Vol. 21, No.

2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
 The Standard
Vol 21, No. 2, June 2007
Managing Editor and Publisher
Jay L. Bucher
6700 Royal View Dr.
De Forest, WI 53532-2775
Voice: 608-277-2522
Fax: 608-846-4269
Email: yokota-69@charter.net
or jay.bucher@promega.com
Advertising
Submit your draft copy to Jay Bucher, with a
request for a quotation. Indicate size desired.
Since The Standard is published ‘in-house’
the requester must submit a photo or graphic
of their logo, if applicable. The following
rates apply:
Business card size ............................ $100
1/8 page .......................................... $150
1/4 page ........................................... $200
1/3 page ........................................... $250
½ page ............................................. $300
Full page ......................................... $550
Advertisements will be accepted on a ‘per
issue’ basis only; no long-term contracts will
be available at present. Advertising must be
clearly distinguished as an ad. Ads must be
related to measurement quality, quality of
measurement, or a related quality field. Ads
must not imply endorsement by the Measure-
ment Quality Division or ASQ.
Letters to the Editor
The Standard welcomes letters from mem-
bers and subscribers. Letters should clearly
state whether the author is expressing opin-
ion or presenting facts with supporting infor-
mation. Commendation, encouragement,
constructive critique, suggestions, and alter-
native approaches are accepted. If the con-
tent is more than 200 words, we may delete
portions to hold that limit. We reserve the
right to edit letters and papers.
Information for Authors
The Standard publishes papers on the qual-
ity of measurements and the measurement of
quality at all levels ranging from relatively
simple tutorial material to state-of-the-art.
Papers published in The Standard are not
referred in the usual sense, except to ascer-
tain that facts are correctly stated and to as-
sure that opinion and fact are clearly distin-
guished one from another. The Editor re-
serves the right to edit any paper.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chair’s Column...............................................................................3
Chair-Elect’s Column .....................................................................4
Financial Report..............................................................................4
Job Descriptions & Education / Training Linkage .........................5
Working Group on Standard Occupation Classifications...............7
A2LA News Releases ............................................................. 10-11
The Learning Curve ......................................................................13
2007-2008 Simmons Scholarship Winner ....................................16
NCSL International Workshop & Symposium 2007 info.............17
MQD Officers and Committee Chairs ..........................................18
MQD Regional Councilors ...........................................................19
ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement Report.....21
FROM THE DESK OF THE EDITOR/PUBLISHER
By the time this edition hits the news-stands, there
will only be a few weeks left in this fiscal year. On
behalf of the officers and regional councilors, I’d
like to thank our outgoing Chair, Graeme Payne. He
has been at the helm of this ship called MQD for the
past two years. He was gracious enough to step up
to the plate when times were rough, and we thank
him for all his hard work, support, and dedication.
That doesn’t mean he gets to slip into our memories, though. He becomes
our immediate past chair, and Dilip Shah has one less chair to fill. Our new
officers starting July 1st, 2007 will be:
Chair: Richard (Rick) Roberson
Chair-elect: Craig (Woody) Niemann, SMSgt, USAF
Secretary: Christopher Grachanen
Treasurer: Jay Bucher
Thanks to all who have made 2006-2007 a great year, and we look
forward to 2007-2008.
ON THE FRONT COVER: The new MQD Challenge Coin—Front and Back;
Graeme Payne, the MQD Chair (2005 ~ 2007), manning our booth at
WCQI 2007
The Standard is published quarterly by the Measurement Quality Division of
ASQ; deadlines are February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15. Text infor-
mation intended for publication can be sent via electronic mail as an attachment in
MS Word format (Times New Roman, 11 pt). Use single spacing between sen-
tences. Graphics/illustrations must be sent as a separate attachment, in jpg format.
Photographs of MQD activities are always welcome. Publication of articles, prod-
uct releases, advertisements or technical information does not imply endorsement
by MQD or ASQ. While The Standard makes every effort to ensure the accuracy
of articles, the publication disclaims responsibility for statements of fact or opinion
made by the authors or other contributors. Material from The Standard may not be
reproduced without permission of ASQ. Copyrights in the United States and all
other countries are reserved. Website information: MQD’s homepage can be found
at http://www.asq.org/measure. © 2007 ASQ, MQD. All rights reserved.
MQD Page 3

CHAIR’S COLUMN
By Graeme C. Payne
Well, it is near the end of my second year as Chairperson of the Measurement
Quality Division. At the beginning of July I will turn the gavel over to Rick
Roberson and then take a break. (Not a long break, because I have to be at work
the next day!)

I want to express my sincere appreciation to all of the member volunteers -

elected officers, committee chairs and members, and those in appointed positions
– for everything you have done to support and promote the Division during the
2006-2007 year.

The Division cannot function without you and other dedicated volunteers. Just
like your local Sections, your Division also needs eager and willing volunteers to
do the work that is necessary. It is a bit harder than doing work for your Section because our members
are all over the world – but the Internet, toll-free teleconference facilities and other tools make it easier
than you would think. You can help – all it takes to start is to contact one of the Division leadership
team listed in this publication.

I will still be involved as a volunteer, because even the immediate past chairperson has a few defined
duties. So you will still hear from me occasionally. In the meantime, let's give a big welcome to Rick as
he takes up the leadership challenges.

Graeme C. Payne
1 404-791-4902 (USA Eastern time zone: UTC – 5 hours)
ASQ and NCSLI Business: Graeme.ASQ@gksystems.biz
All other business: Graeme@gksystems.biz

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 4

CHAIR-ELECT’S COLUMN
By Rick Roberson

This article is for the contract PMEL workers out there. Everyone else may want to
read through in case they ever step into our world-if they can handle it. Let’s talk
about money. Most of us go to work for the paycheck. There are other reasons to
choose this job, but money is probably high on everyone’s list. The problem: the
Department of Labor (DOL) Wage Determinations (WD). Some labs have gone the
union route, and their pay is ties to their collective bargaining agreement (CBA). All
the non-union labs are paid by the WD for the area (they can be viewed at
www.wdol.gov). Since the contracts are lowest bidder/best value, the companies pay
the lowest they can. The WD is basically our “minimum wage”. No one gets more
than the minimum, and we don’t get tips. The WD is probably the least understood
part of working on a contract, and it has the most impact on our pay and benefits. Chris Grachanen put a
lot of work into getting a classification added to the WD for metrologists, but then the DOL listed the
pay rates much lower than expected. (We appreciate all the work Chris-we blame the government.) Part
of the problem with the WD is that we do not fully understand how the pay rates are changed. Some
WD have been at the same rate for more than 5 years. There is only one way to state the problem: It
sucks going years without a raise, and still not knowing when (if) or how much of a raise you will get in
the future. This problem is the number one reason for the unions coming onto the labs. I would think
the companies would like to help, but they don’t seem to care. We don’t get help from the companies
we work for or the government, and this is causing major morale problems in some areas. I am propos-
ing to lead the charge at getting this process better understood, and moving along more smoothly and
predictable. We need reviews of the WD on a regular basis to provide simple cost of living raises. I am
putting together the information I have. I will need some help. Anyone that wants to join this effort,
please e-mail me at richardroberson@sbcglobal.net and I will add you to the list. If anyone has informa-
tion that you think would help, please send it to me.

FINANCIAL REPORT
By Jay Bucher

The following are the current totals from the MQD accounts as of March 31, 2007:

Checking account: $49,788.14

Money market account: $76,752.32

During the period of July 1, 2006 to December 31, 2006, the division received royalties from the sale of
The Metrology Handbook of $1,309.91. For the life of the edition, 2,419 books have been sold.

Respectfully,

Jay L. Bucher
MQD Treasurer

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 5

Job Descriptions and Education / Training Linkage

By Christopher L. Grachanen

Recent ASQ MQD and NCSLI Metrology job description initiatives / ac-
tivities have been pursued under the banner of Metrology education. One
might ask, “What is the linkage between Metrology education and Metrol-
ogy job descriptions?” This question may be best answered in terms of
obtaining and using job related demographics to make informed decisions.

Job related demographics are often the starting point for determining the
relative health of an occupation in the guise of how many personnel are in
an occupation versus how many are leaving in light of industry, government and academia labor require-
ments. The ratio of ‘critical mass’ needed to meet industry, government and academia labor require-
ments versus the population of an occupation gives an insight as to the resources that may likely have to
be expended in order to recruit / maintain enough qualified personnel in an occupation to avoid ad-
versely impacting labor requirements. In addition, job related demographic information is routinely ac-
quired for the purpose of determining the skill sets, education and training necessary to be competent to
perform job tasks in an occupation. Job benchmarking surveys and various census related activities
strive to document job expectations in order to determine what skill sets, education and training is per-
ceived by employers / employees as needed to meet these expectations. From this line of reasoning it
may be postulated that job related demographics provide substantiating data used to 1) determine / jus-
tify resources needed to recruit / maintain qualified personnel in an occupation and 2) establish what
skill sets, education and training is required for personnel to be qualified in that occupation.

Most statistically derived job related demographics are based on classification grouping of job titles and
their associated job descriptions with the assumption that these job titles and associated job descriptions
faithfully represent unique job expectations. Realistic job titles supported by credible job descriptions
helps to insure job related demographics are truthful for a particular occupation and that decisions based
on them are accurate and germane. Unrealistic or out dated job titles and associated job descriptions in-
creases the likelihood that job related demographic inferences are invalid or at best misleading. Deci-
sions based on flawed job related demographic inferences can result in the non-allocation of resources
that could otherwise be used to help enable an adequate occupation labor force. Thus the linkage be-
tween job descriptions and education and training can be viewed on the macro level as a cause and effect
relationship where education and training decisions regarding content and resources are routinely made
using job related demographics compiled by means of job titles and associated job descriptions qualifi-
ers. One can easily see that the old adage ‘garbage in, garbage out’ holds especially true for decisions
based on job related demographics.

Job related demographic inferences like most statistically derived data is deemed more credible as sam-
ple size is increased. Without diving into the merits of having a large sample size for statistically derived
data suffice it to say that the more information that is known about something the more we can infer
about it. The same holds true for job related demographics. The reality of job related demographics is
that across industry there are many different job titles and their associated job descriptions for very simi-
lar job expectations. Sometimes these differences can be explained in terms of trying to keep job titles
and their associated job descriptions in ‘boilerplate’ agreement with established job families within an
organization or that existing job titles and their associated job descriptions may be badly in need of up-
dating or simply human relations (HR) personnel missed the mark when writing up job titles and their
(Continued on page 6)

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 6

(Continued from page 5)

associated job descriptions. Whatever the reason, standardization of job titles and their supporting job
descriptions for similar job expectations can be seen as a good thing when it comes to compiling and
summarizing faithful job related demographics. As previously stated, the more information the better
when it comes to making statistical inferences. Standardization of job titles and their associated job de-
scriptions across industry would help to derive more accurate and reliable job related demographics
which in turn would make for better informed decisions when it comes to resource allocations and estab-
lishing skill sets, education and training requirements. It is acknowledged that it would be very difficult,
if next to impossible to get industry to agree upon standardized job titles and associated job description
templates for similar job expectations. It is however realistic to assume that there should be some accept-
able level of correlation for similar job expectations such that a unique occupation should be easily dis-
tinguished from other occupations in the same job family. Contrary to this assumption is the common
industry practice of categorizing calibration technicians as electronic / electrical technicians with the
only identifiable distinguishing attribute in their associated job description is the mantra catch phase
‘performs calibrations’. Efforts of Metrology advocate groups like ASQ’s MQD and NCSLI have been
to help bring some level of acceptable job description coherence for calibration practitioners across in-
dustry to better understand industry, government and academia labor requirements and how best to allo-
cate resources to meet these requirements. Without such efforts, compiling calibration practitioner job
related demographics across industry lends itself to a quasi hit or miss scenario depending on whether an
organizations job title and associated job description is recognized by an informed individual as being
applicable for inclusion into the demographics. Needless to say much more work is needed to get indus-
try on the same page, or at least the same chapter, when it come to calibration practitioner job titles and
associated job descriptions.

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 7

Working Group on Standard Occupation

Classifications - Project Update
By Christopher L. Grachanen

One of NCSLI’s 163.1 Working Group on Standard Occupation Classifi-

cations major projects is;

Prepare/submit a proposal to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management

(OPM) - A number of Metrologists have suggested that the standard titles
and descriptions used by the U.S. Department of Labor are not used by
OPM. This proposal would take the materials submitted to the Depart-
ment of Labor and repackage them for OPM to update Federal job classi-
fications.

To this ends the 163.1 working group (members comprised of NCSLI and ASQ Measurement Quality
Division (MQD) volunteers) drafted and sent the following to the OPM (12Apr07):

“My name is Christopher L. Grachanen, chair of the National Conference of Standards Laboratory in-
ternational's (NCSLI) Standard Occupational Classification Working Group and secretary of the Ameri-
can Society for Quality (ASQ) Measurement Quality Division (MQD). I am writing you to relate the
work done by these organizations to help standardize classification standards (commonly referred to as
job descriptions in industry) for calibration / Metrology practitioners as well as to volunteer assistance
in regards to revising the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) classification standards for these
practitioners.

In 2004 a Metrology Job Description initiative was launched to take advantage of a window of opportu-
nity to submit new classification standards to the U.S. Dept. of Labor's Standard Occupational
Classification (SOC) system for inclusion in their 2010 revision (the SOC is updated every 10 years).
This work was deemed necessary as existing classification standards for Calibration Technicians, Cali-
bration Engineers and Metrologists were either missing, inadequate or simply misrepresented job ex-
pectations. To this end, hundreds of calibration / Metrology practitioners from industry, government and
academia rallied in support of creating new classification standards reflecting a consensus of job expec-
tations for the aforementioned job titles. I have attached a presentation which describes the Metrology
Job Description initiative and a copy of an article which includes titles and recommended high-level
classification standards. We anticipate that the submitted classification standards will be used as the
basis for updating the U.S. Dept. of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH), a widely used
source for disseminating information about occupations in terms of job expectations and demographic
statistics / projections.

During the Metrology Job Description initiative, classification standards prescribed by the OPM for
calibration / Metrology practitioners were brought to our working group's attention as also being in
need of revision in order to adequately relate current job expectations. In particular, the classification
standard for Electronic Measurement Equipment Mechanic, 2602 series, is regarded by practitioners
knowledgeable with the occupation as one which inadequately reflects job expectations for calibration
technicians. To this end we (working group) would like to volunteer assistance towards correcting this
disparity while aligning titles and classification standards from all industry and government sources. It
(Continued on page 8)

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 8

(Continued from page 7)

is our hope that standardizing calibration / Metrology classification standards throughout industry, gov-
ernment and academia will help to retain and recruit talented individuals to the profession. It is ac-
knowledged that a skilled calibration / Metrology workforce is critical for U.S. technical viability to
meet technological challenges and innovation requirements today and for our ever changing future.”

The OPM reply is as follows (27Apr07):

“Thank you for following up on this issue.

To provide a little background information on our processes – I meet with Federal agencies on a regu-
lar basis to prioritize our work in developing and updating classification standards to ensure they are
able to meet their organizational missions. We have two current projects relevant to your interests. We
are in the process of revising the classification standards for Federal engineering work – both
“professional” (i.e., those positions requiring at least some undergraduate education) and technical
work. The job family standard for technician work was issued to agencies and placed on our website
last fall in draft format with a request for comments and will soon be issued in final format for imple-
mentation. The job family standard for professional work will be issued in draft format for comment in
the next few months. If you would like to receive a copy of the draft standard and our request for com-
ments, please sign up for our listserv at www.opm.gov/fedclass .

Based on extensive research we have conducted with Federal employees, we anticipate the draft profes-
sional standard will identify metrology as a specialty field within the electrical engineering
(electronics), 0855 series. The broad area of electronics in electrical engineering encompasses numer-
ous specialty fields, each involving rigorous, intense knowledge and skills pertinent to its technological
or industrial concentration. Our working draft standard describes Metrology as precise weight and
measurement activities in support of metrology and calibration programs analyzing precision measure-
ment equipment (PME) to determine requirements and develop standards.

We appreciate your suggestions and welcome your comments on our draft standards.”

The 163.1 working group evaluated the OPM reply and drafted and sent the following (04May07):

“Thank you very much for your informative reply. I am pleased that the forthcoming Electronics Engi-
neering, 855 series draft will recognize the unique job expectations for Metrologists. I will make sure
once the draft is posted to the OPM website that I will spread the news to interested parties in order to
provide comments / suggestions. A few questions if I may;

Question 1: What is the OPM cycle for re-evaluating / updating job classification standards?

Question 2: Are electronics job classification standards based on a 2-year technician degree and elec-
trical job classification standards based on a 4-year technologist degree? (Question is from a NIST em-
ployee where I gather the aforementioned criterion is used).

One issue that I am still unclear on is the OPM’s position regarding the Electronic Measurement Equip-
ment Mechanic, 2602, job classification standard. It is my understanding this classification standard is
used for the vast majority of calibration practitioners and is the standard brought to the attention of our
working group (NCSLI Standard Occupational Classification) as inadequately reflecting job expecta-
tions.
(Continued on page 9)

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 9

(Continued from page 8)

Question 3: Is the OPM of the position that the Electronic Measurement Equipment Mechanic, 2602, job
classification standard needs to be updated / revised in order to adequately reflect job expectations for
calibration technicians?

If the answer to the above question is YES, our working group is willing and able to provide whatever
assistance we can to help revise this job classification standard.

If the answer to the above question is NO;

Question 4: What steps can Metrology advocate groups such as NCSLI and ASQ MQD pursue in order
for the OPM to address our concerns regarding this job classification standard as applied to calibration
technicians?

I appreciate your time regarding this issue and look forward to your reply.”

As of this writing (15May07) the OPM has not replied to the 163.1 working group’s latest correspon-
dence (04May07).

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 10

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

A2LA Recognized by NIST for Accreditation of Telecommunications

Certification Bodies (TCBs) under the APEC TEL MRA
2007-05-14 – Frederick, Maryland - The American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA)
is now recognized by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) for accreditation of
TCBs for FCC requirements.

This recognition expands the A2LA goal of one accreditation accepted everywhere. A2LA ISO/IEC
17025 accredited testing laboratories that are also ISO/IEC Guide 65 accredited Product Certification
Bodies now have the choice of having both accreditations accomplished with one assessment from one
accreditation body. Organizations exercising this option can reduce cost and time expended during the
on-site accreditation process.

Background: Accreditation of TCBs for FCC Requirements

In December 1998, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted new rules to streamline its
equipment authorization requirements by allowing Telecommunications Certification Bodies (TCBs) to
certify equipment under Parts 2 and 68 of the Commission's Rules. The requirements for TCBs were
specified in the Commission's Report and Order (R&O) in GEN Docket 98-68 (FCC 98-338), adopted
on December 17, 1998. Under the Report and Order, TCBs are required to be accredited by the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), or by a NIST recognized accreditor.
Background: Accreditation of CABs/CBs under the MRAs
Under Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Telecommunications and Information (APEC Tel) Mutual
Recognition Arrangement (MRA), NIST is the Designating Authority for the United States. On January
28, 2003 U.S. and Canadian Governments signed an Exchange letter to implement Phase-II of the APEC
Tel MRA. Under this MRA, NIST is responsible for qualifying and designating U.S. Conformity As-
sessment Bodies / Certification Bodies (CABs/CBs). According to Phase-II of the MRA, U.S. CABs/
CBs must be accredited to ISO/IEC Guide 65 and specific APEC Economy’s technical requirements.
Industry Canada (IC) is the Regulatory Authority in Canada for telecommunications equipment
In October 2003 the governments of the United States and Singapore signed Exchange letters to imple-
ment Phase-II of the APEC Tel MRA. IDA is the Regulatory Authority in Singapore for telecommuni-
cations equipment.
A2LA is a nonprofit, non-governmental, public service, membership society. Its mission is to provide
comprehensive accreditation services for laboratories, inspection bodies, proficiency testing providers,
product certification bodies and reference material producers. Services are available to any type of labo-
ratory or inspection body, product certification body, reference material provider and proficiency testing
provider whether private or government. A2LA is the largest internationally-recognized laboratory ac-
creditation body in the country.

Source: A2LA
Website: http://www.A2LA.org
Contact: Trace McInturff at 301-644-3223
E-Mail: tmcinturff@A2LA.org

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 11

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ISO 15189 Medical Laboratory Accreditation Now Offered By A2LA

FREDERICK, MD. (May 28, 2007) - The American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA)
is proud to announce it is adding medical laboratories to its accreditation offerings.

A2LA is accepting applications for accreditation to ISO 15189 beginning June 1, 2007.

“We are excited to begin offering accreditation services to medical laboratories,” said Peter Unger,
A2LA president. “We see strong demand for an internationally recognized accreditation program in the
medical laboratory industry. We offer a distinct approach to laboratory accreditation that, to date, has
not been established for the medical laboratory community in the US.”

Unger continued, “In addition to examining the technical aspects of a laboratory’s operation, the A2LA
accreditation process includes a review of its management system. “We hold ourselves to the same ex-
pectations for competency that we hold our applicants to, that is, we operate a management system to
ISO requirements which is evaluated by external parties, resulting in our international recognition.”

“A2LA accredits to a more rigorous standard than other accrediting bodies in the medical field, signify-
ing to clients and customers an adherence to the highest possible international standard for laboratory
excellence,” said Unger.

General criteria for A2LA accreditation of medical laboratories are contained in ISO 15189:2007, Medi-
cal laboratories — Particular Requirements for Quality and Competence.
A2LA accreditation attests that a medical laboratory has demonstrated:
• competency to perform specific testing procedures
• that its quality management system is documented, is fully operational, and addresses and conforms
to all elements of ISO 15189:2007
adherence to any additional requirements established by A2LA including measurement traceability and
laboratory participation in ongoing proficiency testing.

To assist laboratories in preparing for Accreditation to ISO 15189, A2LA will be offering commercially
available training courses in preparation and implementation of the quality management system and
technical aspects of the standard.

A2LA is a nonprofit, non-governmental, public service, membership society that will be celebrating its
thirtieth year in 2008. Its mission is to provide comprehensive accreditation services for testing and cali-
bration laboratories, inspection bodies, proficiency testing providers, reference material producers, and
product certification bodies. Services are available to any applicant whether they are private or govern-

Continued n page 12)

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 12

(Continued from page 11)

ment, and regardless of their size. A2LA is the largest multi-discipline accreditation body in the United
States, and is internationally recognized.

A2LA welcomes applications for the accreditation of all types of laboratories. The addition of the ISO
15189 program at A2LA will provide medical laboratories with an additional level of recognition of the
excellent service provided to their customers.

Source: A2LA
Website: http://www.A2LA.org
Contact: Ray Minnick at 301-644-3215
E-Mail: rminnick@A2LA.org

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 13

THE LEARNING CURVE 2.-Can statistics professors become acquainted

with real measurement problems and be per-
By Phil Painchaud suaded to incorporate them in their textbooks
and class examples?
This is the fiftieth iteration in a
contiguous series of polemiciza-
3.-Are many educational programs misguided
tions (fancy word for argu-
in teaching technology instead of teaching engi-
mentative discourse) charted to
neering or science?
be on the general subject of Me-
trology Education. We are now
4.-Can measurement science as an educational
well into our fifteenth year of
element be pushed, or is it more likely to be in-
writing these in the form of
corporated in the curriculum by the pull forces
open letters to our esteemed
of demand?
Boss, the Managing Editor of
this periodic journal. We shall attempt in this seg-
5.-Must we resort to subterfuge to get measure-
ment to remain close to our charted topic which we
ment science integrated into the undergraduate
sometimes cannot do to the lack of current viable
curriculum?
inputs on the subject or the necessity of updating
our readers (if any) of breaking news items of met-
6.-How can professors maintain awareness of
rological interest.
current measurement needs and practices?
Dear Boss: Since this is the Fiftieth contiguous it-
Now let us assume that you have gone back,
eration of THE LEARNING CURVE, maybe we
looked up Column 48, and have retrieved my an-
should have a celebration—like a birthday cake
swers to the first three questions. We shall start
with fifty candles? I don’t think that I have enough
with question Number 4.
breath left to blow out that many—do you?
4.-Can measurement science as an educational
As I look back upon the previous columns, I see
element be pushed, or is it more likely to be in-
that we have covered many topics and have dis-
corporated in the curriculum by the pull forces
cussed most of those in depth. However I did lo-
of demand?
cate a gross omission on my part, In Column 48, I
brought forward the six questions that Mr. Fred
My answer to this one is “All of the above”. It is
Hume had asked in his noted ‘White Paper’ that we
up to each of us as both professionals and practitio-
reprinted in totality in Column 47. However, I had
ners in the Measurement Sciences, irrespective of
only discussed three of them, promising you an-
our function or functional level to vigorously pro-
swers in a succeeding column. Well we all got kind
mote the necessity of academic education in Me-
of wrapped up in the Measurement Science Confer-
trology. Vocational training in Calibration and/or
ence in Column 49 and the remaining answers to
device maintenance, while both worthy and essen-
Mr. Hume’s questions went unanswered. So let us
tial to properly implement and achieve an optimum
do it here and now.
Metrology function, is most certainly not an ade-
quate background for the technical overseer of that
Since you have probably forgotten the original
operation. That individual must have a thorough
questions, I shall repeat all six here, but remember
academic indoctrination in the basic sciences and
if you want the answers (my answers) to the first
mathematics.
three, you will have to dig out your downloaded
hard copy of Column 48.
The “push” that Mr. Hume asks in this question
can be achieved from below by an unrelenting de-
1.-Should measurement science exist as a sepa-
mand for more competence in one’s supervision.
rate discipline, a thing to itself? Certainly it
does, today. Should it exist as a discipline co- (Continued on page 14)
equal with mathematics, physics and chemistry?
Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 14

(Continued from page 13) cellor for his blessing. Propter Hoc: The first and
Keep it up and eventually someone of competence still functioning baccalaureate level true academic
above you will hear and act. Metrology program in the nation.

The “pull” in the same question will exist when
management at all levels are indoctrinated with the
truism that a degree in Business Administration can
be a highly improper background for an individual
destined to head a strong efficacious professional
Metrology organization. Management somehow
must be made to realize that the philosophies inher-
ent in such training are not just detrimental to a
correctly functioning Metrology organization, but
could be disastrous. Properly functioning Metrol-
ogy cannot be profit driven; on the other hand it
must return true (not artificial) value for each dollar
invested. As I pointed out in an earlier column,
“When the profit motive is removed, the Practitio-
ner can then become a true Professional!” The
first requirement of a Metrologist is to be a true
Professional.
So the answer to Mr. Hume’s question should not
be in a future tense but in a past tense. Subterfuge
has already been used successfully. There is no
reason it cannot be used again.
6.-How can professors maintain awareness of
current measurement needs and practices.
Now here we have the “sixty-four dollar question”.
We will assume that most professors are human
(personally I haven’t met any who are not; al-
though I have encountered a few whom I felt that
were not worthy of that status). It is ipse dixit (that
is a Latin phrase meaning, “an unsupported asser-
tion by a person of standing) that most people tend
to resist change and since I am the author of this
article, I must be the ‘person of standing’.

5.-Must we resort to subterfuge to get measure- So resistance to change is a normal human trait.
ment science integrated into the undergraduate Intelligent people, who many professors are, can be
curriculum? persuaded to change their mindset when presented
with logical facts. But that alone may not do it—
Well there is the old saying, “That the ends often the entire chain of command must also reshape
justify the means”. That of course assumes that the their thinking. Dr. Watson solved this awareness
means employed in that subterfuge is neither un- problem in his Dominguez Hills program in a
ethical, illegal, immoral, nor indecent. The world is unique manner. Each candidate for his degree in
overburdened with arrogant, self-centered fools Measurement Science was required to spend two
with their ideas of their own self-importance, and semesters off-campus working in an industrial en-
intolerant of any ideas other than their own. Unfor- vironment pre-approved by the Program Coordina-
tunately too often this type of individual is able to tor, while also carrying the full on-campus aca-
con their way into high positions of an administra- demic load prescribed for that semester. The bene-
tion. fits were bi-directional and twofold. The student
got practical experience in applying the theory they
The late Dr. Watson was precisely up against this were learning on-campus. In the frequent reports
problem when he first attempted to introduce a Me- they were required to submit, they not only were
trology curriculum at California State University— required to explain what and how they were apply-
Dominguez Hills. The mindset of the then admini- ing their class material, but also expose the defi-
stration refused to recognize Metrology as a sci- ciencies existing between classroom environment
ence; they erroneously insisted that Metrology is an and the practical real world environment. From
engineering discipline, and the Dominguez Hills these reports Dr. Watson was able to take such cor-
was charted as an ‘Arts and Science’ institution not rective actions as necessary to make the on-campus
an ‘Engineering’ school. Watson’s subterfuge was curriculum more reconcilable with the needs of the
to simply rewrite his proposal entitling it Measure- outside world.
ment Science instead of Metrology. Approval by
the administration was almost immediate and it The problem at Butler County Community College
was sent on to the State University System Chan- (Continued on page 15)

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 15

(Continued from page 14) somebody is reading my column, Mr. Lester

(BC³) was similar yet different. Professor Jim Teza Stricker of Boeing e-mailed me asking for a clarifi-
who conceived the program was not at first con- cation of a statement in an earlier column. Thank
cerned with teaching Metrology; his primary con- you Lester, now I know that I have at least one
cern was a radical new method of teaching, one reader.
that would produce “Problem Solvers” with a
broad general background. He was using Metrol- Meanwhile, as I have said forty-nine times before,
ogy as a ‘vehicle’ to contain the course material “You can reach me at:”
and move the student through it. He was using
what I call “Total Immersion”; i.e., no individual PHIL PAINCHAUD
distinct classes on any subject. Hence there were 1110 West Dorothy Drive
no individual credits as customarily given for the Brea, CA 92821-2017
various subjects. In fact during the freshman se- Phone: 714-529-6604
mester there were only two classes of record: Me- FAX: 714-529-1109
trology 101 and Physical Education 101 e-mail: painchaud4@cs.com
(Pennsylvania state law required the Physical Edu- e-mail: olepappy@juno.co
cation).

Radically new, this concept worked for a while

until it clashed with the mindset at the administra-
tive levels. The President of the institution at that
time confided directly to me, “This concept is won-
derful, it is the way of the future, and it is the way
that all education should be done. But I am not
going to support it; if I do I would look like a fool
to my peers in other academic institutions”.

When Professor Teza’s contract expired it was not

renewed for ‘health’ reasons. Dr. Don Drum was
brought in to pick up the pieces and try to continue
the Metrology program using more conventional
methods. Incidentally the President’s contract was
also not renewed.

We can close this tirade with the repeat of a state-

ment that I copied directly from an NIST e-mail
and presented to you in Column 49 — “We must
somehow provided for the academic education
of a new generation of Professional Metrolo-
gists!”

Well Boss that nearly wraps it up for this session. I

am very disappointed that no one has attempted to
claim my $100 cash prize. I thought that from
among our purported ten thousand or more readers,
that someone would take a stab at it.

I have had one letter from a reader recently, my

very first letter from a reader since distribution of
THE STANDARD went electronic so I know that

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 16

2007–2008 SIMMONS SCHOLARSHIP WINNER

By Norman B. Belecki

The Joe D. Simmons Memorial Scholarship for the academic year 2007–2008 has been awarded to
Timothy F. Chereck, a student at the Central Georgia Technical College.

Mr. Chereck is studying for an Associate’s degree in metrology as a part of a career-field change from
that of an industrial-electronics technician. As such he repaired and/or adjusted misperforming produc-
tion equipment that, while still functioning, was affecting the quality of manufactured products. In this
he was responsible for both hardware and software maintenance. This is a natural move for Chereck as
he was an end-user of the tools of metrology. He has a perfect academic record as a metrology student.

The Simmons Scholarship is pleased to recognize his ability and hard work by presenting its 2007–2008
award to Timothy Chereck of Central Georgia Tech.

The Scholarship is in memory of Dr. Joe D. Simmons, who was Chief of the NIST Calibration Program,
NIST liaison to the National Conference of Standards Laboratories, recipient of the Measurement Sci-
ence Conference’s Andrew J. Woodington Award and the National Conference of Standards Laborato-
ries’ Wildhack Award, cofounder and Chair of the Measurement Quality Division of the American Soci-
ety for Quality Control (ASQ), and founding Chair of the Measurement Quality Conference. He devoted
his later career to promoting institutional support for metrology as the cornerstone of quality. The Schol-
arship fosters the furtherance of metrology through education by striving to:

a) support the academic pursuit of a metrology career by worthy students;

b) promote and improve measurement science education and educational opportunity;
c) encourage talented individuals to enter the field of metrology; and
d) stimulate professionalism in metrology,

through an annual award to a student exhibiting scholastic excellence in the study of measurement sci-
ence and quality. The Scholarship is cosponsored by the ASQ Measurement Quality Division, the Meas-
urement Science Conference and NCSL International, and is supported by many individual friends and
colleagues of Joe Simmons.

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 17

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 18

MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION OFFICERS AND COMMITTEE CHAIRS

Chair Joe Simmons Scholarship
Graeme C. Payne Norm Belecki
GK Systems, Inc. 7413 Mill Run Dr
4440 Weston Drive SW, Suite B Derwood, MD 20855-1156
Lilburn, GA 30047 USA Voice (301) 869-4520
Voice: (770) 931-4004 / Fax (866) 887-9344 E-mail: n.belecki@ieee.org
E-mail: Graeme@gksystems.biz

Standards Committee Representative

Chair-Elect Robert M. Graham
Richard D. Roberson Primary AC Standards Lab
10301 Clinkenbeard Rd NE Sandia National Laboratories
Norman, OK 73026 P.O. Box 5800, M.S. 0665
Voice (405) 321-8580 Albuquerque, NM 87185-0665
E-mail: richardroberson@sbcglobal.net Phone: (505) 845-0434
Fax: (505) 844-6096
E-mail: rmgraha@sandia.gov
Secretary, Certification Chair, Website
Manager, NCSL International Representative
Christopher L. Grachanen Examining Chair
Manager, Houston Metrology Group Hewlett- Duane Allen
Packard U. S. Navy
P. O. Box 692000 MS070110 P.O. Box 5000, Code MS11
Houston, TX 77269-2000 Corona, CA 92878-5000
Voice (281) 518-8486 / Fax (281) 518-7275 Voice (909) 273-4783 / Fax (909) 273-4599
E-mail: Chris.Grachanen@hp.com E-mail: duane.allen@navy.mil

Treasurer, Publication Chair, Newsletter Historian

Editor/Publisher, Share Point Administrator Keela Sniadach
Jay L. Bucher Promega Corp.
Bucherview Metrology Services 5445 East Cheryl Parkway
6700 Royal View Dr. Madison, WI 53711
De Forest, WI 53532-2775 Voice (608) 298-4681 / Fax (608) 277-2516
Voice (608) 277-2522 / Fax (608) 846-4269 E-mail: keela.sniadach@promega.com
E-mail: yokota-69@charter.net
jay.bucher@promega.com
ASQ Division Administrator
Ms. Jennifer Admussen, CQIA
Immediate Past Chair, Nominating Chair Voice (800) 248-1946, x7736
Program Chair E-mail: jadmussen@asq.org
Dilip A. Shah
E = mc3 Solutions
197 Great Oaks Trail #130
Wadsworth, Ohio 44281-8215
Voice (330) 328-4400 / Fax (330) 336-3974
E-mail: emc3solu@aol.com, dashah@aol.com

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 19

ASQ MEASUREMENT QUALITY DIVISION REGIONAL COUNCILORS

Regional Councilors represent the Division to members and Sections in their

geographic areas. Regional Councilors are appointed for renewable two-year
terms, and are advisory members of the Division leadership team.
Region 1 (CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT) Region 9 (IN, KY, OH)
Mr. Jun Bautista Mr. Ryan Fischer, ASQ CCT
Genzyme Laboratory Accreditation Bureau
Cambridge, MA 02142 New Haven, IN 46774
E-mail: Jun.Bautista@genzyme.com E-mail: rfischer@l-a-b.com

Region 2 (NJ, NY, PA) Region 10 (OH, MI)

Volunteer Opportunity! Volunteer Opportunity!

Region 3 (CT, NJ, NY) Region 11 (NC, SC, TN, VA)

Mr. Eduardo M. Heidelberg Volunteer Opportunity!
Pfizer
Parlin, NJ 08859 Region 12 (IL, MN, ND, SD, WI)
E-mail: eheidelb@yahoo.com
Dr. Donald S. Ermer
Region 4 (Canada) ASQ Fellow; Eugene L. Grant Medal (2001)
University of Wisconsin—Madison
Mr. Alexander T. C. Lau Madison, WI 53706
ExxonMobil E-mail: Ermer@engr.wisc.edu
Whitby, ON L1R 1R1
E-mail: alex.t.lau@exxonmobil.com
Region 13 (CO, IA, KS, MO, NE, SD, WY)
Region 5 (DC, DE, MD, PA, VA) Volunteer Opportunity!
Mr. Richard A. Litts
Litts Quality Technologies Region 14 (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX, part of
Downington, PA 19335 Mexico)
E-mail: info@littsquality.com Mr. R. Keith Bennett
TRANSCAT
Region 6 (AK, CA, HI, ID, MT, OR, UT, WA, Kingwood, TX 77339
WY) E-mail: kbennett@transcat.com
Volunteer Opportunity!
Region 15 (AL, FL, GA, LA, MS, Puerto Rico)
Region 7 (AZ, CA, NV, part of Mexico)
Mr. E. Bryan Miller
Mr. Randy D. Farmer ASQ Fellow
Metrology Solutions Bryan Miller Consulting
Chula Vista, CA 91913 Florence, AL 35633
E-mail: farmerrd2@cox.net E-mail: milleb@mindspring.com
Region 25 (all other countries)
Region 8 (OH, PA) Volunteer Opportunity!
Dilip A. Shah
E = mc3 Solutions
Wadsworth, Ohio 44281-8215E-mail: em-
c3solu@aol.com, dashah@aol.com

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
MQD Page 20

Vol. 21, No. 2 The Newsletter of the Measurement Quality Division, American Society for Quality June 2007
ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement (WCQI) Report
By Dilip Shah

The 61st annual ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement (WCQI) was held
in Orlando, Florida from April 29 through May 2, 2007. The theme of the conference was
“Fueling Innovation”.

Prior to the conference, the volunteer Division Affairs Council (DAC) took place on
Friday, April 27, 2007. Both Graeme Payne and I participated in this meeting.

On April 28 and 29, the continuation of “Ideas to Action” session was conducted.

The MQD Division teleconference meeting was planed for Sunday afternoon at 3:00
P.M. Unfortunately due to an error; none of the call-in participants were able to join in.
The attendees present at the meeting were able to brainstorm several ideas. It is always
nice to see some new faces and meet old acquaintances at the conference.
LR Graeme Payne Leta Thrasher, Rick Litts, Lou Ann Lathrop

LR Elias Monreal, Graeme Payne, Fatma Ali, Leta Thrasher, Rick Litts and Lou Ann Lathrop
Both Graeme Payne and I performed booth duty at our MQD booth. Our giveaways at the
booth were; good candy (drew a lot of traffic!) and then once we had them, we gave our
sales pitch on advantages of joining the MQD and give away past issues of The Standard
on CD-ROM that I burnt the night before. I burnt some midnight oil performing that task
as I was up till 3:00 AM.

Graeme and Dilip at the MQD booth.

Opposite our booth was the ASQ mega booth with a lot of books to sell. So, it was easy
to guide the prospective buyers of The Metrology Handbook and Jay Bucher’s newest
book, The Quality Calibration Handbook to the mega booth.

I presented our Division sponsored paper titled: Deming funnel experiment and
Calibration over Adjustment: New Innovation?; on Wednesday, May 2, 2007 at 8:00
AM. This being the last day of the conference and the earliest session, I was surprised to
find about 120 attendees at the session compared to the thirty I expected. Following the
session, I was able to bring more attendees to our booth for information.

The MQD also publicized the upcoming NCSL International conference by displaying
and distributing the conference flyers. There was a lot of interest for this conference and
almost all the brochures were gone.
ASQ MEGA BOOTH

Respectfully submitted,
Dilip Shah