The idea behind this credit is to ensure good indoor air quality (IAQ) for building users. The flush-out of indoor air required under Option 1 is frequently pursued by projects seeking a certain and predictable path. Performing testing under Option 2 leaves open the possibility that despite all other efforts to provide and protect air quality, the building could fail the tests, putting the credit in jeopardy.

You might wonder why there would be any chance of failing the IAQ test if a building earns the other IAQ credits. For whatever reason, it happens. This might be due to VOC emissions from materials not covered by the low-emitting materials credit, or from the undetected use of materials not meeting the spec.

Another reason teams may want to pursue Option 1 is that the cost for IAQ testing is often greater than that of a building flush-out. Testing costs vary depending on the size of the building, the number of samples tested, and the travel and fieldwork the testing agency needs to perform.

On the other hand, there may not been enough time in your project schedule to conduct the flush-out for Option 1. The tenant may also prefer the solid results of a test. All of these factors can push a project toward Option 2.

What’s New in LEED v4.1

• Option 2 is now tiered, with the possibility of getting one point for passing a test for particulates and inorganic gases, and a second point for passing a VOC test.
• Testing is required for a reduced list of contaminants in Option 2, Path 2—just 12 VOCs—with exemplary performance offered if testing includes all 35 VOCs from v4.

Should I upgrade?

If you are committed to pursuing IAQ testing, this is a good one to seek a substitution for. Industry has had trouble ramping up to provide the necessary testing for all 35 CDPH VOCs, so v4.1 testing is more targeted and tests for fewer contaminants. While the v4.1 update means that chances of passing tests are much better, there is still a risk of having to retest and incur those additional costs.