We are defining our LEED project as the building plus approximately 26% of a parking deck (and of the landscaped area around it), with the parking deck located in a block diagonally across from the building. We are operationally allocating to the project 407 out of 1550 parking spaces (26.3%), in the 7-level parking deck with 484,500 sq. ft. total. We are planning for the top deck of the parking deck to be a light-colored/ high-albedo site surface (probably regular concrete with a solar reflectance of 0.30, avoiding the darkening fly-ash content for the top floor). Allocating 26.3% of the 69,220 sq. ft. top level, the resulting area - 18,205 sq. ft. - is greater than 30% of the combined area of this plus the other hard site surfaces in the city block of our building. Thus, we exceed the requirement of providing light-colored/ high-albedo material for 30% of the sit? s non-roof impervious surfaces simply with our top parking level. Please confirm that the USGBC agrees with our interpretation. (We may still want to pursue SS Credit 5.1 without being penalized by having to apply the top deck toward the site areas of the main city block, 50% of which we may want to restore to habitat areas. Is this a separate question? SS Credit 7.1 is more important to us.)Also, it is not clear to us if the 50% underground parking option would also apply, as most of the parking is in covered levels in the parking deck; or does the parking deck indeed need to be "underground"? - Further, are the covered levels of the parking deck a non-roof impervious shaded area, qualifying the project for yet another option of meeting the credit requirements? If at all possible, for our education, please address all three options of qualifying for this credit - could we qualify under any of the options? Which one is the best to prove? Should future credit requirements address parking decks?