Forum discussion

equipment rooms and data centers

4

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Tue, 05/18/2010 - 07:02

Practically speaking, assuming that the AHU and ducting are dedicated to equipment rooms (non-regularly occupied spaces) and therefore the air does not mix with air served to humans, I see no advantages to anyone in using MERV13 filters for equipment room air quality. In fact it sounds a bit rediculous. The main purpose of conditioning these spaces at all is for temperature control and to possibly avoid build up of toxic off gassing. But maybe there's something I'm not thinking of...

Wed, 05/19/2010 - 21:34

Jean - I agree. I just can't find anything that specifically exempts these areas, which I feel would be stated if they are. I'll keep digging. Thanks for the advice.

Fri, 05/28/2010 - 19:33

Wendy - I think your question is a valid one, but I would be wary to employ the Reduced Occupancy Guidance to support your conclusion. That guidance is intended specifically for portions of the building that are usually occupied but are vacant during the performance period (unleased tenant space, for example), rather than areas that are unoccupied by design (mechanical rooms or storage areas, for example). For the latter space types, I think you've got a logical point about MERV 13 being a bit much for those spaces. However, the credit language as I read it does not suggest that such an exception is allowed, envisioned, or presently accommodated. I think that short of a CIR getting approval for excluding those spaces, you probably have to assume that the entire building has to get MERV 13 filtration.

Fri, 10/21/2011 - 20:27

To the person who stated their system wouldn't take MERV 13 filters, have you looked at what's available lately? They're coming out with more adaptable filter systems. Check out this site for some examples of current furnace filters