Appendix I-2. Scale Manufacturers Association Presentation Appendix I-3. National Scale Men's Association Presentation Page Excerpts from the Report of the 54th National Conference on Weights and Measures, 1969, NBS Special Publication 318 Excerpts from NBS Handbook 44, Specifications, Tolerances, Excerpts from the Model State Weights and Measures Law, as SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to: 1. Identify and describe the impacts (cost, time, etc.) of changing selected commercial weighing and measuring devices to record and/or indicate in metric units. 2. Analyze the problems that increased metric usage would have on state and local weights and measures jurisdictions (e.g., laws and regulations, testing equipment, and training programs). BACKGROUND Evidence indicates that evolutionary metrication in the commercial weights and measures area is unlikely. Consequently, it is felt that a national metrication program would be needed in order to advance the usage of metric units in this area. SUMMARY: FINDINGS OF FACT ATTITUDES TOWARD METRICATION A. Sixty-seven percent of the 15 weighing and measuring device manufacturers responding to our industry questionnaires were in favor of metrication; a like percentage, of the same respondents, were in favor of a mandatory metrication program based on legislation. B. Sixty-four percent of the 63 weights and measures jurisdictions responding to our jurisdiction questionnaire were in favor of metrication. BENEFITS OF METRICATION Device manufacturers, in fact, 73 percent of the respondents, and many weights and measures jurisdictions felt there would be benefits in using the metric system. However, benefits, even if substantial, are apparently difficult to express in quantitative terms and no respondent offered any analysis showing them in dollars and cents. In general, those surveyed felt that benefits would arise because the metric system is an easier system of measurement to understand and to use as compared with the U.S. customary one. Although, not mentioned directly, it appears that respondents were thinking in terms of more efficient use of personnel; for instance, the use of the metric system may reduce the amount of time spent by employees in doing measurement calculations. Note: Because of the problems of determining the benefits of metrication, the overall economic effects, positive or negative, are difficult to determine. In the absence of sound data on benefits, it was felt wise to avoid estimating net economic consequences. However, because cost data are easier to obtain than those for benefits, there may be a tendency to look only at the cost side. This could lead one to see little or no advantages to metrication. METRIC ADAPTATION OF WEIGHING AND A. The production of weighing and measuring devices to record and/or indicate in metric units does not represent a serious problem. In fact, a number of manufacturers already produce such devices in either their domestic or foreign plants, and thus they have already acquired some of the needed expertise in order to carry out a metric adaptation program. B. The adaptation of devices now in use would present problems. The limited number of qualified service personnel coupled with the large numbers and varieties of devices now in use precludes quick field adaptation. The time that would be required to accomplish field adaptation is estimated at between 5 and 10 years with an accompanying cost of around $340 million. WEIGHTS AND MEASURES JURISDICTIONS A. Most weights and measures jurisdictions have little or no metric field testing equipment. In order to be able to efficiently test metric indicating and/or recording devices, it would be necessary for jurisdictions to either purchase new and/or adapt present testing equipment to indicate in metric units. The cost of such metrication nationwide would be about $1 million. B. Weights and measures inspectors would have to undergo instruction in order to be able to understand and use the metric system of measurement in |