Standardization News

The partnership between the U.S. federal government and standards organizations is long-standing and successful. James A. Thomas considers the history and current status.

From the beginning, the U.S. government was a part of ASTM. At the turn of the last century, the National Bureau of Standards¹ collaborated with ASTM to improve the nation's failing railroads, contributing materials research on iron and steel to the first ASTM standards.

Starting with that first conscious decision to collaborate in the development of voluntary consensus standards, the federal government continued in a steady, purposeful way to join forces with the private sector. After a long, productive, symbiotic history of collaboration, the federal government and the U.S. Congress came to another conscious decision. In 1995, Congress passed the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act.²

The NTTAA became a model of success for a public policy. During fiscal year 2012, U.S. federal agencies reported 3,085 personnel participating in a total of 552 standards developing organizations.³ Today, the U.S. government is the largest user of voluntary consensus standards.

But that is only part of the story. The relationship between voluntary consensus standards organizations and the U.S. government is generally referred to as a partnership. It is that, and more. Collaboration between the public and private sectors is a thread that is woven into the fabric of the U.S. voluntary standardization system, and into the laws and regulations of this country. There is no relationship like it in the world.

Here's what makes it different: Government participants are individuals who represent the aims and views of their agencies, as individual members from industry often represent the views of their companies. They are equal, active participants who are part of a consensus. They are stakeholders in the process, no more and no less than any other interest that is represented. This public-private balance lends credibility to standards that may be used for regulatory and procurement purposes. There is no oversight by government, no supervision, no overarching direction.

In this process, there can also be no bias or dominance on the part of any sector. It is a controlled environment in which the users of the standard (sometimes the regulator and the regulated) do not waste energy on resistance, or in battles for control. They collaborate. They're in it together. The aftermath of this collaboration, no matter how difficult it may be, is greater compliance with the standard, greater respect among colleagues and greater transparency between them. It's a great way to do things. And it works.

This is a longstanding partnership that is efficient and extraordinarily practical. Nobody understands this better than the federal government. The development and maintenance of a standard is unbelievably costly, so costly that no one so far has been able to accurately assess it. While the administrators of the standardization process can know the costs concomitant with the management, production, distribution and upkeep of a standard (they are considerable), the values associated with time, expertise, experience and research associated with the development of a full consensus standard is not quantifiable. It is that great.

By electing to leave the production of standards to voluntary standards developing organizations, the federal government is able to save taxpayers millions upon millions of dollars. This decision was one of the motivating factors behind the issuance of OMB Circular A-119,⁴ and the NTTAA.

The federal budget process is extremely complicated and time-consuming. It begins with guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (the federal agency that first directed agencies to use voluntary standards and participate in their development). After developing a budget strategy, that is, deciding what requests will succeed, agencies send their budget items back to OMB with price tags attached. The OMB replies, essentially saying, "This is what we can afford." The agency may appeal OMB's decision, but eventually, the president's budget must be sent to Congress, after which there are hearings, markups and votes.

At any stage of this process, requests for potentially large future fees, fees for incorporating standards by reference, or costs for developing government-unique standards would be at high risk. Budget cuts are inevitable, and money for standards projects is easy to sacrifice. The whole process can take close to a year, after which it begins again.

The development of standards is not an on-again, off-again process, to be begun one year and put into storage for another, or two. Technology will not wait for an unsure process to be completed and repeated. It will advance - ready or not. Groups of experts cannot be assembled on the spur of the moment, only to be dismissed because of budget cuts, government freezes or un-allocated funds.

This is what government-developed standardization would look like, while the nation's health and safety problems would wait, unsolved and advancing. This is why their occurrence is extremely rare.⁵ The U.S. Office of Management and Budget, where budget guidance begins, and because that was its job, put a stop to this unworkable, unwise scenario years ago, years before Congress sanctioned its decision by making it the law of the land. In this case, the role of government was to be its own fiscal advisor, and nobody was better qualified.

Collaboration with voluntary standards organizations was, and is, the better alternative. ASTM International recognizes the value of government participation by keeping its fees low to keep government participation high. There is one more distinct advantage to developing a consensus standard with government as a participant: voluntary compliance. With no compliance problems, no regulation is required, and more money is saved.

This is a perfect opportunity to say thank you to our government members and the agencies who second them to ASTM International, a good time to say thank you for the thousands of times they have shared their scientists, administrators, laboratories and research with this standards organization, thank you for helping to create the best standards in the world, and thank you for using them. Above all, thank you for your commitment to this partnership.

References

1. The forerunner of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

2. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act, the law that directs federal agencies to use standards developed by private sector standards organizations, and participate in the development of standards developed by a private sector standards organization. It also directed the agencies to notify an appropriate government office when it does not or cannot comply with the first provisions.

3. The Sixteenth Annual Report on Federal Agency Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and Conformity Assessment.

4. The Office of Management and Budget Circular, which established the policy of Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and Conformity Assessment Activities.

5. Before developing a government-unique standard, agencies must notify an appropriate government office when it does not or cannot comply with the first provision.

James A. Thomas

President, ASTM International