The Forest Stewardship Council
About UsNews / MediaFAQsRegional Standards CertifiersCertified CompaniesGreen Building MembershipDocumentsFSC International Product SearchMake a DonationSite MapContact Us
About Us

Also in this section:

Design & Build with FSC:

USGBC and LEED benchmark

See Also

(2010 December) A Path Forward for Certified Wood in LEED

(2010 October) FSC urges vote of “Negative, with reason” to proposed LEED revisions

(2010 June) FSC-US Open Letter on Fourth Draft Benchmark

(2010 March) FSC-US Open Letter on Changes to LEED

(2010) Failings of the Third Draft of the Forest Certification Benchmark

Background on USGBC and LEED benchmark

FSC in North America

(2009) USGBC Comment Period on LEED benchmark

(2008) FSC-US Comments on LEED Benchmark

Learn more about LEED

FAQs about FSC and LEED

 

Legal Attack by Conventional Industry

A group of conventional forest products companies and landowners, calling themselves the “Coalition for Fair Forest Certification,” filed a petition with the Federal Trade Commission in October 2009, arguing that the FTC's Bureau of Competition "should look closely at the conduct of USGBC, “suggesting that the USGBC has unfairly favored FSC-certified products.” The coalition argued that by “excluding de facto — if not explicitly, competing third-party programs such as SFI,” USGBC's benchmarks favor FSC and that “long-standing legal authority prohibits disadvantaging SFI and other third-party certification systems.”

This is patently absurd. Nothing in antitrust law prohibits USGBC from imposing rigorous standards, especially at the conclusion of a lengthy and open process to set those standards after taking into account the views of interested parties. The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that “when ... private associations promulgate ... standards based on the merits of objective expert judgments and through procedures that prevent the standard-setting process from being biased ... those private standards can have significant procompetitive advantages.” Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v Indian Head, Inc, 486 U.S. 492 (1988).

The bottom line is that USGBC need not weaken its standards to provide “greenwash” cover to the conventional forest products industry. Indeed, the same coalition petition urged the FTC to examine FSC's conduct. When FSC offered to meet with the FTC's Bureau of Competition staff to explain why the coalition's antitrust allegations were baseless, we were told that the Bureau of Competition had no plan to conduct an investigation and a meeting was not even necessary.

In sum, FSC-US hopes that USGBC and its members will not be intimidated by threats of antitrust claims to prevent it from adopting a rigorous, high-bar Forest Certification Benchmark.