NISTIR 7548

Selected Impacts of Documentary

Standards Supported by NIST

2008 Edition
 1 
10% OFF

Use promo codeGETLIFELOCK to take advantage of this offer.
 

NISTIR 7548

Selected Impacts of Documentary

Standards Supported by NIST

2008 Edition

Erik Puskar 

Standards Coordination and Conformity Group 

Standards Services Division 

Technology Services 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

January 2009

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY 

Patrick Gallagher, Acting Deputy Director
10% OFF

Use promo codeGETLIFELOCK to take advantage of this offer.
i

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms............................................................................................................... ii

I. Executive Summary...............................................................................................1

II. Background ............................................................................................................3

III. Proposed Approach ...............................................................................................5

IV. Report Methodology ..............................................................................................8

V. NIST Participation.................................................................................................9

VI. Findings.................................................................................................................11

VII. Reported Outcomes .............................................................................................14

VIII. 16 CFR Part 1633 Standard for the Flammability (Open Flame) of Mattress 

Sets.........................................................................................................................18

IX. Development of Radiation Detector Standards for Homeland Security 

Applications..........................................................................................................23

X. Materials Declaration Standards to Support Environmental Regs................29

XI. Future Steps and Conclusion..............................................................................35

Table of Figures:

Figure 1 NIST Technology Services Created an Approach to Evaluating Stds.......1

Figure 2 NIST Involvement in Standards Development ............................................3

Figure 3 Strategic Assessment Development Process.................................................5

Figure 4 Breakdown of Standards Participation by Org. Type ..............................14

Figure 1F Mattress Sets..................................................................................................18

Figure 2F Burning Bed at One and a Half Minutes ....................................................21

Figure 1R NIST Technical Leadership Contributes....................................................24

Figure 2R Cargo Screening Equipment Installed at an Airport................................25

Figure 3R Handheld Radiation Detectors....................................................................27

Figure 1M NIST has Positive Impact on Standards Development..............................30

Figure 2M IPC 1752 Tool Screen Shot Showing Class 1 & 2 Declarations................33

List of Tables:

Table 1 NIST Participation in Standards Committees by OU ................................10

Table 2 Sample Overview of Impacts Derived from NIST ......................................11

Table 3 Application Areas...........................................................................................13

Table 4 Description of Intermediate Outcome Metrics............................................14

Table 5 Canvassing Results.........................................................................................37

Table 1R IEEE’s Radiation Detection Standards........................................................26
ii

List of Acronyms

ACI American Concrete Institute

ANSI American National Standards Institute

ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers

ASME American Society for Mechanical Engineers

ASTM ASTM International, formerly American Society for Testing & Materials 

CIE International Commission on Illumination

CIPM International Committee for Weights and Measures

CISPR The International Special Committee on Radio Interference

CLSI The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DNDO Domestic Nuclear Detection Office

DOE Department of Energy

FIPS Federal Information Processing Standard

GRaDER Graduated Rad/Nuc Detector Evaluation and Reporting Program

HITSP Health Information Technology Standards Panel

HL7 Health Level 7

HIS Homeland Security Instrumentation

IEC International Electrotechnical Commission

IEEE Institute of Electronic and Electrical and Electronics Engineers

IESNA Illuminating Engineering Society of North America

IETF Internet Engineering Task Force

IFSTA International Fire Service Training Association

ILO International Labour Organization

INCITS International Committee for Information Technology Standards

iNEMI The International Electronics Manufacturing Initiative

IPC formerly Institute of Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits

IT Information Technology

ISO International Organization for Standardization
iii

ITU International Telecommunication Union

JTC1 ISO Joint Technical Committee 1 (Information Technology Standards)

NEMA National Electronics Manufacturers Association

NFPA National Fire Protection Association

NIJ National Institute of Justice

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NVLAP National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

OAG Open Applications Group

OASIS Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards.

OIML International Organization for Legal Metrology

OMG Object Management Group

RM Radioactivity Measurements

SAE SAE International, formerly Society of Automotive Engineers

SCP Standards Committee Participation Database

SI International System of Units

SSL Solid State Lighting

STEP Standard for the Exchange of Product Model Data

TIA Telecommunications Industry Association

UL Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

VESA Video Electronics Standards Association

W3C World Wide Web Consortium
1

I. Executive Summary

This report is intended to reflect NIST‘s success in meeting its mission, executive 

guidance, and legislative requirements for developing standards and reporting on the 

effect of those standards on the manufacturing and service sectors. The survey and study 

also support a NIST strategic priority to foster more efficient transactions in the domestic 

and global marketplace through development and use of effective standards by 

manufacturing and service sectors. 

Figure 1 offers an overview of the reasons why evaluating NIST involvement in 

standards development makes sense and summarizes the approach towards identifying 

benefits accrued from NIST involvement in standards development. 

Figure 1: NIST Technology Services Created An Approach to Evaluating Standards Development 

Impact Based on Policy And NIST Actions

Technology Services canvassed a number of NIST operating units that were involved in 

recent standards development, obtaining results from 53 of 78 projects. The responses 

offered some interesting observations and led to a number of implications for NIST 

involvement in standards development. 

The benefits from NIST involvement included producing standards faster than would 

have been the case without NIST; creating specific improvements to products and 

services; and developing broader standards. Figure 2 offers highlights of the results.

Some specific implications are:
2

On average, for every full-time-equivalent of NIST staff working on one of the high 

impact standards, almost 12 times that amount of non-NIST staff (primarily industry) 

were supporting the project. This suggests that NIST leverages valuable industry 

labor, and is indicative of the lower bound estimate of the social benefits of standards 

development activities. 

NIST participation led to standards produced 1.65 years earlier on average. It is a 

gross indicator of the transaction time savings that NIST involvement in a voluntary 

standards development effort affords industry.

Standards in many cases would have been narrower without NIST involvement. This 

is a gross indicator of an increase in the number of newly available products or 

services enabled by the standard in question. Combined with time saving due to 

NIST‘s participation, the increase in scope scales up the economic benefits that flow 

from NIST‘s participation in voluntary standards development efforts.

1

Of 53 projects, 62% had involvement from industry groups or consortia in developing 

the standard. This percentage indicates strong industry support and, ultimately, 

significant economic impact. 

Forty-two (42) percent of respondents stated that the standard resulted in having a 

product or service available, or available at a lower cost, or more broadly, or in 

different qualities, or earlier that would not be in the absence of the standard. In 

addition, many of the other respondents, who did not specifically claim new products 

or services, did claim broader societal benefits, such as: trade facilitation, increased 

homeland security, interoperability benefits, etc. 

A large majority (85 percent) of the projects resulted in professional publications,

including journal articles, conference proceedings and presentations, NIST 

publications, magazine articles and other reports. These publications are a noneconomic indicator of the secondary output of NIST‘s engagement.

Of those 23 projects which reported claims that the standard has had an impact on 

actual products and services, there is a higher ratio of non-NIST participants to NIST 

staff (15.3 v 11.8). This indicates a higher rate of external (likely industry) 

participation. 

Taken together, it is clear that many of these NIST standards projects leveraged the 

work of non-NIST participants to develop high impact standards which were developed 

faster and resulted in product and service improvements and general benefits to the 

country. If we look at the subsets, industry involvement is, as expected, associated with 

a larger percentage of new or improved products/services. No attempt has been made 

yet to put an economic value on the resulting goods and services or the faster 

development time. 
3

Figure 2: NIST Involvement In Standards Development Generates A Range of Benefits for Industry

NIST involvement in voluntary standards development efforts need not result in new 

products or services to generate significant economic impacts. The only basic 

requirement is that NIST bring valuable resources to a process that contributes value to 

the marketplace of producers and consumers. Where new products and services are 

available, additional benefit streams will have been induced. Where NIST contributes

uniquely to the flow of those benefits, the returns to the investment of NIST‘s resources 

will be higher yet.2

II. Background

The mission of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is to promote 

U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness. One of NIST‘s core competencies is the 

development and use of standards. During late 2007, Technology Services (TS) 

canvassed other NIST Operating Units (OUs) to answer the question: How well is NIST 

doing in this area? The OUs were specifically asked about instances where NIST has 

played an active role in the development or implementation of documentary standards 

that: 

(1) have been broadly adopted, or

(2) have produced, or are expected to produce, significant economic or societal 

benefits. 

Key Benefits of NIST Participation

Results From 

Standards

Development Efforts:

• Faster

• Cheaper

• Broader

Based on Reports from 53 of 78 projects

Standards Are

Broader When

NIST Is Involved

Produced Specific 

Product & Service 

Improvements

Led To Numerous

Technical

Publications

Developed Standards

Average 18 Months

Earlier

NIST Participation

Motivated Appreciation

And Greater

Industry Support 

Leveraged

Work of Non-NIST

Participants

Lower Cost Products; 

Earlier Availability; Greater

Focus on Commercialization
4

This study reports on the results of the survey.1 The report is intended to reflect NIST‘s 

success in meeting its mission, executive guidance, and legislative requirements for 

developing standards and reporting on the effect of those standards on the manufacturing 

and service sectors. The survey and study also support one of the NIST Director‘s 

strategic priorities: to foster more efficient transactions in the domestic and global 

marketplace through development and use of effective standards by manufacturing and 

service sectors. 

NIST has a long tradition of standards development. The Administration‘s American 

Competitiveness Initiative of 2006, for example, highlights NIST‘s role in supporting the 

development of standards used by the public and private sectors. NIST participation 

includes: 

 carrying out research that provides the technical underpinning for standards;

 participating in standards development activities in a broad range of technical 

areas; 

 providing technical information related to standards; 

 participating extensively in international industrial consortia; and

 in some cases, providing calibrations and standard reference materials (SRMs) 

called for in the standards. 

Congress has given NIST additional standards-related responsibilities in several specific 

areas of current national interest, including: IT security, biometrics and voting. In 

particular, under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 

1996, Congress has charged NIST to coordinate standards activities among Federal 

agencies and with State and local governments for the purpose of promoting participation 

in private sector voluntary standards activities and making greater use of available 

voluntary standards rather than relying or depending on developing in-house standards.

Our objective is to have a capability that provides 1) a comprehensive picture of NIST‘s 

documentary standards development activities and 2) the ability to assess their impact. 

There are many choices of standards venues with which to participate. NIST‘s 

participation is broad, but selective. Our ultimate goal is to be able to provide advice to 

the stakeholder community inside and outside NIST on the best use of the resources 

dedicated to documentary standards development. 

One of NIST‘s strategic priorities is to develop and encourage the use of effective 

standards by the manufacturing and service sectors. There is ample evidence that 

standards foster, and indeed are integral to, economic growth and development, and that 

the role of standards-related activities is increasingly important to international 

competitiveness in technology-based markets. Conceptually, we understand the role of all 

these infratechnologies in the design, development, production, and marketing of 

products and services.3 NIST has an important role in supporting the development, 

diffusion, and impact of physical standards and measurement technologies.

 

1 This is a follow-up study to NISTIR 7398 ―Selected Impacts of Documentary Standards Supported by 

NIST‖ and part of a broader Technology Services (TS) effort to assess the impact of documentary 

standards on global competitiveness and innovation. 
5

There are grounds for asserting that documentary standards are an important factor in 

reducing risks and transactions costs in product and service markets. Recent studies, as 

well, indicate that documentary standards are correlated with indicators of economic 

growth at the macroeconomic level.4 However, public and private organizations in the 

United States and globally lack a well-developed understanding of the role, nature and 

impact of documentary standards.

5

This unawareness complicates NIST‘s ability to 

inform its own leadership and other stakeholders of the best ways to manage this critical 

responsibility.

Several people supported the work reflected in this report, with special credit to David 

Leech6for work on success stories and impact analysis guidance, and Joanne Henson,

7

who assisted with the early data analysis.

III. Proposed Approach

This report highlights NIST‘s effort to fill this ―awareness vacuum‖ by providing a 

strategic assessment of the role and impact of NIST‘s documentary standards efforts. The 

initial canvassing study identified 55 high impact standards projects and described some 

of their characteristics8Figure 3 describes the three stages of Technology Services‘ 

proposed approach.9

Figure 3. Strategic Assessment Development Process

Technology Services‘ canvassing efforts are part of the first stage of this process. The 

near-term goal is to describe NIST‘s documentary standards activities and to begin the 

iterative process of constructing a conceptual framework for talking about, 

communicating, and exploring the nature and impact of these efforts. This includes 

questions such as the following:

 What ―kinds‖ of documentary standards can we distinguish in the information we 

have gathered? 

 What is the extent of NIST‘s participation in the various ―kinds‖ of documentary 

standards development efforts? 

 What other types of organizations are involved in the development of 

Case

Studies &

Lessons

Learned

Framework

Strategic

Assessment

Capability
6

documentary standards? 

 What is the extent of other organizations‘ involvement? 

 Over and above the formal distinctions between types of standards activities, do 

NIST‘s activities cluster along dimensions that might make them distinguishable 

in terms of high, medium, and low potential impact? 

 Are they distinguishable in terms of underlying technologies, or industries served, 

or in terms of their national or international scope? 

 What are the obvious, near-term consequences (outcomes) of these efforts? 

As a conceptual framework for NIST‘s documentary standards activity begins to emerge, 

it will be compared with, and possibly integrated with, other more general, frameworks 

that that have been developed to describe NIST‘s overall role in the nation‘s (indeed, the 

world‘s) technical measurement and economic systems.10 Integrating NIST‘s 

documentary standards activities into these more general frameworks is important in the 

transition to the second, case studies & lessons learned, step in our approach.

In the case studies & lessons learned step we will ask a different set of questions than 

asked in the first step. How do we understand the impact of NIST‘s documentary 

standards development activity? The two obvious answers — technical impact and 

economic impact — are related, but it is often harder to discern economic impact. During 

the second step of the proposed process, the relationships among the components 

(variables) of our emerging framework are hypothesized and associated with outcomes. 

Case studies are designed to test these associations.11

The broad outlines of this phase are already in view, thanks to the past and ongoing 

efforts of NIST‘s economic assessment community. A host of retrospective and 

prospective case-based economic impact assessments have been conducted.

12 On the 

basis of these and related efforts, we can formulate a conservative model for 

understanding the social benefits of NIST's interaction with voluntary standards 

organizations. A company invests resources in voluntary standards development activities 

(often in the form of in-kind labor time contributions) up to the point where the expected 

value of additional resources invested (for example, another hour of in-kind labor time) 

equals the present discounted value (or present value) of the additional expected benefits 

(from the additional investment) to the company. Investment up to the point where the 

marginal benefit for the company equals its marginal cost will maximize the net present 

value of its investment.13 The present value of the company‘s investments will thus be a 

lower bound on the expected present value of the company‘s benefits from those 

investments. Moreover, the sum of the discounted individual company benefits would be 

a lower bound estimate of the expected social benefits of the voluntary standards 

development process because some of the benefits will spill over to other companies and 

to consumers. It is reasonable to postulate that these social benefits will be higher where 

NIST provides specialized cost-effective resources to the voluntary standards 

development process.

Candidate impact studies are already emerging from the canvassing process (78 high 

impact standards identified) as participants describe 1) their level of involvement, 2) the 
7

identity of private and other public sector participants and their level of involvement, 3) 

the outputs from these activities, and 4) an estimate of any change in scope or timing of 

the documentary standards activity due to NIST‘s involvement. In the future as case 

study impact assessments are selected and performed, a thorough understanding of the 

nature of NIST‘s activities will begin to emerge and our understanding of how, and under 

what circumstances, significant economic impacts come to fruition. Accumulations of 

these case-based explanations are valuable as internal ―lessons learned.‖ They are also 

valuable as a potent means of communicating NIST‘s role to stakeholders about NIST‘s 

important contributions to the nation‘s national innovation system.

Over time, as we accumulate knowledge of high impact activities and those of lesser 

impact, and we clarify the circumstances in which these outcomes transpire, we will 

move into step three of our strategic assessment development process. We will begin to:

 formulate, test, and periodically verify the types of activities NIST does best;

 offer advice about where documentary standards resources should be focused for 

greatest impact; and

 identify NIST‘s optimal role in these activities. 

We will begin to answer the following types of questions: 

 What can be done to create more effective and efficient standards development 

processes? 

 Where is NIST concentrating its efforts today? 

 Where should NIST be concentrating for the future? 

 On what basis is such a strategy established? Is the nature of documentary 

standards development changing? 

 Is the pace of these developments changing? 

 Is NIST facilitating strategic change?

 Are these changes productive? 

In time, we envision that our efforts at developing, testing, and improving strategic 

assessment criteria will evolve into an ongoing ―indicators” approach that will allow 

managers to ―take the pulse‖ of ongoing documentary standards activities. For example, 

it could turn out that when NIST personnel from multiple operating units are engaged in

creating a cluster of related standards, those standards tend to have greater impact 

individually and collectively. Or, it could be that when the ratio of industry participants 

to NIST participants is exceptionally high, the resulting standards tend to have high 

impact. To the extent that such factors can be confidently demonstrated to ―lead‖ the 

emergence of high impact documentary standards activities, they could be construed as 

―leading indicators‖ of effective standards activities and, more importantly, serve as 

guidelines for future activities.

In summary, Technology Services has launched a long-term effort to assess the extent, 

nature, and outcomes of NIST‘s involvement in documentary standards development 

activities. The initial and on-going canvassing activities (this paper) are part of a threestep approach to thoroughly understand NIST‘s role in these activities and the impact. 
8

The long-term goal is to develop an assessment capability and integrate it into NIST‘s 

planning, evaluation, and resource allocation cycle. The ultimate objective is to improve 

the standards development process to help promote U.S. innovation and industrial 

competitiveness.

IV. Report Methodology

The data in Table 1 were used to direct the search for specific standards development 

activities where NIST‘s participation might have produced significant, positive impacts. 

Emphasis was placed on identifying standards efforts that were fairly recent and that 

resulted in (or were expected to result in) either broad adoption of the standard or 

significant economic or social impact. The intent was to limit the collection of 

information to a handful of successful documentary standards efforts and to use this 

information as a basis for choosing activities to be the subject of future retrospective case 

studies. 

The results from the first canvassing study (NISTIR 7398) were sent to all NIST OU‘s in 

late 2007 requesting updates to the initial set of 55 projects or additions to the original 

list. In addition, the following ―potential impact‖ questions were included: 

 Participation

1. Estimate the number of hours (of NIST personnel) dedicated to the development of 

a given standard.

2. Estimate the multiple of total NIST hours that non-NIST participants dedicated to 

the development of this documentary standard.

3. Were any industry consortia involved in the development of this standard? 

Output

4. In the absence of NIST’s participation in the development of this documentary 

standard, would the scope of the resulting standard be broader, narrower, or 

about the same? Is there any evidence you could cite to support this claim?

5. Did NIST personnel publish any professional papers as a result of their 

participation in the development of this documentary standard? 

Effect

6. If everything about this documentary standard development effort remained the 

same except for NIST participation, estimate when the standard would have been 

published. 

7. What products or services are available, or available at a lower cost, or available 

more broadly, or available in different qualities, or available earlier that would 

not be available in the absence of this standard?

After reviewing the results, more in-depth information was sought on three projects 

where the impact rationale was well articulated and plausible and where it was judged 

that a short ―success story‖ would be relatively easy to develop. The success stories are 
9

also referred to as ―descriptive case studies‖ which examine what happened, describe the 

context in which it happened, explore how and why, and. consider what would have 

happened otherwise. Thus case study can be particularly useful in the exploratory phases 

of a program such as this effort by Technology Services.14 We contacted pertinent staff 

and stakeholders to gather additional information or clarify results by asking follow-up 

questions and discussing results. The success stories help to fill the ―awareness vacuum‖ 

by providing a more detailed look at the need for a new standard, the research that was 

required, NIST‘s specific role and contributions, and the resulting success , including a 

description of the impact. These are presented in section VI. 

 

V. NIST Participation

In understanding NIST‘s commitment to the development of high quality standards, it is

useful to know where and how many NIST staff members participate in the activities of 

key standards development organizations (SDOs). Staff participate on committees where 

their technical competence matches committee needs and where they can ensure that US.

national interests are represented. NIST‘s commitment of resources to the development of 

documentary standards is substantial. The Standards Committee Participation (SCP) 

database, which attempts to capture all NIST participation in the committees of SDOs 

and consortia, shows over 400 NIST staff members involved in the development of 

documentary standards. Table 1 displays the number of NIST staff members, organized 

by NIST OU, participating in the standards activities of the listed SDOs as of August 

2008. 
10

Table 1. NIST Participation in Standards Committees by OU

OU No. of Staff 

Members

Committee 

Memberships

No. SDOs Top SDO’s (# 

membership)

Office of the 

Director 

7 10 5 HPS (4)

ASTM (3)

ANSI (1)2

Technology 

Services 

32 195 21 OIML (51)

ASTM (43)

ANSI (25)

Technology

Innovation 

Program 

2 2 2 ASTM(1)

OLA (1)

Center for Neutron 

Research

4 13 3 ANS (8)

ISO (4)

Center for 

Nanoscale Science 

and Technology

2 7 4 ISO (3)

ASME (2)

Electronics and 

Electrical 

Engineering 

Laboratory 

47 145 19 ASTM (28)

IEC (28)

IEEE (26)

Manufacturing 

Engineering 

Laboratory 

52 185 28 ASME (43)

ISO (26)

ASA (16)

Chemical Science 

and Technology 

Laboratory 

65 189 30 ASTM (89)

CIPM (15)

ISO (15)

Physics 

Laboratory 

45 201 26 ASTM (48)

IEEE (28)

CIPM (23)

CIE (23)

Materials Science 

and Engineering 

Laboratory 

33 128 10 ASTM (87)

ISO (17)

ADA (13)

Building and Fire 

Research 

Laboratory 

49 177 18 ASTM (79)

NFPA (23)

ACI (22)

Information 

Technology 

Laboratory 

66 146 25 INCITS (35)

IETF (22)

NIST (14)

Totals 404 1398

 

2 ANSI is not an SDO, but coordinates the development and use of voluntary consensus standards in the 

United States and represents the needs and views of U.S. stakeholders in standardization forums around the 

globe. NIST staff chair or participate in a broad range of ANSI policy committee activities. In addition, 

some of the activities counted as ―ANSI‖ activities reflect NIST staff participation in ANSI-accredited 

standards committees, which are administered by other SDOs.
11

NIST provides technical leadership in standards development in a number of technology 

areas. NIST also works closely with industry to translate NIST research results into 

appropriate standards. A common theme of the standards efforts documented in Table 3 

was NIST support for testing and other conformity assessment activities associated with 

the standards. Other NIST contributions included: conducting research that formed the 

basis of the standard; working cooperatively with industry to establish appropriate 

requirements; and developing applicable software. 

VI. Findings

The results of the canvassing identified 78 documentary standards efforts that are 

considered to have significant impact, or that are widely used and adopted. This is an 

increase of 23 projects (or 42%) from the first canvassing study published in early 2007. 

Table 2 contains a sample from each OU to illustrate the wide variety and the broad 

scope of the impacts and the resulting public benefits. It is important to note that the

impact/benefits noted in the table were self-reported by the participants. In only a few 

cases were the impacts/benefits based on quantitative data or previous study results. The 

complete results are presented in Table 5, which due to its length is included at the end of 

the report.

Table 2. Sample Overview of Impacts Derived from NIST -Supported Standards Efforts

Lab Title Description & NIST Roles Impact SDO

BFRL Sustainable Building In developing its Building for 

Environmental and Economic Sustainability 

(BEES) tool, NIST applied standards for life 

cycle assessment, life cycle costing, 

multiattribute decision analysis, and 

building element classification. Once BEES 

was published, NIST wrote initial draft of 

biobased product sustainability assessment 

standard.

 More than 24,000 users rely 

on BEES software for 

building products. 

 BEES also being applied to 

biobased products as 

required by federal 

regulation implementing 

Section 9002 of the 2002 

Farm Bill

ASTM SP 

D7075 

(Evaluating 

and Reporting 

Environmental 

Performance of 

Biobased 

Products),

ISO

CSTL Alternative 

Refrigerants

NIST engaged in research that would allow 

industry to make the switch to alternative 

refrigerants in a timely and economic 

fashion to meet the timetable imposed by the 

Montreal Protocol of 1987 to develop 

alternatives to CFCs. NIST researchers 

developed the REFPROP database which 

contains precompetitive properties data so 

that industry could design their own 

proprietary CFC alternatives. ISO has 

incorporated this into their standard.

 A comparison of industry 

benefits with the funding 

stream of NIST‘s research 

program estimated a social 

rate of return of at least 

433% and a BC ratio of 4 to 

1 (1998 study).

ISO (2004)
12

EEEL Restriction of Certain 

Hazardous Substances 

in Electronic Products 

(ROHS)

NIST was instrumental in facilitating the 

development of a Materials Declaration 

Management standard (consisting of UML 

model, XML schema and 2 interactive PDF 

forms) necessary for U.S. companies to 

show compliance with an EU directive, 

which bans electrical products exceeding the 

specified threshold amounts for 6 hazardous 

substances used in electronics. 

 Any company that sells an 

electrical product in EU 

member nations after 

7/1/06 must declare the 

hazardous content 

information. 

 NIST work is assisting U.S. 

industry to stay competitive 

in Europe, and has 

promoted information 

exchange between large and 

small firms.

IPC (2006)

(also iNEMI)

ITL Digital Encryption 

Standard (DES) and 

Advanced Encryption 

Standard (AES)

NIST developed DES standard to support 

electronic transactions and implemented 

conformance testing. In 1997, NIST 

announced initiation of the effort to replace 

DES with a new advanced encryption 

module, which implements symmetric key 

cryptography. Implemented as FIPS 

standards in 2001.

 DES was critical in 

launching the commercial 

encryption industry. 

 Users realized significant 

operational efficiencies

 DES was critical to rise of 

electronic banking. 

 Since introduction of AES, 

approximately 200 AES 

products have been 

approved.

FIPS 

46 (1977)

46-3 (1999)

197 (2001)

MEL Quality Measurement 

Data (QMD)

The QMD spec is the work of the MEPT 

Quality Measurement (MEQM) working 

group of the Automotive Industry Action 

Group (AIAG) Metrology Project Team 

(MEPT). The goal of the MEQM has been 

to produce a non-proprietary, computerreadable, and widely implemented standard 

for the interface between measurement 

devices (not merely dimensional) and 

Statistical Process Control (SPC) analysis 

software packages.

 The QMD standard holds 

promise to save statistical 

process control (SPC) 

software industry in the 

U.S. alone around $50 

million over the next few 

years. This estimate is 

based on verifiable data 

from reliable sources.

AIAG

MSEL Hardness 

Standardization for 

Metals

NIST was instrumental in the research to 

establish a traceability system for hardness 

measurements, developing SRMs and is 

refining test methods. NIST has most 

accurate hardness machine in the U.S. 

 Huge impact on trade of 

metals. Establishes national 

chain of traceability to 

fundamental SI units. 

 Disputes between producers 

and users curtailed.

 Information gained from 

NIST‘s participation in the 

CIPM has influenced 

ASTM requirements.

ASTM, ISO

(1991-2007)

PL Specifications for the 

Chromaticity of Solid 

State Lighting 

Products

NIST led the development of this standard 

(ANSI C38.377), which is under final 

approval. This standard specifies the white 

light chromaticity ranges for solid state 

lighting (SSL) products. This standard will 

ensure that new lighting products using 

LEDs will have high-quality white light and 

appropriately classified according to color 

temperature to allow smooth replacement of 

traditional light sources or other SSL 

products having similar color.

 DOE is starting the Energy 

Star program for SSL 

products, which needs this 

standard. 

 All SSL products should be 

designed to meet this 

standard, and in turn, white 

LEDs (used for the SSL 

products) will also be 

deigned and classified for 

color according to this 

standard. 

 This standard will have 

significant impact on both 

white LED and SSL 

industries.

ANSI
13

The cited projects cut across all laboratories and reflect diverse technical areas and 

applications. Based on an analysis of these projects, eight categories were specifically 

identified with the remainder grouped into  ̳Other‘. The results are displayed in Table 3.

Table 3. Application Areas

Category Count

Safety 13

Homeland Security 9

Environment 4

Energy Efficiency 8

Health 5

Information Tech. 10

Supply Chain 10

Measurement Science 14

Other 5

Total 78

Also, 24 of the 78 projects (31%) fit broadly under one of the 14 NIST budget initiatives 

for FY 200915. Some can be categorized as falling under one of NIST‘s previous 

programmatic Strategic Focus Areas. This type of information could be useful in better 

focusing NIST standards development work in the future. 

An additional observation is that 28 of the identified standards were adopted or 

developed by the three major international standards organizations (ISO/IEC/ITU). 

Based on SDO membership reported by NIST staff listed in Table 1, this figure is 

somewhat higher than would be expected. It may indicate that many of the standards 

efforts that were considered to have had a significant impact by the NIST OUs required 

broad, international cooperation where national participation is a priority. This is valued 

by industry-specific sectors and helps ensure that U.S. companies maintain their 

competitive advantage in the national and international market place. In the remaining 51 

cases, NIST involvement focused on supporting U.S.-based standards developing 

organizations or consortia, most of whose standards and specifications are used globally. 

(see Figure 4). 
14

Figure 4: Breakdown of Standards Participation by Organization Type

VII. Reported Outcomes

As part of this second phase of NIST‘s standards canvassing effort, seven (7) additional 

questions were posed to the OUs about the projects identified in the first and second 

rounds of canvassing. These seven questions attempt to capture evidence of outcomes 

from NIST‘s participation in voluntary standards development activity. Table 4 describes 

the additional information requested and the rationale for the outcomes.

Table 4. Description of Intermediate Outcome Metrics

Additional Data Area Item Impact Rationale

Non-NIST labor time The time that industry devotes to the 

development of a documentary standard is 

a lower bound estimate of the cumulative 

(social) value of the standard to industry.

NIST labor time The ratio non-NIST labor time to NIST 

labor time is a gross indicator of a lower 

bound net outcome from a documentary 

standards project. The greater the ratio the 

greater the potential leveraging effect of 

NIST‘s labor time investment.

Standard scope w/o NIST participation Because NIST participation frequently 

supports the grounding of standards on 

measurement science, the scope of 

standards can apply to more products or 

services.

35%

65% ISO/IEC/ITU

US-based SDOs, 

consortia
15

Standard timing w/o NIST participation Because NIST is frequently perceived as an 

―honest broker,‖ the time required to 

negotiate consensus among industry 

participants is reduced (resulting in lower 

transaction costs) and standards are 

implemented sooner than they would be 

otherwise.

Publications resulting from NIST 

participation

These publications are project outputs. If 

publications can be linked to indicators of 

economic value, such as highly cited 

patents, these can be claimed as secondary 

evidence of economic benefits.3

New or improved product/service 

availability

Some fraction of the value added from new 

product/service availability can be claimed 

as a benefit of NISTs standards 

development activity.16

Industry group/consortium participation Participation in industry consortia is linked 

to improvements in productivity and 

profitability.4

Responses were received for 53 of the 78 projects (68%). Not all of them were complete, 

but some interesting observations begin to shed light on the impact of NIST‘s 

involvement with the standards development process. 

Observation: The average multiple of non-NIST hours to NIST hours for all 53 

projects answering the questions was 11.77. 

o Implication: This means that, on average, for every full-time-equivalent of 

NIST staff working on one of the high impact standards, almost 12 times 

that amount of non-NIST staff (primarily industry) were supporting the 

project. This suggests that NIST leverages valuable industry labor, and is 

indicative of the lower bound estimate of the social benefits of standards 

development activities. 

Observation: Of 21 projects that answered the question regarding when the standard 

would have been published without NIST participation, the average was 1.65 years 

later. 

o Implication: This gap is an intermediate indicator of NISTs unique 

contributions from an economic perspective. It is a gross indicator of the 

transaction time savings that NIST involvement in a voluntary standards 

development effort affords industry.

 

3 A. Jaffee and M. Trajtenberg, Patents, Citations, and Innovations,MIT Press, 2002.

4 A. Link and D. Siegel, Technological Change and Economic Performance, Routledge, 2003, pp. 111-114.
16

Observation: Of the 53 respondents, approximately one-third (34 percent) indicated 

that the scope of the standard would have been narrower without NIST involvement.

o Implication: Increased standard breadth is another intermediate indicator 

of the unique contribution that NIST involvement in a voluntary standards 

development effort affords industry. It is a gross indicator of an increase 

in the number of newly available products or services enabled by the 

standard in question. Combined with time saving due to NIST‘s 

participation, the increase in scope scales up the economic benefits that 

flow from NIST‘s participation in voluntary standards development 

efforts.

17

Observation: Of the 53 projects, 62% had involvement from industry groups or 

consortia in developing the standard. 

o Implication: This percentage is indicative of strong industry support and, 

ultimately, significant economic impact. If, as anticipated, the economic 

impact of NIST‘s involvement in documentary standards development 

efforts is highest when industry is most committed, and when NIST brings 

specialized and cost-effective resources to the effort, the involvement of 

industry groups, and especially of consortia (which usually are structured 

to achieve specific ends on the basis of the specialized resource

contributions of members) are an early indicator of significant benefits.18

Observation: Forty-two (42) percent of respondents stated that the standard resulted 

in having a product or service available, or available at a lower cost, or available 

more broadly, or available in different qualities, or available earlier that would not be 

in the absence of the standard. In addition, many of the other respondents who did not 

specifically claim new products or services did claim broader societal benefits such 

as: trade facilitation, increased homeland security, interoperability benefits, etc.

o Implication: Standards provide tangible results that could benefit from 

more precise characterization.

Observation: Finally, as may be expected, a large majority (85 percent) of the 

projects resulted in professional publications, including journal articles, conference 

proceedings and presentations, NIST publications, magazine articles and other 

reports. 

o Implication: These publications are a non-economic indicator of the 

secondary output of NIST‘s engagement with voluntary standards 

organizations.

We also analyzed two sub-sets of the data, looking at those projects which resulted in 

new or improved products or services, as well as all those projects which had industry 
17

group or consortia involvement to see if these two subsets had any differentiating 

characteristics. 

Observation: Taking a look at only those 23 projects that have reported claims that 

the standard has had an impact on actual products and services finds a higher ratio of 

non-NIST participants to NIST staff (15.3 v 11.8). 

o Implication: This indicates a higher rate of external (likely industry) 

participation. 

Observation: These same 23 projects also reflect a very high rate of industry 

association/consortia involvement of 91 percent. 

o Implication: This compares to 62 percent for the entire sample of 53 

projects. Therefore, higher industry involvement in standards 

development is likely an indicator of greater focus on commercialization.

 

Observation: The second group of 33 projects which claimed the participation of 

industry associations or consortia also yielded some interesting, but not unexpected,

findings. For all these projects, 58 percent claimed new/improved products or 

services, as opposed to 42 percent of the entire sample. 

Taken together, it is clear that many of these NIST standards projects leveraged the work 

of non-NIST participants and the participation of industry groups to develop high impact 

standards that were developed on average 1.5 years earlier and resulted in product and 

service improvements, general benefits to the country and a large number of publications 

and presentations. If we look at the subsets, industry involvement is, as expected, 

associated with a larger percentage of new or improved products/services. No attempt has 

been made yet to put an economic value on the resulting goods and services or the faster 

development time. 

NIST involvement in voluntary standards development efforts need not result in new 

products or services to generate significant economic impacts. The only basic prerequisite 

is that NIST bring valuable resources to a process that is also of value to the marketplace 

of producers and consumers. Where new products and services are available, additional 

benefit streams will have been induced. Where NIST contributed uniquely to the flow of 

those benefits, the returns to NIST‘s resources investments, specifically, will be higher 

yet.19

Each of the three following ―Success Stories‖ begins to place these outcome indicators in 

context and to gather some more detailed information on how NIST‘s involvement 

contributed to the overall success of the standard development activity in question. 
18

VIII. 16 CFR Part 1633 Standard for the Flammability 

(Open Flame) of Mattress Sets

Executive Summary

In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, industry 

and public concern about loss of life from 

bedroom fires motivated a hard look at ways 

to reduce deaths and property damage. 

Participants struggling to resolve issues 

knew standards were part of the solution, but 

could not agree on ways to establish, test 

and codify standards. NIST, known as 

objective and technically proficient, got the 

call to engage with industry and regulators to 

help create standards that would be 

effective, but not onerous. Figure 1 is a 

thumbnail of the process, going from the 

need for new standards, to the research 

conducted by NIST, which led to a 

successful regulation. This report highlights 

the process and explains many of the 

benefits that resulted from NIST’s work.

Background 

From 1999 to 2002 about 15,300 fires 

occurred annually where the first item ignited 

was a mattress and its bedding. These fires 

resulted in an annual average of 350 deaths, 

1,750 injuries, 295 million dollars in property 

loss, and untold human suffering.5In June of 

2007, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (CPSC) announced the 

implementation of a new product safety 

standard for mattresses. Mattresses 

manufactured on or after July 1, 2007 must 

 

5

David Miller, Mattress and Bedding Fire Loss 

Estimates for 1999-2000, USCPSC, 2005, cited in, 

Soumaya Tohamy, Final Regulatory Analysis of Staff’s 

Draft Final Standard to Address Open-Flame Ignitions 

of Mattress Sets, Directorate of Economic Analysis, 

USCPSC, January 10, 2006.

meet the U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission's (CPSC) flammability standard, 

known as 16 CFR Part 1633. The mandatory 

standard is designed to reduce the severity 

of mattress fires ignited by open flame 

sources such as candles, matches and 

lighters. Figure 2 shows a pre-standard bed 

ignited by a match-size flame; within 5 

minutes the entire bed can be fully involved.

Working with the International Sleep 

Products Association (ISPA) and its research 

affiliate, the Sleep Products Safety Council 

(SPSC) through a special Cooperative 

Research and Development Agreement 

(CRADA), NIST’s Building and Fire Research 

Laboratory (BFRL) developed the scientific 

basis for CPSC’s mattress flammability 

standard.6

The CPSC estimates that the 1633 

standard will prevent as many as 270 

deaths and 1,330 injuries every year.

Without NIST’s involvement, many of these 

lives would not be saved and many of these 

injuries and property losses would not be 

prevented. But over and above such 

immediate and obvious benefits, it seems 

clear that without NIST’s technical support 

the mattress industry would have suffered 

significant economic losses by adopting a 

less substantiated standard. The cost of 

these mattress industry related losses in 

California alone, was estimated in 2002 to be 

 

6

ISPA and SPSC together account for more than 700 

wholesalers, retailers, and manufacturers of 

mattresses and mattress foundations. Their members 

account for 80 percent of total U.S. sales of 

mattresses and mattress sets.
19

NIST role,

based on hard science and

precise engineering, allowed the 

right solution that saves

lives, prevents injuries, 

and protects wealth

NIST role,

based on hard science and

precise engineering, allowed the 

right solution that saves

lives, prevents injuries, 

and protects wealth

NEED

Outdated fire standards 

jeopardize consumer safety

RESEARCH

NIST designs the test 

and the equipment and 

runs the test and recommends 

the new standards

RESEARCH

NIST designs the test 

and the equipment and 

runs the test and recommends 

the new standards

SUCCESS

Consumer Product Safety

Commission issues new ruling 

with confidence and agreement; 

industry concurs; public is

better protected

SUCCESS

Consumer Product Safety

Commission issues new ruling 

with confidence and agreement; 

industry concurs; public is

better protected

Figure 1F: NIST involvement in standards development directly affects public safety

approximately $276 million less in mattress 

sales and $15 million less in California state 

tax revenues. Since these losses reflect the 

difference between adopting the standard 

that was underwritten by NIST and adopting 

what industry argued was a less appropriate 

standard put forward by the California’s 

Bureau of Home Furnishings & Thermal 

Insulation (hereafter, “the California 

Bureau”), these potential net losses can be 

construed as part of the indirect economic 

benefits that flow to society from NIST’s 

efforts. 

Origin of the effort

The mattresses that U.S. consumers 

purchase must comply with fire safety 

regulations. In particular, since the 1970s 

mattress manufacturers have had to ensure 

that the materials from which their products 

were made do not readily ignite from 

dropped cigarettes, as codified in 16 CFR 

Part 1632. Industry efficiently implemented 

this standard nationwide and consistent 

industry compliance contributed significantly 

to a substantial reduction over the past 25 

years in residential fire deaths.

In 2000, the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission received a petition to modify the 

current flammability standard to include 

sources of ignition other than cigarettes. The 

Commission initiated a proceeding to 

develop a mandatory federal standard to 

address open-flame ignitions in 2001 and 

published a proposed regulation in January 

2005. Accordingly, a mattress manufacturer 

would test three mattress sets of the same 

prototype mattress set and pass technical 

criteria pertaining to the rate and total 

amount of heat a burning mattress releases 
20

in the first 10 minutes after ignition and the 

peak rate at which it releases heat for 30 

minutes after mattress ignition. Since the 

first item typically ignited is bedclothes 

(sheets, etc.), the ignition source intended 

here must mimic burning bedclothes.

The fire resistance standards proposed by 

the California Bureau in its Technical Bulletin 

603 would have required that a mattress and 

box spring combination be fire resistant when 

exposed to a particular open flame source. 

To qualify as a safe mattress under the 

California Bureau’s criteria, a mattress and 

box spring had to burn at a low level 

(maximum instantaneous heat release rate of 

150 kilowatts) for at least 60 minutes. The 

California Bureau intended to finalize its 

regulations in November 2003 and to require 

that all mattresses and box springs 

manufactured for sale in California beginning 

January 1, 2004 meet these standards. A 

major source of uncertainty here was that the 

California Bureau’s flame source bore no 

known relation to burning bedclothes.

NIST gets involved

Part of NIST’s core mission is to pursue 

research and develop technology that 

pertains to measurement: how long, how 

fast, how heavy, how hot, how accurate, how 

precise? Another NIST core mission is to 

support the development of U.S. industry’s 

voluntary standards development activities. 

NIST’s support of the CPSC’s mattress 

regulation brings together these core mission 

areas.

The Sleep Products Safety Council (SPSC) 

initiated a CRADA with the Building and Fire 

Research Laboratory of NIST in response to 

a published notice from CPSC that they 

planned to investigate the possible need for 

a regulation in this area. NIST’s involvement 

began in 1998 and continued until the 

regulation was imposed in July, 2007 on all 

new residential mattresses sold in the U. S. 

NIST developed the only science-based 

approach to the issue of mattress 

flammability, looking at the problem from 

beginning to end. Initial research was 

directed at a viable test method for 

simulating the damage that flaming 

bedclothes (sheets, blankets, etc.) inflict on a 

mattress. This required the development of 

a new technique for measuring the highly 

transient and spatially erratic heat fluxes that 

burning bedclothes entail. This was followed 

by the construction and calibration of a set of 

gas burners that could generate similar heat 

fluxes. It was then demonstrated that 

mattress fire behavior caused by exposure to 

these burners correlated with that seen with 

burning bed clothes on the same mattress. 

The final portion of the work focused on 

development of a basis for predicting what 

various levels of improved mattress fire 

performance implied in terms of potential 

lives saved per year. This gave a rational 

basis for the peak fire size that a regulator 

might allow from a mattress when tested with 

the gas burners (and a guideline for a costbenefit analysis of any regulation). 

The research conducted by NIST showed 

that the peak heat release rate proposed by 

the California Bureau was unnecessarily low, 

and the duration of the test longer than 

necessary. In addition, as noted, their ignition 

conditions bore an unclear relation to the 

hazard. The risk of bedroom flash-over can 

be minimized if mattress, box spring, and 

bedclothes fire does not exceed 400 

kilowatts. The California Bureau’s proposed 

heat release rate of 150 kilowatts would have 

required much higher product design costs,

but the products would not have been more 

effective in preventing flash-over. The 60-

minute test duration proposed by the 

California Bureau was regarded as both 

impractical (the vast majority of mattress 

producers could not make commercially-
21

viable product under California’s proposed 

rule) and ultimately counterproductive (as 

higher priced mattresses would significantly 

reduce the number of safe mattresses sold). 

Lab tests showed that when ignited some 

pre-standard bed ensembles proceed to 

flash-over conditions in the room of origin 

(invariably fatal to room residents and highly 

threatening to other home occupants) within 

five minutes. The typical time for a fire 

department to respond to a residential call is 

five to nine minutes, according to the 

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 

Avoiding flash-over within the first ten to 

twenty minutes post-ignition would 

significantly improve life safety by allowing 

sufficient time for escape and rescue. 

Figure 2F: Burning Bed at One and a Half Minutes

What would have been done, absent NIST?

If NIST had not participated, CPSC might 

have gone forward on the basis of its own 

limited resources. Presumably, it would have 

taken CPSC longer to develop an alternative 

to the criteria proposed by the California 

Bureau. Strong industry resistance to the 

imposition of such a standard can also be a 

“show stopper.” Under this scenario, the lives 

lost, as well as the injuries and property 

loses that would have occurred in the 

intervening time gap can be interpreted as 

benefits unique to NIST’s involvement. As 

an alternative to “new CPSC standard” 

scenario, we might well imagine industrysponsored efforts to modify the existing 

California public occupancy standard 

(Technical Bulletin 603). 

It is unlikely that either of these two paths 

would have produced a test method that was

based on an in-depth analysis of the problem 

since neither organization has the resources 

(money or trained staff) to do this. 

Furthermore, the mattress industry is not an 

R&D intensive industry so it seems unlikely 

that a science-based consensus standard 

would have emerged. It is likely that a 

standard might have emerged after a few 
22

years whose potential effectiveness at 

solving the real world problem could not 

really be assessed. It seems certain that they 

would have gone no further than the 

methodology devised by NIST. They might 

have “gotten to market” sooner (since the TB 

603 test already existed) but the 

effectiveness of that test would be unclear. 

Compared to the NIST fire science based 

approach, the alternative approach made it 

very difficult to know if expensive compliance 

would translate into real world improvements 

in life safety. In such situations industry 

resistance can prevent the development of 

important safety standards and regulations, 

resulting in continued losses and injuries. 

Conclusion

NIST’s support in providing a factual 

foundation and rationale for the desired 

performance level in the standard 

represented a superior outcome to the 

proposed alternative standard and prevented 

a costly delay in implementing a standard 

nationwide. NIST’s deep and unique 

experience with measurement technology 

provides a sure foundation for mattress 

safety and as a result consumers are safer. 
23

IX. Development of Radiation Detector Standards for 

Homeland Security Applications

Executive Summary

Since 9/11, one of the most frightening 

threats that has disrupted many a night’s 

sleep were “dirty bombs,” explosives salted 

with radiological materials and smuggled 

through an American port. It was feared that 

a single dirty bomb attack could cost billions, 

kill hundreds, and take years of recovery. 

The chaos of 9/11 quickly turned into 

widespread resolve to better protect U.S. 

citizens. The challenge faced was simple and 

profoundly daunting: create and deploy 

rugged detector equipment that could be 

used easily by non-specialists and first 

responders to scan massive amounts of 

cargo for nuclear-radiological threats.

Speed and precision were driving factors for 

the diverse group that coalesced to confront 

this challenge. DHS pressed hard on the 

group, urging them to “fast-track” detection 

equipment and training standards. 

Leadership quickly fell to NIST, with its wide 

and deep experience in creating, testing, and 

validating standards. NIST chaired the “N42 

Committee” that coordinated and integrated 

the work of several diverse groups, 

addressing radioactivity measurements, 

homeland security, and protection 

instrumentation. 

NIST guided the dedicated and highly 

proficient groups to create the technical 

foundation for a suite of standards that

reflected the complexities of the challenges

presented by equipment from small, handheld detectors to massive, port-screening 

monitors, including standard data formats to 

easily process readouts. These groups also 

designed the training essential to move the 

standards from the working groups to 

effective field protection practices. The initial 

effort took two years of intense work during 

2002-2004.

The operational experiences that followed 

pointed to even more effective protocols, and 

NIST engaged in another two more years of 

concentrated proceedings refining the 

standards. Today, users and vendors have 

access to a set of nine specific standards for 

radiation detection, which cover

instrumentation, alarms, and fixed and 

mobile systems, easing the burdens on 

industry and defenders
24

Figure 1R: NIST technical leadership contributes to protection of U.S. citizens and property

.

Introduction

In collaboration with the U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), industry, and 

other national laboratories, the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

responded to the nation’s needs for 

increased port security in the post-9/11 

environment. On DHS’s behalf, NIST 

radiation experts took part in and led an 

effort to fast-track a suite of radiation 

detection standards through the voluntary 

consensus standard process. These 

standards set performance requirements for 

radiation detection equipment based on 

homeland security needs, and will increase 

the effectiveness and efficiency of cargo, 

vehicle, and other screening processes and 

reduce the risks of dramatic terrorist attacks 

on U.S. soil. 

In one of the DHS planning scenarios, high 

explosives, radioactive sources, and other 

“dirty bomb” components are smuggled into 

the country in sea-land containers shipped to 

U.S. ports under assumed business names. 

The containers are picked up and transferred 

to safe houses near three target cities. After

detonation, thirty-six blocks are contaminated 

by the initial explosion and the spread of 

radioactive contamination by mild winds. The 

scenario estimates several hundred fatalities 

and injuries, extensive environmental 

contamination, and the evacuation of

NIST role, based on 

experience reconciling

conflicting technical arguments,

creating comprehensive, useful

standards, and conducting

thorough, impartial testing

NIST role, based on 

experience reconciling

conflicting technical arguments,

creating comprehensive, useful

standards, and conducting

thorough, impartial testing

NEED

Terrorist dirty bomb threat

calls for fast track to

reconcile standards, produce

equipment and create

training protocols

NEED

Terrorist dirty bomb threat

calls for fast track to

reconcile standards, produce

equipment and create

training protocols

RESEARCH

NIST chairs the effort to pull

together diverse stakeholders; 

guides testing; builds consensus

for new standards

RESEARCH

NIST chairs the effort to pull

together diverse stakeholders; 

guides testing; builds consensus

for new standards

SUCCESS

One year faster process;

new, harmonized detection, 

reporting, and training standards; 

increased confidence for

buyers, vendors, users; 

better defense for public

SUCCESS

One year faster process;

new, harmonized detection, 

reporting, and training standards; 

increased confidence for

buyers, vendors, users; 

better defense for public
25

thousands of individuals in each city. Bus, 

rail, and air transport routes are altered, and 

highway checkpoints are established to 

monitor incoming traffic for contamination. 

Hospitals in each region, already at 

maximum capacity with injuries from the 

blasts, are inundated with up to 50,000 

“worried well.” Sewage treatment plants are 

quickly contaminated; businesses are closed 

for an extended duration while radioactive 

contamination is remediated; and local tax 

revenues plummet. The entire contaminated 

area is economically depressed for years. 

The total economic impact is in the billions of 

dollars.7

With scenarios like this in mind after 9-11, 

efforts to screen the vast amount of cargo 

that floods into U.S. ports increased 

dramatically. While some of the equipment 

needed to monitor cargo arriving by vehicles 

and vessels had been available previously, it 

was not available in the ruggedized form 

required to handle greatly expanded 

throughput or use in diverse settings, nor 

was the available equipment designed for 

use by non-specialists or first-responders. 

Extraordinary effort was needed to alter the 

situation. NIST was called upon to provide its 

technical expertise and leadership. 

 

7 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National 

Planning Scenarios, March, 2005, “Scenario 11: 

Radiological Attack – Radiological Dispersal Devices,” 

pp. 11-1 – 11-8.

Figure 2R. Cargo screening equipment 

installed at an airport facility.

Origin of the Effort

To address the looming problem described 

above, DHS called on experts from NIST, the 

private sector, and other government 

organizations to “fast-track” a number of 

critical radiation detection equipment and 

equipment training standards through the 

Institute of Electrical and Electronics 

Engineers (IEEE), Radiation Detection 

Standards Program. The primary N42 

Committee, chaired by NIST experts, 

oversaw and coordinated the work of 

subcommittees N42.RM (Radioactivity 

Measurements), N42.RPI (Radiation 

Protection Instrumentation), N42.HSI 

(Homeland Security Instrumentation), and 

working groups.

Through the efforts of a diverse group of 

stakeholders, IEEE’s ANSI-accredited 

National Committee on Radiation 

Instrumentation developed a suite of 

consensus standards for personal radiation 

detectors, portable radiation detection 

instrumentation, hand-held instruments for 

detection and identification of radioactive 

materials, radiation detecting portal monitors, 

mobile and transportable radiation monitors, 

training for radiation detection 

instrumentation, performance criteria for 
26

spectroscopy-based portal monitors, 

performance criteria for active detection 

systems, and standard data formats for 

instrument read-outs.

The initial stage in the development of the 

standards covered the period from 2002-

2004. After development and use of testing 

and evaluation protocols based on these 

standards, they were revised from 2004-

2006. Table 1R lists the suite of radiation 

detection standard currently available to 

users and vendors of radiation detection 

equipment. 

Table 1R. IEEE’s Radiation Detection 

Standards 

42.32 American National Standard Performance 

Criteria for Alarming Personal Radiation Detectors 

for Homeland Security

42.33 American National Standard for Portable 

Radiation Detection Instrumentation for Homeland 

Security 

42.34 American National Standard Performance 

Criteria for Hand-Held

Instruments for the Detection and Identification of 

Radionuclides

42.35 American National Standard for Evaluation 

and Performance of Radiation Detection Portal 

Monitors for Use in Homeland Security42.37 

American National Standard for Training 

Requirements for Homeland Security Purposes Using 

Radiation Detection Instrumentation for Interdiction 

and Prevention

42.38 American National Standard Performance 

Criteria for Spectroscopy-Based Portal Monitors 

Used for Homeland Security

42.41 American National Standard Minimum 

Performance Criteria for Active Interrogation 

Systems Used for Homeland Security

42.42 American National Standard Data Format 

Standard for Radiation Detectors Used for Homeland 

Security

42.43 American National Standard Performance 

Criteria for Mobile and Transportable Radiation 

Monitors Used for Homeland Security 

NIST Gets Involved

Representatives of the Ionizing Radiation 

Division of NIST’s Physics Laboratory have 

been involved with ANSI and IEEE in the 

development of numerous consensus 

standards over the years. N42, the ANSIIEEE committee for the development of 

radiation instrumentation standards, was 

chosen as the lead for this effort because of 

its ability to rapidly produce the desired 

standards. As part of its ongoing support for 

voluntary standards development, NIST 

personnel chaired the committee at the time 

of the DHS initiative At the time the fast 

track effort was initiated, a number of ANSI 

and ASTM standards were in place for

similar applications in the health physics 

arena, but none of them covered the 

requirements needed for their use either by 

non-highly trained individuals nor for the 

additional environmental and mechanical 

ruggedness requirements inherent in 

homeland security applictions. 

The standards that emerged in 2004 were 

subjected to two rounds of DHS-funded 

testing. The testing results were used by 

testing labs to evaluate instruments, by 

manufacturers to improve their product to be 

able to meet the requirements set by the 

standards that apply to homeland security 

applications, and by users for instrument 

procurement purposes. After the initial 

development, validation and implementation 

of these standards, and the failure of any of 

the equipment to meet them, the 

manufacturers began developing new 

equipment and, through an iterative process 

with industry, the standards were further 

refined. 

This resulted in the establishment of the 

Graduated Rad/Nuc Detector Evaluation and 

Reporting (GRaDER) program, which 

establishes the current American National 

Standards Institute (ANSI) N42 consensus 

standards as the initial acceptable 

performance baseline for radiation detectors 

and lays the groundwork for more detailed 

instruction to enter the program. The 

GRaDER program is managed by DHS’s 

Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) 
27

together with NIST and NIST’s National 

Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NVLAP) under which laboratories perform 

independent and consistent testing of the 

commercial-off-the-shelf radiation detectors.8

Results of the GRaDER program testing will 

be made available to law enforcement and 

first responder agencies to inform their 

procurement and grant awards processes. 

Figure 3R. Handheld radiation detectors.

What would have been done, absent NIST?

Without NIST in the lead, these radiation 

equipment standards would have taken 

longer to develop. The fact that NIST is 

viewed as an impartial participant greatly 

helped in resolving differences among the 

various groups involved in the writing of 

 

8 The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 

(DNDO) was established in 2005 to improve the 

Nation‘s capability to detect and report 

unauthorized attempts to import, possess, store, 

develop, or transport nuclear or radiological 

material for use against the Nation, and to further 

enhance this capability over time.

these standards. For all the standards, NIST 

personnel led the harmonization of the 

sometimes unrealistic differences between 

user requirements and the manufacturers’ 

concerns of what present technology can 

achieve. In addition, NIST provided the 

means for collaborators to access the 

information necessary to apply the standards 

to different types of instruments.

Through its voluntary public-private 

collaboration, the IEEE’s suite of radiation 

detection standards was developed in under 

2 years, at least a year earlier than for a 

typical documentary standard, and, as a 

result, problems could be addressed by port 

personnel in a much more effective manner 

than they would have been without the 

standards; industry could develop the new 

ruggedized and user-friendly detection 

equipment needed quickly and effectively; 

and the value added from the sales of new 

equipment would accrue to industry sooner 

than it otherwise would have. 

From an economic perspective, NIST helped 

to lower the high transaction costs 

associated with organizing and harmonizing

technical and quality assurance issues 

among diverse equipment users, designers, 

and manufacturers.

Conclusion

A joint effort between industry and 

government agencies to meet the critical 

DHS objective of increased port security led 

to the fast-track development of a suite of 

ANSI accredited documentary standards for 

radiation detection equipment performance 

and equipment training. These 

achievements would not have been 

achievable in the time accomplished had it 

not been for NIST’s contribution. The 

economic impacts of these efforts would be 

measured in terms of shifting a stream of 

public and private benefits forward in time by 
28

a minimum of 1 year and in the dramatic 

reduction in transaction costs that would 

have been required to harmonize technical 

differences among the users and designers 

of new radiation detection equipment. 

This should result in a system of certified 

radiation detection equipment that reduces 

the ability of terrorists to smuggle radioactive 

material into the United States lowers the risk 

of the dire consequences depicted in DHS 

planning scenarios, and increases our sense 

of security. 
29

X. Materials Declaration Standards to Support 

Environmental Regulations

Executive Summary

In 2003, the U.S. electronics industry was 

already struggling with regulations that 

restricted tin-lead solder and did not focus 

on looming EU requirements on toxic 

materials in electronic products, thus finding

themselves in a bewildering world of 

incompatible standards and complicated data 

exchange tools that threatened to severely 

impact U.S. high tech exports. 

Little progress was being made on creating a 

Joint Industry Guide (JIG) that could guide 

industry design and production. Realizing 

that something needed to be done, in 

December 2004 NIST organized a meeting 

with IPC, a global trade association, and 

iNEMI9to discuss the problem and need for a 

standard way of exchanging JIG and other 

compliance data. From an initial offer of 

collaboration, NIST was invited to expand its 

role and became chair of an international 

group of government agencies, industry 

representatives, and technical experts. 

NIST guided the group through rigorous and 

open analyses that recognized and balanced 

the unique requirements and problems of 

small, medium, and large manufacturers. 

The challenges that NIST helped resolve 

included technical uncertainties, problem 

modeling, software programming, data 

standards documentation, and reference 

implementation. NIST expertise also enabled 

the group to design innovative ways to use 

alternative declaration standards, while 

eliminating many incompatibilities.

 

9

International Electronics Manufacturing 

Initiative

The benefits of NIST involvement, like the 

challenges, were many and varied.

NIST was able to reconcile competing 

approaches in a relatively short time. In only 

16 months NIST guided the groups to 

consensus on the standard and supporting 

software tools. That short time frame would 

likely not have been possible without NIST’s 

reputation for impartiality. NIST recognized 

that the 2004 standard and software would 

not be the final, but made the solutions easy 

to maintain and upgrade. From an industry 

perspective, the relatively speedy resolution 

and ease of use reduces up-front and 

compliance costs, a significant factor in the 

global competitive landscape, especially for 

smaller companies. Finally, the solution 

extends to alternative material declaration 

standards, offering compatibility between 

complementary standards.
30

Figure 1M: NIST has positive impact on standards development process

Introduction

The Restriction on Hazardous Materials 

(RoHS) regulations recently adopted by the 

European Union (EU) and other U.S trading 

partners require significantly reduced 

maximum allowable concentrations of toxic 

chemicals in electronic products. Companies 

seeking market entry for consumer electronic 

and electrical products require stringent 

materials declarations from their suppliers at 

all levels of the supply chain.

RoHS regulations affect the worldwide 

market for “electrotechnical” products, a 

multi-billion dollar annual market. U.S. 

companies are significant exporters of these 

products and must comply with RoHS 

regulations by replacing components and 

designing new manufacturing processes to 

accommodate new or modified raw materials. 

The European Union (EU) is by far the 

largest export market for U.S. high-tech 

electronic goods with $46 billion dollars 

exported in 2006.10

This issue crosses company, industry, 

domestic, and international lines so that a 

collective approach to addressing the 

exchange of compliance data in the new 

 

10 Source: AEA News, ―U.S. Technology 

Exports Up by $21 billion in 2007‖, July 17, 

2007

NIST reputation for 

domain expertise and 

impartiality reduced 

skepticism, encouraged 

cooperation, allowed joint 

collaboration and produced 

foundation for

global standards

NIST reputation for 

domain expertise and 

impartiality reduced 

skepticism, encouraged 

cooperation, allowed joint 

collaboration and produced 

foundation for

global standards

NEED

EU regulations for materials 

reporting lead to conflicting 

reporting standards,

industry confusion, and 

higher costs, without 

more eco-protection

NEED

EU regulations for materials 

reporting lead to conflicting 

reporting standards,

industry confusion, and 

higher costs, without 

more eco-protection

RESEARCH

NIST chairs the effort to 

harmonize diverse needs; 

guides modeling and programming 

to understand domain; 

builds consensus

for new standards

RESEARCH

NIST chairs the effort to 

harmonize diverse needs; 

guides modeling and programming 

to understand domain; 

builds consensus

for new standards

SUCCESS

In 16 months, NIST worked with 

industry and regulators to create 

cost-effective, user friendly 

standards reporting processes, 

ensuring better compliance 

and eco-protection

SUCCESS

In 16 months, NIST worked with 

industry and regulators to create 

cost-effective, user friendly 

standards reporting processes, 

ensuring better compliance 

and eco-protection
31

RoHS regulations was needed. The initial 

standard that emerged from the undertaking 

was the IPC 1752, Materials Declaration 

Management. IPC is a global trade 

association focused on the electronic 

interconnection industry.11

Origin of the Effort

An increased focus on recycling electronics 

led the European Union in 2003 to issue the 

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment 

(WEEE) Directive. The directive set 

collection, recycling, and recovery targets for 

all types of electrical goods. This was further 

expanded to restrict certain hazardous 

substances and the European Union’s new 

Restriction of Hazardous Substance (RoHS) 

Directive was implemented on July 1, 2006. 

To ensure compliance with both Directives 

the electronics industry needed to be able to 

track the material composition of the final 

products being introduced to the EU before 

the July 1st date. US industry was already 

struggling with the technical challenges of 

replacing tin-lead solder in its electronics 

products and processes. Other than a few 

large U.S. companies, there was little 

awareness within the U.S. electronics 

industry of the new EU emphasis on data 

exchange needs. For both these reasons,

implementation efforts in the United States

languished until 2004. Efforts to develop the 

Joint Industry Guide (JIG) which provides 

guidance to industry on what materials and 

substances are to be disclosed by suppliers 

of electronic and electrical products had 

begun, and some individual companies and 

software providers had developed nonstandard non-compatible data exchange 

tools, the proliferation of which actually 

increased industry’s burden of compliance.

 

11 Founded in 1957 Institute for Printed Circuits 

the industry association changed its name to the 

Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging 

Electronic Circuits and, in 1999, to IPC. 

Realizing that something needed to be done, 

in December 2004 NIST organized a meeting 

with IPC and the International Electronics 

Manufacturing Initiative (iNEMI) to discuss 

the problem and need for a standard way of 

exchanging JIG and other compliance data.12 

As a result, IPC created a new ANSIapproved material declaration standards 

development project with NIST providing the 

technical leadership. The 1752 standards 

development team consisted of IPC staff 

members, industry representatives from TI, 

Sun, E2Open, and staff from the 

Semiconductor Electronics Division of NIST’s 

Electronics and Electrical Engineering Lab.

NIST’s Role

NIST and IPC started collaboration in early 

December 2004, with other participants 

joining in shortly afterward. IPC created the 

standards working group and worked to pull 

in individual companies to provide the 

domain expertise needed. NIST provided the 

technical expertise, problem modeling, 

programming for an associated software 

application, documentation for an XML data 

standard, and eventually chaired the effort. 

The development work included creating the 

new documentary standard as well as a 

software reference implementation that could 

be used by industry. This was especially 

beneficial for small and medium 

manufacturers. 

In addition to its role supporting the IPC 

standard effort, NIST also supported the 

efforts of alternative material declaration 

standards, most notably RosettaNet and IEC 

TC111. The IPC 1752 standard was 

 

12 iNEMIis an industry-led consortium whose 

mission is to assure leadership of the global 

electronics manufacturing supply chain. It has a 

membership that includes electronics 

manufacturers, suppliers, associations, 

government agencies and universities.
32

designed so that data could be easily 

imported into a RosettaNet enterprise 

management system. Also, the model 

underlying 1752 was used a starting point for 

the IEC TC111’s standard 62474. This 

allowed the IEC TC111 to leverage the work 

already done in 1752, greatly diminishing 

incompatibilities between the two standards 

going forward.

What would have been done, absent NIST?

NIST’s participation accelerated the process 

both because NIST was a ready source of 

technical expertise and because NIST’s 

“honest broker” role reduced what 

economists refer to as the “transaction costs” 

of negotiating complex technical agreements 

among competing interests. NIST 

participation improved the technical veracity 

of the effort, reduced the cost to industry of 

getting a standard approach in place, and, 

most importantly, accelerated the flow of 

economic benefits that result from the 

implementation of solutions to such 

problems. 

The IPC 1752 working group managed to 

create the new standard from start to finish in 

16 months, releasing both the standard and 

software tools in April 2006. A second 

version will soon support a broader scope 

and can be used for REACH and China 

ROHS.

From an economic impact perspective, this 

time saving is critical. Compliance with the 

EU standard was essential. Even without 

NIST participation, an approach to material 

declaration standards for electronic products 

would have been developed. In fact a 

number of competing approaches had been 

developed. The longer the industry went 

without a common standard, the harder and 

more costly it would have been to adopt 

standard practices. NIST provided technical 

leadership and an “honest broker” function

that would have been time consuming and 

costly for industry to replicate. 

Second, in addition to accelerating the 

standard development process NIST’s 

modeling and software development experts 

improved the quality of the 1752 standard by 

ensuring that it captured the appropriate 

scope and needs. Industry did not have the 

XML schema and programming resources 

needed to develop the solution in the given 

timeframe and it is unlikely that a broadly 

compatible technology such as XML would 

have been selected. The NIST approach was 

based on rigorous software development 

processes for data exchange standards that

included: defining scope, business cases, 

and use cases up front, then using modeling 

to understand the domain, and finally 

generating the data exchange standard itself 

from the models. This approach ensured 

that the final standard more accurately 

captured the needs of industry, was easy to 

maintain and update, and could be integrated 

in data management solutions with minimum 

effort. 
33

Figure 2M: IPC 1752 tool screen shot showing Class 1& 2 declarations

The net difference between the cost to NIST 

of participating in the effort and what it would 

have cost industry to replicate the 

functionality and quality of NIST’s 

participation is an important measure of 

NIST’s economic impact.

Third, IPC 1752 reduced the cost of 

compliance by providing a data exchange 

standard and freely available software tools. 

Prior to 1752, compliance was a laborintensive processes requiring the operation 

and staffing of phone banks and the 

compilation of spreadsheets to answer 

customer requests for information. By 

accelerating the IPC 1752 development 

process, the compliance cost savings 

accrued to industry sooner than they would 

have otherwise, and could be construed as a 

benefit uniquely attributable to NIST’s 

participation. 

Fourth, the high cost of compliance may 

have forced some small manufacturers out of 

the business. To the extent that the lower 

cost of compliance allowed small 

manufacturers to continue operation, the 

value added that would have accrued to 

firms forced to exit the business during the 

acceleration time attributable to NIST’s 

involvement, so can be construed as an 

economic impact attributable to NIST.

Fifth, some spillover benefits may have 

accrued to NIST’s involvement in the IPC 

1752 development effort to the extent that 

NIST’s methodology served as an example 

to industry of how to use a rigorous 

development approach for creating 

standards that could provide similar results if 

used for other data exchange standards.

Finally, NIST also participated in alternative 

material declaration standards, notably the 

Rosettanet and IEC TC111 efforts. By 

participating in the initial efforts of these 

other groups, NIST was able to ensure a 

high degree of compatibility between the 

standards. Due to NIST efforts the 

Rosettanet, IEC TC111, and IPC material 

declaration standards are all based on the 

same underlying data model, greatly 

improving interoperability among the 

standards. If NIST had not engaged in these 

activities, the new environmental standards 

would be largely incompatible; the various 
34

efforts would have duplicated efforts to 

develop underlying data models; and the 

implementation times would likely have been 

extended.13 All these eventualities have 

associated economic costs. To the extent 

that they were (or will be) mitigated by NIST’s 

involvement, these reduced costs can also 

be construed as economic benefits 

attributable to NIST’s involvement in the 

documentary standards development 

process.

 

Conclusion

The dual challenges of trade globalization 

and the globalization of environmental 

consciousness pose difficult technical issues 

for U.S. manufacturers, especially small and 

medium sized manufacturers. The EU’s 

recently adopted Restriction on Hazardous 

Materials (RoHS) regulations are emblematic 

of these trends. U.S. companies are 

significant participants in the a multi-billion

 

13 As of August 2008, the IEC TC111 standard is 

not yet available.

dollar annual market for “electrotechnical” 

products and now require stringent materials 

declarations from their suppliers at all levels 

of the supply chain. 

In cooperation with industry NIST has taken 

a technical leadership role in the 

development of voluntary documentary 

standards that address these concerns. The 

development of IPC 1752, Materials 

Declaration Management, is exemplary. By 

providing unique reputational and technical 

expertise to this effort, NIST’s investments 

have led to economic impacts in the form of 

process acceleration, quality improvement, 

reduced costs of compliance, support of 

small business, and improved 

interoperability.
35

XI. Future Steps and Conclusion

Technology Services has launched a long-term effort to assess the extent, nature, and 

outcomes of NIST‘s involvement in documentary standards development activities. The

initial and on-going canvassing activities (as reported in this paper) are part of three-step 

approach to thoroughly understanding NIST‘s role in these activities and their impact, 

with the long-term goal of developing an assessment capability and integrating it into 

NIST‘s planning, evaluation, and resource allocation cycle. The benefits from NIST 

involvement include producing standards faster than otherwise would have been the case 

without NIST participation; creating specific improvements to products and services; and 

developing broader standards. We have also learned that the efforts cut across many 

application areas and technologies. 

Some broad findings from this study to date are:

NIST personnel are a ready source of information needed to screen documentary 

standards projects for their economic impact potential. 

On the basis of experience conducting outcome assessments, ―indicators‖ can be 

formulated that aid in the selection of outcome assessment candidates

On the basis of a straightforward interrogatory process of questions and answers with 

NIST personnel, ―success stories‖ can be developed that at least illuminate NIST‘s 

unique role in the development process and at best clarify both the basis of an 

activity‘s economic impact and the sources of evidence that can be used to develop 

formal, quantitative economic impact assessments. 

The three cited success stories also show us concretely how NIST was involved in 

supporting the development of some important standards, what its role was vis-à-vis 

industry input in developing the standard, and some concrete outcomes in terms of lives 

saved and injuries prevented, reduced risk of terrorist actions, and industry-wide 

transaction cost savings.

From the 78 projects identified in this canvassing effort, one or two will be chosen as 

case study candidates. A project will be selected based on indications that substantial 

market impact has occurred or is likely in the near future20 The perceived importance of 

NIST‘s contribution to the standardization effort will also be considered in the selection 

of the case study.

These studies should yield analytical methodologies that will support NIST efforts to 

implement a more strategic approach to its standards efforts, including more alignment 

with government-wide or NIST priority or focus areas. The studies will also enhance 

NIST‘s ability to better support industry, government and other stakeholders by 
36

participating in standards areas that are most likely to result in safer, more reliable, 

interoperable products and enhanced U.S. global competitiveness and innovation. 

Although a full canvassing report is not necessary each year, the contents of Table 5 

could be updated on an annual basis to keep this listing current. Such updating would 

serve to emphasize that participation in documentary standards activities is an important 

component of NIST‘s mission. 

In conclusion, the canvassing results presented in Table 5 reflects NIST‘s important work 

in supporting standards development activities and how these efforts result in broadbased economic and social benefits. This information also forms the foundation for future 

work in assessing the extent, nature, and outcomes of NIST‘s involvement in 

documentary standards efforts to help promote U.S. innovation and industrial 

competitiveness.
37

Table 5. Canvassing Results: NIST Supported Documentary Standards Efforts Having High Impact

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

BFRL Fire/Smoke 

Detectors

NIST has been key player in research 

and standards work for smoke

detector tests. Levels of protection 

standard and Indiana Dunes Tests are 

key achievements.

Cut loss of life by 50 % between 

1975 and 1998. Adoption of 

standards and codes 

internationally.

NFPA

UL

(1974)

Dick 

Buko

BFRL Standard Fire 

Service 

Interface

Cooperative program with fire alarm 

industry for interface to fire 

departments. NIST is leading the 

collaboration as well as the effort to 

write standard

Potential for improved public 

safety in large commercial 

buildings. Being implemented 

by large integrators but 

standards has not been sold in 

large numbers yet. City of 

Boston to mandate its use. 

Enabling technology for related 

applications.

NFPA (2002)

NEMA 

(2005)

Dick 

Buko

BFRL WTC 

investigation 

impacts

As a result of the extensive WTC 

investigation, 30 specific code 

change recommendations have been 

made. 19 proposed changes to model 

building codes have been submitted 

to the ICC. Standards will also be 

revised 

Improved building and occupant 

safety through stronger building 

codes and standards will result in 

improved public safety.

ASTM 

(2006)

Dick 

Buko
38

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

BFRL Standard Guide 

for 

Development of 

Standard Data 

Records for 

Computerizatio

n of Thermal 

Transmission 

Test Data for 

Thermal 

Insulation

In the 1990s, NIST developed 

Standard Reference Database 81, 

―NIST Heat Transmission Properties 

of Insulating and Building 

Materials.‖ Recognizing that 

continued development in this area 

required a standard recording format, 

NIST was a driving force behind the 

development of a standardized 

recording format within ASTM Subcommittee C16.30. This standard, C 

1558, is the latest contribution made 

by NIST to C16. NIST‘s

involvement in C16 has spanned over 

60 years. C1558 includes the 

following standards on the guardedhot-plate apparatus: Test Method C 

177, Practice C 1043; and Practice 

C1044.

Guide 1558 is the first step in 

establishing interoperability 

among the thermal insulation 

user community in exchanging 

thermal transmission test data 

from standard test methods. 

This standard can be utilized by 

manufacturers internally to 

compare process specifications 

and externally to exchange data 

with clients or other interested 

parties.

ASTM Rober

BFRL Ventilation for 

Acceptable 

Indoor Air 

Quality

NIST was involved in a major 

revision of the 1989 version of 

ASHRAE 62.1, which took 12 years 

to complete. The goal of was to 

update the technical content of the 

standard as well as to convert the 

standard into mandatory and 

enforceable language suitable for 

adoption into building codes and 

other appropriate regulations. NIST 

contributed its ventilation and indoor 

air quality expertise to the process 

and provided leadership to the 

committee.

This standard is leading to 

improved indoor air quality 

buildings, which in turn has been 

shown to reduce health care 

costs and improve occupant 

productivity. The new format of 

the standard (i.e., the use of 

normative language) is also 

helpful to designers and 

manufacturers because it makes 

compliance and enforcement 

much more predictable.

ASHRAE Andy 

Persil
39

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

BFRL Methods of 

Testing and 

Rating 

Electrically 

Driven Unitary 

AirConditioning 

and Heat Pump 

Equipment

ASHRAE Standard 37 and 116 

describe the test methods – both 

primary and confirming – used to 

measure the steady-state cooling and 

heating capacities of conventional air 

conditioners and heat pumps and 

then how that data is used to predict 

seasonal performance. NIST took a 

lead role on Standard 37, in 

particular because of NIST‘s unique 

and long-standing role of developing 

and maintaining the technical content 

of federally mandated air conditioner 

and heat pump testing and rating 

requirements, which reference 

consensus standards like ASHRAE 

Stds 37 and 116 to the extent 

feasible. 

The standard – that provides 

both primary and confirming test 

methods – acts as the basis for

the different performance ratings 

used to compare and market the 

millions of air conditioners and 

heat pumps sold in the United 

States and Canada each year. 

With regard to Standard 37, had 

NIST not participated, the extent 

of the revisions and updates 

would have been considerably 

less and the public review 

process would have taken 

several more months. 

ASHRAE 

(2005)

Brian 

Doug

BFRL Air 

Conditioning 

and Heat Pump 

Testing and 

Rating 

Standards

ISO 5151 Non-ducted Air 

Conditioner and Heat Pumps; ISO 

Standard 13253, Ducted Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps; ISO 

Standard 15042, Multi-Split System 

Air-Cooled Air Conditioners and 

Air-to-Air Heat Pumps. Each 

standard covers test methods and 

rating conditions for both 

capacity/efficiency tests and pass/fail 

extreme operations tests. The current 

drafts of ISO 5151R and 13253R are 

first revisions of existing standards 

developed in 1994. NIST took a lead 

role on the cognizant ISO working 

group because of interest by both the 

U.S. Dept. of Energy and U.S. air 

conditioner and heat pump 

manufacturers in working towards the 

adoption of international standards.

These ISO standards are too 

different from the current U.S.

standards to gain immediate 

adoption. The same condition 

applies to the European Union 

that relies on CEN standards. 

However, the forthcoming ISO 

standards do provide a target for 

U.S. standards bodies and CEN 

to work towards as they 

periodically revise their own 

standards. Hopefully, in the 

future, both the U.S. and the EU 

will be able to coordinate their 

respective standards and 

regulatory bodies to allow 

adoption of the ISO standards. 

ISO Brian 

Doug
40

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

BFRL Fire Test 

Methods and 

Standards

Fire research activities have led to 

the development of ignitibility test 

methods, surface flammability test 

methods, furniture flammability test 

methods, heat release rate test 

methods, and procedures for 

measuring the toxicity of combustion 

products. NIST has lead efforts 

within the U.S. on fire test standards 

development.

The number of life loss fires has 

been significantly reduced over 

the last several decades. 

Building materials have better 

fire resistant properties. 

Construction practices have 

changed to reflect a better 

understanding of unwanted fires, 

and the ease of ignition. 

Flammability of furnishings used 

in offices and homes has been 

reduced and less toxic building 

materials and furnishings have 

been developed. Fire test 

methods initially developed by 

NIST are now used nationally 

and internationally.

ASTM, 

NFPA, ISO

Randy 

Laws

BFRL Fire Service 

Standards

NIST has advanced firefighter safety 

through research on a range of safety 

issues: personal protective clothing 

and equipment (PPE); electronic 

equipment (PASS devices, radios, 

and thermal imaging systems); 

automatic water sprinklers; and fire 

fighter training and suppression 

tactics. In addition, NIST has 

produced computer fire simulation 

capabilities and has used them for the 

investigation of serious fire incidents. 

Findings from this research have 

been coupled with standards for 

protecting and training fire service 

personnel.

NIST research on low heat flux 

burn injuries brought about 

improvements in NFPA 

protective clothing standards that 

affect firefighter safety. This 

directly influences burn injury 

rates, monetary losses, and 

social loss costs to the nation. 

Work on electronic equipment 

has brought about changes in 

standards for PASS devices and 

radio systems improving their 

reliability. Research on thermal 

imaging systems has resulted in 

a new standard that is also 

helping to protect firefighters. 

Computer simulations of 

firefighter life loss fires have 

brought about changes in 

standards for training.

NFPA, 

ASTM, 

IFSTA

Randy 

Laws

Nelso

Bryne
41

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

BFRL Slug 

Calorimeter

NIST has developed a method for 

testing the thermal conductivity of 

fire resistive materials used for 

protecting steel building structures.

Potential for public safety by 

improving the thermal 

performance of fire resistive 

materials.

ASTM 

(E2584)

Dale 

BFRL Laboratory and 

Field Tests of 

Adhesion for 

Fire Resistive 

Materials

NIST is working on the development 

of laboratory and field tests of 

adhesion of fire resistive materials 

used to protect steel building 

structures.

Potential to improve public 

safety by reducing the potential 

for fire resistive materials to be 

dislodged from protected steel 

elements.

ASTM 

(Committee 

E6)

Chris 

White

BFRL 16 CFR Part 

1633 Standard 

for the 

Flammability 

(Open Flame) 

of Mattress Sets 

(Enforced by 

the Consumer 

Product Safety 

Commission)

This standard applies to all 

residential mattresses sold in this 

country after July 1, 2007. It seeks to 

eliminate fire deaths caused by 

flaming ignition of beds. NIST did 

all of the technical development 

work for this safety standard, 

including a technical assessment of 

how the number of lives saved was 

likely to vary with the allowed 

pass/fail acceptance level of peak 

heat release rate developed in such 

fires.

CPSC estimates that the standard 

has the potential to eliminate 

about 3⁄4 of the deaths and 

injuries due to such fires each 

year in the U.S.

The Sleep 

Products 

Safety 

Council 

sponsored 

most of the 

NIST work. 

They chose 

not to submit 

the test 

method to 

ASTM to 

implement it 

more rapidly.

Tom 

Ohlem

BFRL Sustainable 

Building

In developing its Building for 

Environmental and Economic 

Sustainability (BEES) tool, NIST 

applied standards for life cycle 

assessment, life cycle costing, 

multiattribute decision analysis, and 

building element classification. Once 

BEES was published, NIST wrote 

initial draft of biobased product 

sustainability assessment standard.

More than 24,000 users of BEES 

software for building products. 

BEES also being applied to 

biobased products as required by 

federal regulation implementing 

Section 9002 of the 2002 Farm 

Bill

ASTM SP 

D7075 

(Evaluating 

and 

Reporting 

Environmenta

l Performance 

of Biobased 

Products),

ISO

Barba

Lippi
42

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

CSTL In Vitro 

Diagnostics 

(IVD)

U.S. industry came to NIST for help 

in developing reference measurement 

procedures and materials for meeting 

1998 EU IVD directive. NIST has 

led the development of the process 

for review of the ―higher order‖ 

reference methods and reference 

materials listed in the JCTLM 

database of higher order standards 

and developed and maintains more 

than half of the approved methods 

and materials used by industry.

NIST is still working with industry in 

developing documents for 

traceability and uncertainty within 

the CLSI and ISO framework.

U.S. industry is world leader in 

IVD market. NIST leadership 

within the JCTLM and 

development of reference 

methods and materials for 

clinical diagnostics have 

assured U.S. industry a level 

playing field in Europe. U.S 

firms currently have 60% of the 

~$6 billion/year IVD medical 

device market in Europe. 

CLSI

ISO (2002)

W.E. 

CSTL Alternative 

Refrigerants

NIST engaged in research that would 

allow industry to make the switch to 

alternative refrigerants in a timely 

and economic fashion to meet the 

timetable imposed by the Montreal 

Protocol of 1987 to develop 

alternatives to CFCs. NIST 

researchers developed the REFPROP 

database which contains 

precompetitive properties data so that 

industry could design their own 

proprietary CFC alternatives. ISO 

has incorporated this into their 

standard.

A comparison of industry 

benefits with the funding stream 

of NIST‘s research program 

estimated a social rate of return 

of at least 433 % and a BC ratio 

of 4 to 1 (1998 study).

ISO (2004) Mark 

Mclin
43

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

CSTL Restriction of 

certain 

Hazardous 

Substances in 

Electronic 

Products 

(RoHS)

NIST is Working with IEC TC111 

Working Group 3 drafting and 

validating IEC CDV 62321, a set of 

standard test methods for testing 

products for hazardous substances. 

NIST also holds membership in 

ASTM International Committee F40, 

which is developing standard test 

methods for hazardous substances in 

raw materials used in the electronics 

industry.

Standard test methods are 

needed for companies in the 

electronic and electrical products 

manufacturing supply chain to 

enable them to make accurate 

declarations of hazardous 

substances content and shield

themselves from the risk of 

being banned from markets and 

fined. Supports U.S. 

competitiveness in the EU, 

China and other markets.

IEC and

ASTM 

International

Steve 

CSTL Cement and 

Concrete

NIST consults with ASTM 

Committee C01 on test methods for 

cement, concrete, and their 

ingredients. NIST cement SRMs in 

the 1880a series support ASTM 

Standard C 114 for testing of 

hydraulic cement. 

The Cement and Concrete 

Reference Laboratory (an ASTM 

research partnership with NIST) 

uses C 114 and NIST SRMs to 

qualify all U.S. cement industry 

labs and many government 

transportation labs for analyses 

of cement and concrete.

ASTM 

International

John 

CSTL Metals, Ores, 

and Related 

Materials

NIST participates in the activities of 

ASTM Committee E01 under an 

MOU guiding the development of 

SRMs for the mining and metals 

industries.

Standards development and 

related SRMs improve the 

quality of metals and alloys used 

in aerospace, transportation, 

defense, electronics, human 

health and safety, and many 

other applications.

ASTM 

International

John 
44

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

EEEL Supply chain 

communication 

standards

NIST has been instrumental in efforts 

to develop Product Data Exchange 

(PDX), RosettaNet interchange 

specifications (clusters 2 and 7), and 

Computer-Aided Manufacturing 

Exchange (CAMX). 

Standards support shop floor 

integration of equipment from 

different manufacturers and 

support supply chain 

communication. These standards 

are now used in hundreds of 

thousands of monthly business 

transactions. 

IPC

RosettaNet

Barba

Golds

John 

Messi

EEEL Broadband 

(WiMax) 

Wireless 

Standards

NIST has been at forefront of 

developing common open standards 

for the emerging broadband wireless 

network technologies. 12 standards 

projects have been completed with 5 

more in development. The standards 

are widely supported in Asia, and 

Europeans have elected to follow 

802.16. The 802.16e standard (2/06) 

was major achievement to support 

mobile terminals

The development of these 

standards advances the prospects 

for U.S. technology developers 

and promotes opportunities for 

greater access to broadband 

services. Very broad and fast 

adoption. Four of the standards 

were in the top 100 list of IEEE 

downloads for March 2006. The 

WiMax Forum with over 350 

members was established to 

promote and certify broadband 

wireless products. 

IEEE (2004) 

ITU (2006)

Roger 

Mark

EEEL Restriction of 

Certain 

Hazardous 

Substances in 

Electronic 

Products 

(ROHS)

NIST was instrumental in facilitating 

the development of a Materials 

Declaration Management standard 

(consisting of UML model, XML 

schema and 2 interactive PDF forms) 

necessary for U.S. companies to 

show compliance with an EU 

directive, which bans electrical 

products exceeding the specified 

threshold amounts for 6 hazardous 

substances used in electronics. 

Any company that sells an 

electrical product in EU member 

nations after 7/1/06 must declare 

the hazardous content 

information. NIST work is 

assisting U.S. industry to stay 

competitive in Europe, and has 

promoted information exchange 

between large and small firms.

IPC (2006)

(also iNEMI)

Eric 

Simm
45

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

EEEL Electromagnetic 

compatability 

(EMC)

NIST provides technical leadership 

in developing standards and 

improving the measurement 

methodologies. NIST assists 

companies to better conduct electromagnetic measurements by 

developing alternative EMC test 

methods. 

EMC standards are important for 

the domestic and export 

electronics industry. NIST is 

helping to harmonize U.S. and 

international standards to reduce 

the compliance burden on U.S. 

industry. Informal reports from 

an aircraft manufacturer suggest 

that NIST-developed 

reverberation techniques

(implemented in large hangars) 

alone will at least halve EMC 

test time for production airliners 

saving several hundred thousand 

dollars for each plane tested.

ANSI

SAE

CISPR

IEC

Perry 

Wilso

EEEL Superconductivi

ty Standards

NIST has led IEC‘s 

superconductivity standards efforts 

leading to the first IEC international 

standard on superconductivity 

(1998). 13 standards in total have 

been developed plus one standard on 

terms and definitions. Interlaboratory comparisons are ongoing 

for future standards. 

By encouraging international 

participation in the standards 

process, NIST has helped U.S 

manufacturers be competitive in 

a market dominated by Europe 

and Japan. MRI is the largest 

commercial user of 

superconductivity, and 

demonstration projects are 

happening in power grids. 

IEC (1998) Loren 

Good

EEEL Performance 

standards for 

metal detectors

NIST/OLES developed new 

standards for metal detectors used in 

concealed weapon and contraband 

detection, along with evaluation and 

testing criteria and user guides to 

facilitate implementation.

New standards were used to 

define requirements for testing 

of detectors at airports. 

Standards in use by FAA, TSA 

and Bureau of Prisons have 

contributed significantly to the 

security of U.S.

NIJ (2000)

IPC

Nick 

Paulte
46

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

EEEL/TS Performance 

standards for 

body armor

NIST/OLES was key driver in 

developing standard for Ballistic 

Resistance of Personal Body Armor 

standard adopted by NIJ. Standard 

specifies minimum performance 

requirements and associated test 

methods. The body armor program 

is part of NIJ's successful Law 

Enforcement and Corrections 

Standards and Testing Program, 

through which companies may have 

their products voluntarily certified as 

compliant with the standard.

Ballistic-resistant body armor 

meeting NIST-developed 

performance standards has been 

credited with saving more than 

2500 lives. The Bulletproof 

Vest Partnership is key 

stakeholder. Since 1999, over 

11 900 jurisdictions have 

participated in the BVP 

Program, with $173 million in 

federal funds committed to 

support the purchase of an 

estimated 450 000 vests. 

NIJ (2001 

most recent)

ASTM

Kirk R

Gordo

Giller

EEEL Standard Test 

Methods for 

MEMS

NIST did pioneering standards work 

in developing the first standard test 

methods for MEMS in 2002, with 

validating round robin studies for 

these standards completed in 2005. 

New MEMS/NEMS standards are 

currently being developed.

MEMS industry has suffered 

from a lack of standardization. 

This will allow manufacturers to 

confirm good performance of 

products and facilitate 

international commerce in 

MEMS.

ASTM (2002, 

2005

Janet 

Marsh

EEEL Land-mobile 

radio 

interoperability 

standards

NIST/OLES has been very involved 

in supporting development of 

interface standards since 2005 

(Project 25). Four of a total of 8 

interface standards have been 

completed. OLES is working to 

develop a P-25 compliance 

assessment program.

Allows for better communication 

amongst law enforcement 

officials and first responders. 

Secretary Chertoff made positive 

comment. Public safety 

agencies are requiring the new 

standards in RFPs, but still need 

12-18 months to measure 

impact.

TIA (2005)

(3 new 

standards in 

past 15 

months)

Derek 
47

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

EEEL Flat panel 

display 

standards

NIST developed the Flat Panel 

Display Measurements Standard 

offered by the Video Electronics 

Standards Association (VESA). The 

FPDM is a display-metrology 

document that serves industry and 

other standards organization by 

providing detailed measurement 

methods, diagnostics, cautions, and 

tutorial information to assist those 

concerned about measuring displays.

These standards support 

commerce and use of flat panel 

displays by U.S. industry, which 

is the largest worldwide end 

consumer of displays.

ISO, VESA, 

ANSIHumanFactorsSociety 

Standard, 

IEEE, and 

Society of 

Motion 

Picture and 

Television 

Engineers 

(SMPTE).

Paul 

Boyn

EEEL Optical fiber 

telecommunications

NIST provided technical leadership 

and evaluations for a number of 

measurement standards related to 

optical fiber and instrumentation 

(power meters, optical spectrum 

analyzers, etc.)

This work resulted in numerous 

documentary standards, round 

robin evaluations, and SRMs 

that accelerated the adoption of 

optical fiber communications.

TIA FO-4 

IEC TC86

Tim 

Drape

EEEL High-Frequency 

Dielectric 

Measurement 

Standard

NIST performed the necessary 

metrology and theory to develop the 

split-post method to the point of 

industry acceptance and a standard 

measurement method

As frequencies of operations of 

microelectronics increases, the 

need for well-characterized 

measurement methods from 7 to 

60 Ghz increases. This method 

satisfies the need.

IPC 2006

(ANSI, IEC 

in nearfuture)

James 

Baker

Jarvis

ITL Digital 

Encryption 

Standard (DES) 

and Advanced 

Encryption 

Standard (AES)

NIST developed DES standard to 

support electronic transactions and 

implemented conformance testing. 

In 1997, NIST announced initiation 

of the effort to replace DES with a 

new advanced encryption module, 

which implements symmetric key 

cryptography. Implemented as FIPS 

standards in 2001.

DES was critical in launching 

the commercial encryption 

industry. Users realized 

significant operational 

efficiencies, and DES was 

critical to rise of electronic 

banking. Since introduction of 

AES, approximately 200 AES 

products have been approved.

FIPS 

46 (1977)

46-3 (1999)

197 (2001)

Mike 

Hoga
48

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

ITL Role Based 

Access Control 

(RBAC)

Lack of standardization was 

hampering growth of access control 

products. NIST supplied 

infrastructure tools to support 

industry and provided 

demonstrations of implementations.

NIST's involvement accelerated 

RBAC by 1 year and lowered 

R&D costs for software vendors 

by 6 percent. RTI estimates 

$671M Net Present Value to 

economy. Previously studied by 

Program Office.

INCITS 359 

(2003)

Mike 

Hoga

ITL Biometrics This is an umbrella category covering a 

number of standards initiatives. 

NIST/ITL is a major contributor to the 

national and international biometrics 

programs by providing leadership for 

the two standards bodies (INCITS M1 

and JTC 1 SC 37), by chairing 

development of biometric application 

profiles through these SDOs, and by 

providing technical editors and a 

number of technical experts to both 

SDOs. INCITS, as well as JTC 1 SC 

37, are approaching completion of the 

first generation of biometric data 

interchange formats for a number of 

biometric modalities and other 

biometric standards. Fifteen American 

National Standards and ten 

International standards have been 

published to date.

Many of the first generation of 

data interchange format standards 

have already been adopted by 

large users of personal 

authentication applications 

ranging from financial 

transactions to visitor 

authentication in amusement 

parks. Examples of adoption 

include DHS‘s adoption of the 

face recognition standard (INCITS 

385) and INCITS 383 

(Information technology -

Application Profile -

Interoperability and Data 

Interchange - Biometric Based 

Verification and Identification of 

Transportation Workers) for the 

TWIC program. Please see endnotes

xxi

INCITS

ISO/IEC

Ferna

Podio

ITL BioAPI 

Conformance 

Test Suite 

(CTS)

NIST‘s biometric standards program 

provides leadership to national and 

international biometric standards 

bodies. A key achievement is the 

development of the BioAPI CTS 

implementation also known as the 

Biometric Test Environment.

The BioAPI CTS provides a test 

methodology for biometric 

product developers. The 

biometric industry is growing 

rapidly in response to homeland 

security and commercial needs. 

Over 30 vendors claim products 

conforming with BioAPI.

INCITS 358 Ferna

Podio
49

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

ITL 

other labs 

contribute

Health 

informatics

This is an umbrella category 

covering a number of standards 

initiatives. NIST works with 

industry, government and trade 

groups to develop metrics to 

demonstrate software interoperability 

and conformance to particular 

standards. Specific activities 

include: standards harmonization; 

performance and conformance 

metrics for HIT; guidelines for 

telemedicine; and security related 

activities. NIST has interagency 

agreement with the ONC.

All anticipated benefits:

- consumers can move 

seamlessly between 

practitioners;

- clinicians have information 

needed at point of care;

- payers benefit from economic 

efficiencies;

- public health benefits; and

- less medical errors.

(Note: Can expand on individual 

activities but still early for 

measuring impact.)

HITSP/ANSI

IEEE

HL7

Lisa 

Carna

ITL XDS (crossenterprise 

document 

sharing)

This is a component of NIST‘s 

overall health informatics effort. 

NIST was instrumental in developing 

the ebXML registry standard and 

now supports IHE in developing their 

XDS profile that integrates ebXML 

standard into the health care 

environment. Also developed a test 

environment used in IHE 

Connectathons. Ver 2.1 of standard 

became ISO 15000.

XDS will be a component of the 

technical infrastructure for 

electronic health records. Four 

large commercial vendors have 

demo versions and some CCHIT 

contractors are planning to 

include in their deliverables. 

500 downloads of open source 

implementation. Expect 

products and installed based by 

2007.

OASIS 

(2000)

ISO

IHE, 

HITSP/ANSI

Bill 

Majur

ITL XML 

Technologies

This is an umbrella category 

covering a number of Web-based 

standards, including: XML, XSLT, 

XSL-FO, DOM, XML Schema and 

XML Query. NIST is a major 

contributor to the development of 

conformance tests for these 

standards. 

NIST tests ensure that XML 

implementations are accurate 

and interoperable, providing the 

foundation for the expansion and 

widespread use of XML in 

electronic commerce and 

enterprise systems. NIST tests 

have resulted in bug fixes to 

implementations and corrections 

to the XML specifications.

W3C Carm

Mont
50

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

ITL Voting Systems In response to the 2002 Help 

America Vote Act (HAVA), NIST is 

providing technical expertise and 

developing voting system guidelines 

and standards including a uniform set 

of open tests to replace existing 

proprietary tests for federal 

certification. HAVA requires NIST 

to evaluate testing labs and make 

recommendations for accreditation. 

This will reduce security 

vulnerabilities and voting system 

errors and increase voter 

confidence while maintaining 

reasonable costs and increasing 

usability and accessibility to all 

voters. The first set of testing 

labs certified in January 2007. 

ANSI

IEEE

Access Board

Mark 

John W

ITL Personal 

Identity 

Verification 

(PIV)

In response to Homeland Security 

Presidential Directive-12, NIST 

developed FIPS 201and supporting 

special publications, which specify 

architecture and requirements for a 

common ID standard for federal 

employees and other eligible 

personnel. The PIV card supports 

multiple-factor authentication and is 

to be used for control of both 

physical access to federal facilities 

and control of logical access to many 

federal information systems. 

Agencies must begin to 

implement in Oct 2006. Federal 

smart card market is estimated at 

approx $6B. Smart card 

industry is lining up to develop 

products. Standard will improve 

security of physical and logical 

assets and reliability of federal 

ID credentials. Beginning to 

replace Eauthentication for 

internal agency applications. 

Full implementation required by 

end-2008. 

FIPS 201

(2005)

Bill 

MacG

ITL ISO/IEC 24727: 

Identification 

cards –

Integrated 

circuit card 

programming 

interfaces 

Development of a multi-part 

international standard based on 

NISTIR 6887. Provides interfaces 

and application programming 

interfaces for interoperable use of 

integrated circuit cards. Dedicated 

ISO/IEC task force for this work 

chaired by NIST.

Removal of U.S. barriers to 

smart card adoption. Solves 

known technical barriers to 

interoperable use of integrated 

circuit cards, in particular as 

related to identity credentials, 

such as the Federal PIV card. 

Receiving world-wide attention, 

as evidenced by early adoption 

by the EU and Australia. 

Improves reliability and 

portability of security identity 

credentials; opens markets for 

U.S. API providers.

ISO/IEC JTC 1 

SubCommittee 

17

Teres

Schwa
51

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

ITL National 

technical report: 

ISO/IEC 24727 

Describes the interworking of two 

integrated circuit card applications on 

the same card using the ISO/IEC 

24727 series of standards. The two 

card applications used are the U.S. 

Government‘s Personal Identity 

Verification (PIV) card application as 

described in NIST SP 800-73 and the 

Fare Payment Card application as 

described in the INCITS 

Interoperability Framework for

Contactless Fare Payment 

Technologies and Systems 

documents. National Task Group 

responsible for this body of work 

Chaired by NIST.

Improves U.S. contributions to 

ISO/IEC 24727 standards to 

ensure compatibility with U.S. 

federal standards. Improves 

commercialization of ICC and 

related support products. 

Improves quality of service 

delivery with identity credentials 

tokens.

ANSI/INCIT

S B10

Teres

Schwa

ITL Security 

Requirements 

for 

Cryptographic 

Modules 

NIST developed standard. 

Cryptographic Module Validation 

Program created in conjunction with 

Canadian authorities. FIPS 140-2 

has become defacto international 

standard. Want convergence with 

FIPS 140-3 and ISO 19790.

FIPS 140-2 is recognized by 

governments worldwide. Very 

successful validation program.13 

CMVP labs have been 

accredited by NVLAP. Over 

900 certificates have been 

provided to over 200 different 

vendors. 

FIPS 140-2 

(2001)

ISO/IEC 

19790 (2006 

– but some 

U.S. specific 

items 

removed)

Rand

Easte

ITL Grid 

Computing

To ensure the success of grid 

computing, grid systems that 

implement standards solutions will 

require methods to measure, analyze, 

and manage increasingly greater 

numbers of grid resources in order to 

ensure system reliability under 

volatile and uncertain conditions. 

Metrics for evaluating grid 

welfare/health will provide the 

necessary measurement 

capabilities needed to help 

accelerate the commercialization 

and use of commercial grid 

systems, allow grid users and 

providers to evaluate operation 

of grid systems and grid 

compute economies and improve 

the OGF standards by providing 

a measurement basis for 

evaluation of standards-based 

grid system components

Open Grid 

Forum (OGF)

Chris 

Dabro
52

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

ITL MPEG-7 The MPEG-7 standard also known as 

"Multimedia Content Description 

Interface" aims at providing 

standardized core technologies 

allowing description of audiovisual 

data content in multimedia 

environments. This technology is 

being designed by a range of experts 

including content creators, 

broadcasters, manufacturers, 

publishers, IP rights managers, 

telecommunication service providers, 

academia, gov‘t, etc. NIST is a 

major contributor for the MPEG-7 

Interoperability Testbed provides 

validation tools for MPEG-7 

technology; and is the main editor for 

creation of MPEG-7 profiles and 

levels for various application 

domains. MPEG-7 metadata 

descriptions are the basic building 

block to describe audiovisual content 

so that search engines can index, 

search, and retrieve more effective 

and efficient way

NIST M7ITB validator ensures 

that MPEG-7 description 

instances are accurate according 

to the standard specification and 

interoperable across various 

vendor implementations. It 

provides the validation on 

MPEG-7 schemas and 

conformance testing on MPEG-7 

instances. This technology is 

applicable for wide spectrum of 

applications such as: • Broadcast 

media (e.g., radio and TV );

• Digital libraries (e.g., film, 

image, video and radio 

archives);

• E-Commerce (e.g., advertising, 

directories of e-shops);

• Education (e.g., multimedia 

courses, on-line training);

• Home Entertainment (e.g. 

home video, game, karaoke); 

and

• Multimedia directory services 

(e.g. yellow pages, tourist info).

ISO/IEC 

SC29 WG11

Wo C

ITL Software 

engineering: 

Software 

product Quality 

Requirements 

and Evaluation 

(SquaRe) –

Common 

Industry Format 

(CIF) for 

Usability Test 

Reports 

CIF provides a standard method for 

reporting usability test findings. The 

format is designed for reporting 

results of formal usability tests in 

which quantitative measurements 

were collected and is particularly 

appropriate for 

summative/comparative testing. The 

CIF provides guidance on how to 

report the results of a usability test, 

not how to conduct them. The CIF 

targets usability professionals and 

stakeholders

Stakeholders can use the 

usability data to help make 

informed decisions concerning 

the release or procurement of 

software products. Vendors and 

procurers of software systems 

now have quantitative data on 

which to base decisions 

regarding the usability of a 

product. Raised the visibility of 

usability of software systems for 

procurement.

ISO 

25062:2005

Mary 

Theof
53

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MEL Standard for the 

Exchange of 

Product Model 

Data (STEP)

Previously well-documented study. 

STEP suite of standards enables 

manufacturing companies to 

exchange digital representations of 

engineering and manufacturing data. 

MEL believes revisions, extensions 

to the standard, and work on testing 

methodologies still make this 

relevant. First 12 parts of STEP 

approved as international standards 

in 1995. 30 parts approved by 2002, 

and many more since then. 

NPV over $1 billion calculated 

in previous study. Allows for 

long-term data archiving. Being 

used in most key complex 

manufacturing industries such as 

automotive, aerospace and ship 

building. For example, 

Lockheed plans to use STEP 

across all new aircraft programs 

with first tier suppliers and has 

documented their savings on the 

F-16 program. 

ISO (1995) Steve 

MEL Inventory 

visibility and 

interoperability

NIST was requested by AIAG to 

develop a common interface specs 

and test some OAG standards. 

Tested multi-tier supply chain 

standards in auto industry where lack 

of interoperability costs $1 billion 

annually. Focused on dimensional 

metrology systems.

AIAG study shows that 

implementing NIST/AIAG 

recommendations from testing 

study will result in cost 

avoidance of $197 million and 

net savings of $255 million.

OAG Steve 

MEL Integrated 

Sensor Network 

(RFID)

MEL is working on developing 

standards for integrated sensor 

networks containing RFID. Standard 

still under development.

Industry is looking to 

incorporate wireless 

communications into their 

products and processes. No 

impact to measure at this time.

IEEE Kang 
54

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MEL Systems 

Modeling 

Language 

(SysML)

The Systems Engineering Modeling 

Language (SysML) was adopted by 

the Object Management Group, with 

major contributions from NIST‘s 

Manufacturing Engineering 

Laboratory. MEL‘s contributions 

were in the critical area of process 

modeling, and in cooperation and 

liaison with the International Council 

on Systems Engineering. SysML is a 

graphical modeling language for 

specifying, analyzing, designing, and 

verifying complex manufactured 

systems that may include hardware, 

software, information, personnel, 

procedures, and facilities. 

SysML is the first standard 

systems engineering modeling 

language , used in the 

development of large-scale 

products in the military and 

industry. It is implemented by 

several systems modeling 

companies. 

OMG

MEL Ontology 

Definition 

Metamodel

NIST‘s Manufacturing Engineering 

Laboratory managed the entire 

standard‘s development cycle -- from 

conception to adoption by the OMG 

– over the last four years. In addition 

to this leadership, NIST was also a 

principal technical contributor to the 

effort, which involved four software 

providers and other experts 

throughout the world. The result of 

this multi-year effort was the 

international standardization of the 

Ontology Definition Metamodel, or 

ODM. The standard supports four 

existing international standard 

knowledge representation languages, 

bringing them together in a common 

modeling framework. 

Reasoning tools can be used to 

reconcile the terms found in 

various forms of electronic 

business transactions, enabling 

manufacturers to communicate 

reliably with new software 

suppliers. With ODM, such 

communication will not require 

developing partner-specific 

translation software, which 

introduces longer lead times and 

human errors, and inhibits 

innovative partnerships. Other 

than the manufacturing 

community -- notably the 

intelligence community, the 

emergency response community, 

and the healthcare community --

have similar problems and are 

OMG
55

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

enabling capabilities for Model 

Driven Architecture-based software 

engineering, namely the formal 

grounding for representation, 

management, interoperability, and 

application of business semantics

actively involved in the 

development, use and exchange 

of ontologies.

MEL Unified 

Modeling 

Language

NIST led the introduction of process 

modeling in the Unified Modelling 

Language (UML), the globally 

dominant and information modeling 

standard in use today. UML models 

application structure, behavior, and 

architecture, as well as 

manufacturing process and structure.

A new generation of software 

tools, books, and training 

curricula are based on the 

process modeling capability 

introduced in UML 2 under 

NIST‘s leadership.

OMG Conra

Bock

MEL Business 

Process 

Definition 

Metamodel 

(BPDM)

BPDM was adopted by the Object 

Management Group (OMG), with 

supporting votes from major business 

process tool vendors, service 

providers, and users. Executioninteroperable process models execute 

the same way for all parties 

interchanging the model. NIST 

introduced execution interoperability 

for the first time in an adopted 

process model, using advanced 

metamodeling techniques to ensure 

compatibility with ISO 18629, 

Process Specification Language.

BPDM is the first standardized 

process model designed from the 

ground up with precise and 

reliable execution in mind,. 

NIST received testimonials from 

major corporations in 

appreciation of its leadership and 

technical achievements in this 

area (e.g., Boeing, Borland, 

Unisys, Electronic Data 

Systems, Lombardi, and General 

Services Administration).

OMG Conra

Bock
56

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MEL Process 

Specification 

Language

ISO's Process Specification 

Language has had its first application 

to conventional manufacturing 

process languages, improving the 

efficiency and reliability of system 

construction. The PSL standard is a 

fully axiomatized, first-order logic 

ontology to support the unambiguous 

description and exchange of process 

information. NIST provided the 

initial draft specifications and 

technical leadership in having the 

first 8 parts of ISO 18629 published 

as International Standards.

It resulted in the first 

standardized process model 

designed from the ground up 

with PSL's precision in mind, in 

collaboration with the Object 

Management Group. NIST 

received testimonials from major 

corporations in appreciation of 

its leadership and technical 

achievements in this area (e.g., 

Boeing, Borland, Unisys, 

Electronic Data Systems, 

Lombardi, and General Services 

Administration).

ISO Conra

Bock

MEL Quality 

Measurement 

Data (QMD)

The QMD spec is the work of the 

MEPT Quality Measurement 

(MEQM) working group of the 

Automotive Industry Action Group 

(AIAG) Metrology Project Team 

(MEPT). The goal of the MEQM has 

been to produce a non-proprietary, 

computer-readable, and widely 

implemented standard for the 

interface between measurement 

devices (not merely dimensional) and 

Statistical Process Control (SPC) 

analysis software packages.

The QMD standard holds 

promise to save statistical 

process control (SPC) software 

industry in the U.S. alone around 

$50 million over the next few 

years. This estimate is based on 

verifiable data from reliable 

sources.

AIAG John 
57

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MEL Dimensional 

Interface 

Measurement 

Standard 

(DMIS)

The DMIS standard provides 

interoperability standards for 

coordinate measurement machines. 

NIST has contributed significantly to 

the standard and produced a suite of 

conformance testing tools.

The DMIS standard is currently 

written and read by nearly 

every Coordinate Measuring 

Machine (CMM) software 

vendor worldwide. However, 

proprietary languages and a 

variety of incompatible noncomplaint DMIS 

implementations still abound. 

NIST is providing the first set 

of tools with which vendors and 

users can evaluate the 

conformance of a particular 

implementation to the DMIS 

specification.

ISO 22093

Dimension 

Metrology 

Standards

Consortium

John 

MEL Inspection PlusPlus (I++) 

Dimensional 

Measurement 

Equipment 

(DME) 

Standard

The I++ standard provides 

interoperability standards for 

coordinate measurement machines. 

NIST has contributed significantly to 

the standard and produced a suite of 

conformance testing tools.

The I++ DME standard is 

currently written and read by 

nearly every Coordinate 

Measuring Machine (CMM) 

hardware and software vendor 

worldwide. Incompatible, noncompliant I++ DME 

implementations are rare due to 

the influence of NIST early on 

in the standards development 

process.

International 

Association 

of 

CoordinateMeasuringMachineManufacturer

s [NOTE –

industry 

group, not 

official SDO, 

although this 

is treated as a 

standard]

John 

MEL Safety Standard 

for Guided 

Industrial 

Vehicles and 

Automated 

Functions of 

Manned 

Industrial 

Vehicles

The safety standard for users and 

vendors of manned and automated 

guided vehicles. NIST has 

contributed significantly to the 

standard providing performance 

testing and suggesting improvements 

to the standard for non-contact safety 

systems.

The B56.5 standard is currently 

written and read by forklift and 

AGV manufacturers and users, 

mainly in the US. The language 

was incorporated into the ISO 

safety standard as well and is 

being proposed for a global 

standard. 

Material 

Handling 

Industry of 

America 

(MHIA)

Roger 

Boste
58

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MEL Industrial 

Automation & 

Control 

Systems 

Security 

Standards

MEL is heavily involved in the 

development of standards for the 

security of Industrial Automation & 

Control Systems (IACS). This 

standards effort encompasses 

multiple standards inside the ISASP99 committee. Securing IACS 

facilities involves both the 

development of standards for the 

technology used to build the IACS 

and the policies & procedures 

applied to the IACS. MEL has 

multiple leadership & editorial roles 

in the standards committee

Secure the nation‘s critical 

infrastructure and manufacturing 

facilities.

ISA James 

Gilsin

MEL Industrial 

Robots and 

Robot SystemsSafety 

Requirements

This standard describes the requirements for 

the manufacture, installation, safeguarding, 

maintenance and repair of manipulating 

industrial robots, in order to enhance the 

safety of personnel using these devises. This 

is a very complicated standard that took 

approximately 10 years to prepare and to 

reach consensus.

This standard has been accepted by all the 

users of industrial robots in the USA and 

all the manufacturers who sell these 

devices in the USA. Several years ago 

Canada decided to adopt the same 

standard with some minor changes.

Robotic Industries 

Association/ANSI/RI

A R15.06-1999

Nicho

Dagal

MEL Robots for 

Industrial 

EnvironmentSafety 

Requirements 

Part 1-Robot

ISO has decided to adopt the US 

ANSI/RIA R15.06-1999 robot safety 

standard with some modifications, 

which are dictated by EU relevant 

laws. The main modification 

required was to split the standard in 

two segments, with the first (Part 1) 

addressing the requirements for the 

manufacture of manipulating 

industrial robots and the second for 

the installation, safeguarding, 

maintenance and repair of 

manipulating industrial robots. 

No data available since this standard 

passed balloting only a few months ago.

Robotic 

Industries 

Association

ANSI

RIA/ISO1021

80-12007

Nicho

Dagal
59

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MEL Cleaning Methods and 

Contamination 

Assessment for Optical 

Assembly

The scope of this standard is to describe 

inspection and cleaning methods for all optical 

devices interconnections in order to avoid the 

loss of optical signals.

This standard provides very significant 

information for the manufacturing of well 

functioning and reliable optoelectronic 

devices. The good performance of optical 

communication systems, micro device 

sensors, etc., depends on the information 

provided by this standard. 

IPC Nicho

Dagal

MSEL Charpy 

Program

Test of brittleness/ductility and 

impact energy for metals. NIST had 

instrumental role. Working to 

harmonize with ISO.

Written into numerous specs. 

around the world. Key quality 

test in used in metal contracts. 

Largest selling Standard 

Reference Material in MSEL. 

ASTM 

(1970s -

2007)

ISO

Chris 

McCo

Tom 

Siewe

MSEL Ceramic 

Mechanical 

Properties and 

Specifications

MSEL had lead role in developing 4 

generic ASTM and ISO property 

standards that were later used to 

make materials specifications for hipjoint ceramic balls and ceramic ball 

bearings.

Generic standards were included 

in three hip joint and one ball 

bearing specification standards. 

Hip-joint standards have 

significant health care impact, 

and ball bearings have large 

impact on manufacturing.

ASTM 

(1990-1999)

ISO (2000-

2001)

Georg

Quinn

MSEL Ceramic Armor NIST developed test method 

standards and SRMs used by U.S. 

Army to characterize materials.

Saves warfighter lives. ASTM 

(1990-1999) 

Georg

Quinn

MSEL Hardness 

Standardization 

for Metals

NIST was instrumental in the 

research to establish a traceability 

system for hardness measurements, 

developing SRMs and is refining test 

methods. NIST has most accurate 

hardness machine in U.S. 

Huge impact on trade of metals. 

Establishes national chain of 

traceability to fundamental SI 

units. Disputes between 

producers and users curtailed.

Information gained from NIST‘s 

participation in the CIPM has 

influenced ASTM requirements.

ASTM, ISO

(1991-2007)

Sam L
60

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MSEL Knoop Test for 

Ceramics

Hardness test invented at NIST 

(Knoop method) adapted for 

advanced ceramics.

To be written into USA tariff 

schedule and under negotiation 

within NAFTA for items such as 

ceramic wares for technical uses, 

kitchen and bath products, and 

porcelain and china.

ASTM, ISO

(1996-2000)

Georg

Quinn

MSEL Instrumented 

Indentation 

Testing

Standard practice and test methods 

for instrumented indentation provide 

first reliable basis for quantitative 

mechanical property determination 

for thin films and coatings. 

Provides the first basis for 

product specifications related to 

coating and thin film hardness 

and elasticity. Relevant to 

microelectronics and MEMS 

components, wear coatings for 

cutting tools, scratch-resistant 

optical (eyeglass) coatings, 

automotive paints, etc.

ASTM, ISO

(2002 – 2007)

Doug

Smith

MSEL Test Method for 

Molecular Mass 

Distribution of 

Polystyrene

New ASTM Test Method D 7134 

uses matrix assisted laser 

desorption/ionization mass 

spectroscopy to determine the 

molecular mass of polystyrenes 

This method will significantly 

improve the ability of different 

laboratories to measure 

compositions of synthetic 

polystyrenes, which are used for 

a wide variety of products.

There was broad international 

and industrial support via a 23 

lab VAMAS round robin. An 

ISO standard is in preparation.

ASTM

(2005-2007)

Charl

Guttm

and 

Willia

Walla
61

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

MSEL Test Methods 

for Embedded 

Passive 

Materials 

Master IPC standard TM -650, Test 

Methods Manual has been expanded 

with new tests to Determine 

Permittivity and Loss Tangent of 

Embedded Passive Materials at High 

Frequencies. Recently two new 

standards have been adopted: IPC 

4821 is a specification for capacitor 

materials and contains material 

designation, conformance 

(requirements), qualification 

(characterization) and quality 

assurance specifications for 

fabrication of embedded passive 

capacitor devices. IPC 2316 is a 

Design Guide that gives 

manufacturers the necessary 

information for incorporating 

embedded passive components into 

their applications. In addition, it also 

assists the users in understanding 

some of the physical and thermal 

characteristics of the embedded 

component materials.

New test procedures and 

specifications are having a major 

impact on Embedded Passive 

Electronic materials for wireless 

communications components 

and military devices where 

miniaturization is critical. 

Improved reliability. 

IPC

(2005-2007) 

Jan O

PL Standard 

Practice for 

Obtaining 

Colorimetric 

Data from a 

Visual Display 

Unit Using 

Tristimulus 

Colorimeters

ASTM E1255-

03

This standard adopted the method 

developed by NIST researchers and 

drafted by a NIST researcher. It 

prescribes the method for measuring 

chromaticity of displays accurately 

using tristimulus colorimeters, with 

computational corrections for errors 

introduced by imperfect matching of 

spectral responsivity of the detectors. 

This method can be applied to 

measurement of any RGB based 

color displays. 

This standard is helping improve 

the measurement accuracy for 

color displays and thus 

contributing to efficient 

production, commerce, and 

quality of display products. 

Tristimulus colorimeters are 

widely used in the display 

industry, but the accuracy has 

been a problem. This method 

corrects the errors. Used in 

some commercial products.

ASTM 

(2003)

Yoshi 

Ohno
62

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

PL Approved 

Method for 

Total Luminous 

Flux 

Measurement of 

Lamps Using an 

Integrating 

Sphere 

Photometer

This standard (IESNA LM-78-2006) 

was drafted by a NIST researcher, 

and NIST played the leading role in 

developing this standard. This 

standard provides recommendations 

on how to use integrating sphere 

photometers for accurate 

measurement of total luminous flux 

(lumen) of light sources, including 

design of integrating spheres, 

recommended sphere geometry, 

measurement procedures, correction 

methods, and uncertainty analysis. 

This document is to be referenced in 

many other IESNA LM standards. 

This standard will help improve 

the measurement accuracy of 

total luminous flux (lumen) in 

lighting industry, thus 

contributing to efficient 

production, commerce, and 

quality of lamp products. This 

standard is to be referenced by 

accreditation program for 

Energy-Efficient Lighting 

products, and all lamp 

manufacturers will follow the 

practice given in this standard. 

IESNA 

(2007)

Yoshi 

Ohno

PL Specifications 

for the 

Chromaticity of 

Solid State 

Lighting 

Products

NIST led the development of this 

standard (ANSI C38.377), which is 

under final approval. This standard 

specifies the white light chromaticity 

ranges for solid state lighting (SSL) 

products. This standard will ensure 

that new lighting products using 

LEDs will have high-quality white 

light and appropriately classified 

according to color temperature to 

allow smooth replacement of 

traditional light sources or other SSL 

products having similar color.

DOE is starting the Energy Star 

program for SSL products, 

which needs this standard. All 

SSL products should be 

designed to meet this standard, 

and in turn, white LEDs (used 

for the SSL products) will also 

be deigned and classified for 

color according to this standard. 

Thus, this standard will have 

significant impact on both white 

LED and SSL industries.

ANSI (2008) Yoshi 

Ohno
63

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

PL Approved 

Method for the 

Electrical and 

Photometric 

Measurements 

of Solid-State 

Lighting 

Product

NIST is leading the development of 

this standard (IESNA LM-79), which 

is in the final stage. This standard 

provides standard test methods for 

measurement of total luminous flux 

(lumen), electrical parameters, 

luminous efficacy (lm/W) and color 

quantities of solid state lighting 

(SSL) products.

DOE is starting its Energy Star 

program for SSL products, 

which needs this standard. An 

associated laboratoryaccreditation program for SSL 

products is being developed, 

which refers to these test 

methods. The SSL 

manufacturers and testing 

laboratories will be required to 

use the test methods specified in 

this document, and commercial 

photometric instruments will be 

designed to comply with this 

standard.

IESNA Yoshi 

Ohno

PL Color Rendition 

by White Light 

Sources

NIST is leading the development of 

this international standard. This 

standard will replace the CIE Color 

Rendering Index, which has been 

used widely over 30 years by lighting 

industry. A new metric is needed to 

address the problems of the index 

with solid-state light sources. Color 

rendering is a very important 

property of light sources for lighting, 

and is also closely related to energy 

efficiency.

Energy regulations such as the 

U.S. Energy Policy Act and 

Energy Star (for fluorescent 

lamps, and solid state lighting 

products) require minimum 

Color Rendering Index as well 

as minimum lumens per watt for 

light source products. DOE is 

waiting to use the new standard 

for Energy Star. The new 

standard being developed is 

expected to improve color 

quality and energy efficiency of 

all light sources including SSL 

products.

CIE Wend

Davis
64

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Conta

PL Photometry of 

Flashing Lights

NIST is leading the development of 

this international standard. This 

standard will specify the photometric 

scale for the effective intensity of 

flashing light used in signaling and 

warning lights according to temporal 

human visual sensitivity. This 

standard will unify different scales 

used in different countries.

Flashing warning lights are 

widely used for signaling and 

warning lights in transportation 

for aircraft, airport, highways, 

roads, and buildings. The 

intensity scale for these flashing 

lights has never been 

internationally standardized.

The specification of all these 

flashing lights products will use 

the effective intensity scale 

(candela) defined by this 

standard.

CIE Yoshi 

Ohno

PL Radiation 

Detector 

Certification 

(Rad-Nuc)

NIST was driving force behind the 

revision of 4 standards (N42.32-35) 

related to radiation detector 

certification for four classes of 

detectors from hand-held instruments 

to monitors used for trucks to cargo 

containers. The team also revised 

test and evaluation protocols to be 

used for testing these instruments.

These standards and the 

associated testing will help 

improve public safety by 

addressing performance of 

detection equipment used in 

border control, customs, coast 

guard and postal services and 

their need for detection of illicit 

radioactive materials and 

response to terrorist threats. 

This work is recognized by DHS 

as a model for gov't/private 

sector development of standards 

for homeland security. 

IEEE /ANSI 

(2005-

present)

Mike 

Unter

PL Radiation 

Detector 

international 

performance 

standards 

NIST is heavily involved in the 

development of international 

standards for radiation detectors for 

both metrology and security uses.

These standards will lead to 

improvements in the detection of 

illicit radioactive materials on 

the international level.

IEC

(2005 –

present)

Mike 

Unter
65

Lab Title Description Impact SDO Contact 

PL/TS X-Ray Security 

Screening 

Systems

NIST is leading a program to 

develop 4 technical performance 

standards (ANSI N42.44-47) 

related to the image quality of xray security screening systems for 

cargo, computerized tomography 

(for checked baggage), checkpoint 

and body scan. These standards 

will include test methods, test 

artifacts, and minimum 

performance requirements where 

this does not compromise security 

sensitive information.

These standards will be used by 

DHS and state and local 

governments to insure that only 

systems that meet satisfactory levels 

of performance will be purchased 

and used in the nation‘s aviation 

security venues, public buildings 

and events, and screening at ports, 

borders, and prisons. 

IEEE 

/ANSI 

N42.46 

(2008)

N42.44 

(2008)

Larry Huds
66

ENDNOTES

 

1

It is possible that in some instances a narrower scope might actually serve the market better, but only 4 

percent of the respondents indicated that NIST‘s involvement narrowed the scope of the standard.

2 Link and Scott distinguish three different approaches to evaluating economic impact: the counterfactual 

approach, the Grilliches/Mansfield approach, and the spillover approach. The counterfactual approach 

appears more conservative, in the sense that it accounts for first-order net benefits that accrue to NIST‘s 

unique contributions. The availability of new products and services suggests second-order benefits and the 

application of the Grilliches/Mansfield approach to economic impact evaluation. See, A.N. Link and J.T. 

Scott, Evaluating Public Research Institutions, (Routledge) 2005, pp. 103-105.

3 Gregory Tassey, The Technology Imperative, Edward Elgar 2007; The Roles and Economic Impacts of 

Technology Infrastructure (version 3), 2008; and ―The disaggregated technology production function: A 

new model of university and corporate research,‖ Research Policy, 34 (2005) 287–303.

4

See, for example, Trade and the impact of innovations and standards: the case of Germany and the UK, 

Knut Blind and Andre Jungmittag, Applied Economics, 2005, vol. 37, issue 12, pages 1385-1398; Knut 

Blind, The Economics of Standards: Theory, Evidence, Policy, (publisher)

5 The ISO is undertaking a study to develop a general methodology for assessing the impact of 

documentary standards.

6 David Leech is a Senior Analyst with the Industry & Technology Evaluation Intelligence Group (TASC) 

of Northrop Grumman Corporation

7

Joanne Henson was a Guest Researcher at NIST during 2008.

8 Erik Puskar, Selected Impacts of Documentary Standards Supported by NIST, NISTIR 7398, March 2007.

9 Our approach is adaptation of an approach to strategic assessment developed Clayton M. Christensen, Paul Carlile, 

and David Sundahl, The Process of Theory-Building, (Harvard Business School Working Paper 02-016), 2002; Clayton 

M.Christensen and Michael E. Raynor, ―Why Hard-Nosed Executives Should Care About Management Theory,‖ 

Harvard Business Review, September 2003, pp. 67- 74; and, Paul R. Carlile and Clayton M. Christensen, The Cycles of 

Theory Building in Management Research, (Harvard Business School Working Paper 05-057), 2005.

10 For example, see, Tassey, op.cit., 2005; and the ―U.S. Measurement System‖ framework described in, Dennis Swyt, 

An Assessment of the United States Measurement System, NIST Special Publication 1048, February, 2007. The United 

States Measurement System (USMS) is described as an essential infrastructure woven into the fabric of our economy 

by the organizing activities of private sector standards developing organizations (SDOs), supported by NIST‘s 

participation in these SDOs and its measurement science and technology development activities. From an economic 

perspective, these private and public activities mitigate the measurement risks and costs associated with product 

development, production, marketing, and use. 

11 In the context of the proposed strategic assessment development process, case studies are understood not simply as 

stand-alone vignettes but rather as means of building towards the kind of rich analysis capability that allows the case 

study & lessons learned step to transition the strategic assessment step. See, Robert Yin, Case Study Research Design, 

4

th edition, Sage Publications, 2005 [CHECK CITATION]; and Christenson, et al, op. cit., 2002, 2003, 2005. 

12 See, ―Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield,‖ The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 30, Nos. 1/2, January 2005; 

Cite a compilation of ATP economic assessments; Tassey, op. cit., 2008.

13 See, John T. Scott, "Financing and Leveraging Public/Private Partnerships: The Hurdle-Lowering 

Auction," STI Review, No. 23, 1998, pp.67-84.

14 See, Ruegg, Rosalie and Irwin Feller, ―A Toolkit for Evaluating Public R&D Investment‖, NIST, July 

2003, p. 34

15 Nanotechnology (environment, health and safety measures); Biosciences; Leap-ahead security 

technologies; Optical communications and computing; Neutron research expansion; Quantum science, 

Enabling nanotechnology; Climate change science program; Measurement science; Earthquake hazards 

reduction; Disaster resilient structures; Hydrogen as fuel; Biometrics; Supply chain integration.

16 The fraction of value added from new products or services depends on the gap in the timing or scope of 

the standards that can be attributed to NIST‘s participation.

17 It is possible that in some instances a narrower scope might actually serve the market better, but only 4 

percent of the respondents indicated that NIST‘s involvement narrowed the scope of the standard.

18 As with the other intermediate indicators, we are only claiming that evidence of industry group or 

consortium involvement is suggestive of significant benefits. Significant economic impact is a much 

stronger claim requiring significant net benefits.

19 Link and Scott distinguish three different approaches to evaluating economic impact: the counterfactual 

approach, the Grilliches/Mansfield approach, and the spillover approach. The counterfactual approach 
67

 

appears more conservative, in the sense that it accounts for first-order net benefits that accrue to NIST‘s 

unique contributions. The availability of new products and services suggests second-order benefits and the 

application of the Grilliches/Mansfield approach to economic impact evaluation. See, A.N. Link and J.T. 

Scott, Evaluating Public Research Institutions, (Routledge) 2005, pp. 103-105.

20 Methods for Assessing the Economic Impacts of Government R&D (Planning Report 03-1), NIST, 

September 2003