BOARD OF CERTIFICATION INPROFESSIONAL ERGONOMICS

THEPROFESSIONALERGONOMISTThe Newsletter of the BCPEBoard of Certification in Professional Ergonomics • P.O. Box 2811 • Bellingham • Washington • USA • 98227-2811 • Phone (360) 671-7601 • Fax (360) 671-7681 • e-mail: BCPEHQ@aol.com • http://www.bcpe.orgSUMMER/FALL, 1999 VOLUME VII NUMBER 2

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 1

ETHICS IN ERGONOMICS: THE SKELETON OFSOCIAL ORDER AND TECHNOLOGICAL VALUESby Dieter W. Jahns, CPE

As the world turns and the passageof time drives us towards a newmillennium milestone in the history ofhumanity, there seems to be a renewedinterest in debating rights,responsibilities and risks in terms of“standards of care” and “rules ofconduct.” The body of these standardsand rules is composed of threestructures which influence individualand societal behaviors:

1. Ethics - the reasoning, judgmentand choices made by individuals inrelation to other people and their wellbeing based on “free will” and “moral”values (e.g., “Do no harm!”)

2. Regulation - a consensus-based,voluntary adoption of procedures andrules to accomplish a common goal(e.g., engineering standards, academicstandards, “best practices” designguidelines)

3. Law - the legislative and judicialrules and theories which are enforceableby government action regarding therights and responsibilities of individuals(both “real” and “pseudo”, i.e. peopleand corporate).

These structures are somewhathierarchical and tend to be of differentsizes and importance among variouscultures and periods throughout history.For example, in times of transition, (asnow from industrial to informationeconomies), standards of conductdeteriorate and absolutes tend to losetheir hold (Dennis, 1990; Toffler, 1980).Conscience and individualresponsibilities are relaxed. As a result,more is expected of the law than whenhigh moral principles prevail. Yet, as

the famous judge Dean Roscoe Poundobserved at the turn of the last century,law is merely the skeleton of the socialorder. The skeleton must be clothed inthe flesh and blood of morality.Similarly, the “regulation” ofcommerce, engineering, agriculture,and other creative human endeavorswaxes and wanes with the balance ofpower among those promoting “self-interest” versus “the common good.”In times and cultures where consensusfor the common good is easilyobtained, fewer regulations will existbecause cooperation is the commonsense of doing things.

Thus, the foundation for socialorder and technological values isethics, with regulation and law servingas secondary, political substitutes. Itwould be a mistake, however, toassume that any ethical problem can besolved simply by pontificating that weshould be more honest, more moral,and/or more caring about each otherand the environment. An ethic is awhole system of moral values thatindividuals or groups follow indeciding how they ought to live, whattheir responsibilities are, and whatthey ought to teach the nextgeneration. Rational people hardlyever live without an ethic or a systemof moral values, and they inherit theirvalues from a previous generation. Aperson or group may decide to switchto a different system, combine differentethical traditions, or even try to createan entirely new ethic (Van Doren,1981).

What are the ethical challengesfacing ergonomists in their professional

endeavors? There is probably a hugediversity of answers to this question, andreaders of this article are encouraged toprovide scenarios, commentary andother feedback to the editor for futurearticles on the topic. For starters,though, consider that ergonomists sharea common interest with engineers intechnology derived from physics,chemistry and the biological sciences; weaugment that with specialized“knowledge concerning thecharacteristics of human beings that areapplicable to the design of systems anddevices of all kinds” and promote “thesystematic use of such knowledge toachieve compatibility in the design ofinteractive systems of people, machines,and environments to ensure theireffectiveness, safety, and ease ofperformance” (HFES, 1999, pg. 1).Given this charter, how safe is safeenough (risk assessment and criteria)?How do we balance rights andresponsibilities of workers whendesigning new devices based on newtechnologies which automate somefunctions? Can crew size reductions beethically justified when they eliminatejobs and/or increase workload of theremaining crew? Is it ethical to makedesign recommendations based on“expert opinion” rather than “empiricalperformance data”? How do we trade-off design, training, selection alternativesin the face of economic and legalpressures to accommodate increasinglydiverse population parameters andefficiency pressures?

Currently ergonomists have fewerregulations, standards and guidelinesthan engineers, medical personnel and

continued on page 4

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 2

NEWS FROM THE MIDYEAR MEETINGDespite weather-related travel

delays, the midyear meeting got offto a good start, beginning with ahalf day strategic planning sessionfacilitated by past BCPE Director,Jerry Duncan. The workshopemphasized a greaterunderstanding of BCPE’s currentreality, a strong commitment to itsfuture vision, and included thedevelopment of a mission andvision statement. BCPE’s mission:to protect the public, theergonomics profession, and itsprofessionals by defining andassuring standards of competency,and advocating the value ofergonomics and certification. Itsvision: for the BCPE to be thepremier ergonomics certifying body,and BCPE certifications accepted asessential for practice acrossapplication domains andspecializations.

Other noteworthy items include:1) The fostering of a formal

collaboration with the AmericanBoard of Industrial Hygiene(ABIH). For those not familiar withABIH, ABIH is the certifying bodyfor the Industrial Hygieneprofession and offers the CertifiedIndustrial Hygiene (CIH)designator. The BCPE feel such analliance will be mutually beneficialto both organizations and willpromote continued growth ofergonomics as a distinct and uniqueprofession.

2) Marketing. A customerneeds/satisfaction survey wasdiscussed and agreed upon.Spearheaded by Marketing ChairAnna Wichansky, the survey hassince been developed anddistributed. Feedback from thesurvey will be used to betterarticulate the benefits of BCPEcertification and to develop astrategic marketing plan.

3) Enhancement of the website.Ideas for improving the website arebeing investigated by Website ChairRon Laughery Jr. Concepts being

explored include offering eachcertificant, free of charge, his or herown web page and creating a jobsearch feature.

4) Election of new directors. BobSmillie, PhD, CPE and DaveAlexander, MS, CPE were each re-elected to serve second, consecutiveterms as BCPE directors. Gary Orr,MS, CPE was elected to fill theposition of outgoing director IanNoy, PhD, CPE. All will serve from

1999 to 2002. Congratulations toBob, Dave and Gary!

News from the Annual BusinessMeeting, just held this September inHouston, will be featured in thenext issue of the newsletter. Yourconcerns, comments and/orsuggestions are always welcomeand appreciated.

The Board of Directors at the 1999 Midyear Meeting in April. From left to right: DavidAlexander, MS, CPE; Kris Alvord, Executive Administrator; Bob Smillie, PhD, CPE; BrianPeacock, PhD, CPE; Anna Wichanski, PhD, CPE; Valerie Rice, PhD, CPE; Carol Stuart-Buttle,MS, CPE; Ian Noy, PhD, CPE. Not pictured: Andy Imada, PhD, CPE; Ron Laughery Jr, PhD,CPE.

We would like to thank theapproximately 600 certificants whoreturned the recent “DatabaseUpdate” form and encourage each ofyou to keep BCPE informed of yourcurrent work and home address.The BCPE cannot know whensomeone moves or changesemployment, and self-reportedchanges minimize staff time andcosts. You can report a change ofaddress by phone, fax or e-mail.

For those certificants whoreported professional designationsother than BCPE’s with their update,we regret we are unable to includethese designations in your listing.We have, however, notated thesedesignations in our records, should itbe decided in the future to includesuch designations in the certificantlistings.

CERTIFICANTS ON THE MOVE

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 3

WHY I CHOSE TO APPLY FOR AND MAINTAIN CERTIFICATIONby Thomas C. Way, CPE

When I was on the HFS ExecutiveCouncil (1983-86), we addressedcertification. Unfortunately, weadopted a tortuous and expensivefocus group methodology todetermine “who we are and what dowe do?” We finally concluded thatcertification was too complex and tooexpensive but maybe should berevisited later. We just temporized.

In 1990, my friend Dieter Jahns,after serving a term on the HFSExecutive Council himself, asked meto work with him at the beginning ofwhat is now called BCPE. But Itemporized. Not that I didn’t supportcertification — I did. I had somemisgivings about capability. Could wepull off what the HFS had not beenable to?

Dieter’s approach was direct. Heassembled a group of outstandinghuman factors people as the firstBoard. They knew who they were andwhat they did. They identifiedergonomic analysis, ergonomic designand ergonomic test and evaluation asthe core themes of our profession. Aqualified human factors practitionershould have training and experience inall three areas but most important,design. They established the Board ofCertification in ProfessionalErgonomics as an independent entityand obtained seed money from HFS.

They launched Phase 1 by settingrequired attainment levels in the threeareas and developing an applicationform for potential certificants topresent their credentials.

I completed one of the forms, wasjudged to have demonstratedsatisfactory credentials in analysis,design and test and evaluation, andbecame Certified ProfessionalErgonomist Number 72. Later, Ihelped evaluate other Phase 1applicants.

Why had I applied and why do Imaintain the certification? First, Iwanted to support certification as asign of maturation of our profession.We had begun to accredit academicprograms that met criteria weestablished. We were working onstandards that communicated humanfactors criteria for good product andprocess design. It clearly was time toestablish and communicate criteria forcertifying qualified human factorspeople.

The processes of accreditation,standardization and certification assistergonomic decision making bycodifying generalizable characteristicsand helping move decision making outof the ad hoc realm.

Second, recognizing the logic andthe potential market for certification,the process needed to be done welland to meet the needs of the North

American human factors profession.Indeed, certification processes wereunderway in Europe and elsewhere.In addition, certification of humanfactors people by human factorspeople might at least reducepreemptive human factors certificationby other professions. E.g., medical,safety, industrial hygiene, computer,military, or aviation organizationsmight attempt to define us in termsthat do not meet our needs. Finally,purveyors of courses, seminars andhome study systems might offerhuman factors certificates byinoculation. “Take our course andreceive a certificate as a human factorsexpert.” None of these potentialcertifiers would have identifiedqualified, rounded, North Americanhuman factors people. It would takean independent body of clearlyqualified human factors people toidentify other people who are alsoqualified in the practice of humanfactors.

Other established achievements,while perhaps positively correlated,would not work either. Academicdegree, academic rank, job title, societymembership or fellowship are grantedfor other reasons and meet othercriteria. What was needed was a wayto identify qualified practitioners.

There were personal reasons toapply for and maintain certification.While I knew that my daytimeemployer would be indifferent to mycertification, they might some daycome around. The BCPE certificationprocess provides an easily appliedscreening device when looking for newmid-career or senior human factorsprofessionals. If those professionalsalready on staff were already certified,it would validate the idea of lookingfor more BCPE certificants.

For some years, I have consultedwith attorneys on human factorsissues. Our state does not have rulesfor who may call themselves, orpractice as, ergonomists or humanfactors professionals. Attorneys andcourts look for such screening devicesand BCPE certification provides that.It is a cumulative thing again. Themore qualified people who arecertified, the more certification isvalidated and used.

So, both for philosophical andprofessional reasons I applied for andmaintain my identity as a CertifiedProfessional Ergonomist with pride.©The New Yorker Collection 1998 Jack Ziegler from cartoonbank.com. All rights reserved.

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 4

LETTER TO THE EDITORRE: The Past & Projected Role of HumanFactors Engineering – (HFE) in thecommercial maritime industry by G.E.Miller, MA, CPE, in the March 20, 1999(page 5) issue of TPE.

The concluding statement in thereferenced article, “Marine orientedHFE specialists do not currently exist,with or without certification,” iscurious, at best, since it appeared in apublication of the organization thatcertifies HFE professionals. It maycome as a surprise, but marine-oriented HFE professionals have beenworking in the commercial maritimeindustry (i.e., “commercial shipping”)for many years, in this country andabroad. And, many have beenproperly credentialed, both fromeducational and experimentalstandpoints. A literature searchwould show that the substantialcontribution of human error tomaritime accidents has been wellknown for decades. In fact, thefederal government, certain stategovernments, and even privateorganizations, have developed majorfacilities and conducted considerableresearch into various aspects of theperson-ship-waterway system (e.g.,including equipment and systemdesign; staffing and operatingprocedures; and training). The U.S.Maritime Administration had an HFER&D program from the 60’s into the80’s; the U.S. Coast Guard has hadHFE professionals on their staff fordecades; the National ResearchCouncil formed multiple committeesover the years to investigate issuesrelevant to the person-ship-waterwaysystem, with publication ofcorresponding reports; and the IMOhas been concerned with aspects ofhuman performance for many years,to the extent they establishedinternational treaties and formed theWorld Maritime University. Elementsof HFE in the maritime industry havebeen the subject of many papers andreports, published in this country andabroad.

Although their numbers may besmall, marine oriented HFE specialistsdo “exist,” and have existed fordecades. Yes, I am one of them; and, Iknow several others.

Sincerely,Thomas J. Hammell, PhD, CHFP

NOTE FROM THE AUTHORDr. Hammell is correct when he

states that HFE professionals haveworked in the maritime industryand it was certainly not my intent tobelittle or ignore those HFEspecialists involved with themaritime industry in the past years.I am familiar with the R&D workfunded by the MaritimeAdministration that Dr. Hammellreferences, and I have worked forand with the USCG in the HFEarena for the past decade. I haveassisted in writing HFE designstandards issued by IMO and mypersonal library contains many HFEreports and papers published in themaritime area. Thus, I canpersonally attest to the pastcontributions made by HFEprofessionals to the maritime world.

What I was attempting to conveyin the article to which Dr. Hammelltook exception, was the scarcity oftrained and accredited HFEprofessionals available to work atapplying existing HFEmethodologies and standards to thedesign of maritime facilities ingeneral, and offshore structures inparticular. This position is based onmy own work history, where I haveworked for every major navalarchitectural company and shipyardin the U.S. for nineteen years andalmost never encountered anotheracademically trained and certifiedHFE specialist working on thedesign of ships or offshorestructures. The position is alsobased on the extreme difficulty Ihave had over the past decade inattempting to find other qualifiedand certified HFE professionals towork for companies in the maritimedesign field, who were desiring tohire such individuals. I know ofcompanies who, after advertising inthe HFES bulletin, using the HFESjob search data base, contactingmany universities with graduateHFE programs listed in the HFESgraduate school listing, callingprofessors and individuals listed inthe HFES directory and asking forreferences, and even advertising inlocal newspapers in areas where

high concentrations of HFEprofessionals were known to exist,have failed to find suitableapplicants for their HFE jobopenings.

As a result of this void of HFEprofessionals capable of working inthe design of maritime equipmentand systems, I have seen personswith backgrounds as mechanical orelectrical engineers, naval architects,ship masters, and even ex-marineinspectors and surveyors representthemselves as specialists in the“human element” area (the termnow used in the maritime industryto denote what we in the HFEprofession would call human factorsengineering). This is not good for thecustomer of HFE services nor ourprofession.

–G.E. Miller, MA, CPE

other professionals who are dependenton technological progress. Consequently,our ethical behavior is vitally importantboth for the growth of the professionand the clients we serve. We promotethe design and use of technology for thecommon good. I hope that professionalergonomists will build an ethicaltradition which can be taught widely tothe present and future practitioners.

ReferencesDennis, J. L. (Sept. 1990). For the

common good: reclaiming our ethicaltradition. Trial Magazine, Washington,D.C.: ATLA, pgs. 55-61.

HFES (1999). Directory and Yearbook:1999-2000. Santa Monica, CA: TheHuman Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Toffler, A. (1980). The Third Wave.New York, NY: Bantam Books.

Van Doren, C. (1991). A History ofKnowledge. New York, NY: BallantineBooks.

Suggested Reading for FurtherDiscussion:

Goodpaster, K. E. (1984). Ethics inManagement. Boston, MA: HarvardBusiness School.

Martin, M. W. and Schinzinger, R.(1989). Ethics in Engineering. New York,NY: McGraw-Hill Inc.

Rabinbach, A. (1992). The HumanMotor. Berkeley, CA: University of CAPress.

ETHICS IN ERGONOMICScontinued from front page

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 5

continued on page 6

CONFESSIONS OF A HUMAN FACTORS PROFESSIONALBook review by Jack Stuster, CPE, AnacapaSciences, Inc., Santa Barbara, California

The Chapanis Chronicles: 50 Yearsof Human Factors Research,Education, and Design. By AlphonseChapanis. Aegean PublishingCompany, Santa Barbara,California (Address: PO Box 6790Santa Barbara, CA 93160;Telephone: 805-964-6669). 1999.ISBN 0-9636178-9-3. 256 pages.Illustrated. Hardcover. $34.00 +$4.50 shipping.

This book documents theprofessional life of AlphonseChapanis, one of the founders ofthe human factors and ergonomicsprofession, and one of thefounders of the Board ofCertification in ProfessionalErgonomics; he holds BCPEcertificate Number 0001. Dr.Chapanis writes in the Prologuethat the purpose of the book is tocapture the highlights of his careerso that he could be reminded ofthem during his retirement, and sohis family might read about someof his accomplishments anddisappointments. This highlypersonal story includes manyextraordinary accomplishmentsand a few disappointments, butthe reader will not bedisappointed.

Alphonse Chapanis helpedcreate the human factors andergonomics discipline beginningwith his studies of pilot error,night vision, and cockpit designduring World War II. He describeshis misgivings about the fast-paced, applied orientation of hismilitary research, and hisrealization that the approach wasnecessary under the conditions:“There was a war to be won.”Chapanis and his survivingcolleagues of the era should takegreat pride in their many

contributions to the designs ofmilitary equipment,procedures, and researchmethods; their pioneeringefforts created the profession inwhich we now work.

In describing the highlightsof his career, AlphonseChapanis provides a history ofthe human factors andergonomics profession from thepersonal perspective of one ofthe central figures in the field.The book is full of interestinganecdotes, such as thecircumstances surrounding thepublication of the first humanfactors textbook, which definedthe field, literally. We also learnof some of his manycontributions to the designs ofitems in widespread use,including the layout of theubiquitous telephone keypad.Chapanis’ discussion of his workfor Bell Labs tells us somethingabout his personality-strongopinions, which he did not hesitateto express-but it also provides areminder of how work wasperformed in the days before thepersonal computer. I had almostforgotten about typing pools andhow much time and energy wasdevoted to the iterative process ofdocument production before theadvent of “word processing.”

As promised in the prologue,the book describes many ofChapanis’ accomplishments, buthe also delivers some personaldisappointments. Among them aredisappointments endemic to ourfield, such as having one’s resumeused in a proposal to win acontract, but never receiving anywork from it, and frequentencounters with managers andengineers who consider humanfactors to be the application of

common sense. But some of hisdisappointments are monumentaland truly sad, especially his forcedretirement from the university heserved for 35 years.

This book is about many things,but more than anything else, it isabout growing old. It is thisunderlying theme that makes thebook both disturbing andimportant to read. Chapanisdescribes his profound sadnessconcerning his hearing loss andfailing health, which finally forcedhim to give up his consultingpractice in 1996. And, the tone ofthe book, occasionally, is that of athird party reconstructing events ofthe distant past from a review ofincomplete documents-as if theevents happened to someone else.In particular, Chapanis frequentlylaments his inability to recall “evena glimmer of recognition” for someof the activities he describes fromhis remaining files. Although these

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 6

passages seemed sad to me, he isnot without humor. For example,he observes that a particularspeech that he cannot remembergiving must have been prettygood, because his notes show thathe was approached afterwards tobecome a consultant to IBMFederal Systems Division - arelationship that lasted for 13 yearsand one that he especiallycherishes.

Chapanis is most enthusiasticwhen describing his special workas liaison scientist to the Office ofNaval Research during the heightof the Cold War. He describes theexcitement of his trips abroad toevaluate special programs and thedanger associated with these secretassignments. Chapanis’ revelationsabout his intelligence work areimportant, if not controversial,contributions to the history of ourdiscipline.

Some readers will findChapanis’s occasional complaintsabout specific individuals to beoffensive, and others might findhis admissions of a failing memoryto be disturbing. However, theseelements of the book are accuratereflections of the man who wroteit. Throughout his career, Chapanishad little patience with those whohe perceived to be functioning inthe “mists of mediocrity,” and heis, in fact, growing older; age andexperience provide a certainlicense to be candid. Further, abook that impels the reader toreflect on his or her own mortality,or to contemplate the swiftpassage of time, provides avaluable service. We are indebtedto the author for many reasons,including this interesting,informative, and thought-provoking book.

Registration of EuropeanErgonomists (CREE) and hasexchanged his CPE for theEuropean Ergonomist, ‘Eur. Erg.’,designation. He is the firstindividual to benefit from thisreciprocity.

Proctors for the BCPE examsdeserve a special “thank you”;these CPEs provide a properenvironment and care for examcandidates while maintaining testsecurity and coordination with theBCPE headquarters staff during afull day in their busy workschedules. Proctors for 1999:Paul Adams PhD CPE, ThomasAlbin MS CPE, Joseph Davis PhDCPE, Andrew Imada PhD CPE,Vincent Ciriello ScD CPE, MaryBrophy PhD CPE, Hal HendrickPhD CPE, William S. Marras PhDCPE, Donald Morelli MSIE CPE,Valerie Rice PhD CPE, CarolStuart-Buttle MS CPE, Jack StusterPhD CPE, and Sheryl Ulin PhDCPE.

Qualifying for Associatecertification by waiver of Part I ofthe exam were:

Steven M. Belz MS AEPKermit Davis III PhD AEPSue A. Ferguson PhD AEPCarol Heffernan MS AEPKaren E. K. Lewis MS AEPKyle A.Wingate MS AEP,Michael S. O’Brien MS AEPThomas Varghese MS AEPThese certificants bring current

totals of BCPE certificants to 751CPE/CHFPs and 67 AEP/AHFPsand 20 CEAs.

Ross Ailslieger MS, Khaled Al-Eisawi MS, Craig Fontaine PhD,Elinor Fulton-Suri MSc, GaryGershzohn MA, Arthur Keller BS,Anil Mital PhD, Donald SchurmanPhD, and Carla Springer PhD areno longer active certificants.

Lastly, it is with deep regret thatwe acknowledge the passing ofJames Buck PhD CPE on June 10th.We extend our condolences to hisfamily.

CONFESSIONScontinued from page 5

CERTIFICANT ROSTERSUMMER 1999

Thirty-nine candidates sat for theBCPE certification exams so far thisyear. Fourteen ergonomistssuccessfully passed the exam toearn the CPE/CHFP credential.One candidate was successful inearning the AEP/AHFP credential.There are 12 new CEAs.

Those passing the Spring 1999exams:

Jon C. Anderson MSIE CPEMarcella K. Bryan MS AEPAwwad J. Dababneh PhD CPEJames W. Dwyer MSc CPECarol J. Heffernan MS CPEMichael S. Grasso MS CPEJ. Murray Gibson MIE CPEKathleen Y. Kawano MS CPEHaniff Mohammed MS CPEKen Nah PhD CPERobert C. Nerhood II MS CPEJerry Purswell PhD CPESandra S. Sellers MS CPEScott A. Valorose MS CPEKurt F. Walecki MS CPE

New Certified ErgonomicsAssociates are:

Gary T. Bagsby MBA CEAJacqueline R. Cartier MBA CEAShonna L. Cole BSEH CEAJodi M. Glunz BS CEAAl K. McCarty CEAMatthew W. Morrissey MBA CEADavid W. Munson BLA CEADonald J. Nanneman MPH CEAPatrick J. O’Brien BS CEAWilliam H. Piispanen MS CEADonald D. Triggs BS CEAKevin C. Weaver PT MA CEA

Carol Heffernan MS CPE, Kurt F.Walecki MS CPE, Robert C.Nerhood II MS CPE, Jerry PurswellPhD CPE, and Scott A. Valorose MSCPE transitioned from AEP to CPEwith fulfillment of the four yearwork experience requirement andpassing Parts II and III of the exam.

Malcom Pope PhD, who is nowliving in Scotland, has takenadvantage of BCPE’s reciprocityagreement with Center for

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 7

The 1998 financial report ofthe Board of Certification inProfessional Ergonomics ispresented here in a “cashbasis” format. As one can see,most of BCPE’s incomederives from certificationmaintenance fees paid bycertificants. Total revenues donot quite meet the totalexpenses. The greatestexpense of salaries, wages,payroll tax results from havingthree part-time employees.Business meeting expensesinclude a midyear meeting inDenver and annual meeting inChicago, with travel expensesand some out-of-pocketreimbursements to Directors,plus the expenditure of theannual Networking Reception.

In 1998 BCPE achievedrecognition by the IRS as atax-exempt nonprofitorganization and was grantedthe 501(c)(6) status. There wasmuch expense generated inthis effort as seen by theaccounting expenses.Unfortunately, attempts toqualify with the USPS for anonprofit bulk mail statuswere not successful sinceUSPS views BCPE as a“business league.”

Statement of Revenues and ExpensesJanuary 1, 1998-December 31, 1998

Revenues:Application Fees $16,220Certificant Maintenance Fees 71,445Directory 125Lapel Pin 30Disk Labels 453Policies, Practice, & Procedures Handbk 45Newsletter 251Exam Retake Fee 480Meister’s ‘The Practice of Ergonomics’ 2,586Miscellaneous 387

Total Revenues $92,022

Expenses:Administrative Salaries & Wages $48,669Payroll Tax, L&I, Unemployment Ins 4,645Office Rent 5,834Office Equipment, Leased 521Maintenance and supplies 1,818Bank charges 1,412Business Meetings 8,312Information Dissemination

Marketing 950Phone/Fax 2,214Printing/Copying 1,171Directory 115Postage/Shipping 2,816Newsletter 1,331Website 1,148

Legal/Accounting 7,322Taxes 1,171Casualty Insurance 277Standards Development & Admin. 3,069Capital Improvements 316Depreciation 292Miscellaneous 1,916

Total Expenses $95,319Excess Expenses over Revenues $3,297

Observations of our treasurer, David Alexander, CPE, are that BCPEhas a relatively stable operation despite an increase in expenses todevelop the CEA, with little income boost from that certification.Changes anticipated for 1999 include salary for one full-time and onehalf-time employee (instead of three part time) with medical insurancebenefits, plus gradual payment of a promissory note to Dieter Jahns,CPE for BCPE development and startup expenses.

BCPE’S 1998 FINANCIAL SUMMARY

S U M M E R / F A L L 1 9 9 9 P A G E 8

THEPROFESSIONALERGONOMISTThe Newsletter of the BCPE

Board of Certification inProfessional ErgonomicsP.O. Box 2811Bellingham, WA 98227-2811USA

Summer/Fall 1999Volume VII Number 2Editor: Thomas C. Way, MA, CPEAssoc. Editors: Steven Casey, PhD, CPEAssoc. Editors: Dieter W. Jahns, MS, CPEExecutive Administrator: Kris AlvordFinancial/Information Systems Manager: Karel JahnsBCPE Directors: Valerie B. Rice, PhD, CPE, PresidentJ. Brian Peacock, PhD, CPE, Vice PresidentDavid C. Alexander, MS, CPE, TreasurerRobert J. Smillie, PhD, CPE, SecretaryAndrew Imada, PhD, CPEK. Ron Laughery Jr. PhD, CPEIan Noy, PhD, CPECarol Stuart-Buttle, MS, CPEAnna M. Wichansky, PhD, CPE

Copyright ©1999, The Board of Certification inProfessional Ergonomics (BCPE), PO Box 2811,Bellingham, WA,98227, USA; phone: 360-671-7601;fax: 360-671-7681; e-mail: bcpehq@aol.com;http://www.bcpe.org. Inquiries regarding editorialcontent, advertising, address changes andsubscriptions may be directed to this address. TheProfessional Ergonomist is published quarterly.

CALENDAR OF EVENTSDecember 6, 1999 BCPE Exam in Anaheim CA prior to the National Ergonomics

Conference and Exposition. Postmark deadline for application:October 6, 1999

March 13, 2000 BCPE Exam in Los Angeles CA prior to the Institute ofIndustrial Engineers’ Applied Ergonomics Conference.Postmark deadline for application: January 13, 2000

April 10, 2000 BCPE Exam at various locations throughout the United Statesand Canada. Postmark deadline for application: February 10,2000

April 2000 BCPE Midyear Meeting

July 2000 (date TBA) BCPE Exam in San Diego CA at the joint IEA/HFES 2000Meeting. Postmark deadline for application: May 2000 (dateTBA)

October 2000 BCPE Annual Meeting