Does anyone have experience or know whether GBCI accepts MDF with melamine-urea-formaldehyde (MUF) in it for IEQc4.4? The melamine is a scavenger additive that serves to reduce the rate of formaldehyde emissions. I assume the improved hydrolytic stability that the melamine brings to the MDF meets the intent of the credit, since even pure solid wood has formaldehyde emissions making getting to zero literally impossible. Since no specific limit is set in the LEED Requirement, nor is there a related LEED Interpretation or CIR, I am left wondering... MUF is NOT UF and the manufacturers would gladly write a corresponding letter, but does the obvious need to be stated simply because there is a "U" in MUF? As far as I can tell the Healthy Building Network provides a list of composite woods with no added urea-formaldehyde (http://www.healthybuilding.net/healthcare/2008-05_ProductComp_NoAddUrea_...) and they list melamine formaldehyde as the binder, which as far as I understand can not be used as a wood binder without the urea, so I am left wondering, does MUF count as no added urea-formaldehyde?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Josh Jacobs
Technical Information & Public Affairs ManagerUL Environment
515 thumbs up
March 26, 2012 - 11:05 am
Ward - you bring up a great question. While I agree that this type of product meets the intent of the credit (low emissions of formaldehyde), remember that the credit is based on content. I don't know which way GBCI would go, but I think an explanation of MUF and how it meets the intent of the credit would be a great way to help inform GBCI.