NOTICE OF DECEMBER 15 COMMITTEE CALL &
DRAFT MINUTES, 11/28 SMART Building Product Committee Call

Introduction.  It was explained that two objectives need to be achieved in today's call, first, addressing negative votes of voters that declined to defend their negative vote before the Committee.  And second, scheduling a Committee meeting for two negative voters wishing to defend their votes.

Resolution of Negative Votes For Voters Declining to Defend Vote Before Committee.  These negative votes were all form letters instigated by the American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA)/Sustainable Forestry Initiative which sent them to many other trade associations.  None of the negative voters ever contacted MTS about the Standard to inquire if the form letters were valid.  All negative voters were provided in writing by MTS, the reasons their negatives were viewed as nonpersuasive and given the opportunity to defend their negatives before the Committee.  None of the groups of negative voters individually or collectively described below, requested to defend their negative vote before the Committee.  All of these voters were contacted in writing and given this opportunity.

The negative votes were grouped into the three categories in the call agenda below:  1. wood industry, 2. chemical industry & 3. Georgia Pacific.  Lou Newett  suggested that each group be handled separately.  

None of the negative voters from the wood industry responded to MTS' request to initiate an Activity/Process immediately in December to resolve the very destructive wood industry competing standards problem.  In contrast, representatives from the State of Wisconsin and Province of British Columbia withdrew their negatives supporting such a Process.  Compelling evidence transmitted to the Committee from World Wildlife Fund indicates that FSC is the superior standard including environmentally, and is well recognized as having driven all sustainable certified wood improvement for the past 15 years.  Also, the wood industry provided misleading comments that due process procedures were not followed because they allegedly were not notified even though ANSI Essential Requirements state that notice to affected parties is provided through suitable media which was done both for the Standard Organizational Meeting hosted by the City of Chicago and Perkins+Will and the SMART National Public Meeting hosted by USG and Sponsored by AIA, USG, CitiGroup, USGBC Chicago, State of Illinois, Bosch, Knoll & MTS.  ANSI and due process do not require that every potentially affected party specifically be notified.  This would make all Standards processes impossible to conduct because there are millions of potentially affected parties.

Ginny Dyson made a motion seconded by Rik Master, that as recommended by Committee Officers, the wood industry negative votes as summarized below are ruled nonpersuasive.  The motion was approved unanimously.

The chemical industry made many false claims about the Standard unsupported by any evidence whatsoever, and thus Lou Newett made a motion seconded by Ginny Dyson, that as recommended by Committee Officers, the chemical industry negative votes as summarized below, are nonpersuasive.  The motion was approved unanimously.

Georgia Pacific alleged that the formaldehyde requirements are not transparent, but did not provide any evidence.  To the contrary, the Standard requirements are incorporated from state law, enumerated in parts per billion (ppb), and account for naturally occurring formaldehyde concentrations in ppb levels in wood.  Rik Master made a motion seconded by Deborah Dunning that as recommended by Committee Officers, this negative is ruled nonpersuasive.  The motion was approved unanimously.

Weyerhaeuser's & AF&PA's Requests to Defend their Negative Votes Before the Committee.  AF&PA was instructed in the written response to its negative vote and verbally, that pursuant to MTS' Industry Trade Association Policy, AF&PA's participation in this process is encouraged but must be through one or more of AF&PA's Members, and AF&PA was asked to identify its Member representative(s).  AF&PA was reminded of this policy that it was not adhering to and told that it must provide written notice of its designated representative(s) if it wishes to participate including in the Special SMART Committee Meeting of December 15.

Two lengthy conversations were conducted with Weyerhaeuser regarding its negative including with Steve Castellanos, MTS & AIA Director.  Weyerhaeuser's negative was based on its misleading comment that there was alleged lack of notice as described above in the Committee ruling that the wood industry negative is nonpersuasive.  Weyerhaeuser refuses to participate in a Process to provide mutual recognition or equivalent of the competing standards unless approval of the SMART EMERGENCY Standard was put in abeyance while the Process was conducted, even though Weyerhaeuser admitted that this Process would be very political, controversial, difficult, and time consuming which reflects the nature of the competing wood standards.  The Committee decided and communicated in writing to Weyerhaeuser that Weyerhaeuser's offer does not meet the needed good faith test for conducting the Process which requires that it be initiated immediately in December as part of the Standard first amendment.  

The Committee decided to conduct another Meeting on December 15 at 3:00 ET in response to Weyerhaeuser's request to defend its negative vote and to send an invitation to Weyerhaeuser.

The Committee call was adjourned.

Participants

Ginny Dyson, DMJM
Lou Newett, Knoll, Committee Vice Chairman

Deborah Dunning, IDCE
Ben Taube, GreenGuard
Rik Master, USG
Leanne Tobias, Malachite, LLC
Ralph Bicknese, Hellmuth+Bicknese, Committee Vice Chairman (proxy assigned to Ginny Dyson)
Eric Freed, Organic Architect, Committee Vice Chairman (proxy assigned to Ginny Dyson)
Michael Bohn, Bosch, Committee Vice Chairman (proxy assigned to Deborah Dunning)
Dan Winters, Evolution Partners (proxy assigned to Deborah Dunning)
Doug Pierce, Perkins+Will (proxy assigned to Mike Italiano)
Katherine DeMatteo, DeMatteo Consulting (proxy assigned to Mike Italiano)
Doug Barker, Barker & Scott (proxy assigned to Lou Newett)
Mary Ann Lazarus, HOK (proxy assigned to Lou Newett)
Mike Italiano, MTS

SMART Building Product Committee:

We'll have a SMART Building Product Committee call on Tuesday November 28, 3:00 ET to vote to hold negative votes as nonpersuasive as decided by Committee Officers:  605-772-3001 Code 70369#

These votes were from form letters instigated by the American Forest and Paper Association's Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) due to SMART's specification of FSC Certified Wood as sponsored by 60 environmental groups. 

As sent to you in documents attached to the email below, World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the World Bank concluded that FSC is the best wood certification system from an on the ground analysis compared to the industry led certifications. 

Two of the voters, the State of Wisconsin and Province of British Columbia, withdrew their negative votes in return for MTS initiating a process to resolve the dispute/brand warfare among the competing certified wood brands.  To be effective, establishing this process is conditioned upon the need for a leading forest product company to withdraw its negative and participate as well in this process. 

We have repeatedly asked these companies and many associations to participate over the years including this year as it relates to the SMART Flooring and Building Products Standards, but heard no response.  Steve Castellanos and I are in discussions with the largest forest products company about withdrawing its negative to participate in a process to resolve the brand disputes and we'll let you know if our discussions are fruitful.

The negative votes are as follows and we recommend the Committee hold them nonpersuasive since they are false:

• FORM LETTERS OF:  American Forest & Paper Association/SFI/Canadian Standards Association/Engineered Wood Association
  
• There was improper notice and due process.  Proper notice and opportunity to participate was provided to affected parties consistent with ANSI Essential Requirements.
• Wood Industry certification schemes should also be recognized.  This is nonpersuasive since no companies wish to help MTS resolve the FSC/SFI/CSA brand warfare over a $trillion North American market which causes market confusion, harms the competitive advantage of the wood industry, and impedes much needed progress on illegal logging and global deforestation.  The market trusts the FSC label the most and FSC has caused all global improvement in sustainable forestry for over 15 years which needs to continue.
  
• FORM LETTERS OF:  American Chemistry Council/Vinyl Institute/American Plastics Council/Wallpaper Association/Molders Association/Chemical Fabrics & Films Association
  
• Cost Prohibitive.  This is false since many companies have already certified, helped develop SMART and its certification and auditing scheme, and voted for it unanimously in four SMART Ballot votes.
• Alternative certification schemes are necessary.  This false since the SMART certification scheme is very rigorous and consistent with ANSI Essential Requirements, and has been unanimously approved in four SMART Ballot votes.
• The Scope of the Standard is unclear and can't cover all building products and materials.  This is false because the scope clearly states it covers all products and materials in the whole building environment, and no bona fide reasons were given why it can't.  All issues in the standard are relevant for any product.
  
• Certifying manufacturers should not publicly disclose the basis of their certification.  This is false since a publicly disclosed summary of the nonproprietary basis of the certification increases the transparency, credibility and validity of the certification and has been unanimously approved in four SMART Ballot votes.
  
• Insufficient weight to LCA.  This is false since the Standard requires LCA and is LCA based, and the LCA scheme has been unanimously approved in four SMART Ballot votes.
• Overly and unnecessarily burdensome.  This is false since manufacturers help develop and approve the standard, are certifying to SMART and California Gold Standards, the minimum certification points are reasonable, and these requirements have been unanimously approved in four SMART Ballot votes.
• Standard doesn't address global climate change.  This is false since the greatest number of points in the Standard are awarded for climate change pollution reductions.
• Georgia Pacific:  Formaldehyde requirements are not clear and transparent.  This is false since the Standard incorporates the State of California's 1350 Formaldehyde Requirements, as also approved in the SMART Flooring Standard Ballot.
  

The negative voters have been contacted to see if they wish to defend their negative votes before the Committee on this call.  Please contact me ASAP if you object to holding these negatives nonpersuasive, and no later than Tuesday November 21.  Please confirm your participation on the call at your earliest convenience.  Thanks!  With best regards,



Mike
202-338-3131

MTS wrote:

SMART Building Product Committee:

Jason Grant with the Wood Floor Resource Group, kindly sent me the attached documents from WWF providing its evidence that FSC is the superior sustainable forestry certification scheme consistent with SMART's inclusion of FSC. 

Jason provided a very strong leadership role in 2002 in the development of MTS' Sustainable Forestry Paper that led to the LEED License Agreement with Canada.  With best regards,



Mike
202-338-3131

MTS wrote:

SMART Building Product Committee:

We received several negative form letter votes regarding the sustainable wood issue (see attached).  We need to respond to these voters with our position and offer them the opportunity to participate in our decisionmaking if they wish.

In short, the comments suggest incorrectly that we did not follow proper procedures, and that we should recognize the wood industry's sustainable forestry program.  SMART recognizes FSC Certified Wood which is supported by 60 environmental groups.

Our response below has been reviewed by the Committee Officers.  Please provide your comments on this response by Monday November 13.  Thanks!  With best regards,



Mike
202-338-3131

MTS Response to Timber Products

Appropriate due process procedures have been followed in the year long development of this SMART© Standard.

Consistent with MTS' policy for the last 5 years as shown in the attached MTS Sustainable Forestry Paper, MTS will work with Timber Products if it chooses, to achieve a merger of the competing brands which we believe is the best solution so that more time, energy, and funds can be devoted to stopping illegal logging and destructive deforestation which are severe global problems.  MTS has made this offer to America Forest & Paper Association and Sustainable Forestry Initiative manufacturers several times over the years including last year during the development of this Standard, but the offer has not been accepted.  See attached MTS Sustainable Forestry Paper. 

A large forest product manufacturer, Home Depot, and the State of Oregon supported this approach with Bill Ruckelshaus taking the lead during our extensive activities on this issue in 2002.