EBOM 2009 IEQc3.5: Green Cleaning—Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control

Alyson, I feel your pain! It can be very frustrating when you are doing the right thing, even go beyond the credit requirements, and not earn the point for your efforts. It seems the credit was denied because the reviewer did not understand that typical carpeting was replaced with walk-off mat material, but not because it was permanently installed. In fact, the credit requirements are to employ permanent entryway systems (grilles, grates, mats). Did you submit a cut sheet of the walk-off carpet material? I think this would have cleared up the confusion.

I am not surprised that the project did not receive credit for MRc9 though. A facility alternation is defined as an alternation that includes construction activity by more than 1 trade specialty and includes substantial changes to at least 1 entire room. Therefore carpet removal would be considered a minor upgrade. But at least you can feel good about keeping the old carpet out of landfill!

Yes, I would say so. I would want to check that this carpeting does a good enough job at being a trackoff mat, and that no matter which direction someone is coming from, they walk over the required amount of mat.

Janna, there is no specific cleaning frequency requirement. It just has to be part of a good overall cleaning policy for the facility. You can see a template for this in the Doc Toolkit above.

Let's step back from a minute from the requirements in this case.

Is this a situation where the intent of this credit is relevant? What would you do with the trucks if you were meeting the credit intent?

I'm curious, what kind of factory?

Robert, I think you're asking about loading docks. If that's the case, no entryway mats are required for the garage roll-up style doors, but if there is an entrance that workers use to cross from the loading dock area into the main part of the facility, there should be at least 10 feet of entryway mat at that entryway.

I've got a similar situation for a car dealership/ workshop. We have several new roll-up doors for car entry. These car entries do not need entry way systems, correct? We're installing entry systems at all people enties.

Thank you.

That's correct, no mats for roll-up garage doors used in this way.

How about for a mixed use roll up garage door, loading dock to main area.... people/forklift/carts/freight etc. thanks!

Under NC the credit IEQc5 Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control requires roll out mats to be cleaned on a weekly basis. I assume you can consider the same requirements for this credit. It is not specified how they are to be cleaned.
best regards
Robert

I haven't seen this, but I don't see why it wouldn't be accepted. Another options is to use multiple mats to make up the full 10 feet. You mentioned that you have 8 feet on the landing before the stairs begin. If you put a separate 2 foot mat outside the door, and there is some sort of awning or overhang that would protect it from the elements, the combined coverage of the two separate mats would be acceptable.

You can definitely combine multiple mats to make up a total of 10 linear feet in the direction of travel. If you have some sort of awning or protective cover, you can even put one mat outside. For example, it would be acceptable to put one 2' mat outside the door under an awning and two 4' mats inside the door to make up 10' linear feet of entryway mat.

From your description, it sounds like the total resulting coverage would be 8' wide (for a 6' door) and 12' long in the line of traffic. Is that right? Sounds good to me in terms of the credit requirements.

Be sure to address the indoor/outdoor issue that's been discussed in other threads here.

It's acceptable to split up your entryway system between an indoor and outdoor mat. As long as you're covering a linear 10 foot area, this can be compliant. Keep the intent of the credit in mind though - the point is to reduce the transfer of particulates and other pollutants from the outdoors into the interior of your building. If you have 10' of outdoor mat that is exposed to the elements, you'll need to be very clear in your documentation to show that you're maintaining those mats so that they effectively reduce pollutant transfer.

Does anyone have a recommendation for a specific type of mat to use? I do not want to use a grille or grate.

Paul, there are hundreds of trackoff mats on the market. It's hard to single out a product to recommend without knowing more about your project, but I think it would be a straightforward task to pick something suitable.

I hope other people with more experience will weigh in, but my initial response is to be a bit dubious. A good track-off systems is designed to catch dirt and pollutants on the way in the door. A lot of carpets just wouldn't do a great job at this. I think you would have to demonstrate that the particular carpet is functionally similar to a walk-off mat.

Thanks, Tristan, that was my reaction as well.

Seems like a good reaction to me, too, but some walk-off mats that get the credit are not a whole lot different than your basic carpet. And in these cases, simple documentation of the cleaning contract and a narrative of the cleaning could suffice.

Though a good reviewer should realize the credit intent and look to see that the wall-off mat has the three components: “scraper”, “wiper”, and “finisher” areas.

The key requirement to document, as Tristan points out, is to capture dirt and particulates entering the building at all public entry points. Your basic carpet simply distributes it throughout the building.

This NC IEQc5 forum discussion on use of carpet tiles is relevant to this discussion. Looks like this approach may be fairly acceptable.

Since the credit language refers to "public entry points" I would assume that an internal courtyard would not be subject to the requirements.

I would recommend caution here since the intent of the credit is reduce/prevent the amount of particulate matter that is tracked into a building's interior on the occupants' shoes. If your open-air courtyard features landscaping, soil, gravel or any other type of material that could be carried into the building on a regular basis, I'd say that it would be important to have entryway mats at those building entrances. The key point here is that people are entering the building interior at these locations. "Public entry point" simply means that the entryway is not a private entrance used by a single individual or family; if these courtyards are accessible to any of your building occupants, they would be considered public entry points.

Thank you Tristan and Jason. Regards

Chris, the credit requirements seem pretty clear here, that all public entryway points for the building are subject to the requirement.

Is the bank involved in the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project? Might be tough to do without their cooperation.

This is a really good question. Some of our first floor tenants are not participating in LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.. They represent 10% of the square footage of the building that is exempt. As such, I would assume their entryways do not need 10 foot mats. Is that correct?

Wendy, IEQc3.5 is not that cut and dry here regarding the 10% exception. This could be one of those credits that "require commitment and cooperation from tenants" especially since the requirement is for at all public entry points.

That being said, however, all credits do offer a 10% exception, but not all credits contain that option in the LEED Credit Form. The IEQc3.5 form states in the required signatory "at all
entryways in the project building, except those not in use over the performance period..."

So, if your circumstance is sticky (e.g., the first floor tenant has public entry way into the lobby of the main building from the tenant space) you should expect to either try out your strategy through a CIR or be prepared for clarifications during the review process. Or, if you would have concern about not being read clearly by the reviewer, an alternative compliance path could be selected where the project team would submit a floor plan which highlights all entryways and installed entryway
systems, and marks any entryways not in use over the performance period (the tenant excepted spaces included) or that serve only as emergency exits.

In your situation you probably simply can't earn the credit—a requirement as specific as this typically cannot be bent in LEED.

The IEQc3.5 credit language specifies "in the primary direction of travel," so this should work fine as long as the perpendicular route is in the line of travel, i.e. that someone entering the building basically has no choice but to walk the full 10 feet. If they could cut a corner and walk only 5 or 8 feet of it, I might have concerns.

Thanks, Tristan. One other nuance ... are there any mat requirements, in terms of backing, pile, material, etc. ??

No, I don't know of any specific requirements. The key thing would be whether the mat was made for that purpose and is effective in the building.

Hi Tristan, Along the lines of the mat requirements Jared mentioned, I cannot find anywhere under the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. system the requirement for the carpet system to be certified by the Carpet & Rug Institute - is that low emitting flooring/carpets credit not applicable for Exiting Buildings? Would installing new matting that is certified and/or increased to ten feet qualify for EBOM 2009 IEQ1.5 as an alteration (adding the extra feet) or as an addition (getting new carpet that is certified by the CRIColor-rendering index, or CRI, is a scale of 0 to 100, used by manufacturers of fluorescent, metal halide, and other non-incandescent lighting equipment to describe the visual effect of the light on colored surfaces. Natural daylight is assigned a CRI of 100. or equivalent). I know there needs to be an additional trade change besides just the matting...thanks!

Use of carpeting that meets CRIColor-rendering index, or CRI, is a scale of 0 to 100, used by manufacturers of fluorescent, metal halide, and other non-incandescent lighting equipment to describe the visual effect of the light on colored surfaces. Natural daylight is assigned a CRI of 100. Green Label standards is actually rewarded elsewhere in EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems., specifically under MRc3 - Sustainable Purchasing, Facility Alterations and Additions. Replacement of carpeting in a project building alone would not meet the LEED definition of "facility alteration or addition"; a renovation project must employ more than one trade, so for example, painting and new carpeting could qualify a project for MRc3 (and MRc9).

Any project can attempt EQc1.5, because all that credit requires is that you develop an Construction IAQ Management PlanA construction IAQ management plan outlines measures to minimize contamination in a specific project building during construction and describes procedures to flush the building of contaminants prior to occupancy. for future renovation projects. If you also attempt MRc3, you'll need to explicitly document that your Plan was executed throughout the performance period to meet the compliance criteria.

As far as EQc3.5 goes, the key requirement for entryway systems is that the material used is classified as a walk-off mat surface. There are some carpet materials available that may meet this criteria; however, whether or not the carpet is CRI Green Label certified would have no bearing on compliance with EQc3.5.

Hi Tom -

From what I've seen, you need to comply with the requirements as stated, which means that you will need 10 feet of entryway systems at all entrances. You likely know this, but you can use a combination of entryway systems inside and outside each door to meet the 10 foot requirement.

However, you do raise an excellent question as to the requirements for residential projects, as this is not well addressed in the Reference Guide for many of the LEED-EB: O&M credits, though there are relevant CIRs for some credits. It seems to me that submitting a CIR is your best path. Otherwise, it may be that this credit just might not be appropriate for your particular project type.

All entryways regularly used by employees should be equipped with entryway systems (mats, grates, etc.). The only entryways that can be excluded are emergency exits and entryways that are never used (e.g., they are blocked or locked).

Thanks Shira. This helps.

Similar issue as Wendy, however, the main entry is a revolving door with two side entry doors. I would expect that the systems must be the full width of the door opening(s) and must be in place immediately inside the required entryways. But, where in the rating system or Reference Guide is this implied/stated?

Do you want to take a different approach than full width and right inside the entryway? I'm not clear from your question what you have in mind.

I am trying to figure out if the side doors of a main building entry that uses the revolving door as the primary would still have to have walk-off mats. My expectation would be that the systems must be the full width of the door opening(s) and must be in place immediately inside the required entryways, but I can't find anything within the Reference Guide regarding full width of the openings.

In most buildings with entry doors alongside revolving doors, those doors get a fair amount of traffic. I don't see a rationale for excluding them here.

Seems like the common-sense approach on width is that the systems would have to be pretty much the size of the opening and immediately inside to be effective, although I could see them being slightly smaller if there were some design constraint.

Would 5 feet of entryway mat before a revolving door, and 5 feet of entryway mat after a revolving door in the primary direction of travel comply? I guess my main question is, would there be any issues with the area within the revolving door not having appropriate matting. 10 feet of matting would be in place, but it would not be 10 consecutive feet, since the revolving door breaks up the two mats.

Seems reasonable to me, as the credit intent is met—keeping pollutants out of the indoors, and providing adequate track-off mats in the direction of travel. I would make sure that if there is not a mat in the revolving door area, that it is built in such a way that it will stay clean and not create a hazard.

At this point, there is very little guidance around the definition and use of "containment drains." Your description of the high school's lab waste disposal protocol with emphasis on the neutralization basins and compliant hazardous waste disposal process should suffice. Make sure to mark the locations of the drains on the floor plan demonstrating entryway locations.

Please update this string of comments when you receive your comments and let us know how the review turned out - we're all still learning when it comes to this issue.

Rand and others — the containment drain requirement has been removed, per the USGBC's July 2010 LEED addenda. Hallelujah?