Specifications and Tolerances Committee

**Interim Agenda**

Michael J. Sikula, Chairman

Assistant Director

New York Bureau of Weights and Measures

###### 300 INTRODUCTION

The Specifications and Tolerances (S&T) Committee ("Committee") will
address the following items at its Interim Meeting. All items are listed
below in Table A by Reference Key Number. The headings and subjects
apply to NIST Handbook 44, \"Specifications, Tolerances, and Other
Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices.\" The
Appendices to the Report are listed in Table B. The acronyms for
organizations and technical terms used throughout the agenda are
identified in a glossary in Table C. In some cases background
information will be provided for an item. The fact that an item appears
on the agenda does not mean that the item will be presented to the
Conference for a vote. The Committee will review its agenda at the
Interim Meeting and may withdraw some items, present some items for
information meant for additional study, issue interpretations, or make
specific recommendations for change to NIST Handbook 44 which will be
presented for a vote at the Annual Meeting.

The recommendations are statements of proposals and are not necessarily
those of the Committee. Suggested revisions to the handbook are shown in
**bold face print** by **~~striking out~~** information to be deleted
and **[underlining]{.underline}** information to be added. Requirements
that are proposed to be nonretroactive are printed in **bold-faced
*italics.***

**Note:** The policy of NIST is to use metric units of measurement in
all of its publications; however, recommendations received by the NCWM
technical committees have been printed in this publication as they were
submitted and may, therefore, contain references to inch-pound units.

**Table A**

**Index to Reference Key Items**

**Reference**

**Key Number Title of Item Page**

[**300 INTRODUCTION 1**](#introduction)

[**310 GENERAL CODE 4**](#general-code)

[310-1 G-S.2. Facilitation of Fraud 4](#g-s.2.-facilitation-of-fraud)

[310-2 G-S.5.6.1. Recorded Representation of Metric Units on Equipment
with Limited Character Sets and Table 1. Recorded Representation of
Metric Units on Equipment with Limited Character Sets
4](#g-s.5.6.1.-recorded-representation-of-metric-units-on-equipment-with-limited-character-sets-and-table-1.-recorded-representation-of-metric-units-on-equipment-with-limited-character-sets)

[310-3 G-S.8.1. Multiple Weighing or Measuring Elements with a Single
Provision for Sealing
5](#g-s.8.1.-multiple-weighing-or-measuring-elements-with-a-single-provision-for-sealing)

[**320 SCALES 7**](#scales)

[320-1 S.1.1. (c) Zero Indication; Requirements for Markings or
Indications for Other than Digital Zero Indications
7](#s.1.1.c-zero-indication-requirements-for-markings-or-indications-for-other-than-digital-zero-indications)

[320-2 S.1.1. 1.(b) Digital Indicating Elements
8](#s.1.1.-1.b-digital-indicating-elements)

[320-3 S.1.2.1. Weight Units and T.N.2.1. General
10](#s.1.2.1.-weight-units-and-t.n.2.1.-general)

[320-4 S.1.4.6. Height and Definition of Minimum Reading Distance,
UR.2.10. Primary Indicating Elements Provided by the User, UR.2.11.
Minimum Reading Distance, and Definitions of Minimum Reading Distance
and Primary Indications
11](#s.1.4.6.-height-and-definition-of-minimum-reading-distance-ur.2.10.-primary-indicating-elements-provided-by-the-user-ur.2.11.-minimum-reading-distance-and-definitions-of-minimum-reading-distance-and-primary-indications)

[320-5 S.2.1.7. Tare Rounding on a Multiple Range Scale
14](#s.2.1.7.-tare-rounding-on-a-multiple-range-scale)

[320-6 N.1.3.1. Bench or Counter Scales, N.1.3.8. All Other Scales
Except Crane Scales, Hanging Scales, Hopper Scales, Wheel--Load
Weighers, and Portable Axle‑Load Weighers, and Appendix D; Definitions
of Bench Scale and Counter Scale
17](#n.1.3.1.-bench-or-counter-scales-n.1.3.8.-all-other-scales-except-crane-scales-hanging-scales-hopper-scales-wheelload-weighers-and-portable-axleload-weighers-and-appendix-d-definitions-of-bench-scale-and-counter-scale)

[320-7 N.1.3.6.1. Dynamic Monorail Weighing Systems
23](#n.1.3.6.1.-dynamic-monorail-weighing-systems)

[320-8 Table 4. Minimum Test Weights and Test Loads
24](#table-4.-minimum-test-weights-and-test-loads)

[320-9 Appendix D; Definitions for Tare Mechanism, Gross Weight Value,
Net Weight, Net Weight Value, Tare, and Tare Weight Value
26](#appendix-d-definitions-for-tare-mechanism-gross-weight-value-net-weight-net-weight-value-tare-and-tare-weight-value)

[**324 AUTOMATIC WEIGHING SYSTEMS 28**](#automatic-weighing-systems)

[324-1 S.1.2. Value of Division Units and T.2.1. General
28](#s.1.2.-value-of-division-units-and-t.2.1.-general)

[324-2 Note 5 Table S.7.b. Notes for Table S.7.a.; Temperature Range
30](#note-5-table-s.7.b.-notes-for-table-s.7.a.-temperature-range)

**330 [LIQUID-MEASURING DEVICES 32](#liquid-measuring-devices)**

[330-1 S.1.2.3. Value of the Smallest Unit
32](#s.1.2.3.-value-of-the-smallest-unit)

[330-2 S.1.6.5.5. Display of Quantity and Total Price and S.1.6.5.6.
Display of Quantity and Total Price, Aviation Refueling Applications
34](#__RefHeading___Toc152647589)

[330-3 S.3.1. Diversion of Measured Liquid
35](#s.3.1.-diversion-of-measured-liquid)

[**331 VEHICLE-TANK METERS 37**](#vehicle-tank-meters)

[331-1 Temperature Compensation 37](#temperature-compensation)

[**356(a) GRAIN MOISTURE METERS 40**](#a-grain-moisture-meters)

[356-1 S.1.2. Grain or Seed Kind and Class Selection and Recording and
Table S.1.2. Grain Types Considered for Type Evaluation and Calibration
and Minimum Acceptable Abbreviations
40](#s.1.2.-grain-or-seed-kind-and-class-selection-and-recording-and-table-s.1.2.-grain-types-considered-for-type-evaluation-and-calibration-and-minimum-acceptable-abbreviations)

[**357 NEAR-INFRARED GRAIN ANALYZERS
41**](#near-infrared-grain-analyzers)

[357-1 S.1.2. Selecting Grain Class and Constituent and Table S.1.2.
Grain Types Considered for Type Evaluation and Calibration and Minimum
Acceptable Abbreviations
41](#s.1.2.-selecting-grain-class-and-constituent-and-table-s.1.2.-grain-types-considered-for-type-evaluation-and-calibration-and-minimum-acceptable-abbreviations)

[**360 OTHER ITEMS 43**](#other-items)

[360-1 International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) Report
43](#international-organization-of-legal-metrology-oiml-report)

[360-2 Developing Items 45](#developing-items)

**Table B**

**Appendices**

**Appendix Title Page**

A [Item 360-2: Developing Items A1](#AppendixADevItems)

[Part 1, Item 1 Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems: UR.3.2.(c) Maintenance;
Zero Load Tests A1](#AppendixA_Pt1a)

[Part 1, Item 2 Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems: UR.2.2.(n) Belt Alignment
A2](#AppendixA_Pt1b)

[Part 2, Item 1 General Code: T.5. Predominance -- Retail Motor-Fuel
Devices A3](#appendixa_pt2a)

> [Part 2, Item 2 Liquid-Measuring Devices: Price Posting and Computing
> Capability and Requirements for a Retail Motor-Fuel Dispenser (RMFD)
> A4](#AppendixA_Pt2a)

[Part 3, Item 1 Water Meters: U.R. 2.1. Accessibility for Reading
A5](#AppendixA_Pt2a)

**Table C**

**Glossary of Acronyms**

+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| CC  | Certificate of           | NCWM | National Conference on      |
|     | Conformance              |      | Weights and Measures, Inc.  |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| C   | Central Weights and      | N    | Northeastern Weights and    |
| WMA | Measures Association     | EWMA | Measures Association        |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| EPO | Examination Procedure    | NIST | National Institute of       |
|     | Outline                  |      | Standards and Technology    |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| GAS | Grain Analyzer Sector    | NTEP | National Type Evaluation    |
|     |                          |      | Program                     |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| GMM | Grain Moisture Meters    | N    | National Type Evaluation    |
|     |                          | TETC | Technical Committee         |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| G   | Gasoline Pump            | RMFD | Retail Motor-Fuel Dispenser |
| PMA | Manufacturers            |      |                             |
|     | Association              |      |                             |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| H44 | NIST Handbook 44         | SI   | International System of     |
|     |                          |      | Units                       |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| H   | NIST Handbook 130        | SMA  | Scale Manufacturers         |
| 130 |                          |      | Association                 |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| LMD | Liquid-Measuring Device  | SWMA | Southern Weights and        |
|     |                          |      | Measures Association        |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| LPG | Liquefied Petroleum Gas  | WMD  | Weights and Measures        |
|     |                          |      | Division                    |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| MMA | Meter Manufacturers      | WWMA | Western Weights and         |
|     | Association              |      | Measures Association        |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| MFM | Mass Flow Meter          | U    | NIST/OIML U.S. National     |
|     |                          | SNWG | Working Group               |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| "   |                          |      |                             |
| Han |                          |      |                             |
| dbo |                          |      |                             |
| ok  |                          |      |                             |
| 44" |                          |      |                             |
| me  |                          |      |                             |
| ans |                          |      |                             |
| the |                          |      |                             |
| 200 |                          |      |                             |
| 7 E |                          |      |                             |
| dit |                          |      |                             |
| ion |                          |      |                             |
| of  |                          |      |                             |
| N   |                          |      |                             |
| IST |                          |      |                             |
| Ha  |                          |      |                             |
| ndb |                          |      |                             |
| ook |                          |      |                             |
|  44 |                          |      |                             |
| "   |                          |      |                             |
| Spe |                          |      |                             |
| cif |                          |      |                             |
| ica |                          |      |                             |
| tio |                          |      |                             |
| ns, |                          |      |                             |
| To  |                          |      |                             |
| ler |                          |      |                             |
| anc |                          |      |                             |
| es, |                          |      |                             |
| and |                          |      |                             |
| Ot  |                          |      |                             |
| her |                          |      |                             |
| Tec |                          |      |                             |
| hni |                          |      |                             |
| cal |                          |      |                             |
| Req |                          |      |                             |
| uir |                          |      |                             |
| eme |                          |      |                             |
| nts |                          |      |                             |
| for |                          |      |                             |
| We  |                          |      |                             |
| igh |                          |      |                             |
| ing |                          |      |                             |
| and |                          |      |                             |
| Mea |                          |      |                             |
| sur |                          |      |                             |
| ing |                          |      |                             |
| De  |                          |      |                             |
| vic |                          |      |                             |
| es" |                          |      |                             |
|     |                          |      |                             |
| "H  |                          |      |                             |
| and |                          |      |                             |
| boo |                          |      |                             |
| k 1 |                          |      |                             |
| 30" |                          |      |                             |
| me  |                          |      |                             |
| ans |                          |      |                             |
| the |                          |      |                             |
| 2   |                          |      |                             |
| 006 |                          |      |                             |
| E   |                          |      |                             |
| dit |                          |      |                             |
| ion |                          |      |                             |
| of  |                          |      |                             |
| N   |                          |      |                             |
| IST |                          |      |                             |
| Han |                          |      |                             |
| dbo |                          |      |                             |
| ok  |                          |      |                             |
| 130 |                          |      |                             |
| "U  |                          |      |                             |
| nif |                          |      |                             |
| orm |                          |      |                             |
| L   |                          |      |                             |
| aws |                          |      |                             |
| and |                          |      |                             |
| Re  |                          |      |                             |
| gul |                          |      |                             |
| ati |                          |      |                             |
| ons |                          |      |                             |
| in  |                          |      |                             |
| the |                          |      |                             |
| Ar  |                          |      |                             |
| eas |                          |      |                             |
| of  |                          |      |                             |
| Le  |                          |      |                             |
| gal |                          |      |                             |
| Met |                          |      |                             |
| rol |                          |      |                             |
| ogy |                          |      |                             |
| and |                          |      |                             |
| F   |                          |      |                             |
| uel |                          |      |                             |
| Qua |                          |      |                             |
| lit |                          |      |                             |
| y." |                          |      |                             |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+
| No  |                          |      |                             |
| te: |                          |      |                             |
| N   |                          |      |                             |
| IST |                          |      |                             |
| d   |                          |      |                             |
| oes |                          |      |                             |
| not |                          |      |                             |
| im  |                          |      |                             |
| ply |                          |      |                             |
| t   |                          |      |                             |
| hat |                          |      |                             |
| th  |                          |      |                             |
| ese |                          |      |                             |
| ac  |                          |      |                             |
| ron |                          |      |                             |
| yms |                          |      |                             |
| are |                          |      |                             |
| u   |                          |      |                             |
| sed |                          |      |                             |
| sol |                          |      |                             |
| ely |                          |      |                             |
| to  |                          |      |                             |
| id  |                          |      |                             |
| ent |                          |      |                             |
| ify |                          |      |                             |
| th  |                          |      |                             |
| ese |                          |      |                             |
| o   |                          |      |                             |
| rga |                          |      |                             |
| niz |                          |      |                             |
| ati |                          |      |                             |
| ons |                          |      |                             |
| or  |                          |      |                             |
| tec |                          |      |                             |
| hni |                          |      |                             |
| cal |                          |      |                             |
| t   |                          |      |                             |
| opi |                          |      |                             |
| cs. |                          |      |                             |
+-----+--------------------------+------+-----------------------------+

**Details of All Items**

**(In Order by Reference Key Number)**

###### 310 GENERAL CODE

####### 310-1 G-S.2. Facilitation of Fraud

**Source:** Western Weights and Measures Association (WWMA)

**Recommendation:** Amend Handbook 44, Section 1.10. General Code
Paragraph G-S.2. as follows:

> **G-S.2. Facilitation of Fraud.** **-** All equipment and all
> mechanisms[,]{.underline} **~~and~~** devices**[, software, and
> programmable components]{.underline}** attached[,]{.underline}
> **[associated or interfaced]{.underline}** thereto or used in
> connection therewith shall be so constructed, assembled, ~~and~~
> installed**[, programmed, and/or coded]{.underline}** for use such
> that they do not facilitate the perpetration of fraud.

**Background/Discussion:** This proposal modifies the language in
Paragraph G-S.2. to clarify that the prohibition against facilitating
fraud applies to the electronically programmed and coded components of
weighing and measuring devices to address electronic manipulation or
alteration. Some argue the existing language in Section 1.10. General
Code. Paragraph G-S.2. Facilitation of Fraud is intended to address only
hardware components of weighing and measuring devices. That is,
"equipment, mechanisms, and devices" and the mechanics of how they are
"constructed, assembled, and installed" appear to deal with tangible
components. Fraud issues in the past ten years involved: (1) altering,
manipulating, or interfering with software interfaced or installed in
equipment; (2) microprocessor issues such as additional pulser units
hidden in gas pumps and taximeters; and (3) software programs permitting
manipulation of motor truck scale data used to generate weighmaster
certificates.

WWMA, CWMA, and SWMA recommended this item move forward for a vote.

NEWMA recommended this item be referred to the NTETC Software Sector for
review and input.

####### G-S.5.6.1. Recorded Representation of Metric Units on Equipment with Limited Character Sets and Table 1. Recorded Representation of Metric Units on Equipment with Limited Character Sets

**Source:** Southern Weights and Measures Association (SWMA)

**Recommendation:** Amend Paragraph G-S.5.6.1. and Table 1. as follows:

> **G-S.5.6.1. [Indications and]{.underline} Recorded Representation of
> ~~Metric~~ Units ~~on Equipment with Limited Character Sets.~~ [--
> Appropriate Abbreviations.]{.underline}**
>
> [(**a) For equipment manufactured after January 1, 200X, the
> appropriate defining symbols are shown in NIST Special Publication SP
> 811 "Guide for the Use of International System of Units (SI) and
> Handbook 44 Appendix C--General Tables of Units of
> Measurement."**]{.underline}
>
> **[Note: SP 811 can be viewed or downloaded at
> <http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/pdf/sp811.pdf>.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> [**(b)**]{.underline} The appropriate defining symbols **[on equipment
> manufactured prior to January 1, 200X, with limited character
> sets]{.underline}** are shown in Table 1. [**Representation of Units
> on Equipment Manufactured prior to January 1, 200X, with Limited
> Character Sets**.]{.underline}
>
> (Added 1977) **[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Table    |             |             |             |             |
| 1.**       |             |             |             |             |
|            |             |             |             |             |
| **~~       |             |             |             |             |
| Recorded~~ |             |             |             |             |
| Repr       |             |             |             |             |
| esentation |             |             |             |             |
| of         |             |             |             |             |
| ~~Metric~~ |             |             |             |             |
| Units on** |             |             |             |             |
|            |             |             |             |             |
| *          |             |             |             |             |
| *Equipment |             |             |             |             |
| [Ma        |             |             |             |             |
| nufactured |             |             |             |             |
| prior to   |             |             |             |             |
| January 1, |             |             |             |             |
| 200X,]{.   |             |             |             |             |
| underline} |             |             |             |             |
| with       |             |             |             |             |
| Limited    |             |             |             |             |
| Character  |             |             |             |             |
| Sets**     |             |             |             |             |
+============+=============+=============+=============+=============+
|            |             | **Repre     |             |             |
|            |             | sentation** |             |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
|            |             | **Form I**  | **Form II** |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Name of  | **In        | **(double   | **(single   | **(single   |
| Unit**     | ternational | case)**     | case        | case        |
|            | symbol      |             | lower)**    | upper)**    |
|            | (common use |             |             |             |
|            | symbol)**   |             |             |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Base SI  |             |             |             |             |
| units**    |             |             |             |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| meter      | m           | m           | m           | M           |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| kilogram   | kg          | kg          | kg          | KG          |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Derived  |             |             |             |             |
| SI units** |             |             |             |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| newton     | N           | N           | n           | N           |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| pascal     | Pa          | Pa          | pa          | PA          |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| watt       | W           | W           | w           | W           |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| volt       | V           | V           | v           | V           |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| degree     | °C          | °C          | °c          | °C          |
| Celsius    |             |             |             |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Other    |             |             |             |             |
| units**    |             |             |             |             |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| liter      | l or L      | L           | l           | L           |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| gram       | g           | g           | g           | G           |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| metric ton | t           | t           | tne         | TNE         |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| bar        | bar         | bar         | bar         | BAR         |
+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Background/Discussion:** At its fall 2006 Annual Meeting, SWMA
reviewed a proposal from the Weighing Sector to amend Paragraph
G-S.5.6.1. The amendment would require abbreviations for SI units as
specified in NIST Special Publication 811 "Guide for the Use of
International System of Units (SI) and Handbook 44 Appendix C -- General
Tables of Units for both indications and recorded representations on new
technology. The amendment would also continue to permit exceptions to
those guidelines for older equipment with limited character sets. NIST
WMD has received inquiries from device manufacturers regarding how to
apply the requirements in Table 1. for the abbreviation of SI units.
There appears to be confusion about the intent of Table 1. unless one is
directed to review Paragraph G-S.5.6.1. in conjunction with Table 1.
Additionally, there are devices where abbreviations for SI units may be
confused with other abbreviations when used in devices designed with or
capable of indicating and/or recording in other units of measure (e.g.,
inch-pound units) or with identifiers for measurement values such as
gross, tare, and net (G, T, N).

Handbook 44 Paragraph G-S.5.6.1. was originally added to Handbook 44 in
1977 to address concerns about equipment with limited printing
capabilities, that is, with either upper or lower case characters only.
If a recording element, interfaced with a weighing system, is equipped
with upper case characters only, it will print the symbol for kilogram
as "KG." It was the NCWM S&T Committee's view that to require a lower
case character capability solely to provide the appropriate symbol in
lower case character ("kg") would be cost prohibitive. Further, the
Committee saw no problem in identifying "KG" as representing kilograms
just as there is no problem in identifying the abbreviation for pound as
"LB" or "lb." The Committee also reviewed International Standard
IS0 2955, which sets forth guidelines for the representation of SI and
other units for use in systems with limited character sets.

WMD believes that permitting exceptions for abbreviations of SI units of
measure is no longer necessary when considering advances in printer and
display technology.

SWMA supported the proposal and agreed to forward it to the NCWM S&T
Committee with a recommendation that it be a voting item on the
Committee's 2007 agenda.

####### 310-3 G-S.8.1. Multiple Weighing or Measuring Elements with a Single Provision for Sealing

**Source:** Carryover Item 310‑3. (This item originated from the Western
Weights and Measures Association (WWMA) and first appeared on the
Committee's 2006 agenda.)

**Recommendation:** Add a new Paragraph G‑S.8.1. as follows:

> **[*G-S.8.1. Multiple Weighing or Measuring Elements with a Single
> Provision for Sealing.* - *A change to any metrological parameter
> (calibration or configuration) of any weighing or measuring element
> shall be individually identified.*]{.underline}**
>
> ***[\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 200X\]]{.underline}***
>
> **[Note: Examples of acceptable identification of a change to the
> metrological parameters of a weighing or measuring element include,
> but are not limited to:]{.underline}**

(1) **[a broken, missing, or replaced physical seal on an individual
    weighing, measuring, or indicating element or active junction
    box;]{.underline}**

(2) **[a change in a calibration factor or configuration setting for
    each weighing or measuring element;]{.underline}**

(3) **[a display of the date of or the number of days since the last
    calibration or configuration event for each weighing or measuring
    element; or]{.underline}**

(4) **[counters indicating the number of calibration or configuration
    events per weighing or measuring element.]{.underline}**

**[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

**Background/Discussion:** The Committee believes a General Code
requirement for identification of adjustments to individual weighing or
measuring elements is appropriate regardless of the device type when
systems have multiple weighing or measuring elements with a single
provision for sealin[g]{.underline}. Initially, the proposal was
developed to add to all the liquid-measuring device codes a requirement
for identifying when an adjustment is made to [any]{.underline}
measuring device which has multiple measuring elements, but is equipped
only with a single provision for sealing the adjustment mechanism. After
rejecting a meter for not meeting performance requirements,
jurisdictions reported difficulty in determining whether or not repairs
or adjustments were made to that meter. During the subsequent
inspection, an official might have to test multiple grades or blends to
confirm the rejected meter had been corrected. The proposed requirement
is similar to the current requirement in Section 3.30.
Paragraph S.2.2.1. Multiple Measuring Elements with a Single Provision
for Sealing.

The Committee has heard from the weighing industry that the proposal is
not appropriate for all devices. The Committee believes it is important
to be sure no specific Handbook 44 codes are adversely affected by
placing the requirements in the General Code; therefore, the Committee
agreed to make the proposal an information item to provide the
opportunity for the National Type Evaluation Technical Committee Sectors
and the regional weights and measures associations to evaluate the item
further, especially for any adverse impact on a particular device
type(s).

A General Code requirement addresses all possible device types,
including weighing systems, and any scenario where metrological
parameters (calibration or configuration) have a single means for
security. The list of acceptable means for individually identifying a
change to a metrological parameter addresses devices where features are
accessed through an indicator or active junction box, but is not meant
to be all-inclusive. Examples of weighing systems that have multiple
weighing elements connected to a single indicator such that the
calibration of each is controlled by a single seal include "in-and-out"
weighing systems, shipping scale systems equipped with at least two
platforms with different capacities connected to a single indicator, and
multiple platform vehicle scales and axle-load weighers used for highway
load enforcement or for truck operators' use such as "Cat Scales."
Additionally, NTEP has evaluated indicators with the ability to support
up to as many as ten weighing elements.

At the July 2006 NCWM Annual Meeting, the Committee received a comment
that if the proposal is adopted in 2007, then LMD Code
Paragraph S.2.2.1. would be redundant and should be deleted.

At their fall 2006 meetings CWMA, NEWMA, SWMA, and WWMA agreed the
proposal should move forward for a vote as written. CWMA agreed that if
this item is adopted, LMD Code Paragraph S.2.2.1. becomes redundant and
should be deleted. WWMA agreed the proposal should apply to all device
technologies where multiple components with metrological functions are
secured by a single seal. WWMA also heard that there are weighing
devices with multiple load-receiving elements interfaced to a single
indicator (where sealing occurs) that have the ability to track changes
to metrological parameters through an audit trail. Devices with an event
logger would comply with the proposal. Devices utilizing only common
counters for calibration and configuration parameters that increment one
time when one or more weighing or measuring element has been accessed
would still need an additional means, such as a calibration factor for
each element, to identify that changes were made to a particular
element.

For additional background information, refer to the Committee's 2006
Final Report.

###### 320 SCALES

####### 320-1 S.1.1.(c) Zero Indication; Requirements for Markings or Indications for Other than Digital Zero Indications

**Source:** Carryover Item 320-1. (This item originated from the
Committee and first appeared on its 2004 agenda.)

**Recommendation:** Amend Paragraph S.1.1.(c) as follows:

> S.1.1. Zero Indication.
>
> \(a\) On a scale equipped with indicating or recording elements,
> provision shall be made to either indicate or record a zero-balance
> condition.
>
> \(b\) On an automatic-indicating scale or balance indicator, provision
> shall be made to indicate or record an out‑of‑balance condition on
> both sides of zero.
>
> \(c\) A zero-balance condition may be indicated by other than a
> continuous digital zero indication, provided that an effective
> automatic means is provided to inhibit a weighing operation or to
> return to a continuous digital indication when the scale is in an
> out‑of‑balance condition **[and is marked or includes supplemental
> indications to indicate that the "other than continuous digital zero
> indication" represents a no‑load condition of the
> scale]{.underline}.**
>
> (Added 1987) (Amended 1993 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)
>
> **[Note: The markings or supplemental indications in S.1.1.(c) are not
> required if, prior to the start of a transaction: (1) operator
> intervention is required to verify the zero-balance condition with a
> digital zero indication, or (2) for a scale equipped to indicate a
> zero-balance condition by a digital zero indication, the scale
> automatically resets to a digital zero indication.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> (Amended 1987)

**Background/Discussion:** The proposed changes to the requirement are
intended to clarify that all primary indicators on scales using anything
other than a digital zero indication (e.g., scrolling messages, dashes,
etc.) to indicate zero require additional markings or indications to
inform customers the scale is at a zero‑balance condition. No markings
are necessary on these devices when operator intervention is required to
return the indication to a digital zero before conducting a transaction.
The proposal addresses instances where the OEM elects to display rather
than mark the information (i.e., supplemental indications). The proposed
changes are meant to be applied retroactively and, therefore, apply to
all equipment including self-service applications that have undergone
type evaluation.

The proposal is more than a simple clarification or housekeeping item.
The proposed language is not in conflict with type evaluation procedures
in Publication 14 (a document derived from Handbook 44 requirements).
The proposal is warranted because of ongoing disagreements between NTEP
laboratories at type evaluation on whether or not a scale complies with
Paragraph S.1.1.(c). If the proposal is adopted, the labs will find that
Publication 14 and Handbook 44 agree and there is no vagueness in the
wording of either document or room for misinterpretation. Since field
officials may not have access to Publication 14, they need definitive
guidelines in their working documents on how to apply the requirement
should devices be modified after type evaluation.

In 2004 the Committee interpreted General Code Paragraph G‑S.6. Marking
Operational Controls, Indications, and Features and Paragraph S.1.1. as
requiring weighing devices to be marked or provide an indication stating
the zero balance is represented by other than a digital zero indication.
This position is supported by the 1993 amendment to Paragraph S.1.1.(c)
as well as type evaluation requirements and other Handbook 44
requirements adopted to ensure customers have sufficient information
about displays and recorded transaction information in order to make an
informed decision during a direct sale transaction.

The Committee has heard opposition to the proposal from several regional
associations, the Weighing Sector, and scale manufacturers. These groups
cited the following reasons for taking this position: (1) current
Handbook 44 language provides sufficient guidelines, (2) labeling
criteria applied during type evaluation offers adequate protection from
fraud, (3) the type evaluation laboratory determines that labeling is
not necessary if a scale has an automatic means to inhibit a transaction
when it is out of balance or returns to a continuous digital indication
when in an out‑of‑balance condition, or (4) several jurisdictions have
indicated they are not receiving any complaints because equipment lacks
explanatory marking information.

The Committee believes provisions should be in place for all devices to
clearly indicate a zero-balance condition either with a digital zero, an
annunciator, or using some other accepted means. The Committee is
concerned there are no definitive guidelines available for the field
official to verify a zero-balance condition on software-based devices
modified after type evaluation. The Committee continues to believe the
proposal has some merit, but modified the language in response to
comments that there is confusion about the language that addresses
markings and indications. The Committee made changes to S.1.1.(c) to:
(1) specify that markings and indications must be visible to the
customer and (2) to clarify one instance where markings and indications
are not required.

The Committee heard further opposition to the proposal from the public
and private sector members who believe the wording in
Paragraph S.1.1.(c) is adequate to prevent fraud. However, one
jurisdiction in support of the proposal noted that an indication other
than zero would not be acceptable for devices such as a retail
motor-fuel dispenser since it found dispensers in the field with no zero
indication as a result of software changes made to indications after
type evaluation. Consequently, the Committee changed the status of the
proposal from a voting item to an information item. The Committee asked
that the regional weights and measures associations consider the
proposal during their 2006 fall sessions, being mindful that there are
installations where the operator is not present to verify a zero-balance
condition.

WWMA agreed it should be clear that a scale starts a transaction at
zero. WWMA believes the proposed modifications to (c) are sufficient and
the note describing when markings are not necessary is redundant. WWMA
further asserts that part (2) of the note describing how the device must
function is not clearly worded. Consequently, WWMA supports the proposal
as a voting item, but without the addition of the proposed note. SWMA
supports the WWMA alternate proposal.

CWMA and NEWMA recommend this proposal be withdrawn because the current
wording in NIST Handbook 44 is sufficient.

For additional background information, refer to the Committee\'s 2004,
2005, and 2006 Final Reports.

####### 

####### 320-2 S.1.1. 1.(b) Digital Indicating Elements

**Source:** National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC)
Weighing Sector

**Recommendation:** Amend Paragraph S.1.1.1.(b) Digital Indicating
Elements as follows:

> S.1.1.1. Digital Indicating Elements.
>
> \(a\) A digital zero indication shall represent a balance condition
> that is within ± ½ the value of the scale division.
>
> *(b) A digital indicating device shall either automatically maintain a
> \"center-of-zero\" condition to ± ¼ scale* *division or less, or have
> an auxiliary or supplemental \"center-of-zero\" indicator that defines
> a zero balance condition to ± ¼ of a scale division or less. **[The
> auxiliary or supplemental "center-of-zero" indicator may be operable
> with a zero net weight indication.]{.underline}***
>
> *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1993\]*
>
> (Amended 1992 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

SWMA recommends an alternate proposal as follows:

> S.1.1.1. Digital Indicating Elements.
>
> \(a\) A digital zero indication shall represent a balance condition
> that is within ± ½ the value of the scale division.
>
> *(b) A digital indicating device shall either automatically maintain a
> \"center-of-zero\" condition to ± ¼ scale* *division or less, or have
> an auxiliary or supplemental \"center-of-zero\" indicator that defines
> a zero balance condition to ± ¼ of a scale division or less. **[The
> auxiliary or supplemental "center-of-zero" indicator may be operable
> with a zero condition in the net weight mode.]{.underline}***
>
> *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1993\]*
>
> (Amended 1992 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

**Discussion:** Scales Code requirements do not include sufficient
detailed language that identifies all types of tare, define how tare
features must operate, or specify the net and tare values a scale must
indicate and record. Current NIST Handbook 44 requirements that address
tare include Paragraphs S.2.1.6. Combined Zero-Tare (\"0/T\") Key,
S.2.3. Tare, S.2.3.1. Monorail Scales Equipped with Digital Indications,
and T.N.2.1. General (Tolerances). This Weighing Sector proposal is the
first of several proposed modifications to Handbook 44 requirements
intended to clarify the suitability of tare features that are already
widely used in commercial applications.

The Weighing Sector developed criteria used to type evaluate tare
features based on General Code Paragraph G-S.2. Facilitation of Fraud
and other requirements that apply to indicating and recording elements
and recorded representations. NTEP laboratories find that it has become
increasingly difficult to solely base its compliance decisions on
Paragraph G-S.2. because the general nature of the language results in
multiple interpretations. Type evaluation criteria are published in NCWM
Publication 14; however, this document is not in wide distribution in
the weights and measures community and only a limited number of weights
and measures officials, device manufacturers, and device owners and
operators are regular participants in Weighing Sector meetings where
tare evaluation criteria are developed and discussed. Additionally, it
is difficult for parties responsible for the design, use, and test of
the tare feature to interpret and apply technical requirements published
in Publication 14. This results in differing interpretations of
Handbook 44 requirements.

In 2006, the NTETC Weighing Sector formed a Tare Work Group to review
existing tare requirements and make recommendations about how tare is to
operate on a single range scale, multiple range scale, and
multi-interval scale. The work group was also asked to develop, where
necessary, recommendations for changes to Publication 14, Handbook 44,
and Handbook 130 and to provide guidance to the Weighing Sector on type
evaluation requirements.

The work group is currently developing proposals to amend Handbook 44
requirements to: (1) ensure that a tare feature operates in a manner
that increases the accuracy of net weight determinations, (2) clearly
state what information and values are permitted and required for
indicated and recorded representations of net weight and tare weight,
and (3) identify the types (e.g., semiautomatic and stored tares) of
tare weight values that are determined at the time objects are weighed
or tare weight values that are determined prior to the time objects are
weighed. The Weighing Sector agreed the work group's proposal to amend
Paragraph S.1.1.1.(b) further clarifies that an auxiliary or
supplemental "center-of-zero\" indication is permitted with a load on
the scale provided tare material is zero-balanced off by the tare
mechanism and prescribes that the acceptable limits of accuracy are
within ± ¼ scale division for the resulting zero net indication. The
Weighing Sector recommends the adoption of the proposal as an important
step to promoting the development of specific language in Handbook 44
for specifications, test notes, and tolerances for different types of
tare (e.g., tare, preset tare, percentage tare, etc.).

SWMA supports the intent of the Weighing Sector\'s proposal, but agreed
that some modifications to the text were needed to clarify that the
center-of-zero indicator may be operable when a zero condition exists in
the net weight mode. SWMA recommends that its alternate proposal move
forward as a voting item to the NCWM S&T Committee\'s agenda.

####### 

####### 320-3 S.1.2.1. Weight Units and T.N.2.1. General

**Source:** National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC)
Weighing Sector

**Recommendation:** Add new note to Paragraph S.1.2.1. and amend
Paragraph T.N.2.1. as follows:

> ***S.1.2.1. Weight Units.** - Except for postal scales, a
> digital-indicating scale shall indicate weight values using only a
> single unit of measure. Weight values shall be presented in a decimal
> format with the value* *of the scale division expressed as 1, 2, or 5,
> or a decimal multiple or sub­multiple of 1, 2, or 5.*
>
> *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1989\]*
>
> **[Note: The requirements that the value of the scale division be
> expressed as 1, 2, or 5, or a decimal multiple or submultiples of 1,
> 2, or 5 does not apply to net weight values that are calculated from
> gross and tare weight indications where the scale value of the gross
> weight is different from the scale value of the tare weight(s) on
> multi-interval or multiple range scales. For example, a scale
> indicating in 2‑kg divisions in the lower range or segment and 5-kg
> divisions in the higher range or segment may result in net values
> ending in three (3) or eight (8) or a scale indicating in 20‑lb
> divisions in the lower range and 50‑lb divisions in the higher range
> or segment may result in net values in 30 or 80.]{.underline}**

\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1989\]

(Added 1987) **[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

> **T.N.2.1. General.** - The tolerance values are positive (+) and
> negative (-) with the weighing device adjusted to zero at no load.
> When tare is in use, the tolerance values are applied from the tare
> zero reference **[(zero net indication)]{.underline}**; the tolerance
> values apply to **[the net weight indication for every possible tare
> load using]{.underline}** certified test loads**~~only~~**.
>
> **[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

SWMA recommends the Committee also consider modifying Paragraph S.2.3.
as follows:

> **S.2.3. Tare.** - *On any scale (except a monorail scale equipped
> with digital indications), the value of the tare division shall be
> equal to the value of the scale division.\** The tare mechanism shall
> operate only in a backward direction (that is, in a direction of
> underregistration) with respect to the zero-load balance condition of
> the scale. *A device designed to automatically clear any tare value
> shall also be designed to prevent the automatic clearing of tare until
> a complete transaction has been indicated.\**
>
> *(Amended 1985)*
>
> *\[**Note**: On a computing scale, this requires the input of a unit
> price, the display of the unit price, and a computed positive total
> price at a readable equilibrium. Other devices require a complete
> weighing operation, including tare, net, and gross weight
> determination\]\**
>
> *\[\*Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1983\]*
>
> **[This requirement does not apply to multi-interval scales or
> multiple range scales when the value of tare is determined in a lower
> range.]{.underline}**

**[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

**Discussion:** In 2006, the NTETC Weighing Sector formed a Tare Work
Group to review existing tare requirements and make recommendations
about how tare is to operate on a single range scale, multiple range
scale, and multi-interval scale. The work group was also asked to
develop, where necessary, recommendations for changes to Publication 14,
Handbook 44, and Handbook 130, and to provide guidance to the Weighing
Sector on related type evaluation requirements.

This proposal, which was developed by the Tare Work Group and is
supported by the Weighing Sector, adds a new note to Paragraph S.1.2.1.
The note recognizes display and printing of net weight values in
divisions other than the scale division used in the display of gross
weight, resulting in a more accurate net weight determination.

The proposal also amends Paragraph T.N.2.1. to clarify that tolerances
also apply to net weight indications regardless of the gross load on the
scale. The Tare Work Group reviewed OIML R 76 \"Nonautomatic Weighing
Instruments\" for corresponding requirements and to determine if there
were areas where Handbook 44 could be aligned with international
recommendations. Based on that review, the work group agreed that
Handbook 44 Paragraph T.N.2.1. should be modified to state that
tolerances also apply to net load indications.

The Tare Work Group discussed problems associated with determining the
appropriate direction to round tare on multi-interval scales and
multiple range scales whenever gross and tare weights fall in different
weighing segments on a multi-interval scale or in different weighing
ranges on multiple range scales. In these cases, the scale division size
for the gross and tare weights differ; however, the net weight must be
in mathematical agreement with the gross and tare weights that are
indicated and recorded by the device (i.e., gross weight - tare weight =
net weight).

The problem arises when the tare weight is rounded up to the next larger
scale division where the net weight falls in the higher segment or
range. For example, a 0.004 lb tare weight in a weighing range or
segment with 0.002 lb intervals in the lower weighing range or segment
may round to zero when the net weight falls in the upper weighing range
with 0.01 lb intervals:

10.05 lb Gross Weight

[-- 0.004 lb Tare Weight]{.underline}

= 10.046 lb the Mathematically Correct Net Weight;

However, due to rounding the device indicates 10.05 lb Net Weight

This results in a transaction where a commodity is bought or sold on the
basis of gross weight or when an insufficient amount of tare weight is
taken and results in a misrepresentation of net weight for the
transaction. Essentially, the rounding of tare that falls in a smaller
division in either direction (e.g., a 0.015 lb tare weight rounded down
to zero or to 0.01 lb or up to 0.02 lb) provides a less accurate net
weight.

The Tare Work Group developed a corresponding proposal for the Automatic
Weighing Systems Code to clarify the appropriate scale division values
and the application of tolerances to tare weights for those devices (see
S&T Item 324‑1).

SWMA supports the recommendation; however, SWMA also agreed that an
additional note should be added to Paragraph S.2.3. Tare, as shown in
the recommendation above to eliminate any conflict with proposed changes
to Paragraph S.1.2.1. The new note proposed for Paragraph S.2.3.
clarifies that the requirement does not apply to multi-interval scales
or multiple range scales when tare is determined in the lower range of
those scales.

####### 320-4 S.1.4.6. Height and Definition of Minimum Reading Distance, UR.2.10. Primary Indicating Elements Provided by the User, UR.2.11. Minimum Reading Distance, and Definitions of Minimum Reading Distance and Primary Indications

**Source:** Carryover Item 320-2. (This item originated from the
National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC) Weighing Sector and
first appeared on the Committee's 2006 agenda.)

**Recommendation:** The Committee considered the Weighing Sector's first
attempt at a proposal that adds new Paragraphs S.1.4.6., UR.2.10., and
UR.2.11. to the Scales Code.

**S.1.4. Indicators.**

> ***[S.1.4.6. Height. - All primary indications shall be indicated
> clearly and simultaneously.]{.underline}***

(a) ***[On digital devices that display primary indications during
    direct sales to the customer, the numerical figures displayed to the
    customer shall be at least 9.5 mm (0.4 in) high.]{.underline}***

> ***[(b)]{.underline} [The units of mass and other descriptive markings
> or indications, such as lb, kg, gross, tare, net, etc., shall be
> clearly and easily read and shall be at least 2 mm (0.08 in)
> high.]{.underline}***
>
> ***[\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 200X\]]{.underline}***
>
> ***[(Added 200X)]{.underline}***

**[UR.2. Installation Requirements]{.underline}**

> **[UR.2.10. Primary Indicating Elements Provided by the User. --
> Primary indicating elements that are not the same as the primary
> indicating elements provided by the original equipment manufacturer
> (e.g., video display monitors) shall comply with the
> following:]{.underline}**

(a) **[On digital devices that display primary indications during direct
    sales to the customer, the numerical figures displayed to the
    customer shall be at least 9.5 mm (0.4 in) high.]{.underline}**

(b) **[The units of mass and other descriptive information, such as
    gross, tare, net, etc., shall be displayed or marked on the device
    and shall be at least 2 mm (0.08 in) high.]{.underline}**

> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> **[UR.2.11. Minimum Reading Distance -- On digital devices that
> display primary indications, the height of the numbers expressed in
> millimeters should be not less than 3 times the minimum reading
> distance expressed in meters, without being less than 2 mm (0.08 in).
> (Example: If the height of the primary indications is 10 mm, then the
> minimum reading distance should not be greater than
> 30 m).]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

Add new definitions of "minimum reading distance" and "primary
indications" to Appendix D as follows:

> **[minimum reading distance. The shortest distance that an observer is
> freely able to approach the indicating device to take a reading under
> normal conditions of use. This approach is considered to be free for
> the observer if there is a clear space of at least 0.8 m in front of
> the indicating device. However, if the minimum reading distance "S" in
> Figure X is less than 0.8 m, then the minimum reading distance is "L"
> in Figure X. \[2.20\]]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

![](media/image1.png)

> **[Figure X]{.underline}**
>
> **[primary indications. Weight or other units of measurement values
> that are displayed by a primary indicating element. The primary
> indications are used as the determining factor in arriving at the sale
> representation when the device is used commercially. (Examples of
> primary indications include the measurement value, unit price or
> count, and total price on instruments capable of price computing.
> Primary indications do not include indications from auxiliary
> indicating devices such as totalizing registers and pre-determined
> stop mechanisms.) \[1.10\], \[2.20\]]{.underline}**

**[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

This proposal was developed to address a growing problem with the
readability of weight indications and the values that define transaction
information. Field and laboratory officials indicate both are becoming
increasingly smaller, as demonstrated in the following example of a
weight display where the actual size of the weight values are 23 mm in
height, but the unit of measurement (g) is 4 mm in height.

![](media/image2.png)

Field and laboratory officials need more specific requirements to
consistently determine if indications are suitable for the environment
in which the device is used. Currently only the Taximeters, Grain
Moisture Meters, and Near-Infrared Grain Analyzers Codes include
requirements that specify the minimum height of figures, words, and
symbols. The size requirements for all three device technologies were
developed primarily because of concerns about the visibility of
indications from the customer's position. NIST Handbook 44 and NCWM
Publication 14 include no uniform size requirements or specific
guidelines on how to evaluate display information for clarity and
readability for equipment other than these three device types.

The Weighing Sector developed and voted on a proposal which provided
guidelines for determining whether or not indications are appropriate in
a particular installation. The Weighing Sector's proposal was aligned
with OIML R 76 requirements for visibility of indications to the
customer in direct sale applications, minimum height of lettering for
identification information, and the minimum height of numbers for analog
indicating devices.

In 1999 a similar proposal to amend General Code Paragraph G‑S.5.2.3.
Size and Character to include minimum height requirements was considered
but later withdrawn. GPMA expressed strong opposition to the 1999
proposal because many of the measuring devices were equipped with
quantity displays that would not meet the proposed 9.5 mm size
requirement. The Committee agreed at the time that officials need
uniform guidelines that are not ambiguous as to which transaction
information must meet size requirements. However, the Committee also
believed that any future proposals should address a specific device
technology since it is difficult to address all device configurations
and the environmental conditions that exist at each installation site.

The Weighing Sector balloted its members with expectations of only minor
changes to the proposal. The Weighing Sector received feedback that the
definition and illustration of a minimum reading distance were
confusing. SMA also opposed the proposal because it believed a reading
distance requirement is unenforceable.

The Committee also received comments from a consultant that the proposal
is unnecessary. General Code Paragraph G.S.5.1. Indicating and Recording
Elements can be applied in type approval and thus eliminates the need to
borrow any corresponding language from R 76 or add any language to
Handbook 44. Comments received suggest that the United States should
stick to performance-based requirements, noting that the proposal does
not adhere to that principal.

The Committee agreed that although the clarity and readability of
indications is a growing issue, the current proposal has only limited
support from the public and private sectors. The Committee recognized
the proposal requires a significant amount of work before the language
is clear, technically correct, and deemed applicable to the different
types of installations and technologies in current use. The Committee
has concerns about whether or not the proposed 2 mm height requirements
for units of measurement and other markings are adequate. The Committee
also questioned the clarity of the proposed user requirements for the
minimum reading distance. Therefore, the Committee asked the Weighing
Sector to continue its work to develop the proposal and possibly
consider two separate proposals--a design specification and a user
requirement--since the specification for the primary indication height
is nearer to completion. The Committee agreed the proposal should remain
an information item to allow the Weighing Sector sufficient time to
fully develop the language.

At its September 2006 meeting, WWMA agreed that a minimum height
requirement for values should be specified in design requirements and in
user requirements that apply throughout the life of the device,
especially when any modifications are made to the original equipment.
WWMA believes the proposed new user requirement and definition
pertaining to "minimum reading distance" are not clear and, therefore,
are not necessary because they are already addressed elsewhere in
Handbook 44. The requirements for ensuring values are adequate in size
in all possible installation sites are also addressed elsewhere in
General Code Paragraphs G‑UR.2.2. Installation of Indicating or
Recording Element and G-UR.3.3. Position of Equipment. Consequently,
WWMA modified the proposal by removing proposed new Paragraph UR.2.11.
and the definition of minimum reading distance and kept the Weighing
Sector\'s proposed requirements for the minimum height requirements and
the definition of primary indications recommending the modified proposal
move forward as a voting item to the NCWM S&T Committee agenda.

CWMA believes that the proposed new user requirement and definition
pertaining to "minimum reading distance" are already addressed in the
user requirements of the General Code (G-UR.2. Installation
Requirements). The requirement for ensuring that values are adequate in
size are also addressed in the same General Code section. Therefore,
CWMA agreed to the proposal of removing new Paragraphs UR.2.10. and
UR.2.11. from the proposal and recommended the amended language move
forward as a voting item.

During its 2006 meeting, the Weighing Sector reviewed taximeter
requirements for the minimum height of figures, words, and symbols for
comparison with the proposed Scales Code requirements. The public
members concluded the minimum height requirements for figures, words,
etc., (3.5 mm) were 35 % of those for fare indications (10 mm). The size
requirements in the current Scale\'s Code proposal represent a
relationship of 21 %. The Weighing Sector did not reach a consensus on
the most appropriate relationship for this displayed information. The
Weighing Sector agreed to consider an alternate proposal that specifies
the proposed size requirements for units of mass and other descriptive
markings or indications as 21 % of the height of primary indications
rather an exact length value. The Weighing Sector was not able to
discuss the user requirements or definitions because of time
constraints.

CWMA and NEWMA agreed that proposed new Paragraphs UR.2.10. and UR.2.11.
and the proposed new definition of \"minimum reading distance\" are not
needed and are addressed elsewhere in Handbook 44; they agreed the
proposed new Paragraph S.1.4.6. alone is sufficient. However, NEWMA
questions whether or not the 2 mm height minimum in Subparagraph (b) is
unrealistically small. One NEWMA member suggested that the minimum be
some fraction of the height of the primary indication but no smaller
than 4 mm or 5 mm. NEWMA has no specific recommendations but supports
this item as an information item until new language regarding the
minimum height can be agreed upon.

SWMA supports the Weighing Sector\'s recommendation in principle, but it
is not certain that 21 % is the correct relationship.

####### 320-5 S.2.1.7. Tare Rounding on a Multiple Range Scale

**Source:** Southern Weights and Measures Association (SWMA)

**Recommendation:** Add a new Paragraph S.2.1.7. to the Scales Code as
follows:

####### 

> **[S.2.1.7. Tare Rounding on a Multiple Range Scale. - A multiple
> range scale with tare capability must indicate and record values that
> satisfy the equation:]{.underline}**
>
> **[net = gross - tare]{.underline}**
>
> **[and round the tare value up to the larger division size when
> entering the larger division.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

**Discussion:** A recent reversal of a ten-year-old NTEP policy now
permits the operation of tare on multiple range scales to round down,
thus overstating the quantity. SWMA believes this Weighing Sector
decision to round tare down should be addressed by all members of NCWM.
The proposal was developed to eliminate any conflict in the operation of
the tare function on multiple range scales in the determination of a net
weight.

Currently, there may be a conflict between NIST Handbook 44 requirements
and NCWM Publication 14 policy for rounding tare values on multiple
range scales. NIST Handbook 44 General Code Paragraph G‑S.5.2.2.(c)
Digital Indication and Representation requires that digital values round
off to the nearest minimum unit that can be indicated or recorded. Also
in question is a possible conflict with NIST Handbook 130 guidelines
which specify that in no case shall rounded values result in overstating
the net quantity. NTEP is also revising its tare criteria through its
Tare Work Group to ensure there is no further conflict with NIST
Handbook 44.

At their fall 2006 meetings, the regional weights and measures
associations considered this SWMA proposal as part of ongoing work by
the Weighing Sector Tare Work Group when SWMA intended it to be a
separate proposal that addresses only tare rounding policies and
procedures for multiple range scales. WWMA believes the issue of tare
capability is complex and the proposal also needs to address the
suitability of the tare division size; prohibition of division sizes
other than 1, 2, and 5; the scale application (buying or selling); and
other issues that relate to tare. For these reasons, WWMA believes the
proposal should be thoroughly developed in the NTETC Weighing Sector
prior to forwarding it to the NCWM S&T Committee for action.
Consequently, WWMA recommended withdrawing the SWMA proposal. CWMA and
NEWMA opposed this proposal as presented and agreed to await further
input from the Weighing Sector Tare Work Group.

During its 2006 meeting, SWMA considered its proposal, designated in
2006 as a developing item, an urgent matter that no longer needs input
because the proposal is ready for national consideration. SWMA reports
that a majority of the Weighing Sector believes the criteria noted in
Publication 14 for use in type evaluation of devices with the tare
feature do not meet Handbook 44 requirements. SWMA agreed that the
decision to permit rounding keyboard tare down on multiple range scales
is facilitation of fraud. The customer and the operator observe that a
tare weight was entered in the lower range of a multiple range scale.
When the gross weight is in a higher weighing range, the customer is not
provided with "clear, definite, accurate" indications of the possible
reduction of tare.

SWMA recognizes that OIML permits rounding tare down, but believes that
customers are not able to make adjustments in unit prices to compensate
for losses when tare is rounded down, whereas businesses can adjust the
price to compensate for overhead expenses and losses that occur if tare
is rounded up.

SWMA provided discussion and examples to support its position as
follows:

*History*

The operation of "tare" on a weighing device was first addressed in
detail in 1971. In the 1971 Committee\'s Final Report (see NIST Special
Publication (SP) 358, Page 170), the rationale for adding
Paragraph S.2.3. Tare Mechanism to Handbook 44 was to ensure net weight
is represented for commodities sold directly over computing scales and
to recognize new developments in device technology. Tare capability and
its operation were again addressed in S&T Item 301‑3 Tare of the 1980
Committee\'s Final Report (see NIST SP 599 Page 216). The report noted
"a key factor is the requirements in Paragraphs G-S.2. Facilitation of
Fraud and G‑S.5.1. Indicating and Recording Elements, General specify
the indications to be clear, definite, accurate, and easily read by all
parties involved in the weighing operation."

SWMA notes that some believe that General Code Paragraphs G-S.5.2.2.
Digital Indication and Representation is intended to address the
rounding of tare to the nearest minimum unit when it was amended in
1973. However, the 1980 Committee\'s Final Report notes only General
Code Paragraphs G-S.2. and G-S.5.1. Furthermore, there is no evidence in
any of the Final Reports that the Committee agreed that the practice of
rounding tare up, which has been NTEP policy, is in conflict with
Handbook 44.

In 2006, the Weighing Sector technical advisor contacted two members of
the 1980 NCWM S&T Committee and determined that the focus of tare
discussions were on single range scales, rather than multi-interval
scales and multiple range scales, and followed rounding rules listed in
Handbook 44. Consequently, specific interpretations or proposals were
needed to determine how requirements apply to multi-interval and
multiple range devices.

SWMA provided an example to make its point that if no tare is taken, the
store has sold less than the quantity represented. Consider an example
where a store\'s deli is selling cheese for \$7/lb and the weight of the
roll of wrapping paper used in the deli is 40 lb. Sections of the wrap
used in individual transactions are not heavy enough to register on the
scale during a single transaction; however, if no tare is taken, the
store collects an extra \$280 (40 lb x \$7/lb). The store controls the
unit price for the commodity and selects the tare material and the
resolution for the scale that it uses. SWMA heard the argument that the
store is losing money if it is forced to round tare up. SWMA\'s response
to that argument is to remind everyone that businesses view such losses
as part of overhead expenses, which most typically compensate for by
making adjustments to their unit prices. The customer does not have the
ability to adjust or bargain on the unit price.

SWMA notes that the loss to the customer when tare is rounded down is
larger when scale error is on the plus side, even though the scale is
within accuracy tolerances. In this case, SWMA does not believe scale
error is a justification for selling less than the quantity represented.
For example, given a 30 lb x 0.01 lb scale:

The scale has an internal error of plus (+) 0.012 lb, which is displayed
as 0.01 lb, which is within maintenance tolerance. However,

> If the tare material used weighs 0.004 lb, there is an increased loss
> to the customer from 0.01 lb to 0.02 lb since (0.012 lb + 0.004 lb =
> 0.016 lb would be displayed as 0.02 lb on the scale)

*OIML*

Historically, weights and measures officials have been against rounding
tare down. But what should occur if you are rounding to the nearest
division? Is zero considered a division? SWMA acknowledges that zero is
a division. The OIML Secretariat of TC9/SC1 for Nonautomatic Weighing
Instruments R 76 noted in his response to the United States inquiry on
that same question was "of course, rounding the tare value to zero is
possible if it is less than 0.5 e~i~ (interval of the weighing segment)
of the actual range i (interval)." Multiple range scales meet R 76
rounding criteria when they round to zero. However, R 76
Section 4.13.3.2 Semi-automatic Tare Device specifies that an instrument
may be fitted with semi-automatic tare devices if the action of the tare
devices does not permit a reduction of the value of the tare.

SWMA notes that there is not consensus within the international weighing
and measuring community to allow tare to round down. A direct quote of
the Netherlands position on the latest draft of R 76 (in regard to
4.6.12.5 Multi-interval instrument with a preset tare device) was "In
principle the conclusion that with e = 2 g the value of 3 g can be
rounded to 2 g or 4 g is correct. However could we not agree in this
Recommendation that 1 g or 3 g always will be rounded up (because in the
case where e = 1 g, a tare value of 0.5 g is always rounded up)."

*Application of Tare Rounding Criteria*

On multi-interval scales tare is restricted to the smallest division,
thus eliminating the possibility of rounding tare below its actual
weight. For example, criteria for rounding tare on a multiple range
scale results in a tare value of 12 lb in Range 1, but when the net
weight causes the scale to switch to Range 2, the tare value would
become 10 lb.

The Tare Work Group considered the problems of tare rounding can be
demonstrated in another example that was considered by the Tare Work
Group which illustrates some of the losses that can occur to parties
involved in a transaction that is conducted on a multiple range scale
where different rules for rounding are applied:

Given a multiple range scale where,

Capacity of the first range = 60 lb; scale division of the first range =
0.01 lb

Capacity of the second range = 300 lb; scale division of the second
range = 0.1 lb

+-------+--------------------+--------------------+------------------+
|       | No Tare Rounding   | Tare Rounded Down  | Tare Rounded Up  |
|       |                    |                    |                  |
|       | in the 2^nd^ Range | to Nearest         | to Nearest       |
|       |                    | Division           | Division         |
|       |                    |                    |                  |
|       |                    | in the 2^nd^ Range | in the 2^nd^     |
|       |                    |                    | Range            |
+-------+--------------------+--------------------+------------------+
| Gross | 266.2 lb (falls in | 266.2 lb (falls in | 266.2 lb (falls  |
|       | 2^nd^ range)       | 2^nd^ range)       | in 2^nd^ range)  |
+-------+--------------------+--------------------+------------------+
| Tare  | 53.44 lb (falls in | 53.4 lb (falls in  | 53.5 lb (falls   |
|       | 1^st^ range)       | 2^nd^ range)\*     | in 2^nd^ range)  |
+-------+--------------------+--------------------+------------------+
| Net   | 212.76 lb (actual  | 212.8 lb           | 212.7 lb         |
|       | weight)            |                    |                  |
+-------+--------------------+--------------------+------------------+
| Loss  | 0.0 lb             | 0.04 lb (consumer  | 0.06 lb          |
|       |                    | \'s loss)          | (store\'s loss)  |
+-------+--------------------+--------------------+------------------+

A multiple range scale is viewed as two separate scales even though it
has two or more weighing ranges with different maximum capacities and
different scale intervals, each extending from zero to its maximum
capacity all on the same load receptor. A multiple range scale is
basically multiple scales in one housing. Current practices do not allow
rounding of tare to zero with completely separate scales when the
results of weighments on both scales are used to determine the gross,
net, and tare weight. Indicators totalizing multiple weighing elements
are required to calculate the total weight based on the smallest scale
division to eliminate problems with inaccurate net weights.

*Conclusion*

SWMA agreed that if the real issue is protecting both the retailer and
the consumer perhaps what should be looked at is: (1) the suitability of
the scale division based on unit price and/or application, (2) limiting
the multiple of the scale division difference between the weighing
ranges, (3) reducing the allowable tolerance, and (4) limiting the
initial determination of the tare, gross, and net to the same weighing
range.

SWMA believes all multiple range scales currently evaluated by NTEP
should not round tare down when changing to a higher scale division. For
over ten years, the NTEP checklist test criteria for multiple range and
multi-interval devices in NCWM Publication 14 has always been that tare
will round up to the nearest scale division.

####### 320-6 N.1.3.1. Bench or Counter Scales, N.1.3.8. All Other Scales Except Crane Scales, Hanging Scales, Hopper Scales, Wheel--Load Weighers, and Portable Axle‑Load Weighers, and Appendix D; Definitions of Bench Scale and Counter Scale

**Source:** Carryover Item 320-3. (This item originated from the
National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC) Weighing Sector and
first appeared on the Committee's 2005 agenda.)

**Recommendation:** Delete Paragraph N.1.3.1. and renumber subsequent
paragraphs.

> **N.1.3. Shift Test.**
>
> **~~N.1.3.1. Bench or Counter Scales. -- A shift test shall be
> conducted with a half-capacity test load centered successively at four
> points equidistant between the center and the front, left, back, and
> right edges of the load-receiving element.~~**

Renumber and amend Paragraph N.1.3.8. as follows:

> **N.1.3.~~8~~[7]{.underline}. All Other Scales Except Crane Scales,
> Hanging Scales, Hopper Scales, Wheel-Load Weighers, and Portable
> Axle‑Load Weighers.** A shift test shall be conducted using the
> following prescribed test loads and test patterns. **[A single field
> standard weight used as the prescribed test load shall be applied
> centrally in the prescribed test pattern. When multiple field standard
> weights are used as the prescribed test load, the load shall be
> applied in a consistent pattern in the shift test positions throughout
> the test and applied in a manner that does not concentrate the load in
> a test pattern that is less than when that same load is a single field
> standard weight on the load-receiving element.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(a)]{.underline} [For scales with a nominal capacity greater than
> 500 kg (1000 lb), a shift test may be conducted by either using a
> one‑third nominal capacity test load (defined as test weights in
> amounts of at least 30 % of scale capacity, but not to exceed 35 % of
> scale capacity) centered as nearly as possible at the center of each
> quadrant of the load‑receiving element using the prescribed test
> pattern as shown in Figure 1 below, or by using a one‑quarter nominal
> capacity test load centered as nearly as possible, successively, over
> each corner of the load‑receiving element using the prescribed test
> pattern as shown in Figure 2 below.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(b)]{.underline} [For scales with a nominal capacity of 500 kg
> (1000 lb) or less, a shift test shall be conducted using a one‑third
> nominal capacity test load (defined as test weights in amounts of at
> least 30 % of scale capacity, but not to exceed 35 % of scale
> capacity) centered as nearly as possible at the center of each
> quadrant of the load-receiving element using the prescribed test
> pattern as shown in Figure 1 below.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(c)]{.underline}** For livestock scales, **~~the~~[a]{.underline}**
> shift test **~~load~~**shall **[be conducted using either a test load
> of one half nominal capacity provided that the test load
> does]{.underline}** not exceed one-half the rated section capacity or
> one-half the rated concentrated load capacity, whichever is
> applicable**~~. A shift test shall be conducted using either:~~**
> **[The test load shall be centered as nearly as possible at the center
> of each quadrant of the load‑receiving element using the prescribed
> test pattern as shown in Figure 1 below, or one-quarter the rated
> section capacity or one-quarter the rated concentrated load capacity
> load centered as nearly as possible, successively over each corner of
> the load-receiving element using the prescribed test pattern as shown
> in Figure 2 below.]{.underline}**
>
> **~~(a)~~ ~~A one-quarter nominal capacity test load centered as
> nearly as possible, successively over eachmain load support as shown
> in the diagram below; or~~**
>
> **~~(b)~~ ~~A one-half nominal capacity test load centered as nearly
> as possible, successively at the center of each quarter of the
> load-receiving element as shown in the diagram below.~~**
>
> (Amended 1987**[,]{.underline}~~and~~** 2003**[, and
> 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> Delete the diagrams that correspond to existing Paragraphs N.1.3.8.(a)
> and (b) and add new Figures 1 and 2 to correspond with proposed
> revisions to N.1.3.8. as follows:
>
> (Added 2003)

**[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

Delete Appendix D definitions for "bench scale" and "counter scale" as
follows:

**~~bench scale. See \"counter scale.\"\[2.20\]~~**

> **~~counter scale. One that, by reason of its size, arrangement of
> parts, and moderate nominal capacity, is adapted for use on a counter
> or bench. Sometimes called \"bench scale.\"\[2.20\]~~**

**Discussion:** The proposal is intended to clarify the appropriate
shift test pattern and test loads for scales currently designated as
bench/counter scales and other platform-type scales. Currently, bench
and counter scale shift tests are conducted with a one-half capacity
test load centered successively at four points equidistant between the
center and the front, left, back, and right edges of the load-receiving
element. Other platform scale shift tests are conducted with a one-half
capacity test load centered, as nearly as possible, successively at the
center of each quadrant. The proposal eliminates references to bench and
counter scales and instead prescribes that the shift test load and test
pattern used for those and all scales other than livestock be based on
the scale's nominal capacity. For livestock scales the proposal further
clarifies, but does not change, the existing requirements for shift
tests.

In 2005, the proposal was kept on the agenda as an information item in
response to comments indicating that data should be collected on shift
tests to verify that the proposed test loads and positions are
equivalent to existing test patterns and allow the data to be reviewed
by the Weighing Sector, NIST, and the NTEP laboratories.

During the 2006 NCWM Interim Meeting, the Committee received data for
shift tests conducted using current shift test requirements and shift
tests conducted using the proposed test requirements on the same scales.
The NIST technical advisor to the Weighing Sector provided a summary of
data gathered by multiple jurisdictions on 207 scales demonstrating that
the proposed procedures (i.e., shift test loading pattern and the amount
of test weights) based on scale capacity are adequate for use to
determine that an instrument with load points of any design
configuration can meet performance tolerances during off-center loading.
There was no demonstrated difference in scale performance based on the
location of the scale, thus the terms "bench" and "counter" should be
eliminated. In response to that data, comments were received from the
public and private sectors in support of the proposal. SMA also
supported the proposal.

NIST WMD supported the intent of the proposal with two changes to
clarify what is meant by one-third nominal capacity and the proper
placement of test weights to avoid overloading load bearing points. WMD
recommended language that specifies the test load at one-third capacity
shall not be less than 30 % or greater than 35 % of scale capacity. WMD
also noted inconsistencies in the manner in which weights are
distributed within the test pattern during shift tests; therefore, it
also recommended including language in renumbered Paragraph N.1.3.7.
that specifies "when multiple test weights are used, the load shall not
be concentrated in a test pattern smaller than that which a single
weight would occupy."

Consequently, the Committee modified the entire proposal, Parts (a)
through (c), to include language that is technically correct and
consistent in its description of how to conduct a shift test on all
types of scales. The Committee modified the language to: (1) clarify
what defines "acceptable" weight values for a test load that is
one-third of the scale's nominal capacity, (2) ensure uniform procedures
are followed when applying test weights on the load-receiving element,
and (3) eliminate instances where test weights are concentrated in a
pattern that overload the load bearing points as illustrated in the
example below.

Consider an example of a livestock scale with a section capacity of
1000 lb: a shift test is performed as shown in Figure 1 using a test
load of 500 lb. While 100 lb test weights are not commonly used or
available, they are used in this example to illustrate the concept of
uniformity when applying a test load in a specified pattern on the
load-receiving element.

**Figure 1: Application of Test Weights**

The Committee agreed there was sufficient data to present the proposal
for a vote at the July 2006 NCWM Annual Meeting since it received no
data indicating there were problems with the proposed shift test
procedures.

At the 2006 NCWM Annual Meeting, the Committee addressed concerns about
the lack of a guideline for a minimum test load and the extensive nature
of modifications to livestock scale requirements. The Committee
explained that it had only reorganized the livestock scale requirements.
The Committee further modified proposed new Paragraph (c) to specify a
minimum shift test load of one-half nominal capacity to ensure
sufficient test weights are used during the test. Industry acknowledged
that although the shift test loads for other scale types was reduced
from one-half to one-third, the rated nominal capacity specified in the
newly proposed test load patterns for the lighter test load could
sometimes create a more stringent test of the scale\'s performance.

The Committee heard concerns that substantive changes were made to
livestock scale requirements and it should revisit earlier proposed
language. The vote on the item did not yield a sufficient number of
positive or negative votes for the item to be accepted or defeated and,
therefore, the proposal was returned to the Committee for further
action. The Committee asks jurisdictions to carefully review the
consistency that exists between the proposed language and current
Handbook 44 requirements for livestock scales and to provide input on
alternate language that might be more appropriate and/or further clarify
the shift tests and test loads for these devices.

The WWMA S&T Committee had the opportunity to review an alternate
proposal that was to be presented to the NTETC Weighing Sector in
September 2006. The WWMA S&T Committee liked the direction of the
Weighing Sector alternate proposal, which clarifies shift tests
procedures in livestock scale applications, addresses shift test
patterns for circular platforms, and eliminates some of the redundant
text. Since the Weighing Sector members would not have the opportunity
to review and agree on the alternate language until after the WWMA
conference, WWMA recommended the proposal as an information item.

CWMA supports the proposal, but recommends an alternate proposal to
modify and renumber Paragraph N.1.3.8.(b) to read as follows:

> **N.1.3.~~8~~[7]{.underline}. All Other Scales Except Crane Scales,
> Hanging Scales, Hopper Scales, Wheel-Load Weighers, and Portable
> Axle‑Load Weighers.**
>
> **[(b) For scales with a nominal capacity of 500 kg (1000 lb) or less,
> a shift test shall be conducted using up to 50 % nominal capacity test
> load (defined as test weights in amounts of at least 30 % of scale
> capacity, but not to exceed 50 % of scale capacity) centered as nearly
> as possible at the center of each quadrant of the load-receiving
> element using the prescribed test pattern as shown in Figure 1
> below.]{.underline}**

CWMA developed this alternate recommendation for modifying and
renumbering Paragraph N.1.3.8.(b) that is intended to allow
jurisdictions more flexibility in using their existing weights.

Based on the comments received during the 2006 NCWM Annual Meeting, the
NIST technical advisor to the Weighing Sector amended the proposal as
summarized below to:

\(1\) Make it clear that no significant changes are being made to
two-section livestock scales;

\(2\) Simplify the language for the shift test on "Other" scales;

\(3\) Group the livestock scale shift test requirements together;

\(4\) Change the order of the "test notes" so that the more common type
of scales are listed first; and

\(5\) Include minor editorial suggestions on existing language.

The Weighing Sector considered this alternate proposal along with a
comment solicited from the PTB and one industry consultant indicating
there is a higher risk of overloading one of the (multiple) supports by
using a one-half capacity load in an eccentric loading test pattern than
by using a one-third capacity load. This appears to stem from the
difference in test method between Handbook 44 and OIML R 76. In other
words, Handbook 44 more or less assumes a rectangular platform and
places the load at a point on a line halfway from the center to the edge
as illustrated in Figure 1.

OIML R 76 recognizes that platforms exist in other shapes (e.g., square,
triangular, or circular platforms) as illustrated in Figure 2.

Thus, since OIML R 76 depends more on placing the eccentric load in a
prescribed section of the total area of the platform rather than on a
specific line, they more or less trust the load will be placed at the
center of the quadrant according to the figures illustrated in OIML R 76
for scales with four or fewer supports. The end result of both methods,
especially for rectangular platforms, is more or less the same.

During the subsequent discussions, several Weighing Sector members
stated that the proposed language was unnecessary since there was no
technical justification to change the current language in Handbook 44.
Additionally, the proposed language would prohibit weights and measures
officials from using one-half capacity even though the scale could be
weighing loads up to one-half scale capacity that are not in the center
of the platform. In contrast, the NIST technical advisor stated that
there was no technical reason to use procedures different than those in
R 76. (Note: Manufacturers have stated in past discussions that they
have to adjust the scales differently for scales intended for North
America and scales intended for countries that adopt OIML
recommendations.)

Another industry consultant cited text from the 1915 edition of the
precursor to Handbook 44 (see Section 10 for Counter Balances and Scales
page 19), noting that the shift test loads and positions have not
changed in 91 years.

Measurement Canada reported that the proposal to amend Handbook 44 would
be in conflict with their current requirements, however, in the past
they have indicated a commitment to align their requirements with OIML
R 76.

One scale manufacturer reminded the Sector that the test load positions
were also changed in the proposal and that the proposed change to
one-third scale capacity puts a different torque on the load cell that
is roughly equivalent to current forces when using current Handbook 44
test loads and positions.

Based on a vote of 11 in favor and 8 against withdrawing the proposal to
amend current Handbook 44 shift test procedures and shift test loads,
the Weighing Sector agreed to withdraw their support for the proposal
and recommends that the proposal be withdrawn from the Committee\'s
agenda.

NEWMA supports the proposal.

SWMA recommends withdrawing this proposal from the S&T Agenda, but
provided no rationale for this position.

For more background information, refer to the Committee\'s 2005 and 2006
Final Reports.

####### 320-7 N.1.3.6.1. Dynamic Monorail Weighing Systems

**Source:** Central Weights and Measures Association (CWMA)

**Recommendation:** Modify Paragraph N.1.3.6.1. as follows:

> **N.1.3.6.1. Dynamic Monorail Weighing Systems.** - Dynamic tests with
> livestock carcasses should be conducted **[during normal plant
> production]{.underline}** **~~to duplicate actual use conditions~~**.
> No less than 20 test loads using carcasses or portions of carcasses of
> the type normally weighed should be used in the dynamic test**~~; two
> additional test loads may be included in the test run for use in the
> event that one or two test loads are rendered unusable during the
> dynamic test. Prior to starting the dynamic test, the test carcasses
> must be positioned far enough ahead of the scale so that their swaying
> motion settles to duplicate the normal sway of a continuously running
> plant chain~~**. If the plant conveyer chain does not space or prevent
> the carcasses from touching one another, dynamic tests should not be
> conducted until this condition has been corrected.

All carcasses shall be individually weighed statically on either the
same scale being tested dynamically or another monorail scale with the
same or smaller divisions and in close proximity. (The scale selected
for weighing the carcasses shall first be tested statically with test
weights.)

> If the scale being tested is used for weighing freshly slaughtered
> animals, (often referred to as a \"hot scale\") care must be taken to
> get a static weighment as quickly as possible before or following the
> dynamic weighment to avoid loss due to shrink. If multiple dynamic
> tests are conducted using the same carcasses, static weights should be
> obtained before and after multiple dynamic tests. If the carcass
> changes weight between static tests, the amount of weight change
> should be taken into account, or the carcass should be disregarded for
> tolerance purposes.
>
> (**Note:** For a dynamic monorail test, the reference scale shall
> comply with the principles in the Fundamental Considerations
> Paragraph 3.2. Tolerances for Standards.)
>
> (Added 1996) (Amended 1999 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

SWMA recommends an alternate proposal that further modifies
Paragraph N.1.3.6.1. to specify test conditions for the scale selected
to weigh the carcasses as follows:

> **N.1.3.6.1. Dynamic Monorail Weighing Systems.** - Dynamic tests with
> livestock carcasses should be conducted **[during normal plant
> production]{.underline}** **~~to duplicate actual use conditions~~**.
> No less than 20 test loads using carcasses or portions of carcasses of
> the type normally weighed should be used in the dynamic test**~~; two
> additional test loads may be included in the test run for use in the
> event that one or two test loads are rendered unusable during the
> dynamic test. Prior to starting the dynamic test, the test carcasses
> must be positioned far enough ahead of the scale so that their swaying
> motion settles to duplicate the normal sway of a continuously running
> plant chain~~**. If the plant conveyer chain does not space or prevent
> the carcasses from touching one another, dynamic tests should not be
> conducted until this condition has been corrected.

All carcasses shall be individually weighed statically on either the
same scale being tested dynamically or another monorail scale with the
same or smaller divisions and in close proximity. (The scale selected
for static weighing of the carcasses shall first be tested statically
with certified test weights that have been properly protected from the
harsh environment of the packing plant to ensure they maintain
accuracy.)

> If the scale being tested is used for weighing freshly slaughtered
> animals, (often referred to as a \"hot scale\") care must be taken to
> get a static weighment as quickly as possible before or following the
> dynamic weighment to avoid loss due to shrink. If multiple dynamic
> tests are conducted using the same carcasses, static weights should be
> obtained before and after multiple dynamic tests. If the carcass
> changes weight between static tests, the amount of weight change
> should be taken into account, or the carcass should be disregarded for
> tolerance purposes.
>
> (**Note:** For a dynamic monorail test, the reference scale shall
> comply with the principles in the Fundamental Considerations
> Paragraph 3.2. Tolerances for Standards.)
>
> (Added 1996) (Amended 1999 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

**Discussion:** CWMA supports this item and recommends that it move
forward for national consideration. CWMA heard testimony from the USDA
Packers and Stockyards Administration indicating the proposal clarifies
that the device should be tested while in production and the extra two
carcasses referenced in the current language are only for replacement
purposes in cases where carcass weight loss occurs as a result of
influences other than from the device being tested. The extra carcasses
were not intended to replace erroneous or outlying device readings.

####### 

SWMA supports the proposal, but recommends further modifications to
Paragraph N.1.3.6.1. to specify the test conditions for the static test
of the reference scale.

####### 320-8 Table 4. Minimum Test Weights and Test Loads

**Source:** Carryover Item 320-4. (This item originated from the
Northeastern Weights and Measures Association (NEWMA) and first appeared
on the Committee's 2006 agenda.)

**Recommendation:** Modify Table 4. Minimum Test Weights and Test Loads
as follows:

+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| **Table 4.**  |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| **Minimum     |                    |       |                        |
| Test Weights  |                    |       |                        |
| and Test      |                    |       |                        |
| Loads^1^**    |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| **Device      | **Minimums (in     |       | **(where               |
| capacity**    | terms of device    |       | practicable)**         |
|               | capacity)**        |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
|               | **Test weights     | *     |                        |
|               | (greater of)**     | *Test |                        |
|               |                    | loads |                        |
|               |                    | ^2^** |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 0 to 150 kg   | 100 %              |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| (0 to 300 lb) |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 151 to 1      | 25 % or 150 kg     | 75 %  | Test weights to dial   |
| 500 kg        | (300 lb)           |       | face capacity,         |
|               |                    |       | 1 000 d, or test load  |
| (301 to 3     |                    |       | to used capacity, if   |
| 000 lb)       |                    |       | greater than minimums  |
|               |                    |       | specified              |
|               |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       | During initial         |
|               |                    |       | verification a scale   |
|               |                    |       | should be tested to    |
|               |                    |       | capacity               |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 1 501 to      | 12.5 % or 500 kg   | 50 %  |                        |
| 20 000 kg     | (1 000 lb)         |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| (3 001 to     |                    |       |                        |
| 40 000 lb)    |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 2             | 12.5 % or 5 000 kg | 25    |                        |
| 0 001 kg~~+~~ | (10 000 lb)        | %^3^  |                        |
| **[to         |                    |       |                        |
| 250 000 kg]{  |                    |       |                        |
| .underline}** |                    |       |                        |
| (40 001       |                    |       |                        |
| lb~~+~~ **[to |                    |       |                        |
| 500 000 lb)]{ |                    |       |                        |
| .underline}** |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| **[250 001    | 12.5 % or 30 000   | **[25 |                        |
| kg+           | kg (62 500 lb)     | %^3^  |                        |
| (5            |                    | ]{.un |                        |
| 00 001 lb+)]{ |                    | derli |                        |
| .underline}** |                    | ne}** |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| ^1^ If the    |                    |       |                        |
| amount of     |                    |       |                        |
| test weight   |                    |       |                        |
| in Table 4    |                    |       |                        |
| combined with |                    |       |                        |
| the load on   |                    |       |                        |
| the scale     |                    |       |                        |
| would result  |                    |       |                        |
| in an unsafe  |                    |       |                        |
| condition,    |                    |       |                        |
| then the      |                    |       |                        |
| appropriate   |                    |       |                        |
| load will be  |                    |       |                        |
| determined by |                    |       |                        |
| the official  |                    |       |                        |
| with          |                    |       |                        |
| statutory     |                    |       |                        |
| authority.    |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| ^2^ The term  |                    |       |                        |
| \"test load\" |                    |       |                        |
| means the sum |                    |       |                        |
| of the        |                    |       |                        |
| combination   |                    |       |                        |
| of field      |                    |       |                        |
| standard test |                    |       |                        |
| weights and   |                    |       |                        |
| any other     |                    |       |                        |
| applied load  |                    |       |                        |
| used in the   |                    |       |                        |
| conduct of a  |                    |       |                        |
| test using    |                    |       |                        |
| substitution  |                    |       |                        |
| test methods. |                    |       |                        |
| Not more than |                    |       |                        |
| three         |                    |       |                        |
| substitutions |                    |       |                        |
| shall be used |                    |       |                        |
| during        |                    |       |                        |
| substitution  |                    |       |                        |
| testing,      |                    |       |                        |
| after which   |                    |       |                        |
| the           |                    |       |                        |
| tolerances    |                    |       |                        |
| for strain    |                    |       |                        |
| load tests    |                    |       |                        |
| shall be      |                    |       |                        |
| applied to    |                    |       |                        |
| each set of   |                    |       |                        |
| test loads    |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| ^3^ The scale |                    |       |                        |
| shall be      |                    |       |                        |
| tested from   |                    |       |                        |
| zero to at    |                    |       |                        |
| least 12.5 %  |                    |       |                        |
| of scale      |                    |       |                        |
| capacity      |                    |       |                        |
| using known   |                    |       |                        |
| test weights, |                    |       |                        |
| and then to   |                    |       |                        |
| at least 25 % |                    |       |                        |
| of scale      |                    |       |                        |
| capacity      |                    |       |                        |
| using either  |                    |       |                        |
| a             |                    |       |                        |
| substitution  |                    |       |                        |
| or strain     |                    |       |                        |
| load test     |                    |       |                        |
| that utilizes |                    |       |                        |
| known test    |                    |       |                        |
| weights of at |                    |       |                        |
| least 12.5 %  |                    |       |                        |
| of scale      |                    |       |                        |
| capacity.     |                    |       |                        |
| Whenever      |                    |       |                        |
| practical, a  |                    |       |                        |
| strain load   |                    |       |                        |
| test should   |                    |       |                        |
| be conducted  |                    |       |                        |
| to the used   |                    |       |                        |
| capacity of   |                    |       |                        |
| the scale.    |                    |       |                        |
| When a strain |                    |       |                        |
| load test is  |                    |       |                        |
| conducted,    |                    |       |                        |
| the           |                    |       |                        |
| tolerances    |                    |       |                        |
| apply only to |                    |       |                        |
| the test      |                    |       |                        |
| weights or    |                    |       |                        |
| substitution  |                    |       |                        |
| test loads.   |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| (Amended      |                    |       |                        |
| 1988, 1989,   |                    |       |                        |
| 1994, **and** |                    |       |                        |
| 2003)         |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| \[**Note:**   |                    |       |                        |
| GIPSA         |                    |       |                        |
| requires      |                    |       |                        |
| devices       |                    |       |                        |
| subject to    |                    |       |                        |
| their         |                    |       |                        |
| inspection to |                    |       |                        |
| be tested to  |                    |       |                        |
| at least      |                    |       |                        |
| "used         |                    |       |                        |
| capacity,"    |                    |       |                        |
| which is      |                    |       |                        |
| calculated    |                    |       |                        |
| based on the  |                    |       |                        |
| platform area |                    |       |                        |
| of the scale  |                    |       |                        |
| and a weight  |                    |       |                        |
| factor        |                    |       |                        |
| assigned to   |                    |       |                        |
| the species   |                    |       |                        |
| of animal     |                    |       |                        |
| weighed on    |                    |       |                        |
| the scale.    |                    |       |                        |
| "Used         |                    |       |                        |
| capacity" is  |                    |       |                        |
| calculated    |                    |       |                        |
| using the     |                    |       |                        |
| formula:      |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| > Used Scale  |                    |       |                        |
| > Capacity =  |                    |       |                        |
| > Scale       |                    |       |                        |
| > Platform    |                    |       |                        |
| > Area x      |                    |       |                        |
| > Species     |                    |       |                        |
| > Weight      |                    |       |                        |
| > Factor      |                    |       |                        |
| >             |                    |       |                        |
| > Where       |                    |       |                        |
| > species     |                    |       |                        |
| > weight      |                    |       |                        |
| > factor =    |                    |       |                        |
| > 540 kg/m^2^ |                    |       |                        |
| > (           |                    |       |                        |
| 110 lb/ft^2^) |                    |       |                        |
| > for cattle, |                    |       |                        |
| > 340 kg/m^2^ |                    |       |                        |
| >             |                    |       |                        |
| (70 lb/ft^2^) |                    |       |                        |
| > for calves  |                    |       |                        |
| > and hogs,   |                    |       |                        |
| > and         |                    |       |                        |
| > 240 kg/m^2^ |                    |       |                        |
| > (50 lb/     |                    |       |                        |
| > ft^2^) for  |                    |       |                        |
| > sheep and   |                    |       |                        |
| > lambs\]     |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+

**[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

**Discussion:** Field officials are faced with determining the minimum
test load necessary to verify the performance of scales with nominal
capacities that exceed 1 000 000 lb. Since January 2006, the Committee
has considered several proposed modifications to Table 4., which
included listing the minimum and maximum test weights and test loads for
devices with capacities that exceed 500 001 lb. However, this action has
not resulted in any new guidelines beyond the existing minimum test load
requirements in Table 4.

The Committee further acknowledged that officials might have difficulty
placing the recommended minimum 25 % test load on some load-receiving
elements such as railway track scales with two small platforms with a
dead space between them because this configuration limits the size of
each platform. Consequently, the Committee agreed that until the
submitter develops alternate language and data to justify specific
minimum load requirements that warrant a change to existing Handbook 44
requirements, the proposal should remain an information item.

WWMA discussed the proposal and heard one comment that recommended the
proposal specify only 62 500 lb of minimum test weights in the proposed
new device capacity range that exceeds 500 001 lb. WWMA believes that
the carryover proposal does not change the requirements in Table 4.,
even though the proposed text specifies the amount of test weights for
scale capacities that exceed 500 000 lb. WWMA also believes that data
may be needed to demonstrate what is an adequate amount of test weight
for scales with capacities that exceed 500 000 lb. Consequently, WWMA
recommends that the proposal should be withdrawn.

CWMA recommends that this proposal be withdrawn.

NEWMA recommends that NIST Handbook 44 provide flexible guidelines for
determining the minimum acceptable test load when testing high capacity
scales. At its October 2006 meeting, NEWMA developed an alternate
proposal which modifies Table 4. to address devices with a capacity up
to 500 000 lb and to allow some flexibility by eliminating the last
column where there are conditions that dictate, when it is practical,
the use of a specified amount of test weight.

NEWMA recommends Table 4. be modified as follows:

+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| **Table 4.**  |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| **Minimum     |                    |       |                        |
| Test Weights  |                    |       |                        |
| and Test      |                    |       |                        |
| Loads^1^**    |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| **Device      | **Minimums (in     |       | **~~(where             |
| capacity**    | terms of device    |       | practicable)~~**       |
|               | capacity)**        |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
|               | **Test weights     | *     |                        |
|               | (greater of)**     | *Test |                        |
|               |                    | loads |                        |
|               |                    | ^2^** |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 0 to 150 kg   | 100 %              |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| (0 to 300 lb) |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 151 to 1      | 25 % or 150 kg     | 75 %  | **~~Test weights to    |
| 500 kg        | (300 lb)           |       | dial face ca­paci­ty,    |
|               |                    |       | 1 000 d, or test load  |
| (301 to 3     |                    |       | to used capacity, if   |
| 000 lb)       |                    |       | great­er than mini­mums  |
|               |                    |       | specified~~**          |
|               |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       | **~~During initial     |
|               |                    |       | verification, a scale  |
|               |                    |       | should be tested to    |
|               |                    |       | capacity~~**           |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 1 501 to      | 12.5 % or 500 kg   | 50 %  |                        |
| 20 000 kg     | (1 000 lb)         |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| (3 001 to     |                    |       |                        |
| 40 000 lb)    |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| 2             | 12.5 % or 5 000 kg | 25    |                        |
| 0 001 kg~~+~~ | (10 000 lb)        | %^3^  |                        |
| **[to         |                    |       |                        |
| 250 000 kg]{  |                    |       |                        |
| .underline}** |                    |       |                        |
| (40 001       |                    |       |                        |
| lb~~+~~ **[to |                    |       |                        |
| 500 000 lb)]{ |                    |       |                        |
| .underline}** |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| **[250 001 kg | 12.5 % or 30 000   | **[25 |                        |
| (             | kg (62 500 lb)     | %^3^  |                        |
| 500 001 lb)]{ |                    | ]{.un |                        |
| .underline}** |                    | derli |                        |
|               |                    | ne}** |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+
| ^1^ If the    |                    |       |                        |
| amount of     |                    |       |                        |
| test weight   |                    |       |                        |
| in Table 4    |                    |       |                        |
| combined with |                    |       |                        |
| the load on   |                    |       |                        |
| the scale     |                    |       |                        |
| would result  |                    |       |                        |
| in an unsafe  |                    |       |                        |
| condition,    |                    |       |                        |
| then the      |                    |       |                        |
| appropriate   |                    |       |                        |
| load will be  |                    |       |                        |
| determined by |                    |       |                        |
| the official  |                    |       |                        |
| with          |                    |       |                        |
| statutory     |                    |       |                        |
| authority.    |                    |       |                        |
|               |                    |       |                        |
| > .           |                    |       |                        |
| >             |                    |       |                        |
| > .           |                    |       |                        |
| >             |                    |       |                        |
| > .           |                    |       |                        |
| >             |                    |       |                        |
| > Where       |                    |       |                        |
| > species     |                    |       |                        |
| > weight      |                    |       |                        |
| > factor =    |                    |       |                        |
| > 540 kg/m^2^ |                    |       |                        |
| > (           |                    |       |                        |
| 110 lb/ft^2^) |                    |       |                        |
| > for cattle, |                    |       |                        |
| > 340 kg/m^2^ |                    |       |                        |
| >             |                    |       |                        |
| (70 lb/ft^2^) |                    |       |                        |
| > for calves  |                    |       |                        |
| > and hogs,   |                    |       |                        |
| > and         |                    |       |                        |
| > 240 kg/m^2^ |                    |       |                        |
| > (50 lb/     |                    |       |                        |
| > ft^2^) for  |                    |       |                        |
| > sheep and   |                    |       |                        |
| > lambs\]     |                    |       |                        |
+---------------+--------------------+-------+------------------------+

####### 320-9 Appendix D; Definitions for Tare Mechanism, Gross Weight Value, Net Weight, Net Weight Value, Tare, and Tare Weight Value

**Source:** National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC)
Weighing Sector

**Recommendation:** Modify the definition for "tare mechanism" and add
new definitions for "gross weight value," "net weight," "net weight
value," "tare," and "tare weight value" to Appendix D.

Amend the following definition for "tare mechanism:"

> tare mechanism. A mechanism (including a tare bar) designed for
> determining or balancing out the weight of packaging material,
> containers, vehicles, or other materials that are not intended to be
> included in net weight determinations **[and setting the indication to
> zero when the tare object is on the load-receiving
> element:]{.underline}**

1.  **[by reducing the weighing range for net loads \[e.g., subtractive
    tare where 15 kg Gross Weight -- 5 kg Tare Weight = 10 kg maximum
    Net weight)\], or]{.underline}**

2.  **[without altering the weighing range for net load on mechanical
    scales \[additive tare mechanism (e.g., tare bar on a mechanical
    scale with a beam indicator)\].]{.underline}**

> **[The tare mechanism may function as:]{.underline}**

1.  **[a non-automatic mechanism (load balanced by an
    operator),]{.underline}**

2.  **[a semi-automatic mechanism (load balanced automatically following
    a single manual command),]{.underline}**

3.  **[an automatic mechanism where the load is balanced automatically
    without the intervention of an operator. An automatic tare mechanism
    is only suitable for indirect sales to the customer (e.g.,
    prepackaging scales).]{.underline}**

\[2.20**[, 2.24]{.underline}**\]

> Add the following new definitions to Appendix D:
>
> **[gross weight value. Indication or recorded representation of the
> weight of a load on a weighing device, with no tare mechanism in
> operation.\[2.20, 2.24\]]{.underline}**
>
> **[net weight. See the current edition of NIST Handbook 130 Uniform
> Weights and Measures Law Section 1.10. \[2.20, 2.24\]]{.underline}**
>
> **[net weight value. Indication or recorded representation of the
> weight of a load placed on a weighing device after the operation of a
> tare mechanism. \[2.20, 2.24\]]{.underline}**
>
> **[tare. The weight of packaging material, containers, vehicles, or
> other materials that are not intended to be part of the commodity
> included in net weight determinations. \[2.20, 2.24\]]{.underline}**
>
> **[tare weight value. The weight value of a load determined by a tare
> mechanism. \[2.20, 2.24\]]{.underline}**

In addition to the above proposed changes SWMA also recommends adding
the complete NIST Handbook 130 definition for \"net weight\" to
Appendix D as follows:

> **[net weight. The term \"net mass\" or \"net weight\" means the
> weight of a commodity excluding any materials, substances, or items
> not considered to be part of the commodity. Materials, substances, or
> items not considered to be part of the commodity include, but are not
> limited to, containers, conveyances, bags, wrappers, packaging
> materials, labels, individual piece coverings, decorative
> accompaniments, and coupons, except that, depending on the type of
> service rendered, packaging materials may be considered to be part of
> the service. For example, the service of shipping includes the weight
> of packing materials. \[2.20, 2.24\]]{.underline}**

**Discussion:** This Weighing Sector proposal is the one of several
proposed modifications to Handbook 44 requirements intended to clarify
the acceptable tare features already recognized for use in commercial
applications. Scales Code requirements do not include sufficient
detailed language that identifies all types of tare, defines how tare
features must operate, or specifies the net and tare values a scale must
indicate and record. Current NIST Handbook 44 requirements that address
tare include Paragraphs S.2.1.6. Combined Zero-Tare (\"0/T\") Key,
S.2.3. Tare, S.2.3.1. Monorail Scales Equipped with Digital Indications,
and T.N.2.1. General (Tolerances).

The Weighing Sector has developed criteria used to type evaluate tare
features based on General Code Paragraph G-S.2. Facilitation of Fraud
and other requirements that apply to indicating and recording elements
and recorded representations. NTEP laboratories find that it has become
increasingly difficult to solely base its compliance decisions on
Paragraph G-S.2. because the general nature of the language results in
multiple interpretations. Type evaluation criteria are published in NCWM
Publication 14, however, this document is not in wide distribution in
the weights and measures community. Also, only a limited number of
weights and measures officials, device manufacturers, and device owners
and operators are regular participants in Weighing Sector meetings where
tare evaluation criteria are developed and discussed. Additionally, it
is difficult for parties responsible for the design, use, and test of
the tare feature to interpret and apply technical requirements published
in Publication 14. This results in differing interpretations of
Handbook 44 requirements.

In 2006, the NTETC Weighing Sector formed a Tare Work Group to review
existing tare requirements and make recommendations about how tare is to
operate on a single range scale, multiple range scale, and
multi-interval scale. The work group also was asked to develop, where
necessary, recommendations for changes to Publication 14, Handbook 44,
and Handbook 130, and to provide guidance to the Weighing Sector on type
evaluation requirements.

The work group is currently developing proposals to amend Handbook 44
requirements to: (1) ensure that a tare feature operates in a manner
that increases the accuracy of net weight determinations, (2) clearly
state what information and values are permitted and required for
indicated and recorded representations of net weight and tare weight,
and (3) identify the types (e.g., semiautomatic and stored) of tare
weight values that are determined at the time objects are weighed or
tare weight values are determined prior to the time objects are weighed.
At its 2006 meeting, the Weighing Sector agreed to submit a proposal the
NCWM S&T Committee to amend Handbook 44 Appendix D by amending the term
"tare mechanism\" and adding new tare definitions to ensure a uniform
understating of the terminology used in Handbook 44.

SWMA supports the proposal, but also believes the wording to the
definition for \"net weight\" should appear in Appendix D rather than
have the reader refer to NIST Handbook 130 for that information.
Consequently, SWMA recommends adding the complete definition of \"net
weight\" to the proposal as shown in the recommendation above.

###### 324 AUTOMATIC WEIGHING SYSTEMS

####### 324-1 S.1.2. Value of Division Units and T.2.1. General

**Source:** National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC)
Weighing Sector

**Recommendation:** Add a new note to Paragraph S.1.2. and amend
Paragraph T.2.1. as follows:

> **S.1.2. Value of Division Units.** - The value of a division d
> expressed in a unit of weight shall be equal to:
>
> \(a\) 1, 2, or 5; or
>
> \(b\) a decimal multiple or submultiple of 1, 2, or 5.
>
> **[Note: The requirements that the value of the scale division be
> expressed as 1, 2, or 5, or a decimal multiple or submultiples of 1,
> 2, or 5 does not apply to net weight value that are calculated from
> gross and tare weight indications where the scale value of the gross
> weight is different from the scale value of the tare weight(s) on
> multi-interval or multiple range scales. For example, a scale
> indicating in 2 g divisions in the lower range or segment and 5 g
> divisions in the higher range or segment may result in net values
> ending in three (3) or eight (8).]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> T.2.1. General. -- The tolerance values are positive (+) and negative
> (-) with the weighing device adjusted to zero at no load. When tare is
> in use, the tolerance values are applied from the tare zero reference
> **[(zero net indication)]{.underline}**; the tolerance values apply to
> the **[net weight indication for every possible tare load
> using]{.underline}** certified test loads **~~only~~**. (**[Amended
> 200X)]{.underline}**

In addition to the above proposed changes, SWMA recommends the Committee
also consider modifying Paragraph S.2.2. as follows:

> **S.2.2. Tare.** - On any automatic weighing system the value of the
> tare division shall be equal to the value of the scale division. The
> tare mechanism shall operate only in a backward direction (i.e., in a
> direction of underregistration) with respect to the zero-load balance
> condition of the automatic weighing system. A device designed to
> automatically clear any tare value shall also be designed to prevent
> the automatic clearing of tare until a complete transaction has been
> indicated.
>
> **Note:** On a computing automatic weighing system, this requires the
> input of a unit price, the display of the unit price, and a computed
> positive total price at a readable equilibrium. Other devices require
> that a transaction or lot run be completed.
>
> **[Note: This requirement does not apply to multi-interval scales or
> multiple range scales when the value of tare is determined in a lower
> range.]{.underline}**
>
> **(Amended** 2004 and **[200X]{.underline}**)

**Discussion:** In 2006, the NTETC Weighing Sector formed a Tare Work
Group to review existing tare requirements, and make recommendations
about how tare is to operate on a single range scale, multiple range
scale, and multi-interval scale. The work group was also asked to
develop, where necessary, recommendations for changes to Publication 14,
Handbook 44, and Handbook 130, and to provide guidance to the Weighing
Sector on type evaluation requirements.

This proposal, which was developed by the Tare Work Group and is
supported by the Weighing Sector, adds a new note to Paragraph S.1.2.
The note recognizes display and printing of net weight values in
divisions other than the scale division used in the display of gross
weight, resulting in a more accurate net weight determination.

The proposal also amends Paragraph T.2.1. to clarify that tolerances
also apply to net weight indications regardless of the gross load on the
scale. The Tare Work Group reviewed OIML R 76 \"Nonautomatic Weighing
Instruments\" for corresponding requirements and to determine if there
were areas where Handbook 44 could be aligned with international
recommendations. Based on that review, the work group agreed that
Handbook 44 Paragraph T.2.1. should be modified to state that tolerances
also apply to net load indications.

The Tare Work Group discussed problems associated with determining the
appropriate direction to round tare on multi-interval scales and
multiple range scales whenever gross and tare weights fall in different
weighing segments on a multi-interval scale or in different weighing
ranges on multiple range scales. In these cases, the scale division size
for the gross and tare weights differ; however, the net weight must be
in mathematical agreement with the gross and tare weights that are
indicated and recorded by the device (i.e., gross weight - tare weight =
net weight).

The problem arises when the tare weight is rounded up to the next larger
scale division, where the net weight falls in the higher segment or
range. For example, a 0.004 lb tare weight in a weighing range or
segment with 0.002 lb intervals in the lower weighing range or segment
may round to zero when the net weight falls in the upper weighing range
with 0.01 lb intervals:

10.05 lb Gross Weight

[-- 0.004 lb Tare Weight]{.underline}

= 10.046 lb the Mathematically Correct Net Weight;

However, due to rounding the device indicates 10.05 lb Net Weight

This results in a transaction where a commodity is bought or sold on the
basis of gross weight or when an insufficient amount of tare weight is
taken and results in a misrepresentation of net weight for the
transaction.. Essentially, the rounding of tare that falls in a smaller
division in either direction (e.g., a 0.015 lb. tare weight rounded down
to zero or to 0.01 lb or up to 0.02 lb) provides a less accurate net
weight.

The Tare Work Group developed a corresponding proposal for the Scales
Code to clarify the appropriate scale division values and the
application of tolerances to tare weights for those devices (See S&T
Item 320-3).

SWMA supports the recommendation; however, SWMA also agreed that an
additional note should be added to Paragraph S.2.2. Tare as shown in the
recommendation above to eliminate any conflict with proposed changes to
Paragraph S.1.2. The new note proposed for Paragraph S.2.2. clarifies
that the requirement does not apply to multi-interval scales or multiple
range scales when tare is determined in the lower range of those scales.

####### 324-2 Note 5 Table S.7.b. Notes for Table S.7.a.; Temperature Range

**Source:** National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC)
Weighing Sector

**Recommendation:** Amend Note 5 in Table S.7.b. as follows:

> 5\. Required only on automatic weighing systems if the
> **[temperature]{.underline}** range **[on the NTEP CC]{.underline}**
> is **~~other~~** **[narrower]{.underline}** than **[and
> within]{.underline}** --10 C to 40 C (14 F to 104 F).
>
> **[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**

SWMA recommends including a new Paragraph T.2.X. Subsequent Verification
Examination that was inadvertently overlooked by the Weighing Sector as
follows:

**[T.2.X. Subsequent Verfication Examination. -- For subsequent
verification examinations, the tolerance values apply regardless of the
influence factors in effect at the time of the conduct or the
examination. (Also see G‑N.2.)]{.underline}**

**Background/Discussion:** Periodically questions arise about whether or
not a device is suitable for field operation based on the limited
temperature range the device is subjected to under type evaluation. In
other cases a device\'s suitability is questioned when the temperature
limits marked on the device were narrower or wider than --10 °C to 40 °C
(14 °F to 104 °F) temperature range. In 2005, the NTETC Weighing Sector
established a policy where its laboratories only will test and issue
approvals over the --10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F) temperature range
because of the limitations of its environmental chambers and safety
concern for laboratory staff working in high temperature environments.
In 2006, the Weighing Sector asked for the Committee's interpretation of
how to apply temperature limits given the climatic conditions developed
in the laboratory and those that exist in real-world environments.

Most NIST Handbook 44 Section 2 and Section 5 device codes include
requirements for marking equipment with temperature limits. Many of
those codes include specific conditions for marking a temperature range
on commercial equipment. Weighing devices are required to perform within
tolerance over the temperature range of --10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to
104 °F). The temperature range of --10 °C to 40 °C was selected as the
low and high climatic limits of operation to: (1) align U.S. and
International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) environmental
conditions for performance tests, (2) keep within a range that
represents at least 80 % of the climatic conditions for meeting
performance requirements in military specifications for electronic
equipment, and (3) duplicate the conditions typically found in most
outdoor environments. Current OIML recommendations for temperature test
levels for electronic equipment are left to each nation based on the
severity of climatic conditions where the instrument is typically in
use.

In 1991, the NCWM S&T Committee provided guidelines on how to apply
temperature range marking requirements and the appropriate use of a
scale that is marked for use in a temperature range narrower or wider
than --10 °C to 40 °C. Device manufacturers are required to mark the
equipment's working temperature range when it is narrower or wider than
--10 °C to 40 °C. Device codes also specify the minimum difference
between the lower and upper limits of the temperature range based on the
device's accuracy class.

The following text is excerpted from the 1991 Final Report S&T
Item 320-3 and includes the Committee's interpretation on marking
requirements for temperature ranges on scales that should be included in
the training modules for scales:

*Temperature Range of --10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F):*

This case has two parts. The conclusion is the same whether or not the
temperature range is marked on the device.

If temperature range is not marked on the scale, the device must be
accurate over the range of --10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F). If a
temperature range is not marked on a device with an NTEP Certificate of
Conformance, it was tested over a temperature range of --10 °C to 40 °C
(14 °F to 104 °F). The device may be used outside the specified
temperature range, but the device must be accurate in the environment in
which it is used, since Scales Code Paragraph T.N.2.3. Subsequent
Verification Examination applies.

If a device is marked with a temperature range of --10 °C to 40 °C
(14 °F to 104 °F), the marking is not considered to be a limitation to
its application. The device may be used outside the specified
temperature range, but the device must be accurate in the environment in
which it is used since Scales Code Paragraph T.N.2.3. Subsequent
Verification Examination applies. The marking of the temperature range
--10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F) is optional.

*Marked Temperature Range [Less]{.underline} Than --10 °C to 40 °C
(14 °F to 104 °F):*

If a device is marked with a temperature range less than --10 °C to
40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F), then the environment in which the device is
used must be evaluated to determine if the device is suitable for use in
that application. The device cannot be used in an environment in which
the temperatures exceed the temperature limits marked on the device.

*Marked Temperature Range [Greater]{.underline} Than --10 °C to 40 °C
(14 °F to 104 °F):*

If a device is marked with a temperature range greater than --10 °C to
40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F) this indicates a scale of higher quality than a
scale without a temperature marking for devices within the same accuracy
class and of the same scale division value. This fact may be used as a
marketing tool in the same manner as the maximum number of scale
divisions, n~max~. A scale marked with a wider temperature range is
tested during type evaluation over the marked temperature range.

No changes were made to Handbook 44 temperature marking requirements
until 1998 when the Weighing Sector identified a discrepancy between
Handbook 44 and Publication 14 National Type Evaluation Program
Administrative Procedures, Technical Policy, Checklists, and Test
Procedures in the requirement for marking temperature ranges on scales.
Handbook 44 required that Class III, III L, and IIII devices be marked
with a temperature range if the temperature limits are *other* than
--10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F). However, some sections of
Publication 14 stated that these devices must be marked with a
temperature range if the temperature range is *narrower* than --10 °C to
40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F).

In 1998, the Weighing Sector discussed instances where is it permissible
to use a device if the device is marked with a specific temperature
range or a range is listed on a CC. The Sector agreed that, if possible,
the requirement should harmonize with OIML. OIML R 76 Clause 3.9.2.1.
Prescribed Temperature Limits states, "If no particular working
temperature is stated in the descriptive markings of an instrument, this
instrument shall maintain its metrological properties within the
following temperature limits: --10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F)."

Subsequently, the Committee considered a proposal to modify Scales Code
Table S.6.3.a. Note 5 to correct the discrepancy. A proposal was heard
to modify Table S.6.3.b. Notes for Table S.6.3.a., Note 5. to read as
follows:

> *5. Required only on Class III, III L, and IIII ~~scales~~
> [devices]{.underline} if the [temperature]{.underline} range [on the
> NTEP CC]{.underline} is ~~othe~~r [narrowe]{.underline}r than [and
> within]{.underline} --10 °C to 40 °C (14 °F to 104 °F).*

*\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1986\]*

The Committee agreed that although the modifications to Note 5 are less
restrictive, they appear to more adequately describe the temperature
marking requirements and eliminate any conflict between Handbook 44 and
Publication 14. During the 1999 Annual Meeting, hearing no unfavorable
comments on this proposal, the Conference adopted the item, and it
remains the same today.

In 2006, the Sector also questioned why requirements that address
instances where equipment operates in temperatures outside of the
--10 °C to 40 °C temperature range such as Scales Code
Paragraph T.N.2.3. Subsequent Examination Verification are not included
in all weighing device codes. The Sector also noted there are
inconsistencies in the language that specifies temperature requirements
throughout the weighing device codes. The Weighing Sector agreed this is
an important issue, yet it gave the Committee time to research the codes
and policies established on this topic. Consequently, the Weighing
Sector request became a developing item on the Committee\'s agenda.

The Weighing Sector agreed that no evaluation would be conducted for
temperature ranges outside of laboratory capabilities, which are --10 °C
to 40 °C while it awaits input from the Committee. The Weighing Sector's
*ad hoc* policy is contrary to an earlier 1991 NTEP policy where NTEP
agreed to require testing to demonstrate compliance with the
manufacturer's specified temperature range, including accepting data
from recognized and approved laboratories for tests performed at
temperature ranges that exceeded the --10 °C to 40 °C temperature range.

At their fall 2006 meetings, the regional weights and measures
associations reviewed the proposal in its former status as a Developing
Item (Part 4, Item 1) that did not include any recommendation to modify
Handbook 44. WWMA agreed the proposal is predominantly a type evaluation
laboratory issue and should be considered at the next meeting of the
Automatic Weighing System Work Group. WWMA may revisit the issue at a
later date if it is deemed necessary to modify Handbook 44 to adequately
address temperature requirements. WWMA recommends the issue remain a
developing item while the NCWM S&T Committee and Weighing Sector develop
a position that can be published for review.

CWMA recommends that the Automatic Weighing Systems Code reflect NIST
Handbook 44 Scales Code T.N.8. Influence Factors. NEWMA supports the
CWMA recommendation.

At the conclusion of its 2006 meeting, the Weighing Sector agreed that
the NIST technical advisor would prepare and submit to SWMA proposed
changes to Note 5 as shown in the recommendation above. The Sector
agreed that any further changes to other codes should first be evaluated
by the appropriate NTETC Sector.

The Weighing Sector believes that its 2005 technical policy defining the
scope of temperature testing conducted by NTEP is not in conflict with
the 1991 S&T Committee\'s position since the 1999 modification to Note 5
resulted in a link of the temperature range marking requirement to the
range listed on the CC. The Sector also agreed that the CC does not
cover devices marked with a larger temperature range than what is listed
on the CC. For example, an NTEP CC that lists a temperature range of
--5 °C to +30 °C would not cover a device that was not marked with a
temperature range or a device marked with a --5 °C to +45 °C temperature
range.

The Sector agrees with the concerns from the NTEP laboratories that
testing over increasing temperature ranges may become a health and
safety issue and that existing temperature chambers are limited in their
capabilities to perform temperature tests over wider ranges.
Additionally, the Sector recommends the NCWM S&T Committee reconsider
amending the Committee's 1991 position on temperature requirements to
correspond with the Sector's current marking requirement policy that
recognizes health and safety concerns and the limitations of NTEP
laboratory testing equipment.

SWMA agreed that the Weighing Sector\'s proposal should move forward as
a voting item on the NCWM S&T Committee\'s agenda. However, SWMA also
recommends including in the proposal a new Paragraph T.2.X. Subsequent
Verification Examination that was inadvertently overlooked by the
Weighing Sector as shown in the recommendation above.

###### 330 LIQUID-MEASURING DEVICES

####### 330-1 S.1.2.3. Value of the Smallest Unit

**Source:** Carryover Item 330-2. (This item originated from the
National Type Evaluation Technical Committee (NTETC) Measuring Sector
and first appeared on the Committee's 2006 agenda.)

**Recommendation:** Modify NIST Handbook 44 Paragraph S.1.2.3. as
follows:

> **S.1.2.3. Value of Smallest Unit.** -- The value of the smallest unit
> of indicated delivery, and recorded delivery if the device is equipped
> to record, shall not exceed the equivalent of:
>
> \(a\) 0.5 L **(~~1 pt~~ [0.1 gal]{.underline})** on **~~retail~~**
> devices **[with a maximum rated flow rate of 750 L/min (200 gal/min)
> or less.]{.underline}**
>
> \(b\) 5 L (1 gal) on**~~wholesale~~** devices **[with a maximum rated
> flow of more than 750 L/min (200 gal/min)]{.underline}.**
>
> This require­ment does not apply to manually operated devices equipped
> with stops or stroke-limiting means.

(Amended 1983**[,]{.underline}** **~~and~~** 1986**[, and
200X]{.underline}**)

CWMA recommended a corresponding new user requirement become part of the
proposal as follows:

> **[UR.XX - Value of Smallest Unit. -- The value of the smallest unit
> of indicated delivery, and recorded delivery if the device is equipped
> to record, shall not exceed the equivalent of:]{.underline}**
>
> **[(a) 0.5 L (0.1 gal) on devices with a flow rate of 750 L/min
> (200 gal/min) or less.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(b) 5 L (1 gal) on devices with a flow rate of more than 750 L/min
> (200 gal/min).]{.underline}**
>
> **[(c) 5 L (1 gal) on meters with a rated maximum flow of 375 L
> (100 gal/min) or more used for aviation turbine fuels.]{.underline}**
>
> **[This user requirement allows high-volume meters to sell in 1 gal
> increments to the end user, and requires 0.1 gal increment deliveries
> only from meters delivering at less than 200 gal/min.]{.underline}**

**[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

SWMA and the Measuring Sector recommended an alternate proposal to amend
Paragraph S.1.2.3. as follows:

> **S.1.2.3. Value of Smallest Unit.** - The value of the smallest unit
> of indicated delivery, and recorded delivery if the device is equipped
> to record, shall not exceed the equivalent of:
>
> \(a\) 0.5 L **(~~1 pt~~ [0.1 gal]{.underline})** on **~~retail~~**
> devices **[with a maximum rated flow rate of 750 L/min (200 gal/min)
> or less.]{.underline}**
>
> \(b\) 5 L (1 gal) on**~~wholesale~~** devices **[with a maximum rated
> flow of more than 750 L/min (200 gal/min)]{.underline}.**
>
> **[(c) 5 L (1 gal) on meters with a rated maximum flow rate of 375 L
> (100 gal/min) or more used for jet fuel aviation refueling
> systems.]{.underline}**
>
> This requirement does not apply to manually operated devices equipped
> with stops or stroke-limiting means.

(Amended 1983, 1986, and 200X)

**Background/Discussion:** In 2004 the definition of a "retail device"
in NIST Handbook 44 was modified to include all devices used to measure
product for the purpose of sale to the end user. At that time, the
Committee believed all affected parties were aware of the proposal and
there was no opposition to the change. The Committee had not considered
applications where very large deliveries are made to the end user,
typically at high flow rates. After the 2005 edition of Handbook 44 was
published and distributed, NIST WMD received input from a weights and
measures jurisdiction that routinely tests large meters used to deliver
fuel to fishing fleets and other large ocean-going boats. The
jurisdiction stated that the average fuel delivery is approximately
300 000 gal and may be as much as 1 million gal. Prior to the revision
of the definition of "retail," the value of the smallest unit of the
indicated delivery for these devices was permitted to be 1 gal. Most of
these devices have mechanical registers which make it impractical to
have a smallest indicated unit of 0.1 gal at the high flow rates used
for such large deliveries. Because the fuel is being delivered to the
end user, the jurisdiction believes this is a retail delivery. However,
with the revisions to the definition of retail device, Handbook 44 now
requires a smallest unit of delivery of not more than 0.5 L (1 pint or
0.125 gal) for these devices.

To remedy this issue the NTETC Measuring Sector developed the original
recommendation above. The Measuring Sector believed that, because the
maximum flow rate for many applications has increased, 200 gal/min is an
appropriate "break point" for determining what the smallest unit of
measurement should be.

At the 2006 NCWM Interim Meeting, it was suggested that the Committee
revisit the discussion on suitability of liquid-measuring devices that
was discussed by NCWM in 1991 through 1993. In these earlier
discussions, NCWM was unable to reach a consensus on any changes to NIST
Handbook 44, and the item was withdrawn from the Committee\'s agenda.
The Committee was informed that there was interest expressed at the 2005
NTETC Measuring Sector Meeting in developing new criteria addressing
suitability as it relates to flow rate, minimum measured quantity (MMQ),
and smallest unit of measure for applications using liquid-measuring
devices. The Committee encourages the NTETC Measuring Sector to pursue
development of suitability requirements for submission to the Committee
for consideration and is interested in input from the weights and
measures community on this approach.

During the 2006 NCWM Annual Meeting, the Committee received input from
several aircraft refueling equipment manufacturers that there is a
safety concern with stationary refueling systems capable of delivering
jet fuel through two different size hoses at different flow rates using
two different meters. In this scenario, the operators of the refueling
facility want both meters to have the same unit of indication, that is,
5 L (1 gal). The Committee understood the concern, but was reluctant to
modify the recommendation based on the limited information available at
the meeting. The Committee believes the aircraft refueling industry
should propose a change during the next Conference cycle through the
NTETC Measuring Sector and the regional associations. However, the
Committee recognized that a legitimate problem may exist with existing
jet aircraft refueling equipment and encourages weights and measures
jurisdictions to consider safety implications before taking official
action on existing jet aircraft refueling devices that may not meet the
requirements of Paragraph S.1.2.3. During the voting session there
appeared to be concern that, if this item was adopted, weights and
measures officials could be perceived as ignoring safety issues for
aircraft refueling. There was lack of support for the proposal without
an exemption for jet aircraft refueling; therefore, the Committee
changed the status of the proposal from a voting item to an information
item to allow sufficient time to address these areas of concern.

At its fall 2006 meeting, CWMA agreed with the original recommendation,
but proposed that an accompanying User Requirement also be added to
Handbook 44 to address aircraft refueling applications.

At its fall 2006 meeting WWMA discussed the proposed amendment to
Paragraph S.1.2.3. and also discussed the issues the aviation industry
has when refueling aircraft using a combination of meters that register
in 0.1 gal and 1 gal increments. The aviation industry was not present
at that meeting, but WWMA was made aware that the aviation industry has
safety concerns about under-filling fuel tanks and tanks with an
unbalanced load because of misread meter indications. WWMA recognizes
industry's concerns but believes this is a training issue for aircraft
refuelers. WWMA agreed there is an immediate need to provide guidelines
for fishing fleet and similar applications; therefore, it recommends the
proposal move forward as written as a voting item.

At their fall 2006 meetings, the NTETC Measuring Sector and SWMA
reviewed a proposal to add a new Subparagraph (c) to the original
proposal to address jet aircraft refueling applications. The Measuring
Sector considered the proposed marked maximum flow rate of 575 L
(150 gal/min), but agreed it should be changed to 375 L (100 gal/min) to
harmonize with a similar requirement in Handbook 44 Section 3.31.
Paragraph S.1.1.3. Value of the Smallest Unit (c). The Measuring Sector
and SWMA supported the modified proposal as shown above. SWMA agreed to
forward the proposal to the NCWM S&T Committee with the recommendation
that the new Subparagraph (c) be added to the original proposal.

####### 330-2 S.1.6.5.5. Display of Quantity and Total Price and S.1.6.5.6. Display of Quantity and Total Price, Aviation Refueling Applications

**Source:** Southern Weights and Measures Association (SWMA)

**Recommendation:** Modify Handbook 44 Section 3.30.
Paragraph S.1.6.5.5. and add a new Paragraph S.1.6.5.6. as follows:

> ***S.1.6.5.5. Display of Quantity and Total Price. -- [Except for
> aviation refueling applications, ~~W~~w]{.underline}**hen a delivery
> is completed, the total price and quantity for that transaction shall
> be displayed on the face of the dispenser for at least 5 min or until
> the next transaction is initiated by using controls on the device or
> other customer-activated controls.*
>
> *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 1994\]*
>
> (Added 1992) (Amended 1996 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)
>
> ***[S.1.6.5.6. Display of Quantity and Total Price, Aviation Refueling
> Applications. -- The quantity must be displayed throughout the
> transaction. The total price must also be displayed; however, it may
> either be displayed throughout the transaction or only at the end of
> the transaction. The total price display can appear on the face of the
> dispenser or through a controller adjacent to the device. Total price
> and quantity must be displayed for at least 5 minutes or until the
> next transaction is initiated by using controls on the device or other
> customer-activated controls. A printed receipt including, at a
> minimum, the total price, quantity, and unit price must also be
> provided.]{.underline}***
>
> ***[(Added 200X)]{.underline}***
>
> ***[\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 200X\]]{.underline}***

**Background/Discussion:** The typical self-serve installation for
aviation fuels does not use an analog or digital "gasoline dispenser"
that simultaneously displays money and volume. In most cases the
self-serve user interface is a credit card console/controller that
handles the transaction. These devices display only quantity and are not
set up for the simultaneous display of quantity and total price. This
proposal provides an exemption for aviation refueling based on the
position that the information provided by equipment that complies with
the proposal is sufficient for the customers using these devices. The
submitter stated that pilots are an informed group of customers that
necessarily pay attention to the quantity of fuel put onboard the
aircraft during a refueling operation, but are less concerned about the
total cost of the commodity until the end of the transaction. As long as
a unit price is posted, they have the ability to verify that the total
price is correct provided it is available at the end of the transaction.

Some designs of aviation self-serve dispensing systems use a
meter-register that is a PD meter that can have a mechanical register
and pulser, an electronic register with pulse output, or an "industrial"
dispenser with a "volume only display" and a pulse output. The
meter-register sends pulses to the credit card console/controller. In
the example given, all three components including the console/controller
have separate NTEP certificates, but were not evaluated as a system.

In June 2006 a jurisdiction reviewed a couple of planned installations
and informed the installing company that the equipment was a "retail
motor-fuel dispenser" that required continuous display of "quantity and
total sale." In addition some "card-lock systems" were opened to other
self-serve customers. This started a series of exchanges of information
between several parties including two console/controller manufacturers,
several equipment suppliers, and the weights and measures jurisdiction.

The submitter stated that a typical "retail gasoline dispenser" that has
the simultaneous display of quantity and total price capability is not
designed, in terms of materials of construction, for aviation gasoline
or jet fuel, nor does it have the appropriate flow rate capability. Some
higher flow rate diesel dispensers have the materials of construction
that are not compatible with some aircraft fuels and do not have the
flow rate capability required for stationary jet refueling applications.

There is one small company that assembles dispensers that could put
together a unit to meet the materials of construction and minimum flow
requirements. Their NTEP certificate currently covers diesel and
gasoline applications on their simultaneous display dispenser. They
could use the appropriate aviation-approved materials of construction
components for applications up to 50 gpm and simultaneously display
quantity and total price. However, these devices are not commonly used
in the aviation industry and the maximum flow rate of the meter would be
inadequate for jet fuel applications.

####### 

At their fall 2006 meetings, the NTETC Measuring Sector and SWMA
reviewed a proposal to allow devices used in aircraft refueling to
either display or print the total price and quantity delivered at the
end of the transaction. The Measuring Sector took no position on the
proposal because most members did not feel qualified to make an informed
recommendation concerning the proposal. SWMA believed that a printed
receipt containing, at a minimum, the quantity, unit price, and total
price should be required for all deliveries; therefore, SWMA modified
the above proposal to allow devices used in aircraft refueling to
display the total price either throughout the transaction or at the end
of the transaction provided a printed receipt was available. SWMA agreed
to forward the modified proposal to the NCWM S&T Committee with the
recommendation that it be a voting item on the Committee's 2007 agenda.

####### 330-3 S.3.1. Diversion of Measured Liquid

**Source:** Carryover Item 330-4. (This item originated from the Central
Weights and Measures Association (CWMA) and first appeared on the
Committee's 2006 agenda.)

**Recommendation**: Amend Paragraph S.3.1. as follows:

####### 

**S.3. Discharge Lines and Valves.**

> **S.3.1. Diversion of Measured Liquid.** - No means shall be provided
> by which any measured liquid can be diverted from the measuring
> chamber of the meter or its discharge line. Two or more delivery
> outlets may be installed only if automatic means are provided to
> ensure that:
>
> \(a\) liquid can flow from only one outlet at a time, and
>
> \(b\) the direction of flow for which the mechanism may be set at any
> time is clearly and conspicuously indicated.
>
> A**[n]{.underline} ~~manually controlled ~~**outlet that may be opened
> for purging or draining the measuring system or for recirculating[,
> **if recirculation is required in order to maintain the**]{.underline}
> product in **[a deliverable state,]{.underline} ~~suspension ~~**shall
> be permitted **~~only when the system is measuring food products or
> agri‑chemicals~~.** Effective **[automatic]{.underline}** means shall
> be provided to prevent passage of liquid through any such outlet
> during normal operation of the measuring system and to inhibit meter
> indications (or advancement of indications) and recorded
> representations while the outlet is in operation.

(Amended 1991, 1995, **~~and~~**1996, **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

####### 

WWMA recommends an alternate proposal as follows:

> **S.3.1. Diversion of Measured Liquid.** - No means shall be provided
> by which any measured liquid can be diverted from the measuring
> chamber of the meter or its discharge line. Two or more delivery
> outlets may be installed only if automatic means are provided to
> ensure that:
>
> \(a\) liquid can flow from only one outlet at a time, and
>
> \(b\) the direction of flow for which the mechanism may be set at any
> time is clearly and conspicuously indicated.
>
> A**[n]{.underline} ~~manually controlled ~~**outlet that may be opened
> for purging or draining the measuring system or for recirculating[,
> **if recirculation is required in order to maintain the**]{.underline}
> product in **[a deliverable state,]{.underline} ~~suspension ~~**shall
> be permitted **only when the system is measuring food
> products[,]{.underline} ~~or~~ agri‑chemicals[, biodiesel or biodiesel
> blends]{.underline}.** Effective **[automatic]{.underline}** means
> shall be provided to prevent passage of liquid through any such outlet
> during normal operation of the measuring system and to inhibit meter
> indications (or advancement of indications) and recorded
> representations while the outlet is in operation.

(Amended 1991, 1995, **~~and~~**1996 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

**Background/Discussion:** CWMA noted that the requirements in
Paragraph S.3.1. in Section 3.30. of the Liquid‑Measuring Devices Code
and Paragraph S.4.1. Diversion of Measured Product in Section 3.37. of
the Mass Flow Meters Code of NIST Handbook 44 are not consistent with
each other. Paragraph S.3.1. bans manual valves for recirculating
product or for purging or draining the measuring system, except for
foods and agri-chemicals. Paragraph S.3.1. allows manual valves but
appears to ban automatic valves by omission and it makes no distinction
for types of products measured as long as the system meets the specified
requirements.

####### 

Cold weather and physical characteristics make recirculation necessary
for a number of products not currently recognized in Paragraph S.3.1.,
for example, #6 fuel oil and B100 biodiesel. Liquid-measuring devices
exist which have NTEP CCs for these high viscosity products; however,
the current wording of Handbook 44 forces vendors of these products to
use mass flow meters if they wish to recirculate their product in order
to keep it in a deliverable state. This appears to be the unintended
result of the fact that the two codes were written at different times
with input from different segments of industry. CWMA does not believe
retailers of these products should be restricted to using only mass flow
meters for commercial measurements if other suitable technologies are
available. Likewise, CWMA believes that both manual and automatic valves
are suitable for recirculating products in discharge lines of
liquid-measuring devices, and the requirements for either type of meter
should be the same.

The Committee believes that the means to prevent passage of liquid
through any such outlet during normal operation of the measuring system
and to inhibit meter indications should be automatic. Therefore, the
Committee modified the proposal accordingly.

At the 2006 NCWM Annual Meeting, this proposal along with a
corresponding proposal to modify the Mass Flow Meters Code was presented
for a vote. The Committee received input regarding the inappropriateness
of allowing diversion of product on all types of liquid-measuring device
applications. The vote on this item did not yield a sufficient number of
positive or negative votes for the item to be accepted or defeated and,
therefore, it was returned to the Committee for further action. The
corresponding proposal under 2005 S&T Agenda Item 337-2, S.4.1.
Diversion of Measured Product to similarly modify the Mass Flow Meters
Code, was adopted.

At its fall 2006 meeting, CWMA affirmed that this proposal was drafted
primarily to address an inequity between mass flow meters and other
liquid-measuring devices in handling biodiesel and #6 fuel oil at
terminals and marine fuelers. The objections to the proposal at the 2006
NCWM Annual Meeting seemed to center on the idea that passage of this
proposal would lead to widespread recirculation at retail motor-fuel
pumps and in applications with products other than biodiesel and #6 fuel
oil. Minnesota, which adopted this proposal by rule in 2005, has
experienced neither of these phenomena.

It has been Minnesota's experience that, because recirculation systems
are expensive to install and operate, industry has utilized it only as a
last resort. Recirculation has been confined to the marine fuelers on
Lake Superior, to a handful of terminals in the coldest regions of the
state, and to milk meters where recirculation has always been allowed.
Minnesota has received no complaints about these installations and has
seen no evidence that allowing recirculation has led to the facilitation
of fraud.

Because recirculation is allowed in Paragraph S.4.1. of the Mass Flow
Meters Code for any product requiring it to be kept in deliverable form,
failure to pass this proposal will not prevent recirculation of products
other than milk or agri-chemicals dispensed from mass flow meters. It
will just force device owners to purchase mass flow technology for that
purpose instead. This seems like an undue burden on the device owner who
might already own meters which are otherwise suitable for the intended
product. It also seems to be an unfair competitive advantage for mass
flow technology over other meter technologies. That advantage was
created by the lack of harmonization between the Liquid-Measuring
Devices Code and the Mass Flow Meters Code in Handbook 44, and the
inequity can be ended by passage of this proposal.

WWMA discussed an objection to the proposal because it would allow
diversion and recirculation of all products. It may not be appropriate
to recirculate some products and might facilitate fraudulent practices.
WWMA recognizes that jurisdictions are preparing for sales of alternate
fuels, but is uncertain at what point biodiesel products and blends need
recirculating (low temperature limits or specific blend ratios). The
WWMA S&T Committee agreed the list of products should be limited, but
should recognize all biodiesel products and blends. Consequently, WWMA
developed an alternate proposal as shown in the recommendation above and
recommended it move forward as a voting item on the 2007 CWMA S&T
Committee's agenda.

SWMA agreed with WWMA's position.

NEWMA supports the original proposal as written in the recommendation
above.

###### 331 VEHICLE-TANK METERS

####### 

####### 331-1 Temperature Compensation

**Source:** Carryover Item 331‑3. (This item originated from the Western
Weights and Measures Association (WWMA) and first appeared on the
Committee's 2000 agenda.)

**Discussion/Background:** The Committee is considering a proposal to
modify Section 3.31. Vehicle-Tank Meters (VTM) Code by adding the
following new paragraphs to recognize temperature compensation as
follows:

> **[S.2.5. Automatic Temperature Compensation for Refined Petroleum
> Products.]{.underline}**
>
> **[S.2.5.1. Automatic Temperature Compensation for Refined Petroleum
> Products. - A device may be equipped with an automatic means for
> adjusting the indication and registration of the measured volume of
> product to the volume at 15 °C (60 °F) where not prohibited by state
> law.]{.underline}**
>
> **[S.2.5.2. Provision for Deactivating. - On a device equipped with an
> automatic temperature-compensating mechanism that will indicate or
> record only in terms of liters (gallons) compensated to 15 °C (60 °F),
> provision shall be made for deactivating the automatic
> temperature-compensating mechanism so the meter can indicate and
> record, if it is equipped to record, in terms of the uncompensated
> volume.]{.underline}**
>
> **[S.2.5.3. Gross and Net Indications. - A device equipped with
> automatic temperature compensation shall indicate and record, if
> equipped to record, both the gross (uncompensated) and net
> (compensated) volume for testing purposes. If both values cannot be
> displayed or recorded for the same test draft, means shall be provided
> to select either the gross or net indication for each test
> draft.]{.underline}**
>
> **[S.2.5.4. Provision for Sealing Automatic Temperature-Compensating
> Systems. - Adequate provision shall be made for an approved means of
> security (e.g., data change audit trail) or physically applying
> security seals in such a manner that an automatic
> temperature‑compensating system cannot be disconnected and no
> adjustment may be made to the system.]{.underline}**
>
> **[S.2.5.5. Temperature Determination with Automatic Temperature
> Compensation. - For test purposes, means shall be provided (e.g.,
> thermometer well) to determine the temperature of the liquid
> either:]{.underline}**
>
> **[(a) in the liquid chamber of the meter, or]{.underline}**
>
> **[(b) immediately adjacent to the meter in the meter inlet or
> discharge line.]{.underline}**

**[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

> **[S.5.6. Temperature Compensation for Refined Petroleum Products. -
> If a device is equipped with an automatic temperature compensator, the
> primary indicating elements, recording elements, and recording
> representation shall be clearly and conspicuously marked to show the
> volume delivered has been adjusted to the volume at 15 °C
> (60 °F).]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> **[N.4.1.3. Automatic Temperature-Compensating Systems for Refined
> Petroleum Products. - On devices equipped with automatic
> temperature-compensating systems, normal tests shall be
> conducted:]{.underline}**

(a) **[by comparing the compensated volume indicated or recorded to the
    actual delivered volume corrected to 15 °C (60 °F);
    and]{.underline}**

(b) **[with the temperature-compensating system deactivated, comparing
    the uncompensated volume indicated or recorded to the actual
    delivered volume.]{.underline}**

> **[The first test shall be performed with the automatic
> temperature-compensating system operating in the \"as-found\"
> condition. On devices that indicate or record both the compensated and
> uncompensated volume for each delivery, the tests in (a) and (b) may
> be performed as a single test.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> **[N.5. Temperature Correction for Refined Petroleum Products. -
> Corrections shall be made for any changes in volume resulting from the
> differences in liquid temperatures between the time of passage through
> the meter and the time of volumetric determination in the prover. When
> adjustments are necessary, appropriate petroleum measurement tables
> should be used.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> **T.2.1. [Automatic Temperature-Compensating Systems. - The difference
> between the meter error (expressed as a percentage) for results
> determined with and without the automatic temperature-compensating
> system activated shall not exceed:]{.underline}**
>
> **[(a) 0.4 % for mechanical automatic temperature-compensating
> systems; and]{.underline}**
>
> **[(b) 0.2 % for electronic automatic temperature-compensating
> systems.]{.underline}**
>
> **[The delivered quantities for each test shall be approximately the
> same size. The results of each test shall be within the applicable
> acceptance or maintenance tolerance.]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> **[UR.2.5. Temperature Compensation for Refined Petroleum
> Products.]{.underline}**
>
> **[UR.2.5.1. Automatic.]{.underline}**
>
> **[UR.2.5.1.1. When to be Used. - In a state that does not prohibit,
> by law or regulation, the sale of temperature-compensated product, a
> device equipped with an operable automatic temperature compensator
> shall be connected, operable, and in use at all times. An electronic
> or mechanical automatic temperature-compensating system may not be
> removed, nor may a compensated device be replaced with an
> uncompensated device, without the written approval of the responsible
> weights and measures jurisdiction.]{.underline}**
>
> **[\[Note: This requirement does not specify the method of sale for
> products measured through a meter.\]]{.underline}**
>
> **[UR.2.5.1.2. Invoices. - An invoice based on a reading of a device
> that is equipped with an automatic temperature compensator shall show
> that the volume delivered has been adjusted to the volume at 15 °C
> (60 °F).]{.underline}**

**[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

This proposal was developed to provide design requirements and testing
criteria for vehicle-tank metering systems that incorporate temperature
compensation capability. When this item was originally submitted,
several officials reportedly were confused about the specific
applications of a meter covered by an NTEP CC that included a
temperature-compensation feature. WWMA acknowledged some jurisdictions
permit temperature-compensated deliveries in applications not addressed
by NIST Handbook 44. Some states do not allow the use of automatic
temperature compensation for the delivery of products using a VTM. At
the 2002, 2003, and 2004 NCWM Annual Meetings, this proposal did not
achieve a majority vote to pass or fail and was, therefore, returned to
the Committee for further consideration.

The L&R Committee has kept a corresponding item addressing the method of
sale for petroleum products on its agenda. The L&R Committee proposal
allows voluntary temperature compensation for the sale of petroleum
products, other than LPG through a meter with a flow greater than
20 gal/min and petroleum products sold through retail motor-fuel
devices.

During the 2005 NCWM Annual Meeting, a manufacturer stated that the
number of requests for retail motor-fuel dispensers with temperature
compensation capability is increasing. The Committee has heard differing
positions on this issue from the regional associations indicating that:
(1) temperature compensation is also a "method of sale" issue and the
proposal should be retained as an information item until an accompanying
method of sale requirement is added to NIST Handbook 130; (2) the
proposal has strong support, and the item should go forward for
adoption; and (3) there is not enough support for this item; therefore,
it would not be adopted.

At the 2006 NCWM Interim Meeting, the Committee agreed to leave the
proposal on its agenda as an information item because the L&R Committee
was closer to fully developing a corresponding method of sale
requirement that is acceptable to most jurisdictions. The Committee
encourages the weights and measures community to review the newly
modified L&R item along with the proposal shown in the recommendation
above and provide input to the Committee prior to the 2007 January NCWM
Interim Meeting.

At their fall meetings CWMA, NEWMA, SWMA, and WWMA supported the
proposal as a voting item on the 2007 NCWM S&T Committee's agenda. SWMA
recommended the development of an additional requirement that the device
have the ability to display both gross and net indications, but did not
have a specific proposal to offer at the time. WWMA reiterated that
temperature-compensated devices are already in use in some
jurisdictions.

For additional background on this item, see the 2000 through 2006 S&T
Final Reports.

###### 356(a) GRAIN MOISTURE METERS

###### 

####### S.1.2. Grain or Seed Kind and Class Selection and Recording and Table S.1.2. Grain Types Considered for Type Evaluation and Calibration and Minimum Acceptable Abbreviations

###### 

**Source:** NTETC Grain Analyzer (GA) Sector

**Recommendation:** Modify Handbook 44 Section 5.56.(a) Grain Moisture
Meters Paragraph S.1.2. and Table S.1.2. to include minimum acceptable
abbreviations for "multi-class" grain moisture calibrations as follows:

> S.1.2. Grain or Seed Kind and Class Selection and Recording. -
> Provision shall be made for selecting and recording the kind and class
> [or multi-class group]{.underline} (as appropriate) of grain or seed
> to be measured.  The means to select the kind and class [or
> multi-class group]{.underline} of grain or seed shall be readily
> visible and the kind and class [or multi-class group]{.underline} of
> grain or seed selected shall be clearly and definitely identified.
> Abbreviations for grain types [and multi-class groups]{.underline}
> indicated on the meter must meet the minimum acceptable abbreviations
> listed in Table S.1.2. ~~Meters shall have the capability (i.e.,
> display capacity) of indicating the grain type using a minimum of four
> characters in order to accommodate the four-character abbreviations
> listed in Table S.1.2.~~
>
> (Amended 1993, ~~and~~1995, **[and 200X]{.underline})**

+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| ***Table S.1.2.  |                 |                 |              |
| Grain Types [and |                 |                 |              |
| Multi-Class      |                 |                 |              |
| Gro              |                 |                 |              |
| ups]{.underline} |                 |                 |              |
| Considered for   |                 |                 |              |
| Type Evaluation  |                 |                 |              |
| and Calibration  |                 |                 |              |
| and              |                 |                 |              |
| [Th              |                 |                 |              |
| eir]{.underline} |                 |                 |              |
| Minimum          |                 |                 |              |
| Acceptable       |                 |                 |              |
| Abbreviations*** |                 |                 |              |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| ***Grain Type*** | ***Minimum      | ##              | ***Minimum   |
|                  | Acceptable      | ## *Grain Type* | Acceptable   |
|                  | Abbreviation*** |                 | Abb          |
|                  |                 |                 | reviation*** |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| *Corn*           | *CORN*          | *Soybeans*      | *SOYB*       |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| *Durum Wheat*    | *DURW*          | *Two-Rowed      | *TRB*        |
|                  |                 | Barley*         |              |
| *Soft White      | *SWW*           |                 | *SRB*        |
| Wheat*           |                 | *Six-Rowed      |              |
|                  | *HRSW*          | Barley*         | **           |
| *Hard Red Spring |                 |                 | *[BARLEY]{.u |
| Wheat*           | *HRWW*          | ***[All-Class   | nderline}*** |
|                  |                 | Barley\*]       |              |
| *Hard Red Winter | *SRWW*          | {.underline}*** |              |
| Wheat*           |                 |                 |              |
|                  | *HDWW*          |                 |              |
| *Soft Red Winter |                 |                 |              |
| Wheat*           | ***[WHEAT]      |                 |              |
|                  | {.underline}*** |                 |              |
| *Hard White      |                 |                 |              |
| Wheat*           | ***[WHTEXDUR]   |                 |              |
|                  | {.underline}*** |                 |              |
| ***[All-Class    |                 |                 |              |
| Wheat\*          |                 |                 |              |
| ]{.underline}*** |                 |                 |              |
|                  |                 |                 |              |
| ***[Wheat        |                 |                 |              |
| Excluding        |                 |                 |              |
| Durum\*          |                 |                 |              |
| ]{.underline}*** |                 |                 |              |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
|                  |                 | *Oats*          | *OATS*       |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| *Sunflower seed  | *SUNF*          | *Long Grain     | *LGRR*       |
| (Oil)*           |                 | Rough Rice*     |              |
|                  |                 |                 | *MGRR*       |
|                  |                 | *Medium Grain   |              |
|                  |                 | Rough Rice*     | ***          |
|                  |                 |                 | [RGHRICE]{.u |
|                  |                 | ***[All-Class   | nderline}*** |
|                  |                 | Rough           |              |
|                  |                 | Rice\*]         |              |
|                  |                 | {.underline}*** |              |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| *Grain Sorghum*  | *SORG           | *Small Oil      |              |
|                  | [o              | Seeds (under    |              |
|                  | r]{.underline}* | consideration)* |              |
|                  |                 |                 |              |
|                  | *MILO*          |                 |              |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| **[\[Note: Grain |                 |                 |              |
| Types marked     |                 |                 |              |
| with an asterisk |                 |                 |              |
| (\*) are         |                 |                 |              |
| "Multi-Class     |                 |                 |              |
| Calibrations"\   |                 |                 |              |
| ]]{.underline}** |                 |                 |              |
|                  |                 |                 |              |
| *                |                 |                 |              |
| \[Nonretroactive |                 |                 |              |
| as of January 1, |                 |                 |              |
| 1998\]*          |                 |                 |              |
|                  |                 |                 |              |
| (Table Added     |                 |                 |              |
| 1993) (Amended   |                 |                 |              |
| 1995,            |                 |                 |              |
| **~~and~~**1998, |                 |                 |              |
| **[and           |                 |                 |              |
| 200X             |                 |                 |              |
| ]{.underline}**) |                 |                 |              |
+------------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+

**Background/Discussion:** The GMM Chapter of Publication 14 was
recently amended to allow multi-class moisture calibrations.
"Multi-class" describes the grouping of grain classes in a calibration.
There are a total of 15 NTEP grains, which include wheat, rice and
barley, all of which have different classes. There are six classes of
wheat, two classes of barley and two classes of rice. A manufacturer may
decide to have (1) a separate calibration for each individual class of
wheat, rice or barley, or (2) have a single calibration for all the
classes of wheat, barley or rice ("All-Class Wheat, All-Class Barley, or
All-Class Rice"), or (3) have a calibration that includes all the
classes of wheat except durum wheat ("WHTEXDUR" Wheat excluding durum).
Examples (2) and (3) are "multi-class" calibrations. Currently, the
acceptable abbreviations (and grain names) in Table S.1.2. of
Handbook 44 do not address the groupings and the names that might be
used for selecting and recording "multi-class" calibrations. At its
August 2006 meeting, the NTETC Grain Analyzer Sector agreed that
"multi-class" groups should be added to Table S.1.2. Grain Types
Considered for Type Evaluation and Calibration and Minimum Acceptable
Abbreviations and included minimum acceptable abbreviations for
"multi-class" groups, and Paragraph S.1.2. Grain or Seed Kind and Class
Selection and Recording should be modified to recognize "multi-class"
groupings.

Paragraph S.1.2. Grain or Seed Kind and Class Selection and Recording
requires that the means to select the kind and class of grain or seed be
readily visible and that the kind and class of grain or seed selected be
clearly and definitely identified. A multi-class grain calibration that
includes all the NTEP classes of a given grain type (e.g., two-rowed
barley and six-rowed barley) can be clearly and definitely identified by
a single type name (e.g., BARLEY). Similarly, both long-grain and
medium-grain rough rice could be identified unambiguously as \"rough
rice.\" However, a multi-class grain calibration that does not include
all of the NTEP classes of a grain type may not be clearly and
definitely identified using a single grain type name (e.g., wheat). For
example, a calibration for \"all wheat except durum\" cannot be labeled
\"WHEAT\" because the grain type \"WHEAT\" (i.e. "all-class wheat")
includes \"durum wheat.\"

At its August 2006 meeting the NTETC Grain Analyzer Sector agreed the
originally suggested multi-class groups--soft wheat, hard wheat, red
wheat, and white wheat--were confusing and subject to potential misuse.
Only the following multi-class groups should be considered for type
evaluation:

> All-Class Wheat
>
> Wheat Excluding Durum
>
> All-Class Barley
>
> All-Class Rough Rice

A poll of manufacturers present revealed that increasing the
four-character display requirement of Paragraph S.1.2. to eight
characters would not be a problem with instruments in current
production; therefore, it was agreed that up to eight characters could
be used for multi-class group abbreviations. The Sector agreed that the
sentence specifying the display capacity was not needed because the
necessary display capacity was obvious from the number of characters in
the longest minimum acceptable abbreviation listed in Table S.1.2.

The Sector agreed to modify Paragraph S.1.2. and Table S.1.2. as shown
above and forward its recommendation to the 2007 NCWM S&T Committee for
consideration.

SWMA recommended the proposal move forward to the NCWM S&T Committee as
a voting item on its 2007 agenda.

Note: The WMD technical advisors agree that adding definitions for
"multi-class" and "all-class" groups would assist weights and measures
officials in understanding the differences between the two. Prior to the
2007 Interim Meeting WMD will ballot the Sector for approval of a
proposed definition for each.

###### 357 NEAR-INFRARED GRAIN ANALYZERS

####### 357-1 S.1.2. Selecting Grain Class and Constituent and Table S.1.2. Grain Types Considered for Type Evaluation and Calibration and Minimum Acceptable Abbreviations

**Source:** NTETC Grain Analyzer (GA) Sector

Recommendation: Modify NIST Handbook 44 Section 5.57. Near-Infrared
(NIR) Grain Analyzers Paragraph S.1.2. Selecting Grain Class and
Constituent and Table S.1.2. Grain Types Considered for Type Evaluation
and Calibration and Minimum Acceptable Abbreviations to include minimum
acceptable abbreviations for "multi-class" constituent (protein, starch,
and oil) calibrations as shown below.

> ***S.1.2. Selecting [and Recording]{.underline} Grain Class and
> Constituent.** - Provision shall be made for selecting, and recording
> the type or class **[or multi-class group]{.underline}** of grain and
> **[the]{.underline}** constituent(s) to be measured. The means to
> select the grain type or class **[or multi-class group]{.underline}**
> and **[the]{.underline}** constituent(s) shall be readily visible and
> the type or class **[or multi-class group]{.underline}** of grain and
> the constituent(s) selected shall be clearly and definitely identified
> in letters (such as HRWW, HRSW, **[WHEAT,]{.underline}** etc. or PROT,
> etc.). A symbol to identify the display of the type or class **[or
> multi-class group]{.underline}** of grain and constituent(s) selected
> is permitted provided that it is clearly defined adjacent to the
> display. Minimum acceptable abbreviations are listed in Table S.1.2.
> **~~Meters shall have the capability (i.e., display capacity) of
> indicating the grain type using a minimum of four characters in order
> to accommodate the abbreviations listed in Table S.1.2.~~***
>
> *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 2003\]*
>
> *If more than one calibration is included for a given grain type, the
> calibrations must be clearly distinguished from one another.*
>
> *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1, 2004\]*

+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
| > ***Table S.1.2. Grain Types [and       |                           |
| > Multi-Class Groups]{.underline}        |                           |
| > Considered for Type Evaluation and     |                           |
| > Calibration and [Their]{.underline}    |                           |
| > Minimum Acceptable Abbreviations***    |                           |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
| > ***Grain Type***                       | > ***Minimum Acceptable   |
|                                          | > Abbreviation***         |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
| > *Durum Wheat*                          | > *DURW*                  |
| >                                        | >                         |
| > *Hard Red Spring Wheat*                | > *HRSW*                  |
| >                                        | >                         |
| > *Hard Red Winter Wheat*                | > *HRWW*                  |
| >                                        | >                         |
| > *Hard White Wheat*                     | > *HDWW*                  |
| >                                        | >                         |
| > *Soft Red Winter Wheat*                | > *SRWW*                  |
| >                                        | >                         |
| > *Soft White Wheat*                     | > *SWW*                   |
| >                                        | >                         |
| > ***[All-Class Wheat\*]{.underline}***  | >                         |
| >                                        | ***[WHEAT]{.underline}*** |
| > ***[Wheat Excluding                    | >                         |
| > Durum\*]{.underline}***                | > ***                     |
| >                                        | [WHTEXDUR]{.underline}*** |
| > *Soybeans*                             | >                         |
| >                                        | > *SOYB*                  |
| > *Two-Rowed Barley*                     | >                         |
| >                                        | > *TRB*                   |
| > *Six-Rowed Barley*                     | >                         |
| >                                        | > *SRB*                   |
| > ***[All-Class Barley\*]{.underline}*** | >                         |
| >                                        | > *                       |
| > *Corn*                                 | **[BARLEY]{.underline}*** |
|                                          | >                         |
|                                          | > *CORN*                  |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
| **[\[Note: Grain Types marked with an    |                           |
| asterisk (\*) are "Multi-Class           |                           |
| Calibrations"\]]{.underline}**           |                           |
|                                          |                           |
| *\[Nonretroactive as of January 1,       |                           |
| 2003\]*                                  |                           |
|                                          |                           |
| (Table Amended 2001 **[and               |                           |
| 200X]{.underline}**)                     |                           |
+------------------------------------------+---------------------------+

> (Amended 2003 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

**Background/Discussion:** The NIR Chapter of Publication 14 was
recently amended to allow multi-class moisture calibrations.
"Multi-class" describes the grouping of grain classes in a calibration.
There are a total of 15 NTEP grains, which include wheat, rice and
barley, all of which have different classes. There are six classes of
wheat, two classes of barley and two classes of rice. A manufacturer may
decide to have (1) a separate calibration for each individual class of
wheat, rice or barley, or (2) have a single calibration for all the
classes of wheat, barley or rice ("All-Class Wheat, All-Class Barley, or
All-Class Rice"), or (3) have a calibration that includes all the
classes of wheat except durum wheat ("WHTEXDUR" Wheat excluding durum).
Examples (2) and (3) are "multi-class" calibrations. Currently, the
acceptable abbreviations (and grain names) in Table S.1.2. of
Handbook 44 do not address the groupings and the names that might be
used for selecting and recording "multi-class" calibrations. At its
August 2006 meeting, the NTETC Grain Analyzer Sector agreed that
"multi-class" groups should be added to Table S.1.2. Grain Types
Considered for Type Evaluation and Calibration and Minimum Acceptable
Abbreviations and included minimum acceptable abbreviations for
"multi-class" groups, and Paragraph S.1.2. Selecting Grain Class and
Constituent should be modified to recognize "multi-class" groupings.

The Sector recommended changes to the GMM Code Table S.1.2. and
Paragraph S.1.2. and also recommended modifications to the Near-Infrared
Code to provide minimum acceptable abbreviations for multi-class
groupings when user selection of a multi-class group is performed using
the group name or an abbreviation of the name.

The Sector agreed to modify Paragraph S.1.2. and Table S.1.2. as shown
above and forward its recommendation to the 2007 NCWM S&T Committee for
consideration.

**SWMA Recommendation:** SWMA recommended the proposal move forward to
the NCWM S&T Committee as a voting item on its 2007 agenda.

Note: The WMD technical advisors believe that adding definitions for
"multi-class" and "all-class" groupings would assist weights and
measures officials in understanding the differences between the two.
Prior to the 2007 Interim Meeting WMD will ballot the Sector for
approval of a proposed definition for each.

###### 360 OTHER ITEMS

####### 360-1 International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) Report

Many issues before the OIML, the Asian-Pacific Legal Metrology Forum
(APLMF), and other international groups are within the purview of the
Committee. Additional information on OIML activities will appear in the
2007 Board of Directors Interim agenda and on the OIML website at
[http://www.oiml.org](http://www.oiml.org/). NIST WMD staff will provide
updates on OIML activities during the open hearing session at the
January 2007 NCWM Interim Meeting in Jacksonville, Florida. For more
information on specific OIML‑related device activities, contact the WMD
staff listed in the table below. The OIML projects listed below
represent only currently active projects. For additional information on
other OIML device activities that involve WMD staff, please contact WMD
using the information listed below:

WWMA and SWMA support these issues and the related device activities as
an Information Item on the Committee\'s agenda.

+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| **NIST     |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| Weights    |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| and        |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| Measures   |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| Division   |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| (WMD)**    |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| **Contact  |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| List**     |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
+============+===+========+===+=============+===+==================+===========+
| **Staff**  |   | *      |   | **E-mail**  |   | **Re             | **Postal  |
|            |   | *Telep |   |             |   | sponsibilities** | Mail or   |
|            |   | hone** |   |             |   |                  | Fax**     |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Mr. Steven |   | \      |   | <steven.coo |   | •R 50            | All       |
| Cook       |   | (301\) |   | k@nist.gov> |   | \"Continuous     | contacts: |
| (LMDG)     |   | 97     |   |             |   | totalizing       |           |
|            |   | 5-4003 |   |             |   | Automatic        | NIST WMD  |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Weighing         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments      | 1         |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | (Belt            | 00 Bureau |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Weighers)\"      | Drive     |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 51            | MS 2600   |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | \"Automatic      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Catchweighing    | Gait      |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments\"    | hersburg, |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  | MD        |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 60            |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Metrological    | 2         |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Regulations for  | 0899-2600 |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Load Cells"      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  | WMD Tel:  |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 76            |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Non-automatic   | \(301\)   |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Weighing         | 975-4004  |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments"     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  | Fax:      |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  | \(301\)   |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  | 975-8091  |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Dr.        |   | \      |   | ch          |   | •B 10 "Framework |           |
| Charles    |   | (301\) |   | arles.ehrli |   | for a Mutual     |           |
| Ehrlich    |   | 97     |   | ch@nist.gov |   | Acceptance       |           |
| (ILMG)     |   | 5-4834 |   |             |   | Arrangement      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | (MAA) on OIML    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Type             |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Evaluations"     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •TC 3/SC 5       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Expression of   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Uncertainty in   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measurement in   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Legal Metrology  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Applications,"   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Guidelines for  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | the Application  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | of ISO/IEC 17025 |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | to the           |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Assessment of    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Laboratories     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Performing Type  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Evaluation       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Tests," & "OIML  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Procedures for   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Review of        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Laboratories to  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Enable Mutual    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Acceptance of    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Test Results and |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | OIML             |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Certificates of  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Conformity"      |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Mr.        |   | \      |   | ric         |   | •R 106           |           |
| Richard    |   | (301\) |   | hard.harshm |   | "Automatic       |           |
| Harshman   |   | 97     |   | an@nist.gov |   | Ra               |           |
| (LMDG)     |   | 5-8107 |   |             |   | il‑weighbridges" |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 107           |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Discontinuous   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Totalizing       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Automatic        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Weighing         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments"     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | (totalizing      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | hopper weighers) |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 134           |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Automatic       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments for  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Weighing Road    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Vehicles         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | In‑Motion and    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring Axle   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Loads"           |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Ms. Diane  |   | \      |   | <diane.le   |   | •R 59 "Moisture  |           |
| Lee        |   | (301\) |   | e@nist.gov> |   | Meters for       |           |
| McGowan    |   | 97     |   |             |   | Cereal Grains    |           |
| (LMDG)     |   | 5-4405 |   |             |   | and Oilseeds"    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 92 \"Wood     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Moisture         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Met              |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | ers-Verification |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Methods and      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Equipment\"      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 121 \"The     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Scale of         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Relative         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Humidity of Air  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Certified        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Against          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Saturated Salt   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Solution\"       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •TC 17/SC 8      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Measuring       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments for  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Protein          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Determination in |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Grains"          |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Mr. Ralph  |   | \      |   | <r          |   | •R 35 "Material  |           |
| Richter    |   | (301\) |   | alph.richte |   | Measures of      |           |
| (ILMG)     |   | 97     |   | r@nist.gov> |   | Length for       |           |
|            |   | 5-3997 |   |             |   | General Use"     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 105 & R 117   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Measuring       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Systems for      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Liquids Other    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Than Water"      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | (includes Direct |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Mass)            |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 118 "Testing  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Procedures and   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Test Report      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Format for       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Pattern          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Examination of   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Fuel Dispensers  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | for Motor        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Vehicles"        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •TC 3/SC 4       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Verification    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Period of        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Utility Meters   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Using Sampling   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Inspections"     |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Mr. Wayne  |   | \      |   | <s.stiefe   |   | •TC 8/SC 8 "Gas  |           |
| Stiefel    |   | (301\) |   | l@nist.gov> |   | Meters"          |           |
| (ILMG)     |   | 97     |   |             |   | (Diaphragm,      |           |
|            |   | 5-4011 |   |             |   | Rotary Piston, & |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Turbine Gas      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Meters)          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 49 "Water     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Meters" (Cold    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Potable Water &  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Hot Water        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Meters)          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 71 "Fixed     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Storage Tanks"   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 80 "Road and  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Rail Tankers"    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 85 "Automatic |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Level Gauges for |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring the    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Level of Liquid  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | in Fixed Storage |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Tanks"           |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •TC 5/SC 2       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "General         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Requirements for |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Software         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Controlled       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments"     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •TC 8/SC 7 P1    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Measuring       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Systems for      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Gaseous Fuel"    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | (i.e., large     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | pipelines)       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •TC 8/SC 7 P2    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | "Compressed      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Gaseous Fuels    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Systems for      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Vehicles"        |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Dr. Ambler |   | \      |   | <amble      |   | •D 16            |           |
| Thompson   |   | (301\) |   | r@nist.gov> |   | "Principles of   |           |
| (ILMG)     |   | 97     |   |             |   | Assurance of     |           |
|            |   | 5-2333 |   |             |   | Metrological     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Control"         |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •D 19 "Pattern   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Evaluation and   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Pattern          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Approval"        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •D 20 "Initial   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | and Subsequent   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Verification of  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments and  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Processes"       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •D 27 Initial    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Verification of  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments      |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Using the        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Manufacturer's   |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Quality          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Management       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | System"          |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 34 "Accuracy  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Classes of       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Measuring        |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Instruments"     |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | •R 46 "Active    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Electrical       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Energy Meters    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | for Direct       |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Connection of    |           |
|            |   |        |   |             |   | Class 2"         |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| Ms. Juana  |   | \      |   | <ju         |   | •R 21            |           |
| Williams   |   | (301\) |   | ana.william |   | "Taximeters"     |           |
| (LMDG)     |   | 97     |   | s@nist.gov> |   |                  |           |
|            |   | 5-3989 |   |             |   |                  |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| **LIST OF  |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
| ACRONYMS** |   |        |   |             |   |                  |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+
| ILMG --    | L |        | B |             | R |                  |           |
| Int        | M |        | - |             | - |                  |           |
| ernational | D |        | - |             | - |                  |           |
| Legal      | G |        | B |             | R |                  |           |
| Metrology  | - |        | a |             | e |                  |           |
| Group      | - |        | s |             | c |                  |           |
|            | L |        | i |             | o |                  |           |
|            | e |        | c |             | m |                  |           |
|            | g |        | P |             | m |                  |           |
|            | a |        | u |             | e |                  |           |
|            | l |        | b |             | n |                  |           |
|            | M |        | l |             | d |                  |           |
|            | e |        | i |             | a |                  |           |
|            | t |        | c |             | t |                  |           |
|            | r |        | a |             | i |                  |           |
|            | o |        | t |             | o |                  |           |
|            | l |        | i |             | n |                  |           |
|            | o |        | o |             |   |                  |           |
|            | g |        | n |             | S |                  |           |
|            | y |        |   |             | C |                  |           |
|            | D |        | D |             | - |                  |           |
|            | e |        | - |             | - |                  |           |
|            | v |        | - |             | S |                  |           |
|            | i |        | D |             | u |                  |           |
|            | c |        | o |             | b |                  |           |
|            | e |        | c |             | c |                  |           |
|            | s |        | u |             | o |                  |           |
|            | G |        | m |             | m |                  |           |
|            | r |        | e |             | m |                  |           |
|            | o |        | n |             | i |                  |           |
|            | u |        | t |             | t |                  |           |
|            | p |        |   |             | t |                  |           |
|            |   |        | P |             | e |                  |           |
|            |   |        | - |             | e |                  |           |
|            |   |        | - |             |   |                  |           |
|            |   |        | P |             | T |                  |           |
|            |   |        | r |             | C |                  |           |
|            |   |        | o |             | - |                  |           |
|            |   |        | j |             | - |                  |           |
|            |   |        | e |             | T |                  |           |
|            |   |        | c |             | e |                  |           |
|            |   |        | t |             | c |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | h |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | n |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | i |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | c |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | a |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | l |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | C |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | o |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | m |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | m |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | i |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | t |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | t |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | e |                  |           |
|            |   |        |   |             | e |                  |           |
+------------+---+--------+---+-------------+---+------------------+-----------+

####### 360-2 Developing Items

NCWM established a category of items called "Developing Items" as a
mechanism to share information about emerging issues which have merit
and are of national interest, but that have not received sufficient
review by all parties affected by the proposal or that may be
insufficiently developed to warrant review by the Committee. The
developing items are currently under review by at least one regional
association or technical committee.

Developing Items are listed in Appendix A according to the specific NIST
Handbook 44 Code section under which they fall. Periodically, proposals
will be removed from the developing item agenda without further action
because the submitter recommends that it be withdrawn. Any remaining
proposals will be renumbered accordingly.

The Committee encourages interested parties to examine the proposals
included in Appendix A and send their comments to the contact listed in
each item. The Committee asks that the regional associations and NTETC
Sectors continue their work to fully develop each proposal. Should an
association or Sector decide to discontinue work on an item, the
Committee asks that it be notified.

Michael J. Sikula, New York, Chairman (1)

Carol P. Fulmer, South Carolina (2)

Todd R. Lucas, Ohio (3)

Brett Saum, San Luis Obispo County, California (4)

Kristin J. Young, Colorado (5)

Ted Kingsbury, Measurement Canada, Technical Advisor

Richard Suiter, NIST, Technical Advisor

Juana Williams, NIST, Technical Advisor

**Specifications and Tolerances Committee**

## THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

## **Appendix A**

[]{#AppendixADevItems .anchor}**Item 360-2: Developing Items**

[]{#AppendixA_Pt1a .anchor}**Part 1, Item 1 Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems:
UR.3.2.(c) Maintenance; Zero Load Tests**

**Source:** Western Weights and Measures Association (WWMA)

**Recommendation:** Modify UR.3.2.(c) as follows:

> **UR.3.2. Maintenance.** - Belt-conveyor scales and idlers shall be
> maintained and serviced in accordance with manufacturer\'s
> instructions and the following:

(c) **[Zero-load and load (simulated or material)
    tests,]{.underline}~~S[s]{.underline}~~**~~imulated load
    tests**[,]{.underline}** or material tests, **and zero load
    tests**~~ shall be conducted at periodic intervals between official
    tests in order to provide reasonable assurance that the device is
    performing correctly.

> **[(Amended 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> **[The action to be taken as a result of the zero-load tests is as
> follows:]{.underline}**
>
> **[(Added 2000X)]{.underline}**
>
> **- [if the change in zero is less than ±0.1 %, make no adjustment,
> record results and proceed to simulated load tests; or]{.underline}**

-   **[if the change in zero is ± 0.1 % to ± 0.25 %, inspect the
    conveyor and weighing area for compliance with UR.2. Installation
    Requirements and retest.]{.underline}**

> **[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**
>
> The action to be taken as a result of the [simulated load
> or]{.underline} material tests ~~or simulated load tests~~ is as
> follows:

(Amended 2002)

> \- if the error is less than 0.25 %, no adjustment is to be made;

-   if the error is at least 0.25 % but not more than 0.6 **%, [inspect
    the conveyor and weighing area for compliance with UR.2.
    Installation Requirements and repeat the test]{.underline}
    ~~adjustment may be made if the official with statutory authority is
    notified~~;**

> (Amended 1991 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)
>
> \- **[if the result of tests, after compliance with UR.2. Installation
> Requirements is verified, remain greater than ± 0.25 %, a span
> correction shall be made and the official with statutory authority
> notified]{.underline}**
>
> \- if the error is greater than 0.6 % but does not exceed 0.75 %,
> **[inspect the conveyor and weighing area for compliance with UR.2.
> Installation Requirements, and repeat the test;]{.underline}**
>
> (Amended 1991 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

-   **[if the result of tests, after UR.2. Installation Requirements
    compliance is verified, remain greater than ± 0.25 %, a span
    correction shall be made, the official with statutory authority
    shall be notified and an official test shall be
    conducted]{.underline}**

-   if the error is greater than 0.75 %, an official test is required.

> (Amended 1987 and 200X)

**Discussion:** NIST Handbook 44 gives limited guidance on what to do
with zero-load test results. Belt loss is not the only factor which may
require the scale operator to make physical adjustments to the
belt-conveyor system to correct for deficiencies. For example, a dirty
scale structure or a worn belt scraper will increase the zero reference
number and the test results may exceed tolerances.

The scale user/owner has to protect his interest between weighing
transactions. At present, some belt-conveyor systems may have error
greater than 0.5 % in zero reference over a 24‑hour period. The belt is
part of tare (net load) on any empty running system and the system must
be maintained to within tolerance at all times.

During its 2006 meeting, WWMA recommended the alternate industry
proposal shown above. WWMA also recommended the alternate proposal be
considered at a future meeting of the USNWG on Belt-Conveyor Scale
Systems. WWMA recommended the alternate proposal remain a developmental
item to allow sufficient time for a review by the work group. CWMA
concurs with WWMA\'s recommendation.

SWMA agrees with the WWMA recommendation

To comment on this proposal, contact Steven Cook, NIST Technical Advisor
to the NTETC Belt-Conveyor Scales Sector, by e-mail at
<steven.cook@nist.gov>, by telephone at (301) 975‑4003, by fax at
(301) 975‑8091, or by postal mail at NIST WMD, 100 Bureau Drive MS 2600,
Gaithersburg, MD 20899‑2600.

[]{#AppendixA_Pt1b .anchor}**Part 1, Item 2 Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems:
UR.2.2.(n) Belt Alignment**

**Source:** Southern Weights and Measures Association (SWMA)

**Recommendation:** Modify Paragraph UR.2.2.(n) as follows:

####### 

**UR.2.2. Conveyor Installation**

####### 

**(n) Belt Alignment. -- [The belt shall be centered on the idlers in
the weighing area and shall track in practically the same position
whether empty or loaded.]{.underline}** The belt shall not extend beyond
the edge of the idler roller in any area of the conveyor.

(Amended 1998 **[and 200X]{.underline}**)

**Discussion:** During the 2006 NCWM Interim Meeting, the Committee
considered the NCWM review panel's recommendations and heard comments
from industry. The review panel indicated the proposal should have
included national data that demonstrated a need for modifying
Paragraph UR.2.2. and should be a developing item. At that time, one
representative from the belt-conveyor scale service industry indicated
there are too many factors that influence belt tracking to ensure a belt
is centered at all times. The service representative recommended that
the belt should not extend beyond the edge of the idler roller in any
area of the conveyor on the carrying side or touch holding brackets on
the return side to reduce any detrimental affects on accuracy. Industry
representatives indicated the design of idlers and scales are such that
the belt is not intended to stay in exact center. Industry also
indicated there is no mechanism available to monitor the belt's tracking
24 hours a day, seven days a week. Industry requested either
specifications for what constitutes "center" or an acceptable "range of
center" for belt tracking. Although the 2005 SWMA reported the proposal
was ready for national consideration, the Committee agreed it is more
appropriate to make the proposal a developing item until there is some
clear indication that belt alignment can be tracked for maintenance and
accuracy purposes.

At its 2006 meeting, WWMA agreed with concerns about the difficulties in
tracking belt alignment and agreed it should first be determined if
there are mechanisms capable of monitoring this feature before
establishing device requirements. Consequently, WWMA recommended this
item be withdrawn from the agenda.

CWMA does not believe this proposal should move forward without more
information from industry.

In 2006, SWMA recommended the proposal remain a developing item;
however, if industry provides no additional input, the item should be
withdrawn from the Committee\'s agenda.

To comment on this proposal, contact Steven Cook, NIST Technical Advisor
to the NTETC Weighing Sector, by e-mail at <steven.cook@nist.gov>, by
telephone at (301) 975‑4003, by fax at (301) 975‑8091, or by postal mail
at NIST WMD, 100 Bureau Drive MS 2600, Gaithersburg, MD 20899‑2600.

[]{#AppendixA_Pt2a .anchor}**Part 2, Item 1, General Code: T.5.
Predominance -- Retail Motor-Fuel Devices**

####### 

Source: Central Weights and Measures Association (CWMA)

**Recommendation:** CWMA recommends withdrawing its earlier proposal to
add a new Paragraph G‑UR.4.1.1. to the General Code and replacing it
with the following new proposal developed by the Nebraska Weights and
Measures Division to add a new Paragraph T.5. to Handbook 44
Section 3.30. as follows:

> **[T.5. Predominance - Retail Motor-Fuel Devices. - The retail
> motor-fuel devices in service at a single place of business shall be
> considered maintained in proper operating condition when evaluation of
> normal test results indicate the following parameters are
> met:]{.underline}**

(a) **[The number of meters with minus test errors in excess of one-half
    maintenance tolerance shall be less than 60 % of the meters at the
    location, and]{.underline}**

(b) **[When there are three or more meters of a single grade or type of
    fuel, the average error of the meters shall not be a minus value
    exceeding one-half maintenance tolerance. Meter test results that
    exceed maintenance tolerance shall not be included in determining
    the average meter error of a single grade or type of
    fuel.]{.underline}**

**[(Added 200X)]{.underline}**

In 1991, this same topic was brought before NCWM as an information item.
The intent of the proposal at that time was to provide guidance to
states in the interpretation of General Code Paragraph G‑UR.4.1.
Maintenance of Equipment. In 1993, the State of Wisconsin adopted a
policy that defined "predominance" as shown in the proposal. That policy
was similar to the one proposed in 1991, except Wisconsin felt that
one-third [acceptance]{.underline} tolerance was too stringent because
there was a need to take into account normal variability in testing
procedures, equipment, and environmental conditions found in the field.
Wisconsin, therefore, adopted a "greater than one-third"
[maintenance]{.underline} tolerance guideline. In 2003, the Wisconsin
policy was further refined by deleting the language "[all]{.underline}
devices are found to be in error in a direction favorable to the device
user." The new guideline for permissible errors was "[sixty percent or
more]{.underline} of the devices are found to be in error in favor of
the device owner/user by more than one-third of the maintenance
tolerance." Both of these criteria were seldom used in the field because
they made the policy confusing.

Recently NIST conducted a national survey of retail motor-fuel dispenser
testing and the results pointed to a need to gain more uniformity in the
application of tolerances. There is a wide variation in how different
states handle the "predominance" question. Strides should be continually
made to gain uniformity. Adoption of the proposed new
Paragraph G‑UR.4.1.1. would be one step toward gaining greater
uniformity. With more than five years of history using the proposed
criteria, Wisconsin saw a relatively low number of devices rejected on
the basis of "predominance," and most station owners and all service
companies have a working understanding of predominance.

In 2005, CWMA agreed to submit the modified proposal to the NCWM S&T
Committee with a recommendation that it be placed on the Committee's
agenda as a "Developing Item."

At their fall 2006 meetings, NEWMA, SWMA, and WWMA considered an earlier
CWMA proposal to modify a General Code requirement and set limits on how
to determine predominance in favor of the device operator. NEWMA
believes this item is already adequately addressed in Handbook 44 and
recommends it be withdrawn from the NCWM S&T Committee's 2007 agenda.
SWMA recommends that Developing Item, Part 1, Item 1, on the 2006 NCWM
S&T Committee agenda remain "developing" as a user requirement in the
General Code. SWMA encourages the jurisdictions to review the proposed
policy and try it out. WWMA considered the limits in the proposal too
stringent given the effects of temperature and other uncertainties. WWMA
is concerned dispensers will be set to the limits in the proposal rather
than as close as practical to zero error. The current General Code
adequately addresses predominance, and jurisdictions may establish
policy to gain uniformity in determining predominance. Consequently,
WWMA recommends this proposal be withdrawn from the agenda.

**Part 2, Item 2 Liquid-Measuring Devices: Price Posting and Computing
Capability and Requirements for a Retail Motor-Fuel Dispenser (RMFD)**

**Source:** WMD and all Regional Associations

**Recommendation:** Review and update NIST Handbook 44 requirements that
address RMFD pricing and computing capability. This issue is under
development and not ready for committee action.

**Background/Discussion:** In the early 1990s, various sections of the
Liquid-Measuring Devices Code in NIST Handbook 44 (including
Paragraphs S.1.6.4. Display of Unit Price and Product Identity,
S.1.6.5.4. Selection of Unit Price, UR.3.2. Unit Price and Product
Identity, and UR.3.3. Computing Device) were modified to address
multi-tier pricing applications such as cash-credit. Since that time,
marketing practices have evolved and recent years have seen the addition
of new practices such as frequent shopper discounts and club member
discounts. Numerous questions have been posed to the NIST Weights and
Measures Division (WMD) regarding the requirements for posting unit
prices, calculation of total price, customer-operated controls, and
other related topics such as the definitions for associated terminology.

It is clear from these questions that changes are needed to NIST
Handbook 44 to ensure the requirements adequately address current
marketplace conditions and practices. WMD has raised this issue with the
NCWM S&T Committee and has also discussed a variety of pricing practices
with individual state and local weights and measures jurisdictions.

NIST WMD is now in the process of reviewing the existing requirements
and their application to current market practices. WMD has collected
information on a number of scenarios, including the following: (NOTE:
The conditions under some of these scenarios may not typically fall
under the authority of weights and measures jurisdictions.)

WMD is interested in receiving input from the weights and measures
community about the various practices and pricing structures in use.
Working with input from the weights and measures community, WMD plans to
introduce proposed modifications to current requirements through the
regional weights and measures associations and technical committees. In
the meantime, WMD welcomes opportunities to discuss this issue at
regional weights and measures associations to ensure the issue is
adequately addressed.

WWMA acknowledged that marketing practices change on a daily basis and
the task to ensure Handbook 44 codes address each scenario is
monumental. However, WWMA encourages NIST in its efforts to tackle this
ongoing issue. Therefore, WWMA recommends this issue be considered and
move forward to the national level as a developing item.

CWMA recommends that the State Directors compile information regarding
whether or not they are enforcing the Liquid-Measuring Devices Code in
NIST Handbook 44 (including Paragraphs S.1.6.4. Display of Unit Price
and Product Identity, S.1.6.5.4. Selection of Unit Price, UR.3.2. Unit
Price and Product Identity, and UR.3.3. Computing Device). If they are
not enforcing the specific code requirement, it should be determined why
not (for example, overriding state statute). Information is to be sent
to:

James Truex, Chief Phone: (614) 728-6290

Division of Weights and Measures Fax: (614) 728-6424

8995 E. Main Street E-mail: truex@mail.agri.state.oh.us

Reynoldsburg, Ohio 43068

NEWMA looks forward to further development of this item.

SWMA recommends adding this item to the NCWM S&T Committee's 2007 Agenda
as a developing issue.

To comment on this proposal, contact NIST technical advisors to the NCWM
S&T Committee: Richard Suiter at <richard.suiter@nist.gov>, or by
telephone at (301) 975‑4406, or Juana Williams at
<juana.williams@nist.gov> or by telephone at (301) 975‑3989, or either
by fax at (301) 975‑8091, or by mail at NIST WMD, 100 Bureau Drive
MS 2600, Gaithersburg, MD 20899‑2600.

**Part 3, Item 1 Water Meters: UR.2.1. Accessibility for Reading.**

**Recommendation:** Add a new Paragraph UR.2. to Handbook 44, Section
3.36. Water Meters, as follows:

> **[UR.2. Accessibility for Reading. - A water meter shall be so
> located that there is reasonable access to obtain a reading by means
> of the primary indicating element or a remote indicating element.
> Otherwise, it shall be the responsibility of the device owner or
> operator to make available, within 24 hours of a request being
> received by the owner or operator from a current lessee, mortgagee, or
> titleholder, the necessary labor and support to provide the consumer a
> means to obtain a meter reading, provided such requests are made with
> a frequency consistent with the normal billing cycle of the
> utility.]{.underline}**

WWMA also considered an alternate proposal developed by California to
add new Paragraph UR.2.1. to the Water Meters Code as follows:

> **[UR.2.1. Accessibility of Customer Indication. - An unobstructed
> standing space of at least 30 in wide, 36 in deep, and 78 in high
> shall be maintained in front of an indication intended for use by the
> customer to allow for reading the indicator. The customer indication
> shall be readily observable to a person located within the standing
> space without necessity of a separate tool or device.]{.underline}**

***Industry Position:*** The industry proposal is intended to assist
enforcement personnel in properly and uniformly enforcing the applicable
regulations for obtaining meter readings. The proposed language is more
appropriate than: 1) trying to define inherently ambiguous and
subjective terms like "reasonable" and "ordinary circumstances" or
2) defining specific height requirements that insure visibility for
customers and/or officials. Proposed new Paragraph UR.2.1. Accessibility
for Reading should be added to Section 3.36 Water Meters Code of
Handbook 44 because there needs to be language which describes
acceptable and applicable provisions.

Industry members stated that existing language in General Code
Paragraphs G-UR2.1.1. and G-UR.3.3. includes terms such as "reasonable"
and "readily observable" which are subjective requirements; it is not
possible to understand the installation requirements without relying on
each local authority's interpretation of these terms, which varies even
within the same jurisdiction.

Water submetering locations are in a vast majority of cases NOT chosen
by the Service Agency or the property/meter owner, but are dictated by
the engineers and architects who use both national and state building
and plumbing codes as their primary guide.

The regulation which is most commonly cited on notices of violation for
register visibility issues is Paragraph G‑UR.3.3. Position of Equipment.
Handbook 44 defines [direct sale]{.underline} as "*a sale in which both
parties in the transaction are present when the quantity is being
determined*...,". Industry notes that Paragraph G-UR.3.3 is being
misapplied and should have no bearing on a water submeter since both
parties are **not** present when the quantity is determined.
Furthermore, the antonym of a direct sale would be an indirect sale.
NIST Handbook 130, Packaging and Labeling, Section 11. Exemptions,
Subsection 11.1.1 Indirect Sale of Random Packages gives examples of
indirect sales, several of which are exact examples of how water
submetering is paid for. Examples of such indirect methods include:
on-line bill payments, phone bill payments, fax bill payments, and bill
payments by mail.

Since water submetering is a commodity which is billed on a monthly
cycle and since water submetering is not a direct sale where both
parties are present at the time of the transaction, accessibility
requirements for reading water meters should not be the same as those
enforced on direct sale devices where transactions take place frequently
and with both parties present.

If the interpretation of the terms "reasonable and readily observable"
continue to be enforced as they are currently many meter owners will
choose to abandon their systems for alternative billing methods such as
"remote utility billing service" (RUBS) because replumbing existing
water lines within walls is costly to building and coop/condo owners.
This is especially true because there is no framework in place to know
how to perform such a plumbing retrofit so that the work will be
compliant with all interpretations of "reasonable" and "readily
observable."

A detailed, 12-month sampling of call center complaints from California
properties showed that not a single complaint about the difficulty in
obtaining a water meter reading had been received.

***Regional Association Positions:***

NIST Handbook 44, Water Meters Code Paragraph S.1.1.1. General permits a
remote display as long as it is "readily accessible to the customer."

The industry proposed language is no more definitive than existing
language. The industry proposal removes the requirement for providing a
readily accessible customer indicator. The alternative language would
remove the vagueness from the current requirement while providing
flexibility to installers.

Property owners do not read the indicators on each meter or they would
be placed in a more convenient reading location. With remote reading,
however, many meters are now being placed in inaccessible locations.
Hardware is being installed to permit remote readings for billing
purposes, but not for customers use.

Complaints have been lodged where the remote billing did not match the
meter readings and we believe customers should be able to easily monitor
their actual use without involving the property owner. Occasionally
disputes exist between the property owner or manager and tenants that
make requesting assistance a less desirable solution to reading a meter
for verification.

The industry in California has been advised that remote customer
indications are permissible. However, industry has not submitted devices
for California type evaluation. Between better planning for the
installation of future meters and submitting remote indicators to be
approved for use by customers, this problem can be resolved in a manner
more consistent with other device applications.

WWMA considered a proposal developed by industry and an alternate
recommendation developed by California. The industry proposal permits
access to indications either through a primary indicator, remote
indicator, or requires the operator to provide a means for customer
access to meter indications when given 24 hours notice within a billing
cycle. The California proposal specifies the dimensions for a clear,
unobstructed perimeter surrounding the device to ensure accessibility
for viewing meter indications.

WWMA acknowledged that a device used to submeter a utility service is
commercial equipment that presents a unique set of circumstances because
the customer making the purchase does not observe the entire measurement
operation, but receives a bill on a periodic cycle based on meter
indications. In some cases, the operator/meter owner may be offsite and
not required to observe primary meter indications, and may not be
familiar with the unusual plumbing configurations that make it difficult
to install an accessible meter and to read a meter. Consequently, no one
General Code or Water Meter Code requirement appears to provide a
complete and uniform set of guidelines that specify all conditions for
making meter indications available so that the consumer can verify the
measurement and allow the official to conduct an inspection. Some
jurisdictions have developed policies to address this situation. In
2002, Paragraph S.1.1. was modified to ensure that when indications are
remote they remain accessible to the customer.

In any case, requirements and jurisdiction policies should address the
needs of the customer and the official for access to meter indications
without placing an undue burden on the operator or customer, and they
should not deter a customer from making a legitimate complaint. It is
essential in the marketplace to have all components used in determining
utility charges transparent; this includes meter indications that are
available to all parties involved in the transaction.

WWMA agreed that each proposal has some elements necessary to address
meter accessibility and indicator accessibility. Therefore, WWMA
recommends the proposal become a developing item to allow time to rework
the text so that there are uniform guidelines to fully address
accessibility and include the following points: (1) Installation and
location is such that there is no obstruction of the meter or
indications and (2) Indications are accessible for viewing by the
customer and official without the use of tools separate from the device.

WWMA encourages the California Division of Measurement Standards and
industry to work together to develop a proposal for regional
consideration.

At the fall 2006 CWMA Meeting, there was discussion that LP gas, natural
gas, and electric meters should be included in this proposal; however,
CWMA did not submit any additional language at this time.

SWMA supported the proposal moving forward as a developing item on the
NCWM S&T Committee's 2007 Agenda.

To comment on this proposal, contact Ken Lake, California Division of
Measurement Standards, by e-mail at <klake@cdfa.ca.gov> or by telephone
at (916) 229‑3047.

[]{#appendixa_pt2a .anchor}THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK