-
An easy, no-cost credit
Like the similar credit, IEQc4.1: Low-Emitting Materials: Adhesives and Sealants, it shouldn’t cost you anything extra to earn this credit—it will just take some work. Your first priority should be to specify only paints and coatings that comply with the credit’s VOC limits, and enforce those specifications on the jobsite. Research low-VOC paints and coatings before construction begins and provide lists of acceptable materials to contractors to help ensure that the right products are used.Performance should not be an issue
Major manufacturers offer paints and coatings that are just as durable and perform just as well as their higher-VOC...
-
Verify Your Information
Don’t allow the use of products that merely claim to be “low VOC.” Everyone specifying and purchasing products must actually find the products’ VOC content in grams per liter (g/L), which is usually found on the product’s technical data sheet or material safety data sheet, and compare that number with VOC limits listed for different uses determined by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule #1113 and Green Seal GS-11 and GS-03.
Only 20% of product cut sheets selected at random need to be uploaded to LEED Online to document this credit although it is best to keep all product cut sheets on file in case the credit is audited.
Step-by-step credit help
Got the gist of the LEED credit but not sure how to actually achieve it? LEEDuser gives step-by-step help. Members get:
- Checklists covering all the key action steps you'll need to earn the credit.
- Hot tips to give you shortcuts and avoid pitfalls.
- Cost tips to assess what a credit will actually cost, and how to make it affordable.
- Ideas for going beyond LEED with best practices.
- All checklists organized by project phase.
- On-the-fly suggestions on useful items from the Documentation Toolkit, Resources, and Credit Language.
-
Credit language straight from USGBC
Need to check up on the exact LEED credit language from the LEED Rating System on the fly? LEEDuser includes the verbatim language. Members get:
- Easy access to the official LEED credit language with just a couple of clicks.
- On the jobsite without your bulky LEED Reference Guide? Check up on the credit language details here.
- Credit language content is used by permission of the U.S. Green Building Council.
Your credit-by-credit reference library
Why waste time chasing down referenced standards and supporting resources when LEEDuser links you directly to the ones you need? LEEDuser has gathered all the best tools out there and organized them by credit for easy reference. Members get links to:
- Organizations that can give information or help on a credit.
- Standards or studies that are key reference points for credits and prerequisites.
- Articles that help explain important topics.
- Key documents or references for credit inputs.
- Software tools you can use to run calculations or simulations.
Documentation Toolkit
In the end, LEED is all about documentation. LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit saves you time and helps you avoid mistakes with:
- Calculators to help assess credit compliance.
- Tracking spreadsheets for materials purchases.
- Spreadsheets and forms to give to subs and other team members.
- Guidance documents on arcane LEED issues.
- Sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions.
- Examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects.
144 Comments
Anti-Rust Coatings
I am a little confused by the anti-rust paint/coating VOC limits. The second bullet-point for this credit states that anti-corrosive and anti-rust paints must not exceed 250g/L, which is consistent with the credit form. However, when I go to Table 1, I see a line item titled Rust:preventative coatings that has a VOC limit of 400g/L per SCAQMD #1113 dated 1/1/03. What is the difference? I was given a list from the contractor referencing Rust Preventative Coatings having a limit of 400g/L, which does seem to comply with the manual, but there is no corresponding option in the form. I didn't see it mentioned in any of the addenda, so I'm not sure how to advise. Has anyone else had this problem?
Ellen,
I'm not sure what "Table 1" you're referring to...
For the purposes of LEED anti-rust coatings are not governed by the SCAQMD limits, but rather by the Green Seal Standard (see above credit language).
Hey Emily - thanks for the quick reply. I am referring to Table 1: Standard VOC limits - pg.483 in the BD+C reference guide. This appears to be the SCAQMD 1113 table (google search of SCAQMD 1113 produces the same chart). There is a line item called Rust:preventative coatings that has a current limit of 400g/L which is presumably still valid for LEED, but went down to 100g/L effective 7/1/06. My question is how this differs from the anti-corrosive/anti-rust paint requirement of 250g/L outlined in the credit requirements.
Ellen,
It differs because the requirement in the Table 1 you are referencing is from SCAQMD Rule 1113 and the Credit Requirements are from Green Seal Standard GC-03. For this credit anti-corrosive and anti-rust paints are regulated by GC-03. The VOC listed in the table does not apply for this VOC category.
Also, Table 1 was revised on 11/3/2010 with the Addenda. Search here for it: https://www.usgbc.org/leedinterpretations/LILanding.aspx
Based on when your project was registered you may be subject to the information in this Addenda. Either way, because of the credit requirements specifying GC-03, the requirement that applies to this credit for anti-corrosive and anti-rust paints is 250g/L.
paint paste
Which category should paint paste fall under?
How can I establish the VOC limit?
Thank you very much
would it be ok to put the paint paste as a coating? thanks a lot !
Space types included in IEQ 4 credits ?
Hi
My questions conserns calculation of VOC:s from technical & garage spaces. While both clearly (in my case) inside the weatherproofing system and applied on-site, could they still be dismissed because of the service type ?
USGBC has made a new and highly hoped-for IEQ space type matrix, which will clarify things a lot. However, while technical & garage is not included in the matrix, could this be taken as a quideline to rule out those spaces while evaluation IEQ credits ?
Any suggestions and/or previous experiances?
Yours
timo
comment: based on IEQ space matrix auditoriums should NOT be included in IEQ 8 calculations, unlike demanded by the auditor in past project.
Timo,
I would include those spaces and specify/purchase products that comply. An omission on the part of GBCI should not be assumed to be an indication that a certain space type can be omitted from compliance and documentation. Based on my own experience, garages and/or other types of utility space must be included. I've never heard of or pursued any kind of exemption for an interior space. Whether regularly occupied or not, interior spaces must comply. If this interior space cannot comply, I would plan on pursuing the VOC budget approach and offset the difference with other Low-VOC products.
Material VOC vs. Coating VOC?
I have product submittals that list both the material VOC and the coating VOC for wood stains and lacquers, the latter of which is substantially higher. I can't find any information on which VOC number LEED wants us to use - does anyone know?
Ellen,
I actually touched on this in an article on BuildingGreen last March. If you have a BuildingGreen account you can view it here. If not this explaination is helpful.
Thanks Emily, that is very helpful. I had sort of come to the conclusion that material VOC was the number to use, but I appreciate the confirmation.
Emily,
After reviewing the MACLAC document, I am still left with questions involving this topic. I do not have a BuildingGreen account.
Under Credit IEQ 4.2 in LEED 2009 BD+C, Table 1 states the Standard VOC limits. In parenthesis at the top of the table it says "g/L minus water, minus exempt compounds."
This makes it sound like the limits are measured after all the water and exempt solvents are mathematically subtracted.
However, the Material VOC does not measure the VOC content with all the water and exempt solvents subtracted. It seems using the Material VOC would not be an apples to apples comparison.
Why wouldn't I use the Coating/Regulatory VOC number where the water and exempt solvents are subtracted?
Thank you much!
paints for steel door
where do these kind of paints fall under the Product Type of Table 1. IEQc4.2 Applicable VOC Limits ?
Mostly likely as a standard non-flat paint (150 g/L), unless it has some anti-rust property and has been selected for that reason (250 g/L).
fireproof coatings
does anybody out there know if Fireproof coatings for steel are covered under EQc4.2 and how are they classified?
We have 0 VOC coatings from Cafco, but just checking to see if they should be included.
Yes, fireproofing is a coating.
converting VOC content
Hi
I receive several MSDS1. Material safety data sheets (MSDS) are detailed, written instructions documenting a method to achieve uniformity of performance. 2. A report that manufacturers of most products are required to make available to installers and purchasers, informing them of product information on chemicals, chemical compounds, and chemical mixtures, the existence of potentially hazardous ingredients, and providing instructions for the safe handling, storage, and disposal of products for the coatings that will be used in our project and inside them, the VOC content is measured in Europe (EU) which are usually expressed in percentage % (w/w). It happened that the VOC content (EU) are 0% (w/w), which I'm pretty sure it's the same as 0 g/L , is it correct?
And some MSDS also stated VOC content in lbs/gal, which we can easily convert it to g/L by multipy them by 120. Do I still have to ask the supplier to declare the VOC content of materials in g / L or not?
I would ask for the information in g/L for your own convenience. If you can convert it yourself, that's fine. If something has 0 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. I would expect that to be acceptable regardless of the unit it is being reported in (% or g/L). If it has VOC and is reported as a %, I would try to find some alternative confirmation. I'm not confident that would be reviewed favorably.
EU Standards vs LEED
EU Standards vs LEED
We have some problem with the VOC (g/l) content in our products. This beacsue we just found out that the EU standards use 250 degrees as as specified limit when VOC is measured and for LEED they should use 280 degrees. How will this affect our information, Should we force our suppliers to carry out two measurements for every product, in order to measure according to both principles?
Or are we fine using the EU standards?
Hi Tanja
Please check new LEED 2012 suggestions. In there, the EU values are clearly accepted to be equivalents.
So we are fine using EU standards (here in Finland also)
Epoxy Flooring Again
I have a product by Sherwin-Williams "Tile-Clad High Solids" w/ a VOC of 374 g/l. If this is listed as an "Industrial Maintenance Coating", looks like the limit for this is now 100 g/l as of 7/1/06. Am I correct on this? I am hoping not to have to do a VOC budget for this credit.
Thanks very much.
100 g/L sounds correct to me.
Exemplary Performance for IEQ C4 under LEED NC for Retail 2009
The LEED NC for Retail 2009 rating system differs from the LEED NC 2009 rating system for IEQ C4 in that the retail system includes 6 options -- all those included in NC plus 'Furniture and Furnishings' and 'Ceiling and Wall Systems.' Each of the six options is worth a point each; however, a maximum of five points may be earned for the credit.
I'm wondering if anyone knows whether projects can earn an 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. point (in addition to the credit maximum of five points) by meeting the requirements for all six options.
Neither the Retail Reference Guide supplement nor the sample credit template for IEQ C4 contain any information on this, but it seems reasonable to me that an exemplary performance point would be allowed in this situation.
We have a LEED CI Gold space and we were given 4 EQc4 points and ID points by meeting all of the EQc 4s (4.1-4.6) that are called out in LEED for Schools at the time of our certification.
Sealants and gaskets
we are using polyurethane and silicone sealants and gaskets in fire barriers and glazing works. which LEED standards should I refer to? is VOC a concern? thanks
Ruffina, this credit covers things that are applied on site—usually wet-applied. So gaskets would not be covered, and usually glazing is made off-site. Sealants are covered under IEQc4.1, so please post your questions about those under that forum.
Polished Plaster (Armourcoat Perlata) Categorization in LEED
I recently spent a great deal of time trying to determine where a polished plaster product (Armourcoat Perlata) falls into LEED. I thought I would share my findings here in hopes to clear up some confusion regarding this type of product.
It is not a true plaster, yet it is a three-step process. Our spec writer suggested it adhere to the VOC requirements of paint in LEED, I suggested it was a specialty coating, the mnaufacturer has cleared up the issue below. Direct from the manufacturer:
"From a recent council and review meeting with Planing Rule Development for Southcoast AQMD, the Armourcoat Perlata Decorative Specialty Finish Coatings were reviewed and discussed with compliance inspectors and staff. From this review, based on our product datasheets for Perlata , it falls under the Japan/Faux Finishing Coatings. This is based on the fact that Perlata it is a three part system with the middle part, Perlata being the faux specialty coating finish. The basecoat and clear top coats for the system would be categorized as either a non-flat or flat coating depending on the gloss level."
Mary thanks for sharing this!
Theoretical vs. As-Applied VOC content
The MSDS1. Material safety data sheets (MSDS) are detailed, written instructions documenting a method to achieve uniformity of performance. 2. A report that manufacturers of most products are required to make available to installers and purchasers, informing them of product information on chemicals, chemical compounds, and chemical mixtures, the existence of potentially hazardous ingredients, and providing instructions for the safe handling, storage, and disposal of products for one component of a 4-part sparkproof/conductive flooring system lists a theoretical VOC content level (i.e. as packaged) and an As-Applied content level. The As-Applied value is significantly less than the Theoretical value and satisfies the LEED requirement, whereas the Theoretical limit does not. The other components in this system list only the Theoretical values, all of which are below the allowable limits. Although I would be inconsistent if I was to use the As-Applied value for the one component and the Theoretical values for the other three, it seems to me that the As-Applied value is the appropriate value when the concern is how VOC impacts indoor air quality. Has anyone come up against a similar circumstance?
The VOC content and VOC emissions are two related but different things. VOC content is the amount of VOC in the material. VOC content is regulated by the OTCs (if you're in an OTC). VOC emissions impact air quality and this is what is limited by LEED. It is likely your as-applied value is referencing the VOC emissions but you should call the product's technical reps to confirm.
acrylic textured coating
How would I clasify an acrylic textured coating?
Thank you very much!!!!
That is a tricky one. You are best off checking with the manufacturer to find out how they classify the product for regulatory compliance purposes. If they want to contribute to the credit, they should have done an analysis of the credit language.
Take the following information with a grain of salt. Again, it all goes back to the manufacturer's marketing claims. They may have an entirely different interpretation.
If the manufacturer classifies the product as a Flat paint or it does not meet other category definitions as indicated on label and marketing claims, based on the credit language my understanding is that it would default to the GS-11 1993 VOC limits:
Interior Non-flat: 150 g/L
Interior Flat: 50 g/L
Exterior Non-flat: 200 g/L
Exterior Flat: 100 g/L
SCAQMD included a category with a higher limit (300 g/L) called Mastic Coatings. These are high mil thickness coatings (10 mils dry) designed to conceal surface irregularities. Imagine the paint on the side of a Target store over split face or rough concrete block. If the product is marketed as a protective coating for concrete and/or masonry, there is also a chance that it is classified as a Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry Sealer (400 g/L).
Rule 1113 and GS-11 are not always a good fit for specialty coatings. While the GS-11 definition of paint is broad, it was not intended to capture every conceivable type of opaque wall coating that can form a film. If the manufacturer is not actively selling this product in the Los Angeles basin (SCAQMD), they may well be following other jurisdictional rules and therefore not contribute to a credit.
Did this help? Feel free to ask more questions - other LEEDUser contributors may step in as well.
I forgot to mention this paint will be used on the building´s parking floor in order to mark all the LEED car spaces.
The one I got is a sherwin williams with a VOC of 62.5 g/l so considering it is flat it wouldnt be adecuate.
So im considering the option of clasify it by floor coating would it be ok? thank you very much!
Exempt compounds
The LEED´s definition of VOC should not be exclude the exempt compounds from the VOC content. However, according to the SCAQMD rules 1113 and 1168, the exempt compounds must be calculated. Should I or should not subtract the f exempt compounds of the VOC content? If I calculate the VOC by ASTMVoluntary standards development organization which creates source technical standards for materials, products, systems, and services D-6886 (quoted in the GS-11 ed.2008) for all products, would be correct?
The credit language references the VOC limits from the 1993 edition of GS-11 for interior and exterior wall paints. That edition requires use of USEPA’s Method 24 which would involve testing followed by backing out water and exempt solvent content by calculation. Technically, ASTMVoluntary standards development organization which creates source technical standards for materials, products, systems, and services 6886 is more accurate for low VOC and/or high water content coatings; however, it is not the cited method. For other types of coatings, the credit language cites SCAQMD Rule 1113 as it existed on January 1, 2004. Technically, any coating that complies with the limits in the LEED IEQc4.2 addenda Table 1 should contribute to the credit.
Rule 1113 includes two equations for calculation of VOC content. All categories besides Low Solids Coatings are calculated less water and exempt solvents. The Low Solids category is calculated including water and exempt solvents. As a practical matter, the majority of coatings manufacturers use calculation as the legal means to comply with Rule 1113.
Rule 1113 also allows for direct testing of VOC content via a modified version of USEPA Method 24. This would generally provide defensible results for a manufacturer – although the same holds true for accurate calculations. SCAQMD is also known to use a modified version of ASTM 6886 in their laboratory for enforcement purposes.
Rule 1113 was created with the intent of eliminating ozone precursors and therefore exempts a limited range of 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. that do not participate in ozone formation. The exempt list is based on USEPA definitions and lists as adopted and modified by both the State of California and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The exempt list looks extensive, however, from a practical perspective there are only five VOCs and a family of silicone oils that have formulary utility. I have a personal bias against two toxic exempt compounds, methylene chloride and perchloroethlyene, that I encourage specifiers to avoid.
From a practical perspective I’d say stick with the Rule 1113 approach as it is consistent with the 1993 GS-11 standard. Ask the manufacturer if exempt compounds are used in the product if you or your client wants to know. Also be aware that the less water/exempt compound calculation can yield a VOC content number that can be dramatically higher than the actual VOC formulary percentage. This is particularly relevant for mid-range solids products.
Paola, why are you doing these calculations? Are you a manufacturer / testing agency? I'm not sure a designer or architect can do the level of calculations that Dwyane outlined.
Dwayne, thanks for the detailed response. I would like to hear more aobut those two compounds. Have you been over the pilot credit 11 discussion?
Epoxy for walls
does anyone know how epoxy wall paint would be classified? simply as paint? or an architectural coating? is it even covered under LEED?
thanks!
The credit intent is to protect building occupants by controlling 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. in interior use products. Yes, the product should be covered. However, properly categorizing it for review purposes could be tricky.
The credit language provides three conformance paths depending on the product description and manufacturer’s marketing claims: the 1993 edition of GS-11 for wall paints, GC-03 for anti-corrosive or anti-rust paint, or SCAQMD Rule 1113 as it existed on January 1, 2004.
From my personal perspective, it would be unlikely for an epoxy to be marketed against commodity wall paint. That should eliminate GS-11. GC-03 does not appear on GreenSeal’s website. This leaves a limited range of Rule 1113 categories cited in the credit language and the addenda table another LEEDUser commenter thoughtfully provided: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8608
The original credit language and addenda do not list all regulatory product categories; in particular they are missing the Industrial Maintenance category where most high performance epoxy coatings fall in AIM VOC regulations like Rule 1113. Since regulations are legally enforceable, manufacturers market first to AIM VOC categories and secondly to voluntary programs like LEED. To give you an idea of the stakes, SCAQMD recently proposed a $40,000 penalty for a mom-and-pop paint store for a single gallon of non-compliant product on the shelf.
Categorization depends on marketing claims and category definitions. The vast majority of high-performance epoxy coatings are marketed in the Rule 1113 Industrial Maintenance category (2004 limit = 250 g/L) which includes products you would find in hospitals, locker rooms, swimming pool and spa areas (because of the chlorine and disinfectant use), and non-sacrificial anti-graffiti coatings. Yes, IM coatings are also used for industrial, food and water/waste processing applications as well.
This leaves you with several choices: decide the credit is not worth the hassle, pick the closest category and defend its inclusion towards a credit, or request a formal interpretation. The first option seems an unnecessary sacrifice for what should be an easy credit. The second might be viable if you have clear product marketing claims to work with and a cooperative relationship with the project reviewer. The latter option could be helpful to other project teams as LEED 2009 projects start working through the review process.
Caveat: I’m speaking from the perspective of a manufacturer. Any input from project team members?
Can anyone else weigh in on this? I am trying to determine if 250 g/L is acceptable for a block wall semi-gloss epoxy. The product doesn't fit well into any of the established categories. It's more heavy duty than wall paint but isn't really a waterproofing sealer. Can anyone recommend a 150 g/L semi-gloss epoxy for block walls? Thanks!
A 2 part architectural epoxy for walls and ceilings is a coating. The major paint manufacturers have compliant epoxies.
IdeaPaint and other "process" paints
I'm working on a project that is considering using Glidden's IdeaPaint product that is a paint that turns any surface into a dry-erase board. It has a 220 g/l VOC level, but it's somehow also GreenGuard compliant according to manufacturer provided info: http://www.ideapaint.com/Default.aspx?app=LeadgenDownload&shortpath=docs...
The manufacturer provides information that specifically states it complies with LEED Schools VOC credit requirements, and as a result is also compliant with "all other LEED credit standards." I have a five page powerpoint that was emailed to us (presumably from the mfr... can't find link) that expands their logic in detail, but it keeps referring the the LEED-Schools requirement box as justification for compliance with the other systems.
Any clarification on the compliance of this product would be appreciated. Does anyone else have experience with this?
The GreenGuard certification relates to the post application emissions of the product utilizing the CDPH/01350 small chamber test method. As a practical matter, this should provide assurance that product use will not harm building occupants.
However, IEQcr 4.2 is based on compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1113 as it existed on January 1, 2004. This product is a prime example of a specialty niche that does not fit the rule. Unfortunately, every coating is captured and defaults to the flat or nonflat category if it doesn't fit a specific niche category definition.
I suggest you ask the manufacturer for a verification on their Rule 1113 categorization for this product. There are odd niche categories that I could speculate on (e.g. Quick Dry Enamels) but the categorization is ultimately the manufacturer's responsibility. Note that with few exceptions, product supplied in small containers (1 qt or less capacity) are not subject to Rule 1113 and can be offered in the SCAQMD in any form.
I don't recall any specific LEED interpretations regarding substitution of CDPH testing for Rule 1113 compliance in NC projects. Interestingly enough, LEED for Schools requires CDPH testing but allows Rule 1113 compliance substitution through the LEED for Schools PIEACP for IEQcr 4. Perhaps a project team request for a LEED interpretation is in order.
Does anyone else have information on this topic?
Dwayne is correct that the stated criteria for the LEED rating system is compliance with SCAQMD for NC projects, but we at GREENGUARD have been told by one of the largest LEED reviewers that due to emission criteria being allowed to show compliance to EQc4.2 in Schools projects, they always award points if the paint is proven to be low-emitting as opposed to low VOC content. It is essentially the same thing that Dwayne also mentioned - that they allow SCAQMD compliance to gain credit in Schools projects even though the criteria is low-emissions and not low VOC content.
Rule 1113
Rule 1113 was amended on June 3rd 2011 and now the limit for clear wood varnish is 275. I assume updates to Rule 1113 apply to LEED. Is this correct?
My understanding is that interpretation is incorrect... The requirements specifically state effective dates for each rule to avoid this problem of updated standards affecting projects. For Rule 1113, you only have to meet the requirements that are in effect on January 1, 2004.
Thanks!
I also found this addenda helpful: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8608
Steel structure enamel
Hi, this is a retrofit of an existing building where all the exterior structural walls are being replaced and also the interior walls. At this point in construction there are no exterior or interior walls, just the metal structure supporting the roof. Questions is, since the intent of the credit is preventing the harmful contaminants inside the weatherproofing system, do I have to install a low VOC enamel to the metal structure to comply with this credit. The space is not weatherproof at this point, it is completely opened, so I don't see the benefit of going with low VOC enamel. By the way, in which product type is it classified?
Many thanks
I have a similar question, the Contractor wants to use a non complying paint besed on the fact that there is no weatherproof at this point
I don't have definitive references at hand, but my understanding is that LEED would require these coatings to be emissions-compliant, since they will be insdie the weather barrier. While a substantial portion of off-gassing typically occurs early in the curing process, it can continue at reduced levels for a very long time.
Clear Wood Varnish
All of the products on our project are under the VOC limits, but we are running into an unknown on one product. We are using a clear wood varnish on all the wood paneling and millwork. The limit is 350 g/l, but the product is 550 g/l. All of the finishing will take place in an off-site shop, so it will not effect this credit. Although, it is anticipated that their will be an extreamly small amount of touch up on-site (filling nail holes, minor scratches, etc). Is this going to cause us to do the VOC budgeting for this miniscule amount of varnish?
Christopher, how much varnish do you think will be applied onsite, at the end of the day? I ask because "extremely small" can be in the eye of the beholder.
Pending your answer to that question, my answer would be that you have discretion here.
We decided to not take the chance, and went with a compliant product that is 275 g/l.
Thanks.
Christopher , could you give me the name of your clear wood varnish please?
I will apreciate it , thank you
Hi, We are using asphalt as
Hi,
We are using asphalt as a coating on a concrete floor for interior parking. We can't find any requirement on VOC limits, and the supplier has no information on COV content, except a percentage of mass variation.
One may wonder why we are covering the concrete with asphalt rather than just sealing it on joints. We do it to protect it as It has revealed itself to be the best solution in our climate. The building is located in an area where winters are very severe (Quebec QC). The parking area is accesory to the offices located in the building and in any case does not represent 75% of the building`s area.
Has anybody experienced this situation before in application like this one or similar?
Thank you!
This credit only looks at coatings applied within the conditioned area of the building, so I doubt your parking area would be of concern. If cars are driving inside your building, you have bigger air quality problems to worry about than the coating! ;-)
VOC Testing
Hello,
Do you guys know if the VOC testing could be done by the paint manufacturer or should it be undertaken by a third party ?
Should the testing be done in accordance to a special standard ?
Thanks !
In the U.S. VOC-testing is done by manufacturers to meet air-quality regulations. US EPA sets the rules that govern how those tests area done.
As an aside, those tests are established based on smog requirements, so they are not ideal for indoor air quality protection, but they are the all we've got to work with for now.
Nadav - I agree that currently how this credit is written, it looks as though the VOC content method (which as you mentioned was developed for outdoor air purposes) is the only way to answer paint's potential IAQIndoor air quality: The quality and attributes of indoor air affecting the health and comfort building occupants. IAQ encompasses available fresh air, contaminant levels, acoustics and noise levels, lighting quality, and other factors. concerns, but I have to disagree with you that this is all we have to work with. There are things that we can do to ensure that paints don't hurt our indoor air quality.
The CDPH/EHLB/Standard Method v1.1 (or CA 01350) is a product emission test methodology that is referenced in LEED for Schools for the paints and coatings low-emission credit. This test methodology and criteria looks at actual product emissions or what is off-gassing from the product as it is applied. Compliance with this helps ensure that products will not be off-gassing harmful levels of 35 individual chemicals (including, but not limited to 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., benzene, toluene, and xylenes).
Most major sustainable rating systems or codes have recognized the product emission pathway to show that a paint is better for IAQ (LEED Pilot Credit 21, Green Globes, IgCC, and ASHRAE 189.1 to name a few). So while I recognize that the credit currently looks at VOC content only - there is a movement to get the low-emitting criteria to actually focus on low-emitting products.
You're absolutely right, Josh. I totally agree that this is where things should be, and are, heading. I should have said that given the current LEED requirements and limited number of products available with more appropriate metrics, VOC content is what we have to work with. Even in LEED for Schools you're allows--for now--to use the VOC content data because the Spec 01350 standard was not workable for schools outside of California. But hopefully that will all shift soon!
Concrete Block Filler
In reference to the addendum for Table 1 IEQc4.2 Applicable VOC Limits has there been any clarification as to where concrete block fillers fall in the SCAQMD Rule 1113, 2004?
I would identify concrete block fillers as a "sealer and undercoater", or should I be conservative and identify it as a "interior flat primer?"
I have not seen or heard anything on where concrete block filler would fall, but I would classify these as a primer. This is due to the fact that 'sealer' means to me that you have created something that is somewhat impenetrable and 'primer' means to me that you are preparing something. I believe most concrete block fillers are preparing the wall for something.
Please allow me to correct myself Dan - you are correct, per the November 2010 addenda Block Filler should be classified as you asked as a sealer/undercoater. Again, my apologies for this oversight on my part.
Metallic Glaze that is LEED complaint
In reviewing submittals with the painting trade on my project, we came across the specified a specified paint that we are looking for a substitute. The reason for this is the product does not fall within the LEED parameter, it has VOC content of 288 g/l which is above the "non-flat" finish VOC limit. The product is a glaze that is meant to be put over another paint/finish coat to enhance the topcoat with the metallic finish. It is not a one part system and the draw downs look terrible because its meant to be applied over the finish top coat.
Suggestions and/or guidance is greatly appreciated.
So, you're looking for a LEED-compliant metallic coating? I just read about EonCoat, with no 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.. Looks like a cool product. Would that help?
VOC content - testing or calculation
Could anybody please explain to me whether you can declare VOC content on basis of the formulation, or will you always need a test for compliance with this credit?
Reinhard, I don't know the answer to that question but I suppose you could find it through carefully reading the referenced standards. I would guess that you need tesing, because the ingredients could interact in the formulation and create 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. (?).
European Certificates accepted?
Paints and coatings must meet the VOC limits defined by the SCAQMD Rule 1113 respectively the Green Seal Standards GS-11 and GC-03. These limits are given in g/l of the Substance.
However, in Europe almost none of the construction materials are provided with SCAQMD or Green Seal certificates. Instead, the European DECOPAINT certificate is very common for these products.
DECOPAINT:
• Like the SCAQMD or Green Seal certificates also the DECOPAINT certificate regulates the VOC-contents of coating materials in g/l (decorative, protecting or any other kind of functional coatings – including paints and sealants, but not adhesives).
• There are VOC-limits for water based and solvent based products. The VOC limits for water based products generally are between 30 and 200 g/l. The limits for the comparable product categories are below the comparable VOC-limits defined by SCAQMD Rule 1113 (100 – 730 g/l) or Green Seal Standards GS-11 (50 – 150 g/l) and GC-03 (250 g/l).
• However the VOC-analyzing method for DECOPAINT follows European regulations (ISO11890-2 and ASTMD 2369) and therefore is not comparable to the US American standards defined by USEPA (USEPA Reference Method 24) or SCAQMD (Method 304).
Will USGBC accept DECOPAINT certificated products instead of SCAQMD or Green Seal certified products?
Simone, I think you had similar questions on IEQc4.1 and IEQc4.3. As discussed on those forums, this certifiations would not be accepted right now by USGBC, although that could change in the future.
What are your thoughts?
I agree. You can't used the European certificates, but we have applied for these credits successfully in European project. However we had to hired a building biologist expert. He calculated and/or tested to figure out the difference between the US and European method of determining/expressing 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..
Susan, could you please share the contact details of your "building biologist"? The study he carried would be really useful for a few projects in france. Thanks
Please register to use the forum.