So if I'm reading the requirements correctly, to claim Option 2 the project must ensure through the results of computational fuid dynamics modeling, Gaussian dispersion analyses, wind tunnel modeling, or tracer gas modeling that outdoor air contaminant concentrations at outdoor air intakes are below the thresholds listed in Table 1 (or local equivalent for projects outside the U.S., whichever is more stringent).
Seems onerous/supurflous if there a no notable sources of local contamination and ambient levels are below thresholds listed in the reference standards?
CFD modelling will just show that outdoor air contaminates levels will be more or less whatever the ambient levels are?
Would this requirement not put projects off targeting other initiatives such as increased ventilation and CO2 monitoring?
Ben Stanley
Senior Sustainability ManagerWSP - Built Ecology
LEEDuser Expert
250 thumbs up
January 16, 2018 - 6:42 pm
You might be right that the requirement will be onerous and that it could be an unnecessary step for some locations. The rating system language requires the analysis and so I don't know that there's a way around it for now although the Level I screening outline in the reference guide might be a bit more manageable. Either way, I'd suggest providing feedback to USGBC during the v4.1 public comment period which is scheduled for later this year.
Lewis Hewton
Cundall12 thumbs up
July 2, 2018 - 1:07 am
Hi Ben - just bringing this old query back to life - exterior contamination prevention is just one option (A) for getting the point. There's also options B/C/D & E, so it's not mandatory. Thanks.