: R. E. Meek of Indiana, Chairman; J. A. Bernard

of St. Louis, Mo., Nalls Berryman of Florida, J. A. Boyle of Maine, Alfred

Lirio of Cumberland County, N. J., W. F. Masinda of Tolland County, Conn.,

G. W. Warner of Wisconsin.

Committee on Resolutions: J. J. Levitt of Illinois, Chairman; F. M. Greene of

Connecticut, G. L. Johnson of Kentucky, W. A. Kerlin of Alameda County,

Calif., William Kirk, Jr., of Nassau County, N. Y., R. W. Searles of Medina

County, Ohio, S. H. Seighman of Pennsylvania.

Ladies' Committee: Mrs. R. E. Meek, Chairman; Mrs. W. S. Bussey; Mrs. J. M.

Dietz. In charge of Registrations: Mrs. R. E. Taylor.

1 This Committee was appointed by the Conference President following the adjournment of the 35th National Conference, pursuant to the resolution of the Conference

reported on page 166.
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE

DELEGATES—STATE, CITY, AND COUNTY OFFICIALS

CALIFORNIA

State James E. Brenton, Chief, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, Department of Agriculture, Mull

Building, Sacramento.

D. C. Perkins, Measuring Technician, Liquefied

Petroleum Gas, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, Depatrment of Agriculture, Mull

Building, Sacramento.

County:

Alameda William A. Kerlin, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 333 Fifth Street, Oakland 7. Los Angeles Charles Morris Fuller, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 3200 North Main Street, Los

Angeles 31. COLORADO

State Oscar Heriostad, Markets Inspector, 20 State

Museum Building, Denver.

CONNECTICUT

State Frank M. Greene, Deputy Commissioner, Food

and Drug Commission, State Capitol Building,

Hartford.

City:

Bridgeport Louis Snow, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 925

Main Street. Hartford Nathan Kalechman, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Municipal Building.

County:

Fairfield William E. Sheehy, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, County Court House, BridgeportHartford Fred E. McKinney, County Sealer of Weights

Measures, 95 Washington Street, Hartford.

Tolland William F. Masinda, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, West Willington.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

District J. Thomas Kennedy, Director, Department of

Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana

Avenue NW., Washington.

James G. Dance, Deputy Director, Department

of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300

Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

John M. Boucher, Supervisor, Department of

Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana

Avenue NW., Washington.

George Stuart Reeder, Senior Inspector and

Investigator, Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana Avenue NW.,

Washington.

Leo F. Brooks, Inspector and Investigator,

Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

VI
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE VII

District—Continued Fenton C. Harbour, Inspector and Investigator, Department of Weights, Measures, and

Markets, 300 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

William H. Jennings, Inspector and Investigator, Department of Weights, Measures, and

Markets, 300 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

Herbert R. Strong, Inspector and Investigator,

Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

Francis M. Warner, Inspector and Investigator, Department of Weights, Measures, and

Markets, 300 Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

Walter W. Brandt, Inspector, Department of

Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana

Avenue NW., Washington.

Walter R. Cornelius, Inspector, Department

of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300

Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

Theodore B. Middleton, Inspector, Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300

Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

Ralph H. Montgomery, Inspector, Department

of Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300

Indiana Avenue NW., Washington.

Bernard A. Pettit, Inspector, Department of

Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana

Avenue NW., Washington.

Woodrow W. Wells, Inspector, Department of

Weights, Measures, and Markets, 300 Indiana

Avenue NW., Washington.

FLORIDA

Nalls Berryman, Supervisor, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture,

Nathan Mayo Building, Tallahassee.

Howard E. Crawford, Inspector of Weights

and Measures, 431 West Eighth Street. Harvey E. Howard, Supervisor of Weights and

Measures, 321 Courthouse.

ILLINOIS

John J. Levitt, Superintendent of Standards,

Department of Agriculture, 615 Armory

Building, Springfield.

Irvine M. Levy, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Room 608, City Hall.

Frank J. Fitzgerald, Chief Deputy Inspector of

Weights and Measures, Room 608, City Hall. INDIANA

State Rollin E. Meek, Director, Division of Weights

and Measures, Board of Health, 1330 West

Michigan Street, Indianapolis.

City:

Fort Wayne James A. Hilgemann, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 301 South Clinton Street. Gary C. C. Morgan, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

City Hall.

County: Vigo William H. Roberts, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Room 5, Court House, Terre Haute.

State,

City:

Jacksonville.

Miami

State

City: Chicago
VIII PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE;

IOWA

State James W. Reese, Supervisor, Division of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture, Des

Moines.

KANSAS

State J. Feed True, State Sealer, Weights and Measures Division, Board of Agriculture, 915 Harrison Street, Topeka.

Paul A. Wempe, Chairman, Weights and Measures Committee, Board of Agriculture, Seneca.

KENTUCKY

George L. Johnson, Director, Division of

Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, New State Capitol, Frankfort.

Joseph V. Vittitow, Field Agent, Department

of Agriculture, 221 Saint Ann Street, Owensboro.

William H. I sing, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall.

LOUISIANA

State Alois J. Mayer, Director, Division of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture and

Immigration, State Capitol Building, Baton

Rouge.

MAINE

James A. Boyle, Deputy State Sealer, Bureau of

Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, State House, Augusta.

Charles James Wills, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 389 Congress Street. MARYLAND

George H. Leithauser, Senior Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures, 1106

Municipal Building.

Richard S. Hunter, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 1106 Municipal Building.

William I. Scheverman, Inspector of Weights

and Measures, 1106 Municipal Building.

Christian G. Link, Chief Inspector of Weights

and Measures, Offutt Building, Towson 4. George A. Klein, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Offutt Building, Towson 4. A. Morton Thomas, Director, Department of

Inspection and Licenses, Court House, Rockville. MASSACHUSETTS

State John P. McBride, Director of Standards and

Necessaries of Life, 194 State House, Boston.

City:

Agawam Frank Draghetti, Sealer of Weights and

Measures.

Cambridge . Joseph M. O'Neil, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Municipal Building.

State

City: Louisville

State

City: Portland

City: Baltimore.

County:

Baltimore

Montgomery.
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE IX

MICHIGAN

State Miles A. Nelson, Chief, Bureau of Marketing

and Enforcement, Department of Agriculture,

725 State Office Building, Lansing 13. City: %:

Dearborn Mitchell O. Nickon, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, 4731 Korte Street. Detroit George F. Austin, Jr., Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, 740 Elmwood Avenue.

William B. Heaslip, Supervising Inspector of

Weights and Measures, 740 Elmwood Avenue.

James H. Hitcrtngs, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 740 Elmwood Avenue.

Highland Park James F. Baker, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 25 Gerald Avenue.

Lansing Willard P. Barnes, Market Master and Sealer

of Weights and Measures, 333 North Cedar

Street. Pontiac Walter A. Baerwolf, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 8 North Perry Street. County: Washtenaw George P. Smith, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Court House, Ann Arbor.

MINNESOTA

Erling Hansen, Supervisor, Department of

Weights and Measures, Railroad and Warehouse Commission, 216 Corn Exchange, Minneapolis.

Russell S. Ackerman, Superintendent, Department of Licenses, Weights, and Measures,

Room 3, City Hall.

MISSOURI

State Rollo E. Singleton, Director, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture, Jefferson City.

City: St. Louis Joseph A. Bernard, Commissioner of Weights

and Measures, 12 City Hall.

NEBRASKA

City W. W. Gray, Chief Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Room 100, City Hall.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

State Alfred H. Dittrich, Commissioner, Department of Weights and Measures, Concord.

NEW JERSEY

State Joseph G. Rogers, Deputy Superintendent,

Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Law and Public Safety, 187 West

Hanover Street, Trenton 7. Archie T. Smith, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Weights and Measures,

Department of Law and Public Safety, 187

West Hanover Street, Trenton 7. Samuel H. Christie, Jr., Senior Inspector,

Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Law and Public Safety, 187 West

Hanover Street, Trenton 7.

State

City: Minneapolis
X PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE

Englewood Leonabd DeRienzo, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall.

Hoboken Charles P. Romano, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall.

Paterson Joseph P. Leonard, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, 115 Van Houten Street. William J. Kehoe, Assistant Superintendent of

Weights and Measures, 115 Van Houten Street. Union City Alfred O. Oslund, Superintendent, Department

of Weights and Measures, 3715 Palisade

Avenue.

County

Bergen Michael J. Santimauro, Superintendent of

Weights and Measures, 66 Zabriskie Street,

Hackensack.

Ernest E. Dawson, Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures, 66 Zabriskie Street,

Hackensack.

Camden 1 Albert C. Becker, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall, Camden.

Cape May Gilbert S. Smith, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, 183 Twelfth Street, Avalon.

Cumberland Alfred Lirio, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Bridgeton.

Winfield K. Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Court House,

Bridgeton.

Mercer Ralph M. Bodenweiser, Superintendent of

Weights and Measures, Court House, Trenton.

Passaic William Miller, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Administration Building, Paterson. Salem John Kennard Crispin, Superintendent of

Weights and Measures, 60 North Main Street,

Woodstown.

Union James M. Dietz, Superintendent, Department of Weights and Measures, Court House, Elizabeth

4.NEW YORK

State Dr. Ehwin V. Moore, Assistant Commissioner,

Department of Agriculture and Markets, State

Office Building, Albany.

Clement A. Baker, Director, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture and

Markets, State Office Building, Albany.

Matthew G. Rice, Inspector, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture and

Markets, 8 Marlette Place, White Plains.

City:

Binghamton Harby A. Lason, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 201 Eldridge Street. New York Feed J. Loughran, Director, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, 137 Centre Street. Matthew A. Donohue, Inspector of Weights

and Measures, 137 Centre Street. Rochester Anthony C. Samenfink, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Public Market.

County :

• Delaware Guy T. Parsons, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 8 Woolerton Street, Delhi.

Monroe Earl D. Hubble, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 1400 South Avenue, Rochester.
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE! XI

County—Continued

Nassau Robert Williams, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Old County Court House Annex, Mineola.

William Kirk, Jr., Assistant Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Old County Court House

Annex, Mineola.

Rockland Thomas A. Shankey, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 2 Main Street, Haverstraw.

NORTH CAROLINA

State C. D. Batjcom, Superintendent, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture,

415 Agriculture Building, Raleigh.

John I. Moore, Supervising Inspector, Weights

and Measures Division, Department of Agriculture, 415 Agriculture Building, Raleigh.

E. W. Hessee, Senior Chemist, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture,

Raleigh.

Rot P. Woodall, Inspector, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture,

Raleigh.

City: Charlotte Fred C. Yarbrough, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 2100 Brandon Circle. NORTH DAKOTA

State A. J. Jensen, Chief Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Public Service Commission, Jamestown.

OHIO

State C. W. Van Schoik, Chief, Division of Food and

Dairies, Department of Agriculture, Columbus 15. V. D. Campbell, Deputy State Sealer, Department of Agriculture, 710 State Office Building,

Columbus.

City: Akron Robert K. Slough, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 102 Municipal Building.

County:

Medina Robert W. Searles, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Court House, Medina.

Summit Le Roy Wolford, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Court House, Akron.

Wood Leon E. Bates, Deputy Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Rising Sun.

OKLAHOMA

State T. C. Beck, Assistant Director, Marketing Division, Board of Agriculture, 122 State Capitol

Building, Oklahoma City.

R. L. Flanagan, Supervisor of Weights and

Measures, Division of Markets, Board of Agriculture, 122 Capitol Building, Oklahoma City.

PENNSYLVANIA

State Joseph F. Blickley, Director, Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures, Department of

Internal Affairs, Capitol Building, Harrisburg.

Spencer H. Seighman, Assistant Director, Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures,

Department of Internal Affairs, Capitol Building, Harrisburg.

Harry E. Shomper, Senior Inspector, Bureau of

Standard Weights and Measures, Department

of Internal Affairs, Capitol Building, Harrisburg.
XII PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE

PUERTO RICO

Insular Jose R. Rivera, Chief Engineer, Public Service

Commission, San Juan.

RHODE ISLAND

Edward R. Fisher, State Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Department of Labor, State House,

Providence.

James F. Corrigan, Deputy State Sealer of

Weights and Measures, Department of Labor,

State House, Providence.

Armand E. Renzi, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 70 Harris Avenue.

SOUTH CAROLINA

State J. Roy Jones, Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, P. O. Box 1080, Columbia.

Chovine R. Sprott, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, Columbia.

TEXAS

State Oran A. Kirkland, Inspector, Division of

Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, Austin.

UTAH

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

Measures, 118 East First South.

VERMONT

State George E. Carpenter, Supervisor, Division of

Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, Montpelier.

VIRGINIA

R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, Weights and

Measures- Section, Division of Markets, Department of Agriculture and Immigration,

1200 East Main Street, Richmond 19. Walter L. Gray, Inspector, Weights and Measures Section, Division of Markets, Department

of Agriculture and Immigration, Box 422,

Bristol.

J. Alvin Rosen, Inspector, Weights and Measures Section, Division of Markets, Department

of Agriculture and Immigration, Staunton.

Webster K. Tripple, Chief, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, City Market Building.

Robert G. Esleeck, Assistant Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Market Building.

Conway C. Mundy, Chief, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Room 121, Mosque Building,

Laurel and Main Streets. Marion L. Rice, Chief Deputy Inspector, Bureau

of Weights & Measures, Laurel & Main Sts. A. L. Brockwell, Inspector, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Room 121, Mosque Building,

Laurel and Main Streets. John W. Obenchain, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Market.

WASHINGTON

City: Seattle.,, Donald M. Turnbtjll, Supervisor, Division of

Licenses and Standards, Office of the Comptroller, 100 County-City Building,

State

City: Cranston

State.

City:

Norfolk

Portsmouth.

Richmond _ _

Roanoke.
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE! XIII

WISCONSIN

State George W. Warner, Supervisor, Weights and

Measures Inspection, Department of Agriculture, Capitol Building, Madison.

City:

Madison Malcom W. Jensen, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 101 North Blount Street. Milwaukee Louis E. Witt, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

1331 North Fifth Street. Racine Robert Zierten, Sealer of Weights and Measures, City Hall.

Sheboygan Joseph A. Peikert, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall.

Superior Oscar E. Roeseler, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall.

West Allis Arthur E. La Boda, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 7525 West Greenfield Avenue.

WYOMING

State Charles H. Oakley, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Department of Agriculture, 310

Capitol Building, Cheyenne.

DELEGATES—NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Director's Office

:

E. U. Condon, Director.

Lyman J. Briggs, Director Emeritus.

Ralph W. Smith, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures.

William S. Bussey, Assistant Chief, Office of Weights and Measures.

Mrs. K. M. Schwaez, Attorney-Editor, Office of Weights and Measures.

Mrs. R. E. Taylor, Office of Weights and Measures.

Zachary Fortunato, Office of Weights and Measures.

Metrology Division

:

Wilmer Souder, Chief.

Peter Hidnert, Chief, Thermal Expansion Section.

Lewis V. Judson, Chief, Length Section.

Francis C. Morey, Capacity, Density, and Fluid Meters Section.

H. Haig Russell, Chief, Scale Section.

Chemistry Division

:

Elmer R. Weaver, Chief, Gas Chemistry Section.

J. H. Eiseman, Gas Chemistry Section.

Mechanics Division

:

D. R. Tate, Engineering Mechanics Section.

Organic and Fibrous Materials Division

:

R. S. Cleveland, Testing and Specifications Section.

GUESTS REPRESENTING UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

U. S. Department of Agriculture

:

Charles L. Richard, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing, Packers and Stockyards Division, Room 3530 South Building, Washington 25, D. C. Robert J. Neale, Weights and Measures Inspector, Livestock Branch,

Packers and Stockyards Division, Washington 25, D. C.

J. R. Scott, Chief, Trade Label Section, Federal Meat Inspection Service,

Room 232E, North Building, Washington 25, D. C. U. S. Food and Drug Administration

:

J. Kenneth Kirk, Assistant to Commissioner, Washington 25, D. C. Robert A. Osborn, Chemist, Food Division, Washington 25, D. C. Sumner C. Rowe, Chemist, Food Division, Washington 25, D. C. Post Office Department

:

Jesse C. Miller, Commodity Specialist, Division of Equipment and Supplies,

Washington 25, D. C. Treasury Department

:

Fred W. Gast, Chief, Division of Engineering and Weighing, Bureau of

Customs, Washington 25, D. C.
XIV PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE

GUESTS REPRESENTING MANUFACTURERS OF WEIGHING AND

MEASURING DEVICES

American Meter Co. : W. V. Stockton, Assistant Manager, Albany, N. Y. American Scale Co. : W. L. Evans, Executive Vice President, 919 Baltimore Avenue, Kansas City 6, Mo.

Black & Decker Manufacturing Co. : Edwin E. Powell, Manager, Loadometer

Department, Towson 4, Md.

Bloomer Brothers Co. : Raynor M. Holmes, Research Engineer, Newark, N. Y. Bowser, Inc. : Clement P. Griffith, Vice President, Fort Wayne, Ind.

Brodie, Ralph N., Co., Inc. : C J. McCaffrey, Vice President, 550 South Columbus

Avenue, Mount Vernon, N. Y. Chatillon, John, & Sons : J. George Hugel, Jr., Sales Representative, 85 Cliff Street, New York, N. Y.

J. George Hugel, Sr., Sales Representative, 85 Cliff Street, New York, N. Y.

E. C. Prietz, Sales Representative, 85 Cliff Street, New York, N. Y. George C. Reiley, Vice President, Sales, 85 Cliff Street, New York, N. Y. Detecto Scales, Inc.

Mack Rapp, Vice President, 540 Park Avenue, Brooklyn 5, N. Y. Mrs. Carrie G. Woodland, Representative, Fellsmere, Fla.

Durham Scale Co. : William G. Emmons, Ellis Road, Route 4, Durham, N. C. Exact Weight Scale Co. : James F. Sullivan, Chief Engineer, 944 West Fifth

Avenue, Columbus, Ohio.

Ex-Cell-0 Corporation : Eugene R. Andre, Service Manager, Pure-Pak Division, 1200 Oakman Boulevard, Detroit 32, Mich.

George D. Scott, Sales Manager, Pure-Pak Division, 1200 Oakman Boulevard, Detroit 32, Mich.

Fairbanks, Morse & Co.

W. N. Copeland, 1000 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington 5, D. C. Christian A. Hennie, Field Engineer, 2010 Lovegrove Street, Baltimore,

Md.

Jerome Kenney, Field Engineer, 4900 West Hills Road, Baltimore, Md.

Leonard Maguire, Chief Engineer, St. Johnsbury, Vt. G. C Worthley, Manager, Scale Division, 600 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago 5, 111. Forschner, R. H, Co. : Richard A. Forschner, General Manager, 205 Third Avenue, New York 3, N. Y. Gilbert & Barker Manufacturing Co.

Joseph A. Logan, West Springfield, Mass.

C. A. P. Thomas, Sales Engineer, West Springfield, Mass.

Gurley, W. & L. E. : Franklin G. Williams, Washington Representative, 5514

Nevada Avenue NW., Washington 15, D. C. Hobart Manufacturing Co.

Murray W. Craig, Sales Department, Troy, Ohio.

Burns H. Dreese, General Manager, Troy, Ohio.

Ernest A. Reussenzehn, Chief Scale Engineer, Scale Division, 444 Hoffman

Avenue, Dayton, Ohio.

Howe Scale Co.

Robert A. Parham, Branch Manager, 309 East Saratoga Street, Baltimore, Md.

Richard F. Straw, Vice President, Rutland, Vt. Martin & Schwartz, Inc. : Jack H. Prause, Vice President and Director of Sales,

Mill Street, Salisbury, Md.

Measuregraph Co. : E. A. Powell, Regional Manager, 2306 Poplar Grove Street,

Baltimore, Md.

National Store Specialty Co. : Wallace E. Sheaffer, President, Bareville, Pa. Neptune Meter Co. : Walter H. Sieger, Engineer, 50 West Fiftieth Street, New

York, N. Y. Ohmer Corporation: B. C. Palmer, Central District Manager, 939 North Wells

Street, Chicago, 111. Owen-Illinois Glass Co. : J. D. Laird, Qualitv and Specifications Supervisor,

Toledo, Ohio.

Partee Co. : Paul C. Partee, President, Spencerville, Ind.
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE* XV

Peerless Weighing' & Vending Machine Corporation:

Paul W. Barras. Philadelphia District Manager, 29-28 Forty-first Avenue,

Long Island City 1, N. Y. Leverett D. Chambers, President, 29-28 Forty-first Avenue, Long Island

City, N. Y. Penn Scale Manufacturing Co. Inc. : Sydney Black, President, 150 West Berks

Street, Philadelphia 22, Pa. Rockwell Manufacturing Co.

:

Clair H. Daugherty, Service Engineer, Du Bois, Pa. Robert A. Johnson, Sales Engineer, Pittsburgh Equitable Meter Division,

1922 Ward Street, Durham, N. C. H. D. Leisenring, Sales Manager, Pittsburgh Equitable Meter Division, 400

North Lexington Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pa. Charles H. Obrock, Sales Engineer, Pittsburgh Equitable Meter Division,

Empire State Building, New York, N. Y. John Pommersheim, Engineering Department, Pittsburgh Equitable Meter

Division, 400 North Lexington Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pa. Sanitary Scale Co. : W. H. Tough, District Sales Manager, 106 West Fourth

Street, Belvidere, 111. Seraphin Test Measure Co. : T. A. Seraphin, President, 1314 North Seventh

Street, Philadelphia 22, Pa. Smith, A. O., Corporation : Wilson Milligan, Area Sales Manager, Meter Division, P. O. Box 500,

Succasunna, N. J. W. G. Moser, Sales Manager, Meter Division, 1115 Washington Boulevard,

Chicago 7, 111. Stimpson Computing Scale Co. : Frank M. Doyne, Eastern General Distributor,

468 Weaver Street, Larchmont, N. Y. Streeter Amet Co. : Verne C. Kennedy, President, 4101 North Ravenswood Avenue, Chicago, 111. Thatcher Glass Manufacturing Co. : James Arrandale, Director, Quality Control, 623 West Water Street, Elmira, N. Y. Tokheim Oil Tank & Pump Co. : William E. Louthan, Service Manager, 1600

Wabash Avenue, Fort Wayne, Ind.

Toledo Scale Co.

:

Stanley Q. Bennett, Manager of Service and Weights and Measures Division, Toledo, Ohio.

Patrick E. Young, District Manager, Box 2107, Raleigh, N. C. Troemner, Henry

:

Edward J. Furey, General Manager, 911 Arch Street, Philadelphia 7, Pa. Charles F. Rosica, Sales Manager, 911 Arch Street, Philadelphia 7, Pa. Joseph J. Rosica, Weight Department Superintendent, 911 Arch Street,

Philadelphia 7, Pa.

U. S. Slicing Machine Co.

:

Byron D. Miller, Sales Promotion Manager, Standard Computing Scale

Division, La Porte, Ind.

Matt D. Ribble, Standard Computing Scale Division, La Porte, Ind.

Union Tank Car Co. : Raymond L. Hiatt, Engineer, 228 North La Salle Street,

Chicago 1, 111. Veeder-Root, Inc.

:

John J. Brannick, Sales Manager, Computer Division, Hartford 2, Conn.

Austin E. McKeever, Sales Representative, Hartford 2, Conn.

D. J. Post, Jr., Vice President, Hartford 2, Conn.

Wayne Pump Co. : T. J. Uilkema, Chief Engineer, Liquid Dispensing Equipment, 513 Tecumseh Street, Fort Wayne, Ind.

Wood, John, Co.

:

Louis G. Close, Manager Mid-Atlantic District, Bennett Pump Division,

2127 North Charles Street, Baltimore, Md.

William M. Hoxie, Service Manager, Bennett Pump Division, Muskegon,

Mich.

Yale & Towne Manufacturing Co.

:

Oswald S. Carliss, Chief Engineer, Scale Division, Roosevelt Boulevard,

Philadelphia 15, Pa. Fred E. Rau, Scale Sales Department, Roosevelt Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pa.

i
XVI 'persons attending the conference

GUESTS REPRESENTING ASSOCIATIONS, BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY,

AND RAILROADS

American Can Co. : George O. Sampson, Assistant Manager, Research Division,

360 Elizabeth Avenue, Newark, N. J. American Car and Foundry Co. : Clyde H. Folmsbee, Assistant Chief Engineer,

Berwick, Pa. American Paper Goods Co. : Lloyd W. Vibberts, Production Superintendent,

Kensington, Conn.

American Petroleum Institute : James E. Moss, Director, Division of Transportation, 1625 K Street NW„ Washington, D. C. American Seed Trade Association : George B. Smith, P. O. Box 778, Detroit,

Mich.

American Trucking Association : Lewis C. Kibbee, Equipment Engineer, 1424

Sixteenth Street, Washington 6, D. C. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad : E. Kent Lawrence, General Scale Inspector,

Baltimore 1, Md.

Bethlehem Steel Co.

Gwilym E. Evans, General Foreman, Scale Repair, Sparrows Point, Md.

James J. Maginnis, Assistant Foreman, Scale Repair, Sparrows Point, Md.

Carnegie Illinois Steel Corporation : Charles Bauer, Scale Shop Foreman, 328

West Ridge Road, Gary, Ind.

Chicago & Northwestern Railway : Harry Mayer, Engineer of Scales and Work

Equipment, 400 West Madison Street, Chicago 6, 111. Continental Can Co., Inc. : John C. Jennings, Manager Mono Container Sales,

349 Oraton Street, Newark 4, N. J. Dixie Cup Co. : Clement G. McBride, Market Research Assistant, Easton, Pa.

Esso Standard Oil Co.

C. A. Breen, Manager, L. P. G. Sales, 15 West Fifty-first Street, New York,

N. Y. Logan L. Kennedy, Superintendent, Construction and Maintenance, 500 North

Broad Street, Elizabeth, N. J. John H. MoClintock, Manager, Oil Conservation Division, 15 West Fiftyfirst Street, New York, N. Y. Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association : G. Denny Moore, Managing Director,

Graybar Building, 420 Lexington Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. Glass Container Manufacturer's Institute : Nicholas G. Cameron, 8 West Fortieth

Street, New York, N. Y. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

R. G. Carpenter, Meat Packaging Specialist, National Meat Department,

211 West Wacker Drive, Chicago 6, 111. W. P. Reed, Manager, Weights and Measures Department, 1004 Hemphill

Avenue NW., Atlanta, Ga.

Gulf Oil Corporation : John O. Habicht, Superintendent, Marketing Equipment,

1515 Locust Street, Philadelphia, Pa.

Industrial Research Syndicate : C. A. Lindsay, Director, 1305 Euclid Street NW.,

Washington, D. C. International Association of Ice Cream Manufacturers

John S. Conner, 1105 Barr Building, Washington 6, D. C. Ford Young, Attorney, Mills Building. Washington, D. C. Lily-Tulip Cup Corporation : Robert D. Bergman, Assistant to the President,

122 East Forty-second Street, New York, N. Y. Liquid Tight Paper Container Association : Arthur W. Howe, Jr., Assistant

Executive Secretary, 1532 Lincoln-Liberty Building, Philadelphia, Pa.

Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association : H. Emerson Thomas, Board of Directors,

111 Quimby Street, Westfield, N. J. National Association of Scale Manufacturers : Arthur Sanders, Secretary, 1129

Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, D. C. National Institute of Rug Cleaners : Norbert J. Berg, Managing Executive, National Institute of Cleaners and Dyers, 909 Burlington Avenue, Silver Spring,

Md.

National Retail Grocers Association : Charles Siegel, President, Siegel Super

Market Incorporated, 426 North Sixth Street, Richmond, Va. National Scale Men's Association : John H. Downer, Secretary, 608 South Dearborn Street, Room 2236, Chicago 5, 111. Paper Cup and Container Institute, Inc. : Dale H. Eckerman, Executive Director,

1790 Broadway, New York 19, N. Y.
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE' XVII

Phillips Petroleum Co. : Doyle D. Btjttolph, Technical Representative, Bartlesville, Okla.

Pennsylvania Railroad : M. J. J. Harrison, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing,

Box 345, Altoona, Pa. Safeway Stores, Inc.

:

J. A. Anderson, Pricemaker, 1845 Fourth Street NE., Washington, D. C. Edgar Balshaw, Division Manager, 1845 Fourth Street NE., Washington,

D. C. Frederick G. Kayhoe, Real Estate Manager, 1845 Fourth Street NE., Washington, D. C. Frank J. Sheehan, Manager Public Relations, 726 Jackson Place NW.,

Washington, D. C. Joseph W. Upton, Office Manager, 1845 Fourth Street NE., Washington, D. C. Bert R. Warner, Advertising Manager, Standard Oil Building, Washington,

D. C. Gibson I. Wright, Supply Manager, 1845 Fourth Street NE., Washington,

D. C. Stephen W. Wright, Manager, Trucking and Warehouses, 1845 Fourth

Street NE., Washington, D. C. Saybolt, J. W., Business Counsellor, 9209 Carlyle Avnue, Surfside, Miami Beach

41, Fla.

Scale Journal Publishing Co. : Edith J. Saybolt, Secretary, 1703 East Eightyfourth Street, Chicago 17, 111. Shell Oil Co.

:

Charles H. Bethel, Operations Special Assignment, Box 25, Passaic, N. J. Louis A. Thommen, Division Engineer, 3706 Eighty-second Street, Jackson

Heights, N. Y.

Sinclair Refining Co. : Kenneth W. Birkin, Manager, Automotive Division, 630

Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. Suburban Propane Gas Corporation

:

Edward W. Belt, Assistant District Manager, Box 112, Rockville, Md.

Hurlbert R. Bridgewater, District Manager, Box 112, Rockville, Md.

Sutherland Paper Co.

:

L. J. Moore, Assistant Manager of Sales, Division A, Kalamazoo 13-D, Mich.

Lewis E. Shiflea, Assistant Advertising Manager, Kalamazoo 13-D, Mich.

Thread Institute, Inc.

:

John Bell, Chairman, Legislation Committee, 11 West Forty-second Street,

New York 18, N. Y. David Snyder, Executive Director, 11 West Forty-second Street, New York

18, N. Y. Visking Corporation : Elliot Balestier, Jr., Assistant to President, 6733 West

Sixty-fifth Street, Chicago 38, 111. MISCELLANEOUS GUESTS

Charles G. Crockett (Retired Weights and Measures Official), 3632 Roberts

Place, Baltimore 24, Md.

George A. Howe, 112 Fourth Street SE., Washington 3, D. C.

904381—50 2
CONTENTS

Page

Officers and Committees In3

Persons attending the Conference vi

FIRST SESSION—MORNING OF TUESDAY, MAY 23, 1950

Address by Dr. E. U. Condon, Director, National Bureau of Standards, and

President, National Conference on Weights and Measures 1 Abstracts of State Reports:

California, by James E. Brenton, Chief, State Bureau of Weights and

Measures 10

Connecticut, by Frank M. Greene, Deputy State Food and Drug Commissioner 10

District of Columbia, by James G. Dance, Deputy Director of Weights,

Measures, and Markets 10

Florida, by Nails Berryman, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and

Measures 11

Hawaii, by B. K. Cummins, Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures,

City and County of Honolulu 11

Illinois, by John J. Levitt, State Superintendent of Standards 11 Indiana, by Cleo C. Morgan, Sealer of Weights and Measures, City of Gary. 1

Iowa, by James W. Reese, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and

Measures 111

Kansas, by J. Fred True, State Sealer of Weights and Measures 12

Kentucky, by George L. Johnson, Director, State Division of Weights and

Measures 12 j Louisiana, by A. J. Mayer, Director, State Division of Weights ai d

Measures 12

Maine, by James A. Boyle, Deputy State Sealer of Weights and Measures. _ 12

Maryland, by A. Morton Thomas, Director of Inspections and Licenses,

Montgomery County 12

Massachusetts, by John P. McBride, State Director of Standards and

Necessaries of Life 12 j Michigan, by Miles A. Nelson, Chief, Bureau of Marketing and Enforcement 13 ] Minnesota, by Erling Hansen, Supervisor, State Department of Weights

and Measures 13

Mississippi, by Allen McCluer, Chief Inspector, Department of Agricul- ture - 13

Missouri, bv Joseph A. Bernard, Commissioner of Weights and Measures,

City of St. Louis 13 , Nebraska, by W. W. Gray, Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures, City

of Omaha 13

Nevada, by Wayne B. Adams, State Sealer of Weights and Measures 14

New Hampshire, by Albert H. Dittrich, Commissioner of Weights and

. Measures 14

New Jersey, by Joseph G. Rogers, Deputy Superintendent, State Division

of Weights and Measures 14

New York, by Clement A. Baker, Director, State Bureau of Weights and

Measures 14

North Carolina, by C. D. Baucom, State Superintendent of Weights and

Measures 14

North Dakota, by A. J. Jensen, Chief State Inspector of Weights and

Measures 15

Ohio, by V. D. Campbell, Deputy State Sealer 15

Oklahoma, by T. C. Beck, Assistant Director, Marketing Division 15

Pennsylvania, by Spencer H. Seighman, Assistant Director, State Bureau

of Standard Weights and Measures.. 15

Puerto Rico, by Jose R. Rivera, Chief Engineer, Public Service Commission 15

XVIII
CONTENTS XIX

SECOND SESSION—AFTERNOON OF TUESDAY, MAY 23, 1950

Abstracts of State Reports—Continued: Page

Rhode Island, by Edward R. Fisher, State Sealer of Weights and Measures. 16

South Carolina, by Chovine R. Sprott, Deputy Commissioner of Agriculture 16

Texas, by O. A. Kirkland, State Inspector of Weights and Measures 16

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

Lake City 16

Vermont, by George E. Carpenter, Supervisor, State Division of Weights

and Measures 17

Virginia, by R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, State Section of Weights and

Measures 17

Washington, by Donald W. Turnbull, Supervisor of Licenses and Standards, City of Seattle 17

Wisconsin, by George W. Warner, Supervisor, State Division of Weights

and Measures 17 Wyoming, by Charles H. Oakley, State Inspector of Weights and Measures 17

Abstracts of Reports of Representatives of State and Regional Associations

of Weights and Measures Officials: California Association of Weights and Measures Officials, by Charles

Morris Fuller, Sealer of Weights and Measures of Los Angeles County,

Calif . 18

Connecticut Sealers' Association, by Frank M. Greene, Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Commission of Connecticut 18

Illinois Weights and Measures Association, by John J. Levitt, State

Superintendent of Standards of Illinois 18

Indiana Association of Inspectors of Weights and Measures, by James

A. Hilgemann, Inspector of Weights and Measures of Fort Wayne 18

Massachusetts Weights and Measures Association, by Frank Draghetti,

Sealer of Weights and Measures of Agawam 18

Michigan Association of Weights and Measures Officials, by James H.

Hitchings, Inspector of Weights and Measures of Detroit 19

New Jersey Weights and Measures Association, by Winfield K. Thompson,

Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures of Cumberland

County 19

New York State Weights and Measures Association, by Guy T. Parsons,

Sealer of Weights and Measures of Delaware County 19

Northwest Weights and Measures Association, by A. J. Jensen, Chief

Inspector of Weights and Measures of North Dakota 19

Ohio Sealers' Association, by Leon E. Bates, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures of Wood County 19

Pennsylvania Association of Inspectors of Weights and Measures, by

Spencer H. Seighman, Assistant Director, State Bureau of Standard

Weights and Measures of Pennsylvania 20

Rhode Island Weights and Measures Association, by Edward R. Fisher,

Sealer of Weights and Measures of Rhode Island 20

Southern Weights and Measures Association, by John I. Moore, Supervising Inspector of Weights and Measures of North Carolina 20

Texas Weights and Measures Association, by O. A. Kirkland, State

Inspector of Weights and Measures of Texas 20

Virginia Weights and Measures Association, by Conway C. Munday,

Chief, Bureau of Weights and Measures of Richmond 20

Report of the National Conference Committee on Legislation, Presented by

Rollin E. Meek, Chairman 21

A Report from the National Scale Men's Association, by J. H. Downer,

Secretary, National Scale Men's Association 28

Duties of an Inspector in a Service Station, by W. B. Heaslip, Supervising

Inspector of Weights and Measures, City of Detroit, Mich 30

Duties of an Inspector in a Retail Food Store, by F. M. Greene, Deputy

Commissioner, Food and Drug Commission, State of Connecticut 36

THIRD SESSION—MORNING OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 24, 1950

Report of the Special Conference Committee on Uniform Regulations,

Presented by R. D. Thompson, Chairman 40

Remarks of Dr. Lyman J. Briggs, Former President of the National Conference on Weights and Measures 43
XX CONTENT'S

Page

Developments in Electronic Weighing, by C. L. Richard, Supervisor of

Scales and Weighing, Packers and Stockyards Division, U. S. Department

of Agriculture 43

Report of the National Conference Committee on Trading by Weight,

Presented by J. F. True, Chairman 52

Testing Equipment for LPG Measuring Devices:

Remarks of J. E. Brenton, Chief, Bureau of Weights and Measures,

State of California.^ 53

Remarks of Nails Berryman, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Division,

State of Florida 62

Remarks of E. W. Hessee, Senior Chemist, Weights and Measures,

State of North Carolina 65

Remarks of John Pommersheim, Engineering Department, Pittsburgh

Equitable Meter Division of Rockwell Manufacturing Company 73

Discussion on the Four Preceding Papers 75

Tour of Bureau of Standards Laboratories 79

FOURTH SESSION—MORNING OF THURSDAY, MAY 25, 1950 Report of the National Conference Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, Presented by J. P. McBride, Chairman, and Discussion Thereon 80

Section on General Code 81

Section on Fabric-Measuring Devices 82

Section on Cordage-Measuring Devices 82

Section on Liquid-Measuring Devices 83

Section on Grease-Measuring Devices 83

Section on Scales 83

Prepackaged Perishable Commodities:

The Marketer's Viewpoint—Remarks of R. G. Carpenter, Meat Packaging Specialist, The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company 84

The Marketer's Viewpoint—Remarks of Charles Siegel, National

Association of Retail Grocers 89

Informative Labeling and Enforcement Procedures—Remarks of H. E. Howard, Supervisor of Weights and Measures, City of Miami, Fla.. 91

Discussion on the Three Preceding Papers 94

The Responsibilities of the Official to his Weights and Measures Association, by J. R. Jones, Commissioner of Agriculture, State of South Carolina- 94

Report of the National Conference Committee on Weights and Measures

Education, Presented by J. T. Kennedy, Chairman 99

FIFTH SESSION—AFTERNOON OF THURSDAY, MAY 25, 1950 Problems Involved in Setting up a New Weights and Measures Organization:

Administration—Remarks of T. C. Beck, Assistant Director, Marketing

Division, State of Oklahoma 103

Training—Remarks of A. J. Mayer, Director, Division of Weights and

Measures, State of Louisiana 105

Public Relations—Remarks of G. L. Johnson, Director, Division of Weights and Measures, State of Kentucky 107

Weighbeam Maintenance, by M. J. J. Harrison, Supervisor of Scales and

Weighing, Pennsylvania Railroad 109

A Program of Livestock Scale Testing, by Erling Hansen, Supervisor,

Department of Weights and Measures, State of Minnesota 111

The Laws and the Case Book, by Mrs. Kathryn M. Schwarz, AttorneyEditor, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards.- 120

Report of the National Conference Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, Presented by J. F. Blickley, Chairman, and Discussion Thereon. 122

SIXTH SESSION—MORNING OF FRIDAY, MAY 26, 1950 Open Forum:

Increasing the Value of the National Conference to Weights and Measures Officials—R. W. Smith, National Bureau of Standards 133

The Testing of Wheel-load Weighers—V. D. Campbell, Ohio 133

Basis Weights for Paper and Textiles—R. S. Cleveland, National Bureau

of Standards 139

Charges for Rug Cleaning—G. H. Leithauser, Baltimore, Md 143
CONTENTS XXI

Open Forum—Continued Page

Calibration of Tank Cars—H. H. Russell, National Bureau of Standards. 145

Wholesale Labeling of Meat Products—Dr. J. R. Scott, Bureau of Animal

Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture 148

Improving the Service of the NBS Office of Weights and Measures to

Officials and Manufacturers—W. S. Bussey, National Bureau of Standards 154

Strain-load Tests and Build-up Tests—S. H. Christie, Jr., New Jersey. 156

Vapor Meters—F. C. Morey, National Bureau of Standards 159

Measure-containers and Non-measure-containers—George W. Warner,

Wisconsin 162

Additional Topics Brought up by Officials and by Associate Members

of the Conference 163

Report of the National Conference Committee on Resolutions, Presented by

J. J. Levitt, Chairman:

Appreciation to Director and Staff of the National Bureau of Standards. 164

Appreciation to Cooperating Officials 164

Appreciation to Those Participating in Program 164

Appreciation to the Press and Radio 164

Appreciation to Management of Headquarters Hotel 165

In Memory of Deceased Members 165 In Memory of Harry M. Roeser 165

On the Retirement of A. J. Jensen 165

On Budgetary Procedure 165

On the Testing of Railway Track Scales 166

On the Basis of Computation for Pricing Charts 166

Report of the National Conference Treasurer, George F. Austin, Jr 168

Report of the National Conference Committee on Nominations, Presented

by R. E. Meek, Chairman, and Election of Officers 168

REPORT OF THE THIRTY-FIFTH NATIONAL

CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, AND HELD

AT THE WARDMAN PARK HOTEL, WASHINGTON, D. C, MAY 23, 24, 25, AND 26, 1950

FIRST SESSION—MORNING OF TUESDAY, MAY 23, 1950

(The Conference was called to order at 10:15 a. m. by J. T. Kennedy, Vice

President of the Conference.

)

ADDRESS BY DR. E. U. CONDON, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL BUREAU OF

STANDARDS, AND PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

Gentlemen, the first thing that I want to do is to welcome you once

again to Washington, to this our Thirty-fifth Annual—it is supposed

to be annual, but it has had a few breaks in it, as you know, but not

through our fault—Conference on Weights and Measures.

I want to make a rather informal report to you. We regard you

people as our best friends scattered out through the States and cities,

and while our principal contact with you is in the fields concerned with

your own particular day-to-day work, on weights and measures en- forcement, I thought it might be of some interest if I took a few

moments to give you a general report on some trends and developments

in the Bureau of Standards as a whole.

As you know, the Bureau started out primarily having been established as a Bureau of Standards in the narrow sense of an agency re- sponsible for uniformity of physical measurements. That, of course,

at the outset goes somewhat beyond the scope of what we associate

with weights and measures administration work in a narrower sense, because it involved considerations of uniformity and scientific accu- racy and standardization in many fields of scientific measurement such

as temperature and electrical quantities, and optical properties, light

intensity, and a great many other things besides the usual weights,

measures, and volumetric capacity measurements.

Over the years, as you also know, the Bureau has expanded its work

so that it includes a great deal of commodity testing work and specification writing for supplies for the Federal Government. That service

reflects itself out to the State and municipal governments too, through

their procurement agencies, many of whom rely extensively on the

Federal specifications that are drawn up for purchase of Federal

supplies.

But perhaps a larger activity than that results from the fact that the

Bureau has become quite a research and development agency doing

fundamental research in the fields of physical sciences and also in the

matter of developing specialized equipment needed by the Federal

Government, especially in those cases where peculiar research services

1
2 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

are required, as in the fields of specialized military material, or where

the situation is such that the item in question is not attractive to private

industry, because however important it may be to the Government, the

particular market for the product that results is so small as not to be

worth while for a private firm.

In the aggregate the kinds of services rendered by the Bureau, especially including military things, have now become so great that the

budgetary amount of it is somewhat greater than the budget directly

appropriated to us by Congress. Whereas we are getting about 9 million dollars a year to run the Bureau from Congress, we are doing

about 10 million dollars or 11 million dollars a year of work for other

agencies, most of which is military, or closely allied to military needs,

like work for the Atomic Energy Commission.

I thought you would like to have that general perspective because

I know it has been a characteristic of our meetings in the past that we

get so immersed in the problems that are peculiar to our own interests

in this Conference that you don't get much of a picture of what else

is going on in the Bureau.

The military program, of course, is one that is of great importance,

probably at all times, but especially in these times when people are so concerned about the fact that peace seems to be a rather elusive thingafter all. My own view is that we shouldn't get into a state of excitement or frenzy about the possibility of war, but the possibility of war

is always with us. We should, in as sober and serious and responsible

a way as possible, do a solid job of being prepared for it without losing our heads or getting excited or worried.

In the military field we have in the Bureau major responsibility for

one of the guided-missile projects for the Navy. We hope to have a new missile ready for the fleet in a couple of years.

We also have the complete responsibility for the proximity fuse

work for nonrotating missiles for the armed forces altogether. Proximity fuses, for those of you who are not familiar with them, are devices that make it possible that a shell, or anything containing a high

explosive, will sense the nearby presence of the target and explode

without actually coming in contact with it. That has the effect that

you can do damage without making a direct hit. We have the re- sponsibility for all of that development for the armed forces for

nonrotating projectiles which, of course, includes guided missiles. So

we have some rather major responsibilities.

Going with this growth of the Bureau in these activities and with

the general feeling that there should be more and more decentralization from Washington of Government agencies in general, I want to

announce to you that we are moving out—we are not moving the

entire Bureau but we are extending our activities outward to the States

in the West.

We are in the process of acquiring a 220-acre site at Boulder,

Colorado, about 30 miles from Denver, for development of a second

site for the Bureau of Standards so that some of our facilities and

work will be carried on there in the future as well as here. Just how

that will proceed in detail, of course, nobody knows. But this site

development will be initiated during the next year or two by the development of a 4.5 million dollar laboratory devoted to radio fre-
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 3

quency measurements and radio standards, and studies on the propagation of radio waves at large distances.

This will be helpful to the rest of the Bureau in that the radio

people are now taking up so much space in our existing facilities

that if we can get rid of them, life will be more comfortable for the

people who are now being elbowed out of space by them.

I think that is perhaps enough time to devote to this broad general

review, other than to say that I am very happy that you find time on

the program of this Conference to devote some of it to visiting some

of the laboratories of the Bureau. I hope that not only on this occasion but on occasions when you individually are in town on other

business, you will find time to get more acquainted with our laboratory work.

We are making a few organizational changes at the Bureau for

the next fiscal year. One which is of most direct concern to this

group is the fact that our heavy scale work, which is nearly all railway

track scale work, is going to be combined with the Office of Weights

and Measures under Ralph Smith. The idea back of that is that the

work is very similar in character to the work of the Office of Weights

and Measures in cooperating with the State and local jurisdictions.

This work, as you know, has meant operating two railroad cars, specially built with weights, for testing railway track scales. I am

sorry to say that one of these is so old and in such bad condition that

it will have to be condemned pretty soon before somebody condemns

it for us. Then we will carry on as best we can with one such car and

make a study as to whether it is really essential to have two.

I would like to invite the Conference here to give a little thought to

this question of the railway track scale matter, and give us, especially

Ralph Smith and Mr. Russell, the benefit of your own comments and

suggestions. As I see the matter, it is one that, in strict logic, ought

to be in the hands of the State and local jurisdictions ; that is to say,

it is a question of checking up on the accuracy and validity of the

railway track scales. The only reason that I know of for our handling

it instead of you is—I can think of two : One is that it is legitimate

to think of the Federal Government getting into this picture, perhaps

more so than otherwise, because the railway track scales are really

controlling interstate commerce as well as commerce within the States,

and, secondly, for local communities or States to invest in such testing

equipment, the cost would be considerable.

We find that a fairly satisfactory service for the whole country has

been operated in the past with only two test cars. I think it would

be conceded it would be foolish then for the 48 States to engage in such

matters. But it is so closely tied up with the responsibilities of the

State officers that I would like the matter to get some attention from

you in the planning of it, so as to make sure that we are doing what

you want us to do, and not doing what you don't want us to do, and

in general so that the whole matter is handled in a properly coordinated way as between the Federal interest in the matter and the State

and local interests in the matter. I throw that out as one of the things

that I hope formally or informally you will have time to consider

during this Conference.

I would like to mention briefly the fact that I had a very excitingexperience during the month of January, having been invited out to
4 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

visit India by the Indian Government, to visit some of their scientific

laboratories, where I took part in the formal dedication of their new

national physical laboratory at Delhi. I have a wonderful impression

of the enthusiasm and verve and vigor with which they are taking

their independence seriously and proceeding to go about the business

of modernization and development of their country.

This is not to minimize the great difficulties that they are confronted

with economically, a great problem of over-population, and the special

problems concerning the separation between India and Pakistan; but

they are in the process of building up a chain of about a dozen national

laboratories, the aggregate of which would be about the equivalent

of our Bureau of Standards except that two of them are devoted to

food and biological subjects. Out of the 10 of them, 8 play the

role that our Bureau of Standards plays, and the other 2 are analogous

to Government agencies not part of the Bureau of Standards. They

are engaged in the process of trying to set up a weights and measures

administration on a truly national basis. There has never been

anything in the way of a really thorough-going checkup.

If you think we have complicated problems, you really ought to

listen to some of theirs, because they have the most chaotic collection

of special local weights completely undefined and a different kind of

weight for almost every commodity that you can think of. If you go

over the hill into the next valley you get a different set of units. They

are very anxious to remedy that situation.

When I came back I discussed this with Mr. Ralph Smith. He

kindly prepared a special memorandum about how we do it here,

which isn't perfect in all respects, as we know, but at any rate we have | had some experience. We have sent it over to them as a basis for their

studies of their improvements.

About 2 years ago President Truman established by Executive 1 Order an Inter-departmental Committee on Scientific Research and

Development. The idea of it was to take account of the fact that we I have agencies engaged in scientific research in practically every department of the Government. They have problems in common. The |

point was to get them together to understand things, to thrash out

those problems and get some kind of uniformity of action proposed i by conference methods such as we follow here, without particularly

giving this body any authority to enforce anything.

Within the working of that committee there has been, as usually

happens, a group of subcommittees set up. I have the honor to be

chairman of one that is called the Subcommittee on Budgetary Procedures. We have been meeting this year. Out.of this we are getting

a lot of valuable experience. The attitudes of the different agencies

of the Government—which have just grown up by chance—are such

that the vocabulary isn't the same. What some call a project, others

call a program, others call a task, and still others call a mission.

How they account for overhead and how they estimate what is needed

and so on is just a grand jumble of hodgepodge that is well-meaning,

it isn't intended to deceive anybody, but different people have just

grown up with different habits in such a way that it is wholly incomprehensible.

We have been discussing this at great length in attempting to get

agreement on points of view on how best to do that. This activity
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 5

has been so valuable that the idea occurred to me—and I want to

throw it open to you for your own consideration—that perhaps this

Conference ought to have something like a committee on budgetary

procedures, the idea of which would be to consider how we really do

estimate what the legitimate needs are for weights and measures en- forcement activities, weights and measures administration activities,

in each jurisdiction.

I think it has been pointed out here in the past by various speakers

that the situation is actually quite uneven from city to city and

State to State. I think we want to guard against any idea that we are looking for tricky bits of technique as to how we can get our budgets

higher, and against those forces of evil that are trying to keep them

lower and lower. There must be a sober answer to the question of

what does a State or city really require for an effective administration. What budget does it take, how many officers per 100,000 population or per number of retail establishments or any other measure do

you want, and what kind of men should they be, and what should their

equipment be? Certainly this sort of thing is something that we

ought to give attention to, so that we can see how we can do a better

job. I am sure that in many instances the doing of a better job will

call for more of a budget, and that we ought to see ways in which we

can persuade our government officials locally to give us more budget

so that we can really show that a better job can be clone.

It seems to me that just as we find that the different scientific

agencies of the Goverment have problems in common as to how to work

up and present a budget, so there must be a great deal of experience, an interchange of experience, that could be given by officials of different jurisdictions on their experiences and difficulties that would

assist each other in working out better ways of presenting it. I suggest, therefore, to you, that we consider—and I will ask you

to give me your opinions later in the Conference at some time, or give

them to Mr. Smith—that we perhaps should establish a standing

committee on budgetary procedures for dealing with those matters.

One possibility is that this matter be dealt with by the Committee

on Weights and Measures Education, because, after all, the problem

of budget is the problem of educating the government officials that

are above us as to needs. But just how this is to be handled is a

separate question, and I would like your views on it. As you know, Handbook H44, which represents a revision of the

specifications and tolerances and regulations for commercial weighing

and measuring devices, was adopted here last year and became available from the printer in October, 1949. The sales demand we had

underestimated, so that the book was out of print for a while. But

it has now been reprinted. This book I am sure all of you are familiar

with, but I will exhibit one here in case you are not.

The report of the Thirty-fourth National Conference, last year's

Conference, became available from the printing office in January of

this year, as Miscellaneous Publication 195, and copies have been distributed to the persons that were registered at that meeting.

Another publishing activity in which the Bureau has had direct concern is the revision of the old compilation of all the Federal and

State weights and measures laws. This has been going on in the

Office of Weights and Measures and has just been sent off to the
6 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

printer so that later in this year sometime the finished book should

be available. It might possibly be delayed until next year, the next

calendar year, on account of other printing jobs being ahead of it. I

think it is quite likely to be available this fall. This book was last

revised, I think, about 1926.

There is being printed as a Bureau circular a summary and tabulation of the State package-marking requirements. There is continuing demand for this information, and the complete information which

this Circular contains is expected to be helpful to many. The main

table in this Circular clearly demonstrates the opportunity which

exists in many States to strengthen their laws requiring that packages

of all commodities, not merely packages of food, carry declarations

of net content. This example has already been set by 20 jurisdictions

that now have this requirement.

Mr. Smith has been working on—and has made considerable progress on—the preparation of another Handbook which will be a companion volume to H37 and will be entitled "Testing of Measuring

Equipment, a Manual for Weights and Measures Officials." We hope

that will be useful to you.

Also in course of preparation is a weights and measures casebook

which was mentioned here before, and the completion of which

has been delayed by prior activity on the compilation of the laws.

Mrs. Schwarz, the attorney on the staff of our Office of Weights and

Measures, will give a report on this casebook and other matters con- nected with it later in this program.

I have to announce, both with regret and pleasure, that Mr. R. J. Neale, who joined our staff last year, has already left us. I regret

that he has left "us, but he has gone to a better job in the livestock

branch of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. Mr. Neale joined the

Office of Weights and Measures but soon found an opportunity for

a better position, so he left us. But it is in a closely related field

where it will be of help to this work.

There have been some changes in personnel at the State level

since our last meeting which should be reported for your information.

Mr. W. P. Beed, of Georgia, has resigned to accept a position with

the A & P Company. For the time being Mr. A. D. Harris, Chief of

the Division of Food, Feed, Seed, and Weights and Measures of the

Georgia Department of Agriculture, will handle the duties formerly

assigned to Mr. Beed. In Louisiana, Mr. A. F. Chappuis has been

succeeded by Mr. A. J. Mayer as Director of the State Division of

Weights and Measures. In New Hampshire Mr. A. H. Dittrich has

succeeded Mr. J. J. Hensen as State Commissioner of Weights and

Measures. In Oregon, Mr. Walter Steele is the new Deputy Sealer

of Weights and Measures, having succeeded Mr. C. B. Jester. In

South Dakota, Mr. Anton Prestwick has been succeeded by Mr. K. I. Gross as Director of the Division of Inspections of the State Department of Agriculture.

Getting back to our legal questions again, the Office of Weights and

Measures during the past year, and always at the request of State

officials, has made recommendations or submitted proposed bills for

improving or establishing weights and measures supervision in

Omaha, Neb., Denver, Colo., the State of Colorado, the State of

Arkansas, the State of Arizona, and the State of New Mexico.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 7

1 I am happy to report that a bill for establishing a comprehensive

system of supervision in the State of Kentucky has been enacted into

law, and this will become effective as of July 1 of this year. Efforts to

enact similar legislation in the State of Mississippi have been renewed.

As this is written, the legislature has not taken final action on the

weights and measures bill.2 There has been a very gratifying increase in the amount of specialized testing equipment put into service throughout the country. We

have word of new volumetric provers in the District of Columbia,

Baltimore, Md., Madison, Wis., and the States of Indiana, Maine, New

Mexico, and Rhode Island; and of new vehicle-scale testing equips ments in Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, North

s Carolina, New Jersey, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, and Wyoming.

Special equipment for testing grain hopper scales has been put into

service in Texas. A program for testing prescription scales and

a weights has begun in Indiana, and a survey in this field has been made

2 in Texas.

The Indiana Division of Weights and Measures has a new laboratory and new laboratory equipment. We learn of some instances

k of increased appropriations permitting the employment of addih tional personnel. A salutary trend is noted in the increased amount

i, of attention to programs of practical training for weights and measd ures officials; this is discussed in some detail in the report of the

i- Conference Committee on Weights and Measures Education.

I commend the action of those States which have already promul-

!. gated Handbook H44 without major change and urge similar action

it for jurisdictions which have not taken this step. The formal prok mulgation of these codes is strongly recommended in preference to

ie

' mere informal adherence to the requirements. Formal recognition

if is the stronger action and greatly strengthens our pattern of uniformd ity throughout the country.

A few weeks ago we sent out a letter of inquiry to States from which

;] we had not already heard regarding the promulgation of the H44

i, ; codes. Not all States have replied. We do have information on 38

li jurisdictions. I think this is a matter of such importance as to warif ! rant a report on the results of the inquiry.

i First we can account for six States as having no State weights and

v measures organization in the general sense. So action there is not

ii to be expected. The H44 codes, either in complete or essentially comf plete form, are reported as having been actually promulgated in 13

is

; States, and similar promulgation sometime during 1950 or at the

(] latest within the next year, is said to be in process or planned in

T 13 additional jurisdictions. By "essentially complete form" it is

,] meant that relatively minor changes from or additions to the H44

[

! text have been introduced in some cases to conform to existing statu-

[.

; tory requirements or for other compelling reasons, or that some codes

have been deleted entirely because of statutory requirements limiting

d the authority of the weights and measures officers to certain fields of

6

; activity or proscribing certain classes of equipment.

The majority of the States "planning" promulgation say that they

| are unofficially using the H44 codes. In addition to the jurisdic-

? See abstract of State report from Mississippi, page 13.
8 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

tions already mentioned, 6 States reported that H44 is now in use. Two States report that H44 is in partial use, without giving definite indication of plans for early official promulgation. Two more

States report that H44 will be promulgated in part. One State

advised that there are no present plans for promulgation and one

official states definitely that promulgation will not be made. Replies

have not been received from 5 States.

I have some comments here about people saying why they would

or would not use it. I will omit the favorable ones and jump to

the unfavorable ones as more interesting. It is more interesting

to be kicked around rather than to be told you are a fine fellow.

In one State reporting partial present use of H44, the official stated

that while uniformity is very desirable from the manufacturers'

standpoint, State laws or local conditions make uniformity "impossible or of questionable value." I can well understand that a 100-

percent uniformity may never be realized, but I fail to see why uniformity should be thought of as of "questionable value."

The official who rather definitely said that the H44 material would

not be promulgated, an official who has never attended, so far as we

know, this National Conference, took particular exception to the

National Conference tolerances on equipment and criticized these as being too liberal. He suggested that these tolerances "must have been

originated by someone whose weights and measures experience has

been secured with his feet under a desk and not by those who are]

engaged in doing the day-by-day work in this field." He went on

to say that so long as the Conference recommendations are "so un-J

realistic" he will continue to exercise his prerogative under the law'

which requires him to adopt "reasonable rules and regulations on

variations and tolerances".

Contrary to this expressed opinion, I believe that the very gratifying

general acceptance of the National Conference specifications and toler- ances stems largely from the fact that these technical recommendations have been developed by the joint action of members of this Conference which is composed of men who are engaged in doing and supervising the day-by-day work in the field. I think plenty of us wish we

had our feet under a desk a few more hours a day than we do.

Not all of the officials reporting on the promulgation of the codes

accepted the invitation to comment on the general question of uniformity of code requirements among the States.

Summarizing with respect to the H44 codes, it can be said that of

the 43 jurisdictions, including the District of Columbia, in which

general weights and measures programs are being carried on, the H44

codes have been promulgated or will be promulgated probably within one year or less, or they are now in use in a total of 32 jurisdictions.

In four additional jurisdictions they will be promulgated in part or are presently in partial use. In two additional jurisdictions there

is no indication that promulgation will be made. Replies have not

been received from five jurisdictions.

Notwithstanding the minority viewpoint illustrated by some of the

objections which I have reported to you, I am gratified, and I think

the Conference can be well pleased by the general acceptance of the

Conference recommendations.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 9

Appointments are required for some, but not all of the standing

committees of the National Conference. On the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances the term of R. W. Smith expires this year.

I am appointing as his successor, for a 5-year term, W. S. Bussey,

Assistant Chief of the Office of Weights and Measures. Thus the

Bureau of Standards liaison with this important committee will be

maintained. This appointment necessitates Mr. Bussey*s removal

from the Committee on Weights and Measures Education ; to replace

him on that committee, I am appointing, for a 5-year term, C. M.

Fuller, the Sealer of Weights and Measures of Los Angeles County,

California, No additional appointment is required for the Committee on Education because no terms expire this year.

On the Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, the term

of J. A. Boj'le, of Maine, expires this year. No replacement is needed

because Mr. Boyle's retirement will still leave the Committee with the

standard membership of five. You recall we are in the process of

making an adjustment on the size of the Committees by this means. On the Committee on Legislation, the term of F. C. Yarbrough, of

Charlotte, N. O, expires this year. To bring the membership of this

Committee to the standard number of five, and to avoid reducing the

terms of the hold-over members, I am appointing, for a 2-year term,

C. H. Oakley, State Inspector of Weights and Measures of Wyoming.

On the Committee on Trading by Weight there will be two vacancies.

The term of J. E. Brenton, of California, expires this year, and H. K.

Thatcher, of Arkansas, is no longer in the service of that State. I am

appointing for the 5-year term as Mr. Brenton's successor, J. J. Levitt,

Superintendent of Standards of Illinois, and as successor to Mr.

Thatcher, for a 1-year term, I am appointing F. G. Cesar, Director

of the Marketing Division of Oklahoma.

I have to announce with respect to the Committee on Uniform Regulations, that last January the Chairman, J. W. Reese of Iowa, asked

to be relieved of the Chairmanship because of the press of official

duties and the condition of his health. This request was granted.

At that time I appointed another member of the committee, R. D.

Thompson, of Virginia, as Chairman. In view of the circumstances,

I propose that this special committee be granted another year to complete its assignment,

As committees to act during the 35th National Conference, I make

the following appointments

:

For the Committee on Nominations : R. E. Meek, of Indiana, Chairman ; Nails Berryman, of Florida ; J. A. Boyle, of Maine ; J. A. Bernard, of St. Louis, Mo. ; Alfred Lirio, of Cumberland County, N. J.

;

W. A. Masinda, of Tolland County, Conn. ; and G. W. Warner, of Wisconsin.

For the Committee on Resolutions: J. J. Levitt, of Illinois, Chairman; F. M. Greene, of Connecticut; G. L. Johnson, of Kentucky; W.

A. Kerlin, of Alameda County, Calif. ; William Kirk, Jr., of Nassau

County, N. Y. ; R, W. Searles, of Medina County, Ohio ; and S. H.

Seighman, of Pennsylvania.

Gentlemen, this concludes the opening remarks that I had planned

to make to you. I again am happy to see so many here this year and

to note the progress that is being made in our field of work. I am
10 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

happy that you are planning to hold some sessions at the Bureau of

Standards and to devote some time to visiting our laboratories. I

extend to you a standing invitation, one and all, to visit us at any other

time that you happen to be in the city, or to call on us in any way that

Ave can work together in the same, I hope, mutually satisfactory way

that has marked all the relations between the Bureau of Standards

and the State and municipal jurisdictions in the years past.

The Chairman. At the Thirty-fourth National Conference the following resolution was adopted

Resolved, That during the opening session of each annual Conference on

Weights and Measures, time be allotted to permit proper memorial service

in eulogy in memory of those who have been called by our Creator.

The Secretary of the Conference has received no requests for memorials occasioned by deaths among the membership of the Conference,

and- accordingly no arrangements for memorials have been made in

advance of this meeting. However, before proceeding, the Chair ex- tends to any active or associate member of the Conference here present, the privilege of the floor to speak briefly in eulogy of any member of our organization who may have passed away since our previous

meeting. Does anyone wish to take advantage of this opportunity to

speak ? (There was no response to the foregoing invitation of the Chairman.)

ABSTRACTS OF STATE REPORTS 3

CALIFORNIA

By James E. Benton, Chief, State Bureau of Weights and Measures

Mr. Brenton reported the adoption of a code relating to liquefied

petroleum gas, and a code covering farm tanks for the storage and

measurement of milk. He stated that copies of these codes are available upon request.

CONNECTICUT

By Frank M. Greene, Deputy State Food and Drug Commissioner

Mr. Greene reported that but few changes were made in the Connecticut weights and measures organization during the year and that

the only weights and measures legislation enacted was a brief amendment to the Milk Bottle Law relating to the manufacturer's identification. Specifications, tolerances, and regulations are being revised

to conform with Handbook H44.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

By James G. Dance, Deputy Director of Weights, Measures, and

Markets

Mr. Dance reported the successful prosecution of 28 short-weight

cases. During the coal strike, the Director of the Department was

called upon to act as Chairman of the Fuel Coordinating Committee.

A series of discussions has been instituted as a personnel training

program.

3 For convenience of reference, these abstracts are presented herein in alphabetical order by States, regardless of the actual order of presentation at the meeting.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 11

FLORIDA

By Nalls Bebryman, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and

Measures

Mr. Berryman reported that the Florida department has 16 specially trained men who test weighing and measuring devices, and 40

general inspectors who devote about half of their time to the testing

of gasoline and kerosene pumps and checking package weights. Two

men are employed in the weights and measures laboratory in Tallahassee. Florida is now in the process of promulgating Handbook

H44 codes, with a few minor changes.

HAWAII

By B. K. Cummins, Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures, City

and County of Honolulu 4

Mr. Cummins, reporting for the City and County of Honolulu, said

that the County covers the entire 600 square miles of the Island of

Oahu. The population is about 300,000 exclusive of military personnel. The City-County weights and measures staff consists of 3

men. Mr. Cummins cited insufficient appropriations as the biggest

hindrance to progress in weights and measures administration. He

advocated the adoption of the H44 Codes and uniform laws in the

Territory.

ILLINOIS

By John J. Levitt, State Superintendent of Standards

Mr. Levitt reported one additional vehicle-scale test truck, making

a total of three. He announced with regret the resignation of Mrs.

Vivienne Kettlekamp, Secretary in the Weights and Measures Division, and Secretary of the Illinois Association, to become effective

sometime during the coming year.

INDIANA

By Cleo C. Morgan, Sealer of Weights and Measures, City of Gary

Mr. Morgan reported that the State Division is now occupying

new office and laboratory facilities. State and local offices have increased their personnel, and much new equipment has been secured,

including a new vehicle-scale test truck and three 100-gallon portable

meter-testing units. The Handbook H44 codes have been adopted.

IOWA

By James W. Reese, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and

Measures

Mr. Reese reported that his division is now operating six trucks

weighing 16,000 pounds, one truck weighing 24,000 pounds, and a new

truck, placed in service January 31, 1950, weighing 40,000 pounds. He

announced that another unit similar to the larger truck will be pur4 In the absence of a delegate from Hawaii, the Secretary of the Conference presented

the report, which had been submitted by mail. 904381—50 3
12 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

chased after July 1, 1950. His division has also purchased a new

100-gallon portable meter-testing unit. The division personnel includes 8 large-capacity scale inspectors and 22 general inspectors.

KANSAS

By J. Fred True, State Sealer of Weights and Measures

Mr. True reported continued progress in Kansas, especially in the

vehicle and livestock scale field. A new test truck, carrying 18,000

pounds of test weights, was purchased during the year. This makes

two such units for the division.

KENTUCKY

By George L. Johnson, Director, State Division of Weights and

Measures

The Kentucky legislature had adopted a new weights and measures

law, which will become effective July 1, 1950. A new vehicle-scale

test truck was purchased and placed in service. Office standards and

balances, and additional field testing equipment is now being purchased. The city of Lexington has established a new weights and

measures division and the city of Louisville has added two inspectors

to its staff. LOUISIANA

By A. J. Mayer, Director, State Division of Weights and Measures

Mr. Mayer reported much progress during the first full year of

operation by the Louisiana division. Three test trucks, carrying 20,-

000, 2,500, and 1,500 pounds of test weights, respectively, are in

operation.

MAINE

By James A. Boyle, Deputy State Sealer of Weights and Measures

Mr. Boyle reported the adoption of the Handbook H44 codes by the

State of Maine. He stated that a 100-gallon portable meter-testing

unit had been placed in service, and that a new vehicle-scale test truck

had been purchased, during the year. The Department's program of

measuring the capacities of fishing boats was also described.

MARYLAND

By A. Morton Thomas, Director of Inspections and Licenses, Montgomery County

Mr. Thomas reported for Montgomery County only. He pointed

out that Montgomery County is immediately adjacent to the District

of Columbia, and that its population has increased tremendously

within the past few years. Two inspectors are now employed by the

County.

MASSACHUSETTS

By John P. McBride, State Director of Standards and Necessaries of

Life

Mr. McBride reported some progress in Massachusetts regarding

legislation for sale by weight of ice cream, but indicated that they
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 13

were not wholly satisfied yet. He also commented upon the difficulties

encountered with the marked weights and prices on prepackaged perishable commodities.

MICHIGAN

By Miles A. Nelson, Chief, Bureau of Marketing and Enforcement

Mr. Nelson reported that his staff consists of 40 men making both

food and weights and measures inspections and 5 men testing largecapacity scales and wholesale measuring devices. In addition to the

State staff, some 70 sealers, in 26 cities and 7 counties, are active. He

stated that they had purchased and expected early delivery on a 500-

gallon portable meter-testing unit.

MINNESOTA

By Erling Hansen, Supervisor, State Department of ~Weights and

Measures

Mr. Hansen said that effort was being made to replace five vehiclescale test trucks with larger units. He reported the addition of 6 inspectors to the staff, during the year, and said 2 more were expected

to be added on July 1, 1950. This will make a total of 35 State

inspectors.

MISSISSIPPI

By Allan McCluer, Chief Inspector, Department of Agriculture 5

Mr. McCluer reported that the legislature adjourned without passing the general weights and measures bill. A bill directing the Department of Agriculture to test all livestock scales was passed, however. The Department will attempt to purchase a medium-sized test truck and start this program of inspection as soon as practicable.

MISSOURI

By Joseph A. Bernard, Commissioner of Weights and Measures, City

of St. Louis

Mr. Bernard reported for the City of St. Louis only. He stated that

there had been an increase in the number of inspections and a decrease

in the number of complaints, during the year, and noted that there had

been a marked decrease in the number of coal users in the city.

NEBRASKA

By W. W. Gray, Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures, City of

Omaha

Mr. Gray reported only for the City of Omaha, saying that a campaign to educate the public had been instituted and that it was producing good results in the way of better cooperation with the department.

Two inspectors have been added to the staff and additional equipment

for testing large-capacity scales and wholesale meters is being sought.

s In the absence of a delegate from Mississippi, the Secretary of the Conference presented

the report, which had been submitted by mail.
14 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

NEVADA

By Wayne B. Adams, State Sealer of Weights and Measv/res 6

Mr. Adams reported the addition of a new 84-gallon prover, for the

testing of vehicle-tank meters at the Reno office. He reported progress

in the enforcement of the Anti-Freeze Law passed in 1949, and stated

that efforts were being made to secure a larger vehicle-scale test truck

during the coming year.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

By Albert H. Dittrich, Commissioner of Weights and Measures

Mr. Dittrich reported that the Department of Weights and Measures

is being merged with the Department of Agriculture. He expressed

the belief that this reorganization will be beneficial to the Weights and

Measures Department, and that it should help in getting some additional badly needed equipment, especially a large-capacity scale-testing unit.

NEW JERSEY

By Joseph G. Rogers, Deputy Superintendent, State Division of

Weights and Measures

Mr. Rogers reported that there are 128 inspectors in New Jersey, including the State, county, and city departments, that all are under civil

service, that recent salary increases have been allowed in many instances, that the State has acquired a new vehicle-scale test truck, and

that the legislature has passed a new thread law, although eight other

weights and measures bills failed to pass.

NEW YORK

By Clement A. Baker, Director, State Bureau of Weights and

Measures

Mr. Baker reported the passage of two weights and measures bills

by the New York legislature. One of these amended the law governing the size of milk and cream containers, so as to include containers

for sour cream. The other bill requires the sale of charcoal by net

weight instead of by dry measure. NORTH CAROLINA

By C. D. Baucom, State Superintendent of Weights and Measures

Mr. Baucom reported that they had been successful in employing

a sizable number of engineers and chemists in the Division and that

the total personnel stands at 77 people, at this time. He enumerated

some of the equipment operated by the division, including a new

vehicle-scale test truck weighing approximately 40,000 pounds. A

new code for the sale of liquefied petroleum gas was prepared and

promulgated during the year.

6 In the absence of a delegate from Nevada, the Secretary of the Conference presented

the report, which had been submitted by mail.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 15

NORTH DAKOTA

By A. J. Jensen, Chief State Inspector of Weights and Measures

Mr. Jensen related the progress made by the North Dakota department during the past few years. He reminded the Conference that

it had been 18 years since he made his first trip to Washington as the

official representative of his State and announced with much regret

that he was leaving State service and that this would be his last

Conference as a State Weights and Measures Official.

OHIO

By V. D. Campbell, Deputy State Sealer

Mr. Campbell presented his superior officer, Mr. C. W. Van Schoik,

Chief, Division of Foods and Dairies, Ohio Department of Agriculture, to the Conference. He announced that a second vehicle-scale test

truck will be placed in service very soon. An increased budget for

weights and measures work will be requested at the next session of

the legislature. Mr. Campbell also reported progress toward the

promulgation of Handbook H44 material in Ohio.

OKLAHOMA

By T. C. Beck, Assistant Director, Marketing Division

Mr. Beck reported that the present Oklahoma law applies only to

agricultural products and to weighing and measuring devices used

in the purchase and sale of these products. They have 8 inspectors for

small-capacity scales, with two trucks for large-capacity scales. Approximately 75 percent of the small-capacity scales and 60 percent of

the large-capacity scales have been found to be incorrect upon the

first test. PENNSYLVANIA

By Spencer H. Seighman, Assistant Director, State Bureau of

Standard Weights and Measures

Mr. Seighman reported that a survey is being made of present laws,

and bills are being prepared for presentation to the 1951 session of

the General Assembly, to effectuate desirable amendments. He stated

that Handbook HM material had been officially adopted in Pennsylvania, and that a reprint of their own Handbook is to be made in

the near future.

PUERTO RICO

By Jose R. Rivera, Chief Engineer, Public Service Commission

Mr. Rivera reported that the Bureau of Weights and Measures in

Puerto Rico was created in 1913. The present staff consists of a Chief Inspector, 15 field inspectors, and a chemist. Of the 235,874

devices inspected during the fiscal year 1948^9, 93 percent were

new devices. The vast sugar industry consumes much of the time

of the Bureau staff.
SECOND SESSION—AFTERNOON OF TUESDAY,

MAY 23, 1950

(The Conference reassembled at 2 :15 p. m., J. P. Leonard, Vice President of the

Conference, presiding.

ABSTRACTS OF STATE REPORTS—CONTINUED

RHODE ISLAND

By Edward R. Fisher, State Sealer of Weights and Measures

Mr. Fisher reported that the State's new unit for testing wholesaletype and vehicle-tank meters had been placed in service during the

year and that it had proved to be a very efficient piece of equipment.

He also stated that the State office had sponsored the formation of a State Sealers' Organization.

SOUTH CAROLINA

By Chovine R. Sprott, Deputy' Commissioner of Agriculture

Mr. Sprott reported that a new 50-gallon meter prover, for testing

meters on fuel-oil trucks, and a new light scale test truck carrying 2,000

pounds of weights, had been purchased. Plans are being made to

erect another permanent vehicle-tank calibrating station. A special

survey of retail gasoline pumps has been made and a similar survey

concerning the weights of prepackaged perishable commodities will

be started soon. TEXAS

By O. A. Kirkland, State Inspector of Weigh ts and Measures

Mr. Kirkland reported that four additional inspectors have been

provided. Equipment for testing hand-operated grain hopper scales,

including a truck, 10,000 pounds of 50-pound test weights, and a portable balance for testing counterpoise weights, has been purchased and

placed in service. One vehicle-scale test truck has been completely re- newed, including new body, new hoist, and other equipment.

UTAH

By E. C. Westwood, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

City of Salt Lake City

Mr. Westwood reported that the State Department of Utah is not

too active, through a lack of sufficient appropriations. Reporting for

the City of Salt Lake, he said that they have a five-man department,

and that their equipment is reasonably sufficient to take care of their

needs.

10
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 17

VERMONT

By George E. Carpenter, Siopervisor, State Division of Weights and

Measures

Mr. Carpenter reported that there are no local sealers in Vermont.

All work is carried on by the State. The personnel of the Division consists of the Supervisor, three inspectors, and a secretary. A vehiclescale test truck and a portable unit for testing vehicle tanks and wholesale meters, are operated.

VIRGINIA

By R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, State Section of Weights and

Measures

Mr. Thompson reported an increase of 28 percent in the number of

devices tested and a comparable increase in supervisory activities,

such as package reweighing. One additional State Inspector has been

added to the staff. An order has been placed for a new vehicle-scale

test truck, which will carry 12,000 pounds of weights. Handbook

H44 material was officially promulgated. The office and laboratory were moved into modern and adequate quarters.

WASHINGTON

By Donald W. Turnbull, Supervisor, Division of Licenses and

Standards, City of Seattle

Mr. Turnbull, reporting for the City of Seattle, stated that a permanent station for the testing of vehicle tanks and meters is now being

erected. Approximately 25 percent of the gasoline pumps tested in

1949, were found to be incorrect. The Division tests the meters on

some 344 taxicabs each year.

WISCONSIN

By George W. Warner, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and

Measures

Mr. Warner reported that his Division enforces numerous laws

other than those pertaining to weights and measures, among which

are the false or misleading advertising law. Some of the experiences

of the division in these other fields were related by Mr. Warner.

WYOMING

By Charles H. Oakley, State Inspector of Weights and Measures

Mr. Oakley reported the purchase of a new vehicle-scale test truck

which carries 16,500 pounds of weights and has a gross weight of

about 35,000 pounds. He also stated that an additional truck is being

built at this time. Handbook H44 material has been officially promulgated, and the State is erecting a new office building, in which the Division hopes to have adequate office and laboratory space.
18 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

ABSTRACTS OF REPORTS OF REPRESENTATIVES OF STATE AND

REGIONAL ASSOCIATIONS OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES OFFICIALS

CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES OFFICIALS

By Charles Morris Fuller, Sealer of Weights and Measures of Los

Angeles Comity, California

Mr. Fuller emphasized two features of their Association operations.

One was the series of area meetings held. The State is divided into

five areas ; three meetings are held in each area, in addition to the Annual State Conference, each year. The other feature is the Association Legislative Committee ; the five chairmen of the area groups comprise the committee. This gives the Legislative Committee a very

close tie-in with all local sealers.

CONNECTICUT SEALERS' ASSOCIATION

By Frank M. Greene, Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Commission of Connecticut

Mr. Greene said that the Association sponsors two meetings a year,

one in the summer and one in the winter. The winter meeting is of

2 days' duration and the summer meeting is a 1-clay conference.

ILLINOIS WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By John J. Levitt, State Superintendent of Standards

Mr. Levitt stated that the Association held a highly interesting and

instructive conference in Chicago in December 1949, which was well

attended. He expressed the appreciation of the Association to all of

those who took part in the meeting.

INDIANA ASSOCIATION OF INSPECTORS OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

By James A. Hilgemann, Inspector of Weights and Measures of

Fort Wayne

Mr. Hilgemann said that the principal activities of the Association

are the two meetings held annually, that is, the Annual Conference

held each spring and the fall meeting, and the question-and-answer

program. Almost 600 questions have been discussed and authoritative answers developed. These questions and answers are available to

weights and measures officers and other interested persons, in printed

form.

MASSACHUSETTS WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By Frank Draghetti, Sealer of Weights and Measures of Agawam

Mr. Draghetti commented upon the value of the Annual Conference of the Association to the local sealer. He said that area meetings

were also held, in certain sections of the State, about three times per

year. The Annual Conference is held in October.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 19

MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

OFFICIALS

By James H. Hitchings, Inspector of Weights and Measwes of

Detroit

Mr. Hitchings stated that the Association has an active membership

of about 100 weights and measures officials. In addition to the Annual

Conference held each year, area meetings are held by the officials in

the vicinity of Detroit.

NEW JERSEY WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By Winfield K. Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Weights and

Measures of Cumberland County

Mr. Thompson announced that two Weights and Measures Luncheon

Clubs had been organized by association members, one in the north and

the other in the southern part of New Jersey. These clubs meet once

a month. The 40th Annual Conference of the Association is to be held

in Atlantic City on September 5-8, 1950.

NEW YORK STATE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By Guy T. Parsons, Sealer of Weights and Measures of Delaware

County

Mr. Parsons stated that the Association holds its Annual Conference

in the summer. They have two area organizaitons which hold semiannual meetings. One of these is in the eastern part of the State, and

the other is in the western part. The 43rd Annual Conference will be

held in Watertown on July 18-20, 1950.

NORTHWEST WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By A. J. Jensen, Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures of North

Dakota

Mr. Jensen spoke of the increase in membership of the Association,

and complimented the Minnesota department upon its efforts in behalf

of the organization. The 14th Annual Conference of the Association

will be held in St. Paul, Minnesota, on June 26-28, 1950.

OHIO SEALERS' ASSOCIATION

By Leon E. Bates, Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures of Wood

County

Mr. Bates said that two general conferences and three area meetings

are held each year. Open-forum discussions are encouraged at all

meetings. Since practically all enforcement work is done by local

officials in Ohio, he stated that these meetings serve a very worth while

purpose in helping to coordinate the work.
20 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

PENNSYLVANIA ASSOCIATION OF INSPECTORS OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

By Spencer H. Seighman, Assistant Director, State Bureau of

Standard Weights and Measures of Pennsylvania

Mr. Seighman spoke of the increased attendance at the 34th Annual

Conference of the Association in 1949, and the excellent results which

they have obtained from their School of Instruction. The 35th Annual

Conference will be held in Bethlehem.

RHODE ISLAND WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By Edward R. Fisher, Sealer of Weights and Measures of

Rh ode Island

Mr. Fisher told of the formation of the Rhode Island Association

in November 1949. Meetings have been held to select officers and prepare a constitution. The first conference will be held in Providence

sometime in September 1950.

SOUTHERN WEIGHTS AND AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By John I. Moore, Supervising Inspector of Weights and Measures

of North Carolina

Mr. Moore said that the fourth annual conference of the Association

was held in Biloxi, Mississippi, on November 3-5, 1950. An innovation

in the meeting was the holding of group discussions, on various subjects, simultaneously, allowing members to attend the discussion in

which they were most interested. The Association Committee on

Education has started the monthly publication of a News Letter, which

is mailed to all members. The 5th Annual Conference of the Association is to be held in Charleston, South Caroline, during the last week

in September 1950.

TEXAS WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By O. A. Kirkland, State Inspector of Weights and Measures of Texas

Mr. Kirkland stated that the Texas Association has curtailed its

activities, insofar as general annual conferences are concerned, since

the organization of the Southern Association. Texas meetings have

been limited to Schools of Instructions for officials. This policy is to

continue through 1950.

VIRGINIA WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By Conwat C. Mundy^, Chief, Bureau of Weights and Measures of

Richmond

Mr. Mundy said that the Virginia Association is in its sixteenth

year and that it has never failed to hold an annual meeting during

this period. The 15th Annual Conference was held in Roanoke,

Va., on October 13 and 14, 1949, and the 16th Annual Conference

will be held in Virginia Beach on September 14 and 15, 1950.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 21

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION, PRESENTED BY ROLLIN E. MEEK, CHAIRMAN

Your Committee on Legislation has devoted considerable effort,

since the adjournment of the Thirty-Fourth National Conference on

Weights and Measures, to two important assignments given it by

that Conference. One of these had to do with the drafting of proposed model legislation pertaining to the licensing of weighmasters,

and the other called for a study and recommendations on a proposed

model thread law.

Before going into the details of these assignments, it was necessary

for the Committee to give careful consideration to the possibility

that the Model State Law on Weights and Measures might become too

long and too comprehensive for enactment by States with little or no active weights and measures supervision. As a result of this consideration, the Committee, in taking up its first assignment, decided

against recommending for incorporation into the Model Law several

sections relating to the licensing of weighmasters. Instead, it was considered more desirable to recommend the adoption of an entirely separate model law to cover this subject. Furthermore, it would seem advisable for a State to enact a general weights and measures law based

on the present Model Law and to establish satisfactory enforcement,

before enacting weighmaster legislation.

Several reasons can be advanced for the establishment of a satisfactory weights and measures supervision in a State before the enactment of weighmaster legislation such as is being proposed by your

Committee, Among these is the authorization given the enforcing

official to promulgate such rules and regulations as are deemed neces- sary to carry out the provisions of the act ; passing on the qualifications, by the enforcing official, of the applicant for a license as a licensed public weighmaster; the periodic inspection and testing,

by weights and measures officials, of weighing devices used by weighmasters ; and a thorough knowledge of weighing devices and weighing practices on the part of the enforcing official and his deputies to

equip them to adequately supervise enforcement of the act,

Your Committee gave a summary of a rather brief study of existing State weighmaster legislation in its report to the last Conference.

At that time the Committee was not prepared to submit a proposed

model law. As a result of this study, the Committee is now in a position to offer a proposal which, if accepted by the Conference and

enacted into law by the various States, should tend to promote more

accurate quantity determinations and bring about a high degree of

uniformity in a field closely associated with weights and measures

supervision.

While the Committee believes its proposal is a satisfactory one and

in keeping with information at hand, nevertheless, it is recommending tentative adoption, with final action to be taken during the next

meeting of the National Conference on Weights and Measures. Since

what the Committee is proposing is something entirely new and something that probably has not been given sufficient consideration by the

Conference, the delay in taking final action Avould appear to be in

accordance with established precedent.
22 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Further study of the proposal in the meantime would seem advisable—particularly so if constructive criticisms are received from members of the Conference or other interested parties.

The text of the proposed model weighmaster law is as follows

A BILL

FOR AN ACT concerning weighmasters, providing for the licensing thereof,

denning their powers and duties, and prescribing penalties. Sec. 1. When used in this act unless the context requires otherwise

(a) The words "licensed public weighmaster" shall mean and refer to a natural

person licensed under the provisions of this Act.

(b) The word "vehicle" shall mean any device in, upon, or by which any

property, produce, commodity, or article is or may be transported or drawn.

(c) The word "superintendent (commissioner)" shall mean and refer to the

State superintendent (commissioner) of weights and measures.

Sec. 2. The superintendent (commissioner) is authorized to enforce the provisions of this Act and to promulgate, in the manner provided by law, such rules

and regulations as are deemed necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.

Sec. 3. A citizen of the United States or a person who has declared his intention of becoming such a citizen, who is a resident of the State of , not less than 21 years of age, of good moral character, and who has the ability

to weigh accurately and to make correct weight certificates, and who has received

from the superintendent (commissioner) a license as a licensed public weighmaster shall be styled and authorized to act as a licensed public weighmaster.

Sec. 4. Application for a license as a licensed public weighmaster shall be

made upon a form provided by the superintendent (commissioner) and the application shall furnish evidence that the applicant has the qualifications required

by Section 3 of this Act.

Sec. 5. The superintendent (commissioner) may adopt rules for determining

the qualifications of the applicant for a license as a licensed public weighmaster.

He may pass upon the qualifications of the applicant upon the basis of the in- formation supplied in the application, or he may examine such applicant orally or in writing or both for the purpose of determining his qualifications. He shall

grant licenses as licensed public weighmasters to such applicants as may be

found to possess the qualifications required by Section 3 of this Act. The superintendent (commissioner) shall keep a record of all such applications and of

all licenses issued thereon.

Sec. 6. Before the issuance of any license as a licensed public weighmaster, or any renewal thereof, the applicant shall pay to the superintendent (commissioner) a fee of $5.00. Such fees shall be deposited with the State Treasurer

to be credited to a fund to be used by the superintendent (commissioner) for

the administration of this Act.

Sec. 7. The superintendent (commissioner) may, upon request and without

charge, issue a limited license as a licensed public weighmaster to any qualified

officer or employee of a city or county of this State or of a State commission,

board, institution, or agency, authorizing such officer or employee to act as a

licensed public weighmaster only within the scope of his official employment in

the case of an officer or employee of a city or county or only for and on behalf

of the State commission, board, institution, or agency in the case of an officer or employee thereof.

Sec. 8. Each license as licensed public weighmaster shall be issued to expire on the thirty-first day of December of the calendar year for which it is issued:

Provided, That any such license shall be valid through the thirty-first day of

January of the next ensuing calendar year or until issuance of the renewal li- cense, whichever event first occurs, if the holder thereof shall have filed a renewal application with the superintendent (commissioner) on or before the

fifteenth day of December of the year for which the current license was issued

And provided further, That any license issued on or after the effective date

of this Act and on or before the thirty-first day of December 19 , shall be

issued to expire on the thirty-first day of December of the next ensuing calendar

year. Renewal applications shall be in such form as the superintendent (commissioner) shall prescribe.

Sec 9. Each licensed public weighmaster shall, before entering upon his

duties, make oath to execute faithfully his duties. The issuance of a license
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 23

as licensed public weighmaster shall not obligate the State to pay to the licensee

any compensation for his services as a licensed public weighmaster. Each

licensed public weighmaster shall, at his own expense, provide himself with an

impression seal. His name and the word(s) (insert name of State) shall be

inscribed around the outer margin of the seal and the words "licensed public

weightmaster" shall appear in the center thereof. The seal shall be impressed

upon each weight certificate issued by a licensed public weighmaster.

Sec. 10. The superintendent ( commissioner ) shall prescribe the form of weight

certificate to be used by a licensed public weighmaster. The weight certificate shall state the date of issuance, the kind of property, produce, commodity, or

article weighed, the name of the declared owner or agent of the owner and/or

of the consignee of the material weighed, the accurate weight of the material

weighed, the means by which the material was being transported at the time it was weighed, and such other available information as may be necessary to dis- tinguish or identify the property, produce, commodity, or article from others of

like kind. Such weight certificate when so made and properly signed and

sealed, shall be prima facie evidence of the accuracy of the weights shown.

Sec. 11. A licensed public weighmaster shall not enter on a weight certificate

issued by him any weight values but such as he has personally determined, and he

shall make no entries on a weight certificate issued by some other person. A

weight certificate shall be so prepared as to show clearly what weight or weights were actually determined. If the certificate form provides for the entry of gross,

tare, and net weights, in any case in which only the gross, the tare, or the net

weight is determined by the weighmaster he shall strike through or otherwise

cancel the printed entries for the weights not determined or computed. If gross and tare weights are shown on a weight certificate and both of these were not determined on the same scale and on the day for which the certificate

is dated, the weighmaster shall identify on the certificate the scale used for

determining each such weight and the date of each such determination.

Sec. 12. When making a weight determination as provided for by this Act

a licensed public weighmaster shall use a weighing device which is of a type

suitable for the weighing of the amount and kind of material to be weighed,

and which has been tested and approved for use by a weights and measures

officer of this State within a period of 12 months immediately preceding the

date of the weighing.

Sec. 13. A licensed public weighmaster shall not use any scale to weigh a

load the value of which exceeds the nominal or rated capacity of the scale. When the gross or tare weight of any vehicle or combination of vehicles is to be determined, the weighing shall be performed upon a scale having a platform

of sufficient size to accommodate such vehicle or combination of vehicles fully,

completely, and as one entire unit. If a combination of vehicles must be broken

up into separate units in order to be weighed as prescribed herein, each such

separate unit shall be entirely disconnected before weighing and a separate

weight certificate shall be issued for each such separate unit.

Sec 14. A licensed public weighmaster shall keep and preserve for at least one year, or for such longer period as may be specified in the regulations authorized to be issued for the enforcement of this Act, a legible carbon copy

of each weight certificate issued by him, which copies shall be open at all reasonable times for inspection by any weights and measures officer of this

State.

Sec. 15. Whenever in any other State which licenses public weighmasters,

there is statutory authority for the recognition and acceptance of the weight

certificates issued by licensed weighmasters of this State, the superintendent

(commissioner) of this State is authorized to recognize and accept the weight

certificates of such other State. Sec 16. The following persons shall not be required but shall be permitted

to obtain licenses as licensed public weighmasters : ( 1 ) a weights and measures

officer when acting within the scope of his official duties, (2) a person weighing

property, produce, commodities, or articles which he or his employer, if any, is either buying or selling, and (3) a person weighing property, produce, commodities, or articles in conformity with the requirements of Federal statutes or

the statutes of this State relative to warehousemen or processors. Sec 17. No person shall assume the title "licensed public weighmaster,"

or any title of similar import, perform the duties or acts to be performed by

a licensed public weighmaster under this Act, hold himself out as a licensed

public weighmaster, issue any weight certificate, ticket, memorandum, or
24 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

statement for which a fee is charged, or engage in the full-time or part-time

business of public weighing, unless he holds a valid license as a licensed public

weighmaster. "Public weighing," as used in this section, shall mean the weighing

for any person, upon request, of property, produce, commodities, or articles other

than those which the weigher or his employer, if any, is either buying or selling. Sec. 18. The superintendent (commissioner) is authorized to suspend or re- voke the license of any licensed public weighmaster (1) when he is satisfied,

after a hearing upon 10 days' notice to the licensee, that the said licensee has

violated any provision of this Act or of any valid regulation of the superintendent

(commissioner) affecting licensed public weighmasters, or (2) when a licensed

public weighmaster has been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction

of violating any provision of this Act or of any regulation issued under authority of this Act.

Sec. 19. Any person who requests a licensed public weighmaster to weigh any

property, produce, commodity, or article falsely or incorrectly, or who requests a

false or incorrect weight certificate, or any person who issues a weight certificate

simulating the weight certificate prescribed in this Act and who is not a licensed

public weighmaster, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction for

the first offense shall be punished by a fine in any sum not less than twenty-five

dollars or more than one hundred dollars ; and upon a second or subsequent

conviction such person shall be punished by a fine in any sum not less than one hundred dollars or more than five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not

less than thirty days or more than ninety days or by both such fine and

imprisonment.

Sec. 20. Any licensed public weighmaster who falsifies a weight certificate, or who delegates his authority to any person not licensed as a licensed public

weighmaster, or who preseals a weight certificate with his official seal before

performing the act of weighing, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon

conviction shall be punished by a fine in any sum not less than fifty dollars or more than five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not less than thirty days

or more than ninety days or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Sec. 21. Any person who violates any provision of this Act or any rule or regulation promulgated pursuant thereto for which no specific penalty has been

provided shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished

by a fine in any amount not less than twenty-five dollars or more than one hundred dollars. Sec. 22. All laws and parts of laws in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

Sec. 23. If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitutional, or the

applicability thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the constitutionality of the remainder of the Act and the applicability thereof to other

persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Mr. Meek. Since the Committee's Eeport covers two entirely unrelated subjects, I believe it will be in order that we take- action at this

time on the first proposal which has to do with model weighmaster

legislation. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, in order to bring this matter

before the Conference, I move the adoption of that portion of the

report which has already been presented.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to.)

Mr. Meek (reading) : Before submitting a proposed revised textile section of the Model

State Law on Weights and Measures for the consideration of this

Conference, your Committee would like to call attention to the actions

heretofore taken in the matter of model textile legislation by the

National Conference on Weights and Measures. For many years

there has been included in the Model Law a section on textile materials. Its citation is Section 19 of Form 1, Section 26 of Form 2,

and Section 24 of Form 3. From time to time amendments to the

Model Law have been adopted, as these became desirable to meet

changing conditions; however, the textile section has remained

unaltered for many years.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 25

Attention was focused on thread a few years ago by the Conference

Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, and this Committee,

working with representatives of the Thread Institute, Inc., made some

very excellent recommendations to the Thirty-Fourth National Conference on Weights and Measures, which were adopted by an unanimous vote. Immediately following this action, a proposed revision

of the textile section of the Model Law to make separate provision

for marking thread was offered the Conference by The Thread Institute, Inc. This proposal was then referred to the Legislative Committee of the Conference for study and recommendations to be

presented at this time.

Your Committee quickly recognized the desirability of incorporating any new requirements on thread into the existing textile section

of the Model Law, to produce a single section dealing with textile

materials. As was pointed out earlier in this report, it was considered extremely important to keep the length of any suggested

legislation at the practicable minimum, as experience has demonstrated that the longer a bill the more difficult it may be to bring

about its enactment. Accordingly, the first effort was to put together

existing provisions of the textile section of the Model Law and the

new proposals, in such a way that all desired requirements might be

included with the greatest brevity consistent with clarity.

While your Committee did not lose sight of the fact that the proposed model thread law prepared by the Thread Institute, Inc., was

referred to it for study and recommendations, it took into consideration the authority which has been given the Committee to present to

the National Conference on Weights and Measures, at any time, suggestions it deems advisable in the field of weights and measures

legislation. Since it is the best judgment of the Committee that a

revised section covering all textile materials should be recommended

for incorporation into the Model Law, this report, containing such a recommendation, is not believed to be inconsistent with the authorization heretofore given.

From the beginning of discussions on a revised textile section, your

Committee has recognized the importance of excluding from the

revision those purely technical and administrative provisions which

should properly be covered by regulations issued under statutory

authority by enforcing officials. It was firmly believed that the re- vised section, like the pattern set throughout the Model Law, should

state general principles and broad requirements, but that technical

details and enforcement procedures should be established in regulations, within the scope of the statute.

The recommendations contained in the report of the Conference

Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, to a very large extent,

have been incorporated into the new textile section to be offered by

your Committee. Notable among these are proper identification of

the product as to the name and place of business of the manufacturer,

packer, or distributor, and the mandatory requirement that thread

sold in units, the net weight of which is less than two avoirdupois

ounces, shall be sold by linear measure. The recommendation of the Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities relating to specific tolerances was not included in your Committee's proposal, but the enforcing official is mandated to include

reasonable tolerances in regulations to be adopted for the enforce-
26 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

ment of the provisions of the section. It is to be presumed that State

enforcement officials will be guided by recommendations of the National Conference in the adoption of regulations which include the

establishment of reasonable tolerances. At this point, it might be

well to stress the fact that this Conference is on record as recommending a tolerance of three percent on threads, based on a test of an aver- age of not less than 10 units of the same type and put-up, to be selected

at random.

It has been pointed out that weights and measures statutes have

been invalidated by the courts because specific tolerances included in

the laws were held to be improper. When this happens, the entire

regulatory program based on such a statute is destroyed, and cannot

be resumed until new legislation is enacted. On the contrary, if

tolerances are merely authorized, to be promulgated by the enforcing

official, and if the tolerances so promulgated are subsequently and

successfully attacked, the basic statutory provisions remain in effect.

It is then only necessary for the enforcing official to promulgate new

tolerances conforming to the mandate of the court, for the program

to continue without serious interruption.

Your Committee does not agree with the argument occasionally

advanced to the effect that the inclusion of tolerances in the Model

Law would be in the interest of greater uniformity. Neither is it in

agreement with those who argue, with respect to the inclusion of toler- ances in the Model Law, that their problems are unique as compared

to others. It should be remembered that legislative bodies have little

time to study -technical phases of legislation and that some highly

desirable feature may be changed in committee or on the floor to meet

the whim of someone not qualified to influence such a decision. It would seem much more logical for trained enforcement officials, acting

on the experience and best judgment of the National Conference on

Weights and Measures, to adopt and promulgate such technical

requirements.

A reduction of the recognized tolerance on thread from five percent

to three percent as brought about by the last Conference, largely

through the efforts of the Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, serves as a testimonial to the argument that specific tolerances

should never be set out in weights and measures legislation. With a

definite trend toward refinement in the mechanics of weighing and

measuring, this Conference should hold steadfast to the position it has

taken of insisting on a reduction of tolerances wherever practicable.

While no further reduction in thread tolerances is known to be con- templated, nevertheless, the desirability of leaving such matters to

enforcement officials, benefiting from experience and the advice of

technical experts, is clearly evident.

In your Committee's effort to draft an acceptable revision of the

textile section of the Model Law on Weights and Measures, a vote of

thanks is due the thread industry for the splendid cooperation re- ceived. The Committees on Legislation of both The Thread Institute,

Inc., and the National Conference on Weights and Measures began

work on the proposed section shortly after adjournment of the ThirtyFourth National Conference. While there were several differences

of opinion at the beginning, each group made a number of concessions

before the proposal to be presented was agreed upon at a joint meeting
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 27

of the Committee and representatives of The Thread Institute, Inc.,

held in Providence, Khode Island, on September 6, 1949. However, in

all fairness to the Thread Institute, Inc., it should be mentioned that

this organization has reviewed its position and now appears to favor

the adoption, by the Conference, of (1) a section in the Model State

Law on Weights and Measures covering thread marking with the inclusion of specific tolerances, or (2) a revision of the present textile

section including such tolerances.

Since the proposal being submitted calls for a revision of the present

Model Law and the subject matter has been given careful consideration during previous Conferences, your Committee recommends final

adoption at this time. The following is the text of the recommended

revised section of the Model Law pertaining to textiles

:

TEXTILE SECTION

MODEL STATE LAW ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

It shall be unlawful to keep for the purpose of sale, offer or expose for sale, or sell any textile yard goods put up or packaged in advance of sale in a bolt or

roll, or any other textile product put up or packaged in advance of sale in any

other unit, for either wholesale or retail sale, unless such bolt or roll, or such

other unit, be definitely, plainly, and conspicuously marked to show its net measure in terms of yards or its net weight in terms of avoirdupois pounds and/or

ounces, subject, however, to the following limitations and requirements

:

Any unit of twine or cordage may be marked to show its net measure in

terms of feet. Ready-wound bobbins which are not sold separately shall not

be required to be individually marked, but the package containing such bobbins

shall be marked to show the number of bobbins contained therein and the net

weight or measure of the thread on each bobbin. Any unit of sewing, basting,

mending, darning, crocheting, tatting, hand-knitting, or embroidery thread or yarn except nylon hand-knitting yarn, which is not composed in whole or in

part of wool, the net weight of which is less than two ounces avoirdupois, shall

be marked to show its net measure in terms of yards as unwound from the ball or from the spool or other holder. Any retail unit of a textile product, sold only

for household use, consisting of a package containing two or more similar individual units, which are not sold separately, shall be marked to show the number

of individual units in the package and the net weight or net measure of the

product in each individual unit, but this proviso shall not apply where the individual units are separately marked. Any unit of yarn, composed in whole

or in part of wool, sold to consumers for handiwork shall be marked to show the

net weight of such yarn except that any such unit of tapestry, mending, or embroidery yarn, the net measure of which does not exceed fifty yards, may be

marked to show its linear measure only.

The marking required by this section shall in all cases be in combination

with the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor

of the product, or a trade-mark, symbol, brand, or other mark which positively

identifies such manufacturer, packer, or distributor.

Reasonable tolerances shall be permitted, and these shall be included in regulations for the enforcement of the provisions of this section which shall

be issued by the State Superintendent (Commissioner).

The provisions of this section shall not apply to the following textile products

when sold at wholesale in bulk by net weight :Cordage, agricultural bag sewing

threads, twines, yarns which are to be processed, and yarns which are to be

industrially converted into end use products.

R.. E. Meek, Chairman,

C. A. Bakek,

J. A. Bernakd,

J. R. Booth,

F. C. Yaebkough,

Committee on Legislation.

904381—50 4
28 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Mr. Meek. Mr. Chairman, I move the adoption of that portion of

the Committee's report which pertains to textile legislation.

(The motion was seconded.)

Mr. Batjcom. Do you provide for the labeling of the bobbin upon

which the thread is wound ? Some time ago we had occasion to investigate short measure of thread, and there was no way of identifying

the party responsible for winding the thread upon the spool or bobbin.

Mr. Meek. The section provides that, "The marking required by

this section shall in all cases be in combination with the name and

place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor of the

product, or a trade-mark, symbol, brand, or other mark which positively identifies such manufacturer, packer, or distributor." I should

like to call on Mr. John Bell, Chairman of the Legislation Committee

of the Thread Institute, Inc., to tell us what is the general practice in

the industry.

Mr. Bell (Thread Institute, Inc.) . The point raised by Mr. Baucom

is important, because up to this time there has not been any requirement for a mark of identification to be placed on a spool of thread.

Since last year Massachusetts and New Jersey have enacted thread

laws embodying, I should say, 95 percent of the wording of this pro*

posed bill, and I feel confident that within the next year at least two

other States will pass similar legislation.

(There being no further discussion, the question was taken and the motion was agreed to. Thus the Report of the Committee on Legislation was adopted

by the Conference without amendment.)

A REPORT FROM THE NATIONAL SCALE MEN'S ASSOCIATION

By J. H. Downer, Secretary, National Scale Men's Association

It has become a custom to invite the Secretary of the National Scale

Men's Association to make a report to you gentlemen here assembled,

and as far as I can see, being the Secretary is the only qualification for

my being present and speaking to you.

There are now three organizations which are closely allied in

weights and measures work : Your National and State Bureaus of

Standards, the National Association of Scale Manufacturers, and

the National Scale Men's Association. The members of the National

Association of Scale Manufacturers build the scales, the Bureaus of

Standards establish performance and specifications, and the National

Scale Men's Association make the product of the first meet the

demands of the second.

It has been one of the aims of the National Scale Men's Association

to further general education with reference to scale maintenance, practice, et cetera. Since the earliest stages of scale usage, there has been

a lack of material and too great a secrecy with reference to the craft.

Until very recently scale men have guarded very jealously the knowledge they gained in their practice throughout the years. It has only

been within the last decade, Avhen the need for better scale service and

more adequate performance was a demand, that cooperation and the

exchange of information became common practice. Even now, sources

of information are not what they should be. There is as yet no class

at any of our schools that deals with the subject of scales and weights
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 29

and measures. There is no textbook on the subject. What literature

is available is written either in too generalized a form or is generally

incomprehensive to the layman.

Today the scale industry embraces innumerable industries and

becomes more diversified with each passing clay. Interdepartmental

records, inventory controls, cost accounting, wage scales, and innumerable bookkeeping practices, as well as the age-old buying and sell- ing by weight, are determined and based on information secured from

scales. In some phase of every industry on the face of this earth,

weights and measures directly affects every product and every individual. In some way, shape, or form, everything from clothing, food,

equipment, and housing is directly related to weights and measures,

and yet no one craft has less general information relative to it. As

industry progresses, the need for better and faster weighing equipment becomes paramount. Scale manufacturers realize this and are constantly striving to improve the equipment and better maintain that

equipment. As these improvements become actualities, it is necessary

that the personnel in the scale industry be acquainted with them in

order to properly service and maintain them. This information, as developed, should become common information and should be accessible to you, who are in that phase of the craft. We know of no better

outlet than through the National Scale Men's Association. But only

through the cooperation of the manufacturers, the Bureaus of Standards, and various weights and measures departments throughout the

country, and the service personnel in the industry, will it become possible for us to make this modern equipment perform to the requirements of the various functionaries.

The National Scale Men's Association has what we feel is a very well

selected educational committee, and it is their intention to compile

information in a very complete form so that anyone interested in any

phase of scale work will have available text-book material, practical

information, and theoretical information of "Scaleology". In the

past, glossaries of scale terms have been published, and some papers

read before various meetings, formulas have been shown for various

lever ratios, and scaling practices have been explained, but it has

been in an ancient form, that is, by word of mouth—nothing in general

library reference work and made available to any and all. We hope through our Committee on Education to have the cooperation of all three previously mentioned associations—and to be able

to assist in no small way in arriving at a standardization of specifications and laws, codes and construction, performance and practices.

With the establishment of standards, there must, too, be standards

of craftsmanship in all groups. It is not sufficient that aptitude of

tool usage be enough recommendations for an individual to proclaim

himself qualified to service and repair scale equipment. There have

never been enough competent scale men available. Education can and

will eradicate this shortage and each of us will profit by it. So again—we must ask for the cooperation of all groups for better

education—and we shall—beyond all question and doubt—benefit and

prosper—both individually and collectively.

The Chairman. At this point I will recognize the Secretary,, to

make an announcement.
30 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The Secretary. I wish to report the receipt of a telegram from

Mr. R. O. Russell, Chief of the State Division of Weights and Measures of Alabama, reading as follows

National Bureau of Standards Handbook H44 adopted by citation by State

Board of Agriculture and Industry.

Also, Mr. Meek, Chairman of the Conference Committee on Nominations, wishes me to announce an open session of his Committee at

5 p. m. tomorrow, at which time the Committee will entertain suggestions from the membership of the Conference with respect to

nominations for office in this organization.

DUTIES OF AN INSPECTOR IN A SERVICE STATION

By W. B. Heaslip, Supervising Inspector of Weights and Measures,

City of Detroit, Mich.

When I was asked by the Secretary of this Conference, Mr. Ralph

Smith, to prepare a paper on "Duties of an Inspector in a Service

Station," I was pleased that he selected a representative from Detroit

to prepare it, and I was particularly pleased that he chose this important subject for me to discuss.

The function of a service station is to sell gasoline, oil, grease, alcohol, accessories, and service to owners of all makes of automobiles

from all parts of the country; therefore, the duties of an inspector

in Detroit should not differ from the duties of an inspector in Maine,

Texas, or California.

Our duties in a service station are to inspect and test all liquid measuring devices used in the measuring of gasoline, oil, and grease, all

liquid capacity measures and lubricating-oil bottles used for measuring

oil and alcohol, to advise the owner on what type of equipment is best

suited for his particular needs, to instruct the operators on the proper

methods of using and maintaining the equipment, and to see that a purchaser of any commodity, sold by measure in the service station,

receives the amount he is paying for.

It is not necessary for an inspector to know all the intricacies of a modern gasoline pump, such as the pumping unit, the pressure relief

valve, the by-pass valves, the air eliminator, or the meter itself, but I

believe that an understanding of some of the fundamental principles

of their operation is essential if intelligent tests are to be applied.

This information is not too difficult to obtain. The Bureau of Standards publications carry much essential information, the Scale Journal is very helpful and literature published by the pump manufacturers is a very good source. I have been privileged, on occasions, to

work with meter engineers and servicemen from the oil companies,

in the testing of liquid-measuring devices. The information gained

through this contact is invaluable. The engineer's test is usually

under ideal conditions, a so-called "laboratory test," the result being

what a pump should do when all the component parts are co-ordinated

and are working perfectly. The servicemen's test tells you what the

pump actually does when it is placed in service. This is the type of

lest that we are interested in.

When an inspector enters a modern service station, the gasoline

pumps should receive his first attention, not because they are any more
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 31

important to us than the other measuring equipment, but their inspection and test is more time-consuming and it is well to get that portion of our inspection completed first. Modern computing pumps are

all alike in principle. The design and construction varies with the different makes, but for our purpose the fundamental principles are

identical.

Before the pump is given the test for accuracy, it should be given a preliminary inspection for possible violations of the H44 Code of

Specifications. Listed below are some of the more important items

of inspections, each in itself very essential to the correct operation of

the pump.

1. The pnmp must be in level position and fastened securely on its platform.

2. There must be no leaks in the nozzle, hose, visigauge, or meter. This can

readily be detected by the presence of air in the visigauge.

3. All numerals and indicating graduations must be clean and legible.

4. The indicators must line up with the zero graduations and must be of such

a design that an accurate reading is given.

5. The indicating elements must be at least 36 inches above the floor or driveway.

6. The indicating elements must be returnable to a positive stop at zero, and

during this forward motion the shutters must keep all numerals covered.

7. The rate of flow, as recommended by the manufacturer,' must appear on

the dial.

8. The price per gallon must be prominently displayed on the dial of a computing pump.

9. The value of the smallest graduation on the money-value chart must be one cent up to 30 cents per gallon.

10. A thorough inspection of the pump should be made for any attachment

which might be conducive to inaccurate measure or to the perpetration of fraud.

It will require little time for the experienced inspector to make the

above inspections. He will quickly acquire the habit of checking

these points automatically, but the new inspector should carry a list of

the specifications and check them one by one to insure that nothing

is forgotten.

It is to be expected that different inspectors will have diverse ideas

on how a modern gasoline pump should be tested for accuracy. It is

my opinion that the following procedure will tell an inspector all he is

required to know in order for him to approve or condemn a pump on

an accuracy test in a periodic inspection of a service station.

1. One draw of 1 gallon at normal speed.

2. Two draws of 5 gallons at normal speed.

3. One draw of 5 gallons at slow speed.

The purpose of the 1-gallon draw is to determine the amount of

error resulting from the pump standing idle for a period of time. A

5-gallon draw will tell you the same thing, but I choose a 1-gallon

draw to save time. The result of this test determines whether or not

the pump is to be given an elapsed-time test, which I will discuss

later.

The first 5-gallon draw at normal speed tells you the amount the

pump is actually delivering with the whole system primed. The sec- ond 5-gallon draw at the same speed is to determine if the pump is

repeating its performance. If an error exists in these tests, it could

be from one or more of several causes, such as a faulty air eliminator

allowing the air to be measured by the meter, a worn cylinder wall

from the presence of grit or tank scale, hardened leathers caused by
32 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

the presence of water in the system, or the meter might be just out of

adjustment.

At this point is the easiest spot on the dial to check the computing

mechanism. The Unit-Price Indication on the dial is usually in

tenth-cents, such as "28 7/10 cents per gallon." With ten gallons already showing on the dial, the money value should be $2.87. If a

different amount appears, the pump is not computing at the rate of

28TV cents per gallon.

The last 5-gallon draw, at slow speed, is a special test to determine

how much slippage of gasoline through the meter is taking place without actually being measured. The speed recommended for this test

is 5 gallons per minute unless it is stated on the dial that accuracy is maintained at any speed. If this is the case, the pump could be tested

at a slower rate. The tolerance is no greater for this test than it is at

normal speed.

It is now time to check the anti-drain valve. This is a springloaded valve installed in or just ahead of the nozzle. Its function is to hold all the liquid in the hose when the pressure has been shut off. If a pump had no anti-drain valve, the operator could drain the hose

when the pump was idle by simply opening the hand nozzle valve,

with the result that the next customer would receive short measure,

equivalent to the amount removed from the hose. To test this feature

requires very little time. When the pressure is shut off, simply open

the hand-nozzle valve and see if the liquid will run out. If any liquid

comes out, the pump should be condemned. I mention that this test should be made at this time rather than before the accuracy test is begun because if the anti-drain is defective, some of the liquid would

drain out of the hose and the accuracy of your first 1-gallon draw

would be affected.

It is not necessary to give all pumps an elapsed-time test. If the

pump is within tolerance on the first draw and the visigauge is free

of air, a time test may be forgotten. When air is present in the visigauge a time test is usually necessary, or when the first draw is short

and the second draw is within tolerance, a time test should be given.

This error may be due to several causes, but usually it is a leak, either

in the hose-nozzle valve, the pressure relief valve, the visigauge gasket,

the needle valve, or it could be caused by a rapid change of temperature. To make this test, the inspector must draw a definite amount of

gasoline (usually 5 gallons) through the pump and note the reading

on his test measure. The pump is then locked and put out of service

for a certain period of time (usually one or two hours) . The pump is

then made to register the same amount as the first test indicated, and

the reading on the test measure is again noted. The difference in these

two readings is the error in the time test. The tolerance to be allowed

is 2 cubic inches per hour.

The pumps have passed the preliminary inspection and are within

the tolerances on the accuracy test, so our approval sticker is placed

on the dial inside the pump housing. This seal carries the name of

the bureau, also a message to the public that this device was tested and

found legally accurate for commercial use on May 23, 1950, or whatever the date of test may be.

Should any of the pumps fail to pass the preliminary inspection, or

fail to come within the tolerances, as set forth in the H44 Handbook,
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 33

the device should be condemned for repair. A condemnation tag

carrying all the reasons why the pump was condemned is placed in a conspicuous spot on the pump with a lead and wire seal.

If the inaccuracy of the pump would seriously affect a delivery to a

customer, service from this pump would be discontinued until such

time as the proper repairs were made ; however, if the needed repairs

Avere minor and it would be a hardship on the owner of the station to

have the pump out of service, we would allow him to use the pump,

providing he Avould have the necessary repairs made in a reasonable

length of time.

It has been suggested that the inspector should adjust the meter

when the test shows it to be a little out of tolerance, in order to save himself a trip back for a second test. I would strongly advise against

this procedure. An adjustment may correct the error temporarily,

but I do not believe that the average inspector is required to have, or

has, sufficient knowledge of the inner workings of the pump to diagnose

the trouble correctly, when experienced servicemen often make several

trips before the real trouble is corrected.

There has been much discussion over the year on the advisability

of sealing the adjustment on a gasoline pump when the test shows

the pump to be correct. There are good arguments for and against

this procedure. In our territory we have not found it necessary to

seal these adjustments. If, by this procedure, the public would be

guaranteed full measure, it would be made a requirement, but there

are other features on a modern pump that may be manipulated by an

operator with fraudulent intent, which could be conducive to a greater

short measure than the mechanical adjustment. Pump accuracy is

not always maintained by operators having the best of intentions.

Conditions do arise which affect the accuracy of the pump whether it

is sealed or unsealed, so for these reasons, we feel that nothing is gained by sealing the adjustment.

When complaints of short measure against a service station operator

are received, we immediately recheck his equipment. If his equipment

is correct, we check the operator for incorrect use of correct apparatus.

This is done by making a purchase in the same fashion as a regular

customer would buy gasoline. Our car is equipped with a special

auxiliary tank which is always empty when the delivery is begun.

After the delivery is completed the tank is drained through a special

valve, and measured in our test measures. If short measure occurs, the

case is handled in the same way as any other violation involving weight

or measure. Grease-measuring devices are inspected and tested much in the same

manner as the gasoline pumps ; however, with the absence of the computing feature, the preliminary inspection will require very little

time. Listed below are some of the more important items of inspection

as required by the H44 Code.

1. The value of the graduations on the dial must be one pint, a multiple of a

pint, or a binary submultiple of a pint.

2. The indicator may not be moved forward manually.

3. There must be a positive stop at zero.

4. Means shall be provided for making the device inoperable when the

exhaustion of supply of the liquid takes place.

5. A thorough inspection of the device should be made for any attachment

which might be conducive to inaccurate measure or to the perpetration of fraud.
34 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

An accuracy test is given by the use of a one pint and a two quart

test measure. To test the exhaustion of a supply feature, the liquid

in the supply tank must be reduced to a level, a few inches above the

bottom of the supply tank. The device is then put into operation until

the float is no longer in the liquid. If the indicator stops at this point,

this feature is performing its function.

The device has passed the preliminary inspection and is within

tolerance on the accuracy test so the device may be approved.

Liquid capacity measures and lubricating-oil bottles receive our

next attention. Many methods of test and inspection of these measures

are used in different jurisdictions, but we in Detroit believe that we

have the best method of any that has been brought to our attention.

This method might well be considered by new weights and measures

departments.

Our law requires that all measures shall be tested and sealed by our bureau before being used commercially. It is impractical for the field

inspector to carry with him the delicate equipment necessary to test liquid measures, and conditions in a service station are such that a good test cannot be given, so for these reasons, the proper place to test liquid measures is in our own laboratory.

Ninety percent of all new measures sold in Detroit are brought to our office for test, by the wholesale houses, before they are sold to the

service stations. When the wholesaler receives a shipment, he immediately sends the whole shipment to us for test. This is not a requirement," but, by doing this, he saves the purchasers of the measures

many trips to our office to have them sealed, and soon realizes that he

is selling more measures by having them sealed before sale to the

service station. Our interest in this system is, however, that if for

some reason the measures are not approved, the whole shipment is

immediately sent back to the manufacturer, or disposed of for other

than commercial use. In our test and inspection of liquid measures, we adhere strictly to

the HM Specifications and Tolerances. They must be of sufficient

strength so they will not become indented through ordinary use ; they

must be one of the legal capacities; the capacity marking must be

correct and legible ; the capacity must be within the tolerance ; and if

all the other specifications are complied with, we seal the measure with

a power press with the letter "D" for Detroit and the last two figures

of the year, such as "50" for the year 1950. This seal is always put on

in the same place, on the same type of measure, for easier identification, and it is good for the life of the measure. Oil bottles are inspected and sealed much in the same manner, except that an electric

etcher, with a diamond point, is used.

When an inspector starts his inspection of liquid measures and oil

bottles in the service station, much of the work has already been done.

Any that are found to be unsealed are cleaned by the operator and

taken to our laboratory for test. If all are sealed, the oil bottles are inspected for proper fill and the liquid measures are inspected for

indentations. No other inspection is necessary except that illegal

sizes, such as the 5 and 6 quart measures, are immediately removed

from service.

A complete record is made of all the equipment tested and the result

of each test. Reasons are given why a device is condemned. The time
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 35

limit allowed for repairs and the operator's name who received our

instructions are noted. A duplicate copy of this report is made and

through the filing system in our office we are notified when the reinspection is due, which is usually between 7 and 10 days. This duplicate

copy is then taken back to the service station to see if all the corrections

have been made.

Our duties in a service station should not end with the approval

of all the measuring equipment. Too often the station operator has

never been instructed on what is required of him under the local laws.

His source of information is limited on how best to operate and maintain the equipment. Much valuable information is gained by the

inspector in making his daily inspections, which puts him in a position to give constructive advice to the owner of the station. The

inspector should never miss an opportunity to impart this information,

because by so doing he is fostering a cooperative spirit between the

service station and the weights and measures office. Before leaving the station we find it helpful to leave a little instruction card with a message to the operators of the equipment. It bears

the name, address, and phone number of our Division and contains

the following information

:

As a gasoline station operator, we wish you to know that good weights and

measures practices require

:

1. That your pump must always start exactly at zero.

2. That indicators on pumps must be returned to the zero position before

starting a delivery.

3. That your pumps should be tested the first thing each day.

4. That the visigauge and numerals be kept clean.

5. That all liquid and oil measures must be tested and sealed before being

used. (This is done at our office without charge.)

6. That you do not use a pump which seems faulty. Call your service department immediately and then report the matter to the above Division.

As we go about our duties day after day, telling businessmen what

their obligations are, and what they must and must not do, I believe

we sometimes lose sight of the fact that we too have obligations to the

businessmen and to the manufacturers of weighing and measuring

equipment. I will give three examples

:

1. Five- and Six-Quart Liquid Measures: As all of you know, our H44 Code

prohibits the commercial use of five- and six-quart measures. When this specification was written there was no real need for a size other than today's legal sizes. For more than twenty years automobiles have been built with crankcase capacities of five and six quarts. All the popular makes of cars today, except Ford,

have a capacity of five or six quarts. In order to change oil in one of these

cars, if he is using liquid measures, the operator must use a four and a one

quart or a four and a two quart measure, if he is to stay within the law. I have

been asked on numerous occasions why we do not allow these measures to be

used, and frankly, gentlemen, up to this time, I have been unable to give them

a satisfactory answer. It is their belief that it hinges on a nuisance requirement, which produces nothing in benefits to consumer- welfare. They need and

are asking for measures of these capacities.

2. Type Approval: It is my opinion that when a manufacturer makes a measure

that is approved in one or several States, who have adopted the H44 specifications, he has a perfect right to assume that it should be approved by all the

States who have adopted these same specifications. Recently a questionnaire was

sent to three different States, who enjoy very good weights and measures supervision, asking if they would approve one certain type measure. One already had

approved it in his jurisdiction, one would not allow it in his territory, and the

other was not familiar with the measure sufficiently to pass judgment. I can

see no good reason why type approval should be handled differently than toler-
36 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

ances or any other H44 specification. When conflicting opinions exist, among officials well up in weights and measures supervision, my suggestion is that the

decision should be made at the National Conference level.

3. Type Approval Markings on Measures: I have always believed that any

approval stamp on a measure should be placed there by a weights and measures

official, and also, that an approval stamp should not be put on the measure unless

the measure conforms, not only to the H44 specifications, but to the tolerances as well. When a manufacturer is given permission by a State or city to make

a measure with an approval seal stamped on it, the measures are shipped to all parts of the country without the officers who issue the permit ever testing or see- ing the measures. We, as weights and measures officers, know that the stamp

is for type only, but the purchaser believes the capacity must be correct, when

they have all these approval stamps on them. Many times they are not correct. At the present time, we have in our office several cases of new measures, which we have found to be as much as twelve drams short. The tolerance is two drams.

These measures have stamped on them the approval stamp of three or four

States or cities. I would not like to see measures such as these being shipped all over the country, bearing our seal of approval.

We have splendid equipment in our service stations in Detroit. Our

methods of test and procedure have proven very successful and it is

hoped that by this paper and the discussion which may follow, we can

arrive at one ideal procedure for an inspector to follow, from the time

of his entry into the service station until his departure therefrom.

This should result in better uniformity and greater efficiency.

DUTIES OF AN INSPECTOR IN A RETAIL FOOD STORE

By F. M. Greene, Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Commission,

State of Connecticut

At the request of your secretary, I have prepared a paper for delivery at this Conference in which an endeavor will be made to outline

the duties of a weights and measures inspector in making a periodic

inspection of a typical modern retail food store or supermarket.

The inspector's responsibility is to make sure that the w-eighing and

measuring devices weigh accurately and the methods used in the

weighing of prepackaged meats, cheese, fruits, and vegetables are correct, and that all commercial transactions are based on accurate

weight, measure, or numerical count.

It is necessary for the inspector to devote a considerable portion of

his time to reweighing prepackaged food items, especially those prepacked at the store from bulk stocks. It is necessary that frequent

reweighings of representative samples of the various food items and

commodities sold in this form be made, and time spent in the reweighing of prepackaged commodities will assure the customer that correct

weights and computations will be received when purchases are made.

Special prepack scales are used in the weighing of prepacked items.

They are designed and operated to balance out the tare weight of the

package or wrapping material before weighing the commodity and

computing the cost of the net weight of the commodity weighed. An

inspector should be familiar with the operation of prepackaging as well as computing scales. He should have sufficient knowledge on the

operation of other types of weighing and measuring devices used in

these stores. In testing computing and other types of scales found in a modern

food store, each scale should be examined carefully by the inspector

to ascertain if it is functioning properly. Finding no difficulty in its
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 37

operation, he proceeds to test its zero balance. The scale should be

tested from zero load forward to its maximum capacity. A backcheck should then be made from capacity load to zero load with shift

tests of load at capacity and half-load. During the applying of test loads, he must assure himself that the scale is registering properly on

the customer's side as well as the salesman's side. Computations of

prices at various loads must be verified to assure the inspector that the

scale is operating within tolerance. To avoid moving back and forth

from behind the counter to the front of the scale, which consumes much

time, the assistance of a second man in this work is a great benefit.

The following procedure is recommended to the weights and measures inspector entering a retail store for routine inspection, from the

time of his entry into the place of business until his departure from

the store. Upon entering the front door of the store, the inspector must be

observant at all times. While in the store he must be on the lookout

for short weight and improperly labeled packages as well as for inaccurate weighing and measuring devices. Not all violations found

are intentional. Some may be clue to ignorance or carelessness. Any

action taken by the inspector depends on the results of his investigation

and the use of his best possible judgment. He should never "jump to

conclusions" but listen to both sides of every question or dispute, weigh

the evidence, and then make an accurate decision.

His first move is to locate the person or persons in charge, and make

his presence and the purpose of his visit known. In most cases, his

visit will be welcomed, provided it is at a time when the store is not

crowded. Following a discussion of his visit with the person in charge

of the store, he will proceed to test the scales throughout the store

including those in the basement and other parts of the building and

also the prepackaging scales located in the sections used for prepackaging meats, cheese, and other commodities.

Moving to the first section on the right side of the store, he finds

himself in the candy department. As a rule all candy on sale is prepackaged and none weighed at time of sale. He will examine the

packages for improper labeling, weighing representative samples of

the various kinds on display, especially those packages prepacked on

the premises. For purposes of verification of weights, a scale in the

adjoining section of the store will be used but not before it has been

tested by him for accuracy.

Moving to the next section of the store, which in this instance is

the fruits and vegetables section, the inspector proceeds to check all

approved types of scales found in this department. He will seal those

found to be within tolerance and condemn for repairs the scales found

to be inaccurate, stating his intention of returning to test these when

he has been notified that the scales have been repaired.

Following the testing of all the scales in the fruit and vegetable

section, he proceeds to weigh up representative samples of prepackaged fruits, nuts, and vegetables found in this section. He will also

examine packages for improperly labeled commodities, including both

the price computation and weight markings on the packages. Finding errors in weight, pricing or in improper labeling, he will notify

the person in charge to correct the errors immediately or remove
38 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

from sale any such commodity which he finds is being sold in violation of the State laws or regulations.

Next he moves into the dairy section, where he tests any and all

scales found here. A check is made for improper labeling of all prepacked products sold in this department, and the weights and price

computations are verified on samples of these items. Included with

these food items are milk, eggs, butter, cheese, etc. Items found in the frozen food section should be checked and ex- amined for improper labeling, together with the verification of declared weights.

Moving into the bakery counter no scale is used there so the weights

of bread, cakes, cookies, etc. must be verified by the use of scales

previously checked in other departments. A check-up for improper

labeling is made in this section.

He next moves into the meat and fish department where he finds

nearly all the meat and fish on display in prepackaged form. First he

will test the prepack scales used in this section, determining the accu- racy of each, condemning for repairs those found inaccurate and sealing those found within tolerance. Representative samples of different prepackaged meats, fish, and fowl will be tested for weight,

improper labeling, and price computations. A considerable portion

of the time spent in the store will be consumed in the weighing and

examining of the samples of the many food items prepacked for sale

in this section of the store. Upon the completion of the inspection of the meat department, he

will then proceed to the grocery section, and weigh and inspect for

improper labeling all products which he finds there that appear

doubtful to him.

After he has completed his inspection and has tested all weighing

and measuring devices in use at the store, he should make out a report

on his findings. Following a discussion of this report with the per- son in charge of the store, he will request him to sign the report,

and a copy is given to him for reference and file. If repairs or changes must be made in equipment or methods used,

the inspector reminds the proper attendants that he expects them

to be completed in ten days, at which time he will return to check up

on recommendations made in his report.

Having made his report in triplicate, he forwards the original to

his office, and keeps a duplicate for his own file and future reference.

Me. J. T. Kennedy. On prepackaged commodities where there is

bleeding, do you consider the blood as a part of the net weight ? In

the case of frozen lobster tails, when defrosting occurs there is water

in the package ; is this water part of the net weight ? Mr. Greene. With respect to the blood, my answer would be "Yes."

I am not sure about the water—I am not an authority on that—but if

this has not leaked out the package weight should not be changed.

I might mention that a concern in New Haven bought some imported

frogs' legs. The cases were labeled to show a contents of 30 pounds.

The dealer bought fourteen cases, but this commodity does not sell

in too much volume and he could open only -one case at a time. When

the contents of a case was thawed out, it weighed 21 pounds. How do

you handle these situations ?
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 39

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. I require that the declarations be changed.

In many places frozen foods are placed on stands, and they defrost

;

part of the resulting water is absorbed into the tray and part lies loose

in the package.

The Chairman. When Mr. Kennedy speaks of such items as water

and blood, I think the point is that if these are considered as edible

food they are included in the weight. For example, certain canned

hams are packed in gelatin ; if the can is opened and the gelatin scraped

off, there may be a loss of % of a pound, but the gelatin is edible food.

Mr. Ising. What about wrapped hams? The Federal ruling is

that the weight must be shown on the package.

The Chairman. In our State, they must be stripped at the time

of sale and sold by net weight. I think you will find that there are about 6 ounces of paper on the ham. The dealer cannot sell paper

for 59 cents a pound, but he must unwrap the ham and weigh it net. Mr. J. T. Kennedy. In Washington we have required dealers to

strike off all weight indications on hams and weigh them at the time

of retail sale.

Mr. Trhple. Is it in your law, Mr. Chairman, that a dealer must

take the wrapper off a wrapped ham ? The Chairman. We proceed under our general net-weight law.

(At this point, at 4: 40 p. m., the Conference adjourned, to meet at 10 a. in. Wednesday, May 24, 1950.
THIRD SESSION—MORNING OF WEDNESDAY,

MAY 24, 1950

(The Conference reassembled at 10:05 a. ni., A. J. Jensen, Vice President of

the Conference, presiding.)

REPORT OF THE SPECIAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM

REGULATIONS, PRESENTED BY R. D. THOMPSON, CHAIRMAN

At the outset may I ask the indulgence of the Conference for the

brevity of this report and the seemingly few recommendations which

the committee has to offer. As you know, Mr. J. W. Reese, of Iowa,

was originally appointed chairman of this committee, but had to

resign due to ill health and the press of other duties. The present

chairman was appointed by Dr. Condon as of February 8, 1950.

This left a comparatively short time for a comprehensive study of

this subject.

In reviewing the paper of Mr. Lewis E. Witt, presented at the

34th National Conference entitled, "Uniformity of Interpretation

and Enforcement," it was apparently his idea that a Standing Committee be appointed to draft model regulations, to be promulgated

under the Model Law, for adoption or rejection by the Conference

and that if such regulations were adopted that they might serve as models for the several States in promulgating similar regulations.

These regulations are not to be confused with those pertaining to

commercial weighing and measuring devices, as contained in Handbook H44, but rather would be confined to the field of sales of

commodities and interpretation of other phases of the law.

However, the resolution which called for the creation of this committee apparently conceived the duty of the committee to be, and I

quote, "to gather and present to the 35th Conference on Weights and

Measures a program of ideas and examples of regulations that may

be used by weights and measures officials." Therefore, the Committee does not feel it was created as a standing committee and has

chosen to offer a few suggestions which we feel pertinent, also to

suggest certain principles to be followed in the promulgation of

regulations.

It was felt that the first step of the Committee should be to con- duct a survey to determine the number and type of regulations in

force in the several States and principal cities in the United States.

Hence a form letter was sent to weights and measures officials in each

of the 48 States and to 19 cities and counties assumed to be active

in this field. Replies were received from 31 States and from 10

cities. Seven States replying had no regulations other than those

pertaining to weighing and measuring devices ; of the remaining 24,

regulations varied from a minimum of 1 to a maximum of 34.

Apparently only one of the cities, Washington, D. C, promulgates

regulations as such, but many of them enforce State regulations and

have a variety of ordinances which are similar in many respects to

the State regulations.

It is evident that regulations are looked on with more favor by the

courts in some States than in others. The language of the basic

40
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 41

weights and measures law is broader in some States than in others,

and likewise the interpretation of the law varies from State to State,

and one might say somewhat from court to court.

The Committee wishes at this point to show some of the disadvantages as well as advantages of enforcement by regulation. We are of

the opinion that an official who takes out a warrant for a violation

under a specific section of the law stands a much better chance of obtaining a conviction in the average court throughout the country than

he would on a regulation promulgated under the same section of the

law. However, if the regulation has the backing of the National

Conference and the recommendation of the National Bureau of Standards, his chances for a conviction of violation of a regulation would be

improved materially, particularly if the State has the Model Law.

Regulations have the distinct advantage of being more flexible than

laws. If it appears that a regulation, after due trial, is impractical or undesirable, it may be changed or repealed without recourse to

legislative channels. It is also possible to enact through regulation

many desirable and more or less technical matters, that would never

live through a legislative committee loaded with work and limited

through lack of time for proper consideration. A case in point is our

specifications, tolerances, and regulations for weighing and measuring

devices. How many of you would guarantee to pilot this document

through your State legislature in the form of a bill, and have anything

workable left ? Regulations may and should be expressed in simpler and clearer

language than is necessary in a law. It is also desirable that regulations be as brief as possible; however, if another sentence or paragraph serves to clarify a point, it should be inserted.

The committee also recommends some other principles which we feel

should be followed in drafting regulations.

First, the regulation should bear a number, and clear, brief, descriptive title at the top of the page. This should be followed by stating

the authority for its promulgation as "Authority: Section 1485 (19)

Chap. 61—Code of Va. 1920," this to be followed by the effective date

as, "Effective : January 19, 1950." It is noted that some States follow

the practice of quoting the specific act authorizing the regulation.

This would seem to be a good practice and might be followed to advantage. You will of course want to be guided in such matters by

your legal advisor and the custom in your respective States.

Second, some regulations deal with matters of a more or less local

nature or peculiar to certain sections of the country. If the problem

to be regulated is also a problem in adjoining States, it would be wise

to consult your neighboring officials and see what action, if any, they

have taken or plan to take on the problem. It is also important to be

sure that your regulation is not in conflict with regulations of other

enforcement agencies in your own State, such as Health Departments,

Dairy and Food Divisions, Pharmacy Boards, etc., or with some

Federal regulation.

Third, it is recommended that in those States which have authority

under the law to regulate methods of sales of commodities, a careful

study of the Reports of the National Conference Committee on this

subject be made. Officials drafting such regulations may be materially aided by following the recommendations of this committee,

which appear in the Conference Reports over a long period of years.
42 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Many States having adequate Weights and Measures Laws include

a Net Container Act, i. e., an act requiring that all packaged goods

bear a declaration of net contents. This act, in all instances where

the model law has been followed, contains a provision that "reasonable variations or tolerances and also exemptions as to small packages

shall be established by rules and regulations."

Most of these States have enacted some sort of regulations under

this act, and there is as much lack of uniformity in these as can be

imagined. Some States have set up a long list of commodity tolerances, others a flat percentage basis, and in many it is specified that

the variation in weight be as often over as under.

This Net Container Act in the State laws parallels similar sections

in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, with the chief differ- ence being that the Federal Act applies only to packages of foods,

drugs, cosmetics, whereas some State Net Container Acts cover all

commodities.

The Federal Food and Drug Administration has promulgated a comprehensive regulation under the act, and all foods, drugs, and cos- metics in packaged form which move into interstate commerce are

subject to the provisions of this regulation. While as individuals we

may not agree with this regulation, or may have a better idea, it is a

fact that such products manufactured or packed in our respective

States which pass into interstate commerce are subject to the Federal

requirements. From the standpoint of sound business practice, adoption of similar regulations seems desirable. Thus any manufacturer,

distributor, or packer would be assured that if his product met the

requirements of the Federal regulation it would also be acceptable to

the State, and vice versa. Further the States would have the advantage of calling on the Federal Food and Drug Administration for interpretation of certain sections of their regulation, and court decisions

in relation thereto. It would seem, therefore, to be the part of wisdom for the several States to consider adoption of regulations as nearly

in agreement with it as possible.

The State of Texas has promulgated a regulation under the Net

Container Act which parallels the Food and Drug regulation, with

some slight changes. Many States have followed the Federal regulation in part as pertains to exemption of small packages.

Copies of the Texas Net Container Act may be obtained by writing

the Division of Weights and Measures at Austin, Texas, and of the

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and regulation by writing the

Federal Food and Drug Administration, Washington, D. C.

I wish to take this opportunity of expressing the Committee's appreciation for the cooperation of the various State and city officials

who sent us promptly information requested pertaining to their regulations.

R. D. Thompson, Chairman,

C. I. HOEL,

J. W. Reese,

E. C. Westwood,

Special Committee on 'Uniform Regulations.

(It was moved and seconded that the Report of the Special Committee on Uniform Regulations be adopted, the question was taken, and the motion was

agreed to.)
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 43

REMARKS OF DR. LYMAN J. BRIGGS, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE

NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

The Chairman. I know that all of us are glad that there is with us

this morning one of our dearest friends, a man who has had more to

do with weights and measures in the United States than anyone in

the past. I refer to Dr. Briggs, formerly Director of the National

Bureau of Standards and President of this Conference. Will you

come forward, Dr. Briggs?

Dr. Briggs. Gentlemen, I greatly appreciate this welcome. In this

work we are confronted with the proposition of keeping on our toes,

constantly trying to learn more. I notice that the next paper on the

program concerns electronic weighing devices. Whoever thought that

we would have to go into the radio business or the electronic business

in connection with the staid and sober program of weights and measures ! But that is what confronts you, gentlemen. So I am looking

forward to seeing a group of electronic engineers come out of this or- ganization. Thank you very much.

DEVELOPMENTS IN ELECTRONIC WEIGHING

By C. L. Richard, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing, Packers

and Stockyards Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture

In the progressive development of modern weighing appliances

where rapid, precise, and economical determination of weight are paramount objectives, it was inevitable that the vacuum tube, the

servo unit, and the principles of electronics should find practical application. Tried and proven for instrumentation and control purposes in the laboratory, in communications, and in military use, these

useful tools of the electronic age are now being applied to refine, expedite, and simplify the ancient and generally honorable art of weight

determination. Today, in limited number and for special purposes,

there are in use large-capacity weighing scales which employ no

levers, pivots, weighbeams, pendulums, racks, pinions, extension

springs, or other mechanical components common to the conventional

types of scale with which the weights and measures official is familiar.

"Electronic scales" and "electronic weighing" are names generally

used when referring to the new devices and methods, so I shall make

\ise of those same terms in this discussion.

Your Conference Secretary suggested to me that a non-technical

discussion of electronic scales, with explanation of their features and

operating principles, would be of interest to you because devices of

this general type presumably will find practical application in channels of trade where they will be subject to your jurisdiction. Accordingly I shall endeavor to describe for you, in the plain language

of a scale engineer, the fundamental features, design principles, and

performance characteristics of one representative type of electronic

scale which was developed originally, in cooperation with my Department, for weighing livestock at public stockyards and which is now also being used in other special fields of weighing. The particular type of scale I shall describe represents but one generic type of

electronic scale; others, employing analogous principles in varied

types, are in course of development by several scale manufacturers.

904381—50 5
44 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

It is pertinent, first, to consider why we are concerned to weigh ob- ] jects and how we establish their weight value. We weigh them in

order to determine their mass, the quantity of matter contained in

them. We accomplish that purpose, not by direct quantitative determination as in metering fluids but, indirectly, by measuring the forces

which gravity exerts upon them. Thus, all weighing devices are]

primarily force-measuring instruments. With the simple balance, ',

as with all forms of lever scales, we employ a comparison method,

counter-balancing load forces of unknown value with the forces act- - ing upon a standard or unit of known value to evaluate the former.

With the spring scale we directly measure forces by observing their

effects upon a previously calibrated elastic element whose deformation, we know, is in direct ratio to applied load forces.

The research engineer and the laboratory technician, when experimentally studying the properties of materials or the behavior of

structures, use other forms of special force-measuring instruments

which are known as strain gages. One such strain gage, perfected

in recent years and possessing superior qualities of sensitiveness,

accuracy, and constancy, is called a "Resistance-Wire Strain Gage."

This laboratory instrument, in a specially modified and refined form,

is the basic force-measuring component of one typical electronic

scale and I shall therefore undertake to explain its construction and

its function.

To visualize a resistance-wire strain gage consider, if you please, a small upright steel column mounted upon a rigid support. Any

load applied to the upper surface of the column will compress it] and cause a reduction in its height. If loading is confined within

the elastic limit, the compression or other deformation is directly

proportional to the applied load. For example, a load of ten pounds

will actually compress such a column approximately one five millionth of an inch, and twice that load will precisely double the degree

of compression. Thus, you will perceive, we have a true spring scale,

but the load effects are too minute to be measured by ordinary means. However, if we firmly bond to the column a grid work of fine resistance

wire so that the wire reacts to the column compression, the wire's

resistance will decrease in direct proportion to column deformation.

That is to say : The change in resistance is a direct measure of the

column deformation which, in turn, is a direct measure of the applied

force. Connect the resistance wire in an electric circuit with a

sensitive galvanometer, and we may utilize that latter instrument

to weigh loads imposed upon the column. It is true that the minute

resistance changes are too small to be measured without fine laboratory instruments and under controlled conditions. To meet the

accuracy and precision requirements of a good weighing device it would be necessary to measure the gage resistance to the nearest tenthousandth of an ohm. It is here, in this critical phase of the instrumentation, that the special knowledge, experience, and skill of the

electronic engineer make their chief contribution to the scale design.

The problem is to accurately measure the faint electrical impulses

resulting from load changes, amplify them many thousand times without distortion, totalize the effects coming from individual gages in
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 45

an assembly, exclude the influences of stray or induced voltages, and

finally actuate a motor-driven servo mechanism to register the true

net results in terms of weight on a remote dial and printer. The

involved technic and special means by which this is accomplished can not be discussed in these remarks, but the virtue and the function

of electronic circuits and elements is to accomplish just such tasks.

The successful solution of the problem is remarkable but not mysterious, marvelous, perhaps, but not magic. Actually, to perform

the described task is no more phenomenal an achievement than the

manifestations we observe daily in radio and television. Consider,

as a comparable example, how the same principles of controlled

electronic amplification enable us to capture from the ether a vagrant

high-frequency wave, amplify it several thousandfold, and bring

to our homes the voice of a distant singer, the spectacle of a baseball

game.

From consideration of the principle of the strain gage which forms

the primary weight-measuring element, we may proceed now to ex- amine the components, assembly, and installation of a practical scale

constructed on the described principles. For this purpose let us

consider a particular large-capacity scale which represents one type

of electronic weighing appliance. Presently I shall show you some

slides to illustrate my remarks.

Strain gages, in the form I have described, are assembled in

matched pairs within a small metal pedestal or cell about the size

of a pint fruit jar. Inactive dummy columns and gages are included

and connected in a Wheatstone bridge to eliminate variable effects

caused by resistance changes in cables, switches, and plugs, and means

are incorporated for neutralizing the effects of temperature and

humidity changes. Four such cells, each comprising a separate

weight-measuring element but carefully calibrated and matched, support the scale platform near its corners. Shielded flexible cables connect the cells to a central indicating

unit which may be located at any convenient position. Loads applied

to the platform and transmitted to the cells create electrical impulses

which are relayed to the indicator and cause a condition of unbal- ance in the electrical measuring circuits. The degree of this unbalance, converted into pounds, is registered on the dial face as a servo mechanism automatically translates the electrical signals into mechanical motion of the indicator hands.

A printing unit completes the assembly. It is connected to the

indicating unit by a single cable, and through the medium of special

motors of the Selsyn type, motion of the dial indicator hands is

translated into rotation of type wheels to position them for printing.

Accessory elements, in the form of a switch, a push button for printing operation, an adjustable clamping element, and signal lights are provided on the printer unit.

(At this point the speaker showed a number of slides, reproduced herein as

figs. 1 to 6, inclusive, and described the illustrations, as shown immediately

below.)
46 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Figure 1. Component parts of electronic scale.

I should like to make it clear that in discussing and describing this instrument

I am using the particular product of one manufacturer only for purposes of

illustration, and I wish to repeat the statement already made that other principles can be applied and are being applied experimentally by other manufacturers.

The first picture (see fig. 1) illustrates all of the component parts of the scale. These can be broken down into three separate classifications. These are the

four cells, which I have previously described, which are the primary weightmeasuring elements. Extending from the cells when they are installed under

the platform are flexible cables connecting with the dial. This particular dial was designed especially for our use in weighing livestock, where we wanted to measure weights to a precision of 5 pounds up to a capacity of 32,000 pounds.

A noticeable feature of the dial is the two-hand principle. Actually, the hands

are read in the same manner as we read a clock ; the short hand indicates 1,000-

pound units and the large hand indicates 5-pound units. I say "5 pounds" be- cause in practice we read between the graduations. From the dial unit a

flexible cable leads to the printing unit.

The next picture (see fig. 2) is an enlarged view of one of the cells. Machined

metal plates, top and bottom, contain between them the upright steel column

and the resistance networks incorporated in the unit. Above the cell is an

adapter which is designed to insure that loads are applied vertically; this will

adjust and center itself, like a self-alining bearing. The terminal connection for

the cable to the indicating unit is shown ; in the illustration that is covered. In

practice these cells are shielded with a plastic transparent material to exclude

moisture.

The next picture (see fig. 3) illustrates a method which we used for an

experimental installation. A temporary support in the form of a steel tripod was placed in the scale pit near each corner of the scale, the weighbridge was

jacked up to separate the bearings and the pivots, and the cells were then in- serted so that the weighbridge rested upon the cells rather than upon the levers. In effect, the levers were thus disconnected and the weighbridge was supported

by one cell at each corner of the scale. The next picture (see fig. 4) is an enlarged view of the dial. This illustration

is of an early model which was modified later, but I am using it to show the
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 47
Figure 5. Interior view of indicator of electronic scale.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 49

Figuee 6. Printer of electronic scale.

controls. A balancing control knob is sbown, which has since been replaced by

a push-button, which automatically balances the scale when the load is removed.

There is a printing button which actuates the printer to print the scale readings.

There is a damping device to bring- the indicators to rest; this is particularly

necessary on a livestock scale to dampen the disturbing effects of animal move- ments which would interfere with good weighing.

The next picture (see fig. 5) is an interior view of the indicator. Instead of

the customary assembly of racks, pinions, etc.. these are all electrical units.

The only mechanical part of this particular scale is the unit which is called the

"servo mechanism". It is that part of the instrument which converts the re- sistance changes into motion of the indicator hands. These units are designed

to be replaceable, being standardized and calibrated so that if one fails it can be

removed and replaced with a corresponding unit to expedite servicing and minimize interruptions in weighing. Means for electrical adjustment are provided, to obtain effects comparable to those of mechanical nose-iron adjustments.

The next picture (see fig. 6) is an enlarged view of the printer, which is designed particularly for recording the weights of livestock. The printer operates much on the principle of a check-writer. By setting the proper keys, there

will be printed on the scale ticket the number of animals, the type of animals,

the symbol number of the commission firm by whom the animals are being sold,

the year, month, and day, the time to the nearest minute at which the weighing

is made, and the sequential number of the scale ticket. From the illustrations and the preceding explanations, it will be apparent

that the significant difference between the electronic scale and the conventionaltype platform scale lies in the circumstance that electrical and electronic means
50 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

are substituted for the usual mechanical ones. Load forces are measured and

transmitted electrically rather than through a lever train. Magnification for

indication is accomplished electronically rather than with a rack and pinion.

Balancing is performed electrically instead of mechanically with a poise or pendulums. Thus, except for the single mechanical unit in the indicator unit,

there are no moving parts in the assembly and consequently it is to be presumed

that the factor of wear, chief source of error in mechanical-type scales, is reduced to a practical minimum. This is one of the advantages which advocates of electronic weighing emphasize. Some other advantages claimed are the

compact nature, light weight, and portability of the component parts which per- mit ready and economical installation ; the entire weight of the units composing

the assembly is some 85 pounds, although it will weigh, and weigh correctly and

repeatedly, loads as great as 32,000 pounds. The flexible nature of the connect- ing cables, permitting location of the indicating and printing units at any desired

place close to or distant from the platform is assuredly an advantageous feature.

Installations of this kind have been proposed with a separate unit whereby the

weight could be indicated in the office of the plant manager several hundred

feet away. One very practical advantage lies in the fact that rats and other

small animals, which often assume positions on scale levers and cause serious

weighing errors, cannot significantly affect the performance of the new-type scale. In the conventional type of scale a 1-pound rat on the transverse lever may exert a load force of 400 pounds on the dial ; but with an electronic scale a 1-pound

rat can never register more than 1 pound on the dial. When load is applied to the platform there is instant response of the indicating and printing elements

and the customary oscillation interval is eliminated. Since platform motion

is negligible, errors caused by interference are not contributed. The vacuum

tubes in the indicator unit are standard tubes as manufactured for radio purposes, and they are readily replaceable when necessary.

Anticipating questions which some of you might wish to ask regarding scales of the general class under discussion I may here summarize

my own conclusions as to the potentials of electronic scales, their relative costs, performance qualities, durability prospects, maintenance

problems, etc. These opinions, it should be understood, are based upon

observation and study of the one particular type I have illustrated.

The extent to which they may apply to other products of comparable

design and principle will depend upon the degree in which the latter

conform to requisite standards of correct design, precise workmanship,

careful assembly and inspection, and correct calibration and adjusting. In that connection I would offer a warning that the very highest

standards of manufacturing, inspection, and assembly control must

be observed if the product is to yield the quality of jjerformance ex- hibited by devices in use. Inferior materials, careless fabrication, or

faulty inspection and calibration of product, even more so than in

mechanical scales, will be reflected in unsatisfactory weighing results

and excessive maintenance costs. For these same reasons it is unlikely

that satisfactory equipment can be provided at lower costs initially

than those for corresponding mechanical scales. In fact, in their

present state of development their costs will probably be greater.

Repeated and comprehensive testing of the scales in use has demonstrated quite conclusively that the principle of electronic weighing is proven to be practical and, for some special purposes, distinctly advantageous. Installations in use have been found to consistently meet

the accuracy requirements adopted for large-capacity scales. Trial

use over extended periods of time under extreme conditions of weather

and temperature has not significantly affected performance or caused

change in calibrations. Your group will be interested to learn of two

special characteristics common to scales of this type. Sensitiveness

does not decrease with loading as is commonly the case with lever
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 51

scales but remains quite constant throughout the load range, a desirable quality for many applications. Also, unlike a lever scale in which

we may expect the errors to increase with loads when levers are not in

exact ratio adjustment, the load-error relation is not linear but re- mains reasonably constant throughout the full load range. In several

tests it was observed, for example, that the maximum error developed

under loads of from 100 pounds to 20,000 pounds was only 5 pounds.

In fact it seems quite practical to so warp or control the load-error curve of an electronic scale that errors at heavy loads are not significantly greater than those at light loads, a feature of considerable

merit.

Questions are asked regarding factors of maintenance, repair, and

replacement of parts: To date there has been demonstrated no need

for anything more than nominal attention to cleaning and servicing

of the electromechanical servo unit of the indicator and the mechanical

elements of the printer. In a six months' trial of one installation,

maintenance of the electrical elements consisted only of renewing

blown fuses, correcting a loose connection, and replacing a burnedout tube. In a second installation, no failures occurred due to electrical defects but the unit was removed to eliminate mechanical defects

in the printer, a condition which has now been corrected permanently.

The question of durability is one which must necessarily await further

lapse of time, but all present indications are that need for electrical

maintenance measures will occur no more frequently than is the practice with mechanical scales.

In some respects, it is not unlikely that the advent of such new

equipment in commercial weighing may have impact upon prevailing

codes of scale specifications, tolerances, and regulations, for present

codes were conceived and developed with lever and spring scales in

mind. In consequence, some technical provisions, referring specifically to levers, weighbeams, and other mechanical items, will not be

applicable, and I therefore offer the suggestion that cognizance be

taken of the circumstances when the issue of compliance or approval

may arise.

Summarizing comment upon the general subject it can be said that

there seems to be no immediate prospect for wide employment of electronic-principle scales in commerce. Certainly, however, as these

newly developed devices pass their present proving-ground tests and

trials in special fields of use, their applications to commercial and

transport weighing can be expected. Some are in use now for weighing freight cars in motion, for weighing bulk coal at the mines, for

weighing billets in the steel mills. Unquestionably since the induction

and capacitance principles can be employed as substitutes for the re- sistance principle already applied, variations in type may be anticipated. If these measure up in quality to the performance exhibited

by the new ones in use, and if the questionable factors of maintenance,

durability, and reliability find satisfactory solution, they hold promise of bringing closer to realization the ultimate of instantaneous

weight determination which is the objective of every scale engineer,

and the ideal of constant weighing accuracy which is the result desired by all weights and measures officials.

Mr. Richard. Since preparing my paper I have learned that the

National Bureau of Standards recently procured equipment designed
52 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

and constructed on principles similar to those which I have described,

but omitting the automatic indicator and printer. This equipment

is intended to be used in calibrating elastic load-measuring devices

for loads exceeding the capacity of the dead-weight machine.

That suggests to me something still in the field of speculation. I can visualize a unit constructed on electronic principles, sealed and

calibrated, and used to test scales of one type or another without the

use of standard weights. For example, if such a unit were applied

on a platform of a scale the true weights of unknown loads would

be indicated by the instrument and these could be checked against

the indicated weights on the scale, thus providing a satisfactory test of the scale accuracy.

Mr. Baucom. To how close a tolerance can these cells be manufactured, from minimum to maximum loads ? Mr. Richard. In our tests of experimental models, and in trials

of several months, we applied the regular tolerance for large-capacity

scales, applying no tolerance less than 5 pounds. Under all tests at all times the device remained well within the tolerances ; the errors did not increase with the load as is commonly the case with the lever

scale.

Mr. Baucom. In the replacement of a cell which had failed, would

all of the cells have to be sent back to the factory for balancing, or could a satisfactory replacement be made of the single faulty cell?

Mr. Richard. The practice at the factory of this particular manufacturer is to calibrate each cell individually. Then they are matched.

Replacement of a cell which went bad would involve nothing more

than removing the old cell, installing the new one, and connecting it up.

Mr. Witt. You have said that in using these cells, one is placed at

each corner of the scale platform. With modern platforms being

50 to 60 feet long, would four of these cells be enough, or would six or eight be required ? Mr. Richard. In the application I was referring to, we had a maximum platform length of 26 feet, and we used four cells. In one railway track installation where cars are being weighed in motion, I

believe the scale length is 62 feet ; eight cells are employed, two being

placed at each corner. Deflection effects are less noticeable than they

Avould be in the case of a lever-type scale. The adapter absorbs the

effects of deflection and transmits the loads vertically. Cells are very sensitive to off-center loading, and it is necessary to keep the

load forces applied vertically to within 2° ; they will stand an offcenter load of 2°.

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON TRADING

BY WEIGHT, PRESENTED BY J. F. TRUE, CHAIRMAN

The Committee has not been very active, but we did have a meeting yesterday and have the following report to present to this

Conference.

The Committee feels that there is some interest in the proposal

to sell grains on a weight basis. Information presented at our Committee meeting shows that feed manufacturers, seed dealers, and

weights and measures officials who have been contacted are in favor

of this proposal, and that some States on the west coast are at this
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 53

time using the hundredweight rather than the bushel as the legal

and customary basis for trade. The Committee realizes that the grain

trade would have to revolutionize its bookkeeping and records if the

bushel were to be dropped and the hundredweight substituted. The

Committee would like to continue its activities, and probably call on

each State for a report by mail on prevailing conditions.

The Committee recommends, therefore, that it be continued for

another year to give the opportunity for further study. It is hoped

that a more comprehensive report can be made in 1951.

(It was moved and seconded that the Report of the Committee on Trading by

Weight be adopted, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed to.)

TESTING EQUIPMENT FOR LPG MEASURING DEVICES

REMARKS OF J. E. BRENTON, CHIEF, BUREAU OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Liquid petroleum gas (LPG) as generally sold in the United States

is either a mixture of Butane and Propane commonly spoken of as Butane or straight Propane and called such. Liquefied petroleum gas

is secured directly from the oil fields and is also obtained during the

process of refining. Under the general heading of LPG we have vari- ous brand names, for example, Shellane, Flamo, Liqui-Gas, Bu-Gas,

Skell Gas, Rulane, Green's Fuel, and hundreds of others. In colder

climates, propane, because of its low boiling point is used, as are also

LPG mixtures containing high percentages of propane. In warmer

climates there is a tendency to use more butane, which has a higher

boiling point than propane but also has a higher heat value.

As a general rule the LPG that is sold for domestic use in small containers (5 gallons to 50 gallons) is either straight propane or a mixture containing a high percentage of propane, while the LPG that is

sold in larger containers or delivered by vehicle tanks is a mixture

of propane and butane. The sale of straight propane or a mixture

containing a high percentage of propane does not apply to utility, industrial, and motor-fuel use, because where vaporization is done by

hot water, steam, or direct heat, the low boiling point of propane is of no advantage.

In deciding which type of fuel to use, the careful dealer should take

the following points into consideration: Propane contains about

91,000 Btu (heat units) per gallon. It vaporizes or boils at about

43 degrees below zero Fahrenheit and due to the high vapor pressure

produced by summer temperatures, it must be stored and transported

in containers built to withstand high pressure.

Butane mixtures average about 100,000 Btu per gallon. These mixtures vaporize at temperatures ranging from zero degrees Fahrenheit

to 32 degrees above zero. In this range of temperature, there is a tendency to boil out the propane content. A butane mixture produces

comparatively low vapor pressures in warm weather which permits

the use of containers of lighter construction than those used for the

storage and transportation of propane.

LPG in the liquid state expands and contracts with changes in

temperature in the same manner as gasoline and other volatile liquids.

The coefficient of expansion of LPG is approximately twice that of

gasoline, and in preparing for the storage and transportation of this
54 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

commodity, ample allowance for expansion must be provided. In

the vapor state, LPG follows Boyle's Law of Gases and compresses into a smaller space with increased pressure.

A gallon of butane mixture will produce approximately 34 cubic

feet of vapor at atmospheric pressure, and with approximately each

15 pounds of pressure applied, a volume of gas equal to the original

will be compressed into the same space. A gallon of propane will produce approximately 36^2 cubic feet of vapor at atmospheric pressure.

The greatest volume of LPG is used for domestic use such as cooking, heating, water heating, and refrigeration, and a considerable

amount is used for agricultural purposes, namely, tractor fuel, dehydrating, processing, drying, brooder fuel, and pumping. Industrial plants and stand-by plants are also large users of LPG and during peak-load periods the fuel is mixed with air and used in lieu of

natural gas.

It is an accepted fact that all mechanical devices wear out sooner

or later, and because LPG is a dry fuel with practically no lubricating properties, it is not surprising that the wear of the meters being

used for the measurement of this commodity is much greater than

would be the case if the same meters were being used for the measure- ment of cliesel fuel or stove oil. If proper installation procedure is not followed, a meter may pass

vapor and register it as liquid, cheating the buyer in about a 65-to-l

ratio at 60 pounds pressure, or the meter may bypass a considerable

amount of liquid thus causing the seller a loss.

Up until a few years ago, inspections concerning the accuracy of

LPG dispensing devices were sketchy and inadequate. A few of the

counties made laudable attempts to inspect these devices, but the

majority of the county weights and measures officials paid no attention and left any inspection service up to the respective dealers and

distributors. The producer claimed shortages, the dealer and distributor either had shortages or set the adjustment on their meters

so that the consumer received short measure, and the net result of

all this maneuvering was a flood of complaints, each group claiming

that the other was stealing their eye teeth.

At the present time in the State of California, two methods are being used for checking the accuracy of LPG meters. The County of

Los Angeles is using the gravimetric method (weight) and the State

of California and three counties, namely, Tulare, Kern, and Fresno,

are using the volumetric method (liquid volume) . (See figs. 7 and 8.)

The gravimetric method requires the following equipment: An

LPG container, with a minimum net capacity of 50 gallons, mounted

on a scale, which in turn is mounted on a trailer. The accessories re- quired are : An LPG pump, an explosion-proof electric motor, a device

for determining the specific gravity of the product, necessary hoses

and connections for filling and evacuating the container, thermometers, pressure gauges, tools, and adapters as may be required, pamphlet containing conversion tables, a sturdy pair of synthetic rubber

gloves, a pair of asbestos gloves with elbow-length gauntlets, and

last but not least, fire extinguishers.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 55
56 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Before making any test, the metering equipment that is to be inspected should be checked for the following

(a) Sufficient LPG in the supply tank to make the test. (b) Meter-indicating elements readable, operating freely, and readily return- able to zero.

(c) Adequate means to prevent the passage and registration of vapor. The

pressure differential valve or spring check should be set to exert a back pressure

of between 10 and 15 pounds.

(d) Meter correctly installed with vapor-eliminating lines and pump bypass

returning, preferably, into the main tank or into the liquid lines, but not into the

vapor-return line. (e) Vapor-return line installed so that vapor can flow in either direction,

meaning no check valves in the line. (f ) The meter should be an approved model.

(g) All equipment should be in the clear at least 50 feet from thoroughfares or important buildings. The equipment should be in safe operating condition, meaning no leaks, no unauthorized visitors present, no smoking or open

fires. The best place to conduct a test is at the distributor's bulk plant or

station where reasonable caution is practiced and familiarity with LPG is existent, and where an authorized representative of the distributor or the dis- tributor himself is present to operate the dispensing equipment.

The procedure in making a test using the gravimetric method is as follows

1. The trailer carrying the scale and test vessel is leveled and blocked.

2. The test vessel is filled with LPG vapor through the vapor line.

3. The scale is adjusted for zero balance, which in this case includes the

weight of the container and vapor contained therein.

4. The filler hose is connected, and according to the meter reading, exactly

50 gallons is pumped into the test vessel.

5. The temperature of the LPG is recorded at the start of each test, at the half- way mark, and at the completion.

6. Also, during the filling period, the rate of delivery is recorded at the start and at about the 40-45 gallon reading.

7. When the delivery meter reads 50 gallons, the filler hose is disconnected

and the test vessel and its contents weighed and a recording is made of the

weight and pressure.

8. The liquid-return hose is connected and the test vessel evacuated of all liquid.

9. A rerun is then made to determine the constancy of the meter.

10. The test vessel is completely evacuated of liquid.

11. A slow run is made in an effort to determine whether slippage exists in the meter.

12. The specific gravity of the product being measured is determined by pre- cooling a sample with dry ice well below its boiling point and then taking a hydrometer reading at several different temperatures as the sample warms up. An average of these specific gravity readings is taken as the specific gravity of

the product at the temperature which is the average of the respective readings.

13. Through the use of tables, the specific gravity at the actual temperature

of the product being measured is computed, and from this figure the gallons per

pound are determined through the medium of a conversion table.

14. The calculated capacity determined from the weight based on the specific

gravity is compared with the actual meter reading of 50 gallons, and the meter

error, if any, is obtained.

15. Necessary meter adjustments and subsequent test runs are made until the

meter is either brought within tolerance, sealed, or is rejected.

The State of California uses the volumetric method. (See fig. 9.)

We use a 70-gallon test vessel, equipped with a reflex gauge glass

calibrated in y10 and y2 o gallon subdivisions from 69.5 gallons to 71.5

gallons. The test vessel is also equipped with thermometers, pressure

gauges, a bleeder line to determine when it is empty (and which is also

utilized in cooling the gauge glass) , pump, an explosion-proof electric

motor, necessary hoses, fittings, adapters, and electrical connections.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 57

Figure 9. Volumetric-type LPG-meter prover—State of California.

This vessel is mounted on a two-wheel trailer and is built to withstand

a working pressure of 250 pounds. It is equipped with all of the re- quired safety devices including two C02 fire extinguishers. It weighs

2,300 pounds and cost approximately $2,200.

To make a test the trailer brakes are set and the wheels are blocked.

The meter that is to be inspected is connected to the test vessel through

the medium of the regular dispensing hose and fittings. The vapor

spaces of the test vessel and the dispensing vessel are connected by a vapor return hose and the test vessel pump-back hose is connected to

the filler valve of the dispensing vessel whether it be a stationary tank

or a vehicle tank. The electrical connection is then plugged into an

adequate electric supply. We can use either 110 or 220 volts, a-c. Before starting the actual test, the metering equipment that is to be

inspected should be checked as outlined above in our discussion of the

gravimetric method. The actual test is conducted as follows

:

1. Seventy gallons of fuel are pumped into the test vessel at the normal rate of

flow permitted by the installation.

2. The test vessel is immediately emptied by means of its pump, after which

all valves are closed except vapor-return valves. We have by this procedure

equalized the temperature and pressure of the supply vessel and our test measure. The fact as to whether or not the test vessel is emptied of liquid is determined

by means of the bleeder valve located in the bottom of the vessel. If the weather

is hot, the gauge glass may be cooled by spraying it with LPG from the bleeder

valve during the pumping-back process.

3. The test vessel is then refilled at the same rate as before, the rate of fill, vapor pressure, and temperature recorded, and any variances noted.

4. When the test vessel indicates 70 gallons the filling is stopped, all valves

are closed, and the fuel allowed to settle until boiling in the gauge glass ceases. The gauge-glass reading and meter reading are compared and the difference plus or minus is recorded.

5. The test vessel is immediately emptied. Care should be taken that the

filler valve is not accidentally opened during the pumping-back period, that there

is no carry-over of liquid through the vapor line, and that upon completion of the

pumping-back the test vessel is completely evacuated of liquid.
58 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

6. The test vessel is again refilled to 70 gallons in the same manner as noted

above except that the rate of flow is one-third of the previous normal rate,

but is not less than 7 gallons per minute. Results are recorded as before.

7. If the difference between the first and second run does not exceed 3 cubic

inches per indicated gallon (about 9% tenths in 70 gallons) the meter is adjusted

and additional test runs and adjustments are made until the meter meets State

tolerances at normal operating speed. At this time all adjustments are sealed

and the meter certified for use.

8. If the difference is greater than 3 cubic inches per indicated gallon, the

meter is adjudged unfit for continued operation and the operator is given a 30-day notice to repair or replace the equipment. If this is not complied with,

we have authority under the laws of the State of California to confiscate the

device.

9. During this test, and usually on the last pump-out, the back-pressure check

value is tested by closing the vapor valve and leaving the fill-valve open while

the test vessel is being emptied. If the meter starts moving before a 10-pound

pressure drop is noted, the spring pressure in the back pressure valve is increased

or notice is given to repair or replace the valve. (See fig. 10.)

The result of a test should, be noted immediately upon completion

of a test run, because if a delay in noting results occurs, the probable

change of temperature will affect the accuracy of your findings. The

results of each test are recorded in duplicate on individual sheets.

(See fig. 11.) These in turn tie into a master sheet which is given

a file or test number and which remains the same for all subsequent

tests of that particular dealer as long as he may stay in business. (See

fig. 12.) In order to collect data, the folloAving information is re- corded on the master sheet : Date ; location of plant ; location of main

office; county; name of owner; source of supply; is both butane and

propane handled ; is there a bulk plant, and if so, the size of storage

and the Industrial Accident Commission inspection numbers ; is there

a bulk meter ; is there an automotive service station, and if so, what

make and how many meters; is the fuel priced; do the meters have

State of California motor vehicle fuel pump license tags ; their make,

Figure 10. Testing a truck meter with State of California prover.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 59

J. E. Brenton BUREAU OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Bldg Sacto Chief

'

'

METER TEST DATA

Data Test Ho

Location... Condition

Previously sealed When Who

If on vehicle Make License Type

No. Compartments Capacity and State No

Calibrated When Where...

Motor fuel supplied from main tank Remarks.

Meter Data

Make Vapor Pres Propane

Type Temperature °F. Bu-Pro Mix...

Serial Rate of Flow GPM. Back Pres. ck.

Size Sp. Gr Type

Remarks

Test Vessel Meter Reading Dif . Remarks

First Run

Second Run

Third Run

Fourth Run

Fifth Run

Sixth Run.

Sealed as found Adjusted & Sealed Unsatisfactory.

Remarks •

Liquefied Petroleum Gas Teohnloian 765-9 Figure 11. "Individual" record sheet for LPG-meter tests—State of California.

types, and capacities; if trucks use LPG fuel, do they have a separate

tank, or do they draw from the main tank ; is there a bottle-fill plant,

and if so, is weight, volume, or guess work used to measure the product

;

is it manual or automatic ; the number of scales and when last sealed

;

and how many motor vehicles are used in connection with the delivery

of LPG.

A complete summary of all tests made at this particular time are recorded at the bottom of the page. This includes devices sealed as found, the number adjusted and. sealed, and the number found unsatisfactory. There is also a space for the name of the County weights

and measures official, providing one participates in the inspection.

The individual test sheets give the following information : Date of

test: condition of equipment; was it previously sealed; if so, when

and by whom ; if on a vehicle, the make, license, type, number of compartments, capacity, the State inspection number; was it calibrated;

if so, when and where ; is the motor fuel supplied from the main tank

;

the make of the meter, type, serial number, size ; vapor pressure ; temperature of the liquid ; rate of flow ; specific gravity if such is desired

;

the product that is being measured ; is there an acceptable back-pressure check valve installed ; type of valve ; the result of the individual

test showing : Sealed as found ?, Adjusted and sealed ?, Unsatisfactory,

wiry?

904381—50 6
60 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

J. E. Brenton BUREAU OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Kull Bldp Sacto

Chief

REPORT OF INSPECTION OF L.P.G. DISPENSING DEVICE Test* Date c ity County [

Owner User

Location Location

Source of supply Commodity

Bulk Plant Storage State No,

Bulk Meter

Remarks

Automotive Service Station

Type or Hake of Dispenser..

Remarks

MV License Priced....

No. Meters

Motor Vehicles Transports Capacity Make

Motor fuel from Del. Tankers

Main Tank

Pick ups

Remarks

Bottle Fill Method-Weight Meter 10%...

Manual Automatic No. Scales ..Sealed...

Remarks

Results Meters Sealed as Found

Unsatisfactory

Remarks

.Adjusted and Sealed

Why

County Representative Liquefied Petroleum Gas Technician

499-9 Figure 12. "Master" record sheet for LPG-meter tests—State of California.

We prefer the volumetric method because it parallels the delivery as

is practiced in an actual sale to a consumer. This method of inspection discloses errors of measurement clue to rate of flow, leaky diaphragms, delivery of liquid through vapor connections, faulty installation, dirty screens, and sticking meters. It is simpler, considerably faster, and does not require the rather extensive mathematical

calculations that are necessary in connection with the gravimetric

method.

In addition to the above, the equipment used in the volumetric

method is more fool-proof and rugged than that used in connection

with the gravimetric method. For example, in using the gravimetric

method, a vapor-return line is not used, although in actual commerical practice a vapor return line is oftentimes vised; if the dispensing equipment is not in excellent condition it is oftentimes impossible to fill the test vessel, meaning that the dispensing equipment

gradually slows down and finally stops during which slow-down ex- cessive slippage occurs, a slippage that would not be existent in a normal delivery. This is particularly true if the weather is warm and

the product being measured is propane.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 61

We also prefer the volumetric method because we do not have to

determine the specific gravity of each respective sample being measured ; in fact, we do not have to consider the specific gravity of the

product at all. Also, from the standpoint of time, we believe that

the volumetric method is at least three times as fast as the gravimetric and from the point of accuracy it fulfills all practical field

requirements.

This volumetric method is also preferred because utilizing this

method, installations either with or without vapor return lines may

be tested, while in using the gravimetric method, a vapor return line

is never used during the weights and measures inspection. For ex- ample, if an installation that does not have a vapor return line is

being inspected utilizing the volumetric method, all that is necessary

is to record the vapor pressure at the beginning and completion of

the filling and compute the vapor which has been compressed back

into a liquid by displacement, and to allow for additional vapor compressed into the vapor space at the higher finishing pressure.

In order that there would be definite provisions concerning containers, vehicle tanks, and weighing and measuring devices used in

connection with the storage and sale of liquefied petroleum gas, a

series of provisions applicable to LPG were promulgated and are now contained in Article 16, Subchapter 4, Chapter 8, Title 4, California Administrative Code. Because our time is limited, we shall

only discuss those portions of the Code which we believe to be of

universal interest

:

Sections 3410 to 3413 define certain tanks and containers commonly used in the

industry. Section 3414 permits the sale of liquefied petroleum gas by weight. Section 3415 permits the sale of liquefied petroleum gas by liquid volume, either

through an accepted meter or by the use of a certified vessel. Section 3416

defines the word "container."

Second 3417 sets up three methods of sale for LPG, namely, by weight ex- pressed in avoirdupois pounds ; by liquid volume expressed in U. S. gallons ; and

by vapor volume expressed in cubic feet. The meaning of cubic feet under vari- ous conditions is explained. We do not recognize nor will we permit the sale of

LPG in "Butane Units," "Happy Heating Hours," and other catchy phrases

which have absolutely no legal basis of measurement from the standpoint of a

weights and measures official. Section 3418 establishes and unifies the data required to be stamped on LPG

bottles. Section 3419 requires that all installations of LPG equipment be in- spected for safety by the Division of Industrial Safety, Department of Industrial

Relations, State of California, or other authorized commission, before being

checked for accuracy by a weights and measures official. Section 3420 elimi- nates the use of the column gauge glass as a means of measuring the volume

of LPG for the purpose of sale. Section 3421 prevents fraudulent construction.

Section 3422 requires the certified capacity to be plainly marked on transport

trucks. Section 3423 sets forth instructions for the installation of dip pipes

(outage gauges) on various types of containers when such container is used as

a measure. Section 3424 requires that all tank trucks when used as a measure

be certified as to capacity.

Section 3425 requires that a meter be accessible and easy to read. Section

3426 prevents the diversion of LPG after metering unless the fact of such diversion is plainly discernible. Section 3427 requires that the indicating element of

all meters be in good working order and readily returnable to zero. Section

3428 requires that all meters be provided with an acceptable means of vapor

elimination. Section 3429 sets up rules for the testing of LPG meters which

include constancy of delivery, testing drafts and tolerances.

Section 3430 establishes tolerances for the inspection and reinspection of

vehicle tanks which are being used as a measure. Section 3431 does not permit

the use of a liquid meter for the purpose of sale when the LPG is being trans- ferred by the pressure-differential system unless the vapor being returned is also
62 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

measured through an approved vapor meter. Section 3432 prohibits the use of

artificial heat to expand LPG for the purpose of sale. We have tested approximately 2,000 meters used for measuring the

liquid volume of LPG. Of this number we have been able to seal

about 5 percent "without correction." Of the remainder approximately 5 percent were delivering short volume while the rest were all

delivering in excess, some as high as 25 percent over the indicated

delivery. We believe that these figures alone justify the efforts of

weights and measures officials throughout the United States to secure adequate testing standards to be used for the purpose of inspecting the

accuracy of LPG devices being operated under their respective

jurisdictions.

(During the presentation of the foregoing paper numerous slides were shown.

These were prepared from photographs of actual installations, and were described

briefly by Mr. D. C. Perkins, Measuring Technician, LPG, California State Bureau

of Weights and Measures.

REMARKS OF NALLS BERRYMAN, SUPERVISOR, WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

DIVISION, STATE OF FLORIDA

About 3 years ago several dealers in LPG in Florida asked us if we

would test their liquid metering systems for accuracy of delivery.

We told them we had no equipment for this work, but would try to

design and build one. We knew our equipment would have to be portable to test the complete metering system. We did not think much would be gained by

having the meter alone sent to Tallahassee. We searched the literature for information on portable systems for testing LPG meters.

About all we found were several articles by Mr. Charles Fuller, Sealer

of Los Angeles County, California. His articles were of considerable

help. He described two systems, the volumetric and the gravimetric.

In the actual planning of a system we found there were many details,

both practical and theoretical, that we had to work out. We believed

at that time, and we are all the more convinced now, that the gravimetric system is theoretically the best. We believe there are more

unknown variables in the volumetric system than the gravimetric.

However, at that time we were pushed for time and money, and we

ran into several practical difficulties when we considered the gravimetric system. We could not find a practical way of determining the

specific gravity of the LPG in the field or locate a weighing device

that was both portable and accurate. Mr. Fuller used dry ice to cool

his LPG when taking the gravity. Dry ice was not available in Florida except in several large cities. We found the regular portable platform scale inaccurate, and unreliable, after bmnping over the highways on a trailer. Since then we have located a pressure hydrometer

jar and hydrometer sold by the Refinery Supply Company, of Tulsa,

Oklahoma, and Mr. H. L. Shankle, of the State of North Carolina,

has designed and had built a proper portable weighing scale. Mr.

Shankle and I collaborated over the telephone several times, and he

rather recently built a gravimetric system using the pressure hydrometer jar, which you will have described later by a gentleman from the

Weights and Measure Division of North Carolina.

To make a long story short, we designed and had built, about 3 years

ago, equipment for calibrating LPG meters by the volumetric principle. The tank looks something like a mushroom upside down. The

bottom part is made of two 4-foot-diameter, dished tank heads welded
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 63

if I together "with their concave sides facing one another. A 12-inch

round hole was cut in the center of one tank head, and a cylinder 12

e inches in diameter and 20 inches long attached, and on top of this

1 cylinder was attached another vessel made by welding together, con-

[. cave sides facing, two 20-ineh-diameter, dished tank heads. To the

H | outside of the cylinder, or neck, of our volumetric measure is attached

d a heavy glass-gauge tube with scale. The gauge tube is partially insuf lated. The vessel attached to the top of the neck serves as an accue mulator chamber for vapor. Attached to the top of this accumulator

e chamber are a safet}^ valve, a pressure gauge, and a pressure-returne line connection. The meter-delivery-line connection is on the top sur- face of the large bottom chamber. The valve and connection for

emptying the measure are at the very bottom. Also at the bottom is a

device for determining if the measure contains any liquid. The botii torn chamber is also equipped with a thermometer well. (See fig. 13.)

Figure 13. Volumetric-type LPG-meler prover—State of Florida.
64 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

A pump for emptying the measure is also part of the equipment.

Much could be said about the pump. The measure was designed to

hold 100 gallons to center of neck ; it held 103 gallons to the center.

We calibrated the measure with water, using our 50-gallon Bureau

of Standards certified measure. The vapor-return-line fitting was

removed from the vapor accumulator tank at the top of the unit and

the water run in by a short hose from the standard measure. We

determined the volume the new measure would hold at a definite temperature and at a definite pressure. Points on the gauge scale were

determined for 100 gallons to 106 gallons at 1-gallon intervals at

atmospheric pressure. The vapor return fitting was then replaced,

hose connection made, and air pumped in. The volume was then

determined at increasing increments of 10 pounds per square inch

pressure. The safe limit of working pressure of the unit is 200 pounds

per square inch. We found the elastic limit of the measure for all

practical purposes to be at 80 pounds per square inch. I have included

here in this paper a complete copy of the calibration sheets.

Before checking a meter we first fill the measure with the LPG and

then pump back to the tank, completely emptying the measure of all

liquid, but keeping the vapor pressure. When making a check run

we duplicate as closely as possible an actual delivery by the metering

system to the customer's tank. We found very few dealers using a vapor return line from the customer's tank to his storage or truck

tank. We therefore did not use our vapor return connection in many

cases. When we did, we knew we were introducing a probable source

of error, even though the metering system was being used in that

manner. We discouraged the use of vapor return lines. Every now

and then we would run across a pump on a dealer's tank truck that

would not pump against the pressure developed in our unit when

nearly filled with liquid to the 103 gallon mark. Generally a little

work" "on the pump corrected this difficulty. LPG high in propane

content, due to its high vapor pressure, caused the most trouble.

After the delivery had been made we would read the liquid level

gauge, thermometer and the pressure gauge and determine the volume

by the unit calibration sheet.

We can generally check within y2 percent on successive runs with

the same meter, but we realize we have some variables that may be

causing an error. There is the possible difference in temperature of

the LPG when in the measuring chamber of the meter compared to the

temperature of the LPG when in our measure. We can easily determine the temperature of the liquid when it is in our measure by a thermometer in the thermometer well, but we cannot determine the

temperature of the liquid in the dealer's meter. The temperatures

should be the same, or if they are different, we should know what they

are and make a correction.

We doubt that LPG metering systems can ever be checked to as

close a tolerance as fuel oil, kerosene, and gasoline metering systems.

At present we are using an unofficial tolerance of 2 percent. We

believe this tolerance could be cut considerably if a properly con- structed gravimetric prover were used. We think our volumetric unit

has been of practical value in adjusting LPG liquid meters in the

field and we will probably continue to use it until we have the money
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 65

Water, gallons, at 70° F

Inches on scale at atmospheric

pressure

100

101

102

103

104

105

0. 75

2. 75

4. 75

6. 75

8. 75

10. 75

Change in scale reading due to pressure

Scale readings at 103 gallons at various pressures

Gage pressure, psi

Scale reading, inches

lower on

scale

Gage pressure, psi

Scale reading

10 •• .. 0. 40

. 35

. 22

. 16

. 09

. 04

. 02

. 01

o__: 6. 75

6. 35

6. 00

5. 78

5. 62

5. 53

5. 49

5. 47

5. 46

20 10

30 20

40 30

50 40

60 50

70 60

80 70

80

Capacity,

in gallons, at 70° F

100

101

102

103

104

105

Scale readings, in inches, at various pressures, psi

0. 75

2. 75

4. 75

6. 75

8. 75

10. 75

10

0. 35

2. 35

4. 35

6. 35

8. 35

10. 35

20

0. 00

2. 00

4. 00

6. 00

8. 00

10. 00

30

1. 78

3. 78

5. 78

7. 78

9. 78

40

1. 62

3. 62

5. 62

7. 62

9. 62

50

1. 53

3. 53

5. 53

7. 53

9. 53

60

1. 49

3. 49

5. 49

7. 49

9. 49

70

1. 47

3. 47

5. 47

7. 47

9. 47

80

1. 46

3. 46

5. 46

7. 46

9. 46

and time to design and build a gravimetric unit. Certainly on paper,

the gravimetric unit would seem to be the best idea.

(At this point, Mr. J. E. Brenton, Vice President of the Conference, assumed

the Chair.)

REMARKS OF E. W. HESSEE, SENIOR CHEMIST, WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

DIVISION, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

The increasing growth of the liquefied petroleum gas industry in

North Carolina, with an attendant increase in bulk deliveries of the gas

by liquid meters, necessitated the design and operation of equipment

for testing these meters in order to protect the purchasers of this com-
66 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

modify. North Carolina's answer to this challenge was the LPG

liquid meter test unit as illustrated in figures 14 through 18.

The purpose of this talk is to describe the operation of this test unit, show the method of calculation, point out possible sources of

error, and to make some remarks about standard test procedures.

As you will notice from fig. 14, the emphasis is on portability. Most

of the testing equipment is incorporated in a well-balanced, sturdy,

trailer unit. The more delicate apparatus such as the portable scales,

pressure hydrometer jar,, and inlet thermometer are carried in the

tool box in cases especially constructed to prevent damage in transit.

Fittings, adapters, wrenches, and other accessory equipment are also

kept in the tool box in a separate compartment. The necessary

lengths of hose are carried in the back of the truck. This completed

assembly has traveled thousands of miles over all kinds of roads without the slightest damage to any part of the equipment, with which a number of tests have been conducted on many different metering

systems.

The nature of the product handled was taken into consideration in

the design and construction of this test unit. The tank, valves, fit- tings, piping, and hose were all selected for high-pressure operation

sufficient for propane service, since there are many distributors of

propane as well as butane-propane mixtures.

This portable unit makes it possible to perform the test on the premises of the distributor, but before the test unit is set up, a site is se- lected in accordance with all good safety practices. The equipment

is usually set up at a bulk plant or terminal from which the LPG tank

trucks make their hauls. An area is selected where sources of ignition are remote, so that, when venting is necessary, fire hazard is kept

at a minimum. The trailer is then unhooked from the truck, positioned, and placed on jacks so that it will remain stable throughout

the tests (figs. 15 and 18). A ground wire from the trailer is con- nected to an improvised ground if no permanent ground is convenient.

The four retaining clamps are removed from the tank retaining ring,

releasing the tank from the trailer floor. At this time, the ground

Figure 14. Gravimetric-type LPG-meter prover—State of North Carolina.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 67

wire from the tank ring to the trailer floor is examined to insure that

it is intact. The portable scales are suspended from the supporting

bar and universal and adjusted to the level position by simple rotation of the adjusting crank handle (figs. 15 and 16). The suspending

jack is connected between the scale and weigh tank. The filler connection with the thermometer in the "T" assembly (figs. 15 and 17) is hooked to the inlet line by means of a quick coupling. The electrical

hook-up is made and the motor started to ascertain that the pump is working properly. The pump-back hose (see figs. 15 and 18) is .hooked up and the actual testing is ready to begin.

Figure 15. North Carolina prover in weighing position.
68 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Figure 16. Weighbcam of North Carolina prover.

The tests should determine (a) whether the meter will duplicate,

(b) whether the meter is accurate, (c) and whether the back pressure

mechanism is set sufficiently high to prevent vaporization in the meter

at conditions of test. Before actually making test runs the outlet

valve on the tank truck delivery hose is opened with the truck pump

not operating. If the back pressure valve is set high enough at the

prevailing temperature the liquid will drain from the hose to the backpressure valve without the meter spinning.

Before any gas is pumped from the tank truck into the prover, all

connections and valve positions are reinspected. Then 50 gallons of

product are pumped into the prover tank and returned to storage.

This serves the purpose of purging the tank, equalizing the temperature, and filling the delivery hose with liquid. If there are no leaks

between the meter outlet and the prover we are ready for the first

test. The tank is weighed for tare weight. Figure 15 shows the

tank in the weighing position. The tank is lowered and the "wet"

delivery hose reconnected. Fifty gallons of LPG are then metered

into the prover tank. The operating temperature is observed care- fully and recorded. When the delivery is completed, hose connections

are again disconnected and the gross weight determined. The net
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 69

weight of gas delivered is obtained by a simple subtraction of the tare

weight from the gross weight.

The next step is the determination of the specific gravity of the

product in order to obtain the weight per gallon of the LPG product

at the operating temperature. The pressure hydrometer jar with hydrometer installed (see fig. 17) is connected to the sampling valve and

the jar is filled and purged. The jar is then refilled to a level which

freely floats the enclosed hydrometer and the specific gravity determined, as set forth in the procedure from N. G. A. A. Standard Methods for determining the specific gravity of volatile hydrocarbon products by means of the hydrometer. The specific gravity is recorded

with the temperature indicated by the thermometer in the hydrometer.
70 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

TcBjj

|

|

"
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON "WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 71

This specific gravity must be corrected to the temperature of delivery

by means of N. G. A. A. correction tables. The weight per gallon

is obtained by multiplying the corrected specific gravity by the weight

per gallon of water at G0° F. The calculations are then carried out

as shown on the inspection form (fig. 19), and the percent error determined. Several such consecutive tests are run to determine

whether or not the meter is duplicating and to show whether the particular system being considered is satisfactory for metering LP gas

under different conditions. The following precautions must be observed if the test results are to be valid.

1. Inlet temperature.—The inlet temperature as indicated by the inlet thermometer represents the temperature of the liquid passing through the meter. For this reason this thermometer must be as close as possible to the meter being

tested. This temperature will usually level off after a few gallons have flowed

through the inlet connection and should be recorded as the delivery temperature.

If for any reason the inlet temperature is erratic, the run must be discarded.

2. Weight determinations.—Weight determinations must be made carefully

since any error in the net weight would show up in results as an apparent meter

error. The upper beam (600-pound capacity) on the test scale is the notch-beam

type to eliminate possible errors in positioning.

3. Specific Gravity.—If the test is to be accurate the specific gravity determination must be accurate. For this reason good attention should be paid to details

in taking the specific gravity of the sample and care exercised that proper cor- rections are made to convert this specific gravity to the temperature of delivery.

4. Vapor returns—Vapor return is not used in making deliveries to the prover

tank for purposes of test for the following reasons

:

a. It must first be determined whether the meter being tested will duplicate,

and if vapor return were used, accurate compensation for the vapor returned

would be necessary. This is not practical, because the vapor density for the

particular LPG mixture under consideration would have to be known and the

vapor density under the possible varying conditions of flow would either have

to be constant or an accurate average vapor density would have to be used, the

determination of which would make the accuracy of the test method uncertain.

Experience has also shown that the amount of vapor returned by the same sys- tem under the varying conditions of delivery varies widely.

b. In the event that the pump will not deliver 50 gallons into the prover tank

at a sustained rate of at least 5 gallons per minute, then it is necessary to limit

the delivery accordingly.

5. Initial test.—It is desirable on the initial delivery, and additional deliveries

if necessary, to start the test with the prover tank at zero psi gauge pressure. This test will usually indicate whether or not the back pressure valve on the

downstream side of the meter is set high enough to maintain the gas in the

liquid state as it passes through the meter. If there is no back pressure valve,

or if it is set too low, or is inoperative, vaporization will occur in the meter

under certain conditions of delivery and meter error will result (see Delivery

1, fig. 19).

To illustrate the test method just explained, a report of an actual

inspection has been shown in figure 19. This particular LPG meter

system was equipped with a back pressure valve which was merely a

spring loaded check valve, and not a differential valve of the diaphragm type. Before the test was started, it was determined that this

spring loaded check valve was not set as high as the vapor pressure

of the liquid at the prevailing temperature. This was determined

by opening the delivery valve to the atmosphere and observing the

spinning of the meter. Had the back pressure valve been set to the

highest vapor pressure which the product would exert under normal

temperatures of operation, the meter would not have registered until

the pump was started. Before the first delivery was made, the delivery hose was filled with liquid. Observe that the meter delivered
72 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Name

Address -

Truck

N, C. License No.

NORTH C AROLINA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

L. P. GAS INSPECTION DIVISION

C. D. Ilaucom, Director

RalciRh, N. C.

L. P. Gas Liquid Meters

County

Date r ..

ln.p. A 49

Meter Accessories Pump

Make T.UIi»r Rd*. ,1,4-03 S»lU»* Vapor Eliminator |0©n*l Make

Model Visibility O.K. Back Pressure Valve Y« 5 Model

Sixo I '/4- '»ncU Legends Differential Valve l4 o Raled C.P.M.

Sit. No. wet Hose Ve-S Anti-ilrain Noiile t^Jo Vapor Return ppO-i

= AxB

=F-G

= ]00[(E-I

"A" is metered volume. "A

and converted to temperntui

of delivery.

' and "B" must

of delivery by

be at same temperaal

ttcans of A. S. T. M. (

specitie gravity is obtained by means of a hydrometer

A. tables. B=8.3282xSp. G. at the particular temperature

Column A B c D E F G 11 { I J

Deliv. No._

1

Gallons

Delivered

Temp. •P

Pounds Per

Gollon

Temp. •F 60Percent Error -4.39

Cnlculiileil Ni t Wcipht in "165. 2 O

1 64.92.

1 65.37

1 64.36

Actual Net

Weight in

_ Pound! 158.25"

Cross Weight in Pounda

Tare Weight in Pounds

Prove r Tank

Pressure (PSIG)

Average

Delivery

Initial Final Rate (GPU) 360o 60 +.589 S52.»5" 3l4-.oo o 60

2 36 oo 62. 4.5 81 62 - O.to

- 0.07

i64.tr

165.25" Tfeo.75 3<fc. oo ro •sr

3 36>lO 62. 4-.5B1 62 561. TS- S16.5-0 SO

4

6

S5.9iT 34-60 6S

64-

4-.57Z. 63 +0.O9 164.50 S"C1.75 31T.2S 5tr TO 4.564 64- 64-

+ O.06

-1.7a

1 57.91 1 58 .OO S-SS". iF 3if.».r ss

- is- 6* 40.20 64- 4-.564- 183-47 1 8o. 25" S 76-00 31T.7S" rs- ss 20

r. *

4-0.4O 64- 4-. 564- 64- - 1.59 184.39 I 8 1 .50 579.25" rs- ST ZO

8

9

sp. c. @«AfO-.5*7,s> w p Q.5Si. Inspector:

Remark; "P.Uvjt-isa

sfsK^ov V«V**r»1 **^' ^,M> Signed:

US.POV ve»^uvv| .

5" ^..ll.vsl. ^.VKTZ . 0«n,r or Agent

Figure 19. LPG-meter inspection form—State of North Carolina.

short measure on the first delivery because of partial vaporization

of liquid in the meter caused by insufficient back pressure. In deliveries 2 through 5, inclusive, the meter duplicated and gave accurate

measure as shown by the results ; the gas in the prover tank provided

the back pressure necessary to maintain a liquid state in the meter.

The gallons delivered were less than 50 gallons because the pump

would not deliver that quantity and maintain a flow rate of at least

5 gallons per minute. The quantities delivered were not identically

the same in each delivery because the operator could not shut off

flow at the same meter reading each time. In such cases, when the

test delivery can not be carried to at least 50 gallons without vapor

return because of the pump, it has been necessary to do the best that

is possible under the circumstances rather than run no test at all. Deliveries 6 and 7 were made with vapor return to show that the

net delivery is less when vapor return is used. Under the many different conditions of delivery the amount of vapor returned would

vary considerably. No attempt is made to set the liquid meter so that

it will compensate for the vapor returned to the delivery tank.

The results of this actual test show that this system would not be

satisfactory and accurate under all conditions of operation.

Summary.—An apparatus for testing LPG liquid meters has been

described, and a tentative test procedure has been set forth and il- lustrated. The speaker, in concluding, would like to point out the

need for comparing the various methods of testing LP gas liquid

meters and the subsequent development of standard testing procedures.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 73

REMARKS OF JOHN POMMERSHEIM, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, PITTSBURGH

EQUITABLE METER DIVISION OF ROCKWELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY

The development of LPG metering has been characterized more by

a process of revision and adaptation of the existing fluid meter than

by any new development intended solely for the measurement of

LPG. Up to the present time, this redesign and adaptation has

proved quite effective and seems to be meeting the demands of the

industry in regards to accuracy, performance, and safety. Further

developments will, no doubt, take place to meet increased demands

as time goes on. To appreciate more fully the problems attending the measurement

of LPG, let us look at some of the characteristics which have necessitated the redesign of the present ordinary fluid meter.

Pressure.—LPG systems are called upon to withstand pressures

much higher than those handling gasoline and fuel oils. This re- quirement has necessitated the use of a meter case able to withstand

a working pressure of 250 psi and which, to provide a suitable factor

of safety, should be hydrostatically tested at 500 psi. As an added

precaution, case materials are selected on the basis of their ability to

withstand shattering under pressures of five times their working pres- sure or 1,250 psi. Internally we find this requirement met with

strengthened parts, either through the use of redesigned parts or new

materials, so that any deformation and misalignment of moving parts

due to these high pressures can be held to a minimum.

Viscosity.—The efficiency of the measuring element in any positivedisplacement meter is directly related to its fit in the measuring chamber so that we are interested in obtaining the least amount of slippage

(unregistered liquid) consistent with, practically speaking, free operation of these moving parts. It is a recognized fact that such slippage increases with decreased viscosity so that the tolerances of the fits between the measuring element and its chamber have had to be re- duced to insure accuracy in measuring these low-viscosity fuels. Such

close tolerances, in turn, have also necessitated the use of different materials with improved bearing qualities.

Lubricating Qualities.—The lubricating qualities of LPG are characterized by their complete absence. They act rather as solvents and

prohibit the use of lubricants on any moving parts. Such materials

as are used for bearings must be selected with this requirement in

mind. This solvent characteristic further limits us in our choice of

materials for gaskets. We have found that the asbestos-rubber and

Buna-N types of synthetic materials are most satisfactory for this

service. At parts in the meter where no swelling at all is permissible,

such as in the piston packing in the piston-type meter, we are re- stricted to the use of specially treated leather.

Gorroshieness.—Generally speaking, LPG fuels have no corrosive

properties ; however, some produced by a cracking operation and not

thoroughly cleaned may give trouble in this respect. Ordinarily we

are not restricted in our choice of metals because of any corrosive

properties of these fuels.

Low Boiling Point.—This characteristic of the LPG fuels has been

the greatest obstacle to the accurate metering of these liquids. Inasmuch as the positive-displacement meter makes no distinction between
74 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

vapor and liquid, it will register both, making it necessary that only

liquid enter the meter. In the measurement of gasoline and oils with

higher boiling points, the elimination of vapor has been quite success- fully accomplished by means of a float-actuated valve either built into

the meter or contained in a separate unit installed ahead of the meter.

The high pressure involved in LPG measurement, however, oftentimes

crushed this float and rendered this type of construction impractical.

The solution of the vapor problem in the closed LPG metering system

lies more in the prevention of vaporization through maintenance of ':

sufficient back pressure, than in its elimination. Both measures, how- \ ever, need to be taken, and are carried out by means of appropriate

accessory equipment.

This accessory equipment, whose use is an absolute necessity for

accurate LPG metering, brings up another point for consideration,

namely, the pressure drop required by the meter, or the meter and : strainer, to deliver its rated capacity. The amount of pressure drop

required by any fluid meter to deliver its rated capacity is important

however, in the LPG system with its many restrictions in the pump I outlet line, together with the necessity of maintaining sufficient back

pressure to collapse any vapor, this question of pressure drop becomes

doubly important. It is essential that the LPG meter operate with

as low a pressure drop as possible in order that the pressure require- I ments of the pump be kept to a minimum.

In regard to the problem of meter testing, special recognition must

be given to the contributions by the Sealers of Weights and Measures I of the State of California. Little can be added at the present time

to the information on methods of meter proving which they have I developed.

Optimum proving practice requires that a meter be proved under I the same operating conditions and with the same liquid as will be en- I countered in actual service. Due to the many demands made upon the f meter manufacturer for meters to measure various liquids, they have I found it impractical, if not impossible, to follow this practice through- j out. This has been particularly true in the production of LPG meters.

Because of the difficulties attending the use of liquid propane or butane as a proving medium, manufacturers are generally restricted

to the use of some non-hazardous and stable proving fluid ; however,

in order to insure that these meters are properly calibrated for their

respective services, some correlation has had to be set up between the

results obtained with the proving fluid and those called for under

service conditions. In order to establish this correlation, and as a con- tinued check on meter performance, the manufacturers have availed

themselves of the facilities and services of various cooperative Sealers

of Weights and Measures and Liquefied Petroleum Gas agencies. Investigations are currently being made into the possibility of formulating the meter performance (accuracy and pressure drop) so that it might be possible to predict the performance of any one type of meter

for any fluid when its performance is known for one of them. Such

an investigation requires considerable work and study so that it will

J probably be some time before any decision regarding the practicability

of such a procedure will be made.

A survey of LPG meter-proving practice used throughout the country reveals the use of three proving methods—gravimetric, volumetric,
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 75

and water displacement. As stated previously, most of the development of these methods has been made by the weights and measures personnel and has been reported upon by them so that no attempt will be

made to elaborate upon them. Each of these methods, if properly

carried out by trained personnel, will give the required accuracy nec- essary for meter proving.

DISCUSSION ON THE FOUR PRECEDING PAPERS

Mr. Hessee. I wish to ask Mr. Brenton how, in the use of the volumetric prover, he makes temperature corrections to correct the volume

in the prover to the temperature of the delivery which passed through

the meter.

The Chairman. Mr. Perkins is the operator of our test unit in California, and I shall refer that question to him.

Mr. Perkins. We do not attempt to make any temperature correction. We make a very rapid run, and in that way we get our temperatures very nearly equal. I have found by actual check that there is usually less than one degree difference between the temperature in the

meter and in the test vessel. If the liquid remains even for only a few

minutes in the test measure on a hot day we discard that run. Mr. Hessee. I think that in all fairness to the manufacturers, a standard test procedure should be developed, because the meters which

we are attempting to test will probably repeat within a higher degree

of accuracy than the accuracy which we can claim for the test method

itself.

The coefficient of expansion of propane is roughly 0.15 percent per

degree Fahrenheit. It is obvious that the liquid is at some temperature when it goes through the meter being tested ; if that temperature

happens to be 60° F and the temperature of the liquid in the prover is

64° F, it is again obvious that there is going to be an expansion of 0.6

percent.

This temperature variable is involved in both the volumetric and

gravimetric methods of proving. The gravimetric method is based

on weighing a metered volume of, say, 50 gallons. Assume that the net

weight of an indicated delivery of 50 gallons is 200 pounds. The

only way to relate the 50 gallons to the 200 pounds is by a factor of

density, or weight per gallon; by dividing the 200 pounds by the

weight per gallon of the liquid, we arrive at what the meter should

have read. But if our density figure is not correct, then the percentage

error will include an error caused by the testing method, but which

appears to be a meter error. If the test methods are carefully checked

to see what their accuracies are, we won't run into such trouble. Now,

if the temperature error is relatively large and the temperature cor- rection is not made, our procedure is in error. Under different conditions the variations would be different. Unless we know exactly what

the conditions are, the tolerance would have to be large enough to cover the worst conditions encountered.

Mr. Perkins. Have you encountered any temperature increase

within the meter as a result of the setting of the back-pressure valve?

Mr. Hessee. We have found the temperature increased in the meter

from the back pressure and also from the bypassing of the liquid

around the pump. When the bypass on the pump is operating, the

904381—50 7
76 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OP STANDARDS

liquid tends to heat up more rapidly, and of course that heated stream

goes right through the meter. The heat effect causes temperature

variation over a wider range, and a test run under those conditions

must be rejected unless you can integrate over the entire temperature

range and arrive at an average density.

Mr. Perkins. I think that is one of the reasons why we have stayed

with the volumetric method, with the vapor return. We do not slow

down our pump. We get a delivery at the full speed of the equipment,

and I' think that is why our temperatures are in very close agreement.

Mr. Baucom. Please explain the effect of a drop in the pressure on

the volumetric measuring system, from 225 pounds pressure down to

a point just above vaporization.

Mr. Perkins. We would not get any drop in the process of measure. Vapor returns are used throughout. Our test measure is filled from

the bottom and there is very little agitation. We try to get merely a displacement of the vapor rather than any vaporization. That is what we base the whole test on. We always reject the first run. We

try to get everything equal—pressure and temperature—and then

make rapid runs ; that is very important.

The Chairman. In our code the tolerance for a normal run is 2

cubic inches per gallon in excess or in deficiency; on a slow run it' is 3 cubic inches. Also, "the 'normal' test of meter shall be made at

the maximum rate permitted by the installation. The amounts delivered shall not vary from the standard by more than the tolerances

hereinafter provided, (1) during continuous or intermittent discharge

of liquid, (2) when operated, in the case of a meter of less than 2

inches, at a rate not less than 7 gallons per minute, and in the case of a meter of 2 inches or more, when operated at a rate which is 20 percent

of the manufacturer's marked maximum rate or a rate which is % of

the 'normal' maximum rate permitted by the installation, whichever is

less."

I noted from Mr. Hessee's paper—an excellent paper, by the way—

that you were running down as low as 5 gallons per minute. Is that

correct ? Mr. Hessee. That is quite true. Would you tell us your experience

on slow tests % Mr. Perkins. We have found tremendous errors. One meter put

on the market about a year and a half ago showed an error of 1 percent for each gallon-per-minute difference in the rate of flow. That

meter would normally operate at about 20 gallons per minute in filling a customer's tank with a vapor return. But if no vapor return is used

the delivery rate is slowed down. We were finding errors as high

as 15 to 20 percent in excess on that particular type of meter. That

is another reason why we have used the volumetric method with the

rapid run in an effort to get a true run. We also use the slow run to prove out the meter. It usually shows

the actual condition of the meter very well. If the meter is in good

condition the error will not be great, but if the meter is badly worn

the errors on the slow run will be far in excess of the tolerance.

Mr. Hessee. I should like to comment on the vapor return with

respect to the accuracy of customer deliveries, as distinguished from

the ability of the meters to measure liquid accurately. Assume that

we have a tank truck containing liquid at a relatively high tempera-
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 77

ture, and that the pressure is up to about 120 pounds per square inch.

Assume also a consumer's tank with the liquid at a relatively low temperature and the pressure at about 70 pounds per square inch. If a vapor-return line is connected between these two tanks there will be

a flow of vapor to the low-pressure tank until the pressures are

equalized.

Now the question is, "What amount of vapor has been exchanged?"

To determine that, we must know the physical properties of the gas

as well as the number of cubic feet of vapor which flowed from one tank to the other ; and, of course, we may be dealing with two different

gases. Before the operation is started we may have a pressure differ- ence which will cause the net flow to be in one direction or the other.

If this net flow amounts to any appreciable percentage of the delivery,

the fact that the meter is found accurate on one test with vapor return

does not assure the consumer that when the meter says 50 gallons he

is going to get a net delivery of 50 gallons.

Now let us assume that our tanks have equalized pressure, that both

are at 75 pounds per square inch, that the vapor-return valve is open,

and that the liquid-delivery valve is open. For every gallon of liquid

going to the consumer's tank, a gallon of vapor is displaced back to the

other tank. For the delivery to be accurate under all conditions, it would be necessary that the ratio of the density of the vapor to the

density of the liquid be constant. But if you Avill consult the tables

on the properties of saturated propane, you will find that the ratio

between the densities of the liquid and the vapor is different at different temperatures; between 0° and 100° F. there is about a 5-percent

spread between the percentage figures representing the weight per

vapor gallon divided by the weight per liquid gallon. For saturated

butane the corresponding spread is about 2 percent.

Therefore, if customer deliveries are made using a vapor return, no

single meter adjustment will insure accurate deliveries, and seasonal

adjustments of meters will be required to produce accurate deliveries.

If you are going to set up a small "delivery" tolerance and adhere to

that tolerance, vapor returns must be eliminated. After you have

tested a meter and sealed it, that is supposed to mean that when a delivery is made to the consumer he is going to get the quantity represented plus or minus whatever "meter" tolerance applies. This is not

going to be true if deliveries are made with vapor return. I dare say

that about 75 percent of the tank trucks in some of the States that are now delivering LPG will not pump this material without vapor return

because the pumps won't build up a large enough differential. The

problem is to obtain accurate deliveries without sacrificing practical

operation of equipment and safety.

Mb. Perkins. I have checked against Mr. Fuller's equipment on

numerous occasions, and many times I have duplicated Mr. Fuller's

checks and settings which have been by the gravimetric method. I

think the largest discrepancy between the two methods has been about

one-half of 1 percent.

Me. Blickley. Under the California code it is permissible to sell

LPG by vapor volume. Do you permit vapor-volume meters which

measure by the cubic foot but which indicate in some other unit of

quantity % For example, would you permit an index on such a meter
78 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

to indicate 10 "Happy cooking units" as equal to 1 cubic foot? If not,

would you give your reasons ? The Chairman. We do not permit that. We specify that sales can

be by weight, by liquid volume, or by the cubic foot. The reason for

that stipulation is that we want to adhere to standard weights and

measures. To recognize units such as you mention would be like recognizing a New Jersey gallon, a California pound, or an Arizona mile.

We are going to hold to those terms commonly used in the United

States, namely avoirdupois pounds and ounces, the United States gallon, and the cubic foot.

Mr. Blickley. After the measurement has been made in cubic feet or avoirdupois pounds or ounces, would you permit the billing or the

invoicing in any other terms than standard weights and measures ? The Chairman. The answer to that is also, "No."

Mr. Btjttolph (Phillips Petroleum Co.). I should like to ask if, in

California, you are actually establishing the true accuracy of your

metering device, either from a theoretical standpoint or from a practical standpoint.

Mr. Perkins. We have attempted to do just that. Our error has

been less than one-half of 1 percent, which we felt was satisfactory.

The error caused by expansion is so slight that I disregard it entirely.

There is one thing that should be remembered when comparing our

conditions with those in North Carolina and the Middle West. We

have no underground systems in California, and our temperatures are nearly equal in the customer's tank and in the delivery truck.

Mr. Buttolph. The reason I asked that question, Mr. Perkins, is

that the vapor in the tank originally can represent 3 percent of the

liquid volume. So there you could have an error of 3 percent. Theoretically, we have not been able to convince ourselves that the volumetric method of checking is satisfactory. We have been going along

with Mr. Hessee—and when I say "we" I mean the American Petroleum Institute—in working out a satisfactory method of determining

the accuracy of meters for LPG as well as other hydrocarbons. I

would like to say, Mr. Hessee, that a new specific gravity device is

being worked on by the Natural Gasoline Association which we hope

will be much more accurate than the present device that you are using.

I should like to throw in a word of caution to you gentlemen by

saying that in some instances you may condemn meters that are accurate because of errors in your measuring devices or your methods.

However, I think you have done a very good job.

Mr. Perkins. I think you lose sight of the fact that we make a complete fill of liquid and return of vapor before we ever start a check. That is, we do not consider the vapor in the testing tank

at all, when setting the meter. As Mr. Hessee has said, if there

were a large temperature differential there might be a considerable

flow of vapor in one direction or the other. Some of the dealers even install a check valve so that the vapor in their tank cannot flow

into the customer's tank, but in actually setting the meter we try to

get merely a displacement of the vapor.

Mr. Blickley. Mr. Brenton, before the completion of your study

on LPG and the adoption of your code, was LPG sold in California

in units of quality rather than units of standard weight or measure?
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 79

The Chairman". Very definitely, yes. In fact, there are vapor

meters in operation in California that use indicating elements in the

terms Mr. Blickley has mentioned. Our instruction to the owners

of those meters is to have them changed. Would you say, Mr. Perkins,

that there might be 200 such meters?

Mr. Perkins. There are probably a few more than that. There

are some that register in pounds. Of the approximately 6,000 vapor

meters in California I would estimate possibly 300 to 400 are registering in something other than cubic feet. When requests for changes

have been made our recommendations have been well received and

suppliers or owners have cooperated fully. The only objection I have

had so far has been from some of the meter manufacturers.

Mr. Buttolph. I realize that in the State of California there are very few vapor meters, and that it has been no problem to change

the dials and go back to the cubic foot. But we are not all in the

same situation. Actually there are over 500,000 meters registering

in decitherms. BetAveen here and the Rocky Mountains there are over one million A^apor meters in service. To change those meters

iioav would create a tremendous economic problem. We have had

long discussions Avith Mr. Blickley on this, and I respect his opinions

and arguments. I think that he would have had no argument from

us or from any part of the industry had we discussed this matter

twenty years ago Avhen we started out.

(At this point, at 12 : 55 p. ro., the Conference adjourned, to meet at 10 a. m„

Thursday, May 25, 1950.)

TOUR OF BUREAU OF STANDARDS LABORATORIES

During the afternoon of Wednesday, May 24, a 2-hour tour of

selected laboratories of the National Bureau of Standards was held

for those attending the Conference. Delegates and guests participating were divided into small parties, each in charge of a guide.

(On the evening of Wednesday, May 24, an informal party was held at Wardman Park Hotel, the Conference headquarters, for those attending the

Conference.)
FOURTH SESSION—MORNING OF THURSDAY,

MAY 25, 1950

(The Conference reassembled at 10: 10 a. m., C. C. Mundy, Vice President of

the Conference, presiding.)

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON SPECIFICATIONS AND TOLERANCES, PRESENTED BY J. P. McBRIDE, CHAIRMAN, AND DISCUSSION THEREON

During the course of the year your Committee has had under consideration the codes as appearing in NBS Handbook H44, and in

accordance with its established practice, has solicited suggestions from

the Conference members and industry. In December 1949 a communication was received from the National Association of Scale Manufacturers suggesting major changes in the scale code in several instances and requesting an opportunity to be heard by the Committee

in support of its proposals. In January of this year a communication

from the Secretary of the Committee was directed to the State weights

and measures offices and to industry advising them of an interim

meeting of the Committee to be held on February 13-15 at the

National Bureau of Standards and requesting suggestions from these sources in relation to any proposed changes in the several Conference

codes as published in NBS Handbook H44. Your Committee notes

from the tone of the replies that there appears to be a general feeling

of satisfaction with the codes as most recently amended at our last

Conference and a thought that these codes should be afforded a rea- sonable opportunity to work out as now existent. All submitted

matters were placed in the Committee agenda for consideration at

its meeting, and arrangements were made for hearings for those

parties manifesting a desire to be heard. Your Committee assembled

in executive session on February 13 and continued in session during

the entire day. On February 14 hearings were granted to the Technical Committee of the National Association of Scale Manufacturers

(which recommended a number of changes in the scale code), to a general group representing the Gasoline Pump Manufacturers'

Association (which made no recommendations for changes), and to- one individual. Considerable material was submitted at the hearing and the Committee gave careful consideration to all proposals

presented to it. Your Committee now has to advise that it was unable

for various reasons to act favorably on a majority of such proposals.

We have found that in one instance an error was made in one of the

codes as submitted at the last National Conference. The Committee

believes that some strengthening of requirements is desirable, and

accordingly makes some proposals on its own initiative.

The conclusions reached by the Committee at its February meeting were embodied in the "Tentative Report," which was distributed

early in April. Since that time, several new matters have come before

the Committee, and during the past several days the Committee has

80
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 81

met on a number of occasions. The conclusions of the Committee in

relation to the matters most recently considered are embodied in the

"Final Report," copies of which have been available here since the

opening of this meeting on Tuesday morning.

The complete recommendations of the Committee are, therefore,

covered by the two reports in your hands, the Tentative Report and

the Final Report. The specific recommendations contained therein

are presented to the 35th National Conference on Weights and

Measures for consideration and action.

John P. McBride, Chairman.,

R. W. Smith, Secretary,

G. F. Austin, Jr.,

Nalls Berryman,

Lotus E. Witt,

Committee on Specifications and Tolerances.

Mr. McBride. In presenting the specific recommendations of the

Committee, I shall first state the recommendation and shall then add

such explanation as seems appropriate. Following our customary

procedure, I shall then move the adoption of the Committee recommendation, in order to get this formally before the Conference for

action. [Reading :] SECTION ON GENERAL CODE

Add three new General Regulations, as follows

:

G-R.3. Suitability of Equipment.—Commercial equipment shall be suitable as to design and capacity for the service in which it is used.

G-R.4. Use of Adjustments.—Weighing elements and measuring elements

which are adjustable shall be adjusted only to correct those conditions which

such elements are designed to control, and shall not be adjusted to compensate

for defective or abnormal installation or accessories or for badly worn or otherwise defective parts of the assembly. Any faulty installation conditions shall

be corrected, and any defective parts shall be renewed or suitably repaired, before

adjustments are undertaken. Whenever equipment is adjusted, the adjustments

shall be so made as to bring performance errors as close as practicable to zero

value.

G—R.5. Method of Operation.—Equipment shall be operated only in the manner which is obviously indicated by its construction or which is indicated

by instructions on the equipment; if operated in any other manner the equipment shall be subject to condemnation.

Mr. McBride. Proposed G-R.3. is intended to provide a specific general requirement which may be cited by an official when he finds in use equipment which is unsuited for the service in which it is being

used. I move the adoption of General Regulation G-R.3.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus adopting General Regulation G-R.3.

)

Mr. McBride. Proposed G-R.4. and G-R.5. are based upon present Liquid-Measuring Device Regulations R.4. and R.5., and it is the

opinion of the Committee that these sound provisions should be ex- tended to all commercial equipment. If G-R.4. and G-R.5. are adopted as proposed, liquid-measuring device regulations R.4. and R.5.

and Grease-Measuring Device Regulation R.l. will become unnecessary. I move the adoption of General Regulations G-R.4. and G-R.5.

Mr. Batjcom. Would it be binding upon the inspector, to accept

any notation which might be placed on a scale or a meter? Would
82 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

the inspector be required to abide by the instructions rather than by

the code?

Mr. McBride. It would be binding on the inspector, because the

instructions would be a directive to the user of the device as to the

intended method of operation of the device.

Mr. Baucom. Suppose a meter were marked to show a minimum

rate of only 50 percent of its maximum rate ? Mr. McBride. The manufacturer could not mark a device with instructions not consistent with the code; he could not vitiate or nullify

the code by such instructions.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus adopting General Regulations G-R.4. and G-R.5.)

SECTION ON FABRIC-MEASURING DEVICES

Mr. McBride (reading) : Amend the first sentence of paragraph T.l. by changing the final period to a comma and adding the words, "except that the acceptance tolerance on underregistration shall be not smaller than % inch", so that the paragraph will read

as follows

T.l.—Maintenance tolerances on under-registration and on over-registration

shall be as shown in table 1 ; acceptance tolerances shall be one-half the maintenance tolerances, except that the acceptance tolerance on under-registration

shall be not smaller than % inch. (The error of a fabric-measuring device

to which the tolerance is applied—is the difference between the indication of

the device and the corresponding actual length of testing tape passed through

the device.)

The slight change in the acceptance tolerance on under-registration

for fabric-measuring devices is recommended to meet a manufacturing

condition which has been reported to the Committee. The proposed

change is considered by the Committee to be entirely justified under

the circumstances. I move the adoption of the amendment to toler- ance paragraph T.l. as proposed by the Committee.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus adopting the proposed amendment to tolerance paragraph T.l. for

fabric-measuring devices.)

section on cordage-measuring devices

Mr. McBride (reading) :

In table 1, change the heading of column two to read "On over-registration",

and change the heading of column three to read "On under-registration".

An error was made assembling the material for this code, resulting

in the reversal of the captions of the two columns in table 1 of toler- ance paragraph T.l. I move the adoption of the changes proposed

by the Committee.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus adopting the proposed changes in table headings in table 1 under paragraph T.l. for cordage-measuring devices.)

Mr. McBride (reading) : The Committee is cognizant of the tentative status of the code for cordagemeasuring devices. Since the 34th National Conference in 1949 the Committee

has been investigating cordage-measuring devices with reference to the provisions of the code, and has found that some improvements in these devices, as

presently designed, are desirable. It is believed that the manufacturers should

have a further opportunity to improve their product before final action on the

code is proposed. It is the intention of the Committee, during the coming year,
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 83

to keep in touch with this situation, probably conducting performance tests of

the devices from time to time. Accordingly, it is the recommendation of the

Committee that the code for cordage-measuring devices be continued in its present

tentative form until 1951, at which time it is anticipated that recommendations

for final adoption of requirements can be made.

I move that the code for cordage-measuring devices be continued

in its present tentative form until 1951.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus continuing the tentative status of the code for cordage-measuring

devices.

)

SECTION ON LIQUID-MEASURING DEVICES

Mr. McBride. Since the Conference has now adopted General Regulations G-R.4. and G-R.5., Liquid-Measuring Device Regulations R.4.

and R.5. are no longer needed. I move that these regulations be

deleted from the code for liquid-measuring devices, and that present

liquid-measuring device regulation R.6. be renumbered to become R.4.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus deleting regulations R.4. and R.5. from the code for liquid-measuring

devices.)

SECTION ON GREASE-MEASURING DEVICES

Mr. McBride. By reason of the adoption of General Regulation

G-R.4., Grease-Measuring Device Regulation R.l. is no longer necessary. I move that regulation R.l. be deleted from the code for greasemeasuring devices.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus deleting Regulation R.l. from the code on grease-measuring devices.)

SECTION ON SCALES

Mr. McBride (reading) : At the end of paragraph T.I.2.2., relative to minimum tolerance values, change

the final period to a colon and add a new proviso, so that the pragraph will read

as follows

:

T.l.2.2. On Automatic-Indicating Scales.—On a particular scale, the mainte- nance tolerances applied shall be not smaller than one-fourth the value of the

minimum reading-face graduation ; the acceptance tolerances applied shall be

not smaller than one-eighth the value of the minmium reading-face graduation

:

Provided, that on pre-packaging scales such as are defined in paragraph S.23., the maintenance tolerances applied shall be not smaller than one-eighth ounce and the acceptance tolerances applied shall be not smaller than one-sixteenth

ounce. Prior to the development of the prepackaging of perishable foods

for "self service" in retail markets, the weight portions of computingscale charts ordinarily were graduated by 1-ounce subdivisions. Now,

however, the computing scale companies have developed the so-called

prepackaging scales, having 14-ounce subdivisions. Having in mind

our present acceptance tolerance requirement for a minimum toler- ance equal to one-eighth of the value of the minimum reading-face

graduation, a scale with ^-ounce graduations would be required to

respond to a V3 2 -°unce weight; the ability of computing scales to meet

this requirement is debatable. It appears entirely reasonable to the

Committee to amend paragraph T.l.2.2. by the addition of the proviso

recommended, and I move that this Committee recommendation be

adopted.
84 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Mr. Reese. In Iowa there is a great deal of prepackaging of fresh

meats. Meat will shrink, and packages which were full weight when

packaged are out of tolerance when offered for sale.

Mr. Baucom. Is the Committee going to recommend a reduction

of the maximum value of the minimum graduation on prepackaging

scales ? Mr. McBride. The Committee is not recommending any change in

the present requirement that "The value of the minimum graduation

on a scale used for the retail sale of foodstuffs shall be not greater

than 1 ounce."

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus adopting the amendment to scale tolerance paragraph T.1.2.2.) Mr. McBride (reading) :

In the first sentence of paragraph T.2.3.3. change "5 percent" to "3 percent",

and change "3 percent" to "2 percent", so that the paragraph will read as follows

T.2.3.3. For Wheel-Load Weighers.—The basic maintenance tolerance for in- dividual wheel-load weighers, on under-registration or on over-registration,

shall be 3 percent of the known test load ; the basic acceptance tolerance on

under-registration or on over-registration shall be 2 percent of the known test

load. When two wheel-load weighers are tested as a pair, the tolerance shall

be applied to the sum of the indications of the two weighers, and the pair shall

be approved or rejected upon the basis of the combined indications.

The manufacturers of wheel-load weighers have improved their

devices so that they now feel they can meet a finer tolerance than we

have heretofore specified. The Committee feels, therefore, that the

tolerances for wheel-load weighers should be reduced. I move the

adoption of the Committee recommendation.

Mr. M. W. Jensen. Would this change be retroactive ? Mr. McBride. Yes. Tolerances are retroactive.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was

agreed to, thus adopting the Committee recommendation relative to tolerance

paragraph T.2.3.3. for wheehload weighers.)

Mr. McBride. You have now completed your consideration of the

entire Report of the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances. I

wish to thank you for the reception given to H-44:. The codes are being generally accepted without major change, and the Committee

is pleased to know that we have been able to combine a series of codes

that has proved so acceptable to you gentlemen. We have tried to give

you, in language as simple as possible, codes that will be workable, and

I believe that we have achieved a large measure of success.

prepackaged perishable commodities

THE MARKETER'S VIEWPOINT—REMARKS OF R. G. CARPENTER, MEAT PACKAGING

SPECIALIST, THE GREAT ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA CO. Ever since the general store and the proverbial cracker-barrel days,

most changes in food retailing have involved packaging. With the

development of the self-service super food market in the early 1930's

these changes became one of not just packaging for self-service. The

meat department in our concept of the modern food store has been one

of the last to be bitten by the self-service bug. Although this method

of merchandising was looked upon with favor by those closely asso- ciated with the retailing of meats, the application to these products

presented many problems which were difficult to overcome.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 85

The lack of uniformity in quality, trimming, and appearance of

individual meat cuts made it imperative that any consideration along

these lines provide visible packages.

Meats, unlike many other perishable products, are extremely sensitive to change in appearance as well as change in condition. Most

meats lose that bright, fresh-cut appearance some time before they

actually become out of condition. The very marked change which

takes place in the appearance of meats as they lose their bloom made

it a necessity that any packaging materials employed provide, along

with visibility, product stability from the standpoint of appearance

as well as condition.

The development of Cellophane was probably the greatest single

factor contributing to the successful growth and development of selfservice meats. In fact, sliced bacon was one of the first products ever packaged in Cellophane. Even with the development of Cellophane,

however, progress was slow. Lack of refrigerated self-service display

facilities discouraged any real enthusiasm for the idea. It was not

until 1941 that such equipment became available.

With the advent of the first refrigerated self-service meat display

case, interest grew rapidly not only among retailers, but among packaging material suppliers, packers, and equipment manufacturers as

well. The war, and the extreme shortages of meat, tended to retard

further expansion. However, sufficient interest had been created so that today new and improved packaging materials are continually becoming available, packaging know-how is improving, and continued

improvements are being made in display equipment. Despite the

progress which has been made to date, however, self-service in the

meat department is still a relatively new field and might be considered

in the experimental stage. The packages still look a little bit on the

amateurish side when compared with the packaging being done in

other fields.

We are not going to try and discuss today the advantages or disadvantages of self-service in the meat department from a merchandising

standpoint. We are going to talk about self-service and its effect on

correct quantity and price determination, which is the phase of the

development in which we believe you gentlemen are most interested.

The A&P Tea Company, in their anxiety and concern to safeguard

the public's interest, in the operation of our markets, pioneered the

development of Customeread computing scales, so that the customer

could assist in checking each transaction. Today we have specialists

whose chief responsibility is checking the accuracy of our scales.

With the growth of self-service in the meat departments, we cooperated with the various scale manufacturers in the development of

scales particularly designed for prepackaging. The new scales which

are now available for use in such operations provide for a far greater

degree of accuracy both in the weighing and computation.

More important, however, than the mechanical improvements in the

scales, is that the weighing and pricing in a self-service meat department becomes a specialized phase of the market operation. It provides for the weighing and pricing of numbers of packages of similar

items prior to sale. Therefore, the price-per-pound factor is kept

constant in computing the several transactions. Persons are chosen

as scalers who show the greatest aptitude for this type of work. They

I
86 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

are then trained to prepare them properly for their duties. In addition, since they have no other responsibilities at the time, the scaling

and pricing is given their undivided attention.

In operating our markets, we have the person doing the scaling

indicate his or her number on the label. This provides the market

managers and supervision the opportunity for checking their accuracy.

It also tends to place greater responsibility upon the individuals doing

the scaling.

It is not only, however, just in the actual mechanics of scaling that

we provide greater protection to the consumer as well as being of real

assistance to the weights and measures inspectors. It is the recording

of all of the details of the transaction on the self-service label. On

our labels, we provide all of the information which is required by law

as well as other information which we feel is pertinent. We provide a description of the product, the exact net weight of the contents weighed

to the quarter ounce, the price per pound, and the total computed

price, as well as our name as distributor. In addition, we indicate in

code the day of the week the package has been prepared. All of this

information, including the price per pound, is most essential if full

value of the protection afforded through self-service is to be achieved.

From our observation, error in retail meat transactions has not been

a question of weight alone, but—most important—the computation of

the price. In the absence of the price-per-pound indicated on the

labels, it would be impossible to check this factor accurately.

Probably all of the many reasons why weights and measures inspectors have always looked with favor on the prepackaging of staple

commodities would also be applicable to meats. With self-service

meats, they are provided an opportunity to check the accuracy of the

scales and the accuracy of the retailer's weighing and computing of a representative variety of the many products being handled—not just

single transactions. With all information such as weight, price per

pound, and computed price clearly indicated on the self-service packaged meat label, it greatly simplifies the inspector's task of checking

such operations.

The most difficult problems in the development on self-service of

meats have had to do with proper packaging materials. As we mentioned earlier, materials employed had to provide a good, substantial,

visible package—they had to keep the meat in good condition and

maintain the appearance of the product for a salable length of time.

Since Cellophane was first employed as a wrapper on sliced bacon,

innumerable studies have been conducted on this subject. Today there

are a number of packaging materials which perform reasonably well.

Color or appearance retention was, and still remains, one of the most

difficult phases. This problem divided itself into two groups : Cured

meats, such as hams, bacon, luncheon meats, etc., and Fresh Red Meats

such as beef, lamb, veal, and fresh pork. Strange as it may seem, cured

meats have been the most difficult in this respect. These products derive their color from the nitrates and nitrites used in processing. This

color is extremely sensitive to light or oxygen. In the absence of either

of these two factors, color can be retained for a satisfactory length of

time. Cured meats, when kept in the dark, if packaged in Cellophane

or other transparent materials, keep their bright color. Exposed to

light, they fade and lose their bloom rapidly. The only way the light
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 87

factor could be eliminated was through discarding the visibility, which

is so important from a sales standpoint. If oxygen were to be eliminated, it would require the application of a highly air-tight and

moisture-proof material.

All of the studies which had been conducted on packaging materials

for use in meats, however, had to throw out the possibility of a moisture-proof, air-tight, packaging material. Meats had to breathe.

These products are all of a high moisture content, and are continually

exuding moisture. In a completely moisture-proof package, moisture

retained on the surface of the product became the breeding ground for

bacterial action and hastened the rate of spoilage. It has been found,

however, that cured meat products can be packaged in a moisture-proof

container on which a vacuum has been drawn. In the absence of any

air whatsoever on these products, even though packaged in a moistureproof material, the bacterial action is sharply retarded. This operation, however, still presents additional operating difficulties.

In the absence of any alternative, most cured meats today are packaged in material such as LSAT Cellophane which permits these

products to breathe and tends to absorb some of the moisture given

off. Retailers are compelled to strive to control the disadvantage

of fading through turnover, reduction in light intensity, and, in some

instances, going so far as to turn the package upside down.

Until just a few years ago, the packaging of Fresh Meats was not

practical since no materials had been developed which would keep

the bloom on them even for a matter of a few hours. In April 1944

the Du Pont Company, with the cooperation of the A&P Tea Company, developed MSAT-80 Cellophane. This film and others developed since do a really remarkable job in keeping the bright, freshcut color on fresh meats for a workable length of time. Here too,

however, it had to be recognized that these products had to breathe.

Control over the rate of the moisture dehydration was a contributing

factor to the success of these films. The other was the providing for

the presence of oxygen on the surface of the product, which is just

the opposite to what was necessary on color retention for cured

meats.

Providing for the presence of oxygen on fresh meat products is

largely accomplished through the porousness of that side of the film

which comes in contact with the meat. In developing suitable packages for the individual meat items, it was found that cardboards and

cardboard trays were sometimes desirable to give the package rigidity.

With these materials too, it was necessary to provide for controlled

amounts of moisture absorption in order to protect the product

properly.

All meats have a relatively high moisture content. They are constantly being dehydrated. In presenting retail meat items to the

customer in self-service units, those materials which provide the

degree of protection necessary and yet present the product in an

attractive manner, although they tend to control and sharply reduce

this dehydration, cannot eliminate it entirely and still provide the

protection which is necessary. Such moisture loss usually is absorbed

by the packaging materials employed. The relative degree of dehydration within the packages will vary widely depending upon the

type of meat, cut of meat, temperature, and time. As a retailer, we

I
88 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

are conscious of this problem and are taking every precaution to insure

proper weights at all times. All of our tests on the subject indicate

that the shrinkages concerned are relatively small and, where there is a rapid turnover of product and good low-temperature refrigeration,

do not exist to any measurable degree. However, it still remains a

difficult problem.

Part of the difficulty is the procedure employed in the interpretation

of the weights and measures regulations in the different communities.

As a retailer operating stores in many sections of the country, we

find it difficult in setting up standards for our self-service markets to

insure absolutely that we are not only giving our consumer full measure

but that we are also in strict conformance with the rules and regulations of that community covering proper quantity determination.

The procedures by which weights and measures inspectors check the

activities of self-service packaged meat departments are varied. In

some instances in checking these markets, inspectors strip the packaging materials from the package and weigh the contents. Since, as we have mentioned before, it is necessary in the packaging of meats

to employ materials which tend to pick up limited amounts of moisture which must of necessity be given off by these products, slight

shrinkages may be detected. Some jurisdictions have attempted to

recognize this condition and established shrinkage tolerances varying

from an eighth of an ounce to the pound to a quarter of an ounce to

the pound.

It is difficult for us to conceive, however, how this is a practical solution to the problem. It is an impossibility to set a specific pattern for

the shrinkages involved on different cuts of meat and under the constantly varying conditions.

The practice which we have observed on the part of some inspectors

which we feel to be more practical, and which should tend to protect

the customer as well as to provide some degree of protection for the

retailer, is that of weighing the package itself, and then weighing a dummy package of the packaging materials used to insure that there

had been adequate tare allowance provided for the packaging

materials.

Another problem concerns a package produced by the packer. As

you have probably already observed, there is a continually increasing

wider selection of packer prepackaged meats being made available to

retail meat dealers. Recently, in their efforts to produce packages

that would lend themselves more attractively to self-service, the

packers are now preparing some products, such as picnics, processed

in a transparent cellulose casing. On such products, it is going to be

impossible or impracticable for the retailer to strip off this casing in

order to determine the net weight of the product. The Meat Inspection Division of the Department of Agriculture, in interpreting the

regulation that requires that each packaged meat product carry a net

weight before leaving the packer's plant, have interpreted these cellulose casings to be a part of the product, similar to the casing on a

sausage, since these materials are employed in the processing of these

products. We hope that the local weights and measures authorities

will follow a similar interpretation in exercising their responsibilities

in checking these products. We, as a retailer, feel it important, in
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 89

our anxiety to protect the consumer, to be in conformance with local

weights and measures regulations.

In summing up, we would like to say that never before in the history

of the retail meat business has the customer been given the degree of

protection with respect to weights and pricing that is hers in the selfservice meat department. We know that you will agree that your

problems as weights and measures inspectors will be simplified many

times over with the further development of self-service in the meat

departments. We trust that you will bear in mind some of the problems confronting the retailer in developing the procedures for checking

his activities.

THE MARKETER'S VIEWPOINT—REMARKS OF CHARLES SIEGEL, NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION OF RETAIL GROCERS

I have been asked to speak today on the subject, "Prepackaged

Perishable Commodities—The Marketer's Viewpoint". I want to

warn you at the outset that my experience in the field of prepackaged

perishables is somewhat limited—in fact it embraces a period of less

than five months of actual operation. At the same time I do not want

to convey the impression that our company made the swing to prepackaged perishables "blindfolded." For years prior to the changeover I had read and studied all available subject matter as well as acquiring a great deal of valuable information at conventions and

forums within the food industry. Still, I make no claim to being an

expert and so, with this understood, I shall content myself with

attempting to pose questions and ideas which may, perchance, open up

avenues of further discussion from the representative group of specialists here present.

Our store is in the downtown section of Richmond in an area where

Negro patronage constitutes more than half of the volume. It is a long, narrow building and traffic, particularly on week ends, is unusually heavy. When we first considered changing to 100 percent selfservice meats, everyone warned of the disastrous consequences. I began to doubt my own judgment in the light of the many powerful arguments advanced against its practicability. Our kind of business, they

said, was different. Negroes, of all people, would never take selfservice—they wanted to see their meats weighed. The white customers, in the main composed of families of the "old school," would insist

on meats cut-to-order. The venture was deemed to be foolhardy.

For a time the question was whether or not to pay heed to these wellmeaning advisers. Under such circumstances a decision is difficult to

arrive at. As previously stated, our store is a narrow affair and week

end traffic has always been a problem. The long waiting lines at the

counter and the jostling confusion of Negroes and whites definitely

did not make for an ideal situation. In spite of these negative opinions we went ahead with our plans and to date have not regretted it. Shortly after the installation of our Self-Service Meat Department we

ran a full page in the local newspapers, explaining the innumerable

advantages to be enjoyed. The ad contained only a handful of items

and prices, most of it being devoted to copy of an educational or "come

and see for yourself" nature. The response was terrific and except

for one or two past events of an unusual character, we did the biggest
90 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

business in the history of our store. And I am happy to report that

this upward spiral is continuing.

To be sure, we had some complaints at first, but I dare say that if a survey were made among our customers today, 90 percent or better

would express complete approval of self-service meats.

Let's review the advantages of this type of operation both from

the marketer's and consumer's angle, for in each case they are manifold. I cannot point to any noticeable saving in overhead for us

in fact we have had to "up" our personnel by one or two employees,

but they are women working in the packaging department and commanding considerably less by way of income than) skilled meat

cutters. We also have a substantial wholesale meat business and

some of our cutters have thus been diverted, either whole or part

time, to other activities.

The important thing I wish to emphasize, however, is that our meat business with 100 percent self-service has and is continuing to

increase, and due to greater traffic, a beneficial effect upon all other

commodities is being steadily manifested. We have found, moreover, that self-service meats have more "eye appeal"—the customer

with limited money to spend avoids embarrassment at the counter.

Also there is the important factor of sanitation. Under the old

method, many patrons had the habit of personally handling meats,

and in a stoi'e such as ours, catering to mixed trade, there were ever- present and well-justified doubts of cleanliness.

Most of you in session here are, quite naturally, interested in prepackaged perishables from your own perspective of weights and

measures. While I realize that I am "sticking my neck out" by dealing

with this phase of a subject on which you are so well informed, nevertheless I am going to air some of my views and reveal certain

Aveaknesses prevalent under this new method of packaging. May I say

in advance, however, that while our store has its own share of problems, prepackaging and otherwise, the following are not among

them

1. Short Weight And Overcharging.—These "bugaboos" can be largely over- come by first fixing prices a cent or two per pound higher and allowing % ounce

for shrinkage, provided needs beyond two days are not anticipated.

2. Tare Alloivance.-—Some merchants apparently overlook the fact that only

the net contents can be priced to the customer. They should be reminded otherwise.

3. Proper Refrigeration Of SmoJced Meats.—There is a tendency to display

these atop the case or in mass floor displays, with a resultant shrinkage of 10

percent or more in a matter of days. This practice should be discouraged. All

smoked meats except those of old cure should be kept under refrigeration.

4. Handling Of Fish.—Fish live in water and consequently their weight consists of a higher-than-ordinary percentage of water and blood. A low mean

temperature must, therefore, at all times be maintained for firmness, congealment, and avoidance of excessive shrinkage. The proper level should be 28 to 30 degrees.

In conclusion, it would seem to me that the extent of dehydration in

prepackaged perishables is our momentous problem. With differing

climatic conditions and varying moisture content, depending upon

the solidity of beast, fish, or fowl, it is difficult to arrive at any accurate

standard for advance determination of shrinkage. Until such time

as we can scientifically gauge these differentials and depend upon the

honesty and judgment of individuals, you members of the various

Bureaus of Weights and Measures must keep unceasing vigilance.

1
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 91

INFORMATIVE LABELING AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES—REMARKS OF H. E. HOWARD, SUPERVISOR OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES, CITY OF MIAMI, FLA.

In the abstract, labeling need not necessarily be in print for the

analytical mind. Conversely, labeling as applied to the sale of

commodities must be evidenced in concrete form.

Being an exponent of the school of thought, that an apology is in

order for a long presentation of a subject because there was not enough

time to prepare a shorter one, I submit the following

:

Since the advent of self-service for prepackaged commodities and

its increasing popularity, the work of a weights and measures official

is doubled, as it is necessary to check the marked price as well as the marked net weight, on such commodities. Close supervision

must be maintained to nullify a great potential loss to the buyer and

possibly the seller.

To facilitate this double-checking operation and give the buyer

full information on the commodities displayed for sale, our Division

promulgated the following regulation. It was included in the City

of Miami Ordinance No. 3573 and adopted the 19th clay of May, 1948.

Self-Service, Freshly Packaged Meats, Cheese, and Similar Commodities

:

When put in package form and out of the presence of the purchaser, shall

be plainly and conspicuously marked as to price per pound, except when packaged

in standard sizes of one quarter (%.), one-half (%), and one (1) and multiples

of the pound. Price tags shall not be used to conceal bone or undesirable portions

of such commodities in transparent wrappings. Weight markings shall indicate

to the nearest quarter (%) ounce. Thus the price tag will show the "Price per Pound," the "Net

Weight," and the "Price" for the net weight indicated. . This permits

the purchaser, the market supervisor, and the weights and measures

inspector to make an "on the spot" check or inspection at any time.

The regulation is simple enough that no legal or technical clarification

is required.

Tare weight is compensated for by using a duplicate container as a counterbalance, therefore net weights are read directly on the scale.

A check of ten packages of at least five commodities (50 packages)

is considered a representative check. Usually two delicatessen items

and three meat items are checked.

In checking we use a "Weight-Price Inspection Report" form (see

fig. 20), which records the subject Commodity and Price per Pound,

Date Prepackaged, Legibly Marked check, Use of Date Code check.

Then for ten individual actual packages, tabulations under "Net

Weight (Oz) " are made for "Marked", "Exact", "Over", and "Short",

and under "Sale Price _(Cts)" for "Marked", "Exact", "Over", and

"Under." Tare weight is compensated for by duplicate container.

Next is Totals, Number of Packages, and Average Net Weight,

showing excessive or deficient amount and percent; Satisfactory

Weight and Price checks, and, for correction purposes, Re-label,

Re-package, and Stop-Sale checks are shown. A footnote states that,

"Variations from the marked net weight shall be as often above as below."

If items being checked are found on a quick check to be satisfactory

(marked net weights and prices being as often above as below with

904381—50 s
92 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA

DEPARTMENT OF

ENGINF-ERINS

DIVISION OF WEIGHTS 6- MEASURES WEIGHT-PRICE INSPECTION REPORT

DATE INSPECTED TIME

ADDRESS

Legibly Marked Y es No n

DATE PREPACKAGED

Dote Code Used Yel No

COMMODITY NET WEIGHT (OZ.) SALE PRICE (CTS.)

MARKED

EX OVER SHORT MARKED

EX OVER UNDER

PRICE PER LB. A

C

T

AC

T

1.

2. INDIVIDUAL

3. ACTUAL

4, PACKAGES 5.

t>.

7.

6. TARE WEIGHT--

Compensated for by 9. duplicate container

10.

TOTALS

NUMBER OF PKGS.

AVERAGE NET WEIGHT; EXCESSIVE . % DEFICIENT. _OZ.

SATISFACTORY:

RE. PACKAGE - STOP SALE ORDER NO

Copy to: OWNER OH AGENT

Note. Variations from the marked net weight shall be as often above as below.

FORM 965 Figuee 20. Weight-price inspection report form—City of Miami, Fla.

no unreasonable variation), the form can be filled in by check-marking the columns instead of actually marking in the amount of variation. The report will then show only the number of packages in their

respective columns.

The report is signed by the owner or agent and the inspector. A

copy is given to the owner. In Miami we have good cooperation with the market operators.

It is understood that there are 16 ounces in a pound, no more, and
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 93

certainly no less. For the inspector to clear a bin or possibly a whole

case of items with a re-label, re-package, or stop-sale order indicates a weakness in market management. Our market managements are very strong in Miami.

One of the big reasons for this cooperation is that every merchant

knows that each and every one of his competitors is complying with

the regulation. Some chain stores use it outside our jurisdiction

because it tends for better merchandising and checking purposes.

The power of suggestion is often greater than the power of command

for a lasting enforcement. Our prosecutions are relatively few.

In conclusion, I would say that if the weights and measures official

is equipped with the proper regulations and the market operators

are indoctrinated as to compliance with these regulations, confusion

and complaint can be reduced to a minimum, thereby making the

selling and buying transaction a happier one. The regulation also applies to special orders unless scales are so positioned that the customer may see the weighing operation of his

purchase. This eliminates a package coming out of a service window

with only the price marked on the package.

In the absence of "Price per Pound" marking on the individual

package, the purchaser has no means of checking the value represented

unless he is a wizard at mathematics. Therefore, he is at a loss to

compare values in one store with those of another. I consider it a prime duty of any Weights and Measures Department or Division to

initiate regulatory legislation so that the buying public will not, at the

time of purchase, be confronted with solving an equation with an un- known factor. The price per pound marking also eliminates the

possible deceptive or misleading bin prices—for example, a small

marked inconspicuously in pencil above the "lb" mark on a price tag.

When a minimum weight marking of one ounce is used it is easy

enough to note a discrepancy of five cents or more on items in the

higher price range. This prompted the requirement for %-ounce

weight marking.

The uniform placing of price tags, usually on one side of an odd

shaped or round package or on one corner of a rectangular package,

makes a neater display and shows the customer there is no intent to cover anything in the package that might be irregular.

Since the buyer is entitled to the marked net weight, the question

of shrinkage may arise. The merchant may make an allowance at the

time of packaging or he may use a "date code" system which will

enable him to determine how long any item has been packaged. Then

if the time element causes any appreciable shrinkage, he will know

when to recheck any such items. If commodities are packaged and

stored, marking should be made at the time of display. Whatever

method of packaging is used, the buyer is still entitled to the marked

net weight.

In making weight-price checks we use exact weight scales with a one-pound beam graduated in y± ounces, the one ounce over-and-under

indicator having TVounce graduations. Thus the use of unit weights

is eliminated, which makes a faster operation. Prices are checked instantly with a book of weight-price charts. Thus an inspector makes

a complete check with his own equipment without interfering with the

merchant in his normal operation of business.
94 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DISCUSSION ON THE THREE PRECEDING PAPERS

Mr. A. J. Mayer. I should like to ask Mr. Carpenter about picnics.

Those being shipped into Louisiana weigh from iy2 to 2 pounds. They

are not marked to show their net weights and they are not even sold

by the pound ; they are sold by the piece.

Mr. Carpenter. You probably have reference to smoked butts;

picnic hams would run considerably heavier than iy2 to 2 pounds. If

those products are not wrapped and identified as a self-service unit

then our instructions to our organization are that they must be sold

at a definite price per pound, that they must be stripped of their wrappers, and that they must be weighed and priced to the consumer at the

time of sale. If our people are not doing that, you can rest assured

that we will correct any condition of that sort that exists. Variableweight products in our meat stores must be sold at a definite price per

pound, and if these products are not prepackaged and available for

self-service, they must be stripped of their package wrapper and

weighed and priced at the time of sale.

Mr. A. J. Mayer. I did not mean to say that this was done directly

by the A & P stores. These butts are shipped to many of the smaller

stores in the State.

Mr. Carpenter. In our opinion it is impossible to sell equitably, at a unit price, variable-weight merchandise in a meat department. I can

think of no instance where we would condone or tolerate such a

practice.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. It is my feeling that whether or not the merchandise is stripped at time of sale, prepackaged merchandise should

be somewhat overweight. I wonder if it is the fact that where weights

and measures enforcement is effective a little more is put in, and

where weights and measures enforcement is not effective, the merchandise is packed absolutely net weight. In the District of Columbia we require an overage.

THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICIAL TO HIS WEIGHTS AND

MEASURES ASSOCIATION

By J. R. Jones, Commissioner of Agriculture, State of South Carolina

In accepting the invitation to speak to you today on the responsibilities of the official to his weights and measures association, my

thoughts revolved around the word "responsibilities." Webster's dictionary defines the word "responsibility" as meaning "a charge for

which one is accountable." The plural of the word—that is, responsibilities—merely increases the number of charges for which we are accountable.

As an official, either elected or appointed, each of us is familiar

with "accountable charges." The day we assumed our duties we gave

some form of oath that we would be ever mindful of the charges we

had pledged to undertake. Many of the responsibilities were made by

our predecessors, some we made ourselves; and the active, alert official is continually studying and acting on the advice of others, in

order to broaden his responsibilities. Let us discuss briefly the sincerity with which we approached our responsibilities.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON" WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 95

In thinking of the subject given me—"The responsibilities of the

official to his weights and measures association"—I should like to

draw a picture starting with the work in the field, then the man in the

iield, and then the directing officer in the line of their work.

Years ago I began my career in public service as a weights and

measures inspector in my State ; a State which had a limited number

of large buying and selling centers, and a great number of small

rural centers, joined together by either a "jerk water" rail system

or a narrow, muddy, washboard road.

Those of you who date back into that era can well recall the rail

trips made from one small town to another. With a thirty-pound kit

and your fifty-pound weights parked in the express office, you would

trudge for miles and miles around these scattered rural centers in an

effort to find the business places. If there were any platform scales,

that meant hiring a buggy or a wagon. If the scales were bad you

helped the merchant adjust them. Scale mechanics were few and far

between : they lived in the big centers and in many cases would not

accept any out-of-town work. Inspectors had to be strong, active

men in order to keep up the pace of "in town in the morning and out

that night." He had to be a man of strong personality because weights

and measures laws were new and the merchant had to be won over

the see the value in them.

Of course, the actual duties of the inspector were limited to counter

scales, small-capacity platform scales, liquid measures, and here and

there maybe a thumbtack yard measure. A yard of material was

measured from the extended arm to the tip of the nose in many of

the drygoods stores. If you bought a piece of dress material from

"short-arm Susie" you needed seven yards. If you bought material

from "lean and lanky Mabel," six j'ards were sufficient. It may be

interesting to hear some of the old-time inspectors relate how "checks'!

were made on these measurements without accounting for the charges.

However, these pioneers undoubtedly met their responsibilities properly for I know the remarkable strides that have been made in weights

and measures are a result of their missionary work.

Through the years that have transpired since my "inspector days"

up to my present position, it has been my privilege to see the service

of protecting the public grow in latitude and in the esteem of the

merchant and the customer. Responsible to the people of my State

for the administration of the Department of Agriculture, I find my

duties varied. Enforcing weights and measures laws is just one of

these varied duties. Naturally, my time is divided, but with reasonable care in selecting personnel, we feel we have been able to keep

abreast of the times.

TVe have tried to make our representative realize the full importance

of his work—proud of his privilege to be in the service, and deeply

conscious of his responsibility to industry, to the consumer, and to his

State. These three requirements are the rock bed foundation of

public responsibility, whether the official is city, county, State, or

Federal.

Let me digress here for a minute to sound a general warning about

conditions that could enter into our field of service. TVe are witnessing today the tug-of-war between the forces that would destroy in-
96 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

dividual thinking and action by substituting "controlled" human beings, and forces that would hold to our democratic way of life. The

former are called by all kinds of "isms" except Americanism. Proponents of these "isms" are insidious in promoting their well-planned

schemes. They build empires of controlled thinking and controlled

action under the guise of alleviating the responsibilities of the public.

I have seen evidence of a great deal of this kind of thinking creeping into public services and I regret to say some of the proponents

are wholly innocent of the ultimate breakdown of our free enterprise.

I have seen some of this thinking creeping into our weights and measures circle, but I am thankful to say it has not gained a foothold.

Once in a weak moment, I also considered plans which could have

controlled the thinking in our weights and measures division, but

when I stopped to figure the cost, I dropped it like a hot potato.

Ours—yours and mine—is a responsibility that has grown through

mutual understanding and cooperation to meet a public need. In our

case the public is made up of the producer, the seller, and the consumer. Our responsibility to these is equal. In the scheme of "isms" one or more of these will eventually be eliminated.

The continued success of our National Conferences will depend

largely upon keeping our deliberations democratic. As long as those,

who by constitution promulgate the thinking of these democratic deliberations, continue to adhere to the principles of free enterprise,

their success will continue. The continued success of our associations

with each other will grow if we practice these democratic principles,

accepting them as our paramount responsibility.

Let's turn our attention to some of our everyday responsibilities.

First among these is directed towaxxl the authority we hold in selecting, training, and supervising the personnel who enforce our weights

and measures laws. Shall we enforce these laws by instilling fear in

our public, by using cold-blooded police tactics, or by education, the

result of which will bring voluntary cooperation and respect ? In thinking of illustrations to emphasize these points, I am re- minded of an experience in my own organization and of one of our

fellow directors. This fellow director was a city official in one of

our large Southern cities. One day the administration sent him a

six-foot brute of a man to train as a city inspector. Our weights and

measures friend had gained his position through merit, and was conscious of the responsibility attached to an inspector's job. During

the training period, he tried to make this new appointee realize the

importance of his new work. The first day he sent him out alone, the

director received a phone call from an excited merchant, demanding

that the director come to see him at once. It turned out that this new

appointee, filled with the importance of his position, had gone out on

his route with a shining badge pinned to his coat lapel and a gun

strapped to his hip. Naturally, the public resented his appearance and

his attitude.

In my own organization, we had in one of the other divisions of the

department a young man Avhose work and ability to get along with

people had attracted my attention. Although he was a fine office man,

he was really an outdoor person and had asked me to give him an opportunity to work in the field whenever there was an opening. One

day the opening came and after a period of training which all of our
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 97

new field men go through, this young man was assigned his routes and

sent out on his own. Long hours meant nothing to him, neither did

hard work, but the freedom of the outdoors brought to him a sense of freedom in his personal appearance. Being so much out of doors

he became rugged, so to speak, in his dress, careless with his equipment, and adopted a careless attitude toward his position and the importance with which it was regarded in his territory. Soon merchants

were asking me, "Who is the little boy you have working in our

territory" ? As administrative officials, our responsibility begins with the men in

the field. Are they qualified to do the work ? Do they have complete

knowledge and understanding of the laws they are out there enforcing? Do they carry themselves as ambassadors of good will and good

government I Do they command respect and enjoy fellowship in the

places of business where they go ? Do the consumers have confidence

in their work ? Do they talk, live, act, and conduct themselves so as to

lend dignity to their profession? Do their activities convince the

merchant, the manufacturers' representatives, and repairmen that they

not only know the laws but they know what procedure is necessary to

enforce these laws ? The Weights and Measures profession is as strong as the men who

enforce its laws. How can we obtain a uniformity of service and meet

our responsibility ? I wonder if we could say that uniform specifications and tolerances will do much to bring about this uniformity. If

the administrative officer will be specific in his requirements, and

human yet positive in his tolerance, he should be able to build up his

personnel whose work will command the respect of everyone. True

knowledge of specifications and tolerances can be best worked out

through mutual understanding and associations, whether they be applied to human beings or to mechanical devices.

Mutual associations begin with the inspector and his supervisor,

then the city, county, or State groups and their directors. These are followed by the State organization, the Regional organization, and

finally the National Conference. These steps form a link, and the good

of one sifts through from the bottom to the top, and vice versa—from

the top to the bottom. This good that is sifted through all these

various channels broadens all of us and puts us in a better position to

meet the "charges for which we are accountable."

If, as directors and officials, we agree that these are the steppingstones to uniformity, then it behooves us to sponsor more active as- sociations among the men in our field of work. This may not necessarily mean a greater number of associations, but it does mean greater

interest in the associations which are already organized.

Realizing the value of organized associations, and seeing the need

of greater interest in South Carolina, we called our first State Conference in 1949. Our Second Annual Conference was held this past

April, and I cannot begin to measure the influence these meetings have

had in broadening the knowledge of our inspectors, as well as those of us who handle the administrative duties of weights and measures in

South Carolina. These conferences have given us a keener appreciation of the ideals of the Southern Association, and this fine group of

men has assisted us in developing greater respect for the National

Conference, and we feel its influence in our work.

1
98 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The promotion of Weights and Measures is an honored profession.

The ranks are filled with some of the keenest minds I have ever met.

Through organized associations we bring together the thoughts and

ideas in constructive discussions and they naturally have influence on,

and become a part of, the whole profession. Since we are a part of this

profession, either through our connection in city, State, or Federal

work, it is our obligation to support and become active in these organized associations.

Let's get behind State Conferences and carry the message to our own

groups. Let's back up our Regional Associations with constructive

enthusiasm. If you are asked to serve on a committee and accept the

appointment, give that committee every ounce of your interest and

effort. If you accept an office or some special assignment, give that

office or that assignment your full attention and complete cooperation.

If you do not belong to an association, then join your association and

when once joined, support it with your presence, your active interest,

and your full cooperation.

I feel that our failure to act on any committee to which we have been

named is not only a personal reflection but it is discourteous to other

members of the committee. While I am on the subject of courtesy and

discourtesy, let me add that nothing is so irritating as to have someone

ignore a letter and fail to reply to something to which you have given

time and sincere thought. If your committee chairman writes you, even about the most unimportant matter, give him a reply if nothingmore than to acknowledge his letter. We all have clerical help and the

least we can do is to answer a letter, which, after all, will undoubtedly

be to our mutual interest.

I guess we have all heard over and over again, "Let George do it."

Yes, there will always be a George to do the work, but we should also

feel some responsibility in being one of the "Georges." Let's join the

number of Georges in our association work.

We who are here today are attending the most important of all our

Conferences, for it is from these National Conferences that the culmination of all of our thinking is washed, dried, and ironed out, then

placed in consumer packages. Since we have been privileged to be

here, we should feel some responsibility in passing on to those who are not here the benefits we shall reap from this conference.

It is from these National Conferences that all the "fine" in weights

and measures is put in printed form to hand on down for both the

present and the future.

I do not know how many States are represented at this Conference,

but I do know that every State has some form of weights' and measures

law, therefore, every State should be represented here. If every State

is not represented, perhaps the blame lies within us. Have we failed

to let enough of the good in our other associations sift down to them ? If we have been negligent in our responsibilities toward these States,

this, then, is a "charge for which we must account."

Let's add to the revival spirit now sweeping our country and make a pledge that 1951 will bring about closer associations with each other

and stronger association organizations.

City, county and State lines are fast disappearing, therefore our

responsibility cannot stop at our local level. We are no longer a part of

our individual group, we are a part of the whole profession. Our
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 99

responsibilities face us in every step of weights and measures, even up to this National Conference.

Let us face our responsibilities and accept the "charges for which

we are accountable."

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON WEIGHTS

AND MEASURES EDUCATION, PRESENTED BY J. T. KENNEDY,

CHAIRMAN

Members of your Committee on Education have continued the policy

of attending as many State and regional weights and measures conferences and schools of instruction as practicable. We have also taken

advantage of every opportunity to contact and confer with weights

and measures officials outside our own jurisdictions. In the process

of making these visitations, we have emphasized the importance of

weights and measures education. We have especially stressed the need

for greater effort in behalf of education among our own ranks. The

more we study this phase of weights and measures education, the

stronger is our realization of the urgent need for more organized and

concerted activity in this field.

The principal medium which is being employed in the education

of weights and measures officers is the State and regional conferences

held annually. We are glad to report, again this year, that all twelve

of the State and the two regional associations, have held meetings or

schools since the 34th National Conference. Some of the associations

have sponsored more than one meeting or school. In addition to the

meetings sponsored by State and regional associations, the South

Carolina Department of Agriculture has sponsored two conferences,

of two days each. Quite an elaborate school was sponsored by the

State Department in New Jersey. A special two-day school for State

Inspectors was conducted by the Virginia State Department. A

special school was held in North Carolina by the State Department,

also a three-day school was held in Ohio, in addition to the annual

meeting and four regional meetings. In California, New York, the

District of Columbia, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and some other

States, interim meetings, district conferences, or schools of instruction

have been held. Your Committee wishes to compliment all of these

jurisdictions upon their excellent educational activities. We urge you

to continue and to expand your efforts. We also recommend that

additional jurisdictions institute similar programs.

The public relations programs in Chicago and Detroit, which we

mentioned in our report last year, are being continued. The State of

Virginia has had their motion picture, which was previewed at the

34th Conference, in use in that State and also in another jurisdiction.

Los Angeles County, California, has remained active in the public

relations and public education field. The results that these programs

are producing are self-evident.

Although considerable progress is being made in the weights and

measures educational field, it is apparent to your Committee that too

many weights and measures officials are not yet fully mindful of their

rightful responsibilities in this connection. We have endeavored, re- peatedly, to emphasize the fact that there is but one way to promote

weights and measures administration, and that is, through education.

The "educating" must be done by the weights and measures officer
100 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

himself. Nobody else will do it for him. It must be done in the three

definite steps which your Committee has enumerated in the past, that

is, through the education of (1) the weights and measures official, (2)

the merchant, and (3) the general public. This job cannot be done by

a committee. It cannot be done by a few weights and measures officials.

It will take the constant best efforts of all officials, in every jurisdiction.

Your Committee does stand ready, willing, and anxious to assist any

official or jurisdiction in the planning or execution of an educational

program. We have made this offer repeatedly, but have received few

requests.

In its report to the 34th Conference, your Committee made seven

specific recommendations. So far as we have been able to learn, these

recommendations have received very little attention. We are still of

the opinion that they were good recommendations. We suggest that

you read these recommendations in the Conference report. The second

recommendation in that list had to do with the preparation of two

hundred or more fundamental questions that all weights and measures

officials should be able to answer. Your Committee has prepared two

lists of questions, together with the answers to one of the lists. These

questions and answers will be furnished to anyone desiring them, upon

request to the Committee Chairman, or Secretary, or to the Office of

Weights and Measures of the National Bureau of Standards. We hope

that the requests will be numerous and that each weights and measures

officer in the United States will study the questions and learn the

correct answers. It would be our suggestion that the individual officer

be supplied with the questions, and that he work out his own answers,

before he consults the list of answers prepared by the Committee.

This should encourage study and research.

Our recommendation number six was, "That the Bureau of Standards be requested to repeat the Weights and Measures School when the

demand justifies it, and to further explore the field of rendering greater

assistance in the actual training of State and local officials in practical

field activities." While the Bureau was quite agreeable to this request

Ave regret to report that there has been no demand for repetition of the

Weights and Measures Training School on the Calibration of Standards. This is very valuable training. Each State and each large local

jurisdiction should have at least one staff member with this specialized

training. If your department has not taken advantage of this opportunity, we suggest that you give the matter your careful consideration.

Your Committee has but one new recommendation to make to this

Conference. We do wish to renew all recommendations made in previous reports, however. The new recommendation has to do with the

prompt exchange of information by weights and measures officers.

This is being clone to a limited degree, in some States, among their own

personnel. It is accomplished, to some extent, by the issuance of "News

Letters" or "Bulletins", in other jurisdictions. Some of these News

Letters and Bulletins are given considerable circulation outside of the

States which publish them. This is particularly true with respect to

Indiana and Texas. California and Ohio have given their Bulletins

some out-of-State distribution, also. We are glad to report that the

Southern Weights and Measures Association has resumed the publication of its "News Letter." Mr. Howard E. Crawford, Chairman of

the Southern Association Committee on Education, is the editor of this
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 101

publication. If you are not on his mailing list, we suggest that you

contact him.

There is another phase of this idea of "exchanging information"

besides the publication and distribution of news letters and bulletins.

It is the "exchange of correspondence and copies of correspondence", on various subjects. We are all interested in "uniformity." The

principal object of the National Conference is to achieve "uniformity"

in laws and regulations and in the interpretation and enforcement

thereof. The better understanding we have of what the other fellow

is doing, and why he is doing it, the more "uniformity" we will have

in weights and measures administration. Our idea is for weights and

measures officials to collaborate with one another and with other interested parties and to keep others informed as to their decisions and

activities.

This idea was the subject of the remarks of the Committee Chairman,

in an address before a State weights and measures conference, during

the past year. A few representatives of industry did not take to the

idea with favor. They later voiced this disfavor to the speaker. We,

your Committee, cannot conceive of how a program which results in

the enlightenment of weights and measures officials, and in greater

uniformity of enforcement methods and procedures throughout the

country, could fail to be beneficial to the manufacturer, the merchant,

the consumer, and the weights and measures official.

We submit that if such a program is successful and beneficial in one

or more States, it is reasonable to assume that it would be proportionately beneficial on a national scale, through the cooperative efforts

of all active and progressive officials. We are not attempting to suggest the mechanics to effectuate such a program, but we do suggest

that it should be practicable to establish such a program designed to

produce the following results

:

1. Better understanding of problems encountered in various areas.

2. Uniformity of enforcement.

3. Increased efficiency in operations.

4. Uniformity in approval and rejection of commercial equipment.

To succeed, such a program must have the full support of all cooperating officials; it should have the full support and cooperation of all

active departments.

It must be understood, and your Committee desires to make it perfectly clear, that we are not suggesting a "National Committee on Type Approval." That is not in this report. We do feel that a

cooperative program of exchanging weights and measures information promptly, entered into voluntarily by active and progressive

weights and measures officials, on a nation-wide basis, will help to

produce the desirable results enumerated earlier in this report. It will also tend to eliminate confusion (and sometimes, embarrassment) which now exists as a result of varying actions in different

jurisdictions. We submit this general idea for your careful and deliberate consideration. Think it over and discuss it with your fellow

weights and measures officers.

In conclusion, we urge that all weights and measures officials not

only continue, but redouble their educational activities. Enlarge your

present programs and institute new programs. See to it that each
102 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

staff member in your department becomes a "perpetual student," and

do all that you can toward the further enlightenment of the general

public along weights and measures lines.

J. T. Kennedy, Chairman,

W. S. Busset, Secretary,

G. E. Carpenter,

R. K. Slough,

Robert Williams,

Committee on Weights and Measures Education.

Mr. Crawford. As Chairman of the Committee on Education of the

Southern Weights and Measures Association, I have had the opportunity of learning something of what the National Conference Committee on Education has accomplished and what they have provided

in the way of valuable material. I feel that an effort should be

made to make this information available to every official or representative of industry who cares to have it at any time. I feel that

our radio interviews and addresses and newspaper stories and other

educational material should be published and put into the hands of

every official. I hope that our Committee can make it possible for us

to have this information without request, so that it will be available

at the time we need it.

(It was moved and seconded that the Report of the Committee on Education

be adopted, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed to.)

(At this point, at 12: 30 p. m., the Conference recessed for luncheon.)
FIFTH SESSION—AFTERNOON OF THURSDAY,

MAY 25, 1950

(The Conference reassembled at 2:15 p. m., C. A. Baker, Vice President of the

Conference, presiding.

)

PROBLEMS INVOLVED IN SETTING UP A NEW WEIGHTS AND

MEASURES ORGANIZATION

ADMINISTRATION—REMARKS OF T. C. BECK, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, MARKETING

DIVISION, STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Such a topic as mine covers a multitude of sins. And I do mean

sins. At any rate it would most certainly be an imposition to attempt

to outline to you all of the problems encountered in the administration

of a new weights and measure program. We are not pessimistic but,

after all, there's nothing like giving it to you straight from the

shoulder. Yes, we've met with a lot of difficulties ; moreover new ones

continue to arise, but thanks to an abundance of perseverance and

plain old hard work we have managed to surmount most of our

troubles up to now.

First, and we believe most profound, of our many worries probably

has its origin from the fact that no appropriation of funds was provided for the administration of our law. In lieu of an appropriation

the State legislature established a schedule of inspection fees, in the

law, for funds to carry out the provisions of the Act. There are those

of you in this room having similar set-ups who can readily appreciate

the fact that a great deal of animosity stems from the fee system.

And, after all, we cannot deny the good old American right to gripe, even though we are very often on the receiving end. Of course, it

does rather go against the grain when some of the more vitriolic accusers go so far as to say that we are in cahoots with the scale

industry, and proceed to vindicate their wrath upon our inspectors

in other less dignified forms of vilification. Nevertheless, we have

remained undaunted and we are making headway, although it has not

made our Weights and Measures Division appear any more angelic

in the eyes of a great many firms who had their scales recondemned

and retagged with that abhorrent crimson tag, especially after they

had already shown good faith by having hired a scale mechanic and

paid what they believed to be an exorbitant fee. Such an episode was

particularly revolting to one group of merchants who learned, to their

dismay, that one State-licensed, "master mechanic" had absconded for

parts unknown and left them holding the bag—or I mean, the tag.

He has not, as yet, been apprehended. The situation was rectified,

however, by reason of the fact that we were fortunate in having a good

scale mechanic connected with our Division.

It should also be said that certain State newspaper articles have not

been conducive to a complacent attitude. One such article hinted

broadly of ubiquitous chicanery on the part of State officials because of

the fact that their inspection tours were promptly being followed by

scale salesmen.

103
104 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

As a means of learning when condemned scales have been repaired

Ave adopted the more or less customary procedure of requiring the

mechanics to send in the red tags. The owners of condemned scales are given a thirty-day period in which to have them fixed. When we

fail to receive these tags in due time, the scale owner receives a mild

reprimand in the form of a letter, for being delinquent. Very often

these people reply to the effect that their scales have been properly

repaired and upon a more thorough investigation, in some instances, it has been extremely exasperating to learn that some of these tags had

been stowed away for three or four weeks in the glove compartment of

the mechanic's automobiles; which, incidentally, might account for

those suspicious looking stains on some of the tags.

It should go without saying that our weights and measures law was

not enacted unanimously by the State Legislature ; therefore, the static

from that angle continues to disrupt the program. Some of these

misguided demagogues have assumed the responsibility of disseminating antagonistic propaganda among their constituents to our utter

consternation for our diligent efforts. In all fairness we must say that

we believe most of these legislators to be honest in their convictions.

They simply do not understand the program. Nevertheless their attitude and actions act as just one more serious demoralizing factor with

which our Division is forced to cope.

At this point one of our most exasperating enigmas should be mentioned. In all probability this is a dilemma in which the administrators of most any new weights and measures program find themselves

floundering. I refer to the herculean task of securing an adequate

number of qualified repairmen to fix the scales and retrieve the red tags

as fast as a small crew of State personnel can inspect and condemn the

scales. This is especially true where it is necessary, as in our case, to

condemn approximately 75 percent of the small-capacity and 60 percent of the large-capacity scales examined. This irksome paradox re- sults in a titanic amount of insurmountable perplexity.

Then, we are nonplused by the arduous entreaty from the merchants

with a story to the effect that their scales are only off 4 ounces and that

the scales are slow and, therefore, cheating the seller instead of the

buyer anyway. Some argue that the scales are accurate up to 12 or 15

pounds and that they seldom weigh more than 4 or 5 pounds at a time,

so why spend $25 or $30 for repairs when the tolerances are entirely

too rigid and impractical for the poor, hard pressed, indigent, povertystricken merchants. And of course we do realize that a large percentage of the grocers, at least, have only recently emerged from the

status of a neighborhood store in the front room of a residence to a mdernistic, drive-in supermarket. As for this unique progress we can

only proclaim, "More power to them!" Our only interest is to en- deavor to administer our weights and measures program in such a manner that such miraculous prosperity will not occur, or be con- tributed to, by inaccurate scales or short-weight packages. Our

policy, of course, in regard to all other State industries is the same. Another quagmire in which we find ourselves entangled is the diffi- culty of trying to keep pace with the demand for inspections of heavycapacity-type scales. This unprecedented demand for State testing of

large scales is probably due to the fact that there has been in existence

in Oklahoma, for the past four years, a voluntary scale-testing service
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 105

which had already gained a sizable measure of participation. Inability of our Division to cope with these requirements is due to the fact

that Ave have not as yet acquired sufficient equipment for the work.

We are at present negotiating for additional facilities, but as a good

many of you know, this also takes time.

Refusal of some firms to pay the inspection fee, as you can readily

appreciate, also presents a dilemma involving delicate intricacies.

Thus far, however, we have been able to collect practically all outstanding accounts by means of ominous letters originating in the

Oklahoma City Office, xlt this point it is emphasized that by far the

greater part of the fees are immediately paid directly to the State inspectors when the scales are tested.

So far we have refrained from prosecuting any violators, in the belief that prosecutions in the early stages of a program creates a

vindicative attitude among the industry involved. Instead of prosecutions, we have experienced fairly satisfactory results by issuing letters

of warning and using such letters as a matter of record against

offenders. In this connection, of course, we realize that a certain

number of prosecutions are ultimately inevitable. It will never be

the policy of our Division, however, to impute common peccadilloes

to ordinaiw citizens, thereby implicating them in unnecessary imbroglios.

Although the matter of maintaining a proper filing system in the

office was not mentioned in the beginning of this discussion, it is by

no means an insignificant trackless wilderness through which we have

been forced to tread.

It is realized that we have painted an extremely gloomy picture of

the subject matter, but we would not have you conclude that it has all

been bad. On the contrary we have derived an abundance of pleasure

and satisfaction in connection with the project. Also we have had

splendid cooperation from certain segments of industry, including the

Secretary, Manager of the Oklahoma Retail Grocers Association, farm

organizations, civic groups, and others. After all my topic does relate

to the pessimistic approach to the situation and does not propose a

solution to the various perplexing intricacies with which we are confronted.

We realize that it will quite ostensibly be a matter of years before

we reach a Utopian status, and at this time we wish to emphasize a profound desire and urgent need of a lot of good old-fashioned fatherly

advice, especially from those of you "unfortunates" who have a fee

system operating in your State. Any advice from you between now

and the close of this session will be received with immeasurable

gratitude.

We are still floundering in the quagmire of raw recruits, but we

are anxious to scale the heights of Mount Olympus. Please do not

fail to help us.

TRAINING—REMARKS OF A. J. MAYER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WEIGHTS AND

MEASURES, STATE OF LOUISIANA

The training of the personnel of an organization, in my opinion,

makes the difference between success and failure, not only in weights

and measures but in any other organization. In our State of Louisiana

prior to 1949, there was no State-wide weights and measures law, but
106 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

in the city of New Orleans there was a fee system, or a charge of

seventy-five cents per scale (small types only). The organization

consisted of two inspectors, and their total equipment for testing

purposes consisted of two 1-pound weights. It finally wound up in a scandal, so the Legislature decided to enact a law, which became Act

95 of 1948, adopting State standards of weights and measures. This

Act created a Commission composed of the Governor, the Collector of

Revenue, and the Commissioner of Agriculture.

To put the law into operation, it was recognized as being essential

that only personnel trained in weights and measures work could

properly do the job in a creditable manner without imposing undue

hardships and injustices on the users of weighing and measuring

devices in the conduct of their work. It was also recognized that a well informed inspector of weighing and measuring devices could

correct any reasonable inaccuracies of such devices without the necessity of sending the same away for adjustments, thereby causing the

owners undue expense as well as the loss of the use of the equipment

while away. Such personnel was not available ; therefore, the period

from the time the law became operative until February 1, 1949, was

used in training personnel and acquiring suitable equipment with

which to do weights and measures work.

To begin with, the Director was sent up to the National Bureau of

Standards, where he took a course in its training school. He also made

several visits to different State weights and measures offices to gather

data, information etc., relative to said work.

We gradually built up our organization, selecting personnel as we

thought best, considering the conditions in our State. The men

selected for inspectors were given a thorough schooling, which included public relations, a thorough study of Handbook H44, which was

then H29, and a visit up North and East to several scale manufacturers to get the actual fundamentals in both light- and heavy-duty

work. In one instance we spent several days in training in a scale

manufacturer's school.

It now gives me great pleasure to express my sincere thanks and

appreciation to Dr. E. U. Condon, Director of the National Bureau of

Standards, Mr. Ralph W. Smith and Mr. W. S. Bussey of the Bureau's

Office of Weights and Measures, and other personnel of the National

Bureau of Standards, to the Directors and personnel of the several

States we trained in, and to the several scale manufacturers who were

so cooperative and helpful in the schooling of our men.

It goes without saying that without this training our Division

could not have made such strides as it has made in giving to the public

the services a weights and measure organization should give. In 1949 over 60 per cent of weighing devices, etc., were found inaccurate, and

so far as this year is concerned we have brought it down to less than

15 percent.

As to the cost, I'll give you the actual cost to the public. It is not

more than four cents per capita, and the approximate saving was

over forty-six cents per capita. In other words the approximate

saving was about $1,500,000 to the public in our State, due to the
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE OX WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 107

services of weights and measures in obtaining a fair and just return on consumer purchases.

In closing, let me thank you one and all for the wonderful cooperation you have given us in bringing our State where it rightfully belongs in its weights and measures work.

PUBLIC RELATIONS—REMARKS OF G. L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES, STATE OF KENTUCKY

I am delighted to be asked by Mr. Ralph Smith to prepare a paper

on public relations in "forming" or ''setting-up" a new Weights and

Measures Division. I must quickly admit that I am not a writer nor

am I qualified to read too well.

In presenting this paper on this subject I would like to give you,

as best I can. the trials, troubles, and tribulations as we have met them

in this respect in Kentucky.

I have experienced public relations in Kentucky as to passing

legislation and creating public sentiment for our work. Creating

good will is by far the most important step in any governmental

agency. We were not too well established in Kentucky when we took

over in 19iS. We had but few records of the work accomplished by

our predecessors; in fact, we practically had to work out our own

salvation. I do not mean that our predecessors did not do a good job.

but their records were not too well kept for us to get a grounding

immediately.

Public sentiment is definitely the most important job for our department. If and when the public is acquainted with our work, our battle

is half won. Without the interest and cooperation of the people we

are at a loss to get our work done, regardless of how hard we labor

at it. We realized our trouble when we walked in our office in 1918. The

people of Kentucky had little idea of what we were doing in the

Weights and Measures Department. The Department of Agriculture

was well established, and when you mentioned the Department of

Agriculture you were told that it was a State department to better

livestock breeding, and the like. The people in Kentucky had in their

minds that our Department, generally speaking, was set up to advance

the Kentucky State Fair—that we were Fair folks. So we set out to

publicize the activities of the Department which I head. We needed

legislation badly and we realized it took two years at the best to

acquaint our people with facts to lead to passage of necessary laws

in the General Assembly. We prepared editorials for newspapers and

through the fine influence of our Commissioner, Harry F. Walters,

we got the job done. Mr. Walters had the fine ability to prepare his

messages, and coupled with his personality and enthusiasm, his story

of and for better weights and measures for Kentucky was sold to the

people.

We did not stop at newspaper publicity. We went to the people via

radio, and put on demonstrations at the State Fair. We have ten

field men in our Department who are leaders in their communities,

men who know the pulse beats of the people, and these field men have

kept us posted as to what was best and what was not best. Our field

9043S1—50 9
108 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

men are good politicians, and in Kentucky we must play politics which ! is really only the essence of government. Through our field men we

feel that we are conversing with the people at all times.

We made it a point to see the political leaders of our General

Assembly after we had gotten our feet on the ground. We wanted to 1 do a good job. The politicians of Kentucky listened to us at the last

General Assembly in early 1950 which led to the enacting of our present Jaw. This law or legislation was prepared by the Statutes Revision

Commission last summer in order that we have sufficient time to study

and prepare the bill. I think Ave will all agree that plenty of time

should be allowed in preparing new legislation and, as I find it, it is

much easier to prepare and pass legislation than to repeal unworkable

laws already on the statute books.

Another important factor is to place your proposed legislation into

the hands of a respected legislator who is in harmony with the Administration or the majority of the Assembly. The proper time must be

picked for introducing such legislation. Also you must be on your

guard to prevent opposition from lobbyists of the different companies

affected by the proposed legislation. In our particular case, this last

year, we had to tack on four amendments which did not alter the value

of the bill in any way. However, it served as a peace offering with the

lobbyists, and after introducing such amendments, they worked for us

instead of against us in passing this legislation.

One of our largest difficulties was to keep our bill from being "bottlenecked" or "tied up" in the committees, or "pigeon-holed" as so often

happens to legislation. Once you start your legislation it is a good

policy to keep it rolling through both Houses and get it acted upon as soon as possible. We have found that it takes a lot of work to pass

any legislation. You must contact the legislators, explain to them

what the bill is, and once they understand the bill it will be very

beneficial.

If all General Assemblies in the United States are like Kentucky's,

it is difficult to pass a law and, at the same time, ask for a sufficient

appropriation to carry on its work. Therefore, the Commissioner of

Agriculture is allotting the Division sufficient money to carry on these

functions until the next General Assembly, when we probably will

ask for a specific appropriation. I am glad to say that our bill

received not one opposition vote either in the House or the Senate.

The Governor signed it, thus making it a law that goes into effect July

first of this year.

We feel quite confident that the people of our State are ready and

anxious for this work to get under way, and we plan other educational

activities prior to starting our new Division in July, such as constant

publicity in the press and talks before luncheon clubs or at gatherings

wherever and whenever we can get the opportunity.

It is, indeed, a privilege to represent the Commonwealth of Kentucky in this important meeting. The ideas and knowledge I have

gained and will gain here will be of invaluable assistance to me in

advancing the work we are endeavoring to do in our State.

i
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 109

WEIGHBEAM MAINTENANCE

By M. J. J. Harrison, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing,

Pennsylvania Railroad

At the Thirty-first National Conference on Weights and Measures,

held in June 1941, it was my privilege to discuss a few of the essential

characteristics and basic design considerations applicable to scale

weighbeams of the knife-edge type. Informal discussions subsequent

to that presentation—and subsequent to later presentation of the same

material before other groups—tended to emphasize the importance

of weighbeam maintenance, which is the topic of my remarks today.

There are those who hold that the simple weighbeam is, so to speak, on its way out of the picture. I am not going to argue this point,

except to agree that modern equipment for industrial and commercial

weighing seems to be provided with a wide variety of indicating

attachments, with much emphasis on various automatic and semiautomatic devices. However, this does not mean the abolition of the

millions of simple weighbeams that have been provided for weighing

scales during the past one or two generations, many of which are in

commercial service today and may remain in that service for years to come. It is therefore not inappropriate to examine into the situation

and to discuss from a practical standpoint what the weights and measures official has a right to expect from a weighbeam.

My remarks here are by no means intended to outline a manual or

set of rules for the service man or the repairman. If I can present you

with something that will be instructive to a new inspector-—or even

to some older ones—I shall have accomplished my purpose.

Back in 1941, 1 announced my belief that the three essential characteristics of a weighbeam were truth, stability, and sensitiveness—and

after 9 years I have not changed my mind on this. Of these three,

truth is obviously of major importance—perhaps of top importance.

In considering it, however, we must go further than I did in 1941, for

the reason that we here have to consider more than inherent mechanical

truth. By that I mean that, in commercial weighing, we necessarily

have the manipulation of the weighbeam and its accessories by a per- son who at least is presumed to be familiar with its operation—such

operation being meanwhile observed by a second person who is interested in the transaction, but who may or may not—and is not necessarily presumed to—be familiar with the operating characteristics of

that specific weighbeam. Therefore, the first thing to be done by the

weights and measures officer is to examine the weighbeam to determine

the presence of any element which may be so manipulated as to cause

inaccurate indicated weights. Discovery of such an element, whether

connected to the weighbeam proper or elsewhere, would obviously

justify official condemnation of the scale under H44 General Specification G-S.2. and General Regulation G-R.2.

Again, if the normal positions of weigher and observer are such that

they respectively see opposite sides of the weighbeam, the weights and

measures officer should satisfy himself that, for any normal poise

position, the same weight value is indicated on both sides of the

Aveigh-beam.
110 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

A considerable number of commercial weighbeams are of the registering variety. When such a one is examined, it is important to

determine that, for at least a representative number of poise positions,

each registered weight agrees with the visually indicated weight value.

In addition, of course, the registered weights must be clear and distinct

and not readily susceptible of misreading. General Specification

G-S.5. of H44 is applicable to this detail.

And finally, for this portion of the discussion, the weights and

measures officer should satisfy himself that the device under examination permits compliance with General Regulation G-R.l. of H44.

This is the general regulation covering positioning of equipment so that its indications may be accurately read and the weighing operation observed from some reasonable customer position. It is my personal belief that this regulation may be invoked inversely when circumstances justify—that is, that a reasonable customer position must

be provided, from which the indications of the device may be accurately read and the weighing operation observed.

Reverting at this point to mechanical truthfulness of a weighbeam,

it would seem obvious that the numerals and graduations on a weighbeam must be readily readable. But we have all seen too many instances where this condition did not obtain. The weights and measures officer has a right to insist on readability, and I feel that he should

do so. If the scale owner is not ingenious enough to accomplish this,

his repairman may be able to do it. In extreme cases, replacement of

a reading face or even of an entire weighbeam may be necessary.

Here we may touch briefly upon some points which are of importance in considering weighbeam truthfulness. Beware of any weighbeam which shows evidence of one or more of its essential pivots having been relocated. All too often this has occurred, if at all, without

taking into account the effect of the relocation upon weighing accuracy. Beware of an extra hook-like attachment at the end of a weighbeam. Such attachments have occasionally been used for hanging a bunch of keys on the weighbeam, resulting in a false zero-load bal- ance. Beware of a heavily painted poise. This will frequently re- sult in substantial weighing errors—in a minus direction. Beware of

heavily painted counterpoise weights, for the same reason. Beware of

a notched weighbeam where the notches and/or poise track show a heavy coating of any kind. Unpredictable weighing errors may be

expected here, first because the poise is not accurately positioned and

second because the poise rollers tend to pick up this coating, thus altering the poise weight. Beware of a counterbalance cup or a counterpoise cup which is not provided with a fixed lid. (See Specification

S. 1. 8. 2. of H44) . Beware of an installation in which the weighbeam

or shelf lever is obviously out of level, or in which the beam rod or the steelyard rod is obviously not plumb. Unpredictable weighing

errors may be expected in either of these cases. Beware of a notched

weighbeam in which several of the notches (especially if in a group)

are obviously deeper than the rest of the notches. This condition frequently denotes an attempt to make a weighbeam accurate through only

a portion of its capacity or weighing range. And finally, although

not exhaustively, prohibit strictly the "mixing" of counterpoise

weights—that is, the use on a specific scale of counterpoise weights

intended for a scale of some different multiple to the weighbeam tip.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 111

For our present purpose, the item of stability may be disposed of

rather briefly. The basic requirement here is concisely outlined in

Specification S. 1. 2. of H44. As a possible addition or explanation,

attention may be directed to the notched weighbeam heretofore mentioned. In such a weighbeam, it is essential that the tip of the pawl

or latch be such that it will fit snugly into each notch, and that the

spring pressure which tends to force the latch tip down into the notches

be sufficient. These points are of special importance at the zero notch.

As a corollary, the poise must be free-running enough that the poise

latch spring and the form of the notch and latch tip, will result in the

poise being correctly positioned at any notch.

On any weighbeam, the operation of the balancing means should be

positive ; that is, if a balance ball is provided, it should be well fitted

onto the balance ball screw, and the latter should have no perceptible

end play.

As to sensitiveness, this is a characteristic built into the weighbeam

by its original manufacturer, presumably to be consistent with the

value of the smallest graduation provided. When this quality is once

destroyed (except as a result of misalinement) , a careful shop operation is usually necessary. Avoid recommending that the pivots be

"sharpened up" ; in many cases, the results of this are most disappointing. However, in what may be called "mild cases," much good has

been accomplished by a careful cleaning of bearing steels with emery

cloth and a very light honing of the knife-edges, by a repairman who

understood the limitations of what he was doing. Raising or lowering the balance-ball assembly may be effective in some cases, but is

definitely not a cure-all. Correction of misalinement, such as an outof-plumb beam rod, is an obvious step to be taken when necessary.

The foregoing remarks are definitely not all-inclusive. They have

intentionally been restricted to the purpose announced in one of the

introductory paragraphs, and I hope that they will be found useful

for that purpose.

A PROGRAM OF LIVESTOCK SCALE TESTING

By Erling Hansen, Supervisor, Department of Weights and

Measures, State of Minnesota

Statistics are tiresome. I hope those that I bring out won't fall

on as deaf ears as would my ears be if I were the listener and you,

audience, the one to recite the figures. However, without making

comparisons, it would be too difficult to impress you with the value of

the livestock weighed on the hoof, you who are the only ones that have

the knowledge to control the weighing.

The farmers of the United States in 1948 had a cash income of over

$31,000,000,000. Of this amount almost 15 billions, or about one-half,

was for the sale of livestock. This livestock total does not include

poultry or dairy products. Fifteen billions of dollars, that is what

livestock is worth to the farmers.

In 1948, the entire production of all mineral products in the country,

including coal and petroleum products, amounted to only about eight

and one-half billions of dollars. By comparison, the value of the

mining of coal, both bituminous and anthracite, was short of two

billions. I am not trying to belittle the coal industry, nor you who
112 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

are big oil barons, but only trying to show you how great and vast is

this industry, that we neglect, and what short weight can mean to the

producers. Oh, I know you are quick to say : "Well, look at all the

money the farmers get back from the U. S. Treasury in support prices,"

and "Let them get a little less cash by short weight." But did you

ever stop to realize that if the farmers were to lose only 1 percent by

weight on livestock alone, this loss would amount to almost $150,000,-

000? Makes quite a dent in money spent to support farm prices,

doesn't it? There were no moneys paid at all to support livestock

prices. Remember now, 1 percent taken from the farmer by weight

would mean a loss of only 1 pound on the average sheep, iy2 pounds

on the average calf, 2*4 pounds on the average hog, and only about

9 or 10 pounds on the average beef cattle. Do you think anyone

could possibly tell the difference? In fact, I'm willing to bet that

I could let all of you get on a scale that was set 3 percent in error and

there would be but few of you scale experts who would know the difference, even on your own weights. And how can anyone tell the differ- ence of 3-percent short on somebody else's weight, or on animals whose

weight fluctuates easily ? What I am going to try to impress on you, however, is that the

amount that may be stolen in short weight over the country would

knock you off your feet, if you might be a little interested in the subject.

To venture a statement as to how much is actually lost to the producer

in marketing his livestock each year, is quite difficult. Before I get

through with this discourse, I will probably make what may seem to

be many rash statements, but I would like to qualify by stating that

I have been engaged in weights and measures control for almost 30

years, during 25 of which I've been vitally interested in the scales for

weighing livestock and in the manipulation of these scales. For 13

years prior to becoming Supervisor of Weights and Measures for

Minnesota, I was the scale inspector at the State weighing stations for

livestock at the terminal market at South St. Paul and at nine outState concentration points. The knowledge of bad market practices,

and poor scales, is something that has set me to raving and ranting for

many years. Maybe some day people will become enough interested

to do something about it, and be willing to help provide funds for its

control. In the last 25 years I have witnessed as much weighing of

livestock in different markets, both large and small, as has probably

anyone. At least an}^one who would be able to tell what kind of

weighing was being done. Further, I have discussed this subject with

a great many people. I have known several old-time livestock buyers

who have let their hair down to tell me that any buyer who can't steal

10 to 15 percent by weight without official restraint isn't much good.

In 19-18, by robbery, hold-ups, pilfering, and embezzlement, there

was lost only around $119,000,000 in property and money in the entire

nation, 50 percent of which were automobiles. However, there was

$67,000,000 recovered in stolen money and property during the year,

so the net loss was only 42 millions. This, I believe, doesn't begin to

compare with what is lost in the country in a year's time in short weight

practices ; furthermore, stolen weight can't be recovered. How many

thousand people would you guess are employed for protection against

robbery losses, as Federal, State, county, and municipal officers and

policemen? If the loss in weighing livestock were only 3 percent
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 113

against the producer or seller, the loss would amount to about $267,-

000,000. How many officers, scale inspectors, and bonded State or weighing officers are employed to protect the sale of this $15,000,000,000

worth of gold on the hoof? Not very many I am sure. If the public

could only be made to realize this fact

!

I'd like to spend the time to tell you of some of the cases of short

weight that we have run into, on some of which cases we were lucky

enough to get sufficient evidence to prosecute. It isn't easy to gather

the evidence. These buyers are Wary ones; they seem to be able to

smell an investigator. It would take a staff of experts trained like

the F. B. I. to curtail the bad practices. We had one, where 135 pounds

was taken on a 900-pound steer from a farmer in the southwestern part

of Minnesota. One buyer, as we came upon him operating his scale,

was stealing 15 pounds on every weight in buying calves. Sometimes

this buyer felt a little remorse and weighed two at a time and would not

gain quite as much. At the same place, later, the buyer was caught

weighing 13 pounds short on a single pig. Near Mankato, we were

lucky. On complaint, one of our inspectors left his truck at another

town and when he got to the buying station the place was empty, the

operators were out to lunch. The inspector sat down on a bench in

the corner and just waited. It wasn't long before the buyer returned,

followed almost immediately by a farmer with a small truck of livestock. The inspector just sat and watched ; and when a young heifer

was weighed and the check written out for it, he stepped up and said

:

"I'd like to weigh that animal over again ; I am from the State Department of Weights and Measures." The animal was only weighed

45 pounds short. It was easy to get a conviction and the word got

around to the end that the buyer was shamed into leaving town. We

found evidence in other cases of 10 to 15 pounds taken on a single hog.

If this wholesale stealing affected more of the people and not just the

farmers, or the crime was more glamorous, such as vice crimes, or gambling syndicates, this story could get wide publicity in the national

magazines.

There are many ways for the buyer to short weigh. If the scale

inspection is infrequent, the buyer just sets the scale wrong. Remember, he doesn't have to steal much at a time. The price of livestock is. high. The producer may have no scale, or if he has one the chances

are that it is a broken-down one, which is even worse. Because his

scale is generally weighing slow, as do most dirty and corroded ones,

the farmer himself thinks his animal is less weight than it actually is,

and he is an easy victim to work on. However, the operator doesn't

have to have a false scale. I have watched many of these buyers

operate. They can take 10, 20, or even 30 pounds just by juggling the

beam and poises with their fingers. A little off balance to start with,

a kick on the beam with their little fingers to set the beam in motion

;

if it's a type registering beam, flipping the fraction bar back 5 pounds

or 10 pounds while punching the ticket ; a double bar beam where the

lower poise is easily jarred to inch out 4 or 5 pounds away from zero. The zero notch pounded back 2, 3, or 4 pounds, to make a false start. It isn't very hard to fool the farmer. He usually thinks he is so awfully smart, that he is very easily tricked. For example: One time

I showed a superintendent of a distant large stockyard that by moving

and juggling the poises around and setting the beam in motion with
114 MIS'C. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

my fingers, I let the scale be out of balance on zero and out of balance

enough on the total weight, so that when I had a 50 pound weight

placed on the scale, I made the beam operate so that it looked like the

50 pounds weighed nothing, letting this witness be satisfied, by closely

watching me, that the zero balance and loaded balance seemed in each

case correct. In order to be able to detect bad practices you should

know how they work.

All of the foregoing is to show you that unguarded weighing of

livestock is most likely a very costly thing to the American producer.

This paper, however, is chiefly to tell you how we are trying with

very limited means to curb this condition in Minnesota. The Minnesota farmer produced for market $458,542,000 worth of livestock last

year—almost half a billion dollars—most of which was weighed on

the hoof. If the Minnesota farmer was short weighed only 3 percent last year, his loss would be almost $14,000,000. Talk about

teapot dome scandals ! However, Minnesota has pioneered quite a number of control measures on scales and weighing. Also, we produce other things besides livestock. Did you know that your Secretary, Ralph Smith, whom we know as the final and best informed

authority on weights and measures control, is a native Minnesotan?

In his early days, Ralph served in the Minnesota Weights and Measures Department. Another former scale inspector from Minnesota

is Charles Richard, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing of the U. S.

Department of Agriculture. Dick is also considered to be one of the

best scale engineers we have. Minnesota started out in its State

scale testing program in 1885, by taking over the weighing of grain

in the terminal markets, with a bonded State weigher at each hopper

scale, and with a periodic test of the scale twice a year. (By the way,

the granddaddy of all State scale inspectors began his career in

Minnesota shortly after this time. None other than our good old

friend, "C. C." Neale, who also is a native Minnesota product. Charlie

began as assistant scale inspector about 1890 testing State-weight

hopper scales; he then remained in our State service for about 30

years, being our first head of the State Weights and Measures Department. From there, he started his illustrious career in private industry in related weights and measures work for almost another 30

years and just recently retired. Charlie, you know, has probably at- tended more weights and measures conferences over the country than

any one.) State weighing of grain, however, was not begun as a

protection to the producer but instituted as a means of control of

weighing between the country elevator and the buyers in the terminal

market after the farmer had sold his grain. Minnesota began the

testing of railroad track scales in 1907 and is one of the few States

that do test track scales. Existing records show, I believe, that the

track scales in Minnesota are maintained at a greater degree of ac- curacy than anywhere in the country. In 1911 Charlie Neale started

the Minnesota Weights and Measures Department going—one of the

first States to have a, State Department of Weights and Measures with

bona fide State sealers.

Now coming to the point of this subject. To control the weighing

of this 458 million dollars of livestock together with additional stock

that finds its way into this second largest terminal stockyard in the
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 115

country from outside the State, Minnesota has in one respect done

what has not been attempted by any other State to my knowledge.

By a special Livestock Weighing Law, in 1919, the weighing of all

the livestock at the St. Paul Union Stock Yards at South St. Paul was

taken over by the State. A bonded State weigher was assigned to

each scale. The scales were required to be tested every thirty days, or once a month. The tolerance on these scales (listen carefully) is only 14 of 1 pound per 1,000 pounds of test weights at scale capacity.

This is four times as close as the commercial scales in Minnesota, eight

times as fine as the average heavy-duty scale in the country. The

South St. Paul stockyards has grown to be the second largest livestock market in the world, according to the amount of business that

is transacted there. There was $357,000,000 worth of livestock

weighed at South St. Paul last year although it is only fifth in area

in the country. The State livestock weighers and the Minnesota

Weights and Measures Department are not the only ones who are of

the opinion that State weighing has contributed a great deal to this

market's growth. Livestock that could probably be sent more easily

to other livestock centers finds its way to South St. Paul instead.

There has been no scandal about livestock weights at this stockyards

terminal about which much has been broadcast in the papers in other

livestock centers. By the way, one reason why I have been talking

about livestock being 3 percent short weighed, is so that you may

realize that at this market, 3 percent would amount to almost $11,-

000,000 in a year. These scales could be gradually adjusted so that

they would be 3 percent in error either fast or slow and I am sure that

the ones who buy or sell over the scales would not know the difference.

Only three persons would have to be involved to perpetrate such a

steal. If you were to begin this kind of a nefarious scheme in the seven leading terminal yards in the country, it would concern only a handful of men and the take could amount to almost one-half billion

dollars. A recent analysis showed us that if each draft weighed at South St. Paul were only five pounds in error, whether this error was on a single animal or a carload at once, the loss would amount

yearly to over $2,000,000.

In 1921, the United States Congress passed the Packers and Stockyards Act taking control over the weighing of livestock in all terminal

or public yards over the country, but Minnesota was already doing

such a good job at South St. Paul that a stipulation was provided in

this act to permit Minnesota to continue to function with their State

weighing program by license from the Federal Department of

Agriculture.

There are 37 hoof scales operating in this market. In 1935, Minnesota enlarged its program to include the weighing and 30-day scale

test, at 9 out-State buying stations and concentration points, where a daily average of 250 or more head are handled. This brought 19 more

scales in this category under direct control. Two of the largest of

these are the Hormel packing plant at Austin, and the Wilson packing plant at Albert Lea.

I would like to go into some detail about the procedure of this 30-

day test of each scale. May I say that I am prepared to furnish

records that will prove that the State-weight scales at South St. Paul
116 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

have been, and are, the most accurately maintained group of scales

in the country. This has been made possible through an unprecedented state of cooperation between a private industry and a government agency. With perfect harmony and a willingness to always

work for scale perfection, the stockyards company not only is subject

to the strictest test that can be made of scales, but encourage and work

with the Minnesota Weights and Measures Department to keep up

the high standards. This has been largely the result of the stockyard's good fortune in having one of the best scale engineers in the

country—Mr. Joseph M. Moser, who I am sure, not only during his

working day, but his off-work hours as well, has studied scale design,

construction, installation, and maintenance surpassed by none other in

the country. Mr. Moser, as you will see, has been somewhat of a designer of new scale adaptations.

Each monthly test is made, not with strain loads, but with actual

test-weight standards, for the laws require that no scale be used to

weigh more than its tested capacity. At South St. Paul there are 7,000

pounds of 50-pound test, weights, two cast-iron test-weight rollers of

4,500 pounds each and two each of 6,250 pounds, making a total

application on the larger scales of almost 30,000 pounds in test- weight standards so that a whole carload may be weighed at once and stay within the law. At 30,000 pounds, the scale may be no greater

in error than T1^ pounds, plus or minus. This seems unfeasible, does

it not? But first, let me tell you how we keep the weighbeams sufficiently accurate. We test, or calibrate, as we say, the weighbeam

separately from the scale, treating the weighbeam as a steelyard or

a scale in itself where it can be tried out very carefully as a precision

instrument. The scale repair shop is fitted out with a steel I beam

structure on deep piers to eliminate ground vibration, where the beam

is fitted to an adjustable fulcrum loop bearing, and pans are suspended

from the load and tip pivots. By applying the correct amount of laboratory weight standards to the load pan, every notch of the beam

can be read out separately and carefully. A correct tip ratio is care- fully maintained, as is also a definite butt ratio. It is very important

that the same amount of balance weights that may be needed for a

particular scale be hung at either back balance pivot or tip pivot, as the scale requires. The main poise and fractional bars are maintained

at the correct weight the manufacturer intended them to be, and,

since the lever ratio is also so maintained, beams of the same butt

ratios may be interchanged, usually without adjustments to the lever

system. Repairs may be made accurately to all parts of the beam and

poise. Parts may be replaced, poises resealed, and corrections made

to damaged notches. The scale beams in the yards are so standardized

that there are only three different styles and sizes of beams, so that

by keeping three spare beams on hand no scale is shut down for repair

for long, should wear or tear on beam poises or notches develop on the

scales. When the weighbeam passes this careful scrutiny, it is ready

for use on the scale. Every one of these scales are ideally installed

on concrete foundations set on deep concrete piers. All pits are entirely concrete, as are the scale decks. All pits are well lighted and

provided with proper drainage and ample passageways to the pits.

The scales are kept as clean as are any vehicle scales in the country.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 117

Imagine this condition in a stockyard ! Believe me, the happiest years

of my life, to date, were the 13 years I personally made the monthly

inspections of these scales.

The test of the scale progresses as follows : Since the average weight

per draft on these scales is only 1.2 head per draft, it is very important

that the scales be tested in such a manner that all notches will be

checked from 50 pounds up to the maximum weighing capacity. A

single scale may be subjected to the weighing of 50 calves, or it may

be used to weigh only one calf. The ideal SR is maintained on these

scales—from 1 to iy2 times the minimum graduation, or from 5 pounds

to 8 pounds. This permits accurate weighing to the minimum graduation, and still doesn't provide a sluggish or slowly oscillating beam

to unnecessarily delay the weighing. Any finer SR than one graduation only results in confusion, since you can only read the closest 5

pounds, although in most cases, since the scales are so carefully kept,

an SR of 2 or 3 pounds could just as easily be maintained. An indicator is fastened to the tip of the weighbeam with a graduated scale

affixed to the trig loop. (This indicator is also used in calibrating

weighbeams in the rack.) In this manner, there is no mistaking what

the amount of error might be, and the scale in this way can be read to

the closest % pound. (In fact, all the heavy-duty scale inspectors in

Minnesota use indicators on the beams when testing commercial

scales.) The scale is then balanced to a correct zero reading. The

fractional bar, or poise, is first tried, followed by an application of

100 pounds at a time up to 500 pounds in the case of 100-pound notched

beams on the main bar, and this may be to 500 pounds one month, 600

pounds second month, and 100 pounds more each month up to 1,000

pounds so that in each 6 months we maintain an accurate check of all the notches to scale capacity without making tests too tedious. When

1,000 pounds is reached and in the case of 1,000-pounds notched main

beams, the weights are then increased a thousand pounds at a time

until the 7,000 pounds of 50's has been applied. From here on the

test-weight rollers are applied to the weighing capacity of scale.

At any test, as soon as an error beyond tolerance is noted, since ratios

at both butt and tip are known, the inspector immediately determines

whether the error is caused by scale levers or by wear and tear on

notches or poises of the beam. If it is the scale levers or foundation,

corrections are made immediately. If it is the weighbeam in error, the

beam is taken out, a spare beam installed, scale retested, and scale is ready for service. Seldom is a scale idle for repairs more than a few

hours. Seldom when beams are changed is it necessary to make even a slight adjustment. And just think, the tolerance on these scales is only 14 of 1 pound on each 1,000 pounds. Even gold is not weighed

to a more accurate degree.

If you could personally look over our test reports you would see that there are scales that can pass this test month after month without

correction, even with our tolerance. Better than that, you should be

there yourself to observe how really close they are at any reading to

30,000 pounds. I remember one time not too long ago, when Mr.

Christian Christensen, our present special State weight livestock scale

inspector (who ranks as a supervising inspector) was unfortunately

at one of the out-State stations one day, Joe Moser called me and
118 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

begged me to come down immediately to test a scale that had been

idle for several months—a sheep scale that was sorely needed that day.

All that Joe had done to the scale to prepare for the test, was to put

the compressed air to the levers to remove the dust. I took with me

another one of our Supervising Inspectors who had not at that time

been privileged to test these scales. After I had been doing the reading to a few hundred pounds, I asked this inspector to take over while

I had a chat with Joe. Shortly we heard the inspector talking to himself. Wonderingly we walked closer to him to hear him say : "I don't

believe it ! I don't believe it !" The scale had shown no greater error than 1/2 pound at any reading up to the scale's capacity of 20,000

pounds.

One thing has been proved. Frequent tests do not see if the scale is accurate ; 30-day tests maintain the accuracy of the scale.

Things did not run so smoothly years ago. Diversified farming of

the northwest area changed the weighing of 35 years ago from mostly

carload weighing, beginning in the 1920's, to less and less number of

head per draft, so by 1930 only about 2 head per draft were weighed.

(As I said before, the present ratio is 1.2 head per draft.) The commission salesmen, the buyers, and the handlers of the livestock demanded faster and faster weighing. The handling of livestock was

speeded up until they were running in some cases 60 to 80 drafts per

hour over the scale. Weighing accuracy was not hampered, since all

the weighers are adept bonded State men, but with speed, the rough

handling of the poises by weighers which resulted was raising havoc

with the notches and pawls of the poises. Beam-notch errors were

developing gradually worse and worse. Some beam poises weigh 25

pounds and it is easy to see Avhat happens when the poise becomes a sledge hammer on the notch surface. On one scale the 1,000-pound

main beam notch developed a 5-pound error in a month. The goal

that had already been achieved years before was being lost. Attempts

to order a slowing up of the weighing almost resulted in Joe Moser

and myself being run out of the yards by an angry mob. It would

have been too costly to try to have sufficient spare beams to change

every month. Several types of over-and-under indicators were tried

to no avail. It was then that Joe conceived the idea of hooking up

two reading heads to one scale by the use of floating levers between

the extension levers and the two heads. Full automatic dial scales

had been rejected in the yards, since a printed weight was required

by law. Accuracy couldn't be maintained in weighing with an automatic ticket printer dial, since too often just as the weigher pressed

the button to print the weight the animals on the scale would surge

and the scale would print the weight in error sometimes as much as 30 or 40 pounds. Dials equipped with automatic locking devices

wouldn't work out, either, since delay while waiting for animals to

remain quiet long enough to record correct weight would take possibly

three to four times as long. Such loss of time would prove too costly

to buyer and operator and seller alike. Joe's ingenuity and persever- ance in an idea permitted him to work out a plan employing both a dial

and beam on one scale, each working independently of the other and

each recording the same weight. Here was something—a dial to

show in which notch to set the beam poise for fine readings. A dial of
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 119

sufficient capacity, unless employing time-delaying drop weights for

the fine graduations, could not have the required minimum graduation on livestock scales. This dial beam has not only proven to be a boon towards the saving in wear and tear to notches of beams, but has

saved additional time from what had previously been used with just a weighbeam. We had found that in using beams alone, the weighers

had needed an average of 7 placings of the poises before correct

weight was determined. With dial and beam arrangement the aver- age number of placings of the poises for each weight has been cut to

only 2. Weighers had felt that 80 drafts per hour was real hot-shot

weighing. Now dial-and-beam has permitted 100 drafts and over per

hour with ease. In Joe Moser's experiments he had access to another one of the best scale engineers in the country, Mr. Joseph M. Heinen, of

St. Paul.

About this time additional improvement in weighbeams was employed. Beams with single-pawl poises were gradually replaced with

beams with multiple-tooth-pawl poises with notches on the under side

of the beam. More teeth being engaged made less wear. Some of

these beams have been in use for over 15 years without any notch error creeping in.

The dial-beam arrangement resulted in other improvements to the

weighing accuracy. Like a full-automatic scale, the clial-and-beam

has permitted that zero balances be checked as soon as the scale platform is empty and free without returning the beam poises to zero. Less delay incurred in rebalancing. Better conditions of zero bal- ances kept at all times, for greater accuracy. Anyone in the scale

house can easily see what the weight is without having to look closely

at poises.

However, a great deal of livestock in Minnesota is sold by the

farmers to some 1,000-odd livestock buyers before it comes under the

State weigher's protection in the packer stations or in the South

St, Paul Terminal. At these unguarded buyers' scales, presently, I'd

venture to say is employed as much sculduggery as there is anywhere

in the country. But we are taking the advice of Colliers and putting

the cop back on the beat.

In these small buying stations, where we have no State weighers,

the scales are tested only once in 3 years (lack of appropriation funds

for free inspection) with no supervision of the weighing. We are

starting, however, a new program, offering our services to some of the

better ones, and have made contracts already with over a hundred

buying stations and sales pavilions for a 90-day periodic inspection,

as a special, at the owner's expense. This will, by some means or other,

shame most of the remaining to go along with this program. The

publicity that the 90-day test will bring will make business drop off

for those who are not included. We are having a special testing unit,

built for this testing alone, employing twelve 500-pound test blocks

and forty 50-pouncl weights. This truck will carry more test weights

if needed. Usually the average country weights are less than 4,000

pounds. In this way, while testing these scales several times a year,

we can do some supervising of the weighing.
120 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

THE LAWS AND THE CASE BOOK

By Mrs. Kathryn M. Schwarz, Attorney-Editor, Office of Weights

and Measures, National Bureau of Standards

Dr. Condon informed you on Tuesday that the National Bureau of

Standards is preparing; two legal publications for use primarily by

weights and measures officials. The first of these is the fourth revision

of the Federal and State laws relating to weights and measures, and

this is now in process of printing. The second, at present only in the

first stages of preparation, is a case book which will include references

to practically all of the weights and measures decisions of Federal

and State courts of record.

The compilation of weights and measures laws covers statutory

provisions of the 48 States, the Territories and the Island possessions

of the United States, and also Federal laws and regulations. In the

case of practically every State, the session laws of 1949 have been

included; this means that this edition will be quite up to date, even by the time it reaches your desks. I think it will be of interest to you

to know something of the format of this new publication and the

respects in which it differs from the previous edition of 1926.

First, the Introduction to the publication sets forth considerable

historical data and includes the texts of certain joint resolutions and

statutory provisions passed by the Congress with respect to standards.

Because of its historical significance this material is considered more

appropriately placed in the Introduction than in the United States

chapter, which presents statutes currently in effect.

The text begins with the United States chapter which, of course,

contains the Federal laws relating to weights and measures. Only the

pertinent sections or parts of sections of these laws are included.

Regulations promulgated pursuant to several of the Federal laws

follow directly after the laws which they supplement.

The chapters dealing with the States, Territories, and possessions

follow the United States chapter, these being presented in alphabetical order. Each contains the text of the weights and measures laws

of the jurisdiction in question.

An important addition to this publication is the inclusion, at the

beginning of each chapter of the text, of a table of contents. Each

table lists, in the order of their presentation in the text which follows,

the main citations and the section numbers and titles, and includes

page references. An examination of the table of contents for a particular State will give the reader a comprehensive picture of the

legislation of that State, and will show clearly the relation between

the various principal enactments and the field covered by each. Moreover, if one is interested only in locating a requirement of that particular State, the table of contents may give quicker results than the

general topical index for the entire publication.

The publication is concluded with a topical or subject index. This

will be one of the most important parts of the volume, for it will enable

the reader to locate all references in the entire text to any particular

subject. Material will be indexed under various key words; that is, it will not only be indexed but cross-indexed. References will include

page numbers and, in addition, the name of the State or other jurisdiction in each case; it is believed that the latter information will be
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 121

especially useful. Thus the index will not only be a tool for locating

the statutory texts but will of itself present a summary of the extent

to which a particular subject has been treated legislatively.

In the text of the laws there are provided complete code or sessionlaw citations with headings descriptive of the various acts. The

descriptive heading takes the form either of the official short title of

the act as enacted by the legislature or of one devised by us when

there is no official short title. Each section is identified by number

and title. The section titles have been retained as they appear in the

various State codes so long as they reflect the contents of the sections

with reasonable accuracy and clarity, but wherever it was deemed

necessary to change a title to make it informative we have not hesitated to do so. Citations, section numbers, and section titles will

appear in bold-faced type to make them stand out from the regular

text. This will facilitate the location of desired material and the

reading of the text. For the text itself this will be printed two columns to the page, and a type style has been selected which it is believed

will make the text easy to read, particularly in the long paragraphs so frequently foimcl in statutory material.

Frequently a law will contain many sections, running for several

printed pages. If the citation is given only once, at the beginning of

the law, the reader of a particular section may have to search many

pages to find the citation. An innovation in the new publication will

overcome this difficulty by repeating the citation at the top of the lefthand page whenever the citation is continued from a preceding page.

Thus, at whatever point the volume may be opened, it will not be

necessary to turn a page to locate a citation—the citation for any text

in view will always appear on one of the exposed pages.

So much for the statutes. As for the case book, though all of our

plans have not been made concerning the method of presentation, it has been decided to report the court decisions in digest form rather

than in full text. In planning this book, our primary aim is to make it of utmost

utility to weights and measures officials. At the same time, we have

kept in mind the needs of other readers—lawyers, courts, and representatives of business interests—and have tried to provide for the

inclusion of material and a form of presentation to meet those needs.

So far, we know of about 600 weights and measures cases and we

plan to include most of them in one way or another, so that there

will be readily at hand in a single volume essentially all of the case law on the subject of weights and measures. All of the significant

decisions will be digested and each decision will be preceded by the

full name of the case, the name of the court, the date of decision,

and a complete citation to the official Report in which it appears.

The other decisions, of lesser significance, will be reported in abbreviated digests or by mere citation. Comments, footnotes, and cross- references will be included throughout as needed to coordinate legal

principles.

It is planned to arrange the book in chapters and subdivisions of

chapters. Each chapter will deal with some general topic of weights

and measures law, such as, perhaps, Regulatory Power, The Weights

and Measures Official, Inspection and Sealing, False Weights and

Measures, Penalties, Criminal Prosecutions, Packaged Commodities,
122. MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Public Weighing, and the like. As an example of chapter subdivision, the chapter titled "Public Weighing", for instance, might very

well have under it a main subdivision called "Municipal Ordinances,

Validity and Effect," and under this may come several subjects. One

such subject might be "Commodities Sold in Load Lots;" all of the

cases involving the validity of municipal ordinances regulating commodities sold in load lots would be presented here.

A case may be referred to in several chapters of the book; this

would happen Avhen a case decides several different points of law con- cerning weights and measures. Whenever one angle of such a case is

discussed, there will be included a cross-reference to the other topics

under which other points of law covered by that decision are discussed.

As to the indexing system, there will be a table of contents at the

beginning of the publication, and also a table of cases, alphabetical

by perhaps both plaintiff's and defendant's name. There may be

another case table alphabetical by States. There will be a topical index, complete and detailed, perhaps indicating jurisdictions. Detailed

plans have not been completed for this indexing system, but our aim

will be, by means of effective indexing, to guide the reader quickly

and easily to the cases covering the legal principles which he is interested in exploring.

Suggestions from weights and measures officials regarding the case book will be welcomed. If any of you has knowledge of very recent

cases of record in your jurisdiction, it will be helpful if you will report

them to us. REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON METHODS

OF SALE OF COMMODITIES, PRESENTED BY J. F. BLICKLEY, CHAIRMAN, AND DISCUSSION THEREON

Preamble.—Your Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities

respectfully submits its report to the Conference for consideration.

The 1940 Conference created the Methods of Sale of Commodities

Committee to study and recommend to the Conference the best method

of sale for commodities which informs the purchaser what is actually

received for the amount of money spent, and which enables a comparison to be made with prices of competitive commodities. Proper

method of sale protects the consumer's interest and decreases the risk

of unfair competition and practices.

By careful study and deliberation previous committees have recom- mended for the consideration of this body the best method of sale for

most commodities where a problem of this nature existed. Some items

still need solution; when brought to the attention of the committee

they are highly technical and controversial, and it is very difficult to

reach decisions which will be satisfactory to all concerned.

Long hours have been spent and many personal inconveniences were

encountered by the members of this Committee since it was created.

We believe they were worth while ; results obtained have been beneficial

to all concerned.

Manufacturers and manufacturers' associations whose commodities

were brought to the attention of the Committee thus far are satisfied

with the fairness and consideration the Committee afforded them in

arriving at solutions even though they did not get all they asked for.

The Committee in many cases also changed their original conception
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 123

after witnessing problems encountered in industry. The only satisfaction both sides of the conference table achieved was a better understanding of the problems confronting each other. Closer relationship

has been established ; instead of being cousins far removed we are now

brothers in a common cause exerting every ounce of strength at our command to furnish the ingenuity to arrive at a solution beneficial

to all. Due to misunderstandings that have been evidenced in the past,

previous chairmen found it necessary to clarify what the purposes

and functions of this Committee are. As some misunderstanding still exists, I find it incumbent to again attempt clarification. The Committee was created to study and decide upon for recommendation to

this assembly, the best method of sale for all commodities, and to

promote adoption of methods recommended and uniform enforcement

in all State jurisdictions. It is not the purpose of this Committee to

impose or attempt to impose any legislation, rules, or regulations on

any jurisdiction; the Committee only acts in an advisory capacity and

recommends for adoption its findings which are worked out on a co- operative basis with industry, with only one purpose in view, uniformity in procedure, which will, beyond a doubt, result in elimination

of harassing restrictions in industry and better consumer protection.

If recommendations are adopted it is in the discretion of the officials of

each jurisdiction to adopt, ignore, modify, or add to the recommendation as coming out of this Conference ; they must act and be governed

by the statutes that are enacted and in effect in their jurisdictions.

Since the last Conference the following items were referred to the

Committee for consideration

:

1. Wiping Cloths.—This was covered by Item 7 of the Committee's

report to the Conference in 1949. The terms of the recommendation at that time, which were adopted by the Conference, are as follows

:

Wiping Cloths (Washed and Unwashed) —should be sold by net weight and

when put up in bales, cartons, or other containers, the net quantity of the contents should be plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the package.

Representatives from the Sanitary Institute of America, representing the wiping-cloth industry, were of the opinion that the above rec- ommendation was adopted upon the basis of incomplete factual information and that if the Conference had been in full possession of

all revelant facts, the recommendations would not have been adopted.

They requested that the recommendation be reconsidered and rescinded,

and they submitted a rather lengthy brief stating their reasons why

the recommendation should be rescinded, at the same time requesting

• that the Committee open the subject and grant a rehearing on this

item with a representative committee of the Sanitary Institute of

America. The Committee finally agreed to grant a rehearing, which

was held in Chicago on December 6, 1949.

In the petition submitted by the Sanitary Institute of America in

which they requested that our recommendation of net-weight sales be

rescinded, they based their plea for this request on custom, trade practice, competition with other commodities that are used for the same

purpose, and unfair competition if the product is produced in States

where no weights and measures laws are in existence. After careful

study and deliberation your Committee decided that the recommendation as adopted by the 1949 Conference should stand as approved.

904381—50 10
124 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Your Committee and the committee representing the Sanitary Institute of America then agreed that the proper method of sale of wiping cloths should be on a net-weight basis and the recommendation

adopted by the 1949 National Conference on Weights and Measures

be put in effect.

In order to meet the net-weight recommendation requirements and

not impose any hardship on the industry as a whole, the following

resolution was submitted by them with a recommendation that our committee favorably report same to the 1950 Conference on Weights

and Measures for adoption

Resolved, That application of the net-weight principle for the wiping-cloth

industry shall be postponed to January 1. 1952, as the effective date for enforcement in order to educate all concerned that wiping materials shall be sold by

net weight.

Resolved, The term "wiping material" shall be construed to mean all textiles,

washed and unwashed, new and/or old, such as mill rags, mill ends, remnants,

cheesecloth, cotton thread, shoddy, clippings, machined cotton and wool waste,

discarded garments, discarded household textiles, raw cotton and/or any other

material or thing used in the manufacture of wiping material.

Some competitors in the wiping-cloth industry are of the opinion

that their products do not come under the recommendation for the reason that the recommendation specifically stated "wiping cloths

washed and unwashed." It was not the original intention of the Committee to exclude the many various types of wiping cloths from the

recommendation ; it was intended to cover all kinds and types of wiping cloths.

The members of this Committee agreed that further defining of the

term "wiping cloth" was a sincere and fair request and by defining

the term in this manner it would involve all materials that are being

used at the present time.

The Committee also agreed that an extension of time should be

granted before actual enforcement begins in order that the industry can educate all concerned and make changes that are necessary to

put the recommendation into effect; however, the Committee was in

disagreement as to the effective date, January 1, 1952, requested, the

actual effective date to be agreed upon by the entire Committee at a meeting which will be held in Washington prior to the convening of

the National Conference.

The Committee, therefore, proposes and recommends for adoption

that the 1949 recommendation of the Committee relative to "Wiping

cloths (washed and unwashed)" be deleted, and that in its stead the

following recommendation, further defining this item, be substituted : Wiping Material.—Wiping material shall be construed to mean all textiles,

washed and unwashed, new and/or old, such as mill rags, mill ends, remnants,

cheesecloth, cotton thread waste, shoddy, clippings, machined cotton and wool

waste, discarded garments, discarded household textiles, and/or any other material or thing used in the manufacture of wiping material, and shall be sold by net weight; when put up in bales, cartons, or other containers, the net quantity

of the contents should be plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of

the package.

Mr. Blickxey. I believe that it will b*e in order at this time for the

Conference to act upon the Committee's recommendation relative to

wiping material.

(It was moved and seconded that the recommendation of the Committee be

adopted.
[THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 125

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. When was that particular code adopted and

when was the industiy notified ? . Mr. Blickley. The industry has known of this change since last

December except as follows : The definition originally included "cotton thread." That was an error; we should have said "cotton thread

waste." Originally the definition included "raw cotton"; these words

were eliminated because we find that raw cotton is never used as wiping

material. These changes in the wording were made at our meeting

here on Monday.

Mr. Baucom. As a member of the Committee, I should like to ex- plain my view on this question. First, practically every State' in the

Union has a net-weight law, which, in substance, means that whenever

the term "weight" is used it means "net weight." Second, it is seldom,

if ever, that wiping cloths are sold or bought except in package form, so

this commodity falls into the category of package goods. Third, the

National Conference on Weights and Measures has already gone on

record as recommending that any commodity in package form be

labeled to show its net content. Fourth, this subject has been before this Committee for three years, and recommendations on the

method of sale of this commodity were adopted at the last National

Conference. Fifth, no new material or facts have been presented,

which to my way of thinking, justify a reconsideration of our action

last year. Therefore, I must vote "No."

Mr. Witt. I move that the definition of "wiping material" as recommended by the Committee be amended to read, "Wiping cloths,

washed and unwashed, and cotton waste." These words are selfdefining and cover the entire field of wiping material.

Mr. Blickley. Perhaps I can clarify the situation Mr. Witt, so that you will withdraw your motion. Our proposed definition includes

the words "or any other material or thing used in the manufacture

of wiping material." That covers practically everything; nothing

is missed.

The Chairman. Do you consent to that, Mr. Witt ? Mr. Witt. I consent.

(The question was taken and the motion was agreed to, thus adopting the

definition of wiping material as recommended by the Committee.)

Mr. Blickley (reading) : The Committee also recommends that an extension of time be

granted in order that the entire industry can make the necessary

changes to put the net-weight recommendation into effect. The Committee further proposes and recommends for adoption the following

:

The effectiye date of enforcement of the net-weight declaration on wiping

material shall be January 1, 1951.

(It was moved and seconded that the recommendation of the Committee

be adopted.)

Mr. Witt. Last year this Conference adopted a recommendation

that wiping cloths, washed and unwashed, be sold on a net-weight

basis. Accepting this recommendation at its face value, I went back to

my own local jurisdiction, the City of Milwaukee, and recommended

that our Purchasing Board and the Milwaukee School Board buy

this commodity on a net-weight basis. The local dealers immediately

objected to this proposal and stated that it would work a hardship
126 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

on them, and that they might refuse to bid for city business on this

basis. I When it was pointed out to the Purchasing Board and the dealers

that my own recommendation was based on the official action of the

National Conference on Weights and Measures, the Purchasing Board

insisted that wiping cloths be purchased on a net-weight basis.

Further, the dealers completely reversed themselves and agreed that

net-weight sale was practical, and that it should be enforced on a net-weight basis. In other words, it was the prestige of this National

Conference which effected the very desirable change in the method of

sale of this commodity in the City of Milwaukee.

Shortly after this, the recommendation of the National Conference \, on Weights and Measures with respect to the sale of wiping cloths \

Avas published in the official organ of the National Institute of Govern- .j mental Purchasing, and given wide distribution. This organization j has a membership of over 2,000 purchasing agents at all levels of gov- 1

ernmental purchasing—local, State, and Federal.

As a result of this wide dissemination of the Conference action last

year, there are many purchasing agents who today are buying wiping

cloths on a net-weight basis. There seems to be small need for additional time to educate the industry. I think it is pertinent to report

to the Conference that the City of Chicago is one of the cities which at the present time is purchasing wiping cloths on a net-weight basis. As | you know, Chicago is the headquarters for the Sanitary Institute of

America, and the Institute certainly is aware of the fact that many of

its members are selling wiping cloths on a net-weight basis to governmental procurement agents.

The Federal Bureau of Supply is at the present time purchasing

this commodity on a net-weight basis. I am quite sure that the Navy

Department, one of the largest users, is also purchasing wiping cloths

on a net-weight basis in accordance with the new consolidated Federal

Government specifications. This method of sale is working no hardship on the bidders and vendors of wiping cloths, and all of them are on the same competitive basis. If the Conference this year were to

tamper with last year's considered recommendation concerning wiping

cloths, this would not only nullify the progress which has been made,

but would seriously damage the prestige of the National Conference

itself. There might be doubt as to whether or not the Conference

meant what it said and did in its deliberations and actions. This

vacillating shifting back and forth of the Conference position would

adversely affect the confidence and respect which this Conference has

enjoyed for many years.

For the reasons cited, I feel that the Conference could very properly

consider the advisability of placing on the table the Committee's rec- ommendation of this year with respect to the sale of wiping cloths.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. I was present during a part of the meeting of

this Committee the other day. I feel that what was said at that meeting by the representatives of the wiping-cloth industry may have some

merit. When industry representatives attend meetings of committees j of this Conference I fear that some of them—not all—go home hoping

that the following year they can come back and protest the action taken

the preceding year.

m* ami in
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 127

I do not feel as Mr. Witt does, and I am sorry to say that I do not

feel as the Committee does. I move that the original motion on the

adoption of the Committee's recommendation be amended to provide

that the effective date of the recommendation will be July 1, 1950

instead of January 1, 1951. I believe that the industry has had time

to get its house in order, and from my observations the other day, and

with my apologies to those gentlemen, I do not believe that they

desire to do so. (The motion of Mr. Kennedy was seconded.)

Mr. Rogers. In fairness to the industry I think we should clarify

what was clone. The Committee did not agree with the industry proposal for a 1952 date. That amount of time was considered to be entirely too long. I said that they had already been placed under notice

G months ago and that they knew what was going to happen, but they

said that there is still much educating to be done in the mills and elsewhere. Some of them do not want net-weight sales at all. So the

Committee decided to give them until January 1, 1951. This thing

has been going on for 75 or 100 years, so this delaying action for 6

months will not hurt anyone. It is regrettable, of course, that we seem

to have broken faith with Mr. Witt and maybe one or two other jurisdictions that have already regulated, but I do not think that we shall

lose any prestige by maintaining our policy of always being as fair

as we can be to industry, so that they cannot say that we arbitrarily

take action that hurts somebody.

The Chairman. Mr. Rogers, will you accept Mr. Kennedy's amendment to your motion ? Mr. Rogers. I must decline to accept the amendment for the reasons

I have given.

Mr. BaitcOm. The reason for my objection is that we would be rec- ommending a violation of practically every law that we have on our

statute books affecting net weight. I appreciate what Mr. Rogers has

said regarding fairness to an industry, but I do not think that we can

properly recommend a violation of our statutes. The Chairman. The question is on the amendment of the recom- mendation of the Committee by substituting the date "July 1, 1950"

for the date "January 1, 1951". Are you ready for the question?

(A voice vote was taken, and the Chair was in doubt as to the result. A show

of hands was called for by the Chairman, and the result was still in doubt. The

Chairman then directed that a teller vote be had, and that those in favor of

the amendment first pass by the Secretary to be counted. The Secretary reported

to the Chairman, and the Chairman announced, that the count was 44 in favor

of the motion. The Chairman then directed that those opposed to the amendment pass by the Secretary to be counted; the number opposed appearing to be

small, the Chairman requested those opposed merely to stand. After the count

the Chairman announced that 20 were opposed to the motion, and that accordingly the motion to amend the Committee recommendation by substituting "July

1, 1950" for "January 1, 1951" was adopted.

It was then moved and seconded that the Committee recommendation as amended be adopted, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed to. This action resulted in the adoption by the Conference of the following: "The

effective date of enforcement of the net-weight declaration on wiping material

Shall be July 1, 1950".)
128 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Me. Blickley (reading) : 2. Liquefied Gases (Butane, Propane, etc.) for household use. This

was covered by Item 3 of the Committee's report to the Conference in

1947. The terms of the recommendation at that time, which were

adopted by the Conference, are as follows

Liquefied Gases should be metered and sold by cubic feet. The proper and best method of sale for this commodity is beyond

a doubt the most difficult problem ever presented to this Committee

for decision. It is the most controversial subject weights and measures

officials have faced in the last decade. The discussions at the 1949

Conference have convinced the industry and weights and measures

officials that a solution must be made as soon as possible.

A sub-committee of the Methods of Sale of Commodities Committee

and a committee of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association have

made a sincere and honest effort to arrive at a solution, several lengthy

conferences were held, and a deadlock developed as to the proper

method of sale. [There is no Committee deadlock at the present

time.]

At the last meeting of the subcommittee and the committee representing the Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association, the following proposal was submitted by them with a request that our Committee submit same for tentative adoption and to remain in effect until the next

annual Conference in order that further study be made of the liquefied

petroleum gas problem with the assurance that steps would be taken

immediately to conform to the proposed temporary requirements.

Liquefied petroleum gases to be sold and distributed by weight, vapor volume,

liquid volume or by specially defined units as follows :* (a) By weight

1. Containers used where gas content is sold by package weight must have

the tare weight plainly marked on the container or on permanently attached

appurtenances, and the net contents plainly and conspicuously marked on the

container or on a tag or other type of label firmly attached thereto. (Tare weight

is the weight of the container, valve and other permanent attachment but does

not include valve protecting cap.)

2. When liquefied petroleum gas is sold by weight, and is expressed, in units

other than pounds for billing purposes, the delivery ticket or invoice shall show

the equivalent of such units in pounds.

3. When measured by weight, variations at the rate of one pound per one hundred pounds over and one pound per one hundred pounds under the specified

net weight of the container are permitted in individual containers, but the average

weight of not less than twelve containers shall not be less than the marked net

weight of the container.

(b) By vapor volume

1. All meters shall be of a type approved by the authority having jurisdiction.

2. The meters shall measure in cubic feet, however, may register in cubic feet or other recognized unit. The dial on new meters shall be marked by the manufacturer with such a unit.

3. When liquefied petroleum gas is sold by vapor volume and is expressed in units other than cubic feet for billing purposes, the invoice shall show the equivalent of such units in cubic feet.

4. Each meter dial shall be equipped with a cubic foot test indicator for checking accuracy.

5. The meter or dial shall be marked with a cubic footage equivalent to the

designated unit of such meter.

(c) By liquid volume

1. When liquefied petroleum gas is sold by liquid measure only devices as ap- proved by the authority having jurisdiction shall be used for such measurement.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS £lND MEASURES 129

2. When measured by meter, the meter and pertinent equipment must be

such as to accurately assure liquid measurement within plus or minus 1 percent.

3. Where liquefied petroleum gas is sold by liquid volume and is expressed in units other than standard United States gallons of two hundred thirty-one cubic

inches for billing purposes, the invoice shall show the equivalent of such unit in

gallons.

A brief was submitted setting forth the reasons why their proposals should be given consideration. Your committee is of the

opinion that you should be acquainted with these reasons, which are

as follows, somewhat briefed

:

Our Industry Committee is most conscious of the magnitude of the problems

involved in our sincere effort to comply with the required standards with respect

to the sale of liquefied petroleum gas commodities. This Committee is fully

conscious of the many instances of unethical sales of liquefied petroleum gas commodities and agrees with all concerned in the thought that unethical sales should

be corrected immediately.

However, in the opinion of this Industry Committee the precentage of unethical sales is small on a nation-wide basis and this Committee is primarily

concerned with the hope that the industry nationally will not be penalized in its ethical, honest, and sincere marketing programs because of the few instances of

unethical marketing operations. The Industry Committee feels that your Committee should be acquainted with the magnitude and number of user accounts

and the volume of business that is being handled as of today in the liquefied

petroleum gas industry. For the sake of comparison there are approximately

eight million users of natural gas in the United States. As of the end of the year

1949 it is estimated (and this Industry Committee concurs) that there are

6.500,000 homes enjoying the use of liquefied petroleum gas service in farm and

suburban homes beyond the gas mains. Included in the domestic figures are requirements for irrigation pumping, tractor fuel, weed and insect pest control,

chicken brooding and fuel sold by domestic distributors to be used for industrial

purposes, internal combustion engines, and for manufacturing purposes. There

are thousands of trucks and busses on the highway using liquefied petroleum gas. there is considerable interest nationally on this subject, and a continuing demand

exists for liquefied petroleum gas fuel for heavy-duty engines and mining equipment. It is estimated that the total volume of liquefied petroleum gas marketed

in the United States in 1945 was 2,725,000,000 gallons which represents an in- crease of 8% percent over the volume sold in 1948.

As was stated in the recent joint Committee meeting in January the Industry

Committee agrees with the Method of Sale of Commodities Sub-Committee that

had such a conference been planned when this industry was new in the 1920's

that we would not be faced with the problems of standardization in units of

measurement. Perhaps a review of the competitive fuel marketing problems

at that time will explain the origin of many of the problems that we have today. In the Industry's beginning the cost of liquefied petroleum gas was terrifically

high on a package basis. Marketers in the industry searched domestic competitive fuel utilization fields, namely, electricity and city gas companies, for an

approach to a competitive marketing procedure in this industry. One of the

handicaps the industry faced then and still faces is the high thermal Btu content

of liquefied petroleum gas on a cubic-foot basis versus the relatively low thermal

Btu basis of gas marketed by city gas companies. In the case of the city gas

manufacturing companies, a nationally common rate for 500 Btu gas in the

1920's approximated $1 per thousand cubic feet or approximately 5,000 Btu

for 1 cent. In the case of the electric companies, 1 kilowatt in the 1920's

approximated 5 cents for an equivalent of about 3,400 Btu or approximately

800 Btu for 1 cent. These two basic competitive quantities of thermal value were used in the beginning of this industry as a pattern to show the thermal cost

of liquefied petroleum gas in small thermal quantities at about the same cost. To illustrate the industry's thinking based on competitive fuel marketing the

industry in the twenties sold liquefied petroleum gas at about 20 cents per pound.

A pound contains about 21,000 Btu and thus the industry could show competitively that 1,000 Btu cost about 1 cent with liquefied petroleum gas which

approached or equaled the cost of similar quantities of heating sold by electric
130 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

companies or gas manufacturing companies. The above accounts for the many

units being marketed and being measured in the industry today.

Also in the 1920's many large gas manufacturing companies in practically every

State in the United States adopted a unit of measurement other than cubic feet

for standardization purposes which is today still in effect. This unit is called

the therm which is 100,000 Btu and 1/10 of a therm is called a decitherm, which

is 10,000 Btu. Also in the twenties several large liquefied petroleum gas dis- tributors copied this new method of marketing and this method is still in effect today.

At some point during the tremendous growth of the liquefied petroleum gas

industry the Bureau of Standards adopted the units of measurement of which

this Industry Committee is fully conscious ; namely, that all commodities must

be sold by the pound, cubic foot, or gallon, and this Industry Committee's problem

today is to attempt to recommend changes in the liquefied petroleum gas industry

marketing to conform as near as possible to these new requirements standards.

This industry Committee sees no reason why we cannot conform to your SubCommittee's request in the marketing of packaging equipment and this Industry

Committee agrees to the net weight markings you have suggested as a requirement. This Industry Committee concurs with your suggestions with respect

to the measurement of liquefied petroleum gas liquids and will appreciate the

privilege of cooperating with your Committee in having ethical measuring devices

approved by the authorities having jurisdiction. The liquefied petroleum gas

industry's problem in measuring liquefied petroleum gas liquid to date involves

three large considerations

1. Accurate liquid displacement metering equipment has only been recently

made available.

2. Liquefied petroleum gas exerts its own pressure at normal atmospheric

conditions in the United States and for that reason the Industry has followed

the I. C. O.'s approved requirements of using an internal liquid level gaging

device for accurate measurement in bulk consumer containers as well as I. C. C.

liquefied petroleum gas tank car containers.

3. Unless liquid displacement meters are properly installed with respect to maintaining the liquid meter full at all times during the transfer of liquid

they do not read accurately, which is not desirable to all concerned.

The above are the three problems which need considerable study to assure accuracy on consumer purchases.

The biggest problem this Industry Committee has is in trying to satisfy the

Weights and Measures group on the subject of vapor metering. First of all this

Industry has over 1,100,000 liquefied petroleum gas meters now in consumer

service. The cost to change these meters is more than sufficient to put out of

business the distributors using the same. Second, because of the magnitude

and number of consumers accounts using meters and the present accepted methods

of registering the liquefied petroleum gas units now being used in other than

cubic feet, the cost of replacing automatic-billing equipment could also place a serious burden on many distributors of liquefied petroleum gas. Third, to change overnight from existing types of liquefied petroleum vapor meters to meters that measure and register in cubic feet would cause much confusion and

inaccuracy in meter reading and billing for years to come. This Industry Committee having the above thoughts in mind with respect to acceptable vapor

meter registering believes that the suggested revision on the subject of vapor

metering might be acceptable if given a trial period for observation. This

Industry Committee has attempted to study the variation from the present

Bureau of Standards requirements in sales commodity measuring and finds the

following

There are many city gas and water companies who meter measure and bill to consumers city water on a cubic-foot basis. (A Bridgeport, Conn., Hydraulic

Company invoice was exhibited and several other cases cited.)

It would consume too much time on this program to discuss all

details of the brief submitted ; having received copies of this tentative

report it is assumed you have carefully studied and considered its

contents. Except for some few changes the proposals as submitted

by the Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association constitute the present
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 131

method of sale. Weighing or measuring devices would continue to

convert the recognized standard units of weight or measure to the

many various units and terms of sale being used at the present time.

Because of the highly controversial nature of this subject, the subcommittee members were of the opinion, and decided, that the entire

Committee should decide if the proposals as submitted should be

recommended for adoption. The Committee is in disagreement in

accepting the proposals of the Liquefied Petroleum Gas Association

as our recommendation to the Conference for adoption. Surrender

of legal and official standard units of weight and measure were the

main objections to the proposals.

Your Committee has made a sincere effort to solve this highly controversial problem. Every effort will be made until it is called up

at the Conference to have the solution and recommend the proper

method of sale for this commodity.

Being convinced by facts presented that it is unfair and restrictive

to confine the sale of liquefied petroleum gas through a volumetric

meter to a cubic-foot basis, the Committee proposes and recommends

for your consideration that Item 3 of the Committee's report to the

Conference in 1947, which read "Liquefied Gases (Butane, Propane,

etc.) for household use: Should be metered and sold by cubic feet,"

be withdrawn.

(It was moved and seconded that the 1947 action of the Conference in adopting

Item 3 of the Committee's report for that year be rescinded, the question was

taken, and the motion was agreed to.)

Mr. Bltcexey. In its tentative report, the Committee made a recom- mendation for your consideration, as a substitute for the recommendation which has now been rescinded. After several meetings which

the Committee has held during the past few days it has been decided

to withdraw the recommendation included in the tentative report.

[Eeading :] The Committee now proposes and recommends for your consideration and adoption, the following

:

Liquefied Petroleum Gas shall he sold- or offered for sale by avoirdupois weight,

liquid measure, or cubic feet: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall be

interpreted so as to prohibit the sale of Liquefied Petroleum Gas by other \urits,

recognized and/or approved by the authority having jurisdiction, if the meter or

scale and the invoice clearly indicate to the consumer the equivalent of such unit

in pounds and/or fractions thereof.

When sold or offered for sale by weight, variations at the rate of 1 pound per

100 pounds under the specified net weight of the container are permitted in individual containers, but the average weight of not less than twelve containers shall not be less than the marked net weight of the container.

Containers used where gas content is sold by package weight must have the

tare weight plainly marked on the container or on permanently attached appurtenances, and the net contents plainly and conspicuously marked on the container or on a tag or other type of label firmly attached thereto. (Tare weight

is the weight of the container, valve, and other permanent attachments, but does

not include the valve-protecting cap.)

All meters shall be of a type approved by the authority having jurisdiction.

Each vapor meter dial shall be equipped with a cubic-foot test indicator for

checking accuracy.
132 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

When liquefied petroleum gas is sold by liquid measure, only devices as ap- proved by the authority having jurisdiction shall be used for such measurement.

When measured by meter, the meter and pertinent equipment must be such

as to assure accurate liquid measurement within plus or minus 1 percent.

J. F. Blickxey, Chairman,

R. S. Ackerman,

C. D. Batjcom,

J. A. Boyle,

J. G. Rogers,

Committee on Methods' of Sales of Commodities.

Mr. Blickxey. Mr. L. R. Roper, the other member of the Committee, was not present and did not sign the report, but I have tentative

authority from Mr. Roper to go along with the proceedings of the

Committee.

(It was moved and seconded that the recommendation of the Committee

relative to liquefied petroleum gas be adopted, the question was taken, and the

motion was agreed to.

(At this point, at 4:40 p. m., the Conference adjourned, to reconvene at 9:30

a. m. Friday, May 26.)
SIXTH SESSION—MORNING OF FRIDAY, MAY 26, 1950

(The Conference reassembled at 9 :35 a. m., J. E. Brenton, Vice President,

presiding.)

OPEN FORUM

The Chairman. The program this morning provides for the discussion of a variety of topics. Each topic will be introduced by a discussion leader, and the topic will then be open for discussion from

the floor. The discussions should be kept within the scope of the

particular topic before the Conference at the time.

INCREASING THE VALUE OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE TO WEIGHTS AND

MEASURES OFFICIALS—R. W. SMITH, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

I speak to you in my capacity as Secretary of the National Conference on Weights and Measures. The purpose of this discussion is not

to invite commendatory comments from anyone. We should like to

have constructive suggestions for the improvement of our Conference

programs, if you have any such suggestions to offer. If there are things that you do not like about the Conference, you are invited to

make a brief statement to that effect, and this will go into the record

and will be given due consideration in making the plans for future

meetings. If there are some things which you think we should do

which we are not doing, we should like to have your suggestions for

the guidance of the Executive Committee and the Secretary.

In other words, we want your help. We want to know whether

or not the Conference is doing for you what you want it to do. We

want to know in what respects we can do a better job.

The Chairman. Gentlemen, if you have any suggestions, as I am

sure you must have, now is the time to present them.

(There was no response to the invitation.)

The Secretary. Gentlemen, I sincerely hope that we may receive

suggestions from you from time to time. The Executive Committee

needs your help, because we want to give you a Conference next year

that is as good as we know how to make it.

THE TESTING OF WHEEL-LOAD WEIGHERS—V. D. CAMPBELL, OHIO

In 1941 the Ohio Highway Patrol purchased some wheel-load

weighers and asked us to work out a program for checking and sealing

these devices. The suggestion was made that they purchase the neces- sary test weights, in view of the fact that the Department of Agriculture did not have sufficient funds for this. They also said they had no

money. So we had to find an "out."

The College of Engineering, Ohio State University, discouraged

the use of hydraulic testing machines, and suggested the use of a screw-type testing machine. The Highway Department had a testing

laboratory and a testing machine which we thought would meet our

needs. All of this occurred, of course, prior to the issuance of National

133
134 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Bureau of Standards Handbook H37, which, as you recall, deals with

the testing of weighing devices.

Our first experiments with the use of this machine were unsatisfactory because of a side thrust that prevented the full force of the

machine from acting upon the weigher platform. However, the engi- neers of the laboratory designed and built a device to overcome this

difficulty. We used this method of testing, then, for several years

and were well satisfied with it because (1) the machine could be read

to within 10 pounds, (2) each value mark on the wheel-load weigher

could be checked, (3) the accuracy of the machine was 1 percent

while the maintenance tolerance for such weighers was 5 percent,

and (4) the Highway Patrol allowed 1,000 pounds overweight before

prosecution for overweight. So we thought we were pretty safe with

that method.

In 1949, the Ohio Legislature saw fit to amend the highway loadcontrol laws in such a way as to eliminate this 1,000-pouncl "tolerance''

and made the amount of fine dependent upon the amount of overload.

For example, an overload of over 2,000 pounds but less than 5,000

pounds carries a $25 fine, plus an additional one dollar fine for each

100 pounds of overload. As the overload increases, the penalty in- creases, until jail sentences occur. This development caused both the Highway Patrol and ourselves

to get together again, in order to see that the wheel-load weighers

to be used were accurate. Still there was no money for test weights,

which, of course, we would have preferred. The following program

was then set up

(1) Each wheel-load weigher was to be checked twice a year by

the Testing Laboratory with the testing machine. The sealers were

to witness the test, verify the results, and seal the device if within

tolerance.

(2) A copy of the test, which showed the amount of variation from

the load placed upon the device by the testing machine, was to be

attached to the lid of the box containing the device. In this way,

a patrolman could apply these variations as correction factors. Since

the testing machine was within 1 percent accuracy, wheel-load weigher

readings, properly corrected, would tend to come close to this same

accuracy.

(3) In event that there was any question, either by the patrolman

or a trucker, as to the accuracy of any device, it was to be brought

back to the laboratory for testing.

(4) County and city sealers were cautioned not to try to test these

devices because they did not have sufficient equipment.

At the Ohio Weights and Measures Conference last December,

a forum discussion on this subject was held, at which a representative

of the Highway Patrol participated. Again the question of the

validity of our testing procedure was raised. Our good friend Bill

Bussey took some exceptions. So it was desirable, not only from

our point of view, but also that of the State Patrol and the Testing

Laboratory, to determine whether or not we were safe in our testing

procedure. I mean by that, could we defend our procedure in court,

if necessary. While the use of the testing machine was a convenient

and fairly rapid means of testing, Ave didn't want to use it unless

it proved to be satisfactory. Hence, we tried this experiment
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 135

(1) Two wheel-load weighers were brought from the field and

tested by the laboratory. We did this to see whether or not there were any variations from the previous tests which had occurred several months before. The results showed that the wheel-load weighers

were as accurate as when tested previously. Errors ran from to

1.25 percent.

(2) These same wheel-load weighers were then checked in accord- ance with the test described in NBS Handbook H37. The errors ran from 0.15 percent to 0.29 percent.

The two tests differed in this respect : The test by the testing machine covered the complete range of the weigher, while the H37 test covered the range from 10,040 pounds to 18,840 pounds with eleven

different loads. By the use of the testing machine, each weigher was

tested separately. By the H37 method, the two were used as a pair,

and the individual readings added, in order to compare with the scale

readings.

To supplement our own thoughts and experiences along this line,

I wrote to twelve different jurisdictions for some data. This was

in line with a suggestion from Mr. Smith. Mr. E. E. Powell, Manager, Loadometer Department of Black and Decker, was also invited

to send in any constructive information. The response was excellent

each of the twelve jurisdictions replied; and Mr. Powell not only

sent some data, but is here in person to assist with this Forum. With

Ohio included, I have data, then, from thirteen jurisdictions. A summary shows the following

:

(1) Out of eleven jurisdictions that check or have checked wheelload weighers, seven use or used the method described in Handbook

H37, three use or used the screw-type testing machine method, and

one State, North Carolina, developed its own devices for applying a load to these weighers.

(2) Nine of the jurisdictions reported that the police used them

for checking overloads on highways, one State reported that they were used at an airport, and they were not used at all in three

jurisdictions.

(3) Out of ten jurisdictions where they are used, the weights and

measures official was responsible for their being properly checked, in

eight instances.

From our own experiences and from a study of the data collected, it

is my opinion that the methods might be listed in the following order

of preference. This does not include the method which was devised

by one State department, because while this is undoubtedly quite an

accurate method, it is not widely used. Anyone interested in this

method, can learn about it by writing to Mr. C. D. Baucom, Superintendent of Weighs and Measures, 415 Agriculture Building, Raleigh,

North Carolina.

(1) The method which I consider most accurate is the use of test weights, so designed as to fit properly upon the wheel-load weigher

platform. This method would also require proper facilities for the

handling of test weights. Black and Decker use that method in their

calibration and checking.

(2)* The method suggested on pages 149 and 150 of the National

Bureau of Standards Handbook H37, entitled "Testing of Weighing

Equipment."
136 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

(3) The use of a screw-type testing machine.

(4) The use of a hydraulic testing machine.

(5) The use of 50-pound test weights.

Listed above are my five choice's of testing methods, listed in the

order of the best to the least efficient. I have chosen this order of

preference for the following reasons

The method best suited for any one jurisdiction will depend upon

the requirements and accuracy demanded by the agency using these

devices. The use of method No. 1 (above) is beyond reproach. I

think we can all agree that applying a definite, known test-weight

load to the wheel platform is the best method.

The second method is highly reliable, provided, of course, that the

motortruck scale used is correct, as defined by G-D.2., on page 8 of

National Bureau of Standards Handbook H44. The pull of gravity

of a given load, then, can be read both on the scale and on the wheel - load weigher. The variations, on a percentage basis, can then be

calculated. When a vehicle-scale testing unit is available for this

test, it is not difficult to obtain 10 to 12 readings, including the lightest

and heaviest wheel loads which the weigher is expected to handle.

The third method, utilizing a screw-type testing machine, while

not quite as accurate as the second method, will be suitable in cases where large tolerances are allowed by the agency using the weighers

for example, as the Ohio Highway Patrol did prior to 1949, when a 1,000-pound overload was allowed. The screw-type testing machine

can be read to within 10 pounds, and has a 1 percent maintenance

tolerance. It has the advantage of providing a test for each weigher

and of providing a check of each of the graduations.

The fourth and fifth methods are undesirable. The use of the

hydraulic testing machine is undesirable because such machines

usually cannot be read with much accuracy, possibly only to the

nearest 50 pounds. The fifth method is unreliable because the number of 50-pound test weights that can be stacked upon a platform is so small as to preclude a check of the wheel-load weigher within the

range of its use. For your information, it is my belief that the newer design of wheelload weighers is superior, by far, to the older hydraulic type.

Finally, I should like to thank each of you who so kindly replied

to my request for information, and also Mr. E. E. Powell of the Black

and Decker Company.

The Secretary. I should like to ask Mr. R. D. Tate of the Engineering Mechanics Section of the Bureau to speak to you brienly

about the testing-machine side of this question. He can speak authoritatively, because his section deals with those machines all the

time.

Mr. Tate. The common working tolerances that are set up for test- ing machines by such societies as the American Society for Testing

Materials, and by the Federal Specifications Board, are generally

1 percent. However, in the case of new testing machines of the better

qualities as now being sold, manufacturers will guarantee an accuracy

of one-half of 1 percent. From that standpoint—that is, accuracy

alone—the testing machines should be satisfactory for the calibration

of a device having a working tolerance of, say, 3 percent. However,

you should consider that the testing machine applies a load in a some-
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 137

what different manner than a dead weight does, and if there is any friction involved, that may enter into the question.

In calibrating- a testing machine it is the common practice to calibrate to read accurately for a specimen—such as a steel specimen

which is being broken. Under these conditions the testing machine

is calibrated under a slowly increasing load. The increase may be

very, very slow, and we try to manipulate the machine so that at the

point of failure of the specimen the load is actually increasing slowly.

With the very best type of testing machines, the friction in the machines

is quite low, perhaps in the order of 0.2 or 0.3 percent. On some types

of machines that are still in use in this country, the figure may be

larger than that, but I doubt that it would exceed 1 or iy2 percent even

in the worst cases. The question of whether the wheel-load weigher responds in the

same manner when loaded by a dead weight as when loaded in a rigid

system having a high spring constant must be considered; the latter

factor may introduce errors greater than those introduced by the basic

inaccuracy of the testing machine.

Mr. Kibbee (American Trucking Association). I agree that the

loadometer does register the weight that is placed upon it. But we

have found that in the case of a vehicle combination having 7 axles

and 14 wheels, the sum of the 14 individual wheel weights does not

agree with the total weight registered on a platform scale. We are being prosecuted on the basis of total weights sometimes arrived at

by weighing one wheel at a time by one loadometer. We feel that the

weighing method is not as accurate as it might be.

Mr. Boyle. In Maine we go to the State police scale, which is of

30,000 pounds capacity, and test that scale, assuring ourselves that it is correct. We then place a pair of loadometers on the scale, balance

them out, and then successivly apply the front wheels and the rear wheels of a truck to the loadometers, comparing the readings of the

loadometers and of the scale. If the loadometer errors are within the

tolerance range, we seal the weighers. That seems to me to be a simple

way of testing the weighers, and if that is not correct I should like to

have Mr. Campbell's comments.

Mr. Campbell. That is similar to the method outlined in H37,

which I did not describe in detail.

Mr. Powell (Black & Decker Manufacturing Co.). In 1926 Mr.

Harry Eoeser, of the National Bureau of Standards, made an extensive

study on portable wheel-load weighers, otherwise known by our trade

name of "loadometers." A Letter Circular was issued by the Bureau,

and this carried the recommendation that in using wheel-load weighers

they should be used in pairs to weigh one axle of the vehicle at a time.

Any Highway Patrol or other enforcing agency which uses only one loadometer and tries to weigh a vehicle by that method is following

an irregular procedure which we, as manufacturers, know is inaccurate.

At the time Mr. Boeser's paper was published, there was no such

thing as a truck with a tandem axle, that is, two axles which are spaced 4 or 5 feet apart. When tandem axles were first introduced

we made a study to develop the proper method of weighing tandem

axle vehicles. We found that there were only two accurate methods

of doing this. One method Avas to use 4 weighing devices, placing

all four of the tandem axles in the same horizontal plane just as they
138 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

are when they are on the highway. The second method was to use 1 two loadometers under the wheels of one axle, mounting the wheels 1 of the other axle on what we called "equalizing blocks" or "dummies."

By that method the two axles are brought into the same horizontal I plane, but this, of course, is a slow procedure because it requires that

one axle be weighed, that the vehicle be backed off, and that the

loadometers and the equalizing blocks be then interchanged in order I to get the weight of the second axle.

I would repeat that in my opinion any State that is using only one I

wheel-load weigher to weigh a vehicle with 4, 6, 8, 10, or 14 wheels is I certainly not following the correct procedure and I do not believe that I

evidence secured in that manner would stand up in court.

Mr. Leithauser. Mr. Powell, would you not say that this all sums |

up to the fact that the loadometers themselves are accurate but that I

the method used by many of the Highway Patrols is inaccurate ? Mr. Powell. I would not say the majority of the States are using

inaccurate methods of weighing. At the present time some States are I

making an axle-load scale by mounting two loadometers on concrete

piers below the pavement level and connecting the platforms with

steel beams the top surfaces of which are flush with the pavement, f

This is the most accurate method of using the portables, but they are 1

not portable in the sense that Ave originally had in mind when we de

signed them to be moved from one location to another.

When you weigh one axle of a vehicle on a pair of loadometers

you are elevating that axle about 3% inches above the horizontal,

and, depending upon how the truck is loaded, you are giving the truck

driver an advantage of about 1 to 2 percent ; the indicated weight will

be slightly less than if the truck had been weighed in a perfectly

horizontal position.

Mr. Leithauser. Mr. Powell, would you consider it accurate weighing if two loadometers are used but the wheels of the other axles are not run up on blocks to bring all axles on a horizontal plane?

Mr. Powell. There are only two ways of properly weighing a tandem-axle vehicle. One is to use four of the portable weighing

units, and the other is to use two weighing units and two equalizing

blocks or dummies.

Mr. M. W. Jensen. Mr. Campbell, what precautions are taken by I the State of Ohio to assure the accuracy of the screw-type testing

machines ? Mr. Campbell. They are tested by the makers of the machines who

use proving rings which in turn are calibrated by the National Bureau

of Standards.

Mr. Rogers. I should like to know what one of these testing machines costs. Mr. Tate. I believe that a good machine, having a range up to

50,000 or 60,000 pounds, may be obtained now for about $7,000 or

$8,000.

Mr. Rogers. We have been testing these devices first with as much

dead load as we can apply, which is not more than 7,000 pounds.

Then we follow the other methods which have been described here.

The platform scale which we use in checking is what might be called a "master scale."
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 139

Mr. G. E. Carpenter. In testing wheel-load weighers in Vermont

I take them over to the Fairbanks plant, place an I-beam across a pair of weighers, and then apply a 10,000-pound test weight such as the factory uses in sealing out their track scales, and then apply two,

or four, or six 1,000-pound weights.

Mr. M. W. Jensen. I should like to ask Mr. Powell if he believes

that the old hydraulic machines can be maintained within an accuracy

of 3 percent.

Mr. Powell. The hydraulic loadometer, which was designed in

1924, and which was discarded by us in 1939, uses a pressure cell and

a gage. Our experience is that it is difficult to hold these machines to a 3-percent tolerance, because of the abuse to which they are frequently subjected in service.

BASIS WEIGHTS FOR PAPER AND TEXTILES—R. S. CLEVELAND, NATIONAL

BUREAU OF STANDARDS

In the trade it is common practice to designate paper and textile

products by units of weight, which are in reality the weights of a given area of paper or fabric or a given length of yarn. These

designations are often very confusing to the uninitiated not only

because the areas or lengths involved are ordinarily not stated but also

because different areas may be used for different kinds of paper or

fabric and different lengths for different kinds of yarn. The following summary gives some of the more common conventions that are used in the two industries. For fuller or more explicit information

reference should be made to some of the sources listed in the Bibliography at the end of this paper.

Paper

The weight of paper per unit area is expressed as "basis weight"

which, for short, is often spoken of simply as "weight" or "substance."

In the United States, the generally accepted standard in industry

for the expression of the basis weight of paper is the weight in pounds

of a ream of 500 sheets of a specified area or size. The Government

Printing Office, and the printing industry use 1,000 sheets per ream. For some papers a ream of 480 sheets is occasionally used.

The size or area of the sheet used for basis weight of a particular

paper is usually established by that part of the trade concerned with

that type of paper. The Technical Association of the Pulp and

Paper Industry (TAPPI) has attempted to standardize the area or

size of sheet by adopting size 25 in. X 40 in. or 1,000 sq. in. This

area is also often used for comparing the weight of one paper directly

with that of another. Other sizes used in this country, depending on

the type of paper are as follows

:

Kind of paper Size, in. Writing and printing 17X22

Blotting 19X24

Cover 20X26

Tissue (double-crown size) 20X30

Cardboard 22X28

Bristol and tag 22%X28y2 News and wrapping 24X36

Book 25X38

Paperboards 1,000 sq ft. 904381—50 11
140 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

In Europe, South America, and occasionally for research work

in this country, a basis weight of grams/square meter is used.

To illustrate the use of these terms, a "60 pound" wrapping paper

would therefore be a wrapping paper of such weight that 500 sheets,

each 24 in. X36 in. would weigh 60 pounds within a commercial

tolerance of ±5 percent. This would usually be written as weight

60 lb (24 X 36—500) but might be written simply as weight 60 lb. It

is apparent, however, from the above, that although the units of size

and ream are frequently omitted, it is desirable to state them in any

transaction in which they may not be clearly understood by all concerned.

The methods outlined above for expressing the weight of paper

are only the more common. There are other less common designations. For example, wallpaper is expressed arbitrarily in ounces. The ounce weight has a peculiar relationship to basis weight on a 24X36, 500 basis whereby four times the given ounce weight, plus 2,

equals the basis weight on a 24 X 36, 500 basis. Thus a 12-oz wallpaper corresponds to a 50 lb paper on this basis.

Textiles

Fabrics.—Like paper, the manner of expressing the weight of fabrics is not well standardized and the method of expression is dictated largely by trade custom in a particular part of the industry.

Three methods of expressing the weight per unit area are in use. (a) Ounces per square yard (oz/yd2 or oz/sq yd).—This unit is

most widely used in purchase specifications, testing, and as a means of

directly comparing the weights of different fabrics. It is also used in

the industry for some fabrics such as tire cord fabrics as the usual

means of designating the weight of the fabric.

(b) Ounces per linear yard of a given width.—-This unit is most

widely used for those fabrics in which the width is fairly well standardized. A 15-ounce serge uniform cloth or men's suiting, for ex- ample, usually indicates a fabric in which one linear yard, 56 in. wide

will weight 15 ounces. This unit is also used for some types of duck,

as indicated below.

(c) Yards per pound of a given width.—This unit is used for lighter

weight fabrics in which the width is well standardized, such as sheeting, percale, and similar materials which are often described by a

designation such as 90 in., "96 X 108, 1.27 yd." This indicates a

sheeting for which 1.27 linear yards, 90 in. wide weighs one pound

and that the fabric has 96 warp and 108 filling yarns per inch.

The weight of some ducks are expressed in ounces per linear yard

of a given standard width. The standard width differs for different

ducks and must be stated or known to have any definite meaning.

Other ducks known as "number ducks" are expressed by a number

running from No. 2/0 for the heaviest up to No. 12 for the lightest

weight. Except for 2/0 and 1/0, the weight in ounces per yd 22 in.

wide may be found by subtracting the number from 19. Some of the

more common ducks are as follows
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 141

Width for weight

Flat duck: Nominal weight basis

Single filling 6 to 15 oz 29 in. Double filling 7 to 15 oz 29 in. Enamel 6 to 10}£ oz 38 in. Wagon 8 to 12 oz 29 in. Army duck 7 to 15 oz 28J.S in. Shoe duck . 7 to 9 oz 37 in. Belting duck 22 oz and up 36 in or 42 in. Bootleg duck 8 to 11 oz 40 in. Numbered duck No. 2/0 to No. 12 22 in. No. 2/0 20 oz No. 1/0 19 oz No. 1 18 oz No. 2 17 oz No. 3 up to 12 16 oz down to 7 oz, by

1 oz steps

Yarns.—The weight, size count, or number of yarns is expressed

as the weight per unit length or the length per unit weight, depending upon the type of yarn. The former is termed the fixed length

system and the latter the fixed loeight system. On the fixed length

system the numerical size designation is larger for larger yarns. On

the fixed weight system, the numerical size becomes smaller as the

yarn becomes larger.

Fixed length system.—The denier notation is by far the most common in this country of the fixed length systems. The denier of a yarn is the weight in grams of 9,000 meters. Thus 9,000 meters of a

100 denier nylon yarn would weight 100 grams. This system is

used principally for reeled silk, nylon, and other synthetic filamentous

yarns.

Another example of the fixed length system is found in jute yarns,

which is based on a fixed length of 14,400 yards called a spyndle, and

on the pound. For a "20-lb" jute yarn, 14,400 yards would weight

20 pounds. Also the "Grex" system based on the number of grams

per 10,000 meters has been proposed as a universal standard.

Fixed weight system.—This is the count or number system. The

count of a yarn is the number of unit lengths in 1 pound. The unit

of length is called a "hank" and varies in length depending upon the

type of yarn. Thus a yarn count of 80s (or 80's) indicates that 80

standard hanks will weight 1 pound. The small (s) is used to indicate count. Some of the more common standard hanks for different

types of yarns are as follows

:

Standard

Yarn hank, yd

Cotton, merino, spun silk 840

Worsted 560

Woolen (run) 1, 600

Woolen (cut) - 300

Asbestos (cut) 100

Linen, wet spun (lea) 300

TYPP (thousand yards per pound) 1,000

For examples of the use of these terms, a 20s worsted would have

560X20 yd/lb, a 4s (or 4 run) woolen would have 1,600X4 yd/lb, and

a 20s cotton would have 840 X 20 yd/lb.
142 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Plied yarns.—The size of plied yarns is usually indicated by a

notation such as 60/2 or 60s/2 where the 60 indicates the count of the

single yarn and the 2 is the number of singles twisted together to

form the yarn. Thus an 8/10 cotton yarn consists of 10 strands of 8s

yarn twisted together. Also, 20/4/2 indicates that four 20

, s are twisted

together and then two of these 4 ply strands are plied to form a yarn.

For worsted yarns the notation is reversed so that the first example

would be written 2/60.

The weight of a plied yarn such as 60/2 cotton would be

60X840-^2 yd/lb, neglecting contraction due to twisting.

Ropes and twines.—The weight of rope is usually expressed on the

basis of "ft/lb" or "lb/ft." A 1-in. diameter manila rope will weigh

about 0.27 lb/ft, or have 3.7 ft/lb. The weight of many small twines

is expressed as "yd/lb" and medium or larger twines as "ft/lb."

Sash cord.—The weight of this product is represented by a size

number which is the number of 32nd in. in the diameter. Certain

other twines also have number designations but these are not asso- ciated with diameter and are arbitrary designations.

Standard Atmospheric Conditions

Inasmuch as both paper and textiles are hygroscopic materials,

their weight is dependent upon the amount of moisture they absorb

from the surrounding atmosphere. Both industries have, therefore,

established standard conditions under which tests of weight and

other properties should be made. These are

Textiles 65±2% R. H. and 70° ±2° F

Paper 50±2% R. H. and 73y2 °±2 F

Materials should be conditioned to moisture equilibrium with these

atmospheres before weighing.

Keferences

This list of references is not intended to be complete, but only suffi- cient to cite authoritative background for the information given above.

Paper

The Dictionary of Paper. American Paper and Pulp Association, New

York, N. Y. Basis Weight of Paper and Paperboard. TAPPI Standard T410 m-45.

TAPPI, 122 East 42d St.. New York, N. Y. Federal Specification UU-P-31b, Paper, General Specifications and Methods

of Testing. Superintendent of Documents, Washington 25. D. C. 25 cents. Textiles

ASTM Standards on Textiles. American Society for Testing Materials,

1916 Race St., Philadelphia, Pa. Handbook of Industrial Fabrics. Wellington Sears Co., 65 Worth St., New York. N. Y. Knitting Mill Manual. Textile World, 10th Ave. & 36th St., New York, N. Y. American Wool Handbook. American Wool Handbook Co., 303 Fifth Ave.,

New York, N. Y. Rayon and Staple Fiber Handbook. Rayon Handbook Co., 303-305 Fifth

Ave., New York, N. Y. The American Cotton Handbook. Textile Book Publishers, Inc., New York

16, N. Y. The Textile Recorder Yearbook. Harlequin Press Co., Ltd., Old Colony

House, Manchester 2, England.

Staple Cotton Fabrics. John Hoye. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New

York, N. Y.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 143

Atmospheric Conditions

:

Standard for Laboratory Atmospheric Conditions for Testing. Federal

Standard No. 1, December 15, 1948. Superintendent of Documents, Washington 25. D. C. 5 cents.

CHARGES FOR RUG CLEANING—G. H. LEITHAUSER, BALTIMORE, MD.

I have been informed that years ago when carpet making was in its

infancy, carpet was made on what was then known as a Jacquard

loom and could not be made any wider than 27 inches, or what was

commonly called "three-fourths width," "one-fourth"' being equal to

9 inches. In those days carpet cleaning was charged for according

to the length in yards of the carpet to be cleaned. As 27 inches was

the standard width for carpet, the pricing method adopted by the

various cleaners in those days seems to me to have been all right.

As time went on, the broadloom came into being, and this loom, I

am told, was capable of making carpets in widths up to four feet

six inches. As carpet was now being sold in widths greater than 27

inches, the carpet cleaners no longer charged for their service by the

loom yard, but based their charges on the so-called "carpet yard,"

measuring 27 inches by 36 inches, although leaving their customers

under the impression that they were paying for this cleaning service

on the basis of a 36 inch by 36 inch square yard. To my mind, this

basis of pricing was not proper and definitely resulted in giving the

customer short measure in the service which the cleaners were rendering, because there is no such unit of measurement in any of our American tables of weights and measures as a 27 inch b}T 36 inch carpet yard.

This unit of measure should never have been adopted by the National

Institute of Rug Cleaners as a basis for rug-cleaning charges. This

pricing method is not only misleading to the public but is detrimental

to customer good will.

In November 1947. I wrote to Ralph Smith of the National Bureau

of Standards asking for a copy of the Standard Weights and Measures

of the United States and I received the following reply : This is in reply to your request of November 4 for a copy of the "Standards of

Weights and Measures of the United States." As you are undoubtedly aware, the Congress of the United States has enacted

very little legislation with respect to standards of weights and measures. The

general situation is outlined to some extent in our Letter Circular LC6S1, a copy

of which is enclosed.

Specifically, the establishment of our standards in this country rests largely

upon the so-called "Mendenhall Order" of 1893. A copy of Appendix No. 6 of the

report of the Treasury Department, containing this order, is likewise enclosed.

The circumstances leading up to this order are set forth in the early part of the

enclosure. It is probable that this document, and particularly the second of the

conversion tables appearing on page 169 thereof, will serve your present purpose.

It seems clear that there is no legal justification for representation that in connection with rug cleaning a unit of 27 inches by 36 inches constitutes a "square yard" in this countryVery truly yours,

R. W. Smith, Chief,

Office of Weights and Measures.

After reviewing the documents mentioned in Mr. Smith's letter I

agreed with him when he said that it seems clear that there is no legal

justification for representation that in connection with rug cleaning

a unit of 27 inches by 36 inches constitutes a "square yard" in this

country.
144 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

In my jurisdiction I have been handicapped in having rug cleaners

in Baltimore charged with giving short measure on rug-cleaning

jobs. In November 1947, I asked the City Solicitor's Office as to my

authority to prosecute under Article 97, Section 30, Annotated Code

of Maryland, Flack, 1939 edition, which says

Any person, firm, or corporation who shall knowingly and willfully give short

weight or short measure to anyone purchasing any article or commodity shall be

guilty of a misdemeanor and shall on conviction be fined not less than twentyfive dollars or more than five hundred dollars. I received the following reply

It is felt that the above Section is not applicable to your situation in that its language refers specifically to the giving of short weight or measure "to anyone

purchasing any article or commodity." Inasmuch as the cleaning and dyeing

business consists of the sale and purchase of services rather than of an article or commodity, the provisions of Section 3 cannot be applied thereto. You are

therefore advised that it is my opinion that Article 97 of the Annotated Code of

Maryland, Flack's 1939 edition, provides no legal basis for the prosecuting of

cleaners and dyers charged on the basis of the English yard.

I could possibly prosecute under the statutes against obtaining money

under false pretenses or by fraud, but as these statutes are not intended for weights and measures enforcement, I hesitate to do so. I

believe that weights and measures officials should adhere to their own

statutes and leave the enforcement of other statutes to the proper

officials. However, I am preparing to present to the City Council

shortly an ordinance covering the giving of short weight or short

measure to any person, firm, or corporation on services rendered.

When I received this program assignment I wrote to all of the rug

cleaners in the City of Baltimore as follows : At the 35th National Conference on Weights and Measures, which will be held

at the Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, D. C, on May 23, 24, 25, and 26, one

of the subjects for discussion by weights and measures officials will be charges

for rug cleaning. If you would be interested in this subject, please have a

representative at this Conference to explain your position regarding the above

matter. If there are any out-of-town officials that would be interested in this

subject, advise the writer, so that he may contact them regarding same. On March 6, 1950, a representative of one of the rug-cleaning companies wrote me as follows

We are very much interested in "charges for rug cleaning" to be discussed at your 35th National Conference. Since the dates of this Conference occur at the

height of our season, we would appreciate knowing on which day this discussion

will be held. We thank you for your cooperation in this matter and will try to be present.

Later I communicated with the writer of this letter, and was told

that they would probably have at the Conference a representative of

the National Institute of Rug Cleaners to present their side of the

story. If there is anyone present this morning representing the

National Institute of Rug Cleaners, I think we should hear from him

at this time.

Mr. Berg (National Institute of Rug Cleaners). I am from the

National Institute of Cleaning and Dyeing, but I represent the National Institute of Rug Cleaners. The facts given to you by Mr.

Leithauser regarding the charging for rug cleaning on the basis of a 27 inch by 36 inch yard are substantially true. As far as I am concerned, and as far as the National Institute of Rug Cleaning is concerned, we are certainly in agreement with the proposal that this prac-
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 145

tice be abandoned. In fact, nation-wide, I understand that it is not

too prevalent, but there are certainly some places in which they are charging on that basis. If it is appropriate, I should like to recom- mend at this time, in the name of the National Institute of Rug

Cleaners, that the square foot be used as a basis for charging for rug

cleaning.

Mr. Leithauser. You mean a square foot of 12 inches by 12 inches ? Mr. Berg. That is correct. I think I should say that the insinuation is not quite as bad as it would seem. I believe that rug cleaners are ethical, and that the evolution of pricing on the basis of a 27 inch

by 36 inch yard is understandable. But since there is another basis,

and since they have gone to the wider broadlooms, I would say that

the practice is antiquated. However, I would not want anybody to

think that we are chiselers and trying to cheat the public. It was a natural evolution, please believe me. Mr. Baucom. I move that the suggestion of Mr. Berg be referred

to the Conference Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities for

consideration and report next year.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was

agreed to.)

CALIBRATION OF TANK CARS—H. H. RUSSELL, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The calibration of tank cars seems to have been a little-discussed

subject. I had always assumed that the handling of petroleum and

other liquids in bulk quantities was something that was being effected

in a manner that was satisfactory to all concerned, but without any

great attempt at precision. As I have recently looked into the subject

I have been surprised. I learned that procedures are well standardized, and that the calibrating and gaging methods now in practice

result in highly accurate calibration. As an example, I wish to read

to you a statement that was enclosed in a letter from Mr. R. M. Smith,

Vice President of the Union Tank Car Corporation.

Over 40 years ago the Union Tank Car Company realized the necessity for the

accurate determination of the capacity of tank cars. After a thorough investigation by the officers of the company, it was decided to construct a specially

designed water gage plant consisting of a series of tanks to hold and discharge

a known quantity of water within very close limits. These tanks were very

accurately calibrated, using as a basis a measure the capacity of which was

certified by the National Bureau of Standards.

The volumetric capacity of each tank car was determined by water gaging.

This method of calibration has been in use by us continuously for over 40 years

with only minor refinements. The API Code for determining the volumetric

capacity of tank cars by the water gage plant method is based upon and is essentially the same as the method in use by the Union Tank Car Company.

Actual tests of the capacity of tank cars determined by the water gage plant

method at different plants of the Union Tank Car Company proved conclusively

that this method is extremely accurate, there being less than 0.02-percent differ- ence between the high and the low.

When I wrote to the Union Tank Car Company, the American Car

and Foundry Company, and the General American Transportation

Company, I asked several specific questions for my own information.

I am going to read those questions and the answers at this time.

There are two principal methods used for the calibration of tank

cars. One is the water-gaging method, and the other is the so-called

"strapping" method under which the capacity of a tank car is deter-
146 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

mined from measurements of the exterior dimensions, due allowance

being made for the shell thickness. My first question was, "Which

method is being employed by your organization and under what circumstances is the alternative method used, if ever?" When I said

"alternative method" I was referring to the strapping method. All

three companies replied to the effect that they used the water-gaging

method exclusively.

The second question was, "What would be the customary procedure

in the case of a tank car which had been obviously damaged or otherwise altered in a manner that would impair the original calibration?"

The answer to that question as supplied by the Union Tank Car Company was, "It has been the practice of the Union Tank Car Company

for many years to regage any tank car damaged in any manner which

would affect its capacity."

My next question was to determine whether or not each tank car

is separately calibrated, or whether a representative sample of a type

is calibrated and all other cars of that type are marked in accordance

with the results obtained on the sample. The answer which I received

from all of the companies was to the effect that each tank car is

separately water-gaged.

We are very fortunate this morning in having present a gentleman

who is an engineer with the Union Tank Car Company, who has been

personally in charge of the calibration and gaging of tank cars for his

corporation. I am going to ask this gentleman to come to the platform, and I would like to have you direct your questions to Mr. Hiatt,

of the Union Tank Car Company, and I would ask that you keep your

questions close to the subject of the calibration of tank cars. Mr. Hiatt (Union Tank Car Company ) . I may say that Mr. E. M.

Smith, Vice President of our Company, is the Chairman of the API

subcommittee on calibration which prepared API Code No. 1201,

July 1948, "Code for Tank Car Quantities or Code for Calibrating

Tank Car Tanks and for Measuring, Sampling, and Calculating Tank

Car Quantities ( Non-Pressure Type ) ." The calibration by the watergage plant method appearing in that code is essentially the same as was developed and used by the Union Tank Car Company for the past

forty years.

If you have questions I should be glad to try to answer them.

Mr. Folmse-ee (American Car and Foundry Company). The so- called strapping method was in use for a considerable length of time,

but is not too accurate because it is dependent upon outside measure- ments and calculations of the volumetric capacity. At the present

time I do not believe there is anyone in the country using that method.

In the new code being prepared at the present time to cover pressuretype tank cars, which handle compressed gases and LPG, the watergage plant method is being used as the most accurate method for calibrating tanks. But I believe that an alternative method of water

weighing should be mentioned. Is that correct ? Mr. Hiatt. That is correct. In that new code the strapping method

as an alternative method has been superseded by the water-weighing

or gravimetric method of calibration. The water-gage plant method

is still the recommended method, and is the more accurate.

Mr. A. T. Smith. Bjerregaard's tables of corrections give identical

outage and inage for any particular class of tank cars, and for every
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 147

dome of a given diameter the mage figure is identical for every car. Also, the outage on the 10,000-gallon tank cars is identical for every

tank car of the so-called 10,000-gallon class. Actually, they run up

as high as 10,200 gallons.

There are many of these cars, 20 to 30 years old, made by manufacturers who do not or did not use at that time either the waterweight or water-gage methods of calibration. The tanks had been

strapped. I believe that either the owner or manufacturer of a tank

car has the privilege of turning in rated capacities to the Kipp's Tariff

300E which lists every tank car in the United States, and such owner

or manufacturer is responsible for any error. It may be possible, but

is it probable that every dome of a given diameter on a 10,000-gallon

1 ank car will take the same inage, and that every tank car of the 10,000-

gallon class will have the same outage ? Mr. Hiatt. I have in my hand a book of outage tables that the

Union Tank Car Company has on its pressure tank cars, of which we

own approximately 3,500. This book contains outage tables. Picking a page at random, here is one page set up at 10,027 gallons. Here

is another at 10,042 gallons. In other words, we do not have a standard gage table that covers every 10,000-gallon tank car. We have them

covered, not in individual capacities, but within a certain range.

Mr. A. T. Smith. When I said every tank car I was referring to

Bjerregaard's tables that are apparently used by many receivers for

the determination of quantities received. I understand that the Union

Tank Car Company is one of the manufacturers which does use the

water-weight method and tries to do things correctly. However,

there are many others. There are apparently thousands of cars in

service that have been calibrated incorrectly and which are in daily

use in the transportation of oils, gasolines, and other liquids. I think

that every tank car that is coming out of the shops as of now should

be water-gaged so that it may be accurate just as in the case of other

devices that are used for measuring processes. After all, a tank car

is a measure. Mr. Hiatt. The petroleum industry has recognized that need, and

here is the result. We have API Code No. 1201, on tank-car quantities. Not only does it cover calibration methods, but it also covers methods of measuring, sampling, and calculating tank-car quantities.

It is an industry code covering those subjects in detail and very well.

So the very thing you are asking for has already been done by the oil

industry.

I should like to read an excerpt from an article on "Program for Loss

Control in Manufacturing and Handling Operations," by Mr. J. H.

McClintock of Esso Standard:

In 1941, even before the United States entered the war, Jersey [that is the

Standard Oil of New Jersey] initiated large volume movements of crude petroleum on the Atlantic Seaboard by tank car, so that losses occurring in tank-car

operations, loading, in transit, and unloading, were considered as among the

first in the study of transportation losses. From tests conducted on tank cars handling crude and nonvolatile products it was determined that the physical

losses in tank-car operations were negligible.

Mr. Folmsbee. I should like to comment on differences in capacity.

There are errors when the strapping method is used. We have recently

gone to the water-gage plant method of measuring. Out of an order

of 100 cars, built, let us say, to 10,000-gallon capacity, there will be
148 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

valuations between the capacities of each one of these cars even by the

most accurate measurements. It is our practice to furnish outage

tables to the customer, and those outage tables will vary within a close

range for a group of cars. So accurate measurement can be obtained

if those tables are used. One fixed table on the basis of a 10,000-gallon

tank car will not give that accuracy.

Mr. Hiatt. The Union Tank Car Company also owns cars which

were not water-gaged, cars purchased from outside companies. We

have a program under which these cars are run through the watergage plant as fast as we get them in, so that we will have accurate

calibration on all of our cars. All of our new cars are water-gaged.

Me. A. T. Smith. That is an admirable program, and it is very

gratifying that steps have been taken to correct this situation.

WHOLESALE LABELING OF MEAT PRODUCTS—DR. J. R. SCOTT, BUREAU OF

ANIMAL INDUSTRY, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

I am indeed happy to have this opportunity of meeting with your

Conference and sharing in the discussions of the problems incident to

the labeling of meat products.

Since this group is primarily interested in the net-weight markings,

I will limit my remarks to that phase of labeling. I assume that most

of you are familiar with the part that the Federal Meat Inspection

Service plays in the labeling of meat and meat food products, but in

order that there be no misunderstanding concerning our responsibilities in the matter, I think it would be well to briefly review the background of our service.

Federal meat inspection dates back to 1890 when the first meat

inspection law was enacted. This law was designed to facilitate the

exportation of meat to foreign countries and did not afford much

protection to the citizens of the United States. As a result of the great

clamor for an improved system of meat inspection, in order to correct

some of the appalling conditions which existed in the meat industry,

Congress passed the Meat Inspection Act which became effective July

1, 1906. Our present meat inspection regulations were issued under

the authority of this act and succeeding acts and apply to all slaughtering and meat processing establishments that prepare meat and meat

food products for interstate and foreign commerce. The principal

purpose, as stated in the Meat Inspection Act, is to prevent the use

in interstate or foreign commerce of meat and meat food products

which are unsound, unhealthful, unwholesome, or otherwise unfit for

human food.

In carrying out the provisions of the Meat Inspection Act and Regulations promulgated thereunder, our present system of Federal meat

inspection includes the following responsibilities

1. To examine food animals including cattle, calves, sheep, swine, gpats, and

horses prior to slaughter to eliminate diseased animals.

2. To conduct a thorough postmortem examination of each animal at the time

of slaughter "to search out and eliminate diseased and otherwise unfit meat.

3. To destroy for food purposes diseased meat and otherwise unfit meat and

meat food products.

4. To see that the sanitary condition of the plant and equipment is such that

food products may be kept clean and wholesome during the stages of preparation

into articles of food.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 149

5. To guard against the use of harmful preservatives and other deleterious

ingredients.

6. To cause sound and wholesome meat and meat food products to be marked

as having been inspected and passed.

7. To require informative labeling and to prevent the use of false and

deceptive labeling on meat and meat food products.

8. To certify meat and meat food products for export.

9. To inspect meat and meat food products offered for importation into this

country.

10. To examine meat and meat food products for compliance with specification

requirements of governmental purchasing agencies.

11. And to assure proper post mortem diagnosis and disposition of carcasses and parts.

With this introduction, I believe we are ready to consider the specific

subject "Wholesale Labeling of Meat Products". My remarks will,

of course, be confined to the labeling requirements of the Federal meat

inspection service. Our primary interest is the same as yours-—that

is, that the product be truthfully labeled and that the label contain

no misleading statements.

Our regulations state that,

When any inspected and passed product is placed in a container or covering

constituting an immediate or true container, such covering or container shall

carry a label showing

:

The true name of the product.

The word "ingredients" followed by a list of ingredients arranged in the order

of their predominance.

The name and place of business of the manufacturer or person for whom the

product is prepared.

An accurate statement of quantity of contents. And an inspection legend with the identifying establishment number.

Such labels may only be used under the supervision of a Meat

Inspection Division employee after the label has been approved by the

Trade Label Section of the Meat Inspection Division.

Our regulations are quite brief as to statements of content. They are standard regulations which appear in the Food and Drug Regulations,

but I might read a part of the regulations

:

The statement of quantity shall represent in terms of avoirdupois weight or

liquid measure the quantity of product in the package (exclusive of materials

packed with it) except as provided for in subparagraph 17.7. When no general consumer usage to the contrary exists, the statement shall be in terms of liquid measure if the product is liquid, or in terms of weight if the product is solid,

semisolid, viscous, or a mixture of solid and liquid. Unless the statement is so

qualified as to show that it expresses the minimum quantity, it shall be taken

to express the actual quantity. When the statement expresses the minimum

quantity, no variation below the stated minimum shall be permitted, and variations above the stated minimum shall be no gi-eater than consistent with filling

the container to the stated minimum in accordance with good commercial practice. When the statement expresses actual quantity, variations incident to packing in accordance with good commercial practice shall be allowed but the average

shall not be less than the quantity stated : Provided, That packages of product

having a capacity of less than one-half ounce avoirdupois or less than one-half

fluid ounce shall not be required to be labeled with the statement of the quantity

of contents. When any product is enclosed in a container along with a packing substance

such as brine, vinegar, or agar jelly, a declaration of the packing substance shall

be printed prominently on the label in connection with the name of product, as, for example, "frankfurts packed in brine," "lamb tongue packed in vinegar," or

"beef tongue packed in agar jelly," as the case may be. The statement of the

quantity of contents shall represent the weight of the drained product when
150 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

removed from the container to the exclusion of the packing substance. The

packing substance shall not be used in such a manner as will result in the con- tainer being so filled as to be misleading.

These regulations all sound very simple. However, we do encounter

a few headaches. For the most part meat is packed and labeled on the

day that it leaves the establishment. In this class of product we have

no problem. Nor do we have a problem in connection with the product

in hermetically sealed cans. Where we get into a problem is where the

meat is packaged and for some reason it is not removed from the establishment on that day but is put back in storage on the premises. Meat

in certain types of containers is known to shrink, depending on various

conditions, time in storage, the type of refrigeration, and it is necessary

to make a very close check on the product when it is removed from storage and is offered for transportation from the plant.

Our inspectors check the weighing of the product when it is packed

and they again check the net weight of representative samples at the

time of shipment from the official establishment.

I want to emphasize the point that it is the responsibility of our

inspectors to assure themselves that the product bears an accurate

statement of quantity of contents at the time the product leaves the

official establishment, but unfortunately their responsibility, as stated

in the Meat Inspection Act, does not extend beyond the limits of the

official establishment.

In closing, I would like to extend an invitation to all of you to

call on our inspectors in charge of your various jurisdictions for the

purpose of discussing any mutual problems you may have on the labeling and the net-weight marking of meat food products. We have

inspection in some 1,000 establishments. They are located in approximately 350 cities. These cities are located in practically every State

in the Union. If you do not know our representative in your particular State or city, we will be happy to furnish you upon request

with a directory which furnishes the names and the addresses of our

representatives in the field.

Mr. Witt. Most packers of meat, whether they ship interstate or

intrastate, include on their invoices the statement, "No allowance in

any case is made for natural shrinkage." I have in mind a wholesaler

of meats in Milwaukee who buys pork loins which are shipped to

him from Chicago; the natural shrinkage is always 4 to 5 percent.

He also buys the same type of pork loins from Iowa, and the shrinkage on these is consistently 1 to 2 percent. Does the Bureau of Animal

Industry have any regulations regarding shrinkage ? Dr. Scott. No. I believe 3^011 have posed two questions. The first

involves the variation in the amount of shrinkage. As I have already

pointed out, there are various factors which influence the loss in

weight. In the case of the shipment that lost 1 to 2 percent, it is quite

probable that the factors included a higher humidity and perhaps a shorter time between the weighing and receipt of the shipment by the

wholesaler.

The other question you raise deals with the statement that appears

on the invoice. We have no jurisdiction over statements made on

invoices. Our responsibility is to see to it that the meat is accurately

marked at the time of shipment.

Me. Witt. Do you consider a shrinkage on pork loins of 4 or 5

percent to be normal and all right ?
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 151

Dr. Scott. I do not think it is all right. I certainly think that

there should probably be an adjustment in price. I certainly would not

want to buy a box of pork loins and take a 4 percent loss.

Mr. Witt. Would your agent in Milwaukee assist us in getting

such an adjustment?

Dr. Scoit. I do not believe that we can do so. I do not think our

jurisdiction would extend that far.

Mr. Witt. But you do not think that a consistent shortage of 4 or

5 percent results for normal shrinkage ? Dr. Scott. I do not know just what we can pin down as "normal

shrinkage." In the plant itself we have products that are stored in

a particular room with a particular type of refrigeration, which come

out with a very, very low shrinkage—even with no shrinkage at all, or so little that it is not necessary to change the marking at the time

of shipment. A similar product, packed in a refrigeration space that

has the same physical conditions as the room previously mentioned,

may come out with a loss of 2 or 3 percent ; in all such cases we require

that the product be reweighed and remarked at the time it leaves the

establishment.

I do not know how we can arrive at what a normal shrinkage should

be. As factors involved, there are the type of wrapper used, the type

of refrigeration, the time elapsing between packing and marketing

of the product, and the time required for the product to reach the

retail level.

Mr. Richard (Packers and Stockyards Division, U. S. Department

of Agriculture). The Division I represent comes into this picture

only when there is evidence of a violation of a trade practice, a perpetration of fraud, a deceptive or discriminatory practice, and so

forth. If there is evidence of deliberate, intentional, incorrect weighing or marking of weight, we can proceed under the provisions of the

Packers and Stockyards Act, which empowers us to prosecute the

packer.

I think it should be said to the credit of the great majority of meat

packers, that an extremely small number of instances of incorrect

weighing or marking of meat come to our attention. An occasional

small slaughterhouse operator or local packer may engage in such

practices, but even there the cases are relatively few ; in such of these

instances as we have had to act upon, the faulty conditions have been

immediately corrected.

Mr. Rogers. I should like to ask Dr. Scott about meat products

which are processed or packed in these heavy casings which give all

the appearance of a container. I believe that some jurisdictions allow

these to go unmarked. Are we to understand that the Federal Government does the same and does not require a net- weight marking on this

type of package?

Dr. Scott. That is correct. Many years ago an administrative

ruling was made in our Bureau, under which meat products in casings

were excluded from the provision for net-weight marking; that has

been extended to include artificial casings. I should emphasize, however, that compliance with our requirements does not relieve the

processor from complying with any State requirements which may be

in effect.
152 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Mr. Rogers. If such products are to be exempt from the net-weight

marking requirements, I feel that they should carry a definite and clear

statement to the effect that the product is to be weighed at the time of

sale. Products packed in these artificial casings look different from

products packed in animal casings ; they look as if they were put in a

bag, even though the product may be prepared and processed in

that bag.

Mr. Baucom. Dr. Scott, if the packing elements you refer to are

edible, may the weight be included in the net-weight declaration?

Dr. Scott. Yes, if it is edible and if it has food value. For example,

in the case of canned hams, varying amounts of free juices result from

processing the ham in the can. These juices may represent as much

as 15 to 20 percent of the weight of the contents of the can. They are included in the net-weight statement because they are an edible product. But our regulations exempt such substances as water, brine,

vinegar, agar, and agar jelly.

Mr. Baucom. Would the percentage of the packing element be

shown in the declaration of the net weight?

Dr. Scott. No. It would be shown in the ingredient declaration, or it may be taken care of in the name of the product. For example,

if we have frankfurters packaged in brine, the name of that commodity is "Frankfurters packed in brine" ; if the statement of content

reads "Net weight, 12 ounces," that means there are 12 ounces of

frankfurters after the brine has been drained away.

Mr. Baucom. But suppose the packing element is edible. What I

am trying to get at is the percentages of the edible ingredients; for

example, in the case of the canned ham, the percentage of ham and the

percentage of juices.

Dr. Scott. There again the name of the product describes the finished article. In your example it would be "Ham with natural juices."

There would be no practical way of showing the percentages because

the amount of natural juices varies in the same pack, depending on

the kind of ham and the type of musculature; even when subjected to

the same processing—temperatures and time—the juices may vary

6 or 7 percent in the same pack.

Mr. Baucom. Your inspectors Dr. Scott, cannot possibly weigh

every package. How do you know how many they do weigh and what

methods they use to satisfy themselves that meats are being correctly

weighed ? Dr. Scott. We have supervisors who check on the operations of the

inspectors. The packers weigh every can or every package. The

inspector checks a reasonable number, and he makes a second check at

the time the product reaches the loading dock for shipment. Packages

are selected at random and these are weighed. If the samples weighed

are found to be inaccurately marked, additional samples are taken

and weighed. If these, likewise, are found to be inaccurately marked,

the inspector throws the whole shipment back to the processing department for reweighing and remarking.

Mr. Baucom. What about carcasses, halves and quarters that are simply shipped in sacks or cheesecloth.

Dr. Scott. If the quarter- or half-carcass is not in package form,

we do not require a statement of weight. If the weight is shown, as

it usually is, we observe enough of them and have enough of them
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 153

weighed to make certain that the average is correct. It would be

impossible for our inspectors to weigh each carcass. But if a goodly

number of samples are found to be accurate, it is self-evident that all are accurate.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. Getting back to packaged products, you stated,

Dr. Scott, that they are weighed at the time they are wrapped and that

they are rechecked at the time of shipment. Do you allow any

shrinkage tolerances between those two points?

Dr. Scott. You will understand, of course, that there is a commercial tolerance in weighing and packing. We do not permit a toler- ance. The average weight at the time of shipment must be correct.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. Do your inspectors ever find an overage when

checking the weights of hams ? Dr. Scott. Occasionally, yes.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. That must certainly be a rare occurrence. Every ham that we receive in the District of Columbia is short weight

when received. We know definitely that there is shrinkage in a period

of 12 or 24 hours. I feel sure that hams checked at the time of

wrapping and then checked at the time of shipping would show a

shrinkage.

Dr. Scott. Wrapped hams are usually wrapped and shipped on the

same day by train or truck. In most of the packing plants it is not

the normal way of doing business to wrap hams and then store them

in the plant for even 24 or 48 hours.

Mr. Baker. Dr. Scott, your Bureau approves labels; does it not?

Dr. Scott. That is correct.

Mr. Baker. You have stated that a label must carry an accurate

declaration of net weight. We have found meat products which were

labeled as so many pounds and ounces "when packed." Is it the general practice of your Bureau to approve labels which carry qualifying

phrases ? Many States do not permit that ; we do not.

Dr. Scott. The qualifying statement, "when packed," means nothing as far as the Bureau of Animal Industry is concerned.

Mr. Baker. It does mean something to the State of New York and

to other States. It meant a great deal to the packer in the particular

case I have in mind, because he had ordered a large supply of labels in

good faith, believing that they would be acceptable in all State jurisdictions. In this instance, the packer had to discard the faulty labels.

When your Division approves a label, it would seem advisable that

you let the packer know that he should also obtain the approval of the

States where the labeled product is going to be sold.

Dr. Scott. When labels for meat and meat-food products are submitted to us and the label carries a qualifying statement, we always

warn the person submitting the label that the qualifying statement

has no meaning and that the stated weight must be an accurate weight

as of the time the product leaves the plant. Our Division has no

responsibility over poultry.

Mr. Searles. Dr. Scott, what shrinkage loss would you say there

should be on the average weight of packages traveling a distance of 28

miles in one hour in refrigerated trucks ? Dr. Scott. It shouldn't be to much if conditions are favorable, but

I am not qualified to give you a figure.
154 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Mr. Searles. Would you say it should run as high as 3 or 4 percent ? Dr. Scott. I would not say so. Mr. J. T. Kennedy. Dr. Scott, I have here an example of a qualifying statement, printed in type so small that I can't read it. Will you

look at it?

Dr. Scott. This is an invoice, and as I have already said we have no

jurisdiction over the invoicing of the products. Our responsibility is simply that the product must bear an accurate statement of contents

at the time of shipment.

IMPROVING THE SERVICE OF THE NBS OFFICE OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

TO OFFICIALS AND MANUFACTURERS—W. S. BUSSEY, NATIONAL BUREAU OF

STANDARDS

The primary objective of the Office of Weights and Measures is to

promote greater service and protection to the citizens of the Nation,

through cooperation, coordination, and efficiency on the part of State

and local weights and measures enforcement officers. The Office of

Weights and Measures was established as a separate Division of the

National Bureau of Standards in October 1947. Since that time it has been possible for the Division to carry on a more active program

of cooperation and assistance to weights and measures officials and

representatives of industry than had been practicable theretofore.

The principal features of our program are sponsoring the National

Conference on Weights and Measures, making personal visits to State

and local weights and measures offices, assisting various jurisdictions

in the preparation of laws, ordinances, and regulations, preparing

helpful publications on weights and measures subjects, and attending

State and regional weights and measures conferences.

We have endeavored to encourage State and local weights and measures officials to attend and participate in the National Conference on

Weights and Measures. We have attempted to interest all States and

the principal local jurisdictions in the short course on the calibration

of standards which was conducted by the Bureau ; 16 officials have

taken advantage of that course, and we were disappointed that more

have not responded to our invitation. In our personal visits to officials, we have tried to be helpful toward improving administrative

conditions by discussing existing problems and suggesting solutions.

We have encouraged officials to obtain more nearly adequate equipment, and have assisted officials in some instances by presenting this

idea to their superiors.

These personal visits have given us the opportunity of becoming

better acquainted with weights and measures enforcement officers.

They have enabled us to make close, firsthand studies of existing problems, to examine testing equipment, and to discuss methods of en- forcement and testing procedures. In general, we have been enabled

to learn a great deal about weights and measures administration in

the United States. Such information should place us in a better position than before to be helpful, because we have the opportunity of

passing on the good ideas picked up in one jurisdiction to officials

in other jurisdictions who are confronted with like problems.

We have assisted several States and cities in the preparation of laws

and ordinances which have been enacted, and we are still working
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 155

along these lines with several other jurisdictions. We have encour- aged all jurisdictions to adopt uniform specifications, tolerances, and

regulations based upon the National Conference recommendations.

Through our attendance at State and regional conferences we have

tried to make constructive contributions and encourage more efficient

weights and measures administration. Mr. Smith is well along in the

preparation of the manuscript for the new handbook on the testing

of measuring devices, which will be a companion handbook to H3<

and should be a useful addition to the Bureau's series of handbooks.

That is a summary of what OWM has been doing. It is our desire

to render the utmost service to weights and measures officials and

others with the facilities placed at our disposal. The purpose of this

discussion is to give you the opportunity to express your thoughts con- cerning the program of the Office of Weights and Measures. Do you

think the present program is worth while? Do you think that the

personal visits to State and local offices should be continued ? Do you

think that the practice of attending and participating in the various

State and regional conferences is desirable? What additional services can we render ? How can we improve upon the services that we

have already been attempting to render? Specifically, what can we

clo for you ? The Office of Weights and Measures exists for the purpose of serv- ing the weights and measures administrative officials of this Nation

and all others who are interested in weights and measures problems.

Our service is strictly cooperative and advisory. We can only serve you if it is your desire that we do so and if you request that service.

We want your suggestions as to how we can best serve. Mr. R. D. Thompson. Mr. Bussey, your program has certainly been

helpful to all of the States that have availed themselves of your services. To what extent are the States and localities availing themselves of those services?

Mr. Bussey. I have no figures on the number of States which have

requested services of various kinds. These have been numerous, but

there are many local and State jurisdictions which have not called

upon us for assistance. We get frequent requests from some jurisdictions, and there are others from whom we hear rarely, if at all. Mr. R. D. Thompson. I should like to make the point that the Office

of Weights and Measures is covering the entire United States and

has an over-all picture of what is going on, and that it is decidedly

to our advantage to avail ourselves of all of the help winch we can

get from the Bureau.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. Mr. Bussey, you say that you do receive cer- tain requests for assistance from various agencies. Is it the policy

of your Division to send copies of this correspondence to other agencies who might be confronted with the same problem? In other

words, are you furthering the work without request ? Mr. Bussey. The general answer is, "No."' However, when some

problem comes up that we think is of interest to various jurisdictions,

information on that problem is sometimes furnished to the Scale

Journal and to the associations and State offices that publish news

letters and which have requested that service. An illustration is the

Southern Association News Letter. We receive regular requests froni

0043S1—50 12
156 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

the Chairman of the Association Education Committee, Mr. Crawford, for any items of general interest to the weights and measures

officials of the States that make up that Association. If these other

associations or other publishers of news letters would like to have

that same type of service, we should be glad to give it to them.

Another illustration is in relation to the interpretations of H44 re- requirements which are made officially by the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances when they are called upon for an official

interpretation of a code requirement. Such official interpretations are furnished to the Scale Journal for publication and they can be

made available to any of you people who issue news letters, if you so

desire.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy. Has the Bureau of Standards given any consideration to bringing back the news letters which they issued back in

1942, 1943, and 1944 ? Personally, I looked forward to receiving that

publication. It was a clearing house through which we could distribute information.

Mr. Bussey. No consideration has recently been given to reestablishing that news letter. It seems to me that the field is rather well

covered by the news letters now being published by the various State

and regional organizations. I do not know how many officials in

other jurisdictions are receiving those news letters, but I know that

some of the publishers of those news letters are willing to send them

to almost anyone who requests copies.

Mr. Fuller. I have talked about this to many officials, and every

one of them regrets that that news letter has been discontinued. I

think that could be the one medium for reaching entirely throughout the country and distributing at one time this information that

we all should have. I think we should like to see consideration given

by the Bureau to re-establishing the news letter.

Mr. Boyle. I wish to state that in my opinion the visits by a representative of the Office of Weights and Measures to the different weights

and measures jurisdictions throughout the country should definitely

be continued. I also feel that these personal contacts should be supplemented by the news letter ; it is of great value to officials to receive

information coming from the Bureau of Standards.

Mr. Bussey. We may not be able to meet every request which is

made to us, but we can guarantee one thing: We shall do our best

to help you at any time that you think we can be of service.

STRAIN-LOAD TESTS AND BUILD-UP TESTS—S. H. CHRISTIE, JR., NEW JERSEY

The weights and measures officials as a group have always been

confronted with the problem of adequate tests of commercial devices

used in the weighing or measuring of the various commodities passing

from the producer or dealer to the consumer, or those employed in the

other several channels of barter and service. The practical applications of the results of the modern sciences have aggravated this condition because modern governmental groups have failed to keep comparative pace with the facilities being provided to industry. This

failure has been indicated by not providing the necessary complements of working standards, provers, and equipment, and is due to

local economic affairs, indifference to the facts, or not properly recog-
[THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURE'S 157

nizing conditions and needs. These facts also apply to industry ex- cept that they cannot claim to be unacquainted with their own needs.

This is very true of the scale end of the situation. Modern weighing machines of the large-capacity or so-called heavy-duty type have

capacities and are used to such capacities as were not thought to be

practical a few years ago. These devices are being so used that the

economic value of the substances being handled requires a very high

degree of accuracy.

Unfortunately these devices are usually installed with very little

consideration given to proving them, and as a result are not always

favorably located for easy access or are not always provided with

suitable means to run a satisfactory test with a complement of working standards to the scale's capacity or the capacities in use. Thus

the weights and measures field operator and the scale man find themselves in more or less of a dilemma, one to satisfactorily prove out

the device officially, the other to prove out both the device and his

work. As a result of these circumstances, both groups are forced

to invoke the principles of either the "substitution" or "build-up"

method of testing, or the application of strain loading the device in

conjunction with the use of the largest practical increment of sealed

test weights possible.

The mathematical and engineering definition of the word "substitution" means to "substitute for" or "to replace one thing with another

of equal value", and this principle when applied to the testing of

scales means that extraneous available materials are substituted for

the known test weights during the test and in increments equal in

value to the known test weights in use, and, further, the calibration

of this extraneous material is made during the test and by the machine

undergoing the test. In a test of this type, the following steps are made : First, the scale

is given a sensibility-reciprocal test under no load. Second, the

scale is very carefully balanced. The balance condition obtained is one that can readily be duplicated, as in the case of a weighbeam that

just fails to strike or bump the top of the trig loop on its first rise

after being released from the bottom of the trig loop, or, where an

auxiliary device is used, the proper coordination of the indicator and

a graduation is made. This balance is obtained by the use of the

scale's normal balancing mechanism and this mechanism should

not be used again until the test has been fully completed and the

full complement of weight involved is removed from the scale and

the change in zero balance investigated.

Third, if the complement of known test weights being used is suffi- cient in capacity, a regular corner or shift test is made, provided,

however, the scale's platform facilities will so allow, ending with

the test weights in the center position and the results noted. The

balance obtained is made in the same manner as the original or zero- balance condition of the device.

Fourth, the test-weight load is very carefully removed and replaced

with the available foreign material until the balance condition in

the previous step is exactly duplicated. Extreme care must be

employed in both the removal of the test weights and the application

of the foreign material at all times, in order to avoid any disturb- ance to the mechanism of the device. This is important. Because
158 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

the load of extraneous material has produced the same reaction on

the scale that took place with the known test weights, as indicated

by the balance condition, we have, in effect, duplicated the known

test-weight load and the extraneous material is now a known load

equal in value to the known test weights. This is true because of the

principle that things equal to the same thing are equal to each other.

I want to add at this point that with the extraneous material in the

hopper or on the scale, extreme care must be used to check for any

leaks or dribble due to the nature of the material being used.

Fifth, the test weights are again placed on the scale using the aforementioned caution, and the balance very carefully reproduced and

the results noticed. The known load now on the scale is twice that

which was originally used. Sixth, the above steps are repeated the

required number of times always exactly duplicating the balance

and giving due consideration to the precautions required. Seventh,

the load SR is carefully obtained. Eighth, upon the careful removal

of all of the test weights and foreign material, a zero balance check

is carefully made and any balance change noted.

The question of how to apply tolerance is of major importance

and may be answered quite readily and simply in this manner : Since

proper precautionary measures have been constantly followed

throughout the testing procedure and the exact duplication of the

effect of known weight by unknown weight made, plus the principle

that things that are equal to the same thing are equal to each other,

the total combined load of known test weights and foreign material can be properly considered as known Aveight, and the tolerance commensurate with that figure is applied to the device under test. The strain-load proposition is somewhat different in nature. The

principle in use is that of subjecting the working parts of the scale

to sufficient stress to duplicate the effect induced in the scale and its

working parts under that load, and then applying known weight to

the device in an effort to determine the error produced by the known

weight only at that point of strain. What we actually do in the strainload test is to stress the mechanical parts of the device at a certain

point, disregarding the numerical value of the load, just considering it as a superimposed scale deck, platform, or whatever the case may be

by balancing it out and temporarily reducing the available usable

capacity of the scale that exists between the total capacity and the

new dead load and subjecting some point in that region to the usual

test.The procedure is as follows : First, no-load sensibility reciprocal

is obtained. Second, zero balance is obtained as previously described

for the substitution test. Third, the light-load test is now made in

the usual manner and with a duplication of zero-load balance condition, and the results are noted. Fourth, the known test weights are removed and extraneous material is added to the scale to the point

desired and again a very careful balance is obtained, and the numerical

value as indicated by the weighbeam or auxiliary device noted.

Fifth, the complement of known test weight is now added to the

scale, iDroper precautionary measures are followed to prevent any un- warranted changes in the scale mechanism, and the scale is brought to

balance, reproducing that balance condition obtained with the load of
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 159

foreign material, and the numerical value is noted. The arithmetical

difference between the two numerical values determined in this manner

is the reaction of the scale to the complement of known test weight,

while the scale is under stress, and the difference between the figure

and the known weight is the error. Sixth, this process is repeated the necessary number of times required

to test the device at the desired fractions of and to the capacity, beingcareful not to exceed it. Special attention is given to that range of

weights at which the scale is normally used or at which there may be a question of error. Seventh, obtain the full-load sensibility reciprocal.

Eighth, remove all test weight and strain load carefully, if it is possible to do so, and obtain any zero-balance change. In the strain-load

test, the tolerance is applied to the results obtained with the use of the

sealed weights employed only.

The question as to which test to employ is one that confronts the field

operator whenever he finds that he cannot employ the conventional

test procedure, and unless he has direct orders to the contrary, may

best be decided by giving due consideration to a number of factors.

A general run of these factors—not listed in the order of importance,

for this may vary from job to job—may be listed as follows:

The total capacity and type of the device.

The accessibility.

The complement of known test weights available.

The kind and availability of extraneous material to be used as a strain

load. The facilities for handling this foreign material.

The time factor and labor problems involved.

The prices of the commodities passing over the device.

Whether or not the scale is involved in weight discrepancies or disputes.

The general condition and maintenance of the device.

Whether or not the device has been used where a court case is involved, and

the importance of the degree of accuracy required by the operator.

Other jurisdictions may find themselves compelled by the wording

of their statutes, as we in New Jersey do, to test scale equipment not in

commercial service, and it is usually that equipment to which the last of

the foregoing items has reference.

Most professions and businesses have available a number of handbooks and authorities to consult. Incidentally, I highly recommend

that NBS Handbook H37 be studied in conjunction with NBS Handbook Hll on the topic just covered. It will be found that the subject

is very ably covered by our Mr. Ralph Smith of the Bureau.

I wish to thank all the officials in the Bureau of Weights and

Measures who have offered to cooperate on this subject.

VAPOR METERS—F. C. MOREY, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

This will be a very brief discussion of the principal details of construction of vapor meters and their testing and maintenance, and I

will cover fundamentals only. Obviously, in the few minutes available I can only touch on the high spots of an industry which has grown

for more than 100 years.

Meters for LPG seiwice are very similar in design and construction

to those used in the so-called city gas systems, but they are usually

smaller due to the high BTU value of the fuel. The case varies with
160 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

the manner of installation, whether indoors or outdoors, and may be of

soldered copper construction, or brass, or die-cast aluminum, or cast

iron. The mechanism is similar in each case. Here is a partly as- sembled meter, and you can see the various component parts. I will

put this meter in the back of the room after the talk, and anyone who

wants to come up and examine it closely may feel free to do so. While this particular meter is not intended for LPG service, you

can see the parts and see how it works. The gas is metered by means

of diaphragm chambers. Down the center of the meter is a partition.

The partition, plus the diaphragms, divides the meter into four metering compartments. The diaphragms move backward and forward

as the meter operates—I will turn it by hand here, and you can see the tin diaphragm moving in and out.

The motion of those diaphragms is converted into rotary motion at the top by means of flags and flag arms which you see at this point.

By means of the linkage, this oscillating motion is converted into

rotary motion of the meter tangent. Perhaps some of you can see

this rotating part and the linkage at the top. This rotary motion

controls the valves, and the valves direct the flow of gas into the

metering compartments.

The valves are arranged out of phase, so the meter can never get

on direct dead center. The entire action of the meter is similar to a two-cylinder double-acting steam engine. The index of the meter is a revolution counter and is so geared as to indicate the passage of a

definite volume of gas. LPG meters are equipped with a test hand on

the index to indicate the passage of one or two cubic feet of gas per

revolution. The adjustment of the meter is made by means of a screw

device on the tangent ; the radius of rotation of the tangent arm is controlled by means of those screw adjustments. That, of course, controls the length of stroke of the diaphragms, and hence the volume

passed per revolution of the tangent.

The diaphragms are made of soft Australian lamb skins treated

with oil. In recent years molded diaphragms of an impregnated

fabric have been used. And in either case the material should be

soft, impervious to gas, resistant to cracking over many thousands

of cycles of operation, and retaining uniform flexibility over a wide

temperature range and over a long period of time, and not subject

to chemical attack by the possible components of the gas.

As to the testing of gas meters, this is best accomplished by means

of a gas-meter prover. This device is a calibrated gas holder or bell

carrying a scale, which is counterbalanced by means of a pulley and

weights, and is sealed by means of an annular tank filled with the sealing liquid. By connecting the prover outlet to the meter inlet, it is possible to pass a measured volume of air or gas through the meter.

Of course, we first make a shut-in test, under pressure, of the con- nections to determine that all connections are tight, the pressure

being measured by means of a small water gauge. The connections

are tested by applying a small pressure from the prover ; and if the

water gauge remains steady, with the meter outlet sealed, then we

know the connections are tight.

The prover valve is then opened and the meter is operated to bring

the index hand into its zero position. The prover is then filled so that

its scale reads zero. The valve is opened and the meter operated.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 161

When the test hand on the meter has made one revolution, the valve

is shut off, and the prover scale is read. Meter testers become adept

at operating the prover, and can stop the flow of gas at just the right

moment, when the meter has indicated a discharge of 1 cubic foot, or

of 2 cubic feet if it has a 2-cubic-foot register.

The prover scale is read and the volume indicated is the amount of

air passed by the meter during one revolution of the index hand. The

error is usually expressed as percent fast or slow. Tests are made

at two rates of flow, full open discharge and check rate. The check

is a cap which fits on the outlet of the meter and has a small hole

drilled in its center which will cause the meter to operate at about

one-fifth of its rated capacity.

The city gas systems maintain meter shops for periodic testing and

repair of meters. Each meter is brought in for test within the time

period prescribed by local legislation, varying from about 5 to 10 or

12 years. Those meters whose proof does not fall within the prescribed tolerance are opened and adjusted or repaired. The prover

method of testing is the only completely satisfactory method of testing

gas meters. We have to recognize, however, that in LPG service the

financial outlay required for the establishment of a meter-testing shop

may be prohibitive for small companies. Such companies must rely

on manufacturers' testing and repair facilities.

In some instances meters are tested by means of a reference meter

which is operated in series with the meter under test. This practice

is acceptable provided the reference meter is checked periodically and

is carefully handled. It is also desirable that the connections between

the reference meter and the meter under test be of adequate size and

short length so that the gas will not expand in passing from the refer- ence meter to the test meter.

In either case, whether it is tested by the series method or by the

prover, it is desirable to run a slow-rate test to make sure that the

meter does not hang up under pilot-light loads. A test bench is usually

provided with a manifold connection to accommodate a large number

of meters. The meters are connected with the source of air or gas

through a connection containing a very small opening. This restriction permits the meter to make one revolution of the test hand in about

30 minutes. The meter is left connected until the test hand has made

at least one revolution, and if there is any binding in the meter it is

detected in that manner. This test prevents the loss of gas used by

stove and water-heater pilots, whose consumption is at a very low rate,

but being continuous might amount to a considerable item.

In concluding, I wish to point out that vapor meters for LPG service

usually operate under conditions which are very favorable to long life

and high accuracy. The vapor meter is free from tar or gum or dust.

It is not uncommon to find meters which have been in service for 10

years or more, still in excellent condition. The tendency is noted to

increase the length of service in city gas systems. There is even more

reason for the extended service in LPG meters.

The meter manufacturing companies have available for distribution bulletins on the method of testing meters, the use of provers, and

so on. I have two of them here, which I will put on display with the

meter. I also wish to call your attention to this bibliography of gas

meters and metering which contains more than 1,000 references and
162 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

will be available soon for distribution by the American Gas Association. The older edition, I think, is still available at the present time,

but this is a new edition.

MEASURE-CONTAINERS AND NON-MEASURE-CONTAINERS—GEORGE W. WARNER,

WISCONSIN

In starting this discussion I would like to refer briefly to the definitions in Handbook H44 covering measure-containers and milk bottles.

In H44, page 52, under Definitions, a milk bottle to be such must be

used for the measurement and delivery at retail of milk. In H44, page

49, under Definitions, a measure-container is one that is intended for

measurement of a commodity from bulk on the basis of liquid measure,

the measurement being made at the time of retail sale.

The paper milk containers that are filled with a measuring machine

are non-measure containers ; most of them are labeled '"single service

containers" or "one-way" containers, or some other similar name. In

Wisconsin, under our present milk-bottle law, these containers are

classed as milk bottles. We have had no very serious difficulty, but

we are trying to get our law amended so it will harmonize 100 percent

with the specifications in H44. In getting the law amended, we wish to

have a provision in the law to prevent odd quantities of milk from

being sold in the nonmeasure containers.

I believe New York State, and perhaps other States, have a regulation covering single-service containers that probably takes care of

the odd quantities of milk. Mr. Baker probably can advise us on

this point.

In Wisconsin' we consider the buckets used by the retail dealer in

selling ice cream from bulk, and also commodities like oysters, as good

examples of the measure containers. It might be argued that ice

cream is not liquid at time of sale, but the manufacturer packages it in

terms of liquid measure, so why not the retailer ? As members of the Conference know, measure-containers are not

legal in the 12-fluid-ounce size, but the manufacturer—at least in

Wisconsin—packages commodities like cottage cheese in I2-fluid-ounce

containers, which cartons, except for size, could be used by the retail

dealer in his sales from bulk. This has not caused us very much diffi- culty as most retail dealers selling this commodity from bulk sell it by

weight or, if not by weight, they are using cartons that contain S or 16 fluid ounces. Here again, we have a situation where a few commodities are sold by weight or on the basis of weight but which commodity is not actually weighed but is measured.

A commodity, for instance, like cottage cheese, that is about the same

weight as water, presents no difficulty whatever, as 12 fluid ounces of

most kinds of cottage cheese will weigh 12 ounces avoirdupois. We

believe that a sale of 12 ounces avoirdupois of cottage cheese, if correct, by the retail dealer—the sale being made from bulk—takes the

sale out from under the definition of measure-container because under

the definition of measure-container the sale must be on the basis of

liquid measure. This may sound a little complicated, but I believe

that in sales of this kind, made in this way, there is no conflict with

the definition for a measure-container in H44.

Mr. Rogers. There is, of course, a line of demarkation between the

single-service measure-container and the container used for the pack-
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 163

aging of foods. Sometimes that line of demarkation is very finely

drawn. We have been asked -whether we test containers that are filled at the factory level. We most certainly do ; we hold those to the same

approval requirements as are enforced with respect to other measurecontainers. But there is one container that we will not accept. Efforts are being made to break down the standard that has existed not

only in our State but in a great many other States by introducing a

single-service ^-quart container for milk and cream. We are told

that these are marked to show their contents, so there is no deception.

We will not accept that container even at the factory level and we will

not approve it. We are able to hold the line on this, because our milk

bottle law definitely states the standards that are to be employed. Our

position is being supported by our Department of Agriculture, and

the dairy industry.

Then there are those people who vend milk in factories who like to

use a 10-ounce container—approximately % quart. Again we are holding the line. If we break down just one law on which we have

standards, there is no telling how far this will go. I should like to serve notice on anyone who may want to introduce l^-quart bottles for

milk or cream into New Jersey that we will not accept them.

ADDITIONAL TOPICS BROUGHT UP BY OFFICIALS AND BY ASSOCIATE MEMBERS

OF THE CONFERENCE

Mr. Fuller. I wish to bring up a subject which I think should be

worked on during the coming year. I refer to the increasing use of

slack-filled containers, which create unfair competition between businessmen and are a form of deception with respect to the purchasers.

This matter was forcefully brought to our attention recently be- cause of competition between several packers of potato chips. The

argument was advanced that since potato chips are fragile they must

be put up in large containers to avoid breaking them up. Competition

went so far in the direction of increasing the size of the containers

(hat finally the containers were only a little over half filled. It is

true that these packages were correctly labeled as to their net weight.

But too many shoppers buy on the basis of eye appeal. The packer

who was marketing what appeared to be the largest package but which

was really the worst filled, was having the biggest sales. So we took

him in. As a defense he set up a whole table full of breakfast foods

and other commodities, many of which are being distributed nationally, and opened them up before the judge to show the amount of slack

filling on all of them. It was represented that this practice was a recognized trade custom and that we should not pick on a local hometown fellow when these packages were coming in from all over the

country. The result of the case was that the judge issued a restraining

order which we have not yet been able to dissolve. We are working

on the problem, but I think it would be well if investigations of this

slack-filling problem were made in every section of the country during

the coming year. By doing this perhaps we can accomplish something

and make a report on it at our next Conference.

Mr. Rogers. I am 100 percent in agreement with what Mr. Fuller

has said and I know that the condition exists and that it is difficult to

do much about it. But the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
164 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

does have a very definite clause relative to slack filling and false and

deceptive containers. How thoroughly that provision is being en- forced I do not know.

The Secretary. I have a communication from the Ladies' Committee, in which they speak for the ladies attending this Conference,

which I should like to insert into the record at this point. This communication reads as follows

To the National Conference on Weights and Measures : The ladies attending

the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and Measures wish to go on

record as expressing their sincere thanks and appreciation for the program of

entertainment provided for their pleasure while attending this Conference. They

further wish to express their desire that similar programs of entertainment be

arranged for in the future, as a means of encouraging the attendance of the

ladies at these meetings.

Respectively submitted.

Mrs. R. E. Meek, Chairman,

Mrs. W. S. Bussey,

Mrs. J. M. Dietz,

Ladies' Committee.

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON RESOLUTIONS, PRESENTED BY J. J. LEVITT, CHAIRMAN

APPRECIATION TO DIRECTOR AND STAFF OF THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF

STANDARDS

Whereas, Dr. E. U. Condon, R. W. Smith, W. S. Bussey, and their very able

and efficient staff have extended valuable assistance and guidance to this Conference, of which the Conference is very grateful : Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and

Measures, does hereby record its grateful appreciation to the above members of

the National Bureau of Standards.

APPRECIATION TO COOPERATING OFFICIALS

Whereas, the governing officials of the various States and municipalities,

through their manifest interest in weights and measures work, have made it possible for their respective jurisdictions to be represented at this Thirty-fifth

National Conference on Weights and Measures ; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and

Measures, does appreciate such cooperation and assistance and wishes to make

this resolution a part of the records of this Conference.

APPRECIATION TO THOSE PARTICIPATING IN PROGRAM

Whereas, various committees, speakers, and individuals have given generously

of their valuable time and efforts to make this, the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and Measures, a success ; Therefore, be it Resolved, That the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and Measures

does hereby record its grateful appreciation to all who have contributed to the

success of this Conference.

APPRECIATION TO THE PRESS AND RADIO

Whereas, the press and radio of the City of Washington have been generous

in reporting the activities of our present meeting; and

Whereas, the Scale Journal has likewise been generous in publishing news and

advance notice of our present meeting ; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and

Measures, does hereby record its appreciation to the press and radio of the City

of Washington and to the Scale Journal.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 165

APPRECIATION TO MANAGEMENT OF HEADQUARTERS HOTEL

Whereas, The Management of the Wardman Park Hotel has done everything

within its power to make our Conference a success ; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the Thirty-fifth Conference on Weights and Measures, does

express its warmest appreciation and thanks to the Management of the said

hotel for their cordial hospitality and cooperation during our meeting ; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Conference transmit a copy of this resolution to the Management of the Wardman Park Hotel.

IN MEMORY OF DECEASED MEMBERS

Whereas, we the delegates and guests of the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and Measures have learned with regret of the death of several of our esteemed associates during the past year ; and

Whereas, their passing leaves a serious gap in the ranks of weights and

measures activities : Therefore be it Resolved, That we, the delegates and guests of the Thirty-fifth National Conference do hereby express our deep sorrow and sympathetic condolence for the

bereaved families and for the communities of which our associates were -an out- standing part.

Mr. Levitt. The next resolution is in memory of Harry M. Roeser.

This is a special resolution, which the Committee thought it proper to

introduce, and I think that we would be very remiss in our obligations

if we did not take action on it. All of us know that Harry was one

of the outstanding men in weights and measures work for a number

of years. Probably each of us has called on him for help and assistance

at some time; as far as I am concerned, I know that I never called on

him without receiving his help. [Reading :]

IN MEMORY OF HARRY M. ROESER

Whereas, since our last Conference, there has passed from our presence, Harry

M. Roeser, a former member of the Bureau of Standards staff who contributed

ably and helpfully to the programs of past Conferences ; and

Whereas, we desire to record our sorrow at the loss of this esteemed Conference

participant : Therefore be it Resolved, That this Thirty-fifth Conference on Weights and Measures does

herewith officially express its sorrowful regret at the passing of Mr. Roeser ; and

be it further

Resolved, That this resolution be made a part of the official Conference record

and that a copy of it be presented to the family of Mr. Roeser.

ON THE RETIREMENT OF A. J. JENSEN

Whereas, the Chief Inspector of Weights and Measures of the State of North

Dakota, Mr. A. J. Jensen, has, this past 18 years, faithfully attended the National

Conference on Weights and Measures, serving in the best interests of his State

and carrying out his committee assignments faultlessly ; and

Whereas, we have been advisd that his services as Chief Inspector have been

terminated and that we will, in future meetings, be deprived of his. bubbling

enthusiasm : Therefore be it Resolved, That we express to him our regrets that his connections with our

public services have been severed, and that we extend our well wishes in his

future undertakings—Good Luck, Al

!

ON BUDGETARY PROCEDURE

Whereas, attention has been called by Dr. E. U. Condon, President of this

Conference, to the need of uniformity in the administrative work of weights and

measures including budgetary procedure ; and

7 Following the adjournment of the Conference, the President requested the Conference

Committee on Weights and Measures Education to conduct the study contemplated by this resolution.
166 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Whereas, the need for such uniformity is recognized by the members of this

Conference : Therefore be it Resolved, That we, the members of this, the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and Measures, do recommend that the President of this Conference

designate one of the present standing Committees or appoint a new committee

to carry out these suggestions.

ON THE TESTING OF RAILWAY TRACK SCALES 8

Whereas, the President of this Conference has presented to this body the question of the testing of railway track scales by the States, and has recommended

that this question be given careful consideration : Therefore be it Resolved, That a committee of three members of this Conference be appointed

to study and report at the next Conference on the practicability of State supervision over railway track scales and their use, this committee to consult with

accredited representatives of the railway industry, to ascertain the practical

requirements.

Mr. Levitt. The next resolution may be somewhat controversial.

The resolution is not directed to any individual, but the Committee

agrees with the principle expressed in the resolution and has felt

it necessary to bring the subject before this Conference. [Reading:]

ON THE BASIS OF COMPUTATION FOR PRICING CHARTS

Whereas, it has been brought to the attention of the Thirty-fifth National

Conference on Weights and Measures that there are in use certain so-called

"Pricers" or "Pricing Charts" which purport to give the total-price computations for a series of commodity weights and for a series of unit prices, which

computed values are based upon the principle of showing the next higher

cent whenever the mathematically correct computed value involves any fraction

of a cent, however small ; Therefore be it Resolved, That this Conference, meeting in its Thirty-fifth Annual Conference at Washington, D. C, May 23, 24, 25, and 26, 1950, does hereby record

its objection to the principle of price computation described above, and does

endorse the principle of price computation upon the basis of selecting the lower

cent whenever the mathematically correct value involves a fraction of less than

one-half cent, and of selecting the higher cent whenever a fraction of one- half cent or more is involved.

J. J. Levitt, Chairman,

F. M. Greene,

W. A. Kerlin,

William Kirk, Jr., R. W. Searles,

Committee on Resolutions.

Mr. Levitt. The foregoing report is signed by only a part of the

membership of the Committee ; that is because I was unable to reach

all of the members, to have them affix their signatures. But the entire

Committee is in agreement with the entire report.

A short time ago one of the members of the Conference notified me

that a group of members wished Mr. Crawford to introduce a resolution from the floor. This is because the resolution could not be drawn

up and presented to the Committee in time for us to include it in our

report, I suggest that Mr. Crawford present his resolution at this

time,

Mr. Crawford. I wish to thank the Chairman of the Resolutions

Committee for giving me this opportunity to present the following

resolution

8 Following the adjournment of the Conference, the President appointed, pursuant to

this resolution, the following Special Committee on the Testing of Railway Track Scales : J. P. McBride of Massachusetts, Chairman ; J. E. Brenton of California ; Erling Hansen

of Minnesota.
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 167

Resolved, That the method of wholesale labeling of meat products be referred

to the Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities for their study during

the coming year, and report to the next Conference.

Mr. Levitt. I now move the adoption of the report of the Resolutions

Committee and the adoption of the resolution offered by Mr. Crawford.

(The motion was seconded, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed

to, thus adopting all of the resolutions presented to the Conference for action.)

Mr. Howard. I wish to comment on the resolution which had to do

with weight-price charts because it refers to something in which I

have had a part. I agree with the principle endorsed, but I want to

make an explanation relative to the origin of this book of charts.

In our work with prepackaged commodities, checking weights with

prices or prices with weights, we never used the computing charts on

the scale. Instead, we used a slide rule, and I still use one if I do not

have available a book of weight-price charts. We found many discrepancies. So we designed a book to use for checking, and we followed the system of the full cent because it wasn't a question of that

half cent on half the items. If the weight was not as indicated or the

price was not in accordance with the book on actual weighing, the man

was wrong. That is where it started. Some of the market supervisors wanted the books so they could check their items. Then some of

the market operators used it. Here is an actual case of the problems

they were trying to meet : When an item was priced at $1.40 per pound

the total computed price could not be read from the scale because there

w

T as no $1.40 column ; nor was there a 70-cent column. So the operator

used the 35-cent column and made a 2-cent error. That was multiplied by four and became an 8-cent error. The book of charts eliminated those errors. Let me give you an illustration : If an item sells for 96 cents per

pound, the price per quarter-ounce will be iy2 cents. The merchant

will give the fraction of the y^ ounce in order to play safe with his

marked weight. Using the book, he is compensated for that fraction

of the y± ounce therefore. Please note that one-half of the said fraction of weight equals three- fourths cent, so really nobody is the loser.

(Note: Scale tolerance is % ounce, which is the equivalent of threefourths cent in this instance. In checking with the book, no tolerance

is acceptable.)

I don't know what methods most inspectors use. An inspector in

checking for accuracy in price against weight goes into store "A" and

finds everything in order and gives a clean bill of goods on all his

prepackaged commodities. He then goes into store "B" and finds

many discrepancies. Store "A" has used the subject book in its operation. Now I know from the standpoint of "principle'' that it is wrong.

But I do not know that the merchant will not question the legality of

being dispossessed of his method or means of operation which the

inspector has already approved.

Mr. Levitt. What the Committee had in mind was that, as a matter

of good business ethics, these charts should be prepared to break on

the half cent, and that in preparing the book it is just as easy to do this

as to break on the whole cent. We did not feel that it is good ethics

to take the next higher cent if the exact computation is, for example,

one mill over the lower cent. We felt that if the value is less than

y2 cent the lower value should be shown, and that if it is y2 cent or

over, the next higher cent should be shown.
168 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE TREASURER,

GEORGE F. AUSTIN, JR.

May 1, 1950.

Balance on hand May 1, 1950 $19. 61

Receipts:

May 26. Dues—1949 Conference $1, 300. 00

Interest accrued j_ ' 4. 15

1, 304. 15

1, 323. 76

Disbursements:

May 25. Social evening, Wardman Park Hotel:

Buffet lunch, 250 at $2.00 $500. 00

Punch, 15 gal. at $14.00 gal 210. 00

Waiters' service 71. 00

Public address system 10. 00

Music 120. 00

Entertainment 50. 00

Phone service 1. 50

Transportation and miscellaneous 1. 80

Registration services 15. 00

Mimeographing services 30.00

Messenger services 5. 00

1, 014. 30

Balance on hand May 1, 1950 309. 46

Respectfully submitted.

(Signed) Geo. F. Austin, Treasurer.

(It was moved and seconded that the report of the Treasurer be adopted, the

question was taken, and the motion was agreed to.)

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON NOMINATIONS, PRESENTED BY R. E. MEEK, CHAIRMAN, AND ELECTION

OF OFFICERS

Mr. R. E. Meek. Your Committee on Nominations, hoping to benefit from suggestions advanced by members of the Conference relative

to nominations for office, met in open session on Wednesday afternoon

shortly after the tour of the laboratories of the National Bureau of

Standards had been concluded. We are pleased to report that some

suggestions were received and that these were given careful consideration.

The Committee respected the action taken by the Thirty-fourth

National Conference with regard to the number of vice presidents

and executive committeemen to be elected. Consequently, it is placing

in nomination the names of six members for election as vice presidents and, in addition to the officers who will serve as executive committeemen, ex officio, the names of 15 members for election as executive

committeemen.

Careful consideration was given by the Committee to several factors

in its selection of nominees for office. Among these were : Established

custom ; geographical distribution ; attendance records ; previous rec- ognition ; and participation in the work and affairs of the Conference.

With these factors in mind, the Committee met in closed session on

Thursday afternoon and voted unanimously to submit the following

nominations for office in the National Conference to serve during the

ensuing year, or until such time as their successors are elected
THIRTY-FIFTH CONFERENCE ON" WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 169

OFFICERS

For President: E. U. Condon, Director, National Bureau of Standards.

For Vice Presidents: C. A. Baker, of New York; J. E. Brenton, of California;

J. T. Kennedy, of the District of Columbia ; V. D. Campbell, of Ohio ; F. C. Yarbrottgh, of Charlotte, N. C. ; and H. E. Howard, of Miami, Fla. For Secretary: Ralph W. Smith, National Bureau of Standards.

For Treasurer: George F. Austin, Jr., of Detroit, Mich.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

For members of the Executive Committee: F. M. Greene, of Connecticut; J. J. Levitt, of Illinois ; James A. Hilgemann, of Fort Wayne, Ind. ; J. Fred True,

of Kansas; George L. Johnson, of Kentucky; O. A. Kirkland, of Texas;

Charles O. Wills, of Portland, Maine ; J. P. McBride, of Massachusetts

;

Miles A. Nelson, of Michigan; Erling Hansen, of Minnesota; Joseph G. Rogers, of New Jersey ; Joseph F. Blicklet, of Pennsylvania ; J. Roy Jones,

of South Carolina ; George E. Carpenter, of Vermont ; and Malcolm W.

Jensen, of Madison, Wis.

Respectfully submitted.

(Signed) Rollin E. Meek, Chairman.

Nalls Berryman,

James A. Bernard,

James A. Boyle,

Alfred Lirio,

William F. Masinda,

George W. Warner,

Committee on Nominations.

(It was moved and seconded that the Report of the Committee on Nominations

be adopted, the question was taken, and the motion was agreed to.)

The Chairman. Is there any unfinished business to come before the

Conference ? (There was no response.)

The Chairman. Is there any new business to come before the Conference, or is there anything anyone wishes to discuss or bring before

this group before we adjourn?

(There was no response.)

The Chairman. Gentlemen, on behalf of everyone, I thank you and

members of the National Bureau of Standards for a most successful

Conference.

The Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights and Measures is

officially closed.

(Thereupon, at 1:12 p. m., the Thirty-fifth National Conference on Weights

and Measures adjourned sine die. )

Secretary's Note.—Immediately following adjournment of the Conference, a meeting of the new Executive Committee of the Conference was held. This

meetting was attended by 16 of the 24 members. The following decisions were made with respect to the Thirty-sixth National Conference on Weights and

Measures

:

The Conference will extend over four days, with two sessions on the first day, one session on the second day, two sessions on the third day, and one session on

the fourth day.

The dates for the Conference will be May 22, 23, 24, and 25, 1951.

The headquarters for the Conference will be Wardman Park Hotel, Washington, D. C.
170 MISC. PUBLICATIONS, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

A tour of National Bureau of Standards laboratories will not be scheduled on

the program, but such a tour will be made available to those wishing to participate on the afternoon of the second day of the Conference, provided that suitable

arrangements for this can be made with the National Bureau of Standards.

The morning session on the second day of the Conference will be held at the

National Bureau of Standards if suitable arrangements for this can be made with

the Bureau. Other sessions of the Conference will be held at the headquarters

hotel. The customary informal Conference party will be held on the evening of the

second day of the Conference.

Some form of special entertainment will be provided for the ladies attending

the Conference.

In lieu of the customary oral presentation of State and Association reports,

States and Associations will be invited to submit reports, limited to two doublespaced typewritten pages, to the Conference Secretary not later than May 1, 1951. Reports so submitted will then be mimeographed and assembled as a file of State

and Association Reports, copies of which will be made available for distribution

at the Conference. "Introductions" of officials will be made as a substitute for

the program items of State and Association Reports.

o