I like the overall approach of this credit. I often found in v4/4.1 that minor, common obstacles (not having the proper STC rating on one partition, missing a couple thermostats, not having the right data available for all light fixtures) would prevent a project from earning the related credit. So I appreciate the move to a more flexible credit with multiple options and less rigid metrics.

For Option 1, I am curious how this would apply to a residential building. I’d recommend adding additional measures for resi units (e.g. operable windows, blackout shades, dimmable lighting) OR clarifying that the option only applies to workspaces and public/shared spaces such that a multifamily building could achieve it by addressing those spaces.

For Option 3, I appreciate that the requirements align with the typical scope of work of an acoustic consultant and can flex to fit project-specific needs, which wasn’t always the case with v4/4.1. I am concerned by the open-ended nature of the first two bullet points: is there a performance standard the project will be held to for “minimizing” and “addressing” those noise concerns? As it is, there is a lot of room for interpretation as to what is good enough and I would be worried that my acoustic consultant’s recommendation may fall short of how GBCI decides to review the credit. And conversely, I wouldn’t want to see projects falling short of where they should be in terms of acoustic performance. Removing STC requirements for exterior envelope and partitions could be a backslide for schools and healthcare where they were previously a prerequisite. I’m not enough of an expert in acoustic performance to say that a specific sound transmission requirement must be in place and what it should be, but as a long time user of LEED I see ambiguous language like "minimize" as a red flag!