CI-v4.1 MRc3: Environmental Product Declarations 1-2 points

Option 2 has the following changes to the form:
- Title: Change from "Option 2. Multi-Attribute Optimization" to "Option 2. Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization". Change the title in both the checkbox and the header when Option 2 is selected.
- Change first sentence from "BPDO Calculator" to "Products Calculator"
- Delete the cost-based pathway completely
- Revise note to read "Number of products must be at least 5 for 1 point and 10 for exemplary performance."
See screenshots for details.

Revise third paragraph under Behind the Intent to read as:
"For Option 2, new pathways are intended to reward initial first steps, leadership in life cycle impact reductions, and optimized products that have lowered embodied carbon and other impacts. The cost threshold has been removed to allow simpler achievement criteria. Option 2 now only has a number of products-based threshold: procure 5 products from at least three different manufacturers. Manufacturers that do not have comparable lifecycle data will find an entry-level pathway in Option 2 that rewards “action plans” for those who demonstrate initiative towards reducing life cycle impacts."

Revise first sentence under Step by Step Guidance to read as:
"Select which option(s) to pursue. Option 1 and 2 are now based on number of products only, and some products may contribute to both Options 1 and 2. "

Revise the second paragraph under Step 3: Calculate Compliance to read as:
"Option 2: The cost-based pathway is no longer available. Choose products that sum to at least 5 products from 3 or more manufacturers that meet at least one of the requirements listed in Option 2...."

Replace Equation 2 under Calculations with:
"The cost-based pathway is no longer used for this credit. See Equation 3 below. "

Delete the first bullet under Equation 3.
Revise the Note under the bullet to read as "Note: no single product may contribute more than 2X value.

In the first sentence of the Option 2 Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization Report Guidance - Action Plans paragraph, delete "50% of cost or"

In the bullets under Option 2 Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization Report Guidance, delete all instances of "100% by cost or", "150% by cost or", and 200% by cost or"

In first bullet under Notes on Calculations, replace "200% of cost" with "2X value"
In second paragraph under Exemplary Performance, replace "20% by cost or 20" with "10"

In second paragraph under Beta Update, replace "critical review" with "verification of the LCA"

1. Under Step-by-Step guidance, Option 1 EPD, Step 3: Count compliant products and materials and compile documentation, replace the first paragraph as follows:

Follow LEED v4 guidance keeping in mind that products with product-specific LCAs or EPDs meeting more than one criterion are now all equally weighted at the same valuation factor of 1 product. However, Type III EPDs that include external verification of the EPD declaration and external verification of the underlying LCA data are valued as 1.5 products. A Type III EPD is considered externally verified if the person conducting the third-party verification of the underlying LCA data is independent and outside of the organization (as per ISO 14025 and EN 15804 or ISO 21930) in which the EPD is developed.

2. For Option 2, re-title credit as Embodied Carbon/LCA optimization instead of multi-attribute optimization

3. Under Further Explanation, calculations, re-title Equation 2 as : Equation 2: Percentage of cost for materials with Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization Reports (Option 2) and Equation 3 as: Equation 3: Total number of products with Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization Reports (Option 2)

4. Re-title Additional guidance for Type II EPDs as Option 1: Additional Guidance for Type III EPDs for Manufacturers and Program Operators and add "Manufacturers and Program Operators:" to the first sentence.

Revise section "documentation of product specific Summary Sheets as:
"Documentation of Product-Specific LCA Reports: Summary Table
Manufacturers and Program Operators: Product-specific declarations are defined for this credit as declarations that are based on a life-cycle assessment of a product but not constituting a full EPD (for EPD documentation requirements, see Documentation of EPDs: Summary Table). In addition to the documentation outlined in the LEED v4 Reference Guide, product-specific LCA declarations published after July 1, 2021 must include a cover sheet or summary table with the following information at a minimum:

 All requirements outlined in LEED v4 reference guide for this section
 The name/credentials of person(s) conducting the life cycle assessment
 The type of LCA software used to conduct the assessment;
 Date of assessment with period of validity or expiration date of life cycle assessment
 Contact information of the declaration holder or producer (typically the manufacturer)
 Unique document ID number of the report
 Product type
 Product name(s) and/or product line(s) covered by the report
 Product description
 Indication of impact categories measured
 Functional unit
 Standards met
 Independent review entity’s name and statement
 Reference PCR
 The name/credentials of person(s) conducting the life cycle assessment
 URL link to the publicly available version of the document.

Documentation of EPDs: Summary Table

Manufacturers and Program Operators: In addition to the documentation outlined under Required Documentation in the LEED v4 Reference Guide, all EPDs published after July 1, 2021 must include a separate cover sheet or summary table. The summary table must include:
 All requirements outlined in LEED v4 reference guide for this section
 The name/credentials of person(s) conducting the life cycle assessment
 The type of LCA software used to conduct the assessment;
 Date of assessment with period of validity or expiration date of life cycle assessment,
 A reference to the valid PCR
 Names of global regions covered under the EPD
 URL link to the publicly available version of the document.
 Unique document ID number of the report
 Product type
 Product name(s) and/or product line(s) covered by the report
 Expiration date for the report

6. Re-title Option 2: Multi-attribute Optimization Report Guidance as Option 2 Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization Report Guidance - Action Plans and replace the description with the following:
"Compliant Embodied Carbon/LCA Action Plans are standalone documents provided by manufacturers and valued at 50% of cost or ½ product for credit calculation purposes. Action plans are created after a manufacturer has conducted a life-cycle assessment of the product or product type, obtained results for the product in any of the life-cycle impact reporting formats per EPD Option 1, and has generated a publicly available narrative and action plan describing life-cycle assessment analysis with results.

Guidance for Manufacturers and Program Operators Creating Embodied Carbon/LCA Action Plan Reports:

A compliant Action Plan is developed by a manufacturer and based upon analysis from a product-specific LCA or product-specific type III EPD that uses EN 15804 or ISO 21930. The action plan must use the specified PCR functional unit for the LCA or EPD document. Action plans cannot be based on industry-wide LCA data or industry-wide EPDs and can be valid for no more than four years. Note: industry averages derived from a source other than an industry-wide EPD are not acceptable. Manufacturers using an industry-wide EPD must have been part of the industry-wide EPD in order to use it for optimization purposes.
The action plan must be publicly available and include strategies and analysis communicating how a manufacturer plans to mitigate or reduce life cycle impacts over time with special consideration of GWP reductions. The Action Plan does not have to be third party verified but at a minimum must be prepared by an individual with experience conducting product-specific LCAs. The Action Plan must be signed by an executive of the manufacturing company.
Action Plans must be a standalone document that includes the following information:
 Unique document ID number of the report
 Product type
 Product name(s) and/or product line(s) covered by the report
 Expiration date for the report
 Description of the LCA conducted including the dataset, software or platform used by manufacturer to complete the analysis.
 Provide a link to a summary of the underlying LCA data or EPD document.
 A table or otherwise summary of the largest life cycle impacts of their products throughout the product life cycle, which includes GWP impact result reporting at a minimum.
 Date of creation of the action plan as well as date of expiration (a maximum of four years for the plan).
 A written narrative describing immediate actions that will be pursued to reduce the overall life cycle impacts of the product within the four-year timeframe.
o Include a description of the impact areas targeted for reduction in the action plan. The narrative shall describe how GWP is (or is not) targeted for reduction, including a numeric impact reduction target. Impact reductions must be shown as negative values and impact increases shown as positive values.
o The narrative shall describe actions that will be pursued to reduce life cycle impacts of the product(s) within the four-year timeframe.
o Include proposed changes in formulation or manufacturing processes that are planned as part of impact reduction strategy.
o Include specific dates and a timeline for completion of all the steps described in the Action Plan. Only changes that are under the control of the manufacturer are valid for Action Plans.
 Examples of optimization strategies under the control of the manufacturer include: expected changes from sourcing more local materials or suppliers to reduce shipping impacts, reduction in energy impacts from product manufacturing, an anticipation that the product will be designed to use less energy in the use phase or end of life phase, or installation of renewable energy for onsite generation at the manufacturing plant.
 Examples of non-compliant changes are reductions that occurred without manufacturer action. For example, regulatory changes that result in lower impacts, energy grid emissions factor updates for the region, or LCA software updates that result in lower impacts due to dataset changes rather than product optimizations.
 The reference LCA or EPD must meet all the requirements of the life cycle assessment reporting formats per Option 1 credit requirements and documentation requirements of product specific declarations or EPDs.

A sample of a compliant Embodied Carbon/LCA Action Plan is found in the Resources section of the online LEED credit library for this credit.

Project Team Members, Program Operators and Manufacturers: Compliant Embodied Carbon / LCA Optimization Reports are valued as follows for credit calculation purposes:
 Verified comparison documents that show any percent impact reduction in GWP via LCA or EPD compared with LCA or EPD (product-specific or industry-wide EPD if the manufacturer is recognized as a participant by the program operator), value at 100% by cost or 1 product.
 Verified comparison documents that show 10% or more impact reduction in GWP via current LCA or EPD compared with previous LCA or EPD (product-specific or industry-wide EPD if the manufacturer is recognized as a participant by the program operator), value at 150% by cost or 1.5 products.
o Note: if using industry-wide EPDs or a product-specific LCA as the basecase for showing life cycle impact reductions in embodied carbon, the maximum value is 1.5 products or 150% by cost.
 Verified comparison documents that show 20% or more impact reduction in GWP and at least 5% reduction in two additional impact categories via current product specific externally verified Type III EPD compared with a previous externally verified Type III EPD of same product based on same PCR, value at 200% by cost or 2 products.
o Since a 200% by cost or 2X product multiplier is an exemplary level, only products that show improvement from a past product-specific Type III EPD to a newer product-specific Type III EPD can achieve the 2 products or 200% by cost multiplier.

Guidance for Manufacturers and Program Operators Creating Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization Reports:
To be eligible for showing reductions in life cycle impacts or embodied carbon for a product, a manufacturer must have previously conducted a product-specific LCA, product-specific Type III EPD, or participated in a published industry-wide Type III EPD in accordance with EPD Credit Option 1 Requirements. Then, the manufacturer has conducted a second life cycle assessment or published a second industry wide or product specific EPD in accordance to EPD Credit Option 1 Requirements for the same product type or product after making improvements towards impact reductions. Finally, the manufacturer has conducted a comparative analysis of the results between the two life cycle assessments per comparability guidelines in ISO 14025, section 6.7.2 or EN 21930, section 5.5. The comparison must be from two products following the same Product Category Rule of the same product function or product type. Industry averages derived from a source other than an industry-wide EPD are not acceptable. Manufacturers using an industry-wide EPD must have been part of the industry-wide EPD in order to use it for optimization purposes. Note that these requirements are for conducting a comparative analysis towards impact reductions and must not be used to make comparative assertions towards environmental claims for the product or product type.

The comparative analysis must show impact reduction in the global warming potential (GWP) impact category and must include a narrative describing how reductions in impacts were achieved. The published comparisons must be third-party verified. The comparative analysis and Embodied Carbon/LCA Optimization report can be developed by the same organization that conducted the newer product-specific LCA or Type III EPD, but must be reviewed by an independent practitioner with experience in LCA.

The Embodied Carbon Optimization/LCA report
must be a standalone document that includes the following information:

 Unique document ID number of the report
 Product type
 Product name(s) and/or product line(s) covered by the report
 Expiration date for the report
 Summary life-cycle impact category results from the baseline document (product-specific LCA, industry-wide Type III EPD, or product-specific Type III EPD). Results must be shown by module and impact category.
 Provide a link to the public version of the baseline document. Include the validation period and expiration date for the baseline document. The baseline document (LCA or EPD) cannot have expired more than 5 years before the newer LCA or EPD used for comparison was published.
 Summary life-cycle impact category results from the most current document (product-specific LCA or product-specific Type III EPD). Results must be shown by module and impact category. Provide a link to the public version of the current document. Include the validation period and expiration date for the newer document.
 LCA software details, LCA practitioner details and program operator details involved in development of both life cycle assessments.
 Expiration date of the comparative analysis (valid up to four years from when the second life-cycle assessment was conducted. The expiration date on the Optimization report should match the expiration date for the newest LCA or EPD document).
 The comparative analysis must show impact reduction in the global warming potential (GWP) impact category and include a narrative describing how reductions in impacts were achieved. Impact reductions must be shown as negative values and impact increases shown as positive values.
 Narrative explanation of the deliberate decisions taken to reduce life-cycle impacts of the product type or product.
 Only changes that are under the control of the manufacturer are valid for Optimization reports (i.e. “additional”):
o Examples are expected changes from sourcing more local materials or suppliers to reduce shipping impacts, reduction in energy usage to manufacture the product within the manufacturing phase, an anticipation that the product will be designed to use less energy in the use phase, installation of renewable energy for onsite generation at the manufacturing plant, etc.
o Examples of non-compliant changes are reductions that occurred without manufacturer action. For example, regulatory changes that result in lower impacts, energy grid emissions factor updates for the region, or LCA software updates that result in lower impacts due to the dataset rather than actual product optimizations.

8. Add 'Manufacturers and Program Operators' to Third-Party Verification Program Requirements for Life Cycle Impact Reporting, Comparisons and Narrative and change the third bullet in description to read as:
The third-party verifier of the life cycle comparisons and narratives must be different from the individual that created the LCA.

9. Replace the bullets under Required Documentation with the following description:
Follow LEED v4 reference guide documentation requirements with the following modifications for Option 2:
 Option 1: use the LEED v4.1 MR building product calculator. For products that have been verified for LEED by GBCI, include “Verified for LEED Documentation” ID numbers, or copies of EPD/LCA reports and compliant summary documents in LEED Online for products contributing toward credit.
 Option 2: use the LEED v4.1 MR building product calculator. For products that have been verified for LEED by GBCI, include “Verified for LEED Documentation” ID numbers for products selected in the calculator, or copies of action plans and optimization reports in LEED Online for products contributing toward credit.