dockage assessment

[wmoebis]

I took samples to 6 diff elevators representing 4 grain companies for grade and dockage assessment. Not 1 did a proper dockage assessment. All were higher than should be, anywhere from .4% to 1.3% higher.

All were unloading trucks and dockage was done the same way on unloads. Not one farmer/trucker standing there said anything to them.

When I asked graders why they were calling my reclaim from over #5 buck and whole thrashed kernals over the riddle as dockage? they either tried down playing it or some even said they didn't know.

[nicolaas]

thats how they pay the bills!!, take .5% of your grain.

[wd9]

How is it properly done?

[sumdumguy]

The Grain Commission has specific screens for
dockage tests. There is some dockage which
does not fall through due to size. Dokage is
dockage.

[wmoebis]

Each commodity has specific normal
cleaning procedures lined out in the
Grain Grading Guide.
In my case it was wheat, Chapter 4.
Here is a list of the inaccuracies that
I observed in every case.
Sample size and representative sample:
CGC says minimum of 750 grams divided
from original sample through the borner
divider.
In not one cases did the staff use the
borner divider, all samples were just
scooped off the top of pail. In not one
case did they weigh out at least 750 Gr
max was 550. Some even took extra
measures to make sure they were right on
500 gr. to make calculation easier I
presume.

The CGC says dockage is assessed on
material that passes over the #25 riddle
LESS whole thrashed kernals which are
HAND PICKED and returned to clean
sample.
In not one case did the grader even
look at what came over the riddle. I
did! In the cases of the highest
dockages, I observed that the riddles
were so plugged with wild oats and
foreign material(from previous samples)
that there was whole thrashed kernals
that came over riddle and were not hand
picked back to clean sample and became
dockage. In most cases there was still
the last sample still in pans, including
thier whole kernals.

The CGC says that material that passes
through the #5buck in the lower position
is assessed as dockage. Material that
stays on top of the #5buck in the lower
position is included in the clean sample
and becomes grading factors. IE:
shrunken and broken or FM.
In every case the material that stayed
on top of the #5buck in the lower
position was included as dockage.

The CGC says that the %of dockage is
calculated by weigting the material
Removed by asperation, material removed
by the riddle and the material removed
by the #5buck in the lower position and
by dividing by the whole uncleaned
sample to calculate the % of dockage.
In not one case was this done. In every
case they weighed only the grain that
stayed on top of the #6buck and the
material that stayed on top of the
#5buck in the UPPER position. Then
subtracted this against the whole
uncleaned sample to come up with a % of
dockage. So this means that not only was
my #5buck reclaim and my hand pick from
over the riddle not included in my clean
sample and became dockage but also any
clean grain that was hung up in the
Carterday or accidentally spilled became
dockage.

My sample was actually .8% dockage and
I was calculated anywhere from 1.2 to
2.1%

Sumdumguy you are right Dockage is
dockage however, Shrunken and broken is
shrunken and broken and Foreign material
is foreign material. And no there is not
some dockage which does not fall through
due to size that would become a grading
factor and maybe able to be removed
under cleaning for grade improvement.
Which is aqlso in chapter 4 of the Grain
Grading Guide.
I want to be paid for my shrunken/
broken and FM not have it taken as
tookage.

[rook]

So how did your communications with the grain co's go regarding this issue?

[wmoebis]

I was not so much looking for
explanation or confrontation but more as
an observation. Not unlike being a tire
kicker. I did want to know if there was
any differences between companies or
elevators. I found none. None were
fallowing the CGC guide.

As I said when I asked one grader why
they included what came over the #5buck
in the lower position into the dockage
they said they had no idea.
Another grader became very defensive
and I left it at that.
Still another said the material that
came over the #5buck was just 'small and
broken kernals'. Yes it is, but it's not
dockage. It should be included in the
sample and if is a degrading factor, be
checked over a 4.5 slotted hand sieve
and I would be paid for it in the
appropriate grade or cleaned for grade
improvement and then be returned to the
dockage. Otherwise, why would the CGC
even use a second #5 buck in the lower
position?