<div dir="ltr">Dear Ms. Seitz: (Pardon me for changing the subject title) <br><br>Thank you so much for clarifying that the IWA and TC rules are different. If you don't mind, could you please let us know (or guide to other resources) for the following questions: <br><br>(My sole concern here is with solid fuel household cookstoves, not other varieties).<br><br>1a. Is there a public consultation requirement for TCs output, and if so, is it at the TC leadership level or at the ISO management level and at what stage of the processes? <br><br>1b. Or rather, any such public consultation requirement is for the national participant bodies? <br><br>1c. Is there any "code of conduct" for the liaison members of the TC, particularly in regard to making public their stance on the ISO process, their inputs, and their standing on the results? <br><div><br>2a. What are the rules for admitting "liaison" organizations? Are they admitted by consensus of the TC national membership or by ISO management or TC management? <br><br><div class="gmail_extra">2b. In particular, is there a specific charter of engagement by <span style="font-size:12.8px">GACC, Gold Standard Foundation, WHO, WLPGA, Unicef, and ICCI, none of whom have any prior experience in actual "cookstove performance", nor design, manufacture and sales, leave alone testing and national standards (at most re-circulating secondary and tertiary literature)? This is particularly relevant to the issue of PM2.5 emissions performance of representative stoves, or testing and standards including the US. (Earlier national cookstove efforts used TSP or PM10 measurements, but the IWA seems to have suddenly taken on a PM2.5 hourly average emission rate, in turn leading to WHO "Guidelines".) I hold that none of these organizations have a legitimate role in the TC 285 process and that their influence taints the TC 285 results and carries reputational risks for ISO and national participants. (I excluded the World Bank because it has actively promoted design and promotion of alternative solid fuel cookstoves for some 30 years, with the explicit agreement of client governments; has made public evaluations according to prevalent disclosure policies; and has no vested interests in specific designs, protocols, or standards. This cannot be said of any of the other organizations whose legitimacy is in question.) <br></span><br>3a. What are the contractual bases for involvement by the US - of which you are the national body - considering that US does not have any Federal standards for cookstoves or any Federally certified cookstoves testing procedures or laboratory? (These contracts may be between ISO and ANSI, ANSI and GACC, ANSI or GACC with US Government or its independent agencies, or any combination or cross/joint contracting.)</div><div class="gmail_extra">3b. What are the time limits for USG and ANSI involvement in the TC process on cookstoves, and is there room to invoke the need for a refreshed mandate? <br><br>I am a Citizen of India, if that is any consideration for ANSI in answering these questions. If my standing or qualifications are in question, please feel free to ask. For now, I can state I am working on revisiting some earlier work on modern cooking and have been engaged as an analyst or advisor on many areas of energy and environmental policies in US and overseas. <br><br>Many thanks in advance, and best wishes, </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Nikhil<br><br><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="georgia, serif">------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Nikhil Desai</font></div><div><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">(US +1) 202 568 5831</span><font face="georgia, serif"><br><i>Skype: nikhildesai888</i><br></font><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 6:19 AM, Sally Seitz <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:SSeitz@ansi.org" target="_blank">SSeitz@ansi.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US">
<div class="gmail-m_-4658473479269938811WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Hello everyone,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I would like to point out that the presentation to which you refer was for the IWA which took place prior to the formation of ISO TC 285. ISO rules are different
for an IWA – any interested party may attend an IWA meeting and participation is not limited to National Member Bodies or liaison. The rules are different for participation in ISO Technical and Subcommittees. Participation in ISO TCs and SCs is limited to
National Bodies and liaison organizations, and participation includes both offering comments on drafts and attending meetings.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I do hope this clarification helps.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Kind regards,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Sally
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> Xavier Brandao [mailto:<a href="mailto:xvr.brandao@gmail.com" target="_blank">xvr.brandao@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, September 02, 2017 5:40 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:ndesai@alum.mit.edu" target="_blank">ndesai@alum.mit.edu</a>; 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves' <<a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.<wbr>org</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Dr. Ronal Larson <<a href="mailto:rongretlarson@comcast.net" target="_blank">rongretlarson@comcast.net</a>>; 'Crispin Pemberton-Pigott' <<a href="mailto:crispinpigott@outlook.com" target="_blank">crispinpigott@outlook.com</a>>; Neeraja Penumetcha <<a href="mailto:npenumetcha@cleancookstoves.org" target="_blank">npenumetcha@cleancookstoves.<wbr>org</a>>; Sally Seitz <<a href="mailto:SSeitz@ansi.org" target="_blank">SSeitz@ansi.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [Stoves] News: National Geographic on promotion of gas stoves over improved woodstoves - in Guatemala<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div><div><div class="gmail-h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">Dear Nikhil,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">« Taking her word, what Ms. Seitz seems to be suggesting is that "opposition to substantial issues" can be expressed by "concerned interests", not necessarily limited to National Standards Bodies that participate in the
ISO process, and that the ISO process at least has an obligation to seek to take into account (read that bureaucratese anywhich way you wish) "the views of all parties concerned). »<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">OK, I didn’t know that, thanks for sharing the information, I’ll have a look at it.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">« I am afraid there is no "We". Despite GACC and World Bank claims about "stove sector" or "improved and clean cooking sector", there is no official stamp on any testing protocol. »<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">I am for cooperation rather than division. I think a lot can be worked out by discussion.</span><span lang="FR"><br>
</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><br>
Best,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><br>
Xavier <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(181,196,223);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="FR" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif">De :</span></b><span lang="FR" style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif"> Nikhil Desai [<a href="mailto:pienergy2008@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:pienergy2008@gmail.com</a><wbr>]
<br>
<b>Envoyé :</b> samedi 2 septembre 2017 04:20<br>
<b>À :</b> Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Xavier Brandao<br>
<b>Cc :</b> Ronal W. Larson; Crispin Pemberton-Pigott; Neeraja Penumetcha; Sally Seitz<br>
<b>Objet :</b> Re: [Stoves] News: National Geographic on promotion of gas stoves over improved woodstoves - in Guatemala<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">I Xavier:<br>
<br>
1. ISO is not the only body developing "standards". All national standards institutions develop and revise standards, and private organizations also devise standards to be voluntarily accepted. Why, just a few days ago, the Gold Standard Foundation calls itself
a "<a href="https://www.goldstandard.org/our-story/who-we-are" target="_blank">standard and certification body</a>" has floated
<a href="http://Gold%20Standard%20for%20the%20Global%20Goals" target="_blank">Gold Standard for Global Goals</a>, for "</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(89,89,89)">future-proof Gold Standard projects for changing market conditions,
including the emerging rules of the Paris Agreement and the aviation sector’s new market mechanism CORSIA, as well as broader trends in corporate sustainability and climate and development funding."</span><span lang="FR"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(89,89,89)"><br>
</span><span lang="FR">CDM and Gold Standard use of WBT, or any protocol for any metric that it purports to but does not directly measure, are as important at this stage as anything that develops out of the ISO TC-285. I don't know how many countries with what
market type and size would incorporate "international" standards in domestic law and have the capacity to enforce them. We know EPA will not, and that's that. Why EPA is indirectly - via GACC and ANSI - is leading the TC-285 exercise is not exactly a mystery,
just not out in the open. (Ms. Penumetcha or Ms. Seitz, cc'd here, may want to share ANSI contract scope of work with US Government or its agencies and theirs with ISO.) <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span lang="FR">2. You ought to read Ms. Seitz' presentation at the IWA. She said: <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:5pt 0in 5pt 30pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">a. An international standard is characterized by ""<b>consensus</b>: General agreement, characterized by the
<u>absence of sustained opposition to substantial issues by any important part of the concerned interests and by a process that involves seeking to take into account the views of all parties concerned and to reconcile any conflicting arguments.</u> (emphasis
added) and<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="margin:5pt 0in 5pt 30pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">b. A Standard, inter alia, "provides governments with a technical base for health, safety and environmental legislation, and conformity assessment" and "shares technological advances and good management practice"<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">Taking her word, what Ms. Seitz seems to be suggesting is that "opposition to substantial issues" can be expressed by "concerned interests", not necessarily limited to National Standards Bodies that participate in the ISO
process, and that the ISO process at least has an obligation to seek to take into account (read that bureaucratese anywhich way you wish) "the views of all parties concerned). <br>
<br>
Therefore, I suggest that you prepare a document to be sent directly to Ms. Seitz and Ms. Penumetcha (as GACC is officially contracted with ISO and perhaps the US Government). I see no problem in requesting them to not only dump WBT for reasons that you have
raised but officially acknowledge its limits. I think it is entirely permissible to write this in your personal capacity, and you could share it with this group. Those from this group, in their individual capacities, may endorse a petition. <br>
<br>
Such an effort can also be taken to the D-Lab convenors at MIT for their limited and short-sighted version of stove science progress. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR">Your view is</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(89,89,89)">"</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;color:rgb(31,73,125)">We have to take the
time. To take the time to do the right thing, to correct the past mistakes, to move forward, we have to take the time to stop wasting time."</span><span lang="FR"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><br>
Just as I said to Crispin that "There is no there there" in Kirk Smith, et al. GBD estimates or worse still, HAPIT, I am afraid there is no "We". Despite GACC and World Bank claims about "stove sector" or "improved and clean cooking sector", there is no official
stamp on any testing protocol. <br>
<br>
Yes, this applies to WBT in the US. I am not aware of any Federal Register entry that designates WBT - or those who claim to test according to WBT - as "certified" measure or entity respectively. <br>
<br>
Wherefore, anybody who has been damaged by the use of WBT is entitled to bring a claim in a US Federal court for relief against false claims or other torts. <br>
<br>
US claims to be a nation of laws. So US entities are bound by legal agreements. <br>
<br>
Nikhil<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR" style="font-family:Georgia,serif">------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>------------<br>
Nikhil Desai</span><span lang="FR"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span lang="FR" style="font-family:Georgia,serif">(US <a href="tel:(202)%20568-5831" value="+12025685831" target="_blank">+1) 202 568 5831</a><br>
<i>Skype: nikhildesai888</i></span><span lang="FR"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="FR"><br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<wbr>__________<br>
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.<br>
For more information please visit <a href="http://www.symanteccloud.com" target="_blank">http://www.symanteccloud.com</a><br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<wbr>__________<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>