Mounted search and rescue

["IRVIN LICHTENSTEIN" <ilichten1@verizon.net>]

I have been asked to facilitate the development of voluntary consensus standards using the ASTM process for mounted search and rescue. Some of those on the list(s) know me and some of you will want to request copies of my CV.  Please feel free to do so by direct e-mail. 

 

If this process is to succeed we must be civil to each other and adhere to the process. Normally ASTM standards are developed within a specialist committee or sub committee or a task group.  They are discussed and drafts are presented to sub committee or committee level votes.  Negative votes are examined and the document or draft standard is adjusted as the body decides.  It is then re-voted or if the drafting body finds the negative vote not to be persuasive, it reports this to the committee which can sustain or overrule their decision. 

 

In our case there are two open public forums—MSAR Riders which is a general MSAR topic bulletin board and MSAR-ASTM which has been used to discuss the standards drafts.

 

I propose the following process: The drafting group will provide a copy of their proposal to the facilitator who will post same on MSAR-ASTM for comment. Any subscriber, regardless of affiliation or membership in the ASTM may comment via the board, e-mail to me, or by any other means, but preferably in writing.  I will collect these comments and after approximately one month publish on MSAR-ASTM all the comments received, grouped by section or paragraph and the drafting group’s responses to the comments and any revised document(s).  Assuming all negatives are discussed and resolved the document will be scheduled for a sub-committee vote by ASTM F32.02 and the formal ASTM only process will begin.  Once the document has been submitted to an ASTM vote, only ASTM members can vote on the document although you may comment on the document.  Typically a committee schedules vote/negative resolution meetings 2-4 times per year so there is some time between them. 

 

There is the possibility that those whose negatives are overruled by the working group may raise the question again during formal voting.  The comments on the document will support the working group’s findings for the most part if we follow a rational approach to resolving any conflicts.  There will be no rants on the MSAR-ASTM board. There will be no personal attacks on the members or commenters either. 

 

If this is an acceptable arrangement we will commence with posting the first drafts of works in progress for comment on or about Monday, July 2, 2007.

 

If you comment on a document please reference paragraph numbers or section numbers in the posted document.  Any rewriting of the document will probably change the references in the text and make it more difficult to collect the comments on a section by section basis.

 

Irvin Lichtenstein

Ilichten1@verizon.net

215-233-3360 voice

215-233-2343 fax

 

704 Preston Road

Erdenheim, PA 19038-7327