Land clearing debris

Kelly, I doubt the weight of the wood in question will sway calculations much but if you include it in your waste management plan you could try it. The credit intent of MRc2 to "reduce demand for virgin resources . . . " I interpret is referring to construction materials and not consumables. The worst that will happen is the reviewer will strike it out. Good work on saving the owner money through salvaging the wood for their use, but it may not be worth the trouble to document it and defend it in a review. Where LEED may not reward your team for this move, its common sense that should resonate with the owner.

I think you’ve made a strong case for your approach, and I appreciate how you’ve aligned it with the intent of the LEED credit. The key point in the manual—“any construction debris processed into a recycled content commodity that has an open-market value”—does seem to support your scenario. Since the wood material was repurposed for kiln fuel and mulch, both of which would have required purchasing new materials if not sourced from your site, it fits the spirit of waste diversion and resource efficiency. Additionally, the fact that some of the material was used for landscaping mulch adds another layer of sustainability, as it reduces the need for virgin materials and minimizes landfill contributions. That said, I’d recommend documenting the process thoroughly, including how the material was processed, its market value, and the rationale for its classification as a recycled content commodity. This will help if there are questions during the LEED review process. Overall, I’d say you’re on solid ground with this approach. It seems to meet both the letter and the intent of the credit.