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. procedures require the product claim be listed by each product item on invoices and shipping documents. The documents should state the FSC claim such as; FSC Mixed xx% (SW-COC-000000) or FSC Pure (SW-COC-000000), not just the FSC COC number.

Good - this is helping. On some lines it says "Mixed 70%" and on others just "Mixed Credit." I presume I have to go back to the supplier to get the % for the latter - correct?

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. - Mixed Credit should be valued as 100% of the cost.

Great! You actually don't need to go back to the supplier. Per an April 7, 2008 USGBC Memorandum 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. Pure and FSC Mixed Credit are both considered 100% FSC content. Only the FSC Mixed is a product with variable content (anything from 1% to 99% FSC content). This Memorandum gives directicon on COC certificates and invoices that the GBCI will reference when reviewing your submittal. One tip for remembering the difference between Mixed Credit and Mixed is that the shorter of the two words (Mixed) is typically the one "short" on information, meaning you have to usually go ask for the specific %. Good luck!

One other thing: the subcontractor gave me the total cost for each type of material (e.g. "Fire rated plywood sheets") but there are multiple invoices for it. The invoices only state the quantity ordered and price per unit. Two questions here: first, should I do the math for GBCI and provide the total cost for each individual purchase? Second, on the template spreadsheet can I summarize each product type instead of listing the individual purchases?

Thanks for all this assistance!

Here is the addenda instructions. If you follow the advice about developing a spreadsheet and reference the invoices (by #), that will take the guess work out of the auditor's hands and will make for a smoother review.

List all new wood products (not reclaimed, salvaged, or recycled) on the project and identify which components are 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. certified. The cost of all new wood products, both FSC certified and not, must be tallied. Develop a spreadsheet to calculate the amount of new wood and the amount of FSC certified woodWood from a source that has been determined, through a certification process, to meet stated ecological and other criteria. There are numerous forest certification programs in general use based on several standards, but only the Forest Stewardship Council's standards, which include requirements that the wood be tracked through its chain-of-custody, can be used to qualify wood for a point in the LEED Rating System. permanently installed on the project. Wood products that are not FSC certified and those that are identified on invoices as FSC Pure and FSC Mixed Credit should be valued at 100% of the product cost unless the product is an assembly in which case only the new wood portion of the product counts for credit, see the guidance for assemblies in this credit. Wood products identified as FSC Mixed (NN)% should be valued at the indicated percentage of their cost, for example, a product identified as FSC Mixed 75% should be valued at 75% of the cost. FSC does not allow partial claims of certified products, wood products with non-controlled wood components will not earn FSC certification. The entire product must be FSC-certified, Pure, Mixed (NN)%, or Mixed Credit to contribute towards the credit threshold for MR Credit 7.

For example, a product that includes multiple wood components, like a door, the entire product must be FSC certified. The door cannot be labeled, or claim, that only the door core is FSC certified

What if the invoice doesn't specify Pure or Mixed at all, just has the item name and the COC # beneath it?

Technical answer: You will need to get the supplier to revise the invoice to state Pure, Mixed Credit or Mixed N% with the COC number beneath each line item.

Judgement call: Now if this is going to be difficult to get from your supplier, I sometimes make a judgement call and list this product as non-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. on my template. It would be in a situation where $152 dollars worth of product just has the COC number, I know the supplier is going to be difficult and hold up the timing of my submittal, I have over a million dollars in FSC wood product already documented, and my FSC% is about 95%...then adding this $152 as non-FSC is not going to hurt your submittal. To save you and the client time and money, I would enter it as non-FSC.

Hi Donna - The LEED NC V2009 Reference guides says to "include only materials permanently installed in the project." So in my mind, the real question focuses on whether the wood product is going to be "permanently attached" to the building, regardless of the Specification Division.

Wood products show up in a range of spec sections, depending on the specifier, so using the "permanently attached" rule is how I have determined if it is included in the MR 7 Credit for LEED NC for years now.

If the casework is easily moveable, (I.E. on casters), then it might(?) be considered furniture...

| dp

Donna - We have a similar situation on one of our jobs where our permanently installed lab casework (Div. 11) is 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. and a very large dollar value so we would like to use it for this credit. We want to use it just for this credit, however not for any of the other MR credits. The book states "Furniture" (Div 12) needs to be used consistently, but doesn't address Div 11. Did you use the lab casework in pursuing this credit? If so, did you have to apply the casework for all the other MR credits?

Hi Michael - Sorry for the slow reply - your post slipped past me while I was attending The Living Futures Conference in Vancouver.

I would interpret the July 19, 2010 USGBC Addenda Post (Addenda spreadsheet PDF page 29, line-item indentified referring to Page '397' of the LEED BD+C 2009 Reference Guide, First Edition) as NOT allowing the Veneer Only on a Non-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. certified door assembly to contribute to the FSC Credit. I would also interpret the credit as requiring you to list the value of the Veneer (assuming it is new wood) as part of the 'tallied' wood on the project.

The addenda states: "List all new wood products (not reclaimed, salvaged, or recycled) on the project and identify which components are FSC certified. The cost of all new wood products, both FSC certified and not, must be tallied."

The addenda goes onto say: "The entire product must be FSC-certified, Pure, Mixed (NN)%, or Mixed Credit to contribute towards the credit threshold for MR Credit 7. For example, a product that includes multiple wood components, like a door, the entire product must be FSC certified. The door cannot be labeled, or claim, that only the door core is FSC certified."

Here is a link to the compiled addenda PDF - you may want to review the addenda to see if you concur with my interpretation:

http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6392

Although the Veneer may not be claimable under LEED, it's still FSC, which is a good thing...

| dp

Doug,

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I'm still uncertain, though, about this situation, because of your first quote from the addendum, where it states "List all NEW WOOD products (not reclaimed, salvaged, or recycled) on the project and identify which components are 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. certified." [emphasis added] In other words, identify which new-wood components are FSC certified.

I read that as saying that the recycled-wood core is excluded from the MRc7 calculations entirely -- in the same way as it would be if the core were foam, or paper honeycomb -- because it is not "new wood".

I wonder if the second portion of the addendum that you qouted should more accurately read "For example, a product that includes multiple NEW wood components, like a door, the entire product must be FSC certified. The door cannot be labeled, or claim, that only the door core is FSC certified IF IT CONTAINS OTHER NON-FSC, NEW WOOD COMPONENTS." [uppercase text added]

The LEED requirement for 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. claims on doors is that the Forest Stewardship Council's requirements are met in the construction of the door. FSC only allows a manufacturer to use FSC chain-of-custodyChain-of-custody (COC) is he path taken by raw materials, processed materials, and products from the forest to the consumer, including all successive stages of processing, transformation, manufacturing and distribution. A chain-of-custody certificate number on invoices for nonlabeled products indicates that the certifier’s guidelines for product accounting have been followed. A chain-of-custody certification is not required by distributors of a product that is individually labeled with the Forest Stewardship Council logo and manufacturer’s chain-of-custody number. Chain of Custody (CoC) certification requirements are determined by Forest Stewardship Council Chain of Custody Standard 40-004 v2-1. certified woodWood from a source that has been determined, through a certification process, to meet stated ecological and other criteria. There are numerous forest certification programs in general use based on several standards, but only the Forest Stewardship Council's standards, which include requirements that the wood be tracked through its chain-of-custody, can be used to qualify wood for a point in the LEED Rating System. and FSC controlled wood for the wood components in an assembly. If a specification calls out for a mahogany veneer for the doors and the manufacturer can not source FSC certiifed or FSC controlled mahogany the door cannot be claimed as an FSC certified product even though the core may be FSC certified particleboard door core. In my conversations with FSC-US and the MRc7 TAGLEED Technical Advisory Group (TAG): Subcommittees that consist of industry experts who assist in developing credit interpretations and technical improvements to the LEED system. team the intent is to be in alignment with the FSC requirements. In the past LEED claims were made on individual components used in an assembled product even though the door itself could not be claimed as FSC. The purpose of the requirement is to make sure the door is FSC certified by using FSC chain-or-cstody and FSC controlled wood materials in the assembly. Additionally controlled wood products are required for the recycled wood-based materials used in assemblies. LEED only recognizes the new wood for the calculations for the FSC content whereas FSC requires that the only inputs allowed for FSC certified assemblies be FSC certified, FSC controlled and neutral materials (non-wood) components.

Roberto, since the carpenter/cabinet-maker would be considered the installer or "end user," no COC is required by the contractor according to the USGBC. The COC is only required for manufactures/suppliers/vendors. So the material would definitely count towards the credit as long as all invoices and COC's are documented correctly.

Thank you!

Hi Robert - I would have to respectfully offer a differing opinion from above and lean heavily towards saying 'No' - "purchasing 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.-COC certified woodWood from a source that has been determined, through a certification process, to meet stated ecological and other criteria. There are numerous forest certification programs in general use based on several standards, but only the Forest Stewardship Council's standards, which include requirements that the wood be tracked through its chain-of-custody, can be used to qualify wood for a point in the LEED Rating System. (i.e 4'X8'[2,44x1,22m]) and giv[ing] it to the carpenter/ cabinet-maker for the final stage of production" will not satisify the COC criteria for LEED.

The rational for my opinion comes from the "Document Addenda, LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction, 2009 Edition (first edition)" Here's the link (you should take a look at this document and come to you own conclusion):

http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6392

Page 28 states that "Entities that install an FSC-certified product on the project building/site (typically project contractors or subcontractors, but also furniture installers and the like), do not require CoC certification as long as THEY DO NOT MODIFY THE PRODUCTS PACKAGING OR FORM EXCEPT AS REQURED FOR INSTALLATION (capitalization added). Contractors and sub-contractors that temporarily possess FSC-certified material prior to installation should be careful not mix or contaminate the FSC-certified material with non-FSC-certified material."

In my opinion, converting sheets for FSC material into cabinets would qualify as modifying its form - going far beyond basic installation.

| dp

Doug - I agree with your assessment here, but I am curious if you know the reasoning behind it. Why does the cabinet-maker need to be 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.-certified if he can provide CoC numbers for all the raw materials he uses? Does the FSC-certification process include other aspects of the contractor's business besides wood purchases?

Hi Steve - Based on what you have quoted from the LEED 2009 BD&C addenda and what you've said about the product, it sounds like the flooring product is 1). all wood that is 2). more like a door than a cabinet or piece of furniture which might contain non-wood components; this points to the entire product being certified.

Your product may or may not qualify as 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. Mixed Credit; it will depend on the overall operation. FSC Mixed Credit is similar to a 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. or renewable energy credit - the FSC fiber might not all be in the specific product you installed, but an equal amount of fiber that is not in the product you've installed, is another product.

Based on comments from FSC US website, FSC Mixed Credit will result in 100% of the wood product value contributing to the LEED Certified WoodWood from a source that has been determined, through a certification process, to meet stated ecological and other criteria. There are numerous forest certification programs in general use based on several standards, but only the Forest Stewardship Council's standards, which include requirements that the wood be tracked through its chain-of-custody, can be used to qualify wood for a point in the LEED Rating System. Credit.

If you haven't been there, go to FSC US webpage addressing LEED FAQ/'s and refer to the quesiton: "WHY ARE PRODUCTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED ON VENDOR INVOICES AS “FSC Mixed [NN]%” VALUED LESS THAN PRODUCTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED AS “FSC Pure” OR “FSC Mixed Credit,” WHICH ARE VALUED AT 100%?"

Here's the link:
http://www.fscus.org/green_building/leed_faq.php

| dp

In response to Steve's questions I agree with his comment that the product is an assembly. The two components used to manufacture the flooring would be classified as "inputs" which can be with different 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. claims and without FSC claims. The requirement for the veneer would be that is is a "controlled" wood input. The FSC percentage would be the volume or weight of FSC input divided by the total volume or weight ot the final product. The product would then qulaify as a FSC Mixed xx% claim. The FSC content of the final flooring assembly would then need to noted on the packing list information and invoices. Please reference FSC-STD-40-004 (version 2-0) EN Percentage System and Annex I: comparison of the transfer, percentage and credit system.

Steve,
This might get a little long, so hold on – here we go.
It sounds like you are purchasing a wood flooring product that is made up of 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. backing with a Non FSC Veneer applied.
Correct?
I understand it to be that you are not the manufacturer.

The short answer is that if this product is sold to you without an FSC Claim, than you must put the entire value of this product in your ‘non FSC’ column for this calculation (even if you’ve been told that it has some FSC material in the assembly). If this product is sold to you with an FSC claim, than depending on the type of claim on the product, depends on how much of the dollar value gets allocated to FSC and what amount goes to non FSC.

Here’s the reasoning and some clarification.
This product should come from the manufacturer either with or without an FSC Claim –simple as that. If it has no claim (even if you know it has FSC Core) than you must put the entire value of this product in the ‘non FSC’ column for your project calculation. The FSC Claim would appear on the invoice and shippers from the supplier.
If the supplier of this product is not FSC COC Certified, than they cannot ever make any claim regarding the FSC content of this product. Thus their invoice could never include the documentation needed to satisfy the requirements for this credit. (FSC COC# & FSC Claim type).

If you are the manufacturer, than first you must be FSC COC Certified for you to make any type of claim on this product. If you were an FSC COC Certified manufacturer, you would know that you cannot put a NON FSC veneer on a FSC Core and ever make any type of claim on this product.
FSC Does not allow you to do this.
I could go on about minor component derogations etc. But it will always lead back to the fact that you cannot mix FSC with NON FSC and have an FSC Product.

The guidance for assemblies would apply to something like a cabinet, (an item with wood and non wood components)
If I sell you a cabinet that is made up of wood (sides, top, bottom, door etc.) and metal (hardware, hinges, drawer glides) AND all the wood in that assembly is FSC material, than I can sell you an FSC Certified product. However when reporting that product to GBCI for the MR7 Credit, you would need to figure out what amount of that assembly is wood, and what amount is metal, and only report the value of the wood in that product. Your manufacturer of that product should be able to help you out with that calculation.
As an FSC COC Certified manufacturer, I could not make an FSC claim on that cabinet if I used a mix of FSC and NON-FSC wood Materials. If I did this than the entire product would be considered a NON FSC assembly, and the chain of FSC product would end with me. Thus giving you the consumer a non FSC product.

Mike’s comments are a little misleading. They are accurate if you are a FSC COC Manufacturer, not if you are a consumer.
You cannot purchase a product and on your own decide what the FSC Claim is for a product. The process that Mike lays out is the calculation procedure for a FSC COC Manufacturer of a product ONLY.

Hi Kevin,
I am not sure why you say "If you were an 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. COC Certified manufacturer, you would know that you cannot put a NON FSC veneer on a FSC Core and ever make any type of claim on this product. FSC Does not allow you to do this"
The LEED reference guide gives a clear example under "Examples" of how to calculate an assembly that has a veneer that is one of the wood-based components but is not FSC certified. I agree that the Manufacturer must be an FSC COC, but I thought the whole point of the FSC Mixed xx% was for products that have some FSC Wood and some non-FSC wood. Here is a definition I came across:
"FSC Mixed xx%:
This material category details a specific content of FSC-certified material in the product. For labeling purposes, the % must be greater than 70% and there must be documentation to prove this percentage. Most cabinetry, furniture or custom woodworking will carry this label due to the product being built from various inputs. FSC Mixed xx% most often trades under the Percentage systems."

Heather, there are 2 perspectives to this issue. First is what USGBC has written regarding what is and is not acceptable with 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. materials. The second is the responsibility that a COC Certified manufacturer has to FSC and the standards which they are certified against.

There had in the past always been a 'grey' area between these two before the release of an addendum on July 19th 2010. Regardless of what LEED has published in the past, what is important is what is found in the addenda's and 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's. Staying current with these can be time consuming, but is the responsibility of each individual LEED AP/ GA. Unfortunately simply reading the reference guide without taking these other documents into consideration will not give you an accurate picture of what is required. Please reference the attached link.
http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6392

On page 28 & 29 there is line item 397 that lays out how you do the calculations for FSC products. Notice the last part of that paragraph "For example, a product that includes multiple wood components, like a door, the entire product must be FSC certified. The door cannot be labeled, or claim, that only the door core is FSC certified." This is an example of a non FSC veneer being applied to an FSC core, USGBC no longer accepts this methodology for FSC claims - even though the example you sight is written in the reference guide, it is superseded by this addenda. This addendum brought USGBC into alignment with FSC standards.

This directly ties into the second part of this FSC puzzle.
As an FSC COC certified manufacturer, I cannot apply a non FSC face veneer to an FSC core and EVER make a claim that the product is FSC certified. FSC strictly forbids this exact application.
The second misunderstanding from your post is that FSC would allow the use of non FSC materials into an assembly / calculation and that's how you arrive at the FSC mixed xx %. FSC does not allow the use of non FSC materials in any assembly that will carry an FSC claim or label. (The caveat to that being that under some circumstances, a minor component derogation may be allowed if there are extreme circumstances, and even if this derogation is exercised, that material must make up less than 5% of the entire assembly. - Still under this derogation the material cannot be a face veneer.)

A company that is making a FSC mixed percentage claim is arriving at this figure one of 2 ways. Either they themselves are mixing materials with an FSC Pure or an FSC Mixed percentage claim into one product, thus relegating the FSC claim down to a percentage based claim. Or they are mixing FSC labeled wood with 'controlled wood'. Controlled wood is wood that has been harvested by non FSC parties, and then later shown to have met FSC's principals and criteria for sustainably harvested materials. Even though this material has been proven to have been harvested sustainably, the fact that a non FSC company did this now makes this wood a lesser product. Using FSC Controlled wood in an assembly will default your claim to a percentage based system. (IE 95% of the wood in my cabinet is FSC Pure, 5% is Controlled wood - my claim on that cabinet is FSC Mixed 95%)

You can find this information here - http://www.scscertified.com/docs/FSC-STD-40-004_V2-0_EN_Standard_for_CoC...
Look at the last 2 pages of this document. This is the visual representation of how claims are made.

Hope this helps.

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. does allow assemblies such as wood doors to carry FSC Mixed % claims as noted above, as long as the wood in the assembly that is not FSC has been assessed as Controlled Wood and validated as such either through a company risk assessment that has been approved by the manufacturers certfication body, or by purchasing components from vendors that are FSC CW certfified. Wood in the assembly including the vertical and horizonatal edges of doors, door crossbands, face veneer, light molding, etc. must comply. FSC nor the USGBC requires "all" wood to be FSC. The 70% threshold is only required if the product has a FSC on-product label. On-product labels are not required by the FSC. It is optional. If the product does not have a FSC on-product label applied to it, then any amount of FSC % can be claimed. While there is no minimum FSC % requirement, the goal is to supply the greatest amount of FSC contribution possible.

Judy, I agree with most of your statement. However your statement "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. nor the USGBC requires "all" wood to be FSC" is misleading.
Wood inputs can be either
FSC Pure
FSC Mixed Credit
FSC mixed xx%
or
FSC Controlled wood.
If you use a wood that does not fit into one of these 4 categories on your door, than your door no longer holds any FSC value.
As you stated the 70% threshold is only for labeling purposes. However all wood must be from one of the above categories to carry any FSC claim on the invoice- which is used for submittal to GBCI.

Kevin,
We can continue to agree to disagree. Judy's comment is correct in that you can provide "controlled wood" as 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. controlled wood or controlled wood through an organization's controlled wood risk assessment. The controlled wood does not have to be FSC controlled wood, but the organization better have the approved risk assessment if they are not providing FSC controlled wood.

Agreed mike, I think it's a matter of semantics.

One of the better documents explaining in depth the history and details of controlled wood can be downloaded from the Dovetail Partners website at http://www.dovetailinc.org/reportsview/2007/sustainable-forestry/pmatthe...

Thanks Judy - this is great. As mentioned above much of the confusion comes from semantics. I consider 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. Controlled Wood to be "non-FSC certified" since the wood itself is not actually "certified" - at least not as I understand the semantics. I believe it is more correct to say the wood complies with standards - is that correct? However, it would have been much clearer in my post had I referenced the FSC Controlled Wood standard. I also agree it is very important to keep up with the addendae and I do. I try to cut and paste into my Reference Guide all the addendae, but it is making for a very bulky Guide and is time consuming. There have been so many addendae since 2009, I think anyone who purchased a Guide in the past should have access to a one-time printing of an updateing Guide with all addendae incorporated. But that is just an aside....

The following is taken directly from a document that our 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. certfication body (SCS) published. "FSC Controlled Wood products do not originate from forests certified to an FSC Forest Management standard." This same document also list the following "If your company is seeking to undertake a Controlled Wood verification program to determine whether the non-FSC certified virgin wood/fiber you are sourcing comes from forests that meet the five criteria of the FSC Controlled Wood standard, you must meet all the requirements of the FSC-STD-40-005 V2-1 standard." Hope this helps.

Good Question! And I will follow your question with a question - Which Spec Section are the wood nailers specified in?

| dp

Roof nailers are part of the roof curbs.
In CSI Masterformat 2004 roof curbs are spec section 07 71 13.
Since they are within divisions 3-10 they should be included however I have never been involved with a project that was required to submit the 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. info on the roof curbs.

I think the LEED reviewers may not know wood is part of the roof curb and therefore have never inquired about it.

Yes, I would agree to both statements. If the curbs were for some reason specified under the mechanical sections, they would still need to be included as part of the permanently installed wood on the project (in my opinion), however the issue would not be as clear as if they were specified in division 6 or 7.
| dp

Accountability is held with the final receipient and COC certificate holder, so your window subcontractor's documentation is all you need.

Every step along the way of the chain-of-custodyChain-of-custody (COC) is he path taken by raw materials, processed materials, and products from the forest to the consumer, including all successive stages of processing, transformation, manufacturing and distribution. A chain-of-custody certificate number on invoices for nonlabeled products indicates that the certifier’s guidelines for product accounting have been followed. A chain-of-custody certification is not required by distributors of a product that is individually labeled with the Forest Stewardship Council logo and manufacturer’s chain-of-custody number. Chain of Custody (CoC) certification requirements are determined by Forest Stewardship Council Chain of Custody Standard 40-004 v2-1., the receiving party (or subcontractor) is responsible and accountable for verifying the supplier's (company/sub they are getting the material from) certification is accurate and up to date. This can be done at www.fsc-info.org.

When purchasing and selling FSC products, all material quantities and descriptions must be tracked to ensure they have not sold more FSC product than they purchased, and that the correct claim has been passed on.

Annual audits confirm that procedures are being followed by all certified companies. We have our CoC certification and this audit process is a very thorough one to keep procedures and documentation current.

So, if you have the final recipient's COC number and paperwork, this will suffice for documentation of the entire trail, regardless of the number of hands that FSC material went through to get to the final subcontractor.

Hi Keerthi - The first question does not have a black and white answer. As a rule, I try to get vital, core documentation on Letterhead. Secondary, clarifying information, might work fine as e-mail documentation. Others may approach it differently with success. It would be good to hear how others handle it.

The Second question - Earlier LEED Templates offered easy access to guidance around the appropriate diciplines for doing documentation for each prereq / credit, it stated it right in the template and everyone literally had to sign their name. However, the V2009 On-line templates don't make it so easy...some templates require that certain diciplines initial the templates for specific paths, but that only shows up after you 'click' that specific compliance path (I.E. EA PR2 Whole Building Simulation Path requires that the Architect, Mechanical and Electrical Engineers Initial different sections - but you don't see that until you click on that path's radio button). Others have no specific requirements or indications around what dicipline might be responsible for the documentation. The Reference Guides generally seem to be silent as well...

I've been doing certifications long enough that I have my own pattern for who gets what credit as their primary responsibility. Generally, I've found that fairly assigning prereq's / credits to the most obvious dicipline gets the job done and most professionals roll with it. The contractors will typically go with most of the MR credits and low-emitting materials credits, since they have the final responsibilty of procuring the products (the specs have to be done appropriately however).

If you are the Architect and you're doing the assignments, make sure you accept responsibility for a fair share yourself - those that make sense.

Maybe someone else is aware of a Matrix that identifies at least the credits that require initials. Anyone?

Hope that helps a little.
Doug

We (Perkins+Will) are in the process of reviewing both the credit language and the proposed benchmark. We plan on posting a more complete opinion to LEEDuser, however at first blush it looks to us like the Benchmark continues to be a signficant reduction from the current 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. requirements. In our opinion, the governance is weak (which is a very serious issue) and the 'field' requirements for forest management are reduced as well.

If you would like to look at our 'OLD' review and opinion on the PREVIOUS 3rd USGBC Benchmark DRAFT you can visit our website - so far the Final benchmark looks similar to the 3rd DRAFT that we reviewed last spring:
http://www.perkinswill.com/news/fsc-equal-%2B-better-.html

Here's a Direct Link to our proposed Regenerative Forestry Benchmark which includes comments on the 3rd USGBC DRAFT and recommendations to improve it.

http://www.perkinswill.com/files/FSC-Equal-Better.pdf

This is a very important topic - thanks for opening the dialogue.
Doug

Thanks Doug for re-posting the link. I had a similar reaction to the draft. I'm still confused as to how the USGBC intends to implement the evaluation process should this go through. Would it be done on a case by case basis by review teams or through a technical committee and then available to all projects?

Hi Janika - Your new post is very timely! We (Perkins+Will) are recommending a 'NO" Vote on the USGBC's proposed MR 7 Credit revisions. We've completed our review and just recently posted our opinon about what we consider to be key deficiencies on our website. In our opinion, the proposed Forest Benchmark is clearly a step backwards, signficantly reducing the standards for Forest Management and Wood Certification bodies.

You can view our comments here:
http://www.perkinswill.com/news/fsc-equal-or-better---our-position.html

I must admit that I'm not fully versed on how the evaluation process would be handled and would have to do more research. We've focused our efforts on the proposed Forest Benchmark, as it sets the basic protocal / criteria for establishing both a certification body and the field criteria for managing a forest. Maybe someone else can offer insight on proposed USGBC implementation.

Best Regards,
Doug

The final result on this issue was "no change to MRc7", correct? I seem to recall reading this in one of the postings on LEED User, but cannot seem to find it now. Can you direct me to a document of the final result I can share with my project team?

Hi Jeremy - The proposed USGBC Forest Benchmark was voted down by the USGBC membership in late 2010 and 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. remains the MR 7 Credits required certification. Here's the link to the USGBC web page that states that:
http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2378

There are other MR 7 Credit changes proposed for LEED 2012 - here's the USGBC webpage with the official status:
http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2360

Here's a link to the Building Green Article covering the USGBC Forest Benchmark Ballot and Voting results:
http://www.buildinggreen.com/auth/article.cfm/2010/12/7/Not-Enough-Votes...

| dp

Based on what you've identifed above, the simple answer would be YES. Permanent wood fencing will be counted as part of the MR7 calculation.

HOWEVER, if you can find 'salvadged or re-used' wood staves, they would NOT be included as part of the MR7 calculation.
Best,
Doug

A different type of certification will not influence this particular dialogue - specification divisions are organized around product categories.
dp

Hi Jean,

Are you looking to establish compliance with MRc7 through the use of PEFC certified woodWood from a source that has been determined, through a certification process, to meet stated ecological and other criteria. There are numerous forest certification programs in general use based on several standards, but only the Forest Stewardship Council's standards, which include requirements that the wood be tracked through its chain-of-custody, can be used to qualify wood for a point in the LEED Rating System.? You may want to wait a few months on that and see where the current debate of the LEED credit standards ends up.

As you may know, certified wood is a particularly controversial topic in regards to the LEED rating system. For the past 6 or 7 years, there has been nearly non-stop debate on whether or not the 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. should be the exclusive compliant certification scheme. After a tremendous amount of debate and lobbying by all sides (and some very good research by the Yale School of Forestry http://www.yale.edu/forestcertification/USGBCFinal.htm) the USGBC has proposed a new benchmark for wood certification systems. This new benchmark is very similar to the FSC standard, but allows other certification programs, such as PEFC or SFI, to establish compliance with the LEED standards and thus qualify for MRc7. This benchmark has just gone through a fourth round of public comment, and my bet would be on a final draft being released late this fall or early next spring.

Long story short- if you submitted a project today using anything other than FSC certified wood, the credit would be denied. If you are committed to using PEFC wood to establish compliance with MRc7, you will need to wait for the release of the benchmarks, and then for the establishment of PEFC compliance with the benchmarks.

Hope that helps -anne

Hi Jean - As Anne Nicklin noted above, if your question is about applying a different certification than 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. to the credit, then I think you will find that difficult.

Also, From my perspective, there are in fact signficant differences between the proposed USGBC Benchmark and FSC in several key areas including governance, social equity, GMO's and the use of potentially hazardous substances in forestry.

If you are interested in an overview and some details, you can go to the Perkins+Will FSC Equal + Better web page commenting on the 3rd USGBC Forestry Benchmark DRAFT (as Anne noted, a 4th DRAFT has already been through the public comment phase, but the proposed changes were modest):

http://www.perkinswill.com/fsc.aspx

You can download the Perkins+Will proposed FSC Equal + Better Forestry Indicators (Benchmark) which is a line-by-line critique of the USGBC 3rd Forestry Benchmark DRAFT. It includes proposed improvements that go beyond the current FSC standard:

http://www.perkinswill.com/files/sdi/FSC-Equal-Better.pdf

Best Regards - Doug

Dear Anne,
I saw that you had posted the response on PEFC a year and half ago. Has anything changed in a direction of acceptance of other standards for sustainable forestry? Is it possible for projects to use mixture of 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. and PEFC wood to prove compliance?
Thank you in advance!

Hi Maria - PEFC certifications are not accepted by LEED V2009. 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. continues to be the Leadership Standard for sustainable forestry management worldwide and LEED recognizes that at the moment.

Doug

Yes, MasterFormat lists auditorium seating under Division 12 Furnishings in category 12 60 00: Multiple Seating, or more specifically 12 61 00 Fixed Audience Seating. The demountable wall system would not be listed under Furnishings, however. Most likely it would fall under 10 20 00 Interior Specialties, or more specifically 10 22 19 Demountable Partitions. Of course, you could get more specific (metal, wood, plastic, composite, or gypsum). Hope this helps.

Thanks, Brent. So Carrie, as you may know, Division 12 is generally excluded from MR credits for LEED BD&C, although it may be included if it's done consistently.

Lee, this would be included in your new wood budget for MRc7, and would not qualify for that credit. The wood could help you under MRc5, though, since it is harvested and processed within the region.

I don't have experience with trying to put a value on something that only costs you labor. Certainly the labor cost of delivering the usable trim to the project should be counted, but I'm not sure if you can find a way to do more than that.

1. I agree, you would have to include the on-site harvested wood in the MRc7 calculations, as non 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.
2. As Tristan said, MRc5 is the best place to get credit for on-site harvesting.
3. To calculate the value of the wood, count only the cost of the labor that would have otherwise occurred off-site, such as the sawing, milling, drying, etc. Any labor costs associated with installing the wood in the new building should be excluded.
4. That's the best I've got, good luck.

I agree with Anne, with a slight modification to #3. You can count the value per Anne, or you can count its replacement value.

Please reference page 365 and 3666 of the BD+C 2009 Reference Guide MR credit 3 Materials Re-use. The LEED Reference Guide states that "The salvaged materials from both on-site and off-site can be applied to MR Credit 5, Regional Materials, if they comply with the requirements of that credit. Materials qualifying as reused for MR Credit 3 cannot be applied to MR credits 1, 2, 4, 6, and 7." This supports Tristan and Anne above.

Page 366 goes on to say in section 6 Calculations: "Determine the cost of the material. This cost will be the actual cost paid (like Anne stated above) or, if the mateiral came from on-site, the replacement value. The replacment value can be determined by pricing a comparable material in the local market; exclude labor and shipping."

We have used this language and logic with trees cut on-site and milled for the same project's furniture and casework needs as well as concrete slabs crushed on-site used for structural back-fill (per Civil Engineer's approval). We identified the cubic yards of crushed-concrete and determined the cost of what structural back-fill for the same quantity would have cost. We identified current market value for the quantity / size of materials used in furniture/casework and applied that to the wood we salvaged from on-site.

Hope this helps.

From what you say, it sounds like the wood shoring may pre-exist your project? If so, I don't think you need to include it in your budget for 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. It would be like reusing an existing building with wood in it—not necessary to have FSC certification there.

I'm assuming, from your response, Tristan, that if the shoring is part of the project and then remains on site, it DOES need to be included in the 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. documentation. Is that correct?

In our case, it may kill our FSC budget also...

Alexandra, the credit language says to include wood components "permanently installed on the site." Based on this I think permanent wood shoring would be included.

Great question, Kath! I doubt that reviewers would feel authorized to allow this kind of exception. I think that it would have to approved through the LEED committees as an alternative compliance path. Maybe 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. would consider taking it on as well, which would also work.

Either way, you'd have to have some reliable system of documenting that the wood used on a project actually came from these beetle-kill thinnings, which suggests that doing it through FSC and using their COC systems might be a good approach.

That's my sense. Any other thoughts on this one?

This might be more difficult than I thought. The evergreen forests have to be clear cut, all stumps removed. Any fir tree left standing, even partly dead, allows the beetles to thrive. They fly from tree to tree within 35 feet or so. What we need to stop them is a harsh, old-fashioned Montana winter with 10 degree C temperatures holding for several weeks. That did not happen again this year. We had to have three trees removed along the creek behind our house. Neighbors lost 12. Two more may be infected. The milled lumber is absolutely beautiful with beetle trails making incredible patterns and contrasts in the wood. I think I'll try the alternative compliance path to start with my projects. Thanks!

I would think that there are environmentally sensitive ways to harvest beetle-kill lumber, and environmentally insensitive ways. I think it would be good to be able to demonstrate the sensitivity of the harvesting for this path.