              |
- Address materials and construction requirements for equipment items;
- Identify the key parameters used to quantify equipment performance;
- Set requirements for acceptable or qualifying performance levels; and
- Establish methods for testing, data analysis and interpretation, and performance reporting.
- "T-1, Standards (Adoption and Policy): Coordinates standards development activities across all divisions, ballots all standards and recommends Society standards policy.
- T-13, International Standardization: Leads and coordinates activities of the Cooperative Standards Program to assure that issues relating to international standardization are addressed pro-actively.
- SW-03, [Soil and Water] Standards: Coordinates [soil and water] standards development and approves the technical content of draft [soil and water] standards.
- SW-245, Microirrigation: Encompasses research development and education in design, construction, management, evaluation, and maintenance of microirrigation components and systems."
- All manufacturers listed in the IA Directory that might be affected by a standard;
- The U.S. TAG for SC18;
- ASAE SW-03, Soil and Water Standards Committee;
- ASAE technical committee(s) responsible for the subject area of the standard; and
- Individuals and companies who have notified CIT or the IA of their desire to review standards in certain subject areas.
- Contributors to the ASAE & IA Joint Solicitation for the Cooperative Standards
Program;
- ASAE - Pays for ASAE standardization staff and activities, and a portion of travel
expenses for some U.S. delegates to SC18;
- CIT - Pays a portion of travel expenses for some U.S. delegates to SC18; and
- USDA - Pays a portion of travel expenses for some U.S. delegates to SC18.
- { CATI , CIT , CIT - Research Publications }
- Standards Notes -
Standards Development for Microirrigation1
by
Kenneth H. Solomon2 and Allen R. Dedrick3
CATI Publication #950601
© copyright May 1995, all rights reserved
ABSTRACT
This article identifies national and international standards and engineering practices applicable to microirrigation. The organizational structure and procedures for the development of standards proposals and standards by the Irrigation Association, ASAE and the International Standards Organization are described, and the process for developing the U.S. position on international standards documents is presented. Arrangements for financing standardization within the irrigation industry are reviewed. Individual and industry involvement in standardization is encouraged.
Keywords: ANSI, ASAE, IA, Irrigation Association, Irrigation, Drip Irrigation, Microirrigation, Standard, Standardization, Subsurface Irrigation, Trickle Irrigation
IMPORTANCE OF STANDARDS
Standards4 represent the state-of-the-art in their respective areas, and can be important tools for people who select, design, purchase, install, operate and evaluate irrigation equipment or systems. Microirrigation suppliers, designers, advisors and end users should be aware of available standards on various equipment and procedural issues. In covering important topics of significance to everyone interested in microirrigation, standards:Such standardized methods ensure that product information is comparable. Without comparable performance reports, product evaluation and selection would be a nightmare, and designers could never be sure what values for hydraulic characteristics should be factored into their designs.
Uses
Standards are important for both suppliers and consumers. They are often used to specify or pre-qualify equipment that will be considered for purchase. Standards clauses on data interpretation pro-vide the basis for a common understanding of performance evaluation and criteria for categorization. Using standards to guide purchase decisions provides some level of protection for end users and suppliers. End users are assured that minimum performance and safety criteria will have been satisfied by products meeting the standard. Suppliers are assured that they won't have to bid against sub-standard equipment which doesn't meet even minimum criteria.
Standards for field evaluation and acceptance provide protection for both supplier and consumer against either acceptance of substan-dard goods or improper rejection of acceptable goods. Field evaluation standards further aid irriga-tion advisors and users by helping to identify and quantify problems and suggesting possible causes.
Dangers
The irrigation community should participate in and carefully observe the standards development process. Well written standards are very beneficial, but poorly written standards can lead to serious problems. A standard should focus on the results required, not on how the results may be achieved. Specifying "how" can lead to exclusionary language limiting design or manufacturing innovation or prohibiting whole classes of "nonstandard" options for achieving the necessary results. For example, if a standard specified an in-line emitter/lateral configuration, it could exclude the possibility of on-line emitters, laterals with integral emitters, or porous pipe products.
Care must also be taken in specifying testing methods in order to avoid methods that may be inap-propriate to a class of products, too expensive for common use, too lax or too harsh in requirements. For example, a standard may specify that a pressure measurement be taken at least 10 diameters downstream of a flow-disturbing element, since otherwise, reliable readings are not possible. The method of measuring pressure (manometer or gage) should be left to the discretion of test lab. Any device with the necessary accuracy (specified in the test method standard) should be acceptable.
The best safeguard against inappropriate standards is the active participation of knowledgeable experts in the review of documents as they progress through all stages of development.
STANDARDS FOR MICROIRRIGATION
The most important sources of standards for microirrigation are ASAE5 and the International Standards Organization (ISO). Tables 1 and 2 list standards currently available from ASAE and ISO, respectively, on aspects of irrigation in general and on microirrigation specifically.
Obtaining Copies of Standards
A footnote for each table provides a contact for purchasing copies of the standards. ASAE standards can be purchased individually or all together. The ASAE Standards book (updated yearly) contains all ASAE standards, additional related information (ASAE, 1993). ISO standards are purchased from the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the official U.S. representative to ISO.
Fees for Standards
Both ASAE and ISO standards must be purchased. Please note that ASAE, ANSI and ISO (nongovernmental organizations) receive no government funding to support their standards activities. They derive support for their organizations, in part, from the sale of standards documents. Fees charged for standards documents cover far more than just the cost of reprinting a few pages of text - they also cover the administration of domestic and international standards development infrastructures. Charging these fees for the standards documents is based on the philosophy that the primary users and beneficiaries of a standardization should pay for it.
HOW STANDARDS ARE DEVELOPED
The following sections describe the standards development process. Individuals may participate in the development of standards through various organizations at the local, national or international level. We will review these organizations and describe their procedures. We will explain how the U.S. position on various standards documents and issues is developed, how the activities are financed, and how those interested in microirrigation can get involved in standards development.
The most important standards setting organizations for microirrigation are ASAE and ISO. Other organizations may develop recommendations regarding microirrigation. For example, the Florida Irrigation Society (FIS) document "Standards and Specifications for Agricultural Solid Set Sprinkler and Microirrigation Systems"6 (Murphy, 1994) is not, technically speaking, a standard because FIS is not an official standards writing organization in the U.S. The FIS document could serve as the starting point for a standard to be developed by a standards writing organization such as ASAE, but would not itself be recognized as a standard.
The remainder of this paper focuses on standards developed for microirrigation by ASAE and ISO, and on the roles of the following organizations in the development of these standards: the Irrigation Association (IA), ASAE, ANSI, ISO, and the Center for Irrigation Technology (CIT).
INDUSTRY'S ROLE IN STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
Irrigation Association (IA)
The IA7 is a trade organization whose domestic membership represents numerous segments of the irrigation community in the United States. Members include equipment manufacturers, distributors and dealers, contractors, consultants and advisors, and individual members, including representatives of universities, and local, state, and federal government agencies. The IA membership governs itself with an elected Board of Directors (IA, 1993). The IA hires professional staff, which report to the Board of Directors' Executive Committee, to manage the IA day-to-day.
To facilitate work on specific projects, the IA membership is further organized into several committees and divisions. While the IA is not a standards writing organization, the committees and divisions of the IA may utilize industry expertise to develop proposals for voluntary standards which are submitted to outside standards writing organizations (such as ASAE) for their consideration as possible standards. The most important committees and divisions from the viewpoint of microirrigation standards are the Standards and Specifications Committee and the following divisions: Drip/Micro Irrigation; Pumps and Power Units; Sprinklers, Controllers, Valves and Backflow; and Chemigation. Figure 1 illustrates the organization of the IA.
Developing IA Proposals for Standards
The IA has published guidelines for developing standards proposals, including voting procedures and requirements for approval (IA, 1989). The process for the development of a proposal for a standard begins with the identification of a particular market need. A rationale statement is prepared explaining why the standard is needed, by whom, what is to be covered, and how it is to be used. The originating division may wish to submit the rationale statement based on the perceived need directly to a standards setting organization (such as ASAE) for their immediate consideration (Figure 1, action path 1). Or, the division may wish to continue with the preparation of a draft proposal for submission with the rationale statement to the standards setting organization.
The proposal document is written and reviewed at the division level and may undergo several draft-review-revise cycles. When the division has reached consensus, the document is sent to the IA Standards and Specifications Committee for their consideration. Once this committee has approved the proposal document, it is forwarded by the IA Executive Director, along with the original statements of rationale, to an appropriate standards setting organization outside the IA (Fig. 1, action path 2). The IA's originating division may also identify a group of industry representatives familiar with the subject of the proposal to work with the appropriate ASAE technical committee.
The first task in the ASAE standards development process is to prepare an initial draft for the standards document. So a consensus document from an IA division, or division plus the Standards and Specifications Committee, can serve as the initial draft for the ASAE process.
NATIONAL STANDARDS
ASAE
ASAE is the key organization within the U.S. for standards in microirrigation. Standards development is a major priority area for the ASAE to help meet the Society objectives of advancing the theory and practice of engineering in agricultural, food and biological systems. The history of standards within ASAE has been detailed by Stetson (1982).
Like the IA, the ASAE membership governs itself through an elected Board of Directors (ASAE, 1994). The organization hires a staff to conduct the day-to-day activities necessary to the ASAE's purpose. The Board of Directors is composed of three Councils: the Membership Council, the Professional Council, and the Technical Council.
The area of standardization falls under the Technical Council. The ASAE membership is organized into eight technical divisions, along with a number of nondivisional (or pandivisional) committees. The most important ASAE Technical Division for the microirrigation industry is the Soil & Water Division.
The Soil & Water Division is comprised of six technical groups, including Irrigation, and several Soil & Water Division committees. The Irrigation Group is subdivided into one administrative and six technical committees. Figure 2 illustrates the organization of ASAE technical activities under the Technical Council and the approval path for standards.
ASAE (1994) describes the roles of some key committees for microirrigation standards:Developing ASAE (National) Standards
ASAE standards development starts with a request from someone for a standard to serve some specific need. This may take the form of a Need and Rationale Statement or a Standards Proposal from a trade organization such as the IA (see Figure 2). The request will be channeled to the appro-priate ASAE technical committee. ASAE treats standards development as a bottom-up effort. ASAE technical committee members bring extensive subject matter expertise to the standardization process. The ASAE technical committee may coordinate with the corresponding IA division to identify in-dustry experts knowledgeable in the areas to be covered by the standard. Even if not ASAE members, industry experts may serve as advisory members of the standards developing committee.
Microirrigation equipment standards also may originate from within the SW-245 Microirrigation Committee. Note, however, that not all microirrigation related standards may be dealt with by the Microirrigation Committee.
Historically, within ASAE, valves and regulators fall within the scope of the SW- 241 Sprinkler Irrigation Committee. Controllers and safety equipment for chemigation (backflow prevention systems) fall to SW-244 Irrigation Management. A standard (probably an engineering practice - see footnote 3) on weather-based irrigation scheduling might be assigned jointly to SW-244 Irrigation Management and to SW-213 Evapotranspiration (in the Hydrology Group). The subject matter of ASAE Standard S491, Graphic Symbols for Pressurized Irrigation System Design, touched on so many technical areas that it was developed by an ad hoc subcommittee of SW-24 Irrigation Group, with representation from all of the Irrigation Group committees.
If the request is accompanied by an initial draft, ASAE's task is much easier. Previous work by an IA division or special industry task force is a good starting point for an ASAE technical committee. If an initial draft is not available, a special working group may be charged to prepare one. During the early stages, the working group may circulate drafts among the entire technical committee for comment. Additional copies may be sent to affected industry members for their reaction. The technical committee has primary responsibility for the technical accuracy of the document.
After the technical committee has approved the draft standard, it is forwarded to SW-03, the Soil and Water Division's standards committee. SW-03 members receive the draft document to vote on along with information on its history. SW-03 assesses the document from the standpoints of technical accuracy and adherence to procedural and policy norms (for example, proper format, proper procedures by the technical committee, adequate representation of all interested groups). After a document has passed SW-03, it goes on to T-1, the Society level standards committee, where it is reviewed in terms of policy and inter-divisional coordination.
Note that the ASAE approval process assures multiple reviews of both technical and procedural/policy issues. Also, when higher level reviews suggest some change, the document always goes back to the originating technical committee to ensure that any changes do not compromise the technical validity of the standard. ASAE standards are reviewed every five years to see if advances in industry practice require changes in the standard. If deemed necessary, reviews may be initiated before the normal five year review is due. See ASAE (1993) for a detailed discussion of ASAE procedures for developing standards, including voting procedures and requirements for approval.
American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
ANSI is the national organization that coordinates the voluntary development of national standards and establishes criteria for national consensus standards development. ANSI is a private, nonprofit organization originally formed in 1918 as the American Engineering Standards Committee (Dedrick, 1982). Through its coordinating role, and by establishing guidelines for uniform standardization procedures, ANSI adds credibility to our national standardization program. They assure that consensus has been achieved and that standards have been prepared using due process. ANSI requires that all concerned national interests have had an opportunity to review or comment on a document, including the right to appeal actions at various levels of review.
ANSI does not itself develop standards; ASAE and similar standards writing organizations develop standards for their particular areas of interest and expertise. Standards developed by these organ-izations may become American National Standards once ANSI has determined that development was in accordance with ANSI procedural guidelines (Dedrick, 1982). ANSI helps to avoid the conflict, overlap, and duplication that might result if organizations developed standards independently.
ANSI is the U.S. representative to the International Standards Organization (ISO) and authorizes U.S. representation on the various technical committees and subcommittees developing international standards. In the case of microirrigation standards, ANSI has authorized the IA to serve as the U.S. administrator for ISO Technical Committee 23, Subcommittee 18 (ISO/TC23/SC18), the group responsible for developing irrigation and drainage standards for ISO.8
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
International Standards Organization (ISO)
ISO is an international agency for standardization, headquartered in Geneva. Members of ISO are the national standards bodies (like ANSI for the U.S.) of about 90 countries (Dedrick, 1986). The objectives of ISO are to advance worldwide standardization; facilitate international exchange of goods and services; and promote cooperation in intellectual, scientific, technological, and economic activity. ISO comprises over 2,000 technical committees, subcommittees, and working groups. Dedrick (1982, 1986) gives additional background on ISO.
ISO/TC23/SC18 (SC18 for short) is the subcommittee for irrigation and drainage standards. Penkava (1986) reviewed the early history of SC18. Recently, the countries most active in SC18 have been Israel, France, the U.S., Canada, Spain, and Italy. Other countries that have participated in the past are Belgium, the Peoples Republic of China, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, and the United Kingdom. The Secretariat and Chair of SC18 are held by Israel.
Other Key Entities
In addition to the three organizations (i.e., ANSI, ASAE, IA) involved with developing international standards for micro- and other forms of irrigation, two other entities play key roles: the U.S. Technical Advisory Group (U.S. TAG) for ISO/TC23/SC18, and the Center for Irrigation Technology (CIT).
The U.S. TAG for SC18 is the core committee for development of the U.S. position on documents from ISO/TC23/SC18. TAG membership includes both IA and ASAE members. For administrative purposes, the U.S. TAG for SC18 is listed as subcommittee 2 of ASAE's Soil and Water Standards Committee: ASAE SW-03/2 (ASAE, 1994). Selection of an ASAE standard for proposal to SC18 is the responsibility of the U.S. TAG for SC18.
The Center for Irrigation Technology works as a subcontractor to the IA and performs certain functions necessary to the U.S. participation in SC18. CIT, founded in 1980, is part of the School of Agricultural Sciences and Technology at California State University, Fresno. The Center specializes in the testing and evaluation of irrigation equipment and is the only independent hydraulics testing lab in the country specializing in irrigation equipment. The Center also engages in research, demonstration, analytical, and educational projects with regard to both agricultural and turf and landscape irrigation.
CIT acts as technical and administrative assistants to the IA in handling ISO work. The main task is to receive draft standards documents from ISO, organize a suitable review by appropriate members of the U.S. irrigation community, compile comments received into a unified U.S. response, and submit the response to ISO (see more on this task in a following section). CIT may also be asked to prepare reports to IA about accomplished or planned ISO Standards activities, and to develop drafts of documents deemed important enough to the U.S. irrigation industry the U.S. the lead on the project. CIT also provides some of the U.S. delegates to the SC18 meetings.
SC18 Procedures
In SC18 the process of developing a new standard begins with a proposal to add an item to the subcommittee's scope of work. The proposal is voted upon by SC18 member countries. In theory, a proposed item may be rejected, or it may be placed in a low priority position on the subcommittee's work agenda. However, in recent practice, no item has been rejected if the proposal was accompanied by an initial draft and a volunteer (individual) to act as project leader for developing that standard.
Once the item has been added to the work agenda, a small working group (designated SC18/WGx, where x is some appropriate number) may be assigned to begin development of the document. While the document is in the working group, it is called a working draft (WD). WDs may be circulated for comment, but they are usually not voted upon formally. When WDs are circulated among working group members (delegates from various countries), usually only working group members comment on the document. However, U.S. delegates wishing a wider consideration of the document, may ask that the WD be circulated to other U.S. irrigation experts.
When the working group has reached consensus, the document goes to the entire membership of SC18 as a Committee Draft. CDs are circulated for vote as well as comment. Each member country has established its own rules for determining the national position on an ISO document (CD or other). ANSI procedures set the process for establishing a U.S. position. In general, there are two objectives: (1) to allow all affected parties an opportunity to review the document and comment on it; and (2) to develop a consensus response. Further details are provided in the section "Developing the U.S. Position on ISO Documents," below.
SC18 approval may require several cycles of vote, comment, revision, and resubmission for vote. When SC18 approval has been achieved, the document is sent to the ISO Central Secretariat for registration as a Draft International Standard (DIS). Seventy-five percent of the TC23 member bodies must approve a DIS before it is accepted as an International Standard (IS). Once this approval has been obtained, ISO publishes the document as an International Standard (IS). All ISO standards must be reviewed at least every five years to ensure that it remains current.
DEVELOPING THE U.S. POSITION ON ISO DOCUMENTS
Relationships of Authority, Information Routing
The IA, as U.S. administrator for SC18, has subcontracted with CIT to perform some of the functions necessary for interaction with ISO/TC23/SC18. Thus, when a document comes from SC18, its formal routing is SC18-ANSI-IA-CIT. And when the response has been developed, it is sent back to SC18 in the reverse order. To save time, an informal routing is also used: information from SC18 is sent simultaneously to ANSI, the IA, CIT, and the Chair of the U.S. TAG for SC18, so CIT can begin the circulation of the document for comment and vote immediately if necessary. When CIT has considered the review comments and votes received, they develop a recommended U.S. response. This is sent simultaneously to ANSI (for official transmittal to SC18 or the ISO Central Secretariat if appropriate), the IA (to the Executive Director, for information), the U.S. TAG for SC18 (to the Chair, for information), and to the Secretariat for SC18 in Israel.
Reviews
As mentioned above, to establish a U.S. position on any document, all affected parties should have an opportunity to review and comment on the document, and a consensus response must be developed. The extent to which CIT circulates a document for comment varies with circumstance.
In most cases, documents get a full circulation and review treatment, which means about 100 copies of the document are sent out to a diversity of public and private sector reviewers. Some documents might receive only a limited review (ranging from CIT reviews only to reviews by only a small number, 5-10, of selected experts). This option may be selected if the document has previously received widespread distribution and previous U.S. comments have been incorporated into the current draft, and/or if we must complete a review within a very short time. In a few cases, a determination is made that no review is necessary. This could be the case if all/most of the previous U.S. comments have been accepted, or if the U.S. developed the draft in the first place or will have another chance to review it.
CIT always tries to make sure that all manufacturers of a product related to or potentially affected by a standard, as identified in the IA Directory, receive a copy of the document to review. As Dedrick (1986) has pointed out, "It is relatively clear as to who should represent industry when developing standards but it is not as clear as to who should represent the consumer." Because ASAE committees try to include members from various advisory and service agencies, they offer the best practical solution to this dilemma for the moment. A document being given full review treatment would be circulated to the following:Unified, Consensus U.S.A. Response
Developing a consensus response requires considering each comment made by each reviewer. Comments can be ignored, modified, expanded, or passed on generally as submitted. Comments are not considered when they are factually incorrect, contradict a position the U.S. has already taken or compromised to, or when another more serious comment supersedes it. Sometimes conflicting comments are received from different reviewers. If the conflict involves a relatively minor point, a compromise position is developed. If the conflict involves a major point, both (all) parties are contacted and a consensus position is developed by phone.
U.S. Delegates to ISO/TC23/SC18 Meetings
The U.S. delegation to SC18 meetings usually consists of two delegates from CIT, Ken Solomon and David Zoldoske, and the Chair of the U.S. TAG for SC18, Allen Dedrick. Additional delegates (members of the IA, ASAE and ANSI staff and industry representatives from interested companies and agencies) have participated at times, especially at those SC18 meetings held in the U.S. Industry representatives are particularly encouraged to attend meetings if documents pertaining to their interests are going to be discussed. Contact the IA office prior to the meeting to have your name included on the list of official delegates.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR STANDARDIZATION
Standards development can be an expensive process. ISO is supported, in part, by membership dues from member countries, and ANSI pays a significant membership fee to ISO each year to enable the U.S. to participate in international standardization. ANSI derives support from membership fees, the sale of ISO standards, and fees charged to industry organizations who desire to be the U.S. administrator for particular ISO technical and sub-committees.9 The concept here is that it is really the affected industry that receives the direct benefit from international standardization. An industry organization desiring to act as U.S. administrator must be receiving substantial benefit from standardization and from acting as administrator, or they wouldn't be seeking the position. So, they should bear some portion of the cost for ANSI, over and above membership dues, etc. Thus, the IA pays ANSI a substantial fee each year to be able to represent the U.S. irrigation industry in the ISO arena.
In addition, the IA must assume all costs associated with SC18 activities within the U.S. (e.g., the circulation of draft documents for review, the travel costs for some U.S. delegates to the SC18 meetings each year, and costs associated with hosting SC18 meetings held in the U.S.).
In the U.S., standards work is done by a combination of volunteers (usually the subject matter experts) and paid staff (in such organizations as IA, ASAE, and ANSI).10 The value of the time contributed by employers and individuals for development of draft documents, review, and redrafting is substantial. In addition to the financial support from IA, further support comes from the following:
HOW TO GET INVOLVED WITH STANDARDIZATION
All members of the irrigation community may participate in standards development. The easiest way to do so is to join and become actively involved with the organizations doing standards work. These organizations are your vehicles to information and participation.
Join the IA and become active in the Standards and Specifications committee or in one of the divisions. Help them identify standards needs, develop rationale statements, and even standards proposals. Volunteer to serve as an industry expert working with an appropriate ASAE technical committee. Contact CIT and volunteer to review standards documents in your area of expertise. Join ASAE and serve on one or more of the technical committees that originate standards documents within ASAE. Lend your expertise to the review process. Become a member of SW-03 if you want to work on standards across the entire soil and water spectrum.
Attend meetings of SC18 as an official U.S. delegate or as an observer. Industry representatives of interested companies or agencies would be especially welcome. Contact the IA to see about joining the U.S. delegation to SC18 meetings. Volunteer to be the project leader during the development of a document in an area of your particular interest. Participate in the review process for ISO documents.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Standards deal with topics of importance to everyone in the microirrigation industry. They set requirements for products and performance and establish test and data interpretation procedures that allow us to compare products and performance results. The ASAE and ISO have developed, and are developing, nearly 40 standards for different products, techniques, and issues in microirrigation. Readers are encouraged to become familiar with these standards and become engaged in the process of standardization as well.
Members of the irrigation community are urged to become involved with standardization by joining and becoming active in the organizations responsible for standards, especially the IA and ASAE. Technical expertise is always needed in the drafting and review of documents in development. Participation in international standardization as a reviewer of documents or as a delegate to SC18 meetings is encouraged.
NOTES
1 This paper was first presented at the 5th International Microirrigation Congress, Orlando, Florida, USA, April 2-6, 1995.
2 Kenneth H. Solomon, Senior Irrigation Engineer, Center for Irrigation Technology, California State University, Fresno, 5370 N. Chestnut Avenue, Fresno, California 93740-0018.
3 Allen R. Dedrick, Director, US Water Conservation Laboratory, USDA-ARS, 4331 E. Broadway, Phoenix, Arizona 85040.
4 ASAE (1991, page 3) cites three types of standards documents: (1) Standards, "A definite termin-ology, specification, performance criteria, or [testing] procedure ..."; (2) Engineering Practices, "A practice, procedure or guide ... for general use in design, installation or utilization of systems ... based upon current knowledge and the state-of-the-art."; and (3) Data, "Numerical values, ... statistics, and [mathematical or graphical] relationships ... applicable to engineering in agriculture." In this paper, "standard" includes all types of standards documents, unless stated otherwise.
5 ASAE was formerly an abbreviation for the American Society of Agricultural Engineers; but now ASAE is the official society name. The society is further identified as "ASAE, the Society for engineering in agricultural, food, and biological systems."
6 To inquire about this or other FIS documents, contact the Florida Irrigation Society, Kathy S. Murphy, Executive Director, P.O. Box 1627 Goldenrod, FL 32733, U.S.A., Phone (407) 678-8119, FAX (407) 678-6494.
7 The Irrigation Association, 8260 Willow Oaks Corp. Dr., Suite 120, Fairfax VA 22031 U.S.A., Phone (703) 573-3551, FAX (703) 573-1913, Thomas H. Kimmell, Executive Director.
8 TC23 covers Tractors and Machinery for Agriculture and Forestry. SC18 covers Irrigation and Drainage Equipment.
9 The concept here is that it is really the affected industry that receives the direct benefit from international standardization. An industry organization desiring to be the U.S. administrator must be receiving substantial benefit (or they wouldn't be seeking the position of administrator, so they should bear some portion of the cost for ANSI, over and above membership dues, etc.
10 In the U.S., standardization is generally a voluntary process (exceptions are in the area of health and safety). No government support is provided for those individuals or organizations involved in standardization. This is not the case with many of the other member countries in ISO. In these countries, standardization activities are carried out by employees of governmental agencies.
REFERENCES
1. ANSI. 1974. Guide for U.S. Delegates to ISO Meetings. American National Standards Institute, New York, NY, 27 p.
2. ASAE. 1991. ASAE Standardization Procedures, Revised April 1991. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, 11 p.
3. ASAE. 1993. ASAE Standards 1993, 40th Edition. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, 785 p.
4. ASAE. 1994. Committee Directory. Pages 202-231 in ASAE 1994 Membership Roster. ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, 242 p.
5. Dedrick, A.R. 1982. Progress Through Standards - Its Dynamic Future, National and International. ASAE Paper No. 82-5544 Presented at the 1982 Winter Meeting of ASAE, December 14-17, 1982, Chicago, IL, 7 p.
6. Dedrick, Allen R. 1986. International Standards for Irrigation and Drainage Equipment - Why Develop Them. ASAE Paper No. 86-5525 Presented at the 1986 Winter Meeting of ASAE, December 16-19, 1986, Chicago, IL, 8 p.
7. IA. 1989. Guidelines for Standards Activities of the Irrigation Association. The Irrigation Association, Fairfax, VA, 9 p.
8. IA. 1993. The Irrigation Association 1993-1994 Membership Directory and Industry Buyer's Guide. The Irrigation Association, Fairfax, VA, 104 p.
9. Murphy, Kathy S. 1994. Personal communication.
10. Penkava, F.F. 1986. New Developments in International Standards. The Irrigation Association's Irrigation News X(4):3-5.
11. Stetson, LaVerne E. 1982. Setting the Standards. Agricultural Engineering 63(5):12-13.
{ page top }
Copyright © 2000. All rights reserved.
CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE - CATI
College of Agricultural Sciences and Technology
California State University, Fresno
