1!

 Dr. Roger B. Marks 

 4040 Montview Blvd. 

 Denver, CO 80207 

 <r.b.marks@ieee.org> 

 6 February 2011 

Dr. Patrick Gallagher 

Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Co-Chair, National Science and Technology Council’s Sub-Committee on Technology 

Subject: Standardization feedback for Sub-Committee on Standards

Dear Dr. Gallagher, 

I am pleased to provide comments regarding Docket No. 0909100442-0563-02 

(“Effectiveness of Federal Agency Participation in Standardization in Select Technology 

Sectors for National Science and Technology Council's Sub-Committee on 

Standardization”). 

I appreciate your interest in and support for this activity. I understand that one significant 

aspect of the inquiry regards the Sub-Committee’s intent to “develop case studies that 

Federal agencies can consider in their future engagement in standards development and 

conformity assessment, particularly for multi-disciplinary technologies, or for 

technologies involving engagement from multiple Federal agencies.” 

I include below some comments relevant to your inquiry, including a proposed case study 

for your consideration. This is not a comprehensive response to the entire scope of the 

inquiry. 

(1) I am a writing as a citizen with significant background in the area of inquiry. In 

particular, as an employee of NIST from 1989-2006, I began an initiative in 1998 to 

develop standardization activities for broadband wireless access. The effort led to the 

initiation of the IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access (the 

“802.16 WG” <http://wirelessman.org>) in 1999. I was elected the initial Chair of that 

Working Group. I held that position for seven years as a federal employee. Upon leaving 

NIST for the private sector in 2006, I remained 802.16 WG Chair, have been re-elected, 

and remain in that position to date. My current employment is with the WiMAX Forum, 

an industry-led, not-for-profit organization formed to certify and promote the 

compatibility and interoperability of broadband wireless products based upon IEEE 

Std 802.16. 

(2) I would like to point out a relevant paper on Government/Industry Interactions in the 

Global Standards System [1]. As a NIST employee, I co-authored this paper in 2003, 

along with the esteemed Robert E. Hebner, who had served as Acting Director of the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology. The paper, which is an outgrowth of an 

earlier paper presented and published in 2001 [2], was presented in a 2003 conference in 
2

Washington, DC and addresses a number of high-level topics relevant to the current 

inquiry, including: 

• Benefits of standards 

• Key factors forcing changes in standards development 

• Industrial response to global changes 

• U.S. and European responses to Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement 

• 1995 National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

• 1998 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119 

• The U.S. National Standards Strategy 

• U.S. Governmental Role in standards development 

(3) I can personally attest to the fact that, during my tenure at NIST, the compatibility of 

my standardization activities with my governmental position were sometimes subject to 

debate within my agency. Reference [1] argues that “Circular A-119 provides 

encouragement for NIST staff members to participate directly in the development of 

voluntary consensus standards if such standardization will improve the economy and 

quality of life.” 

(4) Reference [1] details “An Example of Proactive NIST Action in Standards 

Development” related to IEEE Std 802.16. It specifically items six ways in which the 

activity fulfills NIST’s mission. 

(5) I would also like to bring to your attention Reference [3], a NIST-authored paper on 

Process, Promise, Problems: Developing WiMAX as an International Standard. This 

paper analyzes the development, costs, and benefits for the various stakeholders of IEEE 

Std 802.16, which it regards as “a joint effort between a traditional standards 

development organization and industry stakeholders, with facilitation and leadership by 

the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).” It indicates that the 

activity is noteworthy: 

The IEEE 802.16 standards development process is notable for several reasons. 

First, the early proponents of the technology made a decision to pursue the model 

followed by data communications standards developers and established a 

working group within the IEEE family with broad global participation to help 

ensure a international support for the developed set of standards. The IEEE 

Working Group then quickly pushed for adoption as formal international 

standard. Secondly, the standards effort was initially championed and then lead 

by a NIST staff member which is not necessarily the norm for NIST or the U.S. 

Government. 

(6) I note that the Sub-Committee on Standards is specifically interested in comments 

that relate to technologies including (a) Smart Grid, (b) Health Information Technology, 

(c) Cyber Security, (d) Emergency Communications Interoperability, (e) Radioactivity 

Detectors and Radiation Monitors, and (f) other technologies involving significant 

Federal agency participation in standards setting. To demonstrate that IEEE 802.16 has 

direct relevance to these topics, I have provided a minimal set of references below: 

(a) Smart Grid [4,5] 
3

(b) Health Information Technology [6] 

(c) Cyber Security [7] 

(d) Emergency Communications Interoperability [8] 

(e) Radioactivity Detectors and Radiation Monitors 

(f) other technologies involving significant Federal agency participation in 

standards setting [1,2,3] 

(7) Based on all the points above, I believe that IEEE 802.16 may serve as a useful case 

study for your consideration. 

(8) In addition, I would like to call to your attention the advantages of applying 

government technical expertise and laboratory facilities to elucidate the suitability of 

proposed standards concepts and thereby encourage standardization groups to make 

technically valid decisions. During the 25 January Roundtable on Federal Government 

Engagement in Standards, I submitted the following questions by email: 

• Should the federal government's technical research resources be used to support 

the standardization process by providing a neutral perspective regarding the 

relative merits of various proposals? 

• What could encourage the likelihood that such research would be considered 

“fair” by the players, particularly when the standards body is transnational? 

Reference [1] includes a paragraph on a similar topic: 

NIST has also contributed its unbiased technical expertise to IEEE 802 

standardization projects. In support of further such contributions, NIST has also 

planned to develop the National Wireless Electronic Systems Testbed (N-WEST) 

for use in measurements that contribute to effective standardization and 

compliance testing. Such an undertaking will require significant investment. 

Such investment did not materialize during my tenure at NIST. 

(9) I thank you and the National Science and Technology Council’s Sub-Committee on 

Technology for taking the time and effort to investigate these questions of broad 

significance to the U.S. role in technology innovation and competitiveness. 

Regards, 

Roger B. Marks, Ph.D. 
4

References

[1] R. B. Marks and R. E. Hebner, “Government/Industry Interactions in the Global 

Standards System,” The Standards Edge: Dynamic Tension (Sherrie Bolin, Editor), 

Sheridan Books, Ann Arbor, MI, 2004, pp. 103- 114 (presented at Innovation and 

Legislation: Standardization in Conflict, Washingon, DC, USA, 4-5 December 2003) 

<http://wirelessman.org/docs/#C03_16>.

[2] R. B. Marks and R. E. Hebner, “Government Activity to Increase Benefits from the 

Global Standards System,” 2001 IEEE Conference on Standards and Innovation in 

Information Technology (Boulder, Colorado, USA), pp. 183- 190, 3-5 October 2001 

<http://wirelessman.org/docs/#C01_13>.

[3] Erik Puskar and Ted A. Aanstoos, “Process, Promise, Problems: Developing WiMAX 

as an International Standard,” August 2008 

<http://ts.nist.gov/Standards/upload/Process-Promise-Problems-Developing-WiMAX-asan-International-Standard.pdf>.

[4] IEEE 802.16 GRIDMAN Task Group <http://ieee802.org/16/gridman>.

[5] IEEE 802.16 Machine-to-Machine (M2M)Task Group <http://ieee802.org/16/m2m>.

 

[6] Antonio Cimmino, Fulvio Casali and Cinzia Mambretti, “Weird Project: E-Health 

Service Improvement Using WiMAX,” Electronic Healthcare: Lecture Notes of the 

Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications 

Engineering, Volume 0001. ISBN 978-3-642-00412-4. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009, 

p. 38 <http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009elhe.book...38C>.

[7] Karen Scarfone, Cyrus Tibbs, Matthew Sexton, “Guide to Securing WiMAX Wireless 

Communications: Recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology,” NIST Special Publication 800-127, September 2010 

<http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-127/sp800-127.pdf>. 

[8] “Tech Topic 11: WiMAX Applications for Public Safety,” Federal Communications 

Commission, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau 

<http://www.fcc.gov/pshs/techtopics/techtopics11.html>.