Entry Type ID Date Applicable Rating System Primary Credit Inquiry (LIs) Ruling (LIs) Related Addenda/LIs Related Resources Campus Applicable Internationally Applicable Country Applicability Reference Guide (Addenda) Page (Addenda) Location (Addenda) Description of Change (Addenda) "Rating System Correction" "100000837" "2011-02-02" "Healthcare" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical and pollutant source control" "None" "None" "�" "263" "Requirements" "In the first bullet, remove the extra space in ""grill s""" "Rating System Correction" "100000838" "2011-02-02" "Healthcare" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical and pollutant source control" "None" "None" "�" "263" "Requirements" "In the paragraph beginning with ""Ensure, through the results..."" replace the word ""testing"" with ""modeling""." "Rating System Correction" "100000839" "2011-02-02" "Healthcare" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical and pollutant source control" "None" "None" "�" "263" "Table" "In the second row, second column, add the following:\n\nAllowable Annual average\nOR\n8-hour or 24-hour average where an annual standard does not exist\nOR\nRolling 3 month average\n" "LEED Interpretation" "10098" "2011-08-01" "New Construction, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction, Retail - New Construction, Healthcare, Data centers - New Construction, Hospitality - New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Retail - Commercial Interiors, Existing Buildings, Schools - Existing Buildings, Retail - Existing Buildings" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical & pollutant source control" "Where there are physical impediments to locating 10 ft of walk-off mats inside the building, is it acceptable to locate a portion of the mat or grate outside and then the remainder of the required 10 ft inside?" "The intent for the entryway system (grilles, grates, walk-off mats) is to capture dirt and dust. An exception to the 10 ft length and/or indoor location is acceptable provided your alternative solution meets this intent and is thoroughly justified. Applicable Internationally." "5585, 5696" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "10247" "2012-10-01" "New Construction, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction, Retail - New Construction, Healthcare, Commercial Interiors, Retail - Commercial Interiors, Existing Buildings" "EQp1 - Minimum indoor air quality performance" "We are meeting the IEQp1: Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance with Option 2, CEN standards EN 15251:2007 and EN 13779:2007. The CEN standards provide minimum outdoor air requirements for most spaces but refer to local codes for certain specialty spaces such as parking garages. To meet the intent of the prerequisite, we propose using our local code requirements for garages, which is Teil 5 Garagen (“Section 5 – Parking Garages”) of the Verordnung über Bau und Betrieb von Sonderbauten - Nordrhein-Westfalen (“Local Law of North Rhine-Westphalia for the Construction and Operation of Specialty Buildings”), dated 17 November 2009 (SBauVO). To meet this local code, our design will use demand control ventilation with carbon monoxide (CO) detectors to limit the CO concentration. Is this approach acceptable?" "**Update 10/01/2014: Ruling has been revised\n\n Yes, garage demand control ventilation is an acceptable ventilation approach for parking garages. This approach is acceptable for projects pursuing Option 2 (EN 15251 and EN 13779) of EQ Prerequisite Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance as well as the hazardous exhaust requirements in EQ Credit Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control. The demand control ventilation strategy must meet the following requirements:\n\n " "2122, 10402" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "2021" "2008-01-29" "New Construction, Existing Buildings, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical & pollutant source control" "The building in question will be a 200,000 square feet warehouse with a 300 square feet office space. The warehouse space will be used for storage of goods and materials that will be transported to an adjacent facility (within 1/8 of a mile) for use in product manufacturing. The employees of the warehouse facility will spend a majority of their day within the office space except for the occasional need to go out into the warehouse space to receive and stock incoming shipments, or transition of these goods and materials to the adjacent facility. The layout of the warehouse space will consist of long rows of aligned storage racks and shelving - with intermediate aisles and end aisles that would be parallel with the exterior walls of the building. One side of the building will have freight car (rail) access as well as tractor-trailer access with overhead doors. As such, is the entire warehouse space considered ""regularly occupied"" space? If so, would we be required to provide ""pollutant control"" system for fork trucks moving goods and materials in and out of the freight cars and tractor-trailers? If so, would permanently installed grill or grate systems (for the fork trucks) aligned with these transition points fulfill the requirements of this credit? If the warehouse space is not considered ""regularly occupied"" space would we only be required to meet the needs of the office space? Please provide some guidance on a strategy that would be consistent with the intent of this credit." "At a minimum, you should provide entryway grates/grilles at all regular entry points for the building users, covering both the warehouse and office space. The same entryway system requirement would not apply directly to the fork truck operations; however, to be consistent with the credit intent, you should describe the measures included in the design to minimize pollutant entry into the building from these vehicles.\n\n **Updated on October 1, 2013 to clarify the entryway system requirement and to align the ruling with LI 5177.\n The project team is requesting clarification on the entryway system requirements for a warehouse space. The exterior entrances to loading docks and garages are not required to have entryway systems. Regularly used entrances from these areas into adjacent spaces in the building (typically office areas of the building) must have entryway systems." "None" "None" "LEED Interpretation" "5177" "2009-01-23" "New Construction, Existing Buildings, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical & pollutant source control" "Our building is a 114,000 sf food processing plant, with office space on one side of the building and process spaces and warehouses on the other. In order to fulfill the intent of this credit, all copy and maintenance rooms have hard ceilings and self-closing doors, and will be exhausted sufficiently to create negative pressure. Air filtration media will provide a MERV rating of 13. Walk-off mats will be installed at all regular entry points into the building, and a cleaning service will be contracted to replace the dirty mats and clean them off-site. We are asking whether the design and cleaning program of our 16 loading bays will comply with the requirements of this credit. To prevent contaminants from entering the building, our loading bay area has been designed with a continuous pit and vertical storing system for the loading docks. We use this design because it far exceeds traditional pit set-up both for cleanliness and thermal efficiency. Such a system differs from the norm for three reasons relevant to this credit: 1) The dock doors close all the way to the dock floor when not in use, preventing dirt and debris from entering. A tight seal is made between floor and door, further hindering pollutant entry. 2) The continuous pit - a space approximately 4ft deep between warehouse floor and bay door which runs the length of the dock bay area and is 18 inches lower than the warehouse floor - serves as a catch basin for dust or particulates coming into the building and allows for easy routine cleaning. 3) Vertical storing dock leveler design further supports easy routine pit cleaning and wash downs by remaining out of the way when not in use. We believe that the innovative design of our loading bays - coupled with the planned stringent cleaning program of this food-grade manufacturing plant - meets the intent of credit EQ 5. Please advise." "The project team is asking whether providing a continuous pit in the loading dock would meet the entryway system requirements of the credit. As described in this CIR, the loading dock entryways into the warehouse do not qualify as regular entry points for building users and thus do not need to be provided with entryway systems. The strategies employed by the project team to reduce indoor chemical and pollutant sources are commendable and encouraged but they are not required by this credit.\n\n **Update October 1, 2013: Applicable credits have been updated." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5460" "2005-02-07" "New Construction" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical and pollutant source control" "A CIR ruling from 1/18/2005 (EQc5) stated that "" [i]f there is a janitorial / housekeeping room in the building then it must meet the criteria for this credit by providing the ventilation requirements and deck-to-deck partitions,"" even if the building adhered to a green housekeeping policy that required only GreenSeal-compliant cleaning materials to be used in the building. In contrast, a CIR ruling from 6/24/2003 (also EQc5), stated that ""The green housekeeping program is commendable but not directly applicable to credit achievement. However, because of this program, there does not appear to be chemical use in this building that would require a separate drainage system, and thus such a system will not be required."" Logical consistency dictates that if no drainage system is required, then no ventilation and partition requirement would be required either. We presume that simply calling the room where green housekeeping chemicals are stored a \'janitorial closet\' couldn\'t trigger the requirements -- we could simply rename the room and then our facts would be the same as the school in the 6/24/2003 ruling. Please clarify whether the 1/18/2005 ruling intended to overrule the 6/24/2003 ruling, or alternatively, please explain what would appear to be a logical inconsistency (no drains are required but ventilation and partitions are required?), or please revise the 1/18/2005 ruling to confirm that if we are using a green housekeeping policy (all GreenSeal-compliant), that this eliminates the requirement for ventilation/partitions/drainage to meet the credit intent. Also please respond to the question in the 1/18/2005 CIR whether, absent a requirement for partitions/ventilation/drains, the credit could be achieved simply with walkoff mats and entryway systems. " "The 1/18/2005 ruling is NOT intended to overrule the 6/24/2003 ruling. Two separate issues are being addressed by these two CIRs. The first one is dealing with the need for chemical mixing areas to have segregated areas with deck to deck partitions and separate outside exhaust. The second one is to do with appropriate disposal of liquid waste in spaces where water and chemical concentrate mixing occurs. In both cases, the CIRs are consistent with the Rating System and Reference Guide requirements. Green housekeeping products still contain chemicals which need to be contained and dealt with per the credit requirements (albeit at lower levels). Therefore, even if the project only uses Green Seal compliant cleaning products, it would still need to meet the criteria of providing the ventilation requirements and deck-to-deck partitions. This is also noted in the CIR ruling dated 1/24/2005 which states that ""Green housekeeping cleaners contain chemicals that need to be addressed."" This credit does NOT differentiate between rooms that store Green-Seal-compliant cleaning products and those that store industry standard products. The need for drains plumbed for appropriate disposal of liquid waste is a separate issue from the ventilation requirements. As noted in CIR ruling dated 2/18/2002, sinks that dispose of chemicals, such as detergents, which are approved by the local water treatment facility, can be part of a conventional sanitary drainage system. If greywater is being directed to re-use for irrigation or uses or to a natural wastewater treatment system, then separate plumbing would be required for disposal of conventional cleaning agents. Projects should check with their local treatment facilities to confirm what the jurisdiction requirements are for chemical disposal. In response to the question raised in CIR ruling dated 1/18/2005, a project MAY be able to meet this requirement by only providing permanent walkoff mats and entryway systems if NO chemicals (of any type) are mixed and stored on-site. If any chemicals are mixed or stored on-site, then the criteria for containment, ventilation and plumbing will apply.\n\n **Update October 1, 2013: Applicable credits have been updated." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "10402" "2014-10-01" "New Construction, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction, Retail - New Construction, Healthcare, Commercial Interiors, Retail - Commercial Interiors" "EQc5 - Indoor chemical and pollutant source control" "Our project is using a demand controlled exhaust system for a parking garage to meet the exhaust requirements for Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance as approved in LEED Interpretation 10247. Is this approach also acceptable to meet the hazardous gases or chemicals requirements in EQ Credit: Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control? " "Yes, for parking garages, the demand exhaust strategy determined in EQ Prerequisite Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance is an acceptable alternative to the exhaust requirements for spaces where hazardous gases or chemicals may be present or used. The other requirements for these spaces must also be met (negative pressure, self-closing doors and deck-to-deck partitions or hard lid ceiling, no air recirculation, pressure differential)." "10247" "None" "X"