machine tools again brings in the possibility of mixed production of metric and customary designed objects, fabricated on the same machine and subject to control by properly translated programs. The Metric Study hopes to identify and document circumstances such as these which, if extrapolated some years into the future, will give a clear picture of the environment within which a future metric conversion might take place. Similarly, there may be other effects, such as a very high degree of interlocking of many industries dependent upon the same set of standardized components and materials based on customary units, that will make conversion increasingly difficult. It is thus essential that the Study undertake to measure not only the present circumstances with respect to metric usage, but expected changes in the near future.

Clearly, the almost worldwide use of the metric system must be accepted as a fact of life, and the U.S. must learn to live with it. Adjustments within the U.S. are being made and will continue to be made in the absence of any recommendations from our Study. Examples surround us, ranging from simple to complex. The American visitor abroad makes mental adjustments for distance and temperature announcements, the physicist switches language when he listens to the engineer. Manufacturers who prepackage for both American and foreign markets, such as our neighbors in Latin America, commonly print both English and metric weights on the package. The pharmaceutical industry is substantially converted to metric usage, and the ball bearing industry is rapidly in the process of the same transition. Newspapers display air pollution regulations in metric dimensions. Farmers use fertilizers whose standards are in metric units. Swimming pools are commonly built to an integral number of meters in length in order to facilitate international swimming competitions. And doctors write Rxs in the understandable metric units. These are but a few examples.

The formulation of a Study plan consonant with the foregoing philosophy and circumstances - and, in fact, the development of the philosophy itself-has been a major undertaking of the Study. The structure of the plan and the status of the numerous surveys and investigations that are underway are described in appendix 3 of this report.

The essence of the plan is that courses of action that are feasible for the U.S. must be examined for costs and benefits in all importantly relevant sectors of our society. Based upon this information, necessary tradeoffs should be identified, consequences quantified, or otherwise described, and the results injected into our legislative and executive political machinery for resolution.

The legislative history of the Metric Study Act makes clear that the Study should not become too narrowly focused upon the metrication issue. The Study Group was therefore charged to see that concern for the pros and cons of metrication would not be allowed to obscure possible findings, such as, for example, that worldwide metrication is but one aspect of a broader undertaking to compensate for some unique advantages already enjoyed by the U.S. without benefit of metrication, in which case some course of action in addition to, or instead of, further metrication may be required.

The wisdom of this legislative precaution has already been demonstrated.

Evidence has appeared which indicates that worldwide metrication may be coupled to and, in part, be a manifestation of a much broader effort to develop an integrated market, in Europe for a start, comparable to that enjoyed by the U.S. domestically. International product quality assurance, backed by seals of compliance, may become another basis for forging such an integrated market. International standards are being used as the basis for definition and verification of product quality and compatibility. SI is to be the primary language for the standards, but agreements about quantitative parameters will predominantly reflect the technology and engineering practices of the dominant participants in international standards negotiations.

The chapters that follow show the nature of these developments, their interesting but secondary dependence upon metrication, their rapidity of development, and the need for the U.S. to decide upon its response to these developments, without awaiting the outcome of the Metric Study. This need is felt to be sufficiently urgent to warrant this interim report, which is being submitted in accordance with the provisions of Public Law 90-472, the Metric Study Act.

III. THE DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT

A. International Trade and Metrication

The Metric Study Act directs the Secretary "to determine the impact of increasing worldwide use of the metric system on the United States," and in particular, to give attention to “international trade, commerce, and in military and other areas of international relations." The statute and its legislative history make clear that this "increasing worldwide use of the metric system" is a principal cause for concern. If the nature of this increase is such as to have strong effects on international trade (for example, various restrictive laws), then the basis of concern in this country may be heightened.

The Congress therefore has a strong interest in the interplay between metrication and areas of international relations, including foreign trade. Theoretically, at least, this interplay may be manipulated to help or hinder free trade and involves both the language of measurement and the consequent engineering standards that determine such things as the size of a nut or bolt. The measurement language used to describe U.S. products or to measure them for sale abroad should be a relatively minor impediment to the trading process:

"The metric system per se is not the real meat of the subject but, rather, is the catalyst which is causing most of us to do some soulsearching about our national and international standards activities and the relatively poor progress we are making in comparison with the stepped up activities in most of the other countries. We tend to blame our poor performance on the difference in the units of measure that are

used to describe our standards and some of this may be justified, but units of measure are not the only reason."4

Engineering standards are involved, because U.S. products may not be compatible with other products in the foreign market, if they are made to different engineering standards. This can have a very direct effect upon the two-way flow of trade and upon the engineering practices or technology of each participating nation.5 Incompatibilities of this kind arise naturally out of the standards process itself and are not necessarily an artificial restraint on trade. However, the use of standards can be so manipulated as to become an artificial barrier. Consequently, the U.S. Metric Study has been examining and following recent events concerning standards development in other countries, to the extent that these events may be related to the increasing worldwide use of the metric system.

In this chapter we present, without interpretation, a series of events and trends in the dynamic environment in which the U.S. Metric Study is immersed, and which must be taken into account in any assessment of the impact of metrication on international trade. There is a sense of urgency in all of this that may not be apparent:

"I find it hard to explain just why international standards should be important . . . . But the conviction is strong, nevertheless. I could point to growing imports of materials and equipment from overseas. I could note that our overseas subsidiaries are having to develop an independent standards program because U.S. based standards aren't responsive to their needs. But these are little clouds, no bigger than a man's hand. They can't account for my view that we in the U.S. have only a few years to develop a strengthened and expanded system of national standards, and that these national standards must then be advanced to the level of international standards.”6

B. Events

1. In January 1970 Australia declared its intent to proceed toward metrication of its standards and commerical practices. The Prime Minister declared 7:

"Following detailed consideration of the recommendations made by the Senate Select Committee on the adoption of the Metric System of Weights and Measures, the Government has decided that Australia should convert to the Metric System as soon as possible. . . . The Government's aim is to complete the changeover during a period of ten years, although conversion will be completed much sooner than this in

From "The Effect of Metrication Upon U.S. Engineering Standards," a paper presented by William K. Burton, Metric System Development Manager, Ford Motor Co., at the Standards Engineers Society Convention, September 23, 1970.

5 Appendix 4 shows how this can happen.

6 From "Standards Management in the Process Industries," a paper presented at the Standards Engineers Society Convention, September 21, 1970. by W. G. Canham, Engineering Standards Manager for the Monsanto Co.

7P.M. No. 12/1970, 19 Jan. 1970.