draft, incorporating the suggestions which he has obtained from his investiga- 
tions in the field. The proposed standards are then reviewed by members of 
the technical staff in Washington, all of whom now have had many years of 
experience in standardization work. Before issuing the standards as official, 
however, copies are often sent back to trade representatives and inspection 
supervisors in the various States for final criticism. 
The period of time necessary to formulate a set of standards varies with the 
commodity. Sometimes investigational work for certain products may be 
completed and standards recommended within a few weeks. Again it may take 
months, and for some products the investigations have taken parts of several 
years. It has always been the policy of the Department not to issue standards 
for official use until they are considered practicable and workable. 
UNIFORMITY OF LANGUAGE IN REQUIREMENTS FOR 
STANDARDS 
Anyone who has occasion to use U. S. standards for fruits and vegetables will 
note a considerable degree of similarity and uniformity in the wording of the 
grade requirements. Such uniformity of language is maintained for the pur- 
pose of making them more easily understood by inspectors and members of the 
industry who use the standards. Similar terms and expressions in one set of 
standards usually have similar interpretations in others, even though they apply 
to different commodities. 
In formulating the standards, it has been the policy to follow a certain order 
in listing the grade factors. Such factors as color, shape, freshness, and firm- 
ness, and other factors which have to be defined in more or less general 
descriptive terms, are usually given first. Then usually follows freedom from 
certain defects, such as decay, and freezing injury or other defects of a serious 
nature. For the grade factors covering the less serious defects, in which it is 
desirable to allow a certain degree of injury, the expressions “free from injury,” 
‘free from damage,” “free from serious damage,” and “free from very serious 
damage” are generally used. 
Each expression in the order named signifies a greater degree of injury. 
Thus, in a U. S. Fancy grade, where it is intended that only a slight degree 
of injury for certain defects be permitted, the expression “free from injury” 
is used. “Free from damage” is usually used for certain grade factors of 
U. S. No. 1 grade, which would be interpreted as an injury not materially 
affecting appearance, edible or shipping quality, or as causing more than per- 
haps appreciable waste. The expression “free from serious damage” is asso- 
ciated generally with certain grade factors in U. S. No. 2 grades and finally, 
“free from very serious damage” with those in U. S. No. 3 grades. It is 
often necessary, however, to use two or more of the above expressions in one 
grade for certain factors. 
Frequently, U. S. standards have been criticized for being too lengthy and too 
technical. It has been the policy of the Department to make standards as 
simple as possible but it must be remembered that the extent to which a stand- 
ard reflects relative value of a product depends to a large extent on the com- 
pleteness with which it defines various grade factors that influence quality. 
Therefore, whenever possible, grade factors are defined as definitely as possible 
in order to facilitate uniformity of interpretation. Descriptive standards, to be 
practical, must be reasonably specific. Some factors are very easily defined by 
specifying the size of an area or the percentage of the surface of a specimen 
which may be affected. Other factors, such as color, firmness, and shape, are 
very intangible and can be defined only in general descriptive language. 
i 
