components or assemblies?

The intention of the wording is to have tested each product separately. An assembly test may be meaningful from a technical viewpoint. But I am not sure whether this will be accepted by US GBC.

Hi Reinhard. On the back of this question, could you please share your views on how you would treat off-site finished assemblies? An example would be acoustic ceiling panels that vary in size, finishes, type of acoustic insulation, etc. but come fully assembled off site.  Based on common sense I would use the budget method to demonstrate compliance and I can't find anything in the reference guide that says off-site finished assemblies must be treated as one product. Would appreciate your thoughts.

I am not too familiar with the reference guide, but the intention of the wording in the credit was to define criteria for the products as they are delivered to, and mounted at, the construction site. In your example, an evaluation could cover several assembled panels with the most typical cores and finishes, to get an overall picture of that type of products. Evaluation does not necessarily mean testing; having tested the thickest panels, and those with the most emissive finishes, and possibly more important - those with the finishes that have the lowest barrier properties to retain the emissions from the insulation core material, that data base could allow analogy conclusions to rate the other products.