Je veux savoir à propos de…

VOLUME 14

NUMBER 15

Washington, Saturday, August 13, 1949

TITLE 7 AGRICULTURE
Chapter VIII Production and Market ing Administration Sugar Branch, Department of Agriculture Subchapter I Determination of Prices Sugar Determination 871.2
P art 871 S ugar B eets PRICES FOR 1949 CROP

Pursuant to the provisions of section 301 c 2 of the Sugar Act of 1948
herein referred to as act , after in vestigation, and due consideration of evi dence presented at the several public hearings held during October 1948 for California, and January 1949 for States other than California, the fo l lowing determination is hereby issued :
871.2 Fair and reasonable prices for the 1949 crop of sugar beets. A proces sor-producer of sugar beets who applies for a payment under the act shall be deemed to have complied with the pro visions of section 301 c 2 of said act with respect to the 1949 crop of sugar beets if such processor-producer shall have paid or contracted to pay for sugar beets purchased from other producers and processed by said processor-producer prices not less than those provided for in the 1949 crop purchase contract be tween said parties.
STATEMENT OF BASES AND CONSIDERATIONS

a General. The foregoing deter mination establishes the level of prices which must be paid for the 1949 crop of sugar beets purchased by a processorproducer i. e., a producer who is also, directly or indirectly, a processor of sugar beets hereinafter referred to as processor from other producers as one of the conditions for payment under the Act. In this statement, the foregoing determination, as well as determinations for prior years, will be referred to as price determination , identified by the crop year for which effective.
b Requirements of the act and standards employed. In determining fair and reasonable prices, the act re quires that public hearings be held and investigations made. Accordingly, pub lic hearings were held at Berkeley, Cali fornia on October 27,1948; Detroit, Mich igan on January 3, 1949; Salt Lake City, Utah on January 7, 1949; Billings, Mon tana on January 10, 1949; and Greeley,
Colorado on January 24, 1949. At these hearings neither the processors nor pro ducers proposed or advocated any par ticular principle or group of principles to serve as a guide in determining fair and reasonable prices for the 1949 crop of sugar beets. The testimony presented was brief and consisted largely of re quests that the 1949 crop purchase con tracts be examined, in the light of mill and farm data then being assembled by the Department, to determine whether the sharing relationships resulting from such contracts were fair and reasonable.
In the past fair and reasonable price determinations have been based largely on testimony presented at public hear ings, on information resulting from in vestigations, and on purchase contracts negotiated between the parties. In most years comparative cost data with respect to producing and processing sugar beets were not available for all sections of the beet area for consideration in price de terminations. However, during 1948 a study was made of the sugar beet indus try with particular emphasis on the costs of and returns from producing and proc essing sugar beets. This study covered the operations of a representative num ber of producers for the 1947 crop and the operations of all processors for the 1945, 1946, and 1947 crops.
In the 1949 price determination, con sideration has been given to the testi mony presented at the hearings, to the results of the study of the sugar beet industry, to 1949 purchase contracts which have been entered into between processors and producers, and to general economic conditions which affect the terms of purchase contracts.
c Background. Purchase contracts covering the terms and conditions of growing and purchasing sugar beet crops have been in use for many years. These contracts have been developed through negotiations between representatives of processors and producers. Many changes have been effected in the contracts throughout the years.
Contracts used in the best area are of two types, generally known as 1 per centage sharing contracts and 2 scale type contracts. The former, used largely in the Great Lakes area and in a few other factory districts, provides, with some variations, that processors and producers shall share equally in the Continued on next page
CONTENTS
Agriculture Department
pQS

See Production and Marketing Ad ministration.

Air Force Department Transfer of regulations to Title 32______ ____________ -______

5021

Alien Property, Office of Notices :
Vesting orders, etc.:
Bukowska, Mary____________
Cagnacci, Mario, and Maria Dieudonne, Hector, et al_____
Plottmann, William H _______
Gittkowski, Joanna_________
Hase, Yoshimatsu___________
Henning, Ada Sophie Auguste, and Hilda Frieda MarieLuise Caroline Hermberg Hoffmann, Charles A ________
Hunold, Carl________________
Kaufman, Dorothy__________
Krudewig, Adm____________
Maier, Matthew L ___________
Mucci, Luigi________
N. V. Handelsmaatschappij W aldorf _________________
Rock Island, Arkansas and Louisiana Railroad Co_____
Rosa-Prati, Virginia A. Phil lips Dalla_______________
Roste, Gunvald, et al_______
Schroeder, Wilhelm_________
S o c i é t é dElectro-Chimie, dElectro-Metallurgie et des Aciéries Electriques dU gin e------------------ -----Wolf, Kathryn M ____________

5030
5035
5035
5031
5034
5033
5033
5031
5031
5033
5034
5032
5035
5035
5032
5036
5035
5032

5034
5035

Army Department Transfer of regulations to Title 32______________________

5021

Civil Aeronautics Board Notices :
Hearings, etc. :
Capital Airlines, Inc_________
Empire Air Lines, Inc_______
Peninsula Airport Commission of Virginia; service to New port News, Va., case_______
S. S. W., Inc.; service to Lake Tahoe---------------------------

5027
5027
5027
5027

Defense, Secretary of Transfer of regulations to Title 32 ___________________________

5021

Federal Housing Administration Notices :
Organization, field____________
5001

5027