This Credit interpretation request pertains to EQ Credit 5, Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control. Our project includes two separate areas (a data center and an equipment storage room) housing an estimated total of 160 to 200 Valve-Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA) batteries per area. These batteries are designed to emit minimal hydrogen gases while charging (up to approximately 22.2 milliliters (mL) of gases per hour per battery. This information is according to the manufacturer). The approximate maximum total off gassing rate for all the batteries is calculated to be (22.2 mL X 200 batteries =) 4440 mL, or 0.16 cubic feet, per hour. In contrast, standard open or flooded lead-acid batteries can emit up to 12,500 mL of gas per battery per hour, which would result in a total of (12,500 mL X 200 batteries =) 2,500,000 mL (2,500 Liters, or 88.3 cubic feet) off gassing per hour. (All data obtained from manufacturer\'s websites.) A Credit Interpretation Ruling dated 5-14-2001 states: "Eliminating the pollutant source through source control rather than through isolation would achieve the intent of this credit." Therefore our question is: Given that our proposed system will generate an estimated two-tenths of one percent of the hydrogen gas amounts generated by standard open lead-acid battery systems, would the "chemical use" be considered: "controlled at the source" and these two areas (a data center and an equipment storage room) not be required to be physically isolated (deck to deck partitions, with separate outside exhausting, no air recirculation and negative pressure) under EQ Credit 5? In addition, could this approach be considered for an Innovation Credit?