Mr. ABERNETHY. This little amendment they propose doesn't create any problems as far as you gentlemen are concerned? Mr. SUTHERLAND. I have not seen the official Department's report. Mr. ABERNETHY. Well, I think they are only clarification amendments. Is that not correct, Mr. Rollin? Mr. ROLLIN. Yes, sir. Mr. ABERNETHY. That is all. Now, I want to ask one other question. You represent the seed trade association, and you state that on June 17, 1969, during the convention of your association that you adopted a certain resolution and you include that resolution in your statement. That resolution concludes with a paragraph as follows: "Resolved further that: AOSCA will apprise the ASTA of their existing standards," and so forth. How is it that ASTA resolves for the AOSCA? They weren't there. Mr. SUTHERLAND. No, they were not there. Mr. ABERNETHY. Was that really just an unhappy construction of a paragraph, or did you have the authority to resolve for and on behalf of the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agents? Mr. SUTHERLAND. No, we did not have the authority, and this is a correction that should have been made in this resolution. This is and has been our policy to work very close with the State seed certifying agencies and this association. It is our hope that through increased cooperation we can take a look at the existing standards and the procedures that we use in developing the standards and work out an agreement with them, that we can sit down either in their committees or in some other manner and work out these standards and propose them to the Department as joint standards which can be approved then and would have the support of the industry and the seed certifying agencies. Mr. ABERNETHY. Was the information which you referred to in this particular paragraph that you have just read, was that brought to the attention of your association and was there a meeting of the minds? Did you have some understanding about it prior to the Senate and House hearings? Mr. SUTHERLAND. No, we have requested this information. It has been given to us verbally in discussions with Dr. Scott as president of the association. We have not formalized a procedure, because our board of directors has not and will not meet until this fall, and the AOSCA board of directors will not meet until this fall. So any formal procedures cannot be acted upon until that time. Mr. ABERNETHY. Well, this paragraph says that this information shall be passed around prior to a Senate and House hearing. Does that raise any question between the two associations, any problem? Mr. SUTHERLAND. There is no problem as far as the American Seed Trade Association is concerned. Mr. ABERNETHY. Any as far as the other associations are concerned, or can you speak for them? Mr. SUTHERLAND. Dr. Scott is here. I would like Mr. ABERNETHY. We have an expert lawyer here that brought this to my attention. I thought I should take some notice of it. All right. Thank you very much. Mr. DE LA GARZA. Thank you very much, Mr. Sutherland. For the sake of the record, Dr. Scott, we perhaps should reopen your testimony and make it explicit in the record your statement that you have just made that your organization is in agreement with this other association, and you are cooperating to the extent that you will have a meeting of the minds to recommend to the Secretary procedures for the certification or the minimum standard. Dr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I would like to point out that the standards and procedures of AOSCA are in printed form, freely available to any interested person. These have been transmitted, I believe, to ASTA. We do plan to cooperate with ASTA in working out a mutually agreeable method of developing standards in the future. Mr. DE LA GARZA. And with the Department? Dr. SCOTT. And with the Department, yes, sir. Mr. DE LA GARZA. You cannot leave the Department out. Dr. SCOTT. Yes, and with the Department. Mr. DE LA GARZA. Thank you very much, Dr. Scott. We will now hear from Mr. Foil W. McLaughlin, director, North Carolina Crop Improvement Association. We will be most happy to hear from you, Mr. McLaughlin. STATEMENT OF FOIL W. MCLAUGHLIN, DIRECTOR, NORTH CAROLINA CROP IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION, RALEIGH, N.C. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. My name is Foil W. McLaughlin. I am director of the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association from Raleigh, N.C. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I certainly appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee in support of H.R. 10236 and other identical bills which amend Federal Seed Act to change the definition of seed-certifying agency and certified seed. Representing the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association, the official seed-certifying agency in North Carolina, I think that this bill is necessary for the continued improvement in seed certification service provided to users of certified seed. Permit me to touch briefly on the purpose of seed certification. First, seed certification is a voluntary participating service. The concept of certification as developed over the last 40 years in North Carolina has been one of providing genetically-variety-pure seed with known origin which is properly identified for the consumer. By this, I mean that the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association through its program of established minimum seed standards, provides a service to farmers and seedsmen who produce and plant seed of varieties approved for certification. When the certification label has been attached to a container of seed grown in North Carolina, that seed has passed field and seed inspections as meeting the minimum standards established for seed certification in North Carolina. The North Carolina Crop Improvement Association is a member of the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies. This member ship provides us with basic minimum seed standards which we use in establishing North Carolina's seed certification standards. This means then, Mr. Chairman, that seed grown and certified in North Carolina meet the genetic purity standards established by the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies. Complying with these minimum standards is important to us not only as producers of certified seed but as a consumer of certified seed grown in other States. It is estimated by the USDA that between 50 percent and 60 percent of the seed entered into commerce crosses at least one State line before it is planted. North Carolina is no exception. For example, it takes approximately 150 million pounds of seed to plant 1 year's crops in North Carolina. We produce about 128 million pounds of certified seed in North Carolina but all of it is not planted in North Carolina. We receive certified seed from many States and seedsmen ship North. Carolina grown seed into other States. This means, Mr. Chairman, that certified seed moves in interstate commerce in large quantity and should be legally defined in the Federal Seed Act as meeting the minimum standards for genetic purity as established by the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies. As I understand, it is the sole intent of this bill to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to approve the standards and procedures recommended by the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies as the minimum requirements to be made by official seed certifying agencies, however, higher requirements imposed by any official State seed certifying agency would be eligible for approval under this bill. To have these standards "approved" as provided in H.R. 10236 would mean that a specified class of certified seed, regardless of the State of origin, would have met at least minimum standards for geneticvariety-purity. This amendment and appropriate regulations will establish the minimum criteria that a seed certifying agency such as the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association must meet if the seed we certify moves in interstate commerce. However, under this bill, the responsibility for maintaining minimum standards for certifying seed in North Carolina will remain that of the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association. The procedures for establishing and changing standards by individual State certifying agencies would not be altered. Such agencies, however, would need to maintain standards which equal or exceed the "approved" minimum standards. I am North Carolina's representative to the board of directors of the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies and a member of its executive committee. As such, I am familiar with the procedure used in establishing and changing the minimum standards of the association. Briefly speaking, the association employs commodity committees composed of representatives and specialists including seed growers, seedsmen, and scientists from all regions of the Nation. These committees carefully consider proposed changes in standards before making a recommendation to the association's board of directors for final approval. This procedure assures us that detailed consideration is given to the needs and problems of all regions before making any change in certification standards or procedures. For seed of many crops, the genetic-variety-purity can only be determined by pedigree records as maintained through certification procedures. However, seed quality factors such as germination or weed mixtures can be determined during laboratory examination of the seed. Therefore, the maintenance of genetic purity and identity for the protection of the consumer is very essential. As agriculture becomes more specialized in North Carolina and the Nation, the variety of seed planted becomes very critical. Once the variety has been chosen, the farmer must be assured that the seed he plants is of this variety and is genetically pure. In North Carolina, we do plant certified seed grown in other States. We would like to be assured that all certified seed meets certain specified approved standards. In other words, certified seed should mean the same thing (genetically speaking) regardless of the State in which it was produced or in which State it is sold. This will not be true as long as 50 States each have the option to adopt its own regulations with no minimum standards. This proposed amendment to the Federal Seed Act will provide for an "approved" minimum standard for all certified seed. I have evaluated this bill with seed producers, seedsmen, and farmer groups in North Carolina and they are in agreement that this legislation is needed. Therefore, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I urge you to give favorable consideration to H.R. 10236. Mr. Chairman, if you will permit, I would like to make one additional statement relative to representation which Mr. Abernethy has raised in regard to the producers. Mr. DE LA GARZA. We will be happy to hear from you. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. The question of representation by the producers, that is the seedgrowers-I will use North Carolina as an example-the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association is the official seed certifying agency recognized by general statute in North Carolina. As such, the members of this association are the certified seed producers. To produce certified seed they must be a member and participate. This membership, therefore, through its board of directors, represent the seedgrowers. I am a representative from the North Carolina Crop Improvement Association, officially, to the Association of Seed Certifying Agencies and, therefore, I do represent the certified seedgrowers at the national level through our Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies. Now, using North Carolina as an example, this will also apply to any of the other 43 member agencies. There is one official director to the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies representing the local certified seedgrowers. So I would say that the Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies does, in fact, represent the certified seedgrower as such. Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. McLaughlin, is your feeling or opinion that the pendency of this legislation, in our consideration of it, that the general contents has been disseminated down to and among the producers themselves? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Speaking for North Carolina, of course, we have discussed this with them over the last year and a half, really. Mr. ABERNETHY. Yes. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Prior to its being introduced, we have discussed this with our board of directors of our North Carolina Crop Improvement Association. We have discussed this with the membership at our annual meeting in January of this year, and I would say that every opportunity at which we have had we have discussed it at the North Carolina level. Only as recently as Monday I participated in the North Carolina Seedman Association program, at which time a special item on the program was a discussion of the proposal. I would think that we have done our best to inform the local certified seedgrower of the proposal. Mr. ABERNETHY. What is his general feeling about it? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. In North Carolina? Mr. ABERNETHY. Yes. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. They hope that you will take favorable action on the bill. Mr. ABERNETHY. All right. Now, can you state whether or not that is the general feeling and attitude and opinion of the seedgrower throughout the seed-producing industry; that is, among the producers? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. The certified seedgrowers? Mr. ABERNETHY. Yes. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. Yes, sir; I would say so, and I would again refer to personal contact Mr. ABERNETHY. Yes. Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. We had within the month a meeting of our southern seed certification officials, at which time this proposal was again further considered. These persons present represented their local State certifying agency, in turn the growers, and we had complete support at the southern agency level of those present. Mr. ABERNETHY. Well, now, this legislation-incidentally-this is off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. ABERNETHY. Back on the record. The question, then, has been raised as to whether or not the general producer himself or themselves have been well notified of this, and I take it from what you say that they have been and they are in support thereof? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. This is my Mr. ABERNETHY. Is that right? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. This is my impression; yes, sir. Mr. ABERNETHY. That is your impression. Does the contrary impression exist among any of the witnesses in the room at this time? No one spoke out, so I guess they are in agreement. Now, are you familiar with the report that has been filed here by the Farm Bureau? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN, Yes. Mr. ABERNETHY. They raise that question. They raise a question about-they said they are concerned that the standards and procedures that might be recommended, that the growers themselves might not have had an adequate consideration of their views. Does that concern you, or do you think there will be a problem as regards such? Mr. MCLAUGHLIN. I think the certified seedgrowers have been and are adequately represented through its representation, its State repre |