See all forum discussions about NC-v4 MRc3
 Subscribe to new posts about NC-v4 MRc3 Post a new question aboutNC-v4 MRc3
See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-v4 MRc3»
FAQs about MRc3 :

The credit language says “Products meeting recycled content criteria are valued at 100% of their cost for the purposes of credit achievement calculation.” How much recycled content has to be in a product for 100% of its cost to count toward credit achieve

Is there any way around the requirement that no more than 30% of the materials used to meet Option 2 be structure and enclosure items?

If Sustainable Agricultural Network (SAN) certification isn’t required for agricultural products to comply with Option 2, does the manufacturer still have to provide documentation of third-party verification?

For the manufacturer “take-back” pathway under Option 2, does the extended producer responsibility program have to be run by the manufacturer?

Are there other ways the products can contribute to Option 1?

Can Corporate Sustainability Reports from the manufacturers of the products I’ve selected help me achieve the Option 1 point for “raw material source and extraction reporting?”

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-v4 MRc3:Building product disclosure and optimization - sourcing of raw materials

Extended Producer Responsibility - documentation

Profile picture for user tristanroberts
Tristan Roberts
Representative
Vermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
7780 thumbs up

Has anyone pursued this credit using Extended Producer Responsibility? Did you find that you had to meet any specific documentation requirements? Or, what formal aspects of the EPR program gave you confidence that it met LEED criteria?

2
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 joanna_1
Joanna Switzer
Sustainability Project Manager
Atkins
LEEDuser Basic Member
59 thumbs up

Fri, 04/21/2017 - 14:06

Hi, I'd be curious to hear any updates on this topic. To date I have found the "Manf take-back/End-user recycling" programs to be the easiest to locate & document (relying upon Online research). I haven't been through formal certification review yet, so no full "confidence" to offer.

Tue, 10/17/2017 - 13:01

Hello, we haven't tried yet, but I'd like to know why the credit language does not require recycling the product back into a similar product, but the LEED User guidance suggests that this is a requirement. Please let me know if this is a recommendation or an actual requirement. Thank you.
Profile picture for user tristanroberts
Tristan Roberts
Representative
Vermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
7780 thumbs up

Tue, 10/17/2017 - 13:28

Hi Rochelle! Where does the LEEDuser guidance suggest this is a requirement? I'm not seeing it. And, I am definitely not aware that it is a requirement.

Thu, 10/19/2017 - 20:26

Hello Tristan: I am quoting the LEED User guidance: Better known as “product take-back,” EPR means that a manufacturer has established measures to reclaim its products at the end of their useful life and to recycle them into the same product in a “closed loop.” Thanks and yes, please do let me know why LEED User is providing this information and/or if this is the intent of the credit. Many thanks.
Profile picture for user tristanroberts
Tristan Roberts
Representative
Vermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
7780 thumbs up

Thu, 10/19/2017 - 20:51

Glad for the chance to clarify, thanks. It is not a requirement. The guidance we posted was giving a general sense of what EPR is about. I'll reword it to make clear that remaking into new products isn't required.

Add new comment

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