A Brave New Green Building World: LEED Certified Products

When I give green building presentations, I make it a point to explain that the LEED rating system does not certify products.

I'm not going to be making that statement anymore.

Two weeks ago, the US Green Building Council announced the launch of LEED Pilot Credit 43: Certified Products (PDF).  As you might have guessed from the name, the pilot credit allows projects to obtain LEED credits if products meeting specific certifications are included.  Here's the credit requirement (PDF): 

Specify and install non-structural products and materials with attributes described below for a weighted value of at least 10% of the total value of all non-structural materials and products. ISO Type I and III Declarations qualify for this credit. Compliant certifications are those consistent with the draft LEED Standard for Standards.

In short, this credit allows projects to obtain LEED points if at least 10 percent of the non-structural products are certified.  Immediately upon reading about this credit, I wondered if it would apply to wood certifications. The USGBC has been embroiled in a long-standing feud regarding its recognition of Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood products.  Other wood certification systems, most notably the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), have been pressing for similar recognition.

The LEED Pilot Credit is a convenient way for the USGBC to recognize other wood certifications.  In the appendix to the pilot credit, four new wood product certifications, including SFI, are recognized.  Although this pilot credit only applies to non-structural products, this change could provide a transition to structural wood products as well.  It's interesting that the USGBC decided to create this LEED Pilot Credit a few months after its members rejected a credit that tried to expand recognized wood certifications.

Even more important, this LEED Pilot Credit means that the USGBC is becoming more involved in certifying products. With many more product and material certifications available for LEED credits, it seems the process of LEED certification will become much more complicated.

What do you think?

Photo credit: chrislang

USGBC Accused of Anti-competitive Practices

We may be settling into 2010, but one unresolved legal development in 2009 could have a broad impact on the future of the green building industry. On October 20, 2009, the Coalition for Fair Forest Certification ("the Coalition") filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (pdf), alleging anti-competitive behavior by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the United States Green Building Council (USGBC):

"[T]he Coalition asks that the FTC investigate through the Bureau of Consumer Protection the deceptive and unfair trade practices arising out of FSC’s forest certification standards; investigate through the Bureau of Competition concerns about anticompetitive activities and monopolization arising out of USGBC’s LEED rating system and preference for FSC-certified products; and provide guidance to standard-setting organizations concerning behavioral standards for compliance with antitrust law."

My law firm represents many of the forest product companies involved in this complaint (another law firm submitted the letter), so I will not be discussing the allegations made against the FSC. Nor will I debate the merits of one wood certification versus another. But I will continue to keep you updated on the status of this complaint and I will be discussing allegations made against the USGBC and the potential impact of these allegations on green building regulations.

First, some background on the connection between USGBC, LEED and FSC:

"Under the LEED system, points can be awarded in five categories: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy & atmosphere, materials & resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation & design process. Credit 7 under the materials & resources category addresses the issue of certified wood, with the intent of encouraging environmentally responsible forest management. The requirements for the credit are:

'Use a minimum of 50% (based on cost) of wood-based materials and products, certified in accordance with the Forest Stewardship Council’s Principles and Criteria, for wood building components including, but not limited to, structural framing and general dimensional framing, flooring, finishes, furnishings, and non-rented temporary construction applications such as bracing, concrete form work and pedestrian barriers.'"

According to the Coalition’s complaint, forest product companies that do not supply FSC-certified wood can not contribute to LEED materials & resources Credit 7: "[T]he three standards most widely adopted by forest owners in the U.S. and Canada - SFI, the Canadian Standards Association ("CSA") Sustainable Forest Management Standard, and the American Tree Farm System - receive no points under LEED, creating a substantial disadvantage for American-sourced wood products."

Among other actions, the Coalition has asked the FTC's Bureau of Competition to investigate the USGBC’s preference for FSC-certified wood:

"The Coalition also believes that the exclusionary actions of USGBC and its exclusive endorsement of FSC-certified products . . . warrants investigation by the Bureau of Competition concerning issues of possible monopolization, attempt to monopolize and conspiracy to monopolize the fast-growing certification marketplace. In examining the issue, the Coalition invites the FTC to use USGBC as a case in point to provide specific guidance to USGBC and other standard setting organizations."

It’s this last sentence that has really caught my attention.  

How do you think the FTC should respond to the Coalition's complaint?

Related Links:

Photo:  Travelin' Librarian