CI 2009 IEQc4.5: Low-Emitting Materials—Systems Furniture and Seating

Christi,

If the furniture is going in the building prior to occupancy and is being taken in to account in other credits, then it must be used for EQ 4.5.

If the designer has proof that the products meet GREENGUARD, then the certification period on it and the manufacturer should be able to tell them when the product was manufactured. For a BIFMA test report the test date should be on the report that was provided.

Thank you, Josh. Regarding credit IEQ 4.5, should I include items that are owner furnished/ owner installed?

Christi,

If they are going to be included in the scope of the project, then they have to be included.

Christi,

With respect to IEQc4.5 furniture and the earliest and latest manufacturing and certification dates, I believe you need to supply the relevant dates on the form.

The period of manufacture, earliest date and latest date, are intended to reflect the time period when the furniture was manufactured. For many manufacturers these dates are essentially the installation date, as many products are built-to-order.

The period of certification, earliest and latest date, reflect the time period when the claim of compliance (made by the certificate) covered furniture being manufactured.

The ANSI/BIFMA option, like the Greenguard option, requires that the furniture must have been manufactured during the time period covered by the relevant certification (SCS Indoor Advantage, Greenguard, etc.).

Providing the dates in a summary on the form allows the reviewer to quickly verify that all of the furniture was manufactured during a time period covered by a certification of compliance.

Your question about EAc1.4 is better answered here:

http://www.leeduser.com/credit/CI-2009/EAc1.4

I think you will see others have asked similar questions. Appliance name plate electrical ratings that only specify voltage and current (in amps) can be used to calculate power (in watts) but this may reflect peak power use for short periods and thus overstate the actual power used over longer periods of time.

William,

From my understanding if you are going to include furniture in the 'scope of the project' for one area of the rating system it must be taken in to account/included in the other areas of the rating system. So my answer would be yes, if you are getting credit for low-emitting furniture (great job by the way), then it must be taken in to account for the MR credits as well.

Thanks Josh,

I assumed that to be the case, but was looking for confirmation. Unfortunately, given the reluctance (or unwillingness) of the owner/vendor to release cost information, it means I will have to unattempt this credit.

Certification to the standards you mention does not demonstrate compliance to LEED-CI EQc4.5-2009. There is furniture available in the Asia-Pacific region that is directly compliant with this credit, as can be found on the Scientific Certification Systems and Greenguard websites.

With respect to other options internationally, it may be helpful for you to consider the LEED 2012 2nd public comment versions, which contain a credit for "low-emitting interiors" that is available now as a pilot credit. This credit is updated to no longer specify any single proprietary certification program brand by name, but rather requires compliance with the newest American National Standards for furniture emissions and furniture sustainability (expanding on the current ANSI/BIFMA option).

Please note the pilot credit also requires compliance for walls, insulation, flooring, and ceilings in addition to furniture. However, it also includes an international compliance option that allows LEED projects outside of North America to use compliance to the German AGBB criteria for everything except furniture, if the AGBB results also demonstrate compliance with a tougher formaldehyde1. Formaldehyde is a naturally occurring VOC found in small amounts in animals and plants but is carcinogenic and an irritant to most people when present in high concentrations, causing headaches, dizziness, mental impairment, and other symptoms. When present in the air at levels above 0.1 ppm, it can cause watery eyes; burning sensations in the eyes, nose, and throat; nausea; coughing; chest tightness; wheezing; skin rashes; and asthmatic and allergic reactions. 2. A known carcinogen with no known safe exposure level. Formaldehyde occurs naturally, but appears in unnaturally high concentra­tions in many buildings because it is an ingredient in binders used in many building materials and furnishings. limit (details are spelled out in the credit).

See "Pilot Credit 21: EQ - Low Emitting Interiors" available in the USGBC pilot credit library at this link: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2104

The criteria are for the whole furniture or whole chair. You can show this either by testing the different combinations of materials into the whole product, or by making sure that the alternative fabric does not show higher emissions than the original fabric.
I am not familiar with how Greenguard certifiers will handle this issue, but this here is the approach the would make sense from the testing viewpoint.

Reinhard has hit the nail on the head. The products that are certified by GREENGUARD in either of our low-emitting product programs are as they come out of the manufacturers facility. If you are using a different fabric then what the manufacturer puts on them or has specified, then the full product is not technically certified. I can not speak for other certification programs, but that is how we would look at it.

If you use that fabric and panel together frequently in projects then I would suggest a CA 01350 test at a qualified product emission lab. This test would entail you submitting a representative of the final full product. This would include the panel system that you are looking to place in the LEED space(s) with the fabric that you intend to use. You would then receive a lab report that hopefully confims that the final full system passes the CA 01350 requirements. This lab report could be used to show that the final product that you are installing passes the criteria for EQc4.5. As product emission testing involves a complex process you may want to get some quotes though and do some cost analysis of garnering 1 point.

Of course you could always just work with the panel system manufacturer and see if they can get a fabric that they currently use (and is on certified products) that matches what you are hoping for in the space.

Some of the labs that are qualified to do this test are listed here: http://www.cal-iaq.org/vocs/voc-links

Sorry - I thought that this was in reference to a LEED for Schools question and now that I look closer it is for CI. Let me correct some issues in my above post.

You would need to show that the complete product - panel system & your choosen fabric - passes the GREENGUARD Certification Criteria (which can be found here: http://greenguard.org/Libraries/GG_Documents/GGPS_001_GREENGUARD_Standar...) by using the GREENGUARD Test Methodology (which can be found here: http://greenguard.org/Libraries/GG_Documents/GGTM_P066_BUILDINGMATERIALS...). Their are two labs that I know have the GREENGUARD Test Method in their ISO 17025 scope: Air Quality Sciences (www.aqs.com) and Berkeley Analytical Associates (www.berkeleyanalytical.com). This would not have to pass CA 01350 criteria.

You could also have the complete product go through a BIFMA Emission Test. This would entail testing the product in accordance with BIFMA M7.1-2007 so that you can show that it passes criteria that is listed in BIFMA X7.1-2007. The labs for this test can be found here: http://www.bifma.org/standards/testlabs.html

This is just to add that also Eurofins Product Testing A/S has the GREENGUARD Test Method in its ISO 17025 accreditation scope (www.eurofins.com/voc-testing).

This raises a good question;

Option 1 of this credit as currently written requires Greenguard(TM) certification, not just testing by an independent laboratory that includes the Greenguard test method within the scope of their ISO 17025 accreditation.

The Greenguard documents referenced also include the Greenguard certification program requirements for laboratories. These call for audits by the Greenguard Environmental Institute (GEI), approval by GEI of the lab's quality assurance project plan, and other details in addition to ISO 17025 accreditation.

So to be clear, testing of the complete product (with chosen fabric) by Berkeley Analytical Associates or Eurofins, even following the Greenguard test method, would not be sufficient to attain Greenguard(TM) certification, and would therefore not meet option 1 of this credit, correct?

However, while Air Quality Sciences (the Greenguard partner laboratory) is still the only laboratory in North America that is allowed by Greenguard to test for Greenguard certification under Option 1, Option 2 uses the American National Standards (ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 and X7.1), which are open to multiple, competing laboratories and certifiers.

Therefore, testing of the complete product (with chosen fabric) by Berkeley Analytical Associates, Eurofins, Air Quality Sciences, or other qualified laboratories following the ANSI/BIFMA standards could demonstrate compliance under Option 2.

Additionally, if the product is seating or an open office product (like a work station) and meets 7.6.2 in the BIFMA E3 standard, it would pass the requirements of CA 01350, therefore qualifying the product for points under LEED for Schools' EQ 4.5.

Full disclosure - I am the Technical Information & Public Affairs Manager for GREENGUARD Environmental Institute.

Lauren - contact SCS and ask them if they have a copy of the old certificate. If the product was certified they should be able to get you a pdf of the certificate. As GREENGUARD does, SCS may also have it listed somewhere on the product listing in their product guide how long the product has been certified - we call it the certification period, but they may call it something different. If that doesn't work, then I'm sure if you contact Steelcase directly they would have the independent test lab report that covers that period of time that would prove that the product passes the criteria.

EQc4.5 is focused on Systems FurnitureSystems furniture includes panel-based workstations comprising modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components, and drawer and filing components or a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert. and Seating. Seating is just what is sounds like, but Systems Furniture is defined as, "Systems furniture is defined as either a panel-based workstation comprised of modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components and
drawer/filing components, or a freestanding grouping of furniture items and their components that have been designed to work in concert.
Furniture other than systems furniture and task and guest chairs used with systems furniture is defined as occasional furnitureOccasional furniture is located in lobbies and in conference rooms. and is excluded
from the credit requirements." So your blinds/screens would have to be sold as part of the panel-based work stations that you are using to be considered within EQc4.5. As an example if you are using some of the full-length movable wall systems then those would not be considered under EQc4.5. They may be considered under EQc4.6 as a wall system, but not as system furniture.

The CI EQc4.5 technically only covers System Furniture (workstations or case goods in commercial office terms) and Seating. So I think your dinig tables would be exempt from this credit as occasional furnitureOccasional furniture is located in lobbies and in conference rooms.. The custom-built wood benches however may be interpreted as seating however (although the seating that they were referencing within the credit was task seating, like a desk chair). Covering them in low-emitting or low VOC content paints would be good for the indoor air quality, but would not show qualification for EQc4.5 as that is a complete piece of furniture credit. Are the benches going to be 'built-ins'? If they are going to be part of the structure of the building - almost like cabinets - then I could see them not being considered within the furniture credit. Then you would just need your seating (bar stools & chairs) to pass the criteria.

The wood benches are not fixed in place so they may be moved to customize seating. The chairs and bar stools are steel (new manufacture). The tables, if it matters, are not fixed in place either. The tables and benches are made from the same reclaimed wood.

You may want to also look at submitting the tables and benches as being over 1 year old as you are stating that they are completely reclaimed wood. As long as you are not adding anything new to the piece that was not there that could be high-emitting - such as stain or other coatings - that may be the best way to show compliance. Obviously the new products would need to pass the stated EQ 4.5 criteria.

Given the clear credit language, I would probably say you can't earn the credit using only the furniture purchased in 2008. If it's important to you I suppose you could try documenting it, include a narrative, and hope that it gets approved?

Thanks Tristan. Well, my reasoning is, that if at the time of manufacture & occupancy both, the Greenguard certification is valid, why can't the credit be earned? Like you said, we'll document it and see how it goes.

Depending upon the furniture and who makes it, it may still be certified. Obviously that piece was made years ago, but GREENGUARD requires quarterly and annual testing on a representative product for all product categories that have certification. So find out if they still have certification on the product, this would show that they have had consistently low-emitting materials over a long time - which should help you with your case for a credit.

Also - even if you don't get the credit, try and unwrap the furniture from its shipping material as sometimes the material that it is shipped in (cardboard) can act like a sponge and therefore keep the potentially bad VOCs1. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are carbon compounds that participate in atmospheric photochemical reactions (excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides and carbonates, and ammonium carbonate). The compounds vaporize (become a gas) at normal room temperatures. 2. A molecule containing one or more carbon atoms that tends to evaporate (volatilize) into the air at typical ambi­ent conditions. Some legal definitions of VOCs are restricted to those that react with sunlight to generate smog. Some VOCs are carcinogens, suspected carcinogens, or known irritants at typical levels., which should off-gas and dissipate, around for a while.

Good luck.

You do not need to provide any proof of equivalency. Scientific Certification Systems SCS Indoor Advantage(TM) or Indoor Advantage Gold certificates are acceptable documentation to show compliance with EQc4.5 and have been used successfully on hundreds of projects to achieve this credit.

The USGBC EQ TAG ruled in 2006 that, for the purposes of the EQc4.5 credit, the ANSI/BIFMA method was equivalent to Greenguard. Thus a 2006 CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide ruling defined the BIFMA option under EQc4.5, which became the ANSI/BIFMA option in LEED 2009. SCS certification demonstrates compliance to the ANSI/BIFMA option. Other third-party certifications also demonstrate compliance to the ANSI/BIFMA option, like BIFMA level(TM) if the product earns the low-emitting furniture point (BIFMA e3 Section 7.6.1). See www.levelcertified.org.

SCS and Greenguard each have strengths and weaknesses. For example, SCS requires independent testing of furniture in accordance with the ANSI/BIFMA standards and does not make any money from the recurring laboratory testing. Greenguard requires testing following their proprietary test methods and requires all North American manufacturers to use their for-profit partner laboratory, Air Quality Sciences.

Greenguard (founded in 2001) was written into the original EQc4.5 credit and is now widely known for certifying low-emitting products and materials. Scientific Certification Systems (founded in 1984) is well known for independent verification of a wide variety of environmental claims, including FSCIndependent, third-party verification that forest products are produced and sold based on a set of criteria for forest management and chain-of-custody controls developed by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), an international nonprofit organization. FSC criteria for certifying forests around the world address forest management, legal issues, indigenous rights, labor rights, multiple benefits, and environmental impacts. wood, recycled & material content, VOC emissions, Floorscore, carbon offsetA fiscal unit measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) representing six main categories of greenhouse gases. Aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, one carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide (or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases). Carbon offsets are typically purchased by consumers of fossil fuels or products using fossil fuels, as a way to "offset" or negate their negative environmental impact., food & agriculture, life cycle impact assessment, and more.

There are many other differences between these two competing organizations and both offer multiple benefits to users.

thanks for your reply, Randy.
In this case, with the SCS certificate, do I need to provide the VOC levels for the product to get the point? Greenguard certificates list them, however SCS does not, therefore there is no way to tell the exact VOC levels numbers of the product, which are what is needed for the credit, if I'm not mistaken?

My apologies, we are not following the LEED CI 2009 version, where compliance with BIFMA furniture emissions is an option. The first version doesn't have that option and that is why i was confused about the lack of information on the SCS certificate.

The BIFMA option is available as an alternative compliance path under LEED v2. Third-party certificates demonstrating compliance to the ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 and X7.1 standards (like SCS Indoor Advantage or Indoor Advantage Gold) are still acceptable documentation. You can also attach a copy of the CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide, available on the USGBC website or at this link: http://www.bifma.org/news/newsrelease.pdfs/USGBC%20Ruling%2019Dec06.pdf.

Be sure to verify the certification dates include the manufacturing dates of the furniture for the project. You do not have to provide the VOC levels along with the SCS certificates under LEED v2 or v3.

Certificates vary. In this case, the important details are the products covered by the claim of compliance, the dates covered by the claim, and the details of the claim. Details include what standards the products complied with, and any applicable restrictions or exclusions to the claim. The standards include the VOC levels and many other details.

SCS certificates do not list the specific VOC criteria, but they do state what exposure scenario was used, e.g., open plan, private office, classroom, etc. Greenguard certificates list the VOC criteria but do not state which exposure scenario was used. Products that are compliant in one scenario may not be compliant in another, even when the VOC levels are the same, because the ventilation rates are different.

Just wanted to add some clarity to some things that Mr. Carter stated above. For full disclosure, I am the Technical Information & Public Affairs Manager for GREENGUARD Environmental Institute. There are some significant differences between some of the GREENGUARD and other organizations' emission programs.

1) GREENGUARD Certification Programs require ongoing quarterly and annual testing of products. This ensures that any changes to a product are not significantly effecting the chemicals off-gassing from the product. You would be amazed at the significant differences in chemical emissions that some small component or ingredient changes can make. Others only require these tests on a annual basis. We have been told by some manufacturers that they can resource components or ingredients multiple times within a 12 month time frame, so we don't feel every twelve months is protective enough.

2) GREENGUARD Certification Programs require the testing of a final full product. This is because this is what is going to be put in to the built environment. Other emission certification programs test pieces of a product and then add together what they are off-gassing. Yet there are reports that show that this can result in full product estimates that are 290% off from what the final product actually does off gas. We want to ensure that our label is on products that are truly low-emitting and for us to have complete faith in that, we need to test the full representative product.

3) GREENGUARD Certification Program and GREENGUARD Children & Schools have limits on around 360 individual chemicals and a protective measure on the other potential chemicals off-gassing from the product through a total volatile organic chemical (TVOCThe sum or total of all volatile organic compounds (VOCs) released from a product or measured in a space under certain defined conditions.) limit. In addition to the individual chemicals the GREENGUARD certification program that is within EQc4.5 has a TVOC limit of 500, the GREENGUARD Children & Schools program that is within LEED for Schools has a TVOC limit of 220. Other low-emitting product standards or programs usually do one or the other. Mr. Carter mentioned the BIFMA X7.1-2007 which is in LEED EQc4.5 - this has a TVOC limit of 500, but only limits formaldehyde1. Formaldehyde is a naturally occurring VOC found in small amounts in animals and plants but is carcinogenic and an irritant to most people when present in high concentrations, causing headaches, dizziness, mental impairment, and other symptoms. When present in the air at levels above 0.1 ppm, it can cause watery eyes; burning sensations in the eyes, nose, and throat; nausea; coughing; chest tightness; wheezing; skin rashes; and asthmatic and allergic reactions. 2. A known carcinogen with no known safe exposure level. Formaldehyde occurs naturally, but appears in unnaturally high concentra­tions in many buildings because it is an ingredient in binders used in many building materials and furnishings. and a chemical called 4 PCH on an individual basis. Mr. Carter also talks about BIFMA e3 (furniture sustainability standard) and its emission criteria. Within that it has a TVOC limit of 500 and individual limits on 32 chemicals. The CA 01350 method that is called out in LEED for Schools as well, only has individual limits of 35 chemicals.

We didn't feel that looking at 35 individual chemicals or looking at chemicals in a lump sum manner alone was being protective enough, especially with more than 10,000 individual chemicals having the potential to emit from man-made products. So that is why we wanted to make sure that our certification protected people from the known (the 360 individual chemicals where we have data that can negatively effect humans through emissions) and then from the unknown (the TVOC limit on other chemicals that just haven't had the research dollars committed to them yet to find out what they do to us).

Hopefully this is a little clearer picture to the differences. So while GREENGUARD certification and other low-emitting programs are accepted for LEED Credit, the programs are not equivalent in the amount that they protect the indoor occupants from chemical exposure.

The period of manufacture, earliest date and latest date, are intended to reflect the time period when the furniture was manufactured. For many manufacturers these dates are essentially the installation date, as many products are built-to-order.

SCS Indoor Advantage is a third-party certification that demonstrates compliance with the ANSI/BIFMA furniture emissions standards, and therefore the signed SCS certificates are acceptable documentation to demonstrate compliance with EQc4.5. Under Form of Compliance I would state: SCS Indoor Advantage third-party certification to ANSI/BIFMA option.

SCS and Greenguard are different in many ways, however EQc4.5 accepts either Greenguard certification or compliance to the ANSI/BIFMA furniture emissions standards, which can be demonstrated by SCS, other third-party certifications, or through other means.

Thanks for your very helpful comment Randy. That cleared up a lot for me. :)

I would probably also use the last date, and just check that the dates match up with all the relevant products.

Not sure—I would ask GBCI.

I'm wondering if yours is an NC-v2.2 project, or 2009? If 2009, I would use a CI 2009 form. (Which may be a trick to obtain, I realize.)

Katrina:
For the 2nd 'Form of Compliance' column, we usually plug in the associated SCS (or other) certification code from the certifying agency. The code should align with the test date in the next column.

I am hoping to also submit a LEED CI 2009 EQc4.5 as an ID credit to my LEED for Schools 2009 application. Any ideas for how I can get a hold of the LEED CI 2009 EQc4.5 form???

Dana - no need to submit it as an ID credit, LEED for Schools EQc4 has 6 options - furniture being one of those options. So simply submit under the LEED for Schools EQc4.0 - if you submit more than the 4 allowable credits, they will move the others over to ID (that is what was done in our LEED Gold CI project). Good luck.

Thanks, Josh. This is my first LEED 2009 and LEED for Schools, for that matter. Things are different than 2.2! I'll look into it.

I just looked at my reference guide and it says schools are limited to 4 credits with no exemplary performanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. acceptable for ID.

You probably aren't going to get LEED for Schools EQc 4.4 - which focuses on composite woodComposite wood consists of wood or plant particles or fibers bonded by a synthetic resin or binder. Examples include particleboard, medium-density fiberboard (MDF), plywood, oriented-strand board (OSB), wheatboard, and strawboard. that meets CA 01350 criteria - because there really isn't any that have been tested to this criteria. So using low-emitting furniture would fill in as your 4th point.

No...see Tristan's July 27 reply above.

Kelvin, the office chairs and anything else older than a year that is not refurbished or refinished is not covered by this credit.

The refurbished or refinished furniture must be tested. In a situation like yours with lots of different items with different histories, I can imagine this might not be practical, in which case perhaps this credit is better left alone. (Although I would still pursue low-emitting furniture when possible.)

I am looking for an electrostatic paint that meets the VOC limits. Can you tell me what you used?

Carrie, I would say that if you look around the office and see desks, cabinets, etc. being used in a system, ven if they came from different sources, they qualify under the credit.

Might be a stupid question - however does a VP's freestanding and lone desk in a private office cell manufactured by Haworth/Herman Miller/Steelcase/Knoll equivalent counts as "system furniture?" In a way it is part of greater system when purchased from same vendor and installed together with the usual adjacent workstation clusters but physically it is not interconnected...Yes or No?

Yes, a freestanding desk would be considered "system furniture" under the definition in EQc4.5, as it can be considered part of "...a freestanding grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert." The confusion seems to stem from people thinking of panel-based furniture systems (Steelcase Answer, Herman Miller Action Office, etc.) as systems furnitureSystems furniture includes panel-based workstations comprising modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components, and drawer and filing components or a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert.. However, in this context a casegoods furniture line made up of freestanding desks, credenzas, file cabinets, bookshelves, etc. is also considered a "system" of furniture.

However, demonstrating compliance under LEED 2009 for a single desk is not clearly defined in the current credit. Option 1 requires Greenguard certification, however Greenguard has different requirements for a whole workstation than they do for a single desk. I believe the original credit was written thinking of an entire workstation meeting the requirements (e.g., 50 ppbParts per billion. formaldehyde1. Formaldehyde is a naturally occurring VOC found in small amounts in animals and plants but is carcinogenic and an irritant to most people when present in high concentrations, causing headaches, dizziness, mental impairment, and other symptoms. When present in the air at levels above 0.1 ppm, it can cause watery eyes; burning sensations in the eyes, nose, and throat; nausea; coughing; chest tightness; wheezing; skin rashes; and asthmatic and allergic reactions. 2. A known carcinogen with no known safe exposure level. Formaldehyde occurs naturally, but appears in unnaturally high concentra­tions in many buildings because it is an ingredient in binders used in many building materials and furnishings. or less under standard conditions). However, Greenguard arbitrarily created requirements for a single desk that allow up to 25 ppb formaldehyde, and requirements for a single bookcase that allow up to 25 ppb formaldehyde, and requirements for a single file cabinet that allow up to 25 ppb formaldehyde, etc. So, a manufacturer could Greenguard certify these items separately, and the combination could create a workstation that would not meet the workstation requirements. Greenguard certificates do not state how the product was evaluated (i.e, as part of a system, or as an individual component).

Option 2, the ETV option, has been eliminated as it was "broken" and was never used successfully on any project.

Option 3 specifies the ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 and X7.1-2007 standards. These define requirements for whole workstations and whole seating units. After 2007, the committee responsible for these standards defined requirements for single desks, tables, bookcases, file cabinets, etc. that require each item to meet their respective fraction of the total emissions allowed for a workstation. Therefore, if a single desk, file cabinet, bookcase, etc. is evaluated for compliance as a stand-alone item, it will also meet the workstation requirements when combined with other items that have also been found compliant alone.

These ANSI/BIFMA requirements for individual furniture items are currently defined in the BIFMA e3 Furniture Sustainability Standard and in the new revisions of the ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 and X7.1 standards that are nearing ANSI approval. So today, individual furniture products that are level(TM) certified and meet the emissions credit (Section 7.6.1 in BIFMA e3) are compliant to these new requirements.

The proposed EQc4 low-emitting interiors credit that is out for public comment between now and Dec 31 requires compliance with the BIFMA e3 furniture emissions requirements, and specifically applies to individual furniture items, not just workstations. You can read more about this on LEEDuser under Pilot Credit 21, which is the same as the newly proposed EQc4 credit.

Thank you Randy,

I need further clarity here. Are you telling me Opt 2 is no longer an option per se? Where in LEED reference does it say that?

Previous projects we just go for Greenguard certified systems, but in one project before us, Client has a preference for a non-Greenguard system, so we need to do the test option.

The project is in China. I just wanted to know what does it take to meet this credit. Approximately how long and how much is the test for a single freestanding desking system? I suppose we need to get it done in USA?

Is there a less painful approach here? You mentioned about an alternative compliant path - BIFMA e3 and level (TM) whatever that is. Please elaborate more...

The ETV option in this credit (IEQc4.5) was eliminated by an addenda published in July 2010, available here: http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8458

That is not a problem, because the ANSI/BIFMA option essentially replaced the ETV option. Independent testing of representative product is required per the ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 test method. You do not have to conduct the tests in the U.S., as there are labs in Europe and the Asia Pacific region that offer the test. You will have to contact laboratories for pricing. A partial list of laboratories that conduct the test is available here: http://www.bifma.org/standards/testlabs.html

BIFMA e3 is a multi-attribute sustainability standard that is to furniture as LEED is to buildings. It contains prerequisites and 90 total, possible points that address product, facilities, or the manufacturing company, in a wide range of sustainability criteria (GHG reduction, recycled content, materials chemistry, energy efficiency, water conservation, LCA, etc.).

One of these points (e3 Section 7.6.1) is available for low-emitting furniture compliance per ANSI/BIFMA M7.1 and X7.1 (just like the option in this LEED credit). Level(TM) certification is third-party certification to the BIFMA e3 standard by one of six independent certifiers. Therefore a level certified product that earns the point from Section 7.6.1 is also compliant to this LEED credit under the ANSI/BIFMA option. See www.levelcertified.org for more information.

What about meeting room furniture? Is this system furniture?
Same question about furniture waiting rooms and lunchrooms?
I could understand such furniture as "a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert." Correct?

I have the same question - has anyone answered this?
I understand the lable of "occasional furnitureOccasional furniture is located in lobbies and in conference rooms." for coffee tables, etc., but what about dining tables?

Nicole,

Unfortunately I don't think there has ever been a consistent answer with the LEED reviewers. I have seen tables that are used in someone's cubicle be required because it is 'part of the system', but then if someone is using the same table and claiming that it is used in conference rooms, it does not need to meet the credit.

If I had to do a review, I would say that dining tables are not included per the credit language, but thankfully there are options that can meet this credit and normally the furniture isn't more expensive - so it would be a good idea to at least look for these types of low-emitting products for the indoor air quality.

Yes, there's no minimum quantity or type of furniture needed to qualify for this credit, so yes.

My only question is whether the furniture built on-site should also be subject to the credit requirements. I don't feel confident giving an answer one way or the other. Were you planning to exclude them, and if so, on what basis?

This is for a NC LEED assessment for a protoype store, and we are identifying potential ID credits; in this case, using CI's IEQc4.5. All the work surfaces will be either shop-built or site-built, carrel-style; but they don't meet the definition of 'systems' furniture in the CI Reference Guide. It will be easy to specify AUFR-free substrates and low-voc adhesives for their construction, but we see them as outside of CI's IEQc4.5 scope.

I am curious what your reasoning is for how they don't meet the definition of systems furnitureSystems furniture includes panel-based workstations comprising modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components, and drawer and filing components or a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert.? I was just looking at the definition and it seems both very specific and also fairly vague and general at the same time!

The anticipated work surfaces are not panel-based, nor are they free-standing. They are custom-built by the project carpentry staff after the walls are completed. They are closer to being part of the base building than to being furniture. If the owner decides to use modular components such as hang-on drawers and files, those components would also be compliant with the credit requirements.

This is a tricky one. The definition of furniture according to the EQc4.5 is

"Systems furnitureSystems furniture includes panel-based workstations comprising modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components, and drawer and filing components or a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert. is defined as either a panel-based workstation comprising modular, interconnecting panels, hang-on components and drawer and filing components, or a freestanding grouping of furniture items and their components that have been designed to work in concert. Furniture other than systems furniture and task and guest chairs used with systems furniture is defined as occasional furnitureOccasional furniture is located in lobbies and in conference rooms. and is excluded from the credit requirements."

On the one hand, site built custom free standing desks could fall under that category. On the other hand, EQc4.5 is asking that these items be Green Guard or equivalent certified. It may be difficult to certify a custom made mill worked piece of furniture and may be better suited to follow the intent of EQc4.4 for no urea formaldehydeUrea formaldehyde is a combination of urea and formaldehyde that is used in some glues and may emit formaldehyde at room temperature. in the composite woodComposite wood consists of wood or plant particles or fibers bonded by a synthetic resin or binder. Examples include particleboard, medium-density fiberboard (MDF), plywood, oriented-strand board (OSB), wheatboard, and strawboard. or laminate adhesives.