Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

fractional parts of a barrel shall be understood to mean like fractional parts of 31 gallons.

Add in section 23 of form 1, section 31 of form 2, and section 29 of form 3, after the words, "or sell any commodity in a manner contrary to law," the following: or who shall use in retail trade, except in the preparation of packages put up in advance of sale, a weighing or measuring device which is not so positioned that its indications may be accurately read and the weighing or measuring operation observed from some position which may reasonably be assumed by a customer;

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES NEWS LETTER

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, in closing the Conference, I have one suggestion to make for your consideration. I have been impressed by what has been said at this meeting, and other times, to the effect that we have full discussions here but that following these Conferences we go back home and often do not see one another until another year, and that consequently we are more or less out of touch with what is going on in the various States and in Washington. You heard this morning statements from our members from California and Michigan about their efforts to keep their own people advised as to what is taking place through the medium of periodical reports or other types of bulletins. I have this suggestion to make: If it seems desirable to you to have the office of the Secretary of this Conference act as a clearing house for information which is of interest and value to State officials, the Bureau will endeavor to set up an informal News Letter which will be made available to all of you. This would appear at first at irregular intervals, but would carry consecutive numbers, so that a file could be maintained. Such a News Letter would supplement the information which is now appearing in State publications and in the Scale Journal, and would help to offset the lack of contact which we experience during these long intervals between our annual meetings.

I should like to know whether you feel that such an attempt on our part would be of interest.

Mr. FULLER. Dr. Briggs, I think that would be one of the most valuable things that could be done. I certainly appreciate your interest and think the idea is a splendid one.

Mr. LEVITT. I wish to join in commending that plan, and I move that the Bureau adopt such a policy and that these News Letters be mailed to all of the members of this Conference for their guidance and information.

Mr. BUSSEY. I wish to add my endorsement to what has been said and also to express my appreciation and the appreciation of the Educational Committee for the splendid work that the Bureau has done in connection with this Conference in making the different talks and papers available to us during the session instead of making us wait until the Conference report is issued several months later. I think the News Letter is a step in the right direction, and, in adding the endorsement of the State of Texas, I should like to second Mr. Levitt's motion.

Mr. SAYBOLT. I think the procedure which has just been suggested would be invaluable to those of us who are in business and whose business intimately connects them with the administration of weights and

measures.

I think that if business representatives may be included on the mailing list, the News Letter will be most valuable to them. (The question was taken and the motion was agreed to.)

Mr. R. W. SMITH. Mr. President, I feel a considerable sense of responsibility in carrying out the instructions of the Conference to draft sections of a Model Law which bears the endorsement of this Conference. I believe that one of my contributions to this News Letter will be the proposed language which I shall do my best to work out in conformance with the desires of the Conference. I would earnestly request an expression from you gentlemen when this material reaches you, so that I may have the confidence of your support if you do not criticize adversely and the assistance of your suggestons if you find my original drafts unsatisfactory. Such comments will serve, in a way, as the action of the Conference; I should like to have that much action on the part of the membership of this group before we publish the new material in Handbook H11 as something which the Conference had adopted.

Mr. BAUCOм. We certainly appreciate that suggestion of Mr. Smith's. That is better than the action of any committee which we could possibly appoint. We shall certainly reply as soon as the material reaches us.

PATTERN APPROVAL

Mr. PISCIOTTA. I have a suggestion to offer relative to approving the types of scales or other devices. Suppose that a particular scale is submitted to me by the manufacturer. I may find some fault, or I may not. If I do not, I will approve it immediately and the manufacturer will then submit it to another official. The second official may find faults, and then he will feel that I have been lax in approving it. In the future I propose to do this, and I hope that others will cooperate with me, because in the long run I think the manufacturers are going to benefit by it: When devices are submitted to us we will withhold approval for a time, and will write the Bureau stating that we have found nothing wrong, or outlining our criticisms. That information can be incorporated in the News Letter, and then we can learn the reactions of everybody else, and all officials can take uniform action in approving or disapproving. That is what I intend to do, and I hope that other officials will cooperate, so that when we approve, it will represent the approval not alone of the city of New York but of weights and measures officials throughout the country.

Mr. ALLEN. I think Mr. Pisciotta's suggestion is excellent, but I have this in mind: When a manufacturer submits a device for pattern approval, he does not know what the reaction is going to be. One of the things which keeps the industry progressive is the possibility of profit on experimental work. If our company should bring out a scale and our competitors should learn the details of that scale, through the News Letter, several months before the scale could be offered on the market, then we lose many of the benefits of our experimental work, and we also lose the incentive to develop something new. You may ask why we have to wait so long before bringing out a new scale. When a new model is developed we have to anticipate possible

changes. The average cost for tools on a new model is $30,000 or $40,000 and it takes about 3 months to make the tools. If we get the tools all ready to go into production, and then some weights and measures official requires a change in design, this is very expensive and may possibly result in scrapping some of the tools already made. For that reason we bring out hand-made models first and try to incorporate in these all necessary changes before tooling up for production. Necessarily, we must submit samples to weights and measures officials 3 or 4 months before a model can be put on the market. Secrecy in our development work is essential, and if type approval is made so involved as to cause a delay of several months, or if the developments are made public through the News Letter, I think you are going to stifle progress in business.

Mr. PISCIOTTA. I think there is a great deal in what Mr. Allen says, and we appreciate his position. A few of us have followed the practice of exchanging correspondence, but it seems that everyone should benefit by the exchange of views. However, not every State requires type approval, and I believe that the National Bureau of Standards has a list of the ones which do. Would there be any objection if, instead of publishing this information in a circular letter, we leave it to the National Bureau of Standards to be the clearing house and send it out directly to those people who have type approval, depending upon these few people to maintain the secrecy desired? Then, for example, instead of writing a circular letter, I would write one letter to the Bureau, and the Bureau would write directly to the others.

Mr. LEVITT. I can appreciate the position of the manufacturers. Our State does not require approval, but we do give certificates on equipment submitted, and I know that we have approved equipment and later on have had to ask for its withdrawal.

We want to be fair in this thing. Would it be possible to have new equipment submitted to the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances instead of to each State individually, and then if the Committee approves a device, we can accept it; and if there is something wrong, the Committee can handle the recommendations or the disapproval? I know that Illinois may tell a manufacturer to do certain things, and he may go right across the line into Indiana, and they may have different ideas, and he may go into Pennsylvania, and they may have still other ideas. A manufacturer may have on hand 100 pumps and get an order from Illinois and not one of the pumps may meet the Illinois requirements. That is not fair to the manufacturer.

It looks to me as if we would be taking a big step forward by placing approval and disapproval in the hands of the Committee. We might have to accept something which we think is not as good as it might be, but for my part I should like to shift the burden of responsibility to the Committee.

Mr. NEALE. Representing the Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association, I am wholly in sympathy with what Mr. Allen has said. as to the inadvisability of having information regarding new types of equipment given to the world at large. Everyone knows that the Bureau can keep matters properly confidential, but as to type approval I do not see how physical equipment could be sent to the Bureau,

which is not authorized to give type approval. All the Bureau could do would be to see whether or not equipment complied with the specifications issued by this Conference, and they could not do that by written description-they could do it only after seeing the device itself in operation.

Mr. PISCIOTTA. Mr. Levitt's idea may be all right. There is no question of our confidence in the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, but I operate under a mandate that I personally approve or disapprove after examining the weighing or measuring device. I cannot issue a certificate of approval because someone from another jurisdiction tells me that a device is all right. I am willing to submit our findings to the Bureau, and I shall appreciate having the Bureau submit to me their findings and those of others. That is the only way it can possibly be done.

Mr. ROGERS. I think the plan of having information given to the Bureau and the Bureau using its discretion as to what should then be held more or less in confidence is the better plan. It is more or less public information anyhow; of course, we do not talk to competitors about another manufacturer's product, but as we meet from time to time we talk these things over. We can confine type approval discussions to the weights and measures group, and have a general news letter to cover matters of a general character. Would not that be acceptable to the manufacturers?

Mr. ALLEN. The only thing I want to stress is the confidential nature of certain information. There has been misunderstanding on the part of some sealers of the trust placed in them, and certain officials have violated our confidence. That is the thing we want to avoid. The fact that that may happen in one instance does not, of course, indict everyone.

Mr. ROESER. I would just as soon that one institution be organized to take care of these problems, or I would just as soon leave things as they are. It is not a question of lack of confidence; it is a question of keeping one's business under control. From the standpoint of myself and my company, I should like very much for you officials to attend to your business as you are attending to it now. We shall get along all right.

Mr. PISCIOTTA. I am willing to submit information to the Bureau, and as a matter of fact I think I shall do that as far as I am concerned. Mr. BUSSEY. There is no doubt that there is room for improvement in the field of type approval, and I think the subject is too large for us to work out the details at this late hour. In order that we may not have to wait until another Conference to put something into effect, I move that the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances be requested to study the subject and try to work out with the manufacturers some plan which will be mutually satisfactory, after which we can be informed through the News Letter of the results. That should be beneficial to everyone concerned.

Mr. LEVITT. I second that motion.

Mr. BAUCOM. There are only about nine jurisdictions which have type approval. Why not let them get together and work this out? Most of the members of the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances have type approval, so it would amount to the same thing, but

there is no necessity for putting that obligation on the Committee when it is really a responsibility which the type approval officials already have by statute. They could work it out among themselves and then advise the Bureau and get the Bureau's advice.

Mr. LEVITT. There is nothing objectionable in being guided by the advice of the Committee.

Mr. PISCIOTTA. If I have not seen a device, I am taking someone else's word that it is all right; I have to see it, and I have to test it. Mr. BUSSEY. I am not suggesting taking type approval authority away from any jurisdiction. It is my thought that the Committee would confer with the manufacturers and with every jurisdiction which requires type approval. As I understand the laws, each jurisdiction would still have to approve each device before it would be legal for use in that jurisdiction. But if we can develop a plan which will promote uniformity and reduce confusion, without betraying the confidence of any manufacturer, I think this would be definitely a step in the right direction. It was not my idea that the Committee would approve any equipment-each jurisdiction will have to do that; the Committee would just work out a plan under which we might operate, along the lines of Mr. Pisciotta's suggestion.

Mr. S. T. GRIFFITH. This is a perennial problem which we have never been able to solve. It is worthy of solution. If it could be solved, it would make our work much easier and would eliminate the confusion which exists in the manufacturing field in trying to make devices to meet the requirements of the several jurisdictions.

As I understand Mr. Bussey's motion, it is to refer the matter to the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances for study. I wish to leave it in their hands and call for the question.

Mr. PISCIOTTA. I do not see any necessity for investigating and figuring out new ideas. As I have done in the past and as I have a right to do in the future, I shall have a device tested by my inspectors, and if they approve it, I shall approve it, and if they find any fault with it I shall disapprove it. I am willing to go further than that, and give to the National Bureau of Standards, which we all recognize, the benefit of my examinations; I am going to withhold my final decision until I hear from the Bureau as to their opinion, and I expect that when I hear from the Bureau I shall also receive information which they have procured from other sources.

Why wait until a committee devises a new way to do it? I am willing to leave it to the Bureau to say, "Mr. Pisciotta, we think you are right," or "We think you are wrong," and I assure you that 999 times out of 1,000 I am going to take their advice regardless of what my particular ideas may be. If I am willing to do that, why should not other men be willing to do the same thing?

Mr. NEALE. While it would be most desirable to have weighing and measuring devices submitted to the Bureau, I hold simply that the question presents a physical impossibility. All that could be sent to the Bureau would be drawings, pictures, etc.-certainly not the physical apparatus itself, outside of a limited line of small devices. I will not say what the Bureau's authority is; yet all the Bureau can say is that the device complies with the specifications adopted by the National Conference. I am sure that, not seeing them, the Bureau cannot tell about the operation of them.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »