**President's Address**

**National Conference on Weights and Measures**

**Orlando, FL**

**July 12, 2005**

**Dr. Hratch Semerjian**

**Acting NIST Director**

Thank you for that fine introduction. I welcome this opportunity to
address the National Conference on Weights and Measures' 90^th^ Annual
Meeting, a meeting that celebrates the NCWM's 100^th^ anniversary.

It's an honor to be part of this centennial celebration. I feel right at
home. At home---not only because I am, as the Acting NIST Director, the
Honorary President of the National Conference on Weights and
Measures---but also because everyone in this room, including this
speaker, shares the same vision.

The theme of our conference is "100 Years of Equity in the Marketplace."
Certainly, the quest for honest weights and measures and all that this
entails for competitiveness, commercialization, innovation and open
markets are the heart and soul of both our organizations. It is our way
of life. It is our mission. It is the way we serve our nation, its
people and, increasingly, the world.

It is a pleasure to recognize at the outset of my remarks one very
special person --- Henry Oppermann. Henry was, until his retirement two
weeks ago, chief of NIST's Weights and Measures Division. He is, in a
very real sense, one of the authors of this feast, a weights and
measures person who has devoted 30 years to nurturing the NCWM-NIST
bond. Henry is a long-time friend and tireless champion of our work and
has had a hand in virtually all the joint programs I will talk about
today. His technical expertise and vision are without compare, and he is
widely respected in all arenas of the weights and measures community.
His contributions have spanned the spectrum of the legal metrology
system, from laboratory metrology to type evaluation to field inspection
to weights and measures administration.

Thank you, Henry, for a lifetime of service and contributions to the
people and the nation. We are grateful for your promise to be available
for consultations and advice to both NIST and the NCWM.

Weights and measures have been a national concern from the birth of our
republic. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution declares, "The
Congress shall have the power to ...fix the standard of weights and
measures." In 1901 the federal government established the National
Bureau of Standards (now NIST). Within four years -- 1905 -- Samuel
Stratton, NBS's first director, and Louis Fischer, the Bureau's chief of
weights and measures, convened a meeting of state sealers of weights and
measures. That meeting of officials from eight states and the District
of Columbia marked the birth of this great organization.

We were born in an era when good men and women first understood the
dangers of adulterated products as well as the need to enact reforms
such as the pure food and drug laws. We opened up shop as America moved
on to the world stage as an industrial power. With each passing year,
advances in science and technology have expanded our means of serving
the nation.

Together, NIST and the Conference helped shape a new age,
fostering---with honest weights, sure measures, and common national
standards---the economic miracle that has brought a good, decent life to
millions.

Now some, especially people outside this room, might be tempted to ask
what am I talking about! That's understandable.

I once saw a *New Yorker m*agazine cartoon that captured a more
stereotypical view of our work. It portrayed a group of glum, mustached
bureaucrats sitting around a conference table. A bespectacled,
middle-aged man at the head of the table is saying, "I'm afraid,
Gentlemen, we must learn to live with the hard truth. The Office of
Weights and Measures is, by its very nature, colorless,
non-controversial, scandal-free, and likely to remain so forever."

Well--let's face it--as a bureaucrat, I have to admit---colorless is
fine... non-controversial is desirable...and scandal-free is more than
good. It is absolutely necessary.

As weights and measures officials, state laboratory metrologists, and
industry leaders in weighing and measuring devices, however, we know one
very important truth--we have laid the groundwork for today's fair,
competitive and equitable marketplace benefiting the citizenry and
business.

As Massachusetts Governor Curtis Guild told the Conference in 1908,
"Some reforms only touch the average citizen once in a lifetime; but the
enforcement of honest weights and measures touches every human being at
every moment of every day."

Our collaboration is symbolized by this commemorative reprint of the NBS
1915 publication on the tolerances and specifications for weighing and
measuring devices. This publication was the forerunner of NIST Handbook
44, which has been adopted by all 50 states, the District of Columbia,
and the Territories as their standard for commercial weighing and
measuring devices. It is used in everything from gas pumps to grain
moisture meters.

Handbook 44 paved the way for other weights and measures handbooks
including Handbooks 112, 130, 133, 105, 143, and 145. They cover model
laws for states, standardized field test procedures, and ways to check
the net contents of packaged goods--from corn flakes to cooking oils.
They save us immense time and expense and promote uniformity in weights
and measures requirements and practices.

Our collective efforts have resulted in documents used by an estimated
3,200 state and local weights and measures officials across the United
States and 50,000 private-sector representatives.

It is a fact that weights and measures rules, regulations, and standards
annually affect about \$4.5 trillion transactions, representing over
half of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP).

Yet another fact, one that grows in importance every day, is that while
we have accomplished much in the last 100 years, we now must do even
better.

It's the 21st Century. We are beginning to recognize that the system
created in 1905 is less and less suited for the needs of the marketplace
in 2005, let alone 10 years from now. The marketplace is changing--and
significantly today's environment is faster paced. Weighing and
measuring equipment grows ever more diverse and complex. Administrators
must tackle high turnover and lengthy training periods for the staff.
Manufacturers, competing in a global marketplace, must continually be on
guard for international standards that are at variance with national
standards. Businesses must comply with a daunting network of
regulations, many overlapping and sometimes conflicting. Consumers'
needs have changed, with a strong focus on convenience and timeliness.

Clearly we need continually to reassess how we do business with regard
to standards development. Technical topics are so diverse and technology
so rapidly changing that the current system cannot provide the technical
expertise needed to address the wide range of topics. Affected parties
aren't effectively informed about impending changes. Limited budgets
prevent participation in many of the technical discussions. Decisions
are often made without adequate information or understanding. Too often,
for instance, NCWM committees neither have sufficient time to adequately
review and make decisions about technical issues nor do they have access
to the technical resources they need.

And on top of all that, our weights and measures budgets have shrunk. At
both the federal and state level, weights and measures jurisdictions
compete for funding with other functions, such as homeland security,
health, education and welfare.

So, what needs to change? What are the most significant influences we
face? How can we be most expedient? How can we ensure input and
involvement from all parties? How can we ensure sound technical
decisions? And how can we be most cost-effective as resources grow
increasingly scarce?

NIST has begun a long, hard look at these challenges. We have gone to
our customers and asked, "What needs to be changed?" We have asked that
question not just in technical meetings and through correspondence but
also in focus groups, including meetings with many of the manufacturers
and weights and measures officials here today.

We are learning a great deal. We have ideas for a new template for legal
metrology standard development, a way to better organize this effort,
and even a national plan to roadmap America's measurement needs for a
stronger innovation infrastructure.

Our conversations convince us that it is critical to expand
participation in the development process for legal metrology standards.

Again and again we have heard calls for more **transparency** in the
process with an end to hidden agendas or behind-the-scenes actions. Many
parties stress the need for **openness, impartiality, due process,
balance** and **consensus** with information freely shared and readily
available to all impacted by the prospective standard ...decisions based
on the national interest \... the views of all duly considered.
\...results generally agreed to and accepted by all participants.

Others call for more **relevance,** in which standards are championed
that have real benefit and impact on products. And for **performance**
**orientation,** in which actions take into account the impact of
potential standards and their cost benefit to products. As well as
**timeliness,** in which actions reflect priority needs of manufacturers
distributing goods and services, as well as regulatory officials faced
with ensuring an environment for fair competition among businesses.

People want **flexibility** that allows a standard to survive changing
needs of parties due to changing technology, changing global influences,
changing market practices and changes in related regulations. And, of
course, there is a plea for more **technical literacy** and
**coherence**---in other words, a standards development process that
avails itself of technical expertise and produces results that are clear
and understandable.

Few of us would disagree with the desirability of a legal metrology
standards development process that is characterized by all these
elements or virtues, from **transparency** and **openness to coherence**
and **technical literacy.**

It's a bit like being in favor of motherhood and apple pie. But the big
question is how do we do it? [How do we make the ideal that we all
strive for, the norm for all of us?]{.underline}

NIST and the NCWM Board of Directors are engaged in a joint effort to
consider alternatives for improving and enhancing the current system.
This partnership is lighting the way to a more productive future.

Recently, we met to discuss an approach, which would expand upon a "work
group" model that NIST uses to develop U.S. comments on International
Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) documents, as well as for the
development of technical requirements and test procedures for
specialized technical topics such as belt-conveyor scales.

You may have already heard of this proposal through presentations given
at the Spring 2005 regional weights and measures association meetings by
your incoming NCWM Chairman, Don Onwiler.

Under this model, work groups consisting of technical experts from
industry and the regulatory community would be used to develop and
address technical issues such as those currently considered by NCWM
standing committees.

Recommendations of the work groups would feed into the existing NCWM
process, thereby providing additional technical resources to the
standing committees and enhancing the efficiency of the process.

These work groups may draw upon the expertise of existing technical
committees, such as the National Type Evaluation Technical Sectors.

Both NIST and the NCWM Board of Directors are optimistic that such an
approach could, if properly implemented, address many of the key issues
and concerns about the current process.

NIST is excited by the prospect of **partnering** with the NCWM to
implement such a model to facilitate the development of legal metrology
standards in the U.S.

We look forward to working with the NCWM leadership in the coming months
to develop the details of this effort.

I also look forward to NCWM participation in the initiative we recently
launched to take the pulse of U.S. measurement capabilities and
infrastructure. NCWM is a logical partner in this effort. Its work to
set legal metrology standards---combined with NIST services---is central
to the national measurement system.

In 2004 NCWM-member state metrology laboratories provided more than
360,000 calibrations to regulatory agencies, research institutes and
manufacturers and scale and meter service companies. This year the
16^th^ state laboratory received its accreditation under NIST's National
Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP)! That's a great
accomplishment! Mass calibrations concerns will be a major concern of
the initiative and NCWM can make a fine contribution to this effort.

This strong private-public sector partnership called "Roadmapping
America's Measurement Needs for a Strong Innovation Infrastructure" will
make the first-ever evaluation of the breadth, depth and overall health
of the U.S. measurement system.

The final report, expected in early 2007, will identify priority
measurement infrastructure needs across industry and the economy,
recommend steps to address them, and point out the consequences of
inaction.

To kick off this process, NIST is reaching out to top customers and
stakeholders in the United States Measurement System, such as NCWM. We
are collecting and reviewing previously published roadmaps and workshop
reports focused on future science and technology challenges and
opportunities, and we are planning an initial set of focused workshops
in key technology areas.

Business, trade and professional associations are encouraged to identify
and advise NIST of pressing measurement needs and gaps in their
particular areas.

Together we will document America's priority measurement needs and their
economic implications. We anticipate that our findings will motivate
interested and affected parties to take action and ultimately ensure
that our national measurement system is healthy and capable of serving
U.S. institutions and citizens in the 21^st^ Century.

Meanwhile, we will continue efforts to document best practices,
harmonize national standards with international standards, and prepare
for a new metrics-only ruling that could affect U.S. exports.

Thanks to the input received from the weights and measures community, as
well as industrial partners, NIST recently completed a two-year
benchmarking and needs assessment study. This limited look at the
effectiveness of the national weights and measures infrastructure
identified some of the challenges facing regulators and industry. With
this kind of information plus your feedback on the study and with the
help of experts in the field, we hope to begin identifying "best
practices" and components, starting with the area of retail motor-fuel
dispensing inspections.

Efforts in this field could be the prototype of more efforts in other
weights and measures inspection areas.

As we work together to enhance our national system, we are also
confronted with the need to think more globally. To keep markets open to
American manufacturers of goods and services, our national system must
strive to establish national standards that are harmonized with (or at
least equivalent to) standards adopted by other nations.

NCWM efforts complement NIST efforts in this field. NCWM committees
routinely consider international documents when considering proposed
changes to U.S. standards. In addition, NCWM participation in the
International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) meetings helps to
raise the visibility of U.S. standards and eliminate differences. NCWM
is considering participation in an OIML Mutual Acceptance Arrangement
(MAA), which would greatly facilitate the type approval process for
device manufacturers. And that would be very good for us all.

I cannot close my remarks without mentioning the metric system. We are
very conscious of the fact that the European Union has set January 1,
2010, as the deadline for implementation of a Metric Directive that
requires only metric units to be used on products, including packaged
commodities. This deadline is of significant concern to U.S. exporters.
With others, we are exploring the possibility of changing the U.S.
Federal Fair Packaging and Labeling Act to allow consumer packaging
companies to continue labeling the net contents of packages in both
inch-pound and metric units as they do now or to label, on a purely
voluntary basis, the net contents in only metric units.

Today 45 states allow metric only labeling for products. I strongly
encourage the remaining states to move forward with the adoption of NIST
Handbook 130, which permits metric-only packaging.

And now, my friends, I congratulate you once more and wish you well as
you begin your second century of service to the nation. I am confident
that with imagination, creativity, cooperation and hard work
we---together---will build a better future for our nation and our
people. Thank you.

**THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.**

**Chairman\'s Address**

**National Conference on Weights and Measures**

**Orlando, Florida**

#### July 12, 2005

**G. Weston Diggs**

**Virginia Office of Product and Industry Standards**

It is my pleasure to welcome you to the 90th Annual Meeting of the
National Conference on Weights and Measures. It has been an honor to
serve a second term as Chairman of this Conference. We are here to
conduct important business that relates to weights and measures issues
that will affect us nationally and internationally. At the same time, we
are celebrating 100 years of providing equity in the marketplace. In
this celebration, we recognize our relationship with the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In 1905 the Department of
Commerce, in its mission to establish uniformity in weights and
measures, created the National Conference on Weights and Measures. To a
great extent, we owe our success to our partners at NIST. Although, like
in any relationship, we have had our differences; the leadership and
support provided by people like Mac Jensen, Carol Brickenkamp, Henry
Oppermann and their staff have been invaluable.

I would like to take some time to discuss a few of our accomplishments
that occurred this year, as well as some of what I believe to be
challenges for the future.

The National Conference is gaining international recognition. We have,
to some extent, always been involved in the international world of legal
metrology. For the most part this was accomplished through the
sponsorship of NIST at meetings of the International Organization of
Legal Metrology (OIML) where NIST represented the United States. This
year, Steve Patoray, our NTEP Director, was invited to speak at a
Japanese Forum on legal metrology. He was asked to discuss the U.S.
system of weights and measures and our National Type Evaluation Program.
Partly as a result of Steve\'s visit, a delegation from Japan visited
California, Maryland, and NIST and met with me representing the National
Conference before going to Canada. Japan is in the process of modifying
its legal metrology system. This delegation was looking for ideas they
could incorporate into their new system. In support of our members that
export weighing and measuring devices, the Conference is participating
in OIML\'s Committee on Participation Review. The long-range goal is to
become an \"issuing authority\" under the Mutual Acceptance Agreement.
This would mean we could issue OIML certificates in the same manner we
now issue NTEP certificates. We will not sign any agreement until we
have reached the status of an "issuing authority." The reality of our
international involvement is that it is very expensive, in terms of
money and time for meetings and travel. I believe it is important, as we
develop international relations, to identify a single person to
represent the National Conference. For the sake of consistency, I
believe Steve Patoray needs to be that person. That lends itself to
another problem---Steve has enough to do with his current workload in
NTEP. We are adding international travel and the possibility of a new
NTEP Software Sector. Even with the capable assistance of Linda
Bernetich and Steve Cook, Steve Patoray\'s workload is reaching the
crisis point. Next year the Board of Directors will have to make some
tough choices in this area.

The Conference must do more to make the public aware of the importance
of its work. Over the years we have made attempts in this area with very
limited success. The last effort I can remember was in the mid-nineties
when we considered having Popeye, the cartoon caricature, as the NCWM
spokesman. With the addition of Judy Markoe to the Management
Solution\'s staff, we have a resource that could develop a plan for
marketing, not only the importance of the Conference activities, but
weights and measures in general.

On June 30 our new website was activated. Based on the initial feedback,
this new site is a vast improvement over what we had in the past. A lot
of money and time has been expended to make this site a reality. It is
our hope the new site is more user-friendly and helpful to those
interested in the National Conference\'s activities. We would like to
express our appreciation to the AMC Committee for its support of this
effort. I would also like to acknowledge the hard work of Linda
Bernetich, Steve Patoray and Judy Markoe of our management staff.

I was your chairman in 2000 when we were experiencing a low point in the
Conference\'s relationship with our partners at NIST. I am happy to
report that since that time, with Henry Oppermann\'s leadership and the
support of NIST upper-management, our relationship has continued to
improve. Henry cannot be replaced but we look forward to working with
whomever follows in his place.

With our partners at the Weights and Measures Division, the Board of
Directors is planning to initiate an improved method of managing
conference issues. On the surface this may seem to be adding another
level of bureaucracy to the process. We need to realize we have many new
officials on committees who are learning about the conference process.
This process is designed to help direct issues coming from the sectors
and regional associations to the appropriate committee or work group. In
some cases a special work group may have to be created to develop the
issue or, if the issue lacks adequate information, it may be returned to
its source. Don Onwiler and Henry Oppermann will go into more detail on
this plan later during the Conference.

The system of weights and measures in our country is unique in that
there is no federal weights and measures law. Although federal agencies
preempt us in certain areas, the enforcement is the responsibility of
state and local officials, which is particularly true at the retail
level. In recent years, the Conference, as well as the weights and
measures community as a whole, has been frustrated because of dwindling
resources. Weights and measures jurisdictions continue to be asked to do
more with fewer resources, not only in terms of dollars but in terms of
people. Both conditions are having an adverse effect on the Conference
and its ability to operate. The money is no doubt important. Besides
running our respective programs, it also allows us to attend the
meetings and be involved in development of the issues. However, even now
the lack of people with weights and measures experience is affecting our
ability to operate as effectively as we would like. The lack of
experienced people is not only on the regulatory side but on the
industry side as well. No one is questioning the dedication to our
profession by our new officials and industry members. It takes time to
gain the knowledge to understand the wide range of issues that come
before our Conference. While knowledge is necessary, it has been my
experience this Conference operates to a great extent on a person\'s
credibility. Whether it is desirable or not, issues are often decided by
the position a person with credibility takes on an issue. My point to
this is credibility doesn\'t come by registering and getting a name tag.
In this organization it takes both time and participation to gain
credibility.

Most of us in government, and perhaps the industry members as well, have
to justify travel to meetings and conferences to a higher authority
within our agencies. If you are a weights and measures official, you
probably justify attendance at conference meetings by saying it is
important because this is where the requirements relating to weights and
measures are developed that affect the citizens in your jurisdiction. I
believe this a true statement, but it goes beyond that. You are to be
complimented by your attendance and participation because in doing so
you are supporting our system of weights and measures in the United
States. Without your continued participation our system would surely
fail.

Before I close, I would be remiss if I did not touch on two other
topics. You have heard this from me before so I will keep it short.
First, the Conference must do something to correct its current voting
requirements for getting issues passed. It is ridiculous that because of
low attendance three or four members can cause an issue to fail. Those
not in attendance have in effect voted \"NO\" on all the issues. In many
cases these jurisdictions may not be members of the Conference. It is
not equitable to those who invest their time and resources developing
issues and have them fail because of a relatively few \"No\" votes at
the Annual Meeting and the \"NO\" votes by those who do not attend.
Second, I believe NIST Handbook 44 needs to be brought inline with
today\'s technology and written so its intended users can effectively
use it in the field. I would like to believe I am wrong concerning both
of these issues, but only time will tell.

In closing, I would like to thank the Board of Directors and all of the
Conference membership for their support during this past year. I would
especially like to express my thanks to Beth Palys and the staff at the
NCWM Headquarters. Until you are chairman of this Conference, you have
no conception of the amount of work turned out by our management group
or how much is done without the knowledge of the general membership. I
also would like to thank the staff at home for their support.

As I close out my career in weights and measures, I hope you will
remember me as someone who was not always right but someone who would
always listen and you always knew where he stood.

I thank you very much, and it has been an honor to serve as your
Chairman.

**New Chairman's Address**

#### National Conference on Weights and Measures

**Orlando, Florida**

**July 14, 2005**

**"Back to the Basics as Stepping Stones to the Future"**

**Don Onwiler**

**Nebraska Department of Agriculture/Weights & Measures**

As I was preparing for this, I took the time to review remarks of
previous chairmen in the Annual Reports. Several talked about "change."
It's not one of our favorite subjects. The NCWM, it's members and
partners have all seen many changes in recent years. We have been
through some challenging times in terms of defending our programs,
protecting our budgets, and focusing on "maintaining" when we would
prefer to focus on "improving."

Difficult times are also times of opportunity. Willingness to adapt is
how we grow. Should we simply concentrate on doing those things that
have worked for us in the past, or should we be looking for a fresh
approach to those difficulties we face? In our program back home, we
emphasize both. There I have learned the importance of researching and
understanding our history while maintaining an eye on the horizon. This
is the foundation for this year's theme, *"Back to Basics as the
Stepping Stones to Our Future."*

So what did get us where we are? In his speech on Tuesday, Dr. Semerjian
reflected on that first meeting in 1905. The subsequent success of NCWM
is based on recognition that attendance, thoughtful participation,
inclusion of our stakeholders, and tireless volunteer effort are
critical to meeting our goals. The success of both NCWM and NIST Weights
and Measures Division has hinged historically on a spirit of cooperation
toward that end.

Concern for a healthy system of measurement goes back farther than that
meeting of state officials in 1905. In his first message to Congress in
1790, George Washington said, "\...uniformity in the currency, weights
and measures of the United States is an objective of great importance,
and will, I am persuaded, be duly attended to."

Unfortunately, there is no longer strong recognition or acknowledgement
from our leaders in Washington of the importance of weights and
measures. Many state and local governments are also overlooking this
fundamental ingredient to a fair business environment. One reason for
this is that we have done such a tremendous job of instilling confidence
into the marketplace. We should take pride in that. But, as former
Chairman Dennis Ehrhart pointed out, we need to be in the public eye. We
need an identity.

Creating awareness of weights and measures activities is not our
specialty, but we're working on it. We have revamped our website to be
more interesting and informative to first-time visitors. In the process,
we have made it more functional to our members. We will also draw on the
expertise of Judy Markoe, a new member of the Management Solutions team.
She will help us develop a plan to elevate the NCWM to a higher level of
public awareness.

The NCWM has also struggled recently with reduced attendance. The
effects of this are tremendous. Valuable input has been lost. We have a
smaller pool of volunteers to serve on committees and work groups. We
are doing less mentoring in the organization because we can't afford to
get new people to the meetings. Go back and read those reports from the
early 1900\'s. Do you think it was easy getting to meetings then? It was
a challenge, but they persevered. When we do get new attendees, we
sometimes overlook them. When we get new volunteers, we tend to
overwhelm them. Sure, as the economy improves membership and attendance
will rebound, and attendance is also issue driven to some degree, but
there are things we can do to help---basic things.

As an example, I'll take you back to my first National Conference in
1993. I did not know anyone at that meeting, not even the other
representatives from my state, so Tina Butcher of NIST took the time to
tutor me on the process of the Annual Meeting. Darryl Brown of Iowa and
Will Wotthlie of Maryland told me my input was important and I should
speak up. Others, like Steve Malone of Nebraska and Sid Colbrook of
Illinois, asked me my opinions and, Heaven help them, they even listened
to me. David McKay from Utah and his wife Carolyn saw a newcomer from
Nebraska who looked lost. Now, David was a quiet man, but he promoted
the NCWM by doing what came naturally to him. He extended friendship and
offered support. And, lastly, I was asked to serve.

Now I ask you, aren't all these basic things that we can be doing? How
often have we all overlooked them? No doubt, some of you wish I had been
ignored in 1993 so that, just maybe, I would have gone away. Had I been
ignored, I would have.

Once we gain awareness and get new people involved, they must find value
in our organization or we will lose them. The efforts of the
Professional Development Committee and NIST to improve training and
create a certification program will provide part of that value. The
value will also come from our proactive approach to standards
development. A process that is responsive to the needs of our
stakeholders will provide benefit in participation. We will continue
working to develop and implement the plan Henry Oppermann and I
presented to you this week to improve our standards development process.
I like this plan because it does not replace what we do. It enhances
what we do. I also like it because it is something the NCWM and NIST are
developing together. As we move forward, it will continue to require a
strong partnership of our organizations.

The relationship between the NCWM and NIST has been a concern. Both
organizations have had to redefine themselves to some degree. There may
have been occasions where we have duplicated efforts or neglected needs.
There may have been occasions when some of our membership has been
compelled to "choose sides." I am asking you now to let that go. Both
organizations remain committed to our respective charges. Both continue
to share common goals. We will continue to have agreements and
disagreements along the way, but we are finding ways to move forward
together, rebuilding the partnership that has served us so well in the
past. I thank Henry Oppermann and Wes Diggs for the role they have
played in that effort.

Another thing I remember from my first meeting was how much I admired
the people who served on Standing Committees. They worked long hours,
often into the evenings. They understood the need to put forward a
quality agenda for the voting session. I noticed they included very
difficult, sometimes political or emotional issues on the agenda. They
welcomed stakeholders with specific agendas and members with unpopular
opinions to the microphone. The Committee members demonstrated
dedication, intelligence, patience, and a desire to get it right. They
knew the tough issues were also important issues.

It was all so glamorous from the outside looking in but any of us who
have been there know it is difficult to listen to disagreements among
membership, sorting through the opinions and facts to work toward the
best solution. It is difficult to generate quality final reports to
serve as an historical record of the NCWM. But it's worth it. I commend
all of you who give so much of yourselves to be part of that process.

Over the years, we have endured many discussions regarding harmonization
with OIML standards. Do you know that one of the early roadblocks to
developing our system in the U.S. was the lack of a uniform measurement
system internationally? Efforts toward harmonization are similar to our
struggle for uniformity among the 50 states. We will never fully achieve
it, but working toward the goal is a necessity if we want to improve the
measurement system in the U.S. We will continue to strive for
harmonization by considering proposals to amend our standards and making
recommendations to modify international standards. We will continue to
consider our options in the world arena as we participate in the
development process for the Mutual Acceptance Arrangements.

So you see, I'm not suggesting change after all. I'm not advancing a new
agenda as your Chairman. My agenda dates back to 1905. If we look back
at our successes and our failures, learn from those experiences what
works and what doesn't, we can apply that knowledge, and we will be
successful. Let's get back to the basics, be innovative in our
approaches, and keep our eye on the horizon.

What do you see when you look forward? Where do you think we need to be
in terms of technology, training, and field enforcement? How well we
predict these things and respond to them will determine the
effectiveness of the NCWM and our level of importance in United States
legal metrology.

Part of the equation lies in computer technology. I appreciate the Board
of Directors' decision this week to address software in a comprehensive
manner. Once again we are leaving our comfort zone. The Software Sector
will draw new experts into our organization, increasing our abilities
and broadening our resources. These particular experts are the future of
our business and we will surely welcome them in.

The Board of Directors and NIST WMD have committed to performing market
surveys in the next year. We will follow the protocol established by the
NCWM in 1999. Our first task will be to identify the scope of the
survey. We have a team established per NCWM protocol and the team will
proceed, reporting to the Board of Directors. Market surveys may be
conducted for devices, for packaged commodities, or any area of weights
and measures enforcement activity.

The Board of Directors has heard criticism occasionally because our
revolving door of leadership can easily create a change of priorities.
This can cause issues or pet projects to go unfinished as new projects
are introduced. Some might guess software to be my pet project. It's
not. My pet project is doing what we can to get this organization
hitting on all cylinders. Having a group of experts assembled to assist
us on software issues is part of that effort. If we can do that, we will
succeed as a multi-functional organization and projects won't fall
through the cracks.

Temperature compensation, stored vehicle tare weights, software-based
devices\... there is no lack of difficult issues, but think about the
marketplace in 1905. Think about the technology or, if you prefer, lack
of technology that existed at that time. Keeping up with new technology
and marketing practices is our business. It's not getting harder. We
just struggle sometimes to fully implement the system we have. We face
the same obstacles that have been there from the beginning, and we honor
those who are committed to helping this organization overcome those
obstacles.

Let's recognize those who attend, participate, and contribute their
talents. Let's be proactive in promoting our meetings and our agendas.
Lets instill pride, the kind of pride so many of us have, into every new
member who walks into the room. Let's not be afraid to take on tough
issues. Let's talk to the political leaders and invite them to
participate. Let's work with our partners to achieve good things.

Now, with our eyes on the horizon, I make the following appointments:

> [Laws and Regulations Committee:]{.underline}
>
> Stephen Benjamin, North Carolina (5)
>
> [Specifications and Tolerances Committee:]{.underline}
>
> Brett Saum, San Luis Obispo County, California (5)
>
> [Professional Development Committee:]{.underline}
>
> There are no vacancies on this committee this year. The committee has
> requested a reassignment of terms of its current members to provide
> for the traditional staggered terms for standing committee members. In
> response to that request, I am extending the following terms:
>
> Ken Deitzler of Pennsylvania to 2007
>
> Will Wotthlie of Maryland to 2010.
>
> By recommendation of the Associate Membership Committee, Gary Lameris
> will serve as the Associate Member to the Professional Development
> Committee.
>
> [Nominating Committee:]{.underline}
>
> Ross Andersen, New York
>
> Tom Geiler, Barnstable, Massachusetts
>
> Max Gray, Florida
>
> Steve Malone, Nebraska
>
> Aves Thompson, Alaska
>
> Jim Truex, Ohio
>
> [Credentials Committee:]{.underline}
>
> Mark Buccelli, Minnesota (3)
>
> [Presiding Officers:]{.underline}
>
> Kristin Young, Colorado
>
> Bill Timmons, Massachusetts
>
> Steve Pedersen, Iowa
>
> John Junkins, West Virginia
>
> [Parliamentarian:]{.underline}
>
> Aves Thompson, Alaska
>
> [Chaplain:]{.underline}
>
> Mike Belue, Belue Associates
>
> [Sergeants-at-Arms:]{.underline}
>
> To be provided by the City of Chicago, Dept. of Consumer Services
>
> [Board of Directors to complete Mike Cleary's term:]{.underline}
>
> Joe Gomez, New Mexico (2)
>
> Jim Truex, Ohio, will continue as NTEP Committee Chairman to fill the
> vacancy resulting from Wes Diggs' retirement. Thank you, Jim, for your
> continued service. We are fortunate to have you.

Thank you, each of you, who have accepted appointments for offering your
time and talents to the NCWM.

Now some personal remarks if I may: To my wife, Peggy, and our children,
Phil, Mark, Tim, and Janessa, who are here this morning, thank you for
your tolerance, thank you for being here this week, and most of all
thanks for not changing the locks when I'm away.

To Steve Malone and our staff back home, thank you for giving me your
support to dedicate so much time to the NCWM. Steve, you have always
seen more in me than I could see in myself. Thank you for giving me the
confidence to stand here today and thank you for allowing me to make my
own mistakes.

It will be my honor to serve the NCWM this year. Chairman-Elect Mike
Cleary and I look forward to seeing all of you again throughout the year
as we visit the regions and continue the work of the National Conference
on Weights and Measures.

Thank you.

**NCWM 2005 Annual Meeting Honor Award Recipients**

  ------------------ ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------
  **Full Name**      **Organization**                   **State**   **No. of
                                                                    Years**

  Steven B.          Hogan & Hartson                    DC          5
  Steinborn                                                         

  Brett Gurney       Utah Department of Agriculture &   UT          5
                     Food                                           

  Steven Beitzel     Systems Associates, Inc.           IL          5

  Kenneth Deitzler   Bureau of Ride & Measurement       PA          5
                     Standards                                      

  Stephen Casto      West Virginia Weights & Measures   WV          5

  William Cobb       West Virginia Weights & Measures   WV          5

  Robert McGrath     Boston ISD Weights & Measures      MA          10

  O.R. \"Pete\"      Foster Farms                       CA          10
  O\'Bryan                                                          

  Jack Kane          Montana Bureau of Weights &        MT          10
                     Measures                                       

  Gordon W. Johnson  Gilbarco, Inc.                     NC          15

  Gilles Vinet       Measurement Canada                 Ontario     15

  Robert A.          Scale Manufacturers Association    FL          20
  Reinfried                                                         

  Robert G. Williams Tennessee Dept. of Agriculture W&M TN          25

  Richard L. Davis   Georgia-Pacific                    WI          25

  Henry Oppermann    NIST                               MD          25

  Steven Malone      Nebraska Division of Weights &     NE          30
                     Measures                                       
  ------------------ ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------

**THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.**