FY 2016 Government Unique Standards used in lieu of Voluntary Consensus Standards 

(Rescinded)

Agency: Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)

Government Standard: All-Terrain Vehicle Standard, Consumer Product Enhancement

Act (CPSIA), Section 232(a) [Incorporated: 2009] [Rescinded: 2009]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

Four Wheel All-Terrain Vehicles - Equipment, 

Configuration, and Performance Requirements 

(ANSI/SVIA-1)

The CPSIA directed the Commission to publish, 

as a mandatory consumer product safety 

standard, the ANSI/SVIA-1-2007 as a 

mandatory standard

Government Standard: Mandatory Toy Safety Standards, Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act or 2008, Section 106 [Incorporated: 2009] [Rescinded: 2009]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Toy Safety (ASTM F963-08)

The CPSIA made certain voluntary standards, 

including the ASTM F963-08, 

into mandatory consumer product standards.

Agency: Department of Transportation (DOT)

Government Standard: 63 FR 17976; April 13, 1998 - Product Safety Signs and 

Labels [Incorporated: 1998] [Rescinded: 2016]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ANSI Z535.4 - ANSI Requirements for Color 

Coded Header Messages for the Different 

Levels of Hazard

NHTSA explained in the NPRM that the 

American National Standard Institute (ANSI) 

has a standard4 for product safety signs and 

labels (ANSI Z535.4) that identifies a hierarchy 

of hazard levels ranging from extremely serious 

to moderately serious and specifies 

corresponding hierarchies of signal words, i.e., 

“danger,” “warning,” and “caution,” and of 

colors. For the header, the ANSI standard 

specifies a red background with white text for 

“danger,” an orange background with black text 

for “warning,” and a yellow background with 

black text for caution.” 

The ANSI standard specifies that pictograms 

should be black on white, with occasional uses 

of color for emphasis, and that message text 

should be black on white. The agency noted in 

the NPRM that when it earlier updated the 

requirements for air bag warning labels to 

require the addition of color and pictograms, it 

had chosen not to adopt the colors specified in 
the ANSI standard. NHTSA chose to use yellow 

instead of orange in the background of the 

heading for the air bag warning label, even 

though the word “warning” was used, because of 

overwhelming focus group preference for 

yellow. Only two of the 53 participants preferred 

orange. Participants generally stated that yellow 

was more eye-catching than orange. Participants 

also noted that red (stop) and yellow (caution) 

had meaning to them, but not orange. 

NHTSA asked for comment on three color 

options for the revised utility vehicle rollover 

warning label. Proposed label 1 used the ANSI 

color format with the heading background in 

orange with the words in black. The remainder 

of the label had a white background with black 

text and drawings. Proposed label 2 used a color 

scheme like the air bag warning labels, which is 

the same as the ANSI color format except that 

the background color for the heading in the label 

is yellow. Proposed label 3 employed the color 

scheme used in the focus groups - the heading 

area had a red background with white text. The 

graphic areas had a yellow background with 

black and white drawings. The text area had a 

black background with yellow text. 

Despite focus group preference for the signal 

word “danger,” the agency proposed the use of 

the word “warning” as more appropriate to the 

level of risk. The agency also noted that the 

word “warning” is used in the air bag warning 

label. 

Recognizing that it might encounter additional 

conflicts between focus group preferences and 

the ANSI standard in future rulemakings, 

NHTSA requested comments in the NPRM on 

the extent to which any final choice regarding 

colors and signal words should be guided by the 

focus group preferences instead of the ANSI 

standard. NHTSA also requested comments on 

the broader issue of the circumstances in which 

it would be appropriate for agency rulemaking 

decisions to be guided by focus group results or 
other information when such information is 

contrary to a voluntary consensus standard such 

as the ANSI standard. 

At this time (February 22, 1999), a final decision 

is still pending regarding its proposal to upgrade 

the rollover warning label. As to the general 

questions it posed in the NPRM, NHTSA 

recognizes that ANSI’s mission differs 

somewhat from that of the agency’s focus groups 

with respect to the labeling of hazardous 

situations. ANSI’s mission is to develop and 

maintain a standard for communicating 

information about a comprehensive hierarchy of 

hazards, while the focus groups’ mission is to 

design an effective label for a specific hazard. 

The agency recognizes further that, given the 

difference in their missions, their conclusions 

about the appropriate manner of communication 

might differ on occasion. 

Since agency labeling decisions are highly 

dependent on the facts regarding the specific 

hazard being addressed, NHTSA anticipates 

making case-by-case determinations of the 

extent to which it should follow voluntary 

standards versus information from focus groups 

and other sources. NHTSA will rely on its own 

expertise and judgement in making 

determinations under the NTTAA and the 

statutory provisions regarding vehicle safety 

standards.

Government Standard: Air Bag Warning Label (1997) [Incorporated: 1997] [Rescinded: 

2016]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ANSI ISO The Air Bag Warning Label uses yellow as the 

background color, instead of orange, in 

accordance with an ANSI standard and uses a 

graphic developed by Chrysler Corporation to 

depict the hazards of being too close to an air 

bag, instead of the graphic recommended by the 

ISO. These decisions were based on focus group 

testing sponsored by the agency which strongly 

indicated that these unique requirements would 
be far more effective with respect to safety than 

the industry standards.

Government Standard: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 226, 

‘‘Ejection Mitigation" (49 CFR 571.226; 49 CFR 585, Subpart K) (2011). [Incorporated: 

2010] [Rescinded: 2016]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

SAE J2568—Intrusion Resistance of Safety 

Glazing Systems for Road Vehicles; BSI AU 

209—Vehicle Security

NHTSA studied the potential of applying these 

standards, but decided against adopting them for 

several reasons. These standards provide glazing 

intrusion resistance requirements from external 

impact (outside-in) as opposed 

to ejection mitigation (inside-out). Additionally,

the requirements are not appropriate for vehicles 

with only side 

curtain air bags, given that there is a time 

dependence associated with a curtain’s ejection 

mitigation performance. Once deployed, the 

pressure in the air bag continuously decreases. 

The 16 km/h test is done at 6 seconds to assure 

that the pressure does not decrease too quickly. It 

does not seem that the 40 mm gap test could be 

done after the 6-second impact, in any timeframe 

which is related to rollover and side impact 

ejections. Further, there was no shown safety 

need for applying the suggested standards. We 

cannot show that ejections that would not be 

prevented by the primary 100-mm displacement 

requirement would be prevented by a secondary 

40-mm requirement. Also, it seemed that the 40-

mm requirement would indirectly require 

installation of advanced glazing. The costs 

associated with advanced glazing installations at 

the side windows covered by the NHTSA 

standard are substantial in comparison to a 

system only utilizing rollover curtains. For these 

reasons, the agency did not accept the standards.

Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Government Standard: 40 CFR 89 - Control of Emissions from New and In-Use NonRoad Compression Ignition Engines [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 8178 - Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines, Exhaust Emission Measurement

Procedures would be impractical because they 

rely too heavily on reference testing conditions. 
Agency decides instead to continue to rely on 

procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 90.

Government Standard: 40 CFR 90 - Control of Emission from Non-Road Spark Ignition 

Engines at or below 19KV [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 8178 - Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines, Exhaust Emission Measurement

Procedures would be impractical because they 

rely too heavily on reference testing conditions. 

Agency decides instead to continue to rely on 

procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 90.

Government Standard: 40 CFR 92 - Control of Air Pollution from Locomotives and 

Locomotive Engines [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 8178 - Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines, Exhaust Emission Measurement

Procedures would be impractical because they 

rely too heavily on reference testing conditions. 

Agency decides instead to continue to rely on 

procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 90.

Government Standard: EPA Method 10 - Carbon Monoxide, NDIR [Incorporated: 1999] 

[Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D3162 (1994) Standard Test Method 

for Carbon Monoxide in the Atmosphere 

(Continuous Measurement by Non-dispersive 

Infrared Spectrometry)

This ASTM standard, which is stated to be 

applicable in the range of 0.5-100 ppm CO, does 

not cover the range of EPA Method 10 (20-1,000 

ppm CO) at the upper end (but states that it has a 

lower limit of sensitivity). Also, ASTM D3162 

does not provide a procedure to remove carbon 

dioxide interference. Therefore, this ASTM 

standard is not appropriate for combustion 

source conditions. In terms of non-dispersive 

infrared instrument performance specifications, 

ASTM D3162 has much higher maximum 

allowable rise and fall times (5 minutes) than 

EPA Method 10 (which has 30 seconds).

CAN/CSA Z223.21-M1978, Method for the 

Measurement of Carbon Monoxide: 3—

Method of Analysis by Non-Dispersive 

Infrared Spectrometry

1. This standard is lacking in the following areas: 

(1) Sampling procedures; (2) procedures to 

correct for the carbon dioxide concentration; (3) 

instructions to correct the gas volume if CO2 

traps are used; (4) specifications to certify the 

calibration gases are within 2 percent of the 

target concentration; (5) mandatory instrument 

performance characteristics (e.g., rise time, fall 

time, zero drift, span drift, precision); (6) 

quantitative specification of the span value 

maximum as compared to the measured value: 
The standard specifies that the instruments 

should be compatible with the concentration of 

gases to be measured, whereas EPA Method 10 

specifies that the instrument span value should 

be no more than 1.5 times the source 

performance standard. 2. Is too general, too 

broad, or not sufficiently detailed to assure 

compliance with EPA regulatory requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 15 - Hydrogen Sulfide/Carbon Disulfide/Carbon 

Sulfide [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASME C00031 or PTC 19-10-1981 - Part 10 

Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses 

Too broad to be useful in regulatory sense. 

Covers Methods 3, 6, 7, and 15 with variants. 

ASTM D4323-84 (1997) - Standard Test 

Method for Hydrogen Sulfide in the 

Atmosphere by Rate of Change of Reflectance

ASTM D4323 only applies to concentrations of 

H2S from 1 ppb to 3 ppm without dilution. 

Many QC items are missing, such as calibration 

drift and sample line losses. The calibration 

curve is determined with only one point.

Government Standard: EPA Method 1650 - Organic Halides, Absorbable 

(AOX) [Incorporated: 1998] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO, DIN, SCAN, and Standard Methods (SM 

5320)

EPA decided to use EPA Method 1650. This 

Method was developed by drawing on various 

procedures contained in the methods of 

voluntary consensus standards bodies and other 

standards developers, such as ISO, DIN, SCAN, 

and Standard Methods (SM 5320). However, 

none of these more narrowly focused voluntary 

consensus standards contained the standardized 

quality control and quality control compliance 

criteria that EPA requires for data verification 

and validation in its water programs. Therefore, 

EPA found none of these VCS standing alone to 

meet EPA’s needs.

Government Standard: EPA Method 18 - VOC/GC [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 

2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D6060-96 (in review 2000) - Practice 

for Sampling of Process Vents with a Portable 

Gas Chromatography

This standard lacks key quality control and 

assurance that is required for EPA Method 18. 

For example: lacks acceptance criteria for 

calibration, details on using other collection 

media (e.g. solid sorbents), and reporting/ 

documentation requirements.
Government Standard: EPA Method 180.1 - Turbidity Nephelometric [Incorporated: 

1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 7027 - Water Quality Determination of 

Turbidity

EPA has no data upon which to evaluate whether 

the separate 90 degrees scattered or transmitted 

light measurement evaluations according to the 

ISO 7027 method would produce results that are 

equivalent to results produced by the other 

methods.

Government Standard: EPA Method 2 – Velocity and S-type Pitot [Incorporated: 1999] 

[Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM 3796-90 (1998), Standard Practice for 

Calibration of Type S Pitot Tubes

They are too general, too broad, or not 

sufficiently detailed to assure compliance with 

EPA regulatory requirements.

ASTM D3154-00, Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

1. The standard appears to lack in quality control 

and quality assurance requirements. It does not 

include the following: (1) Proof that openings of 

standard pitot tube have not plugged during the 

test; (2) if differential pressure gauges other than 

inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) 

are used, their calibration must be checked after 

each test series; and (3) the frequency and 

validity range for calibration of the temperature 

sensors. 2. They are too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.

ASTM D3154-91 (1995), Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

Is too general, too broad, or not sufficiently 

detailed to assure compliance with EPA 

regulatory requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 23 – Dioxin and Furan (PCDD and 

PCDF) [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

European Committee for Standardization 

(CEN) EN 1948-3 (1997), Determination of 

the Mass Concentration of PCDD'S/PCDF'S--

Part 3: Identification and Quantification

Is too general, too broad, or not sufficiently 

detailed to assure compliance with EPA 

regulatory requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 24 – Surface Coatings, Volatile Matter 

Content [Incorporated: 1998] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale
ISO 11890-1 (2000) part 1, Paints and 

Varnishes--Determination of Volatile Organic 

Compound (VOC) Content-Difference Method

Measured nonvolatile matter content can vary 

with experimental factors such as temperature, 

length of heating period, size of weighing dish, 

and size of sample. The standard ISO 11890-1 

allows for different dish weights and sample 

sizes than the one size (58 millimeters in 

diameter and sample size of 0.5 gram) of EPA 

Method 24. The standard ISO 11890-1 also 

allows for different oven temperatures and 

heating times depending on the type of coating, 

whereas EPA Method 24 requires 60 minutes 

heating at 110 degrees Celcius at all times. 

Because the EPA Method 24 test conditions and 

procedures define volatile matter, ISO 11890-1 

is unacceptable as an alternative because of its 

different test conditions.

ISO 11890-2 (2000) Part 2, Paints and 

Varnishes--Determination of Volatile Organic 

Compound (VOC) Content-Gas 

Chromatographic Method

ISO 11890-2 only measures the VOC added to 

the coating and would not measure any VOC 

generated from the curing of the coating. The 

EPA Method 24 does measure cure VOC, which 

can be significant in some cases, and, therefore, 

ISO 11890-2 is not an acceptable alternative to 

this EPA method.

Government Standard: EPA Method 26 – Hydrogen Chloride, Halides, Halogens 

Emissions [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

EN 1911-1,2,3 (1998), Stationary Source 

Emissions-- Manual Method of Determination 

of HCl--Part 1: Sampling of Gases Ratified 

European Text--Part 2: Gaseous Compounds 

Absorption Ratified European Text-- Part 3: 

Adsorption Solutions Analysis and Calculatio

Part 3 of this standard cannot be considered 

equivalent to EPA Method 26 or 26A because 

the sample absorbing solution (water) would be 

expected to capture both HCl and Cl2 gas, if 

present, without the ability to distinguish 

between the two. The EPA Methods 26 and 26A 

use an acidified absorbing solution to first 

separate HCl and Cl2 gas so that they can be 

selectively absorbed, analyzed, and reported 

separately. In addition, in EN 1911 the 

absorption efficiency for Cl2 gas would be 

expected to vary as the pH of the water changed 

during sampling.

Government Standard: EPA Method 26A – Hydrogen Halide and Halogen, 

Isokinetic [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

EN 1911-1,2,3 (1998), Stationary Source 

Emissions-- Manual Method of Determination 

Part 3 of this standard cannot be considered 

equivalent to EPA Method 26 or 26A because 
of HCl--Part 1: Sampling of Gases Ratified 

European Text--Part 2: Gaseous Compounds 

Absorption Ratified European Text-- Part 3: 

Adsorption Solutions Analysis and Calculatio

the sample absorbing solution (water) would be 

expected to capture both HCl and Cl2 gas, if 

present, without the ability to distinguish 

between the two. The EPA Methods 26 and 26A 

use an acidified absorbing solution to first 

separate HCl and Cl2 gas so that they can be 

selectively absorbed, analyzed, and reported 

separately. In addition, in EN 1911 the 

absorption efficiency for Cl2 gas would be 

expected to vary as the pH of the water changed 

during sampling.

Government Standard: EPA Method 2C – Velocity and Flow Rate, Standard 

Pitot [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D3154-00, Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

1. The standard appears to lack in quality control 

and quality assurance requirements. It does not 

include the following: (1) Proof that openings of 

standard pitot tube have not plugged during the 

test; (2) if differential pressure gauges other than 

inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) 

are used, their calibration must be checked after 

each test series; and (3) the frequency and 

validity range for calibration of the temperature 

sensors. 2. They are too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 3 – Molecular Weight Carbon Dioxide, 

Oxygen [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASME C00031 or PTC 19-10-1981--part 10, 

"Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses"

Is too general, too broad, or not sufficiently 

detailed to assure compliance with EPA 

regulatory requirements.

ASTM D3154-00, Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

1. The standard appears to lack in quality control 

and quality assurance requirements. It does not 

include the following: (1) Proof that openings of 

standard pitot tube have not plugged during the 

test; (2) if differential pressure gauges other than 

inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) 

are used, their calibration must be checked after 

each test series; and (3) the frequency and 

validity range for calibration of the temperature 

sensors. 2. They are too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.
Government Standard: EPA Method 320 – Vapor Phase Organic and Inorganic 

Emissions, FTIR [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D6348-98, Determination of Gaseous 

Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface 

Fourier Transform (FTIR) Spectroscopy

Suggested revisions to ASTM D6348-98 were 

sent to ASTM by the EPA that, would allow the 

EPA to accept ASTM D6348-98 as an 

acceptable alternative. The ASTM 

Subcommittee D22-03 is currently undertaking a 

revision of ASTM D6348- 98. Because of this, 

we are not citing this standard as a acceptable 

alternative for EPA Method 320 in the final rule 

today. However, upon successful ASTM 

balloting and demonstration of technical 

equivalency with the EPA FTIR methods, the 

revised ASTM standard could be incorporated 

by reference for EPA regulatory applicability. In 

the interim, facilities have the option to request 

ASTM D6348-98 as an alternative test method 

under 40 CFR 63.7(f) and 63.8(f) on a case-bycase basis.

Government Standard: EPA Method 3A – Carbon Dioxide and Oxygen Concentrations, 

IAP [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D5835-95, Standard Practice for 

Sampling Stationary Source Emissions for 

Automated Determination of Gas 

Concentration

1. They lack in detail and quality 

assurance/quality control requirements. 

Specifically, these two standards do not include 

the following: (1) Sensitivity of the method; (2) 

acceptable levels of analyzer calibration error; 

(3) acceptable levels of sampling system bias; 

(4) zero drift and calibration drift limits, time 

span, and required testing frequency; (5) a 

method to test the interference response of the 

analyzer; (6) procedures to determine the 

minimum sampling time per run and minimum 

measurement time; and (7) specifications for 

data recorders, in terms of resolution (all types) 

and recording intervals (digital and analog 

recorders, only). 2. Is too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.

CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86(1986), Method for the 

Continuous Measurement of Oxygen, Carbon 

Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur Dioxide, 

1. It does not include quantitative specifications 

for measurement system performance, most 

notably the calibration procedures and 

instrument performance characteristics. The 
and Oxides of Nitrogen in Enclosed 

Combustion Flue Gas Stream

instrument performance characteristics that are 

provided are nonmandatory and also do not 

provide the same level of quality assurance as 

the EPA methods. For example, the zero and 

span/calibration drift is only checked weekly, 

whereas the EPA methods requires drift checks 

after each run. 2. Is too general, too broad, or not 

sufficiently detailed to assure compliance with 

EPA regulatory requirements.

ISO 10396:1993, Stationary Source Emissions: 

Sampling for the Automated Determination of 

Gas Concentrations

1. They lack in detail and quality 

assurance/quality control requirements. 

Specifically, these two standards do not include 

the following: (1) Sensitivity of the method; (2) 

acceptable levels of analyzer calibration error; 

(3) acceptable levels of sampling system bias; 

(4) zero drift and calibration drift limits, time 

span, and required testing frequency; (5) a 

method to test the interference response of the 

analyzer; (6) procedures to determine the 

minimum sampling time per run and minimum 

measurement time; and (7) specifications for 

data recorders, in terms of resolution (all types) 

and recording intervals (digital and analog 

recorders, only). 2. Is too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 3B – Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, 

Emission Rate Correction Factor [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D3154-00, Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

1. The standard appears to lack in quality control 

and quality assurance requirements. It does not 

include the following: (1) Proof that openings of 

standard pitot tube have not plugged during the 

test; (2) if differential pressure gauges other than 

inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) 

are used, their calibration must be checked after 

each test series; and (3) the frequency and 

validity range for calibration of the temperature 

sensors. 2. They are too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.

ASTM D3154-91 (1995), Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

Is too general, too broad, or not sufficiently 

detailed to assure compliance with EPA 

regulatory requirements.
Government Standard: EPA Method 4 – Moisture Content in Stack 

Gases [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D3154-00, Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

1. The standard appears to lack in quality control 

and quality assurance requirements. It does not 

include the following: (1) Proof that openings of 

standard pitot tube have not plugged during the 

test; (2) if differential pressure gauges other than 

inclined manometers (e.g., magnehelic gauges) 

are used, their calibration must be checked after 

each test series; and (3) the frequency and 

validity range for calibration of the temperature 

sensors. 2. They are too general, too broad, or 

not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance 

with EPA regulatory requirements.

ASTM D3154-91 (1995), Standard Method for 

Average Velocity in a Duct (Pitot Tube 

Method)

Is too general, too broad, or not sufficiently 

detailed to assure compliance with EPA 

regulatory requirements.

ASTM E337-84 (1996), Standard Test Method 

for Measuring Humidity with a Psychrometer 

(the Measurement of Wet- and Dry-Bulb 

Temperatures)

They are too general, too broad, or not 

sufficiently detailed to assure compliance with 

EPA regulatory requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 5 – Particulate Matter, Stationary 

Sources [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASME PTC-38-80 R85 or C00049, 

Determination of the Concentration of 

Particulate Matter in Gas Streams

It lacks sufficient quality assurance and quality 

control requirements necessary for EPA 

compliance assurance requirements.

ASTM D3685/D3685M-98, Test Methods for 

Sampling and Determination of Particulate 

Matter in Stack Gases

It lacks sufficient quality assurance and quality 

control requirements necessary for EPA 

compliance assurance requirements.

ISO 9096:1992, Determination of 

Concentration and Mass Flow Rate of 

Particulate Matter in Gas Carrying Ducts--

Manual Gravimetric Method

It lacks sufficient quality assurance and quality 

control requirements necessary for EPA 

compliance assurance requirements.

Government Standard: EPA Method 515.1 - Chlorinated Acids in Water by 

CC/ECD [Incorporated: 1998] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

Standard Methods 6640B Standard Methods 6640B for acid herbicides was 

tentatively deemed impractical for EPA’s needs 

because its sample preparation and quality 

control procedures were not similar enough to 

EPA Method 515.1 to ensure that there would 

not be underreporting of acid herbicide 
contamination. EPA plans to offer to work with 

the Standard Methods committee to resolve this 

issue prior to the next publication.

Government Standard: EPA Method 6 - Sulphur Dioxide Emissions [Incorporated: 

1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASME C00031 or PTC 19-10-1981 - Part 10 

Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses 

Too broad to be useful in regulatory sense. 

Covers Methods 3, 6, 7, and 15 with variants. 

ISO 11632:1998 - Stationary Source Emissions 

- Determination of the Mass Concentration of 

Sulfur Dioxide - Ion Chromatography

ISO 11632:1998 - Stationary Source Emissions -

Determination of the Mass Concentration of 

Sulfur Dioxide - Ion Chromatography

ISO 7934:1998 - Stationary Source Emissions 

- Determination of the Mass Concentration of 

Sulfur Dioxide - Hydrogen Peroxide/Barium 

Perchlorate/ Thorin Method

This standard is only applicable to sources with 

30 mg/m3 SO2 or more. In addition, this method 

does not separate SO3 from SO2 as does EPA 

Method 6; therefore, this method is not valid if 

more than a negligible amount of SO3 is present. 

Also, does not address ammonia interferences.

Government Standard: EPA Method 6c - Sulpher Dioxide Emissions Stationary by 

IAP [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D5835-95 - Standard Practice for 

Sampling Stationary Source Emissions for 

Automated Determination of Gas 

Concentration

Similar to Methods 3a, 6c, 7e, 10, ALT 004, 

CTM 022. Lacks in detail and quality assurance 

and quality control requirements. Very similar to 

ISO 10396.

CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86 - (1986) Method for 

the Continuous Measurement of Oxygen, 

Carbon Doixide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur 

Dioxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen in Enclosed 

Combustion Flue Gas Streams

Too general. This standard lacks in detail and 

quality assurance/quality control requirements. 

Appendices with valid quality control 

information are not a required part of this 

method.

ISO 10396:1993 - Stationary Source 

Emissions: Sampling for the Automated 

Determination of Gas Concentrations 

Duplicates Method 3a, 6c, 7e, 10, ALT 004, 

CTM 022. Lacks in detail and quality assurance 

plus quality control requirements. Similar to 

ASTM D5835. 

Government Standard: EPA Method 7 - Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Stationary 

Sources [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASME C00031 or PTC 19-10-1981 - Part 10 

Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses

Too broad to be useful in regulatory sense. 

Covers Methods 3, 6, 7, and 15 with variants.

Government Standard: EPA Method 7e - Nitrogen Oxide, Instrumental [Incorporated: 

1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale
ASTM D5835-95 - Standard Practice for 

Sampling Stationary Source Emissions for 

Automated Determination of Gas 

Concentration

Similar to Methods 3a, 6c, 7e, 10, ALT 004, 

CTM 022. Lacks in detail and quality assurance 

and quality control requirements. Very similar to 

ISO 10396.

CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86 - (1986) Method for 

the Continuous Measurement of Oxygen, 

Carbon Doixide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur 

Dioxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen in Enclosed 

Combustion Flue Gas Streams

Too general. This standard lacks in detail and 

quality assurance/quality control requirements. 

Appendices with valid quality control 

information are not a required part of this 

method.

ISO 10396:1993 - Stationary Source 

Emissions: Sampling for the Automated 

Determination of Gas Concentrations 

Duplicates Method 3a, 6c, 7e, 10, ALT 004, 

CTM 022. Lacks in detail and quality assurance 

plus quality control requirements. Similar to 

ASTM D5835. 

Government Standard: EPA Method GG – (Title not found in index) [Incorporated: 

2003] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM D3031-81 – Method of Test for Total 

Sulfur in Natural Gas (Hyrogenation), 

Withdrawn

This method has been deleted from the final rule 

because it was discontinued by the ASTM in 

1990 with no replacement. If the total sulfur 

content of the fuel being fired in the turbine is 

less than 0.4 weight percent, we are adding a 

provision that the following methods may be 

used to measure the sulfur content of the fuel: 

ASTM D4084-82 or 94, D5504-01, D6228-98, 

or the Gas Processors Association Method 2377-

86. This provision is consistent with the 

provision in 40 CFR 60.13(j)(1) allowing 

alternatives to reference method tests to 

determine relative accuracy of CEMS for sources 

with emission rates demonstrated to be less than 

50 percent of the applicable standard.

Government Standard: EPA Performance Specifications 11 - Particulate Matter 

Continuous Monitoring System [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 10155:1995 - Stationary source emissions. 

Automated monitoring of mass concentration 

of particles - Performance characteristics, test 

methods and specifications.

This international standard is only applicable on 

a site specific basis by direct correlation with the 

manual method ISO 9096 (which does not 

produce particulate matter measurements like 

EPA Method 5). This appears to be a PM CEMS 

performance specification similar to EPA 

Performance Specification 11, but does not 

contain detailed RATA procedures. Also, EPA 

doesn’t have a final performance specification to 

compare this to.
Government Standard: GLI Method 2 [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 7027 - Water Quality Determination of 

Turbidity

EPA has no data upon which to evaluate whether 

the separate 90 degrees scattered or transmitted 

light measurement evaluations according to the 

ISO 7027 method would produce results that are 

equivalent to results produced by the other 

methods.

Government Standard: Standard Method 2130B [Incorporated: 1999] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 7027 - Water Quality Determination of 

Turbidity

EPA has no data upon which to evaluate whether 

the separate 90 degrees scattered or transmitted 

light measurement evaluations according to the 

ISO 7027 method would produce results that are 

equivalent to results produced by the other 

methods.

Agency: Government Publishing Office (GPO)

Government Standard: FED-STD 209 [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2005]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 14644-1 & ISO 14644-2 Quality Assurance. Second ISO standard not 

issued until end of FY 2000. Being phased out.

Government Standard: Federal Information Standards Publication 201 (FISP 201) 

http://fips201ep.cio.gov/apl.php [Incorporated: 2010] [Rescinded: 2010]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

unknown To compete as a GSA approved supplier with 

graphical certification.

Government Standard: Government Paper Specifications Standards, QATAP and 

Microfilm Attributes [Incorporated: 2008] [Rescinded: 2008]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

none There are no voluntary standards

Government Standard: MIL-STD 105 [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2005]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ANSI/ASQC Z1.4 Quality Assurance. Cited in small number of 

contracts due to editing errors. These are being 

corrected and phased out.

Government Standard: MIL-STD 1189 [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2005]

Voluntary Standard Rationale
ANSI/AIM X5-2 & ANSI X3.182 Quality Assurance. Cited in small number of 

contracts due to editing errors. These are being 

corrected and phased out.

Government Standard: MIL-STD 498 [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2005]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

IEEE/EIA 12207.0, IEEE/EIA 12207.1, & 

IEEE/EIA 12207.2

Quality Assurance. Cited in small number of 

contracts due to editing errors. These are being 

corrected and phased out.

Agency: General Services Administration (GSA)

Government Standard: Federal Specification A-A-1925 - Shield, Expansion (Nail 

Anchors) [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2004]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM E488 - Standard Test Methods for 

Strength of Anchors in Concrete and Masonry 

Elements

This government-unique standard is prepared & 

maintained by the Defense Logistics Agency 

(DLA). Both the GSA & DLA contract for 

products that reference A-A-1925. In order to 

maintain product continuity in the Federal 

marketplace, we must cite the standard as the 

DLA.

Government Standard: FF-L-2740 [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2001]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

UL 768 These government specifications cover products 

used for the protection of national security 

information. The standards were developed after 

government review and testing determined that 

the commercial standards did not provide the 

required level of protection, or those commercial 

products that did provide the level of protection 

significantly exceeded the price of products 

meeting the government standards.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Government Standard: CDC/NIOSH use of 42CFR Part 84 in their mandated respirator 

certification program [Incorporated: 2007] [Rescinded: 2007]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

None. None available.

Government Standard: FDA Dosage Form and Route of Administration [Incorporated: 

2006] [Rescinded: 2008]

Voluntary Standard Rationale
HL7 Dosage Form and Route of 

Administration

FDA uses some government-unique standards 

such as 'dosage form' and 'route of 

administration' in lieu of voluntary consensus 

standards. FDA had considered using HL7's 

'dosage form' and 'route of administration'

voluntary standards, but rejected such voluntary 

standards for several reasons, including (1) precoordination of disparate terms, (2) cumbersome 

and untimely terminology maintenance, and (3) 

inadequate terminology coding and versioning. 

The government-unique standards (developed by 

FDA and jointly maintained by FDA and NCI) 

for 'dosage form' and 'route of administration' 

adequately address all of these HL7 

'deficiencies'. These particular governmentunique standards were chosen as a CHI standard 

and mandated throughout the federal 

government, which is yet another compelling 

reason why FDA chose to continue to use them.

Government Standard: FDA Guidelines on Asceptic Processing (1987) [Incorporated: 

1997] [Rescinded: 2004]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ISO 13408-1 - Aseptic Processing of Health 

Care Products, Part 1, General Requirements

FDA/CBER is not using the ISO standard 

because the applicability of these requirements is 

limited to only portions of aseptically 

manufactured biologics and does not include 

filtration, freeze-drying, sterilization in place, 

cleaning in place, or barrier-isolator technology. 

There are also significant issues related to 

aseptically produced bulk drug substance that are 

not included in the document

Government Standard: FR Notice dated June 17, 1994 Tentative Final Monograph for 

Health Care Antiseptic Drug Products; Proposed Rule [Incorporated: 1997] [Rescinded: 

2008]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ASTM Standard E1115 - Test Method for 

Evaluation of Surgical Hand Scrub 

Formulations

Sensitivity and bias of the ASTM Standard has 

not been established.

ASTM Standard E1173-93 - Standard Test 

Method of an Evaluation of Preoperative, 

precatheterization, or Preinjection Skin 

Preparations

Sensitivity and bias of the ASTM Standard has 

not been established.

ASTM Standard E1174-00 - Standard Test 

method for the Evaluation of the Effectiveness 

Sensitivity and bias of the ASTM Standard has 

not been established.
of Health Care Personnel or Consumer 

Handwash Formulations

Government Standard: Government eligibility inquiry and response 

standards [Incorporated: 2006] [Rescinded: 2008]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

X12 270/271 standards Pending completion of a system to support realtime use of the X12 270/271, CMS has permitted 

providers and our contractors to continue to use 

government eligibility inquiry and response 

standards. Use of these GUSs is not in lieu of, 

but in addition to the X12 270/271 standards to 

avoid industry disruption prior to full transition 

to use of the HIPAA X12 270/271 standards 

with Medicare via the Internet and an Intranet. 

Government Standard: National Standard Format [Incorporated: 1997] [Rescinded: 

2004]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

ANSI X12 837 The NSF is used widely across the health care 

payment industry and has become a defacto 

national standard. However, the Centers for 

Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have 

directed their contractors to discontinue use of 

the NSF standard and replace it with ANSI X12 

837 by the beginning of FY 2003.

Agency: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)

Government Standard: NARA data standard [Incorporated: 2000] [Rescinded: 2014]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts 

(APPM); 

General International Standard Archival 

Description (ISAD(G)); 

International Standard Archival Authority 

Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons, and 

Families (ISAAR(CPF)); 

Encoded Archival Description (EAD); 

Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC)

These voluntary standards do not meet the 

precise needs of the agency.

Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Government Standard: Name: WILDLAND FIRE FOAM Number: USDA Forest Service 

Specification 5100-307; July, 2000 Title: International Specification for Fire Suppressant 
Foam for Wild land Fires, Aircraft or Ground Application) [Incorporated: 2005] 

[Rescinded: 2010]

Voluntary Standard Rationale

NFPA 1150 - Standard on Fire-Fighting Foam 

Chemicals for Class A Fuels in Rural, 

Suburban, and Vegetated Areas.

Foam fire suppressants contain foaming and 

wetting agents. The foaming agents affect the 

accuracy of an aerial drop, how fast the water 

drains from the foam and how well the product 

clings to the fuel surfaces. The wetting agents 

increase the ability of the drained water to 

penetrate fuels. Foam fire suppressants are 

supplied as wet concentrates. 

This standard was developed with international 

cooperation for Class A Foam used in wildland 

fire suppression situations and equipment. 

Standard created by the USDA Forest Service in 

cooperation with the Department of Interior 

(DOI), the State of California, Department of 

Forestry and Fire Protection and the Canadian 

Interagency Forest Fire Center. 

The National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA) does have a standard for Class A Foam, 

(NFPA 1150 - Standard on Fire-Fighting Foam 

Chemicals for Class A Fuels in Rural, Suburban, 

and Vegetated Areas). The Forest Service has 

not chosen to utilize NFPA 1150 as it is designed 

specifically for application by municipal fire 

agencies in the wildland-urban interface, 

utilizing apparatus and situations that they are 

likely to encounter. The Forest Service’s GUS 

for foam products is specific to use by wildland 

fire equipment and situations that are unique, 

e.g. helicopter use of foams, remote storage 

situations, and varied quality of water sources in 

the wildland settings. The agency feels this 

standard more accurately reflects the needs and 

mission of the federal wildland fire suppression 

agencies.