DRAFT

Draft

OEOSC Board Meeting

January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m.

Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room

170 South Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113

Present Participants (10/15)

Representing

Voting OEOSC Members

David Aikens

Chairperson (Zygo Corporation)

Sidney Braginsky

Olympus America, Inc., Retired, Alternate

Charles Campbell

OLA (Consultant), Alternate

Walter Czajkowski

APOMA (Edmund Optics)

Marla Dowell

IEEE/LEOS (NIST)

Lincoln Endelman

SPIE (Endelman Enterprises), Alternate

Thomas Germer

NIST

Hal Johnson

Past Chairperson, Director (Harold Johnson Optical Lab)

Gene Kohlenberg

Secretary (OEOSC)

Albert C. Parr

NIST (Alternate)

James Peyton

International Imaging Industry Association

William Royall (by phone)

Treasurer (Eastman Kodak Company)

Ronald Scotti

SPIE

Lee Shuett

Director (Nikon Inc.)

George Steares

Olympus America Inc.

Paul Shumate

IEEE-Leos

William Strackbein

OPIA

Daniel Torgersen

OLA (Walman Optical)

Alan Tourtlotte (by phone)

OSA

Observers (6)

Gordon Boultbee

JDS Uniphase Corporation

Allen Krisiloff

Triptar Lens Co. Inc.

Charles Gaugh

Davidson Optronics, Inc.

John Hamilton

Northrop Grumman

Steven VanKerkhove

Corning Tropel

Trey Turner

Research Electro-Optics, Inc.

Welcome and Introductions:

D. Aikens opened the meeting at 10:25 a.m.

Approval of the Agenda:

M. Dowell moved that the draft agenda stored on the OEOSC website be approved. L. Shuett seconded the motion.

The secretary noted that an item about the Nominating Committee be added. D. Aikens asked that the adoption of ISO

standards also be included. which carried. He also wanted to discuss international standards training. The amended agenda

motion carried.

Approval of August 1, 2005 OEOSC Board Meeting Minutes:

D. Aikens asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes. Al Tourtlotte moved that the draft minutes

be accepted. W. Czajkowski seconded the motion, which carried. Page 2 above scratches. Change 2006- 2007 to 2007

2008.

Reports

Financial Budget. W. Royall good year in terms of expenses.

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

EXPENSES

Expenses

BUDGET MONTH

Account

ACCT #

JAN

FEB

MAR

APR

MAY

JUN

Exec. Director

101

$1,400.00

102

$412.50

$650.00

$475.00

$237.50

$187.50

$450.00

200

$8.37

$3.41

$20.62

$1.20

$45.10

$12.00

Travel

300

$1,307.01

$1,590.25

ISO Trip Support

301

ANSI/TAG Dues

400

$17,750.00

Board Expenses

500

$60.00

$195.00

$48.00

Refresh/Room Charges

501

$293.90

$127.66

Credit Card Fees

502

$29.03

$23.98

Grand Total

$21,260.81

$2,077.39

$2,090.62

$1,766.36

$3,222.85

$1,910.00

Admin. Asst.
Admin. Exp.

EXPENSES

Expenses

Account

ACCT #

JUL

AUG

SEP

OCT

NOV

DEC

Grand Total

Budget

Exec. Director

101

$1,400.00

$1,400.00 $16,800.00 $16,800.00

102

$262.50

$437.50

$225.00

$187.50

$300.00

$359.13 $4,184.13 $4,900.00

200

$24.40

$24.05

$18.39

$4.61

$162.15

$100.00

Travel

300

$1,183.97

$4,081.23 $5,900.00

ISO Trip Support

301

$2,500.00

ANSI/TAG Dues

400

$17,750.00 $17,750.00

Board Expenses

500

$1,000.00

$1,303.00

$450.00

Refresh/Room Charges

501

$421.56

$50.00

Credit Card Fees

502

$1.00

$54.01

$300.00

Grand Total

$1,686.90

$4,045.52

$1,625.00

$1,605.89

$1,704.61

$1,760.13 $44,756.08 $48,750.00

Admin. Asst.
Admin. Exp.

Beginning Savings Bal

$32,721.54

Beginning Check Bal

$11,533.47

2004 checks cleared in 2005

$1,750.00

2005 fees received in 2004

$1,575.00

1/1/2005 RESIDUAL

$40,930.01

2004 Fees Received in 2005

$0.00

2005 Fees Received in 2004

$1,575.00

2005 Fees Received in 2005

$41,789.00

Other Receipts

$19,465.28

Savings Interest

$606.27

EXPENSES

$44,756.08

12/30/2005 RESIDUAL

$59,609.48

$1,759.13

2006 Fees Collected in 2005

$0.00

Transfers from/to Savings

($14,522.80)

Savings Interest

$606.27

Beginning Savings Bal

$32,721.54

CHECKBOOK BAL

$13,518.00

SAVINGS ACCOUNT BAL

$47,850.61

MONTHLY CASH ON HAND

$61,368.61

Checks and fees not cleared

by 12/30/05
Deposits not recorded by

12/30/05

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

D. Aikens asked what the $1,000Board expense covered. The secretary said that was the gift in memory of Harvey

Pollicove. D. Aikens then asked if the room charge account should have a larger budget. The secretary replied that the

charge in January was for the rental of a speaker phone to call D. Aikens, who was stranded because of a winter storm. The

call was to plan how J. Hamilton and W. Royall could teach the scratch and dig training class in place of D. Aikens. The May

charge was for components for the speaker phone connection to G. Kohlenberg's cell phone, which in the future would be

used to avoid excessive hotel conference phone charges.

D. Aikens commented that a year or two ago the Board embarked upon a campaign to financially save this organization

by changing our business model. He was glad to see that this change is working.

BSR/OEOSC OP1.002 Status

This is the scratch and dig standard. The secretary said that he had to resubmit the document for ANSI national

review. The review period ended January 18, 2006. There were no comments so he is now completing the paper work for

final submission for ANSI approval of the standard. D. Aikens asked the secretary when he expected that the standard could

be released. The secretary said that he would probably be able to get the paper work submitted within a week, and he would

expect that the ANSI board would approve it within six weeks.

Policy on Training Reimbursement. The reason this subject came up is because OEOSC was asked to provide the

course at a company site. G. Boultbee wrote a procedure which was placed on the OEOSC web site. When OEOSC is

completely responsible for the course, OEOSC charges the company $5,000 and OEOSC pays the expenses of the presenter.

There is a second path when a company goes to SPIE and asks that the course presented at SPIE conferences be repeated in

house. SPIE then pays OEOSC $2,500 and also pay the expenses of the instructor. There was no negative response to the e-

mail ballot for the adoption of the policy, so this document is now our policy. D. Aikens said that there are two other paths:

when an OEOSC member company self-teaches the course, then that company pays OEOSC $920. For example, G. Boultbee

provided training within JDSU. D. Aikens has done it and J. Hamilton plans to teach it at Northrop Grumman. OEOSC

handout at in-house courses. The original arrangement was to teach the course at SPIE conferences. D. Aikens noted that he

had asked that the honorarium given to the instructor by SPIE could be donated to OEOSC if the instructor could not accept

it. The secretary added that the company who provided the instructor would receive a member fee credit in the amount of the

honorarium.

The secretary was asked to update the policy to reflect the additions.

Other Business

Audit of OEOSC 2004 Finances. L. Shuett said that he is changing assistants and would have the audit within 30

days. Memorial for Joe Oberheuser. G. Kohlenberg reported the death of J. Oberheuser who was from ITT and was

originally the chair of the OSA standards committee. He was influential in the organization of OEOSC, and he wrote the by-

laws. His wife has established a memorial in his honor at the University of Rochester. The Board needs to decide if they

want to make a contribution in his honor. There was a question if there is a precedent for such a contribution. The secretary

replied that a memorial was given for Harvey Pollicove in the amount of $1,000.

M. Dowell moved that $1000 be contributed to Joe Oberheuser memorial. H. Johnson seconded. The motion carried.

Video Projector. L. Shuett moved that OEOSC purchase a video projector so that the meeting material can be viewed

for discussion. J. Hamilton seconded the motion. W. Royall asked if there are restrictions to using a personal projector at a

meeting because the conference venue wants to offer such services for a fee. D. Aikens replied that many heads in the room

were shaking their heads to indicate it would be no problem. The SPIE representative shrugged, however. The motion

carried unanimously.

2007 -2008 Proposed OEOSC Budget. W. Royall presented the proposed budget and compared it to previous years.

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

EXPENSES

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2005

Account

ACCT #

Amount

Exec. Director

101

$16,800.00

$16,800 $16,800

$16,800

102

$7,925.00

$4,388

$5,700

$4,575

$3,800

$3,400

$4,184

$4,900

COM Labor Expenses

103

$7,000

200

$1,933.99

$1,158

$1,375

$1,182

$99

$100

$162

$100

$150

COM Material Expenses

201

$800

Travel

300

$1,983.33

$2,855

$4,970

$2,955

$4,725

$5,300

$4,081

$2,500

$5,900

ISO Trip Support

301

$1,162

$5,000

$1,000

$2,500

ANSI/TAG Dues

400

$30,150.00

$15,750 $19,000

$18,870 $16,250

$16,250

$17,750

$18,790

$19,920

$21,100

Board Expenses

500

$1,279.10

$1,330

$2,427

$464

$311

$500

$1,303

$3,900

$450

Refresh/Room Charges

501

$766

$250

$422

$50

Credit Card Fees

502

$635

$648

$700

$54

$300

$50

Printing Cost

503

$500

Total

$60,071

$42,280 $50,272

$47,409 $42,632

$56,100

$44,756

$48,340

$51,220

$52,400

2004

Budget

2006

Budget 2007 Draft

Budget 2008 Draft

Budget

Admin. Asst.

Admin. Exp.

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

The printing cost is for the new scratch and dig standard, which includes quite a bit of color.

W. Czajkowski asked if there would be significant costs for the upcoming ISO meetings in Boulder, CO. W. Royall

replied that we do not know the magnitude of the meeting costs., but has estimated $3,900 under Board Expenses. M. Dowell

thought it may be around $1,800 because OEOSC and LEOMA will be sharing the costs. NIST will be providing room

arrangements and bus transportation, but can't fund the social event. The secretary reported that M. Dowell and he were

going to look at the components of the cost for the ISO meetings following the Board meeting.

D. Aikens asked if we knew where the ISO meetings would be held in 2007 an 2008. The secretary replied that the

2007 location would be chosen at the end of the 2006 meeting, and the 2008 location would be chosen at the end of the 2007

meeting. London should be the next meeting site, since the last one was in 1998; however, the British delegation is also

having funding problems, and does not know how to fund the meetings. The meetings have been held in Japan twice since the

London meeting. Other meetings have been in St. Gallen, Switzerland; Paris, France; St. Petersburg, Russian Federation; and

Weimar, Germany. D. Aikens asked if the $2,500 ISO travel assistance budget is sufficient. G. Kohlenberg replied that none

of his trips including France, Russia and Japan exceeded $2,500; however, in Japan Harvey Pollicove subsidized several of

the meals. M. Dowell said that her trip to London in the previous year was $3,500. D. Aikens concluded that the $2,500

budget was a good ball park figure, that perhaps is on the low side. W. Royall noted that the ISO meetings may not occur in

both upcoming years. G. Kohlenberg replied that for the past several years the meeting cycle was about 12 months.

D. Aikens asked if expenses, such as for the video projector could be charged to room charges rather than Board

expense. He also asked if the ISO meeting expenses could be segregated. The secretary said that he could create a new

expense item.

D. Aikens asked if the number of corporate members would be stable. The secretary replied that the three are Olympus

America, NIST, and APOMA. He is not aware of any changes. D. Aikens suggested that the training receipts be increased by

$2,500 for 2006 2008 because the release of the new standard will probably increase training interest. The secretary

pointed out that there are only two SPIE classes scheduled for 2006, one at Photonics West and one at Photonics East.

D. Aikens suggested that there should be a built in cost of living increase based on a cost of living index for the

Executive Director starting in 2007. M. Dowell said it could be pegged to the consumer price index. L. Shuett asked the

significance of the note concerning SC 7:

SC 7 documents were 46% of total number of documents processed 1/04 -12/05.

OLA membership includes 46% of Admin. Asst., Admin. Expenses, COM Labor and Mtls.; 20% of

Exec., Travel, Board Exp.; and all of SC 7's portion of ANSI dues.

In 2006 the OLA membership includes 46% of the ANSI 5-year audit of the TAG along with a

$2,500 increase in training receipts.

The secretary replied that in the US the SC 7 activity is handled by ANSI Z80. So the Optical Laboratories

Association pays OEOSC a flat annual fee rather than having each SC 7 member pay an individual fee. The fee is calculated

according to the description in the note (above).

L. Shuett moved that the Executive Directors fee be raised annually by a cost of living index beginning in 2007, and

that the training receipt estimate be raised by $2,500 for 2007 2008. W. Czajkowski seconded. the motion; the motion

carried unanimously.

Passing of James G. Baker and Idea for Honorary . D. Aikens asked A. Tourtlotte to present this item. James

Baker was an internationally known optical expert who died in 2005. There was a long obituary outlining his

accomplishments in OSA's monthly magazine

OPN. A discussion followed concerning honoring Dr. Baker with an optical

unit of measure. No one knew how to start the process for accomplishing the naming of a unit. G. Kohlenberg suggested that

it be added to the agenda of the OEOSC Board for discussion. G. Kohlenberg said that since he also did not have experience

with this process, he contacted Karlhanns Gindele, the administrator of ISO/TC 172. Karlhanns replied as follows:

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

RECEIPTS

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

OLA Membership

$14,144

$11,900

$15,400

$14,500 $12,700

$11,000

$10,900

Company Individual

$9,400

$12,875

$7,726

$7,125

$7,875

$7,975

Self Employed/Academic

$700

$600

$500

$700

$600

Trade Organization

$9,000

$7,000

$2,000

Corporate

$25,000

$15,000

$5,000 $15,000

$15,000

Professional

$3,000

$6,000

$4,000

Sale of Standards

$4,639.00

$350

$140

$168

$182

$350

$2,500

Interest

$85

$606

$500

$600

Training

$19,283

$5,920

$61,244

$58,014

$51,976

$51,365

$41,328 $62,347

$47,345

$49,395

$49,495

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

Dear Gene:

I also have no experience with creating new honorary units. Thinking
about the proposal, I would like to have considered the following:

1) As Michael Jones already mentioned in his mail, the "Baker" would be
an honorary unit rather than a true physical measure. This honorary
"unit", I think, should be more a characteristic quantity (f.e. similar
to the "Strehl" mentioned in Annex C of ISO 10110-5) than a unit.

2) But, first of all there should be a proposal for such a
characteristic quantity, which shall have a close relationship to the
work of Dr. Baker. This might be a quantity describing some important
characteristic of a camera, component or device or a
mathematical/physical equation or a specific design linked with aerial
reconnaissance, instant photography or astronomy.

3) I think the following procedure for establishment might be
appropriate: The proposal should come from some organisation or should
be established or proposed at a conference related to the working field
of Dr. Baker. I think this is at this stage rather a motion, movement or
"flow" than a vote (it must be a bottom-up approach). The vote is done
later by the scientists and experts involved in the field: If the
"Baker" is accepted and used in papers, scientific literature and lab
conversation, the vote is positive. This procedure can strongly be
supported by introducing the "unit" in appropriate International
Standards (international consensus and more binding), f.e. developed by
ISO/TC 172/SC 6 "Surveying instruments" (I copy this mail to the
chairman and secretary of SC 6 for information) or ISO/TC 42
"Photography".

Good luck with your OEOSC annual meeting on Sunday.
Kind regards,
Karlhanns

**********************************************
Dr. Karlhanns Gindele
DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V.
Aussenstelle Pforzheim
Alexander-Wellendorff-Str. 2
75172 Pforzheim
Germany

Tel: +49 7231 / 91 88 22
Fax: +49 7231 / 91 88 33
e-mail:

karlhanns.gindele@din.de

Internet:

www.nafuo.din.de

**********************************************

>>> Gene Kohlenberg

<gene.kohlenberg@toast.net>

13.01.06 16:34:16 >>>

Karlhanns:
I received a message from Alan Tourtlotte of OSA concerning an
honorary unit named for the late James G. Baker. I have added the
subject to the OEOSC agenda for the annual meeting on Sunday, January
22, 2006. Do you know if there is an established procedure for choosing
names for optical units?

Regard,

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

Gene Kohlenberg
OEOSC

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Passing of James G. Baker and idea for honorary unit
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:26:41 -0400
From: Tourtlotte, Alan

<atourt@osa.org>

To: Gene Kohlenberg

<gene.kohlenberg@toast.net>

Hi Gene:,

Would you have any thoughts on this? Please read the string of messages
below. Is this something OEOSC might get invoved in?

Thanks,

Alan
OSA

-----Original Message-----
From: Jones, Michael I [

mailto:michael.i.jones@lmco.com

]

Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 2:15 PM
To: Rogan, Liz; Office of the Exec. Director; Keane, Tony; Awards; New
Idea
Cc:

ken@zemax.com

;

APOCASMAK@aol.com

; Fisher, Robert;

engr@opticalres.com

; Fantone, Stephen

Subject: RE: Passing of James G. Baker and idea for honorary unit

Hi Liz,
I just got off the phone with Dr. Albert Parr, Chief of Optical
Technology at NIST. His counsel was that since the "Baker" would be an
honorary unit rather than a true unit of physical measure, it could be
directly adopted by optical community consensus and would not need ASTM
or ISO standards approval and adoption. So, this may just be as simple
as introducing it for vote at an appropriate upcoming optical design
convention, or even on the OSA website.

Thanks!
Mike

michael.i.jones@lmco.com

+------------------------------------------------+

-----Original Message-----
From: Rogan, Liz [

mailto:erogan@osa.org

]

Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 12:41 PM
To: Jones, Michael I; Office of the Exec. Director; Keane, Tony; Awards;
New Idea
Cc:

ken@zemax.com

;

APOCASMAK@aol.com

; Fisher, Robert;

engr@opticalres.com

; Fantone, Stephen

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

Subject: RE: Passing of James G. Baker and idea for honorary unit

Hi Mike - thanks for the obituary on James Baker. Stephen Fantone,
OSA's Treasurer and OSA staff wrote the attached obituary a few weeks
ago which is on the OSA website.

http://www.osa.org/news/release/07.2005/obit.asp

As for the request to championing a name change to Baker, we don't have
any experience doing this. Please let me know if you have any
experience with this and what the path would be to achieve your goal.

Thanks, Liz
Elizabeth A. Rogan
Executive Director
Optical Society of America
2010 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: 202-416-1484
Fax: 202-416-6130
E-mail:

erogan@osa.org

http://www.osa.org

L. Endelman said that for those who are not familiar with Dr. Baker, he was one of the designers of the Baker camera

which was used during the geophysical year in 1950s. His work was well recognized in the astronomical community. D.

Aikens asked what action was coming before the Board. The secretary said that OEOSC needs to decide if it has a position

concerning the establishment of a unit in honor of Dr. Baker, does it want to take responsibility for moving this idea forward,

or is there another organization that OEOSC would recommend for spearheading the project. He thought that someone on the

SPIE astronomical committee would be very familiar with Dr. Baker's work.

R. Scotti asked if it is something that would be of interest in the SPIE community. L. Endelman replied that it would

be. The Baker camera is only one of a series of astronomical telescopes that he built. R. Scotti said that he was not aware of

any experience in SPIE of establishment of astronomical units in the past, but he could explore how SPIE could be involved.

D. Aikens suggested that the corresponding persons in OSA should also look at the issue. He felt that the OEOSC Board

could not act on the topic unless there were a more concrete proposal before it. A. Tourtlotte asked if a specific proposal

were presented to the OEOSC Board, would it endorse it. D. Aikens said that OEOSC would be happy to take a position for a

specific proposal. He did not think that OEOSC would be making its own proposal but would endorse one presented to it. A.

Krisiloff thought that the professional community needs to spearhead this and that OEOSC would be in the position to use the

unit in a standard after it was established. D. Aikens said that another group is similarly wanting to honor Gary

Sumergrind (sp). L. Shuett suggested that a reconnaissance arena would be a better venue.

Plan for ISO/TC 172/SC 1, 9 meetings in the US in 2006. This was already discussed under the budget item. W.

Royall noted that many activities will occur during the week. He asked if a schedule could be placed on the web site. G.

Kohlenberg said that ISO would be publishing the agenda, and OP meetings would then be scheduled.

TAG Leadership. D. Aikens put this item on the agenda to get this Board to think about leadership of the Tag and

ASC OP. D. Aikens is leading ASC OP until a new person is identified, and W. Czajkowski has been TAG Leader for quite

some time. L. Shuett, the Chairperson of the Nominating Committee said that they had asked Sidney Braginsky, who recently

retired from Olympus USA, to accept the nomination for TAG Leader. Sid had been the ISO/TC 172 international leader for

several years.

The TAG/SC 1 leader needs to be addressed. As the secretariat for the TAG, G. Kohlenberg can appoint the SC 1

leader, but he needs willing candidates. We need to determine how we are going to maintain active participation.. G.

Boultbee said that D. Aikens is doing a fine job as TAG/SC 1 Leader in spite of his self deprecation. For continuity M.

Dowell recommended that D. Aikens fill both roles. D. Aikens responded that his role in this organization has become too

large. It will be easy to break the back of the camel. He is active on many of the work groups, and it is improper for him to

be in the position of leadership for both committees. J. Hamilton asked how quickly this needs to be resolved. D. Aikens said

that it is not urgent, but that we need to be moving toward other leadership.

M. Dowell asked about the history of the leadership positions. D. Aikens said that Harvey Pollicove had been OP

leader and also the TAG/SC 1 leader.

A. Krisiloff said that he is interested in becoming involved in standards activities, but this is his first attendance at an

OEOSC meeting.

S. VanKerkhove said that he has agreed to work on an OP task force, and would consider agreeing to assume the ASC

OP job rather than the OEOSC Chairperson Elect position, that was formerly held by R. Nasca.

M. Dowell said that she is active in ISO/TC 172/SC 9, and felt that others would be more qualified to lead the

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

TAG/SC 1. However, she said that she is interested in becoming more active in OEOSC. G. Kohlenberg said that she could

become Chairperson Elect. S. VanKerkhove said that he liked that proposal. She could act as Chairperson because she is

representing IEEE/LEOS, not NIST.

D. Aikens asked G. Boultbee to consider taking leadership of the scratch and dig task force. G. Boultbee said that he

would be willing to consider that.

G. Kohlenberg said that if S. VanKerkhove were to assume the ASC OP leadership, then D. Aikens could be the

TAG/SC 1 Leader in addition to completing his last year as OEOSC Chairperson.

D. Aikens said that in future years, A. Krisiloff could consider taking the TAG/SC 1 Leader role. That would free D.

Aikens to take on other tasks.

Irvine Valley College, Irvine, CA Request for a Scratch and Dig Talk at the college. G. Kohlenberg said that the

Board needs to decide if we will present an hour talk about optical standards for representatives of companies who send

employees for optics classes. The intent is to inform managers about the importance of scratch and dig standards for their

companies. The request was for the fall of 2005, but the Board asked if the decision could be delayed until this meeting. The

talk would be a shortened version of the training class aimed at urging these company managers that the scratch and dig

standard is important for their commerce. G. Boultbee asked if it would be appropriate to ask the Irvine representative to cull

the slides to help shorten the presentation. G. Boultbee said that he would be willing to make the presentation if he had help

in selecting what aspects of scratch and dig should be included.

W. Czajkowski said that the Board has to be careful about setting the precedent of making such a presentation. Other

colleges may then ask for the same presentation. The Boards needs to consider how closely it wants to guard the course

content. D. Aikens thought that the Board would not get enough benefit from this presentation to make the effort worthwhile.

It would dilute OEOSC's effort to present the full course.

J. Hamilton asked if the student population was known. G. Kohlenberg said that there are a series of companies in his

area who send students for optics training. G. Boultbee said that he understood that the overview for management was to

encourage them to send students to the full four-hour class.

G. Kohlenberg said that in the previous minutes the companies listed were Raytheon, Newport, Northrop Grumman.

L. Shuett moved that OEOSC respectfully declines the request to provide a one hour talk about scratch and dig

standards for Irvine Valley College. M. Dowell seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

Business Models. D. Aikens noted that this was a hot topic two years ago, and the Board has made some progress.

After establishing a training campaign the Board has developed a source of revenue that, combined with our participation

fees, will help sustain OEOSC. However, there were two proposals that still need to be evaluated.

Scratch and dig calculator. D. Aikens asked if everyone had been able to spend a little time with it after

downloading it from the OEOSC website. D. Aikens would like to see the spreadsheet put up on the website. It is a

handy tool to work out the math to determine acceptance or rejection of an optic. D. Aikens questioned whether it

had commercial value. J. Hamilton said that Northrop Grumman offered this tool as something that may draw users

to OEOSC. J. Hamilton said that he would approach Northrop Grumman to see if he can make it available on the

OEOSC web site.

Adoption of ISO Standards as US Standards. This topic was discussed at the OP business meeting. OP

decided that there were a couple of standards worth releasing under the ANSI flag, such as the coating standards.

The secretary was asked to compare the old PH3 standards with the ISO equivalents including the MTF standards

that were originally developed in the US. The documents to be considered are restricted to SC 1 and SC 3. D.

Aikens asked if there were SC 5 or SC 9 documents that could also be considered. The secretary stated that in the

past SC 9 was not interested in participating in OP because they felt that all of their activity was in the international

arena. L. Shuett wondered what the advantages and disadvantages, costs, etc. were for considering SC 5 standards.

There are no US microscopy standards. D. Aikens noted that OEOSC would derive revenue from the sale of US

adopted ISO standards. More importantly by endorsing some standards, we would have the opportunity to not

endorse standards that were unfavorable to the US industry. The secretary reported that recently he received an

inquiry from passed from ISO through ANSI asking why Z80 was not adopting SC 7 standards as national standards.

Charles Campbell explained why they had chosen not to adopt those standards. D. Aikens asked the secretary to

make that information available to the Board. He also asked L. Shuett to explore the possibility with SC 5. L.

Shuett asked if there would be overhead if the standards were adopted. D. Aikens said that he didn't see any unless

the US group decided to modify the document for US sales. Then he would need a committee to handle the

modifications.

J. Hamilton asked if there were ANSI charges associated with releasing these US documents. The secretary

said that formerly ANSI charged a fee in the year after a standard was released, but that seems to have been rolled

into the new continuing fee that is charged for audits. For the record, D. Aikens didn't think that this portion of the

business model will generate large revenue, but it may be a service that we would like to provide.

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt

OEOSC Board Meeting, January 22, 2006 10:15 a.m. 1:00 p.m., Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South

Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113, Continued

Election of Officers:

A. Tourtolotte presented the list of candidates for the 2006 election.

Chairperson-Elect - Steven VanKerkhove, Corning Tropel

Secretary - Gene Kohlenberg, OEOSC

Director - Walt Czajkowski, APOMA/Edmund Optics

S. VanKerkhove nominated M. Dowell to be Chairperson Elect. M. Dowell accepted the nomination. He withdrew his

name from consideration as Chairperson Elect.

There then was a discussion about voting rights on the Board. D. Aikens was concerned because at times there is not a

quorum at meetings, so no votes can be taken. With teleconferencing now available, all voting members should be able to

participate. He thought that the way the Board is formed should be reviewed to eliminate the problem of not meeting a

quorum. The secretary replied that the problem of attendance should be addressed, rather than changing the structure of the

Board. A. Tourtlotte agreed with that assessment.

D. Aikens asked for a vote for the slate. The slate was elected unanimously.

Nominating Committee:

The secretary stated that the Chairperson of the Nominating Committee has to be either a Director, or a representative

of a Professional Society or Trade Organization. D. Aikens appointed W. Czajkowski to be Chairperson, with H. Johnson,

and L. Shuett makeup the rest of the committee.

Biophotonic Workshop: M. Dowell made a brief presentation concerning the workshop that was being held during

Photonics West. She invited meeting participants to get More information concerning the US Measurement System at

http://www.USMS.nist.gov.

Next Meeting:

D. Aikens asked if the Board wanted to hold only one meeting a year. A. Tourtlotte proposed that the Board hold the

Annual Meeting in person and then hold an additional meeting by phone. D. Aikens asked the Secretary to arrange a phone

meeting in June or July. M. Dowell moved that the Board hold a phone conference in July and that the Annual Meeting be

held in San Jose, CA at 10:15 a.m. on January 22. 2007. H. Johnson seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Adjournment:

As there was no further business to come before the Board, A. Tourtlotte moved that the meeting be adjourned. W. Royall

seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 12:45 p.m.

05/02/05 09:42:17 PM

Minutes OEOSC Board 1-22-06.odt