15 September 2010
New Zealand
standards development process robust and world-class
By Debbie Chin, Chief Executive, Standards New Zealand
Features in The Press ('Revisit noise standards – academics' and 'Opposition to decision making process' 18 August) call into question the integrity of Standards New Zealand's development process and its committee members.
In particular claims are made that the wind-energy industry had exerted undue influence in the revising of the Standards New Zealand wind farm noise Standard NZS 6808:2010.
I vigorously reject any allegation of bias or lack of integrity in the process of developing this or any other New Zealand Standard.
In a time where we saw our nation give thanks for the miracle that saw no one killed in the Christchurch earthquake, it is perhaps time to focus on New Zealand's world-class Standards, and the processes by which they are established.
When a similar sized quake hit Haiti earlier this year, up to 230,000 were killed. What was the difference in structural damage between these two events?
Basically, the answer is New Zealand's extremely high building Standards. Standards developed in New Zealand and internationally over the past 100 years.
Standards development processes in New Zealand are very robust, indeed, are often seen as an international Standard in themselves. We draw on scientific evidence, experience, judgement, risk assessment, and input from various stakeholders, including experts and the public.
The 18 August articles suggest bias in the makeup of the Standard NZS 6808:2010
development committee, that possible health effects of noise from wind farms were ignored during development, that consensus was not reached, and inadequate effort was made to reach agreement on this development committee.
I strongly reject these allegations.
The revised wind farm noise Standard, NZS 6808:2010 was developed through well-established, robust standards development processes, consistent with the development of international Standards.
These processes have been and continue to be used to develop a wide range of Standards, including for buildings and earthquake protection, electrical and toy safety, medical equipment, risk management, water quality, acoustics, and many other Standards.
Standards New Zealand's processes draw on international Standards that are developed by experts. They also involve consultation with affected parties, including opportunities for the public to have their say.
In revising the 1998 wind farm noise Standard, the committee considered more than 200 reference documents, including overseas research relevant to wind farm noise. More than 600 public comments were received on the proposed Standard. Each comment was individually considered by the committee, and agreed changes were made to the Standard before the final version, NZS 6808:2010, was published.
NZS6808:2010 is not a new Standard. It is an update of an existing Standard. It is acknowledged by all committee members that the changes are part of the continuous updating process applied to Standards, and that the new Standard is an improvement on the former Standard.
The committee consisted of representatives from a number of sectors, including engineering and scientific experts in acoustics, practitioners in planning, resource management and environmental health, wind farm developers, and individuals who represented local authority and community interests.
The project to revise NZS 6808 was partly funded by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority and the New Zealand Wind Energy Association.
The revised Standard is based on international research and experience in wind farm development over the last ten years. It is a technical document requiring a high level of technical input in addition to consideration of community interests on the control of wind farm noise.
Of the twelve members on the committee, nine had specialist expertise in acoustics or practical knowledge of wind farm noise and its effects. World Health Organisation guidelines, limits set for other sources of noise, and internationally accepted practice were examined and drawn on during the revision of the Standard.
It is common for Standards development committee members and experts to have differing views and through the creation and refinement phases of the Standards development process, these views are robustly facilitated and debated.
Each committee member puts forward their views (which must be evidence-based as per the terms of reference) and they are required to discuss the merits of what they are proposing with their peers.
As a matter of course, committee members work together to resolve any differing views, but where issues cannot be resolved, Standards New Zealand facilitates discussion among the committee members to assist them reach consensus-based decisions. This committee successfully debated and resolved three of the four disagreements over wording of the Standard.
The rules for voting on all Standards New Zealand Standards require at least 80% agreement among committee members, a more stringent requirement than many international Standards bodies. In the case of this Standard, the committee achieved and exceeded this requirement.
I encourage you to visit www.standards.co.nz to learn more about Standards New Zealand and the revised wind farm noise Standard.