The U.S. adoption of the SI is entered into the Federal Register. I
don't have time to dig out the reference for you but I believe the USMA
website cites it. And also, there is NIST SP 330; as I recall, the FR
entry cites that as the authoritative U.S. adaptation (spellings, etc.).
Jim
On 2011-03-18 1707, Martin Vlietstra wrote:
One trusts of course that the Secretary of State will accept the 1983
definition of the metre.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of [email protected]
Sent: 18 March 2011 21:50
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:50097] COMPETES ACT of 2010
I spent some more time scanning PL110-69 and found in Section 3570:
"Metric System Defined. The metric system of measurement shall be defined
as the International System of Units as established in 1960 ... and as
interpreted or modified for the Unites States by the Secretary of Commerce."
Missing still, are calls in the Act for actual adoption of either "SI" or
the "metric system of measurement." Who will help correct this omission?
At this time, the US has no Secretary of Commerce. He is on his way to
China.
Gene.
---- Original message ----
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:08:19 -0500 (CDT)
From:<[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:50096] Re: Fwd: STEM and Executive Order 12770
To: "U.S. Metric Association"<[email protected]>
I agree, Jim, EO 12770 only implicitly promotes adoption of SI by the
authority of Executive Branch entities to grant or deny funding to
metrication initiatives.
Of more recent interest is the America COMPETES re-authorization Act of
2010
(Public Law 110-69) which is loaded with calls for STEM Education, but it
does not contain even a single mention of SI according to John Steele's
search by topic! This is a major deficiency in my opinion.
However, there is considerable doubt that the US House will appropriate
funds for this Act as it stands, and there is time to amend it to explicitly
recommend (if not require) SI. How can we do this? Another task for Tim
Williamson?
Gene.
---- Original message ----
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 18:34:41 -0500
From: "James R. Frysinger"<[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:50077] Re: Fwd: STEM and Executive Order 12770
To: "U.S. Metric Association"<[email protected]>
Upon more careful reading of Ken Butcher's email, Gene, I believe he is
right. The EO directed agencies to metric, with some wiggle room
provided. That had to do with their internal affairs. It did not call
upon them necessarily to metricate their customers, except to the extent
perhaps of requiring metricated inputs required of industry by the
various agencies.
Thus, for example, the Education Department might require reports by
schools of their classroom floor areas in square meters, but it did not
direct or authorize the Education Department to require the teaching of
the SI in schools. Note, of course, that mandates from the federal
Education Department are a "quid pro quo" situation, less politely known
as extortion. "We won't give you any Title 1 funds unless you ....".
EO 12770 pertained to the operation of federal agencies. It said nothing
about their operations upon us.
Jim
On 2011-03-17 1418, [email protected] wrote:
Here is a reply from Ken Butcher. Unfortunately, he does not seem to
support my (our?) recommendation that SI should be the fundamental (if not
exclusive) language of measurement instruction in STEM Education, or he,
more simply, has the view that the DoC (and NIST) do not have the authority
to "direct" other elements of the Executive Branch to adopt SI. What became
of the "shall" duties of DoC and NIST in Executive Order 12770? EAM,
--
James R. Frysinger
632 Stony Point Mountain Road
Doyle, TN 38559-3030
(C) 931.212.0267
(H) 931.657.3107
(F) 931.657.3108
--
James R. Frysinger
632 Stony Point Mountain Road
Doyle, TN 38559-3030
(C) 931.212.0267
(H) 931.657.3107
(F) 931.657.3108
