See all forum discussions about CI-2009 IEQc4.4
 Subscribe to new posts about CI-2009 IEQc4.4 Post a new question aboutCI-2009 IEQc4.4
See LEEDuser’s guidance on CI-2009 IEQc4.4»
FAQs about IEQc4.4 :

Our project is planning to use no composite wood products. Do we automatically earn this credit?

We have a product that complies with very stringent E1 and E0 European standards for low emissions. Does this product comply with this credit?

View answers »

Forum discussion

CI-2009 IEQc4.4:Low-Emitting Materials—Composite Wood and Agrifiber Products

EPP particle board

Profile picture for user prkr
Parker Williams
Green Building Consultant
Green Credential ™
LEEDuser Basic Member
15 thumbs up

The local lumberyard has particle board with this stamp on it: EPP-CPA 3-08. Here is a bit about it, on PDF: http://www.pbmdf.com/CPA30/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000001428/EPP%20CPA%203-08%20SPECIFICATION%20April%201,%202008.pdf In it it says: Unfinished Particleboard. Formaldehyde emissions from unfinished particleboard must be less than or equal to 0.18 ppm using the Large Chamber Test Method (ASTM E1333). Particleboard products will be evaluated at the typical loading rate for particleboard of 0.13 ft2/ft3. Particleboard that uses a bonding system other than Urea Formaldehyde, may qualify for “Exempted” status under section 6.3 of the EPP Grademark Manual. One exception to this requirement is for Grade LD of ANSI A208.1-1999 (Door Core) products. Grade LD is allowed a loading ratio of 0.04 ft2/ft3 as per section 3.4 of ANSI A208.1-1999. I'm thinking this doesn't qualify, it just has limits for the UF,..anyone have anymore info on this?

3
Post a reply

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

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

Go premium for $15.95  »

Profile picture for user jjacobs_1
Josh Jacobs
Technical Information & Public Affairs Manager
UL Environment
LEEDuser Basic Member
356 thumbs up

Wed, 01/26/2011 - 18:13

Because the requirement for the credit states that there is no added urea-formaldehyde, the emission of formaldehyde from the particleboard doesn't really matter. The problem with the stamp is that the way that I read the standard, it does not preclude products from having added urea-formaldehyde. Therefore I do not believe that the stamp would help qualify the product for this credit - now if the supplier or manufacturer of the particleboard has a letter stating that none was added, that is normally enough for proof of compliance. Thankfully in the proposed update to EQc4 they focus on actual product emissions - even in particle board - not just product content.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.