General Exceptions

General Exceptions are broad rulings that apply across materials or project types. They should be reviewed for relevance by all teams that have Red List compliance concerns.

RL-001 General Red List

There may be instances in which, due either to market realities or project-specific challenges, project teams are unable to find a compliant product for a specific application, and a Specific Exception does not exist. In these limited instances, project teams must make every attempt to design the product out of the project. If that is not possible, project teams may specify a non-compliant product if they document both:

1. A good-faith effort (or due diligence) to:

• Design the product out of the project; and
• Find a Red List–free product with compliant ingredient disclosure. To demonstrate a good faith effort, project teams must research and vet a minimum of three competing products from three different manufacturers (unless there are only two or fewer manufacturers of the product).
  

2. Advocacy to the selected manufacturer for elimination of the Red List ingredients from their product.

This Exception should be used sparingly, and only as a last resort. Project teams are expected to exhaust all other Exception options, including the RL-018 Inventory Threshold and RL-004a Proprietary Ingredients Exceptions, before applying this Exception.

RL-002a Small Electrical Components

It is not necessary to seek ingredients information or ascertain Red List compliance for components meeting the definition of small electrical components as contained in the glossary and further detailed under Small Electrical Components clarifications. Instead, these products must compliant with the regulations of the European Union’s Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive 3, 2015, which establishes the following maximum concentration values for toxic chemicals tolerated by weight in homogeneous materials:

Products meeting the definition of a Small Electrical Component can demonstrate compliance with RoHS by either a RoHS label or CE Mark.

Likewise, it is not necessary to seek ingredients information or ascertain Red List compliance for complex electrical or data products that are made up entirely of small electrical components.

Documentation:
Compliance via the RoHS label or CE mark must be demonstrated through documentation or photos that provide sufficient identifying information to enable a clear correlation between the documentation and the product entry in the Materials Tracking Table. Examples include:

• Manufacturer product specification sheets showing the CE mark or RoHS label;
• Photos that show both the CE mark or RoHS label and identifying product markings on the product itself or packaging;
• Signed manufacturer attestation that the product meets each threshold specified in the RoHS standard.
  

RL-003 Small Mechanical Components

Small components within complex mechanical equipment do not need to be vetted for compliance with the Red List. To qualify for this Exception, a small mechanical component must be part of a complex mechanical product with at least 10 parts, and be no more than 10% of the total assembly by weight and volume. Examples include small gaskets or valves within mechanical and plumbing products including HVAC equipment, pumps, or composting toilet systems.
Mechanical equipment, such as Heat Recovery Ventilators (HRVs), heat pumps, water treatment systems, etc., are not considered small components but may have small components in them. In this case, project teams must still gather supporting data for the mechanical equipment housing and other major components.

In addition, project teams must advocate to the relevant product manufacturer(s) that they disclose through an Industry Standard Disclosure Program, or through the Toxnot platform, in order to encourage engagement with transparency platforms.

Manufacturers may not use this Exception when seeking a Declare label as it does not meet reporting requirements of 100 ppm.

RL-004a Proprietary Ingredients

Project teams are required to research and identify products that have 100% of their ingredients publicly disclosed to the greatest extent possible. If a manufacturer is withholding any ingredients as proprietary and the product cannot be avoided in the project, the project team may still use the product if the requirements of this Exception can be met.

To use this Exception, products must have a minimum of 50%, by weight, of the product’s ingredients disclosed. Project teams must obtain confirmation in writing from the manufacturer stating the percentage of the ingredients being withheld (maximum allowed is 50%) and that all ingredients used in the product are compliant with the Red List to 100 ppm. In addition, project teams must advocate to the manufacturer that they disclose through an Industry Standard Disclosure Program, or through the Toxnot platform, in order to encourage engagement with transparency platforms.

This Exception may be used in combination with the RL-018 Inventory Threshold Exception to document Red List compliance at 1000 ppm, only if no products with 100% disclosure at 100 ppm can be sourced.

RL-005 Red List and Code

Red List materials are allowed when they are mandated by code (e.g., in some jurisdictions, only PVC piping is allowed for certain applications) and the project team is unable to get a variance. The project team must propose an alternative solution to the Authority Having Jurisdiction and, if that alternative is rejected, advocate to the AHJ or other relevant regulatory authority (e.g., the National Fire Protection Association) for a change in the requirement due to the toxicity of the Red List ingredient(s) in question. The project team must provide:

• An official statement of the policy or code that conflicts with Imperative requirements.
• The request for a variance and the official AHJ response.
• Evidence of advocacy to the AHJ or other regulatory authority to change their policy or code. Under this Exception, advocacy to the manufacturer of the Red List product is not required.
  

RL-006 Minimum Order Excess

If a Red List Free or Red List Approved Declare product or a Red List compliant product identified from another source is available, but requires a minimum order that is significantly in excess of the project’s needs (typically at least double), a non-compliant alternative may be used instead. Project teams should make every effort to use the compliant product regardless of minimum order requirements, such as contacting local suppliers and other project teams in search of a means to store, share, or sell the excess quantity. If a non-compliant product is used, the project team must document due diligence, by researching the minimum order quantities for two known compliant products (to find a compliant product available in smaller quantities), and must advocate to both the non-compliant product manufacturer to eliminate Red List ingredients and to the compliant product manufacturer for runs or distribution channels that could accommodate smaller projects.

RL-007 Performance Failure in Systems

If a project team replaces a Red List ingredient or component with a compliant alternative that subsequently results in a performance failure of a major system (e.g., water proofing), the project team may replace the compliant component with a standard, non-compliant component or ingredient.

Project teams must submit photos showing the performance failure of the system and a brief narrative explaining the system failure and corrective measures required to resolve the issue.

RL-018 Inventory Threshold

Project teams must prioritize products with available ingredient disclosure at the 100 ppm threshold, before considering disclosure at 1000 ppm. Before using this Exception, project teams must review product databases in an attempt to source a product with 100 ppm ingredient disclosure. If no compliant products meeting the required performance criteria are listed in these databases, the project team must then contact a minimum of one manufacturer to request 100% content inventory disclosure at 100 ppm. If project teams are still unable to source a product disclosed at 100 ppm, they may use a product disclosed at 1000 ppm.

This Exception may be used in combination with the Proprietary Ingredients Exception to document Red List compliance at 1000 ppm, only if no products with 100% disclosure at 100 ppm can be sourced.

The project team must:

• Include a narrative description of their process for researching products listed in available product databases in the Materials Vetting Process Narrative.
• A copy of the advocacy letter or email sent requesting 100% content inventory at 100 ppm.
  

RL-019 Complex Specialty Equipment

Complex Specialty Equipment is defined as equipment that is specific to the program and function of a space, but is not integral to standard building function or integral to the project’s energy and water performance. Specialty equipment is typically only supplied by a limited number of manufacturers that are able to meet the stringent performance requirements of the application. Residential grade equipment and appliances within the scope of the Living Building Challenge are not considered complex specialty equipment and must be vetted against the Red List and documented using an existing exception.

For complex specialty equipment, project teams must request a full ingredients list. If a full list is not available, the team must collect a list of known ingredients within the product (i.e. PVC cable, steel structure), the primary housing material, and an isometric diagram with component names or a replacement parts list. Project teams should prioritize a more in-depth conversation with one manufacturer to educate specialty equipment suppliers on the value of transparency and the Living Building Challenge. Project teams must also advocate to the selected equipment manufacturer* for full ingredient transparency and for the removal of known Red List ingredients in the future.

For laboratory and scientific equipment, project teams should advocate for the manufacturer to pursue an ACT label through the My Green Lab program. Laboratory and scientific equipment with an existing ACT label and a Responsible Chemical Management score of 1 are considered compliant with the Red List Imperative and do not require additional vetting or advocacy.

RL-021 Red List CASRN Removal

In rare cases, ILFI will remove from the Red List CASRNs whose listing is considered to be no longer necessary or accurate. In these instances, the subject CASRNs are considered to be removed from all versions of the Red List.

This exception lists the CASRN’s that ILFI has removed from the Red List. Project teams using any version of the Red List that contains the listed CASRN’s may exclude them from required vetting by citing use of this exception and the removed chemicals during documentation submission.

• 107-46-0 Hexamethyldisiloxane (L2)
• 107-51-7 Octamethyltrisiloxane (L3)
• 141-62-8 Decamethyltetrasiloxane (L4)
• 141-63-9 Dodecamethylpentasiloxane (L5)
• 63148-62-9 Polydimethysiloxanes
• 540-97-6 Dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (D6)
• 541-02-6 Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5)
• 541-05-9 Hexamethylcyclotrisiloxane (D3)
• 556-67-2 Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4)
• 69430-24-6 Dimethylcyclopolysiloxane
• 17928-28-8 Methyltris(trimethylsiloxy)silane
• 3555-47-3 Tetrakis(trimethylsiloxy)silane
• 68585-23-9 Novolac resin (phenol formaldehyde polymer)
  

RL-023a PFAS and PVC in Plenum Wire and Cable

This exception applies to electrical wires and cables and optical fiber cables that are insulated, jacketed, or both, and that are subject to fire codes NFPA 90A, NFPA 262 or UL 910, and/or proposed for use where applicable building codes require the use of fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) compounds in wire and cable sheathing. Examples include wires and cables installed in ducts, plenums, and other spaces used to transport environmental air without enclosed raceways.

When used to meet national and local fire codes that require wires and cables in air-handling spaces to be insulated and jacketed with materials that burn slowly and emit low amounts of smoke, that application of FEP and PVC is considered an essential use of these Red List materials. To comply with the LBC Materials Petal, project teams must make every effort to design the project in a way that avoids the need for FEP and PVC coatings, for example by designing buildings with open ceilings and no plenums; or running cable in metal conduit, sealed wiring chases, or cellular raceways of concrete decking. If highly flame-resistant cable is still needed, it must meet the requirements described below.

For FEP-based wires and cables:

• Product has published and publicly available ingredient transparency for 100% of ingredients at 100 ppm (0.01%) with no proprietary ingredients allowed.
• Process chemicals (e.g., solvents, surfactants, emulsifiers, dispersants, inhibitors, additives) used during the FEP copolymerization process must be fully disclosed.
• Company discloses policy for minimizing emissions and worker exposure to PFAS process chemicals.
• Product is compliant with RoHS III or current standard.

Product has undergone analytical testing showing that:

• Residual monomer levels in the FEP copolymer do not exceed 100 ppm in either the copolymer or the final material/product.
• Residual Red List process chemical levels in the FEP copolymer do not exceed 100 ppm.
  

For PVC-based wire and cables:

• Product has published and publicly available ingredient transparency for 100% of ingredients at 100 ppm (0.01%) with no proprietary ingredients allowed.
• All plasticizers have full chemical hazard assessments and are rated GreenScreen Benchmark 2 or safer.
• All flame retardants have full chemical hazard assessments and are rated GreenScreen Benchmark 2 or safer.
• Product is compliant with RoHS III or current standard.
• Manufacturer has followed best practices for PVC sourcing, production, and emissions control per the Best Environmental Practice PVC v2.0
  

Product has undergone analytical testing showing that:

• The residual vinyl chloride monomer content is less than 1 ppm
• No lead, cadmium, mercury, or hexavalent chromium are present in the product above 1 ppm
• The combined level of the following phthalate plasticizers cannot be above 100 ppm: diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), benzylbutyl phthalate (BBP), diethylbutyl phthalate (DBP), diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP)
  

REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION:

• For FEP and PVC cables:
  • A detailed design narrative explaining the design process and considerations devoted to to maximizing the use of Red List free cable products
  • Applicable codes requiring the use of FEP or PVC
  • Publicly available list documenting all ingredients down to 100 ppm (0.01%) with Red List chemicals flagged
  • Evidence of RoHS III compliance

• Additional for FEP cables:
  • A letter from the manufacturer disclosing all process chemicals used for the FEP copolymerization with Red List chemicals flagged
  • Company policy related to minimization of PFAS emissions and exposure
  • Analytical test data proving that the residual FEP monomers and Red List process chemicals identified are below the required thresholds

• Additional for PVC cables:
  • Affidavit stating that the best practices have been followed for PVC sourcing, production, and emissions control – align with Best Environmental Practice PVC v2.0
  • Chemical Hazard Assessment for each plasticizer used showing that they are rated GreenScreen Benchmark 2 or safer
  • Chemical Hazard Assessment for each flame retardant used showing that they are rated GreenScreen Benchmark 2 or safer
  • Analytical test data showing that the vinyl chloride monomer, lead, cadmium, mercury, hexavalent chromium, DEHP, BBP, DBP, DIBP, are below the required thresholds