Ohio VOC requirements

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Tracy Van Niel, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: tracy_van_niel Post Number: 277 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 09:35 am:    Just wondering how those who write specifications in Ohio have incorporated the Ohio VOC requirements into their paint specification... as part of performance requirements under Part 1? Or other? Thanks! Tracy L. Van Niel, FCSI, CCS Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 1009 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 09:58 am:    We have it in Part 1 under Quality Assurance. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 222 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 11:27 am:    Regardless of US state location, I specify VOC in Part 2 as an attribute of the paint product (primer, 2nd and 3rd coats). In Part 3 I specify the DFT per coat as part of the paint system. Part 1 performance requirements would include only the max VOCs permitted by local or state regulations. Out of curiosity, are the Ohio VOC requirements less or more restrictive than required for LEED certified projects? Richard Howard, AIA CSI CCS LEED-AP Senior Member Username: rick_howard Post Number: 214 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 12:15 pm:    The new Ohio VOC regs are very close to the OTC regs in place on the East Coast. Both are more restrictive than LEED but less than California. If you go to www.swgreenspecs.com you can download a useful publication called "LEED & VOC Coatings Reference Guide" that compares the different VOC standards and also lists complying SWP products. I do what Ralph does now, but when I start following the new SectionFormat, the reference will end up in Part 2. (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 04:43 pm:    Why do you want cite specific VOC limits when it is already regulatory law? Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 225 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 05:47 pm:    Because the American public is not that smart, inspite of what the politicians say. Take a drive on any freeway. Tracy Van Niel, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: tracy_van_niel Post Number: 278 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Wednesday, July 08, 2009 - 08:48 am:    Thanks, everyone! The Sherwin-Williams site has a couple of great downloads (thank you, Howard) ... but it also raises some questions then too 'cause form release and concrete curing materials are cited as well as things like fire-resistive coatings (does that mean intumescent coatings?) and waterproofing masonry sealers (like ProSoCo's products?) and wood preservatives so those appropriate VOC limitations would need to be listed in those sections as well. Tracy L. Van Niel, FCSI, CCS John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1066 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, July 08, 2009 - 12:16 pm:    Or, specify only products that comply. By listing the limit, one may avoid ill-advised substitutions. As to the definition of "fire-resistive coatings," the actual regs always give definitions, which I think are pretty uniform throughout the country. In Mass. regs, (rather than repeat the wordy definition), they are ASTM E-119-tested materials for protecting structural steel.