Under Option 1, It is not clear where the information that is being requested exists. After a quick review of all the acceptable frameworks, we were not able to find any reporting that listed:
• Raw material supplier extraction locations (especially for all the different products most companies produce)
• A commitment to long-term ecologically responsible land use
• A commitment to reducing environmental harms from extraction and/or manufacturing processes
• A commitment to meeting applicable standards or programs voluntarily that address responsible sourcing criteria. (Could you at least provide some examples of the types of programs to which you refer?)

It is unclear how one would ensure the commitments above are real or where one would be able to find them without having to spend an unreasonable amount of time researching companies and their individual products. It is also unclear from the credit language whether every raw material component of say steel (iron, carbon, manganese, phosphorus, sulfur, silicon and traces of oxygen, nitrogen and aluminum) will have to have these reports from every raw material supplier they use in every factory for every product.

If the approach provided under the structure and enclosure section (i.e. by weight) is to be applied across the board, it should be put somewhere so it is clear it applies to all materials not just structure and enclosure.

In Option 2, Why not call it "improvement of" rather than "leadership extraction practices" Please define extended producer responsibility, bio-based materials and ASTM Test Method D6866 in the glossary

The Sustainable Agriculture Standard standard seems primarily oriented around food products at the moment. It is not clear how will they be able to gear up and certify enough building materials in the next two years to make this option viable. How will we know if the raw material has been legally harvested, as defined by the exporting and receiving country?

It seems as though this approach would be more viable if the USGBC were certifying the materials that meet their criteria once and making a data base of acceptable materials available to LEED project teams for specification and documentation purposes. It would be great to be able to enter a material into a database with its cost and the total amount of materials and have all the green attributes automatically calculated. It would also engage the USGBC more directly with the manufacturers that they want to influence and avoid the duplication and waste of effort that will be required if every team has to do the research independently. Also with this approach, the USGBC could promise compliant products access to the broader LEED community not just a single project. and simplify the documentation process enormously..