NSF International: Public Ballot: Interpretations ballot documents

Ballot Details

Title

Interpretations ballot documents

Description

The purpose of this ballot is to review all interpretations issued on the BIFMA e3 standard prior to its ANSI status. This last ballot is for section 5 letters Y and Z.

Please answer the questions for each interpretation:
1. Do you agree with the interpretation? Yes or No

2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation? Yes or No

3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation? Yes or No

If you answer YES to #2 or #3, feel free to comment your suggested language change or addition.

If you need any assistance with this ballot, feel free to contact me prior to the close of the ballot on June 30TH.

Ballot Options

Ballot has closed

[ ]	Y=YES - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?
[ ]	Y=NO - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?
[ ]	Y=YES - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?
[ ]	Y=NO - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?
[ ]	Y=YES - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?
[ ]	Y= NO - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?
[ ]	Z=YES - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?
[ ]	Z=NO - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?
[ ]	Z=YES - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?
[ ]	Z=NO - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?
[ ]	Z=YES - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?
[ ]	Z=NO - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?

Opening Date

Thursday, 9 June 2011 @ 9:45 am EDT

Closing Date

Thursday, 30 June 2011 @ 11:59 pm EDT

Ballot has closed.
Up to 6 options may be chosen.

Referenced Items

Name	Type	Date
	ballot_1734.html Folder: System Ballot Results (archived) Submitted by Costello, Mindy on 2011-06-30 21:02:06 Group: Joint Committee on BIFMA e3 Furniture Sustainability State: Final 59K The purpose of this ballot is to review all interpretations issued on the BIFMA e3 standard prior to its ANSI status. This last ballot is for section 5 letters Y and Z. Please answer the questions for each interpretation: 1. Do you agree with the interpretation? Yes or No 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language... page=ballotrefitems&type=document	* 01734: Interpretations ballot documents	Document (Archive)	2011-06-30	No Access
	ANSI-BIFMA e3 Interpretations Section 5 ballot document.pdf Folder: Interpretations ballot documents Submitted by Costello, Mindy on 2011-06-02 11:29:57 Group: Joint Committee on BIFMA e3 Furniture Sustainability State: Final 33K 320 downloads page=ballotrefitems&type=document	ANSI-BIFMA e3 Interpretations Section 5 ballot document.pdf	Document	2011-06-02	Details

Voting Results

Voting Statistics

Number of votes cast (excluding abstentions)	16
Eligible members who have voted	16 of 22	73%
Eligible members who have not voted	6 of 22	27%

Voting Summary by Option

Option	# Votes	% of Total
Options with highest number of votes are bold
Y=YES - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	15	22 ¹/₁₇%
Y=NO - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	0	0%
Y=YES - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	2	2 ¹⁶/₁₇%
Y=NO - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	8	11 ¹³/₁₇%
Y=YES - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	0	0%
Y= NO - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	9	13 ⁴/₁₇%
Z=YES - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	15	22 ¹/₁₇%
Z=NO - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	0	0%
Z=YES - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	3	4 ⁷/₁₇%
Z=NO - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	6	8 ¹⁴/₁₇%
Z=YES - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	0	0%
Z=NO - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	10	14 ¹²/₁₇%

Voting Summary by Interest Category

Interest Category	Y=YES - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	Y=NO - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	Y=YES - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	Y=NO - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	Y=YES - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	Y= NO - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	Z=YES - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	Z=NO - 1. Do you agree with the interpretation?	Z=YES - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	Z=NO - 2. Should an informational note be added to the specific credit language to clarify the interpretation?	Z=YES - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	Z=NO - 3. Should a change be made to the credit language based on the interpretation?	Not Returned
Academia / NGO	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Distributor	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Emeritus	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Fabricator/Formulator	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
General Interest	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Government	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Industry	8	0	1	5	0	6	8	0	2	4	0	6	1
Ingredient Supplier	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Manufacturer Processes	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Medicine/Health	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Non-voting Liaison	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Other	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Practitioner/Service Provider	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Product Certifier / Testing Lab	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Public Health / Regulatory	4	0	0	1	0	1	4	0	1	0	0	1	1
Trade Association	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
User	3	0	1	2	0	2	3	0	0	2	0	3	4
Water Utility	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Not Specified	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	15	0	2	8	0	9	15	0	3	6	0	10	6

Ballot Details

Referenced Items

ballot_1734.html

ANSI-BIFMA e3 Interpretations Section 5 ballot document.pdf

Voting Statistics

Voting Summary by Option

Voting Summary by Interest Category