If you have been scratching your head over Table 1 in the Reference Guide (p. 483 of the 2009 edition), you're not the only one. This is a table copied almost entirely verbatim from the SCAQMD Rule 1113 document. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that some of the language is not directly relevant to LEED 2009, and this extra language is leading to much confusion. Here are a few of my creative interpretations. If you have additional clarifications on this topic, please share them with the group.

1. LEED references GS-11 for paints applied to interior walls and ceilings. It references SCAQMD for other coatings, not paints. However, SCAQMD as a whole also addresses paints -- and since the USGBC just blindly copied the SCAQMD table, it includes paint standards that theoretically shouldn't be relevant at all.

2. Similarly, this chart includes exterior paints and coatings that are not covered under LEED, such as "roof coatings". We can ignore these for LEED, though from an environmental perspective it is of course always better to do what we can. (An ID credit, perhaps?)

3. The "effective date" section of the chart clearly makes no sense for LEED 2009, because all of the dates listed had passed when the ref guide was published. Again, the USGBC just copied the table straight from the SCAQMD document without any analysis or discussion. Interestingly, the '*' note for "ceiling limit" in the original SCAQMD document (link posted at the top of p.483) is longer: "The specified limits remain in effect unless revised limits are listed in subsequent columns in the Table of Standards." This is much more clear about the fact that we should be following anything listed under the "effective date" columns.

4. The "current limit" column is specific to a certain time when this version of the SCAQMD was posted, and can presumably be ignored for LEED 2009.

Given this, I think we should 1) ignore Table 1 for paints and exterior items, and 2) follow the most current numbers listed under "effective date", where applicable.

There are several errata for this credit, but as of 2/8/10 none address this issue.