If it helps, the idea for this TG was born out of a discussion at the last JC (or maybe the one before that). The basis of the conversation was that today there is very little recognition or use of the NSF 140 standard by commercial carpet customers that specify or purchase carpet. Outside of some mandatory government procurement specs, most customers don't ask, most mills don't tell unless asked. At the highest level the TG would discuss: Does it matter that the standard is barely relevant beyond a few state government specs? If it doesn't, this TG disbands and changes to the standard continue as normal.
If there is interest in broadening the use of this standard - since we are doing the work anyway, in some cases - is that just a marketing effort for the existing standard, or is there something about the current format and requirements of the standard that makes it not relevant, or not easy to understand/communicate about with customers? If the former, that is probably not really work to be done within the NSF JC structure; if the latter, this would be the work of the TG (or at least mapping out where changes would be needed that other subcommittess might work on)?
One example is the effort put in 4-5 years ago to revamp NSF 332 - the resilient flooring sustainability standard, which was originally formatted and setup as a close copy of NSF 140 (in their case they did not have mandatory government procurement use of the standard, so it was more a improve it or walk away from it scenario).
[Full disclosure, they did a full standard overhaul, with everything fair game - ditching outdated credits, adding new credits, revising or renaming credits sections, mandatory credits requirements, changing certification point levels; even the certification hierarchy of silver/gold/platinum was revised. And it took them almost two years, with a very strong lead role from the relevant trade association pushing the project]
It's also worth pointing out that the NSF 332 revision was done in coordination with a concerted education and outreach effort by the RFCI (the relevant trade assoication for the product category). Without a similar effort at raising the profile and awareness of the standard, all the work to revise and improve the standard may have limited impact.
That's my take on what this TG is being asked to consider. If nothing else, I hope this helps start the conversations when we meet.
Best, Troy
------------------------------
Troy Virgo Director - Sustainability
Director - Sustainability
Shaw Industries Group
706-532-2185 Director - Sustainability
troy.virgo@shawinc.com------------------------------