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) "LEED Interpretation" "1297" "2005-11-05" "New Construction" "According to the EBN, Volume 14 No. 10 all Potlatch Corporation forest land is certified by FSC as of 9/1/05. The dimension lumber purchased for the project to date is manufactured by Potlatch through a local lumber yard and was delivered wrapped, banded and clearly labeled ""Potlatch - SFC Certified"". The chain-of-custody is broken only by the local lumber yards who are resisting payment of the FSC certification fee. Can we claim credit for lumber despite its passing through a lumber yard that is not FSC certified?" "**NOTE: Guidance in the following CIR may be superseded by revised FSC Chain-of-Custody requirements issued by USGBC and FSC on 4/7/2008. New comprehensive guidelines can be found on the USGBC website here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=4027 ** Yes, the project may claim credit for the lumber because it is labeled as a packaged unit for sale (and not broken down or re-packaged). Provide the lumberyard\'s supplier\'s FSC certification number in your LEED submittal, and retain documentation that demonstrates purchase of FSC-labeled product. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "1448" "2006-03-06" "New Construction, Schools - New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell" "Our project is a renovation of a university dormitory. We request an interpretation of Materials and Resources Credit 6, Rapidly Renewable Resources. Specifically, we would like to know if plant material used in landscaping can qualify for this point. The LEED NC v2.1 Reference Guide defines rapidly renewable materials as those that ""...substantially replenish themselves faster than traditional extraction demand (i.e., planted and harvested in less than a 10-year cycle)."" All of the plants to be used on our site have been planted and harvested in less than a 10-year cycle. Landscaping is included in CSI Division 2 and all items in Divisions 2 through 10 are to be included when calculating this and other MR credits. Additionally, the Reference Guide shows a sample spreadsheet to calculate compliance with MR Credit 5.1 & 5.2 (Local /Regional Materials), which includes plantings as contributing towards that point. Since all MR points are supposed to include the same materials, it seems reasonable to include plantings in MR Credit 6 calculations, provided they are planted and harvested within a 10-year cycle. We ask for this interpretation because landscaping is not specifically mentioned in the Rating System or Reference Guide for MR Credit 6. Also, if it isn\'t allowed, a project is penalized for having extensive landscaping. Could you please confirm that rapidly renewable landscaping complies with the intention of this credit and should be included in the calculations?" "The strategy described is considered to be standard practice and does not fulfill the credit\'s intent to reduce the use and depletion of finite raw materials and long-cycle renewable materials by selecting rapidly renewable materials. The credit is concerned with manufactured building products. Plantings can not contribute to MRc6 achievement. You may exclude them from the denominator in all MR credit calculations so that projects are not penalized for having extensive landscaping. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "1965" "2007-12-18" "New Construction" "We are requesting clarification on whether the v2.1 CIR ruling 8/4/2003 (revised 6/9/2004) may be applied to MRc7 using the v2.2 compliance path. The CIR ruling states that FSC\'s partial content rules allow for a wood product with 70% or higher FSC content by volume to be considered as 100% FSC in the MRc7 calculator if the wood is sourced from a manufacturer with chain-of-custody certification. The v2.2 Reference Guide does not refer to this partial content rule; therefore we would like to clarify whether or not this v2.1 CIR ruling may be applied using the v2.2 compliance path." "**NOTE: Guidance in the following CIR may be superseded by revised FSC Chain-of-Custody requirements issued by USGBC and FSC on 4/7/2008. New comprehensive guidelines can be found on the USGBC website here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=4027 ** No, the v2.1 CIR ruling dated 8/4/2003 may not be applied to v2.2 projects. Since the writing of that CIR the Forest Stewardship Council has issued a new Chain of Custody Standard, FSC-STD-40-004, which substantially revises the organization\'s labeling and certification rules. In place of what had been referred to as partial content certification, FSC has introduced three new labels: FSC Pure, FSC Mixed, and FSC Recycled. As such the partial content rule as explained in the above mentioned CIR no longer applies. As it states on page 283 of the Reference Guide, ""in the case of an assembly, only the percentage of FSC-certified wood can be applied toward that credit."" Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5457" "2003-03-11" "New Construction" "3. FSC Certified Wood -- Credit 7.0 -- Credit Equivalence Request When we registered this project, LEED 2.1 was not yet out. We decided to apply under 2.1 to reduce the cost of paperwork. The project is using more than 50% FSC certified wood - our current estimate is close to 90%. Under 2.0 this would have qualified for the credit. However, the total value of the wood is less than " "The 2% requirement in LEED 2.1 has recently been removed from the MR credit 7 language. This change will be reflected in the corrected LEED 2.1 Rating System document and letter template to be posted on the USGBC website. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5572" "2002-07-11" "New Construction" "For the Materials Credits: (4, 5, 6 and 7), the percentage calculation is based on material costs only (see exclusions). Our project is a publicly bid government project for which only lump sum bid information is available. The general contractor has significant historical data calculating the materials only cost of a project at 60% of the total construction cost. Would it be acceptable to use this formula to prepare our calculations for these credits?" "The material credits listed require material cost information for each individual material category (i.e. steel, gwb, millwork, carpet, etc) in order to calculate adjusted values for LEED credits. You will not be able to effectively address these credit requirements if your cost information does not break down costs by material. The value you suggest for total material cost percentage is acceptable if you provide some documentation from the contractor that you are using an estimate in lieu of actual material costs. However, an assumption of 60% might be high, making material percentage credits more difficult to achieve. Version 2.1 of LEED includes some new language about this calculation that may be useful to your project. The new Version 2.1 language suggests a material cost percentage that is lower than you propose. This information should be available shortly on the USGBC website, and could be used by your project once it is published there. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "597" "2003-08-04" "New Construction" "Under the current standard, a chain of custody is required under the FSC Certification. To what extent does this chain of custody run? Currently we have certified growers supplying lumber for wood trussed but there is a question if the truss fabricator must also be certified or does the fabricator simply indicate the FSC Certified source of the wood products used?" "NOTE: revised June 9, 2004 (correction based on FSC percentage-based policy). NOTE: Guidance in the following CIR may be superseded by revised FSC Chain-of-Custody requirements issued by USGBC and FSC on 4/7/2008. New comprehensive guidelines can be found on the USGBC website here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=4027 The Forest Stewardship Council requires that every party that takes ownership of the wood or wood product have chain-of-custody certification for the wood product to be called ""FSC-certified."" In an effort to develop the market for certified wood, LEED has, in the past, allowed a party to claim credit for the use of FSC-certified wood in a project even if the party involved in final fabrication of the product before it reaches the building is not chain-of-custody certified. However, this position should be reviewed going forward to avoid conflicts with the FSC trademark. In this particular instance our recommendation is to allow the credit. However no where should it be claimed that these are ""FSC-certified trusses,"" and the manufacturer must warrant that they have indeed used certified wood to make the trusses. A couple of related points regarding LEED\'s de facto position to date: 1. If the wood is supplied to a manufacturer by a wholesaler or distributor who is not involved with fabrication or modification of the material, that supplier must have FSC chain-of-custody certification for the material to qualify as FSC-certified under LEED. 2. If the truss manufacturer were FSC-certified, FSC\'s partial content rules would allow that company to produce ""FSC-certified trusses"" with as little as 70% FSC-certified wood by volume (NOTE: the original CIR text has been edited from saying ""30%"" to ""70%."" 30% is the minimum weight content for chip/fiber material), the entire value of the truss would count towards the FSC-certified wood credit for LEED, regardless of whether it is made from 70% or 100% certified wood. Since the manufacturer in this case does not have chain-of-custody certification, only the actual amount of FSC-certified wood used in the trusses can be applied toward the credit. Applicable Internationally." "None" "None" "X"