Please notify us if you have further information or possible suggestions in this matter, a speedy reply will be appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

CHARLES WILLIS,

Supervisor, Commodity Distribution Program.

MICHAEL F. WEGGENMAN,

Field Representative.

THE CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE

OF THE ROCKY BOY'S RESERVATION,

Box Elder, Mont., September 28, 1973.

Hon. LEE METCALF,

Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SIR: On the 25th of September, 1973, we received a letter from Mr. Charles Willis, Supervisor, Commodity Distribution Program and Mr. Michael F. Weggenman, Field Representative, Social and Rehabilitation Services, State of Montana, informing us that it may come about that our Commodity Food Distribution Program may be discontinued.

The Commodity Food Distribution Program here on the Rocky Boy's Reservation provides a great deal in the way of assistance to the survival of our people and we as the Business Committee are once again seeking your assistance in keeping such an important form of assistance on our reservation. Any assistance that you could give us in keeping this program in effect will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

JOHN WINDY BOY, Chairman, Business Committee, Chippewa-Cree Tribe, Rocky Boy's Indian Reservation.

MARCH 19, 1973.

Reference Food Stamps.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN: We are presently faced with a most serious situation on the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Indian Reservation regarding the problems our people are having in obtaining Food Stamps.

Currently, as of this date (03-19-73) 938 people are receiving general assistance or public assistance from various social service agencies, this does reflect several things and does not reflect many other things:

Unemployment is estimated at over 65% of the labor force, the Fort Peck Tribal Industries, Poplar, Montana, and C&M Construction have curtailed major employment opportunities within their agencies due to: 1). Lack of contracts, and 2). Freeze on new housing contracts.

Other employment in and adjacent to our reservation is low and seasonal labor opportunities are seriously diminished due to: mechanization of many farms, feed lot operations, and related factors.

Additional individuals have been cut-off of General Assistance from Social Service agencies for a number of reasons and problems in meeting GA payrolls within existing agencies.

Serious problems in regards to holding our OEO Grant and Manpower contracts are evident that will significantly increase the socio-economic needs of our people.

Our people have at this time presented many of these problems, and individual problems regarding their inability to obtain foods stamps to their councilmen and tribal officials. We note that in many instances, receipts, and supportive data USDA officials require for certification to receive food stamps are not kept by many of our heads of households.

We have a Operation Mainstream and NYC program and feel that the meager income obtained through EOA funds should be excluded from the means test utilized to qualify for food stamps, we feel that this factor seriously presents a barrier, for many to desire to go back on general assistance or another

32-911-746

form of public assistance as the net income through welfare is higher in many instances than it would be if a head of household worked as a Manpower trainee.

Employment opportunities are at this time diminished and this factor, compounded with the problems of obtaining food stamps and related personal and economic problems present the residents of our reservation with a very grave future.

On behalf of the Assiniboine and Sioux people and our tribal government, we respectfully request your early review and examination of this problem. We stand ready to provide your office with additional information. Our phone numbers are: 406-768-3335, 406-768-3259, 406-768-3759, 406-768-3604, 406–768– 3605.

We have 1200 applicants for employment or training registered with the various agencies on our reservation, our situation is grave.

Senator HUDDLESTON. We will hear from Calvin D. Fisher, president, Roberts Dairy Co., Omaha, Nebr.

STATEMENT OF CALVIN D. FISHER, PRESIDENT, ROBERTS DAIRY CO., OMAHA, NEBR.

Mr. FISHER. Mr. Chairman, and members of your honorable committee, I would like to thank you for the opportunity of appearing here and speak with some knowledge of the Government distribution programs, because from 1938 to 1941 I was a recipient.

Senator HUDDLESTON. In what capacity?

Mr. FISHER. Our family received surplus farm commodities through the common distribution system.

From 1950 through 1957, I was an inspector for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Consumer Marketing Service, Dairy Division, and became actively involved in the administration of procuring and storaging surplus commodities. From 1958 until the present date, I have been involved in company management, and we have been involved in supplying commodities to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for school lunch and commodity distribution.

So my comments this afternoon will be directed pretty much specifically at USDA's policy and procedures in effect as of this date. I would like to give you some background.

The dairy industry in Nebraska became a supply and demand situation in about 1958; for butter and milk powder plants. We began closing down butter and powder plants and looked for other items to process. We first investigated the possibility of processing soybeans. We also investigated the processing of egg products.

From 1959 to 1960, we went through a process of elimination, and in 1960, we discovered that there was a great need for a way of pasteurizing eggs and drying eggs similar to milk products, because eggs contain salmonella. So we decided to perfect a way of pasteurizing and drying eggs so we could guarantee the destruction of the most heat resistant salmonella.

We were able to accomplish this in 1960, and by 1963, we were issued a patent by the U.S. Patent Office to cover the processes. We also knew that the consuming public had a terrible dislike for dehydrated egg products, so we knew it had to be an egg product that tasted like fresh scrambled eggs, and had good shelf life.

We discovered that all dehydrated eggs had to be held in refrigerated storage. By 1960, we accomplished zero salmonella, and a product that tasted as good as fresh scrambled eggs, and accomplished the storage capability we felt we had to have, and that was storage for 2 years at ambient temperatures.

After we made this discovery, we tried to sell it commercially and we signed a 2-year exclusive agreement with General Mills. They took our products for 2 years, but they found out it was not a product that was going to replace sunnyside-up eggs. So we decided that the only way we could market this product was mass feeding.

On that basis, we decided to direct our efforts toward the military and mass feeding programs. In 1965 and 1966, I began working very diligently with the Defense Personnel Support Center, and their research facility at Natick, Mass., and based on the experience gained while working for the Government for 7 years, I was able to get their attention and convince them that it was a tremendous discovery. In fact, we have in the records a letter from a colonel informing us that, to him, it was the greatest discovery since jello.

In 1966, I helped them write the military specifications and they stopped buying those terrible dried, whole eggs and converted to our type product, even though they told us, "you will never sell us a product that has a patent."

In 1966, the military made the decision to convert all the military procurements over to our patented type product. In 1966, many educators became interested in this discovery. Dr. Tuttle from Michigan State received an 80-percent preference for this dehydrated product mixed with water and scrambled, over fresh eggs.

I do not have his publication in my hand, but Dr. Tuttle went to the University of Kentucky for a period of time, and delayed the publication of the article. It was published in 1972 and carried in a lot of the trade magazines.

That gives a little of the history of the background of the product. Incidentally, after it was accepted by the military, then the food and nutrition people from USDA became interested. We met with the school lunch and nutrition people in 1964 in Kansas City, and were given a warm reception. They went out and polled the rest of

the industry, and decided that because of the patents, they did not dare touch it. But when the military converted, the USDA and school lunch decided they would do it also.

The very product we produce for the commodity food distribution programs and military is the same dry product you find in the grocery stores here in the east coast under the Durkee label. The Arvid Nordquist Co. of Sweden purchased this product, and their direction is not at a military, mass feeding area. Their direction is at the silk stocking, hotel-type trade.

So it is something that tastes good, and that really selective purchasers desire. In 1968 the USDA decided to purchase the product for commodity distribution through the poverty program. They started purchasing it in cans. I could see that the can was a cumbersome and expensive package, and went to work with the assistance of the American Can Co. in Wisconsin. And we came up with a 6-ounce paperfoil envelope and presented it to the USDA.

During late 1969 or early 1970, we negotiated a contract to see if it was mechanically feasible to package this item with conventional machinery, and we did it successfully. The product was shipped for storage to Arizona and New Mexico, and it was then distributed after storage. The feasibility tests were directed at the Indian reservation in that particular area.

The USDA converted over to the package, and during the following year netted the Government a 5-cent-per-pound saving because putting it in a foil package or paper, poly, foil, poly-package and the saving in the packaging and the shipping weight, and so forth, and the distribution and storage. The USDA netted a 5-cent-a-pound saving. There were awards passed out to USDA people.

There were outstanding service awards passed out, and the suppliers that came up with the novel inventions were not mentioned. There are still some awards hanging in USDA offices.

That gives the historical background. Now I would like to delve into some of the problems with the food distribution programs that we heard this morning, and how this particular problem relates to it. I could spend a lot of time comparing it nutritionally to meats and other items, because this item is a tremendous product from a nutrition standpoint.

Senator HUDDLESTON. We are more concerned about the economies of the system than the individual product.

Mr. FISHER. I thought I would make a few cost comparisons and how they relate to the market conditions today, and the USDA programs.

If we were bidding on a contract today to supply this product for food distribution programs, we would bid $1.50 per pound. One pound of this product is equal nutritionally to 3 dozen eggs. That means our delivered price on a railcar is 50 cents per dozen.

I called several Safeway stores here in Washington to see if I could get the current price of large, grade A eggs. One store said iust a minute, and had me wait five minutes. And then I found another. I found the best price on grade A large eggs is 73 cents per dozen.

I know the store would like to have a 20-percent markup on anything sold out of refrigerated space, but I am sure Safeway and