Actually, a very reasonable Class. of Ops., with no industry dissenters, was finally completed during the time Byron was Director. …
Actually, there wasn’t. (But it does depend on one’s potentially self-serving definition of ‘industry’).
The incoming Mr. McCormick tossed it, just as he tossed Byron's directive that mandated government policy on Cost/Benefit justification and outcome based regulation.
That’s because Mr Byron’s directives were all vacuous motherhood statements that reflected existing vacuous government policy. If only he’d published a ‘Directive’ to ‘cut red tape’ as well…
But I could be wrong, and maybe I’m a glass half empty guy as guanty suggests, despite my having been
spot on with nearly every prediction I’ve made in the last decade about the regulatory reform program.
So, time to put up or shut up, 'industry peers':
Please cut and paste into this thread the very reasonable classification of operations rules that have no industry dissenters, all reviewed and written in "plane talk" by a panel of industry peers and free of tortuous legalese.
Please do it or please STFU.
My prediction: You won’t do it, because you can’t do it.
The 'industry’ is
not agreed on an underlying philosophy for classification of operations. Anyone who’s read and understands the implications of the publicly available submissions to the ASSR Panel should already know that.
