The CIPM MRA: Why was it needed and how did we persuade Directors of NMIs to sign it?

Transcription

1 The CIPM MRA: Why was it needed and how did we persuade Directors of NMIs to sign it? Terry Quinn Director of the BIPM Deputy Director Oxford English Dictionary definition of persuade: cause to do something through reasoning or argument

2 The Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) set up by the Comité international des poids et mesures (CIPM) and originally signed on 14 October 1999 by the Directors of the National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) of 38 States signatories to the Metre Convention and two international organizations. The CIPM MRA has now been signed by the representatives of 200 institutes from 70 countries

3 Why, when we already had the Metre Convention, was it necessary to draw up the CIPM MRA? First a little bit of history: The Metre Convention, an intergovernmental treaty, was signed in Paris on 20 th May 1875 by the representatives of seventeen States. The origins of the Convention lie in the growth of international trade in manufactured products in the middle of the 19 th century and the consequent need to have some formal agreement related to units of measurement. The intergovernmental organization created by the Convention was the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (BIPM) situated at the Pavillon de Breteuil in the Parc de Saint Cloud.

4

5

6 BIPM is overseen by an International Committee for Weights and Measures known by the acronym of its name in French, the CIPM. The CIPM has ten Consultative Committees, now covering all fields of metrology The CIPM reports to member States through a General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM) which now meets in Paris every four years, most recently in 2007.

7 H.-J. Chaney R. Thalén A. Hirsch (secrétaire) B.- A. Gould A. Arndtsen H. Wild J.-R. Benoît (directeur) St.-C. Hepites L. de Bodola W. Foerster (président) J. Bertrand H. de Marcedo Comité international des poids et mesures (CIPM), septembre 1894

8 P. Giacomo (Director Emeritus,French) J. McLaren (Canadian) W. May (American) B. Inglis (Australian) H. Ugur (Turkish) TJQ (Director Emeritus, British) A. Sacconi ( Italian) S. Bennett ( British) L. Erard ( French) F. Hengstberger ( South African) L. Issaev ( Russian) J. Valdes ( Argentinian) W. Schwitz ( Swiss) R. Kaarls (Secretary, Dutch) E. Göbel (President, German) Gao Gie ( Chinese) M. Tanaka ( Japanese) H. Nava Jaimes ( Mexican) A. Wallard ( Director, British) CIPM October 2008

9

10 At the beginning the BIPM was concerned only with the metre and the kilogram but it was soon necessary to include thermometry in order to deal with the thermal expansion of the platinum/iridium metre bar. Over the succeeding century the BIPM extended its activities and by the end of the 20 th century all areas of metrology were included, either directly or through Consultative Committees of the CIPM.

11 CGPMs from the 1st in 1889 to the 23nd in 2007 and the evolution of the Metre Convention and the work of the BIPM 1875 Length, mass Curie Electricity temperature radium std Photometry The BIPM a scientific institution Extension of the Convention Practical and legal metrology? Ionizing radiation Time Chemistry / The SI Large investment in new laboratories, extension of the site New buildings, metrology in chemistry, biotechnology, medicine etc? creation of CCQM 1999 CIPM MRA

12 Meanwhile, in almost all countries scientific institutions had been created to provide national measurement standards and to support national needs for accurate and reliable measurement. These institutions are now known as National Metrology Institutes (NMIs).

13 National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) USA Founded in 1901 NIST is a non-regulatory federal agency within the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST's mission is to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life. From NIST website May 2009

14 NIST's 2009 resources total $1.6 billion ($1.6 x 10 9 ). (of which about 765 million for NIST labs) The agency operates in two main locations: Gaithersburg, Md., (headquarters 234-hectare/578-acre campus) and Boulder, Colo., (84-hectare/208-acre campus). NIST employs about 2,900 scientists, engineers, technicians, and support and administrative personnel. Also, NIST hosts about 2,600 associates and facility users from academia, industry, and other government agencies. In addition, NIST partners with 1,600 manufacturing specialists and staff at about 400 MEP service locations around the country. From NIST website May 2009

15 PTB Germany Organization: Sites: Staff: Structure Annual budget: Tasks: Historical: Highest technical authority under the auspices of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWI) Braunschweig, Berlin-Charlottenburg 1800 staff members Nine scientific and technical divisions (two of them in Berlin), subdivided into more than 100 sections and projects about 130 million Euro Fundamentals of metrology, metrology for economy, metrology for society, international affairs Historical: Founded in 1887 as the Physikalisch-Technische Reichsanstalt on the basis of the ideas of Werner von Siemens and Hermann von Helmholtz and on their joint initiative From PTB website May 2009

16 Finland MIKES building The new premises offer top level conditions for our operations. Total staff: 77 Administration: 14 MIKES Laboratories: 45 FINAS : 18 Annual budget 5 million euros x X This figure not on website From MIKES website May 2009

17 Just as a matter of interest we note that for 2009 For USA: NIST (labs appropriations) 42 ppm of GDP For Germany: PTB budget 36 ppm of GDP For Finland: MIKES budget 18 ppm of GDP.

18 From the beginning, one of the important activities of the BIPM was the carrying out of international comparisons of national standards. In the early days these were mostly among the so-called grands laboratoires namely the PTR (Germany) the NPL(UK) and the NBS(USA) On the basis of the results of these comparisons, which over the years included more and more NMIs and more and more types of standards, international consistency of national measurement standards was assured.

19 So now we come to why an MRA was needed

20 In the 1980s bi-lateral agreements started to be signed between the NBS and other NMIs. The reason for these agreements was that there were increasing demands for specific documented demonstrations of equivalence between national standards. In particular, American regulators and even companies were requiring foreign partners to demonstrate traceability to NBS for all of their measuring equipment. The long-standing series of comparisons carried out under the auspices of the BIPM were not considered sufficient to meet these requirements. What to do?

21 In 1986 the bureau of the CIPM proposed to the CIPM that these bi-lateral agreements should be somehow brought under the auspices of the BIPM and if necessary new comparisons carried out. The CIPM did not agree.

22 CIPM 1986

23 But two other important influences in international metrology were appearing at about the same time: (a) the development of national calibration services made up of accredited calibration laboratories traceable to the NMI and the accompanying organizations for accreditation which started to call for accreditation of NMIs or some scheme to demonstrate international equivalence of NMI calibration certificates. (b) The creation of regional groups of NMIs, in Europe EUROMET, in Asia Pacific region APMP and in North America NORAMET and for the whole of the Americas SIM.

24 Pressure began to build up for the international metrology community to respond to these developments From the beginning it was clear that one of the main problems would be to find a scheme that would attract the participation of all NMIs from the largest to the smallest, because a scheme that did not have unanimous support would be worthless. I come now to the timeline of what actually happened over the thirteen years from 1986 to This is an abridged version of course as very many discussions took place and not all can be mentioned here.

25 March 1986 first discussion on implications of bilateral agreements on mutual recognition of SI realizations October 1990 CIPM decides not to put the draft Resolution to the 19 th CGPM proposed by the bureau 1980s 1990s Bilateral agreements October 1986 CIPM decides they do not concern the BIPM World wide traceability of calibration requires NMI comparability : calls for NMI accreditation October 1993 CIPM considers a draft scheme for using BIPM and Consultative Committee comparisons as the basis for a formal world wide traceability October 1992 CIPM decides that BIPM should seek a broad role in international traceability of measurements and standards first step towards CIPM MRA October 1994 CIPM adopts a draft Resolution for the 20 th CGPM World wide traceability of measurement standards

26 CIPM 1990

27 March 1986 first discussion on implications of bilateral agreements on mutual recognition of SI realizations October 1990 CIPM decides not to put the draft Resolution to the 19 th CGPM proposed by the bureau 1980s 1990s Bilateral agreements October 1986 CIPM decides they do not concern the BIPM World wide traceability of calibration requires NMI comparability : calls for NMI accreditation October 1993 CIPM considers a draft scheme for using BIPM and Consultative Committee comparisons as the basis for a formal world wide traceability October 1992 CIPM decides that BIPM should seek a broad role in international traceability of measurements and standards first step towards CIPM MRA October 1994 CIPM adopts a draft Resolution for the 20 th CGPM World wide traceability of measurement standards

28 CIPM 1992

29 March 1986 first discussion on implications of bilateral agreements on mutual recognition of SI realizations October 1990 CIPM decides not to put the draft Resolution to the 19 th CGPM proposed by the bureau 1980s 1990s Bilateral agreements October 1986 CIPM decides they do not concern the BIPM World wide traceability of calibration requires NMI comparability : calls for NMI accreditation October 1993 CIPM considers a draft scheme for using BIPM and Consultative Committee comparisons as the basis for a formal world wide traceability October 1992 CIPM decides that BIPM should seek a broad role in international traceability of measurements and standards first step towards CIPM MRA October 1994 CIPM adopts a draft Resolution for the 20 th CGPM World wide traceability of measurement standards

30 20 th CGPM 1995 Resolution 2

31 October 1995, 20th CGPM adopts Resolution 2 and CIPM asks Presidents of Consultative Committees to consider equivalence of national standards and asks Bill Blevin to report on long terms needs for international metrology. July 1996 Report sent to Directors of NMIs and CIPM with an outline proposal. NIST counter proposal with gateway NMIs in each region September 1996 CIPM discusses Blevin s Report on Long-Term needs for metrology; key comparisons and equivalence, agrees to more discussions and a meeting of Directors of NMIs on 17 and 18 February October 1995 to July 1996 TJQ and W. R. Blevin meet with ILAC, EAL, EUROMET, APMP, NORAMET, CCs and NMIs to identify needs. February, Presidents of ILAC and EA (Bob Kaarls) visit TJQ and emphasize need for action September TJQ presentation at an ILAC General Assembly Amsterdam hears strong views from ILAC on the need for NMIs to do something October TJQ presentation at an APEC Conference in the Philippines 7/8 October 1996 TJQ meets with representatives of RMOs at the APMP General Assembly in Philippines: RMO MRAs about to be drawn up; he proposes world wide MRA; is given one year to do something.

32 6 February 1997, 1 st draft of the CIPM MRA

33

34 Thursday 6 February st draft of CIPM MRA (2 pages only!) Monday17/Tuesday18 February 1997, first meeting of Directors of NMIs, 2 nd draft MRA presented to Directors of 38 NMIs; lively discussion but not rejected! Directors agree the principle of a world wide CIPM MRA as better than multi bilateral agreements or linked RMO agreements; revised draft requested. 6 March 1997, 3 rd draft sent to Directors; many comments and suggestions 19 August 1997, 6th draft sent to Directors; further comments and suggestions (still refers to SI value but no JCRB yet) 1997 Friday14 February 1997, 2 nd draft of CIPM MRA 2 April1997, 4 rd draft sent to Directors; more comments 18/19 August 1997, 5 rd draft discussed at meeting of representatives of. APMP, EUROMET, SIM and EA September 1997, CIPM adopts 7 th draft and agrees next meeting of Directors for February 1998 and creates the Joint Committee of the RMOs and the BIPM, JCRB (no reference to SI value).

35 1 st of ten slides presented to Directors

36 2 nd slide

37 RMO participation but not yet a JCRB

38 6 February st draft of CIPM MRA (2 pages only!) 17/18 February 1997, first meeting of Directors of NMIs, 2 nd draft MRA presented to Directors of 38 NMIs; lively discussion but not rejected! Directors agree the principle of a world wide CIPM MRA as better than multiple bilateral agreements or linked RMO agreements; revised draft requested. 6 March 1997, 3 rd draft sent to Directors; many comments and suggestions 19 August 1997, 6th draft sent to Directors; further comments and suggestions (still refers to SI value but no JCRB yet) February 1997, 2 nd draft of CIPM MRA 2 April1997, 4 rd draft sent to Directors; more comments; NIST again proposes as an alternative a Gateway model between regions 18/19 August 1997, 5 rd draft discussed at meeting of representatives of. APMP, EUROMET, SIM and EA September 1997, CIPM adopts 7 th draft and agrees next meeting of Directors for February 1998 and creates the Joint Committee of the RMOs and the BIPM, JCRB (no reference to SI value).

39 February 200 1

40 Mutual Recognition Arrangement National Metrology Institutes national key calibration quality supplementary measurement comparisons measurement systems comparisons to standards capabilities support calibrations Consultative Committees RMOs BIPM Regional Metrology Organizations (RMOs) results submissions Consultative Committees degrees of equivalence MRA appendix B J C R B (Joint Committee of the RMOs and the BIPM) MRA appendix C calibration measurement capabilities Key comparison database

41 23 February 1998, 8 th draft drawn up at Directors meeting and initialled by all those present except one, Directors of 39 institutes from 36 Member States; the NIST representative declined needing further discussions February 1998, first meeting of the JCRB February to July 1998, many discussions between NIST, US State Department and BIPM. Final agreement with NIST seemed to be reached with 9th draft on 21 July 1998 which is sent out to Directors. Director of NIST s initials on 21 July 1998 draft finally received on 30 December During the period February 1997 to August 1999 TJQ makes many visits ( about fifty) to NMIs and to take part in RMO meetings to discuss technical details of MRA with scientific staff and Directors of NMIs, in particular much discussion and disagreement. about key comparison reference values. Also many discussions among members of the CIPM bureau

42 Initials of 38 of 39 Directors present Page 1 of 7

43 23 February 1998, 8 th draft drawn up at Directors meeting and initialled by all those present except one, Directors of 39 institutes from 36 Member States; the NIST representative declined needing further discussions February 1998, first meeting of the JCRB February to July 1998, many discussions between NIST, US State Department and BIPM. Final agreement with NIST seemed to be reached with 9th draft on 21 July 1998 which is sent out to Directors. Director of NIST s initials on 21 July 1998 draft finally received on 30 December During the period February 1997 to August 1999 TJQ makes many visits ( about fifty) to NMIs and to take part in RMO meetings to discuss technical details of MRA with scientific staff and Directors of NMIs, in particular much discussion and disagreement. about key comparison reference values. Also many discussions among members of the CIPM bureau

44 Air France Concorde over the Atlantic at Mach 2.03 and 18 km altitude on 7 March 1999 en route for New York, (photo TJQ)

45 19 th and 20 th January 1999 Key Comparison discussion meeting for members of the scientific staffs of NMIs April1999, final text sent to printers and to Directors with invitation to the meeting on 14 October during 21 st CGPM at which the MRA will be signed by Directors 7July letter from NIST with objections to certain parts of the text; more discussions with final agreement reached between TJQ and Karen Brown, Deputy Director of NIST, during NCSL and JCRB meeting in Charlotte NC on 14 July 1999 February nd meeting of the JCRB, further discussions of fine details of the text of the MRA and calibration and measurement capabilities, preparation of BIPM key comparison database in consultation with NIST. 21 July1999 new final text sent to printers and to Directors 30 November 1999 BIPM Key Comparison Database (KCDB) first goes on line. 14 October 1999 CIPM MRA signed at the College de France by the Directors of 38 NMIs and two international organizations

46

47 19 th and 20 th January 1999 Key Comparison discussion meeting for members of the scientific staffs of NMIs April1999, final text sent to printers and to Directors with invitation to the meeting on 14 October during 21 st CGPM at which the MRA will be signed by Directors 7July letter from NIST with objections to certain parts of the text (copied to all Directors); more discussions with final agreement reached between TJQ and Karen Brown Deputy Director of NIST during NCSL and JCRB meeting in Charlotte NC on 14 July 1999 February nd meeting of the JCRB, further discussions of fine details of the text of the MRA and calibration and measurement capabilities, preparation of BIPM key comparison database in consultation with NIST. 21 July1999 new final text sent to printers and to Directors 30 November 1999 BIPM Key Comparison Database (KCDB) first goes on line. 14 October 1999 CIPM MRA signed at the College de France by the Directors of 38 NMIs and two international organizations

48

49

50

51

52

53 Acknowledgements; Many people contributed to the establishment of the CIPM MRA: the Directors of the NMIs who, from the first meeting in February 1997, strongly supported the idea in principle, the scientific staffs of the NMIs who strongly criticized but ultimately supported key comparisons and key comparison reference values and who eventually actually carried out the key comparisons, senior people in the Regional Metrology Organizations, individually and later in the JCRB, and also ILAC and EA who urged me to do something and who had many constructive suggestions, the staff of the BIPM for their advice and help and understanding during my many absences, and particularly Dieter Kind and Jean Kovalevsky (successive Presidents of the CIPM) and Bill Blevin Secretary of the CIPM without whose wise guidance and continual support and it would not have been possible to reach a successful conclusion.