(HoD) REPORT
U.S. Member Body of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) / / U.S. National Committee of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
Please return this report within one month of the completion of the international meeting and submit it to the appropriate ANSI Department as follows:
ISOUSNC
HoD reports can be used for a variety of purposes. For example:
To report results of a TC/SC meeting to the related TAG
To publicize the work of the TC/SC to the related US constituency via ANSI On-line, USNC News and Notes, or other media
To suggest areas for possible development of featured articles
To address specific challenges and concerns that the HoD may bring to the attention of related ANSI and/or USNC/IEC management
PLEASE REMEMBER: Your HoD report is NOT filed as a confidential, password protected documentand, therefore, may have broad, unintended distribution. Keep this in mind when preparing the report and, if appropriate, use a more secure form of correspondence to call attention to any sensitive issues.
Completed by:
Head of Delegation:(Please print) / John G. Abbott, Ph.D.
Telephone/Telefax: / +1 206 310 6828
Email: /
Date: / 27-September-2016
Meeting of: IEC TC87: Ultrasonics
(Designation/Title)
Date(s): 5-10 September 2016
Location: Sendai Japan
1.MEETING ATTENDANCE
Please indicate, if available, both the number of delegates and the countries represented
at the Meeting:
11 countries and 31 delegates represented at the TC87 plenary. Since WG meetings were held prior to the plenary, some experts left early. Total number of registered experts was approximately 45
__Meeting attendance roster and meeting resolutions attached, if available
meeting minutes are attached (87/637/RM)
Please comment on significant or unusual attendance issues (e.g., new member bodies, regular members not in attendance, new Chairman or Secretariat, non-accredited U.S. persons, etc.).
11 of 14 P-members attended which is typical of TC87 plenary meetings. Israel and Netherlands were noted as not having participated the past 3 and 2 meetings respectively although they have voted in all inquiry votes. The experts from Spain, who normally attends, sent his regrets.
This was the first Plenary meeting for the new Secretary (Berndt Borchet) and new Chairman (Volker Wilkins). The meeting was smoothly run by the new secretary and chairman.
All US Plenary attendees noted on the minutes were accredited.
MEETING OBSERVATIONS
2.Overall, how well did the U.S. meet its objectives on policy or technical matters?
_x_Very Successful -- U.S. positions were accepted in whole
__Successful -- Compromises were reached which are acceptable to the U.S.
__Not Successful -- U.S. positions were not accepted
3.Please comment on any issues of significance which might have an impact upon
materially affected or interested U.S. parties.
No issues were raised.
4. Was there any discussion for which the United States was unprepared? (e.g., late
document distribution, addition of new items, etc.)
The US experts were well prepared and encountered no unexpected events.
5. Did the U.S. extend an offer to assume any new TC/SC Secretariat or management
positions?
_x_Yes __No
(If yes, please indicate which position and provide Officer contact information.)
Sam Howard agreed to assume the role of Convenor of WG3 after the previous UK convenor stepped down. The TC approved this appointment.
6. Did the U.S. extend an offer to host any future TC/SC meetings?
__Yes_x_No
If yes, please identify:
7. Were any new issues raised which require, or might involve, coordination with
other U.S. bodies? (Include coordination items with other U.S. TAGs, ANSI policy-level
committees (AIF, AIC, the USNC TMC and/or Council, etc.)
_x_Yes__No
If yes, please identify:
The first meeting of JWG38 (between TC87 & SC62D) was held. A liaison report will be made to the SC62D plenary in Frankfurt.
NOTE: Even though the Central Office assures us that TC87 is able to assign experts to JWG38, the software system does not presently allow it according to the USNC office at ANSI. Requests to resolve this have been submitted to the CO through multiple pathways without resolution as of this date. I will pursue this with Remy Bailif in Frankfurt to make sure they understand that the problem still exists regardless of the CO’s intent.
8. Did the U.S. put forth/agree to put forth any New Work Items?
__Yes_x_No
If yes, please identify:
All US sponsored NWIP were submitted prior to the meeting in Sendai and all were approved prior to the meetings in Sendai.
9.Was there any evidence of irregular voting by participating countries?
__Yes_x_No
If yes, please identify any significant issues or concerns:
10.Are work items in the TC or SC being affected by related work in regional
standards bodies (e.g., CEN, CENELEC, ETSI, PASC, NAFTA, COPANT, etc.)?
__Yes_x_No
__No related regional activity
If yes, please explain:
11. Were any new issues raised which require, or might involve, coordination with
emerging market countries?
Yes_x_No
If yes, please explain:
12. Were any issues raised which relate to or impact existing U.S. regulatory matters?
__Yes__No
If yes, please explain:
13.Please identify any IMMEDIATE U.S. TAG actions which will be required as a
result of this international meeting.
none
14.Please identify specific decisions which the U.S. delegation believes to be noteworthy for
publication, publicity and/or development of a future article. If there are any, would you
be willing to help develop an article for publication?
__Yes_x_No
No decisions of TC87 presently meet the threshold for publication in future articles.
15.What might be done to further promote the ANSI Federation’s goal of “global
standards that reflect U.S. interests?” (Consider such issues as how might the U.S.
further promote acceptance of related American National Standards in international
and, where applicable, regional fora?)
The US TC87 experts have been very successful in introducing New Work Item Proposals with no opposition from other NCs at this point. The US has an excellent and close working relationship with the other NCs of TC87 and has experienced regular and reliable support of US positions. As a result, we do not see any immediate need for direct support from ANSI on TC activities.
16. Has this report been provided to your TAG Administrator for US TAG distribution?
__Yes_x_No
I will send it to the TAG administrator (MITA) but we typically do not distribute it to the TAG unless there is specific content of direct interest to the activities of the TAG.
17. Do you have any questions, comments, or suggestions regarding the ISO/IEC Directives, including the IEC Supplement?
I guess my only comment would be “quit changing them so often”. It is difficult to follow the directives in day-to-day activities when they change all the time – specifically in the area of standards drafting. Recent, seemingly arbitrary, changes in format occur on a regular basis and we often don’t find out until we send in a draft document to the CO for publication – even when we use the latest template. Perhaps the DMT can send out a “what’s changed” INF every time they change the directives?_
18.Other Comments
none
May 2016