IEEE/NSF Joint Task Group for an Environmental Standard for Servers
Kick-Off Meeting Summary
February 11, 2016
Meeting Summary
Welcome & Review Agenda
Jennifer Costley/JTG-ESS Chair and Matthew Realff/JTG-ESS Vice-Chair welcomed everyone to the
newly formed Joint Task Group for an Environmental Standard for Servers. Jennifer reminded the group
that this is a1 hour kick off call, and is being offered twice during the day to maximize participation. The
same information is being presented during both calls. (Note: this meeting summary reflects discussion
and action items from both calls.)
Costley reviewed the agenda. The primary purpose of the call is to explain the joint process and orient
members to the workplan. The agenda was approved without objection as submitted. The PowerPoint
slides from the call are available here.
Agenda
 Review agenda
 Roll Call / NSF Anti-Trust & IEEE Call for Patents
 Overview of Joint Process
 Joint Process Agreement
 Joint Task Group (JTG)-ESS membership & roster
 Decision process
 Draft standard development & balloting
 Milestones & workplan
 Governance & program support
 Overlapping/Conflicting Criteria Resolution Process
 Wrap Up and Action Items
Roll Call/ NSF Anti-Trust Statement & IEEE Call for Patents
Jessica Slomka, Secretariat, took attendance using the participant list generated by ReadyTalk, then asked
those on the phone only to state their name and affiliation. Slomka asked that for future calls participants
sign in to ReadyTalk using both their full name and affiliation so this is reflected in the attendance. There
were 34 JTG-ESS members in attendance. The meeting attendance record is located at the end of this
document.
Slomka read the NSF antitrust statement, and raised the IEEE call for patents; no one raised any concerns
or any comments for consideration.
(https://development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/slideset.pdf)
Overview of Joint Process
Joint Process Agreement
Costley reviewed highlights of the Joint Process Agreement
(http://standards.nsf.org/apps/org/workgroup/jtg-ess/download.php/30674), including:
 Establishes operating procedures for JTG, merging approaches of IEEE & NSF
 Defines membership categories
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary





Establishes weighted voting to ensure balance of interests in decision making
Defines how initial draft standard will be prepared & ballot process
Details quorum and voting thresholds
Outlines project administration & key milestones
Use of NSF Continuous Maintenance process
JTG-ESS Membership
 JTG voting membership initially comprised of members in good standing from either the NSF
Joint Committee or IEEE 1680.4 Working Group.
 Participation in the JTG is open to all interested stakeholders, either as voting members or
observers. New members can join and attain membership status after attending 2 consecutive
meetings of the Joint TG and also requests membership status. More detail on retaining voting
membership on next call. Considering participation on monthly basis.
 JTG members assigned to 4 stakeholder categories:
 Manufacturers of IT products covered by current and future standards and their trade
associations
 Other industry (suppliers, recyclers, retailers and other types of businesses commercially
engaged with the product and their trade associations)
 Public health & safety/regulatory
 User/consumer
Costley shared the initial roster of 64 voting member, which includes 31 IEEE 1680.4 members, 31 NSF
members, and 2 dual IEEE/NSF members. The equal split is coincidental. The roster will be maintained
on the NSF NOW site. The current breakdown by stakeholder category of the current roster is as follows:
 Manufacturers: 33% (21)
 Suppliers: 19% (12)
 Public Health/Regulatory: 29% (19)
 User/consumer:19% (12)
Discussion/Clarifications:
 Initial roster of voting members is made up of members in good standing from either
IEEE or NSF. The roster is available on the project website, NSF NOW website.

There was concern about the time demands of the joint process with calls every 2 weeks,
and attendance requirements. Costley explained that the governance team is working on
an alternative policy for maintaining membership and will share it on the next call. Given
the accelerated schedule for the joint process, the policy will be more flexible and look at
active participation on a monthly basis, including electronic voting as well as meeting
attendance.
Action Items:
 Send notification to IEEE observers about joint process.
 Circulate roster with member names and affiliation for review by members for accuracy.
 NSF will add member interest categories on NOW website.
 Finish drafting and share policy on maintaining JTG membership.
JTG Decision Process
Costley explained that consensus is the goal of the JTG. When voting is necessary, a two-thirds majority
is needed to make technical changes to the draft standard and approve criteria in the initial draft. JTG-ESS
Page 2
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary
decisions will be made using a weighted voting formula. Twenty-five percent of the total votes is
allocated to each stakeholder category, regardless of the number of members voting in that category.
During meetings, motions will be made to approve criteria and other language. Informal polling of these
motions during the meeting will be used to gauge support. If there is sufficient support, formal voting
will be conducted through electronic ballot (NSF NOW system) to apply the weighted voting procedure.
Discussion/Clarification:
 Balance among stakeholders will be achieved using a weighted voting approach.
Draft Standard Development & Balloting
Costley described the process for developing the initial draft standard that is outlined in the Joint Process
Agreement.

Prior to going the ballot, the Joint Task Group will resolve:
– Overlapping and/or conflicting criteria previously approved by NSF and IEEE
– 9 NSF criteria of “priority concern” selected by IEEE 1680.4 WG. Overlapping criteria
must be finished prior to working on the “priority concern” criteria. Any outstanding
criteria of “priority concern” at the end of the 6-month timeframe go directly to ballot.

All other NSF and IEEE approved criteria to go directly to ballot
– Balloting provides all stakeholders with opportunity to comment and propose modifications
to criteria
The draft standard is balloted by each SDO separately using their procedures. If the standard is
not approved to move to initial ballot by both SDOs within 6 months and one SDO has reached
approval, then the SDO that has reached approval may choose to move forward with balloting.


Ballot comments are resolved jointly, by the JTG. The ballot process and comment resolution
may repeat until each SDO meets its requirements:
 IEEE Sponsor Ballot has met its criteria for acceptance, and
 NSF Joint Committee has achieved consensus
Discussion/Clarification:
 Will there be a friendly amendment process? Is this negotiable? Costley said at this point
she wouldn’t say “yes” or “no”. The governance team will discuss.
 Will there be discussion of points balancing? Can this be done prior to balloting? Costley
offered to take this question up with the governance team as well.
Action Items
 Governance team will discuss friendly amendments and points balancing.
Milestones & Workplan
Costley reviewed the milestones included in the Joint Process Agreement:
 IEEE & NSF sign MOU (January 28, 2016)
 6 months following MOU signing to approve draft for IEEE Sponsor ballot/NSF Draft Review
 3 months following approval to move to ballot for JTG resolution of first ballot comments
Page 3
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary
Pamela Brody-Heine shared an overview of project workplan with members. For more information, she
referred members to the detailed workplan that was distributed in advance of the meeting and is posted on
the NOW website (http://standards.nsf.org/apps/org/workgroup/jtgess/download.php/30675)
Schedule
Milestone
January 28, 2016
IEEE & NSF sign MOU
February 11, 2016
JTG kickoff call
March – July
Biweekly JTG calls
April 12-14, 2016
Face-to-face @ NSF, Ann Arbor, MI
July 29, 2016
•
•
Oct 15, 2016–January 15,
2017
JTG resolution of 1 ballot comments
By January 15, 2017
JTG completes draft standard (“pencils down”)
Draft standard moves to first ballot within each
SDO
st
nd
Draft standard moves to 2 ballot
By March 1, 2017
Balloting complete
By June 1, 2017
Approval of standard by both SDOs
By September 1, 2017
Joint publication of standard*
rd
* Add 3 – 4 months to publication date if 3 ballot needed
Discussion/Clarifications:
 The dates for the April F2F were selected first based on the availability of meeting space
that could accommodate the group, then the availability of the Chair. This resulted in two
proposed date ranges. The dates with the highest number of participants was selected.
 Teleconference capability will be provided. NSF is working with their IT department to
ensure the best possible acoustics for teleconference participants.
 Additional F2F meetings may be scheduled, depending on progress.
 A standing meeting agenda will be posted next week for the biweekly JTG calls. There
will also be a list of specific agenda topics/criteria that will be discussed at each meeting.
This will provide JTG members with advanced notice of topics. It will be subject to
change based on progress at prior meetings.
Governance & Program Support
Costley explained the governance and program support structure for this project.
• Jennifer Costley, Chair
• Matthew Realff, Vice-Chair
• Program management
– Jessica Slomka, NSF International, Secretariat
• Meeting logistics & support
Page 4
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary
–
–
• NOW website management, including electronic voting
• JTG communications & roster maintenance
Pat Roder & Noelle Humenick, IEEE
• IEEE liaisons
Pamela Brody-Heine & Patty Dillon
•
Support Chair & Vice-Chair
Overlapping/Conflicting Criteria Resolution Process
Costley reviewed the process for resolving overlapping criteria, which is the first task of the JTG. There
are 23 IEEE and 19 NSF criteria in 5 categories: Energy, Materials, End-of-Life, Packaging and
Substances. Subgroup leads have been asked to review these criteria and assign them to one of the
following categories, which provide an indication of level of effort and an approach for resolving:

Category #1: Similar criteria; low level of effort can be accomplished relatively quickly by
subgroup leads

Category #2: Some similarities and some key differences; moderate level of can be accomplished
by small group of subgroup leads and/or key authors/contributors

Category #3: Divergent criteria; Seek early directional input from Joint TG, followed by small
group to draft criterion following directional input of JTG.
A master schedule for JTG discussion of each criterion and the proposed resolution is underway.
Discussion of criteria will begin on the March 3rd JTG call.
Costley asked Patty Dillon to provide additional details and the status of the resolution process. Dillon
reported that the resolution process launched immediately following the signing of the Joint Agreement.
Subgroup leads for all 5 performance areas have met, reviewed criteria, and assigned resolution
categories. Most criteria were assigned #1 & #2, with a handful being assigned #3. Subgroup leads are
working to identify key differences, as well as similarities, in the criteria and propose approaches to
resolution. Depending on the criteria, subgroup leads will be reaching out to key drafters and experts on
the criteria topics, forming small groups to propose draft language, or asking the JTG for directional
guidance. Criteria will be discussed by the JTG according to a master schedule. The schedule should be
posted next week, which gives subgroup leads a target for criteria proposals and JTG members time to
prepare. Documentation will be posted online prior to designated calls. The JTG will approve all changes
to criteria.
Discussion/Clarifications:

The Master call schedule will be posted next week.

Criteria will be posted ten days prior to each call.

Criteria resolution in the 5 performance categories will be done concurrently. There will also
be a parallel process for developing upfront sections of the standard.
Costley asked JTG members if they had any questions or concerns about the process. She also invited
members to email her after the call if they had any concerns to raise.
Discussion/Clarifications:

Concern was expressed about participation requirements. Costley reiterated her earlier
response. (See p. 2, under JTG-ESS Membership.)

Is an extension of the 6 months to “pencils down” possible since we’re not getting started
right away? Costley considers the “pencils down” date firm and urged members to think of
Page 5
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary
this as non-negotiable. Dillon noted that the reconciliation process started immediately
following the signing of the Agreement with the process discussed earlier.

Dillon clarified that subgroups for each performance area will not be created for the criteria
resolution process. “Subgroup leads” refer to the individuals from IEEE and NSF that are
spearheading the resolution process; they are mostly the individuals who were the subgroup
leads in the IEEE or NSF processes. Small stakeholder groups may be formed as needed to
draft criteria for JTG consideration.

Will the process be transparent? Brody-Heine noted that documents for JTG discussion will
be posted 10 days in advance of each meeting. These documents compare the overlapping
criteria side-by-side, and will highlight key differences and propose an approach(s) to
reconciliation or draft language. Dillon also noted that the complete list of overlapping
criteria is in Appendix B of the Joint Process Agreement.
Action Items:



Post master meeting schedule
Post master side-by-side overlapping criteria document.
Governance team will write up the reconciliation process in more detail and
distribute.
Meeting Wrap Up & Action Items
NSF NOW website: Costley reminded the JTG that the NSF NOW website is the official project website.
Key resources from both the NSF and IEEE processes have been moved onto the JTG.
Meetings: Costley reviewed the meeting schedule:

Recurring conference calls - every other Thursday from 3 to 5 pm eastern starting March
3rd. Two dates conflict with IEEE 1680.1 WG calls. These weeks this JTG will meet on Tuesday,
noon to 2 pm eastern – March 15 & July 19.

Face to face meeting - April 12 to 14 at NSF headquarters in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Overlapping/conflicting criteria: Subgroup leads and the project management team will be working on
strategies and proposed resolutions for overlapping/conflicting criteria. In the next week a schedule will
be posted for JTG discussion of criteria.
Adjourn: Costley asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting.
a. Motion: Cate Berard/Sarah Westervelt
b. Second: Donna Sadowy/Kim Holliday
c. All approved: Yes (no objections)
2/11/16 11 AM Call Meeting Attendees
Company
Name
Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon
Manuel Andrade
Interest
Role
Category
General Interest Member
Page 6
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary
Consultant – User
US Department of Energy
ITIC
William Baxter
Cate Berard
Pamela BrodyHeine
Chris Cleet
NYAS/IEEE
Jennifer Costley
NRDC
Dillon Environmental Associates
GBH International
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Microsoft
NSF International
California EPA - Department of Resources
R...
Fujitsu
Canon USA
Oracle America, Inc.
Lenovo
Environmental Compliance and
Environmental...
Electronics TakeBack Coalition
IBM - United States
US General Services Administration
Pierre Delforge
Patty Dillon
Tim Earl
Holly Elwood
Holly Evans
Jessica Evans
General Interest Member
Group
General Interest
Chair
General Interest Member
General Interest Observer
General Interest Member
General Interest Member
General Interest Member
General Interest Observer
Fareed Ferhut
General Interest Member
Dieter Feuerer
Kaitlin Greco
Michael Hutchings
Mary Jacques
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
Walter Jager
General Interest Member
Barbara Kyle
Tim Mann
Michael Morimoto
Neil PetersMichaud
Matthew Realff
Wayne Rifer
Patricia Roder
Lynn Rubinstein
Donna Sadowy
Craig Stephens
Lucian Turk
Keith Wilson
General Interest Member
General Interest Member
General Interest Member
Green Electronics Council
Cascade Asset Management
Georgia Institute of Technology
Green Electronics Council
IEEE
Northeast Recycling Council, Inc. (NERC)
AMD
Schaffer Environmental
Dell, Inc.
MRIGlobal
General Interest Member
General Interest Member
General Interest Observer
Member
Member
Member
Member
General Interest Member
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
Vice chair
Member
Observer
Member
Member
Guest
General Interest Member
General Interest Member
2/11/16 4 PM Call Meeting Attendees
Company
Name
Green Electronics Council
Pamela Brody-
Interest
Category
General Interest
Role
Observer
Page 7
IEEE-NSF JTG-ESS February 11, 2016 Meeting Summary
Heine
NYAS/IEEE
Jennifer Costley
General Interest
Dillon Environmental Associates
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
Apple, Inc.
Aarhus University, Denmark
Commonwealth of MA
b-com
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Green Electronics Council
Schaffer Environmental
NSF International
Green House Data - Data Center
Operations
Basel Action Network
Intertek
Patty Dillon
William Hoffman
Kim Holliday
Constance Kampf
Dmitriy Nikolayev
David Pesce
Daisy Poon
Wayne Rifer
Mark Schaffer
Jessica Slomka
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
General Interest
Group
Chair
Observer
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Secretariat
Cortney Thompson General Interest
Member
Sarah Westervelt
Adam Wheeler
Member
Member
General Interest
General Interest
Page 8