Standard 62.1 requires the outdoor air itself to be investigated before a ventilation system is sized. The regional review, the local observational survey and intake placement are all part of the method.
ASHRAE Standard 62.1, published by ASHRAE, a registered mark of that society, requires the outdoor air used for ventilation to be considered before the ventilation system is sized and arranged. The current edition, Standard 62.1-2025, is titled Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. Its approach begins with an investigation of the regional and local outdoor environment, followed by design decisions about treatment, intake position and separation from sources that could degrade the air entering the building.
The standard does not assume that outdoor air is automatically suitable merely because it comes from outside the building. Outdoor air can be affected by regional conditions, nearby land uses, building exhausts, vehicle activity and site-specific discharges. A ventilation calculation that establishes the required quantity without examining the quality and location of the source air is incomplete.
This investigation is intended to influence design. Where the outdoor environment presents a relevant concern, the project team may need to reconsider intake location, filtration, air cleaning, operating strategy or the suitability of a proposed ventilation approach. The assessment should occur early enough to affect the building and system layout rather than being reduced to a handover note after major decisions have been fixed.
The standard's requirement is therefore procedural as well as technical. It asks the designer to establish what is known about the outdoor air, identify local influences and record how the design responds. It does not provide a blanket statement that every site requires the same treatment. The conclusion depends on the building location, the intended use and the sources surrounding the proposed intake.
The regional part of the investigation considers the broader outdoor-air context. The designer should review authoritative information relevant to the project location and determine whether the area is affected by recognised air-quality concerns. The purpose is not to reproduce an ambient assessment within the ventilation calculation, but to establish whether regional conditions need to be reflected in the mechanical design.
The review should be geographically and temporally relevant. Information from a distant area or an unrepresentative period may not describe the project site. Equally, a general city-wide description may not reveal a local condition that dominates at the building boundary. The designer should record the sources consulted, the relevance of the information and any uncertainty that affects the design response.
Where the regional review identifies a concern, the design documentation should explain what has been done with that finding. It may affect the choice of treatment, the hours during which outdoor air can be used, or the location from which it is drawn. Ambient and outdoor air monitoring methods, equipment and limit values are covered elsewhere in this information network and are not restated on this page.
The local investigation is an observational survey of the site and its immediate surroundings. Its purpose is to identify sources that may not appear in regional information or design drawings. The survey considers the actual relationship between the proposed building, neighbouring activities, roads, service areas, roofs, façades and potential discharge points.
Observation matters because sources can be intermittent or operational. A loading bay may be quiet during a design visit but active during normal deliveries. A neighbouring exhaust may operate only at certain times. Traffic can vary with access arrangements, and a roof may contain discharges that are not obvious from street level. The survey should therefore consider how the site is expected to function, not only how it appears during a brief walkover.
The output should be a usable design record. It should identify relevant source locations, describe their relationship to possible intake positions and note any uncertainty that requires coordination. The survey is not a substitute for specialist investigation where a material concern cannot be resolved by observation, but it provides the minimum site understanding needed to avoid obvious intake conflicts.
The most direct way to protect an intake from a local source is often to separate them. Standard 62.1 sets out a method for considering the relationship between outdoor-air intakes and nearby exhausts or other contaminant sources. The copyright separation table is not reproduced here. Its role is to make intake placement responsive to the character of the source rather than relying on a single universal offset.
Separation should be assessed in the actual geometry of the building. Horizontal distance alone may not describe the likelihood of re-entrainment. Relative height, façade form, roof structures, prevailing flow around the building and the direction of discharge can all affect whether exhaust air reaches an intake. A compliant drawing dimension does not remove the need for a coherent arrangement.
The design should also preserve the separation after construction. Architectural changes, relocated plant, added screens or revised service routes can alter the relationship. A late change that moves an intake closer to a source should trigger a review of the original basis rather than being treated as a minor coordination adjustment.
Building exhaust outlets should be positioned so that discharged air is not readily drawn back into an outdoor-air intake. The appropriate separation depends on the nature of the exhaust and the way it is discharged. A relief opening associated with relatively benign air is not necessarily treated in the same way as an outlet carrying a more significant source. The method requires the designer to understand what each outlet represents.
Plumbing vents also require attention because roof plans often place them near air-handling equipment. Their small size can make them appear insignificant during coordination, yet their location and discharge relationship can create an avoidable intake conflict. The design should identify them explicitly rather than assuming that only large mechanical exhausts matter.
Discharge direction is part of the reasoning. An outlet designed to project air away from the roof or façade can have a different interaction from an opening that releases air into a sheltered zone. However, discharge momentum should not be used as a casual substitute for the required separation. The arrangement must remain credible across the intended operating conditions.
Cooling towers can influence nearby intake air through their discharge plume. Standard 62.1 therefore treats the relationship between towers and outdoor-air intakes as a deliberate design issue. The page does not address water-system hygiene, legionella biology, sampling or disinfection, which belong to separate resources. The relevant point here is that a tower discharge must not be treated as ordinary outdoor background when locating an intake.
Loading bays combine vehicle activity, delivery operations and building service functions. An intake positioned near a bay can draw air from a zone affected by engines or other temporary sources. Because bay use is intermittent, the risk may be missed if the survey is based only on quiet conditions. The design should consider normal operations, queuing and the possibility that doors or shutters change the airflow path.
Roads, car parks, drop-off areas and ramps also need to be considered. The nearest source may not be the only relevant source; building form can channel air from a lower level or sheltered area towards an intake. The standard's logic is preventive: the intake should draw from the cleanest practicable location rather than relying entirely on downstream treatment to correct an avoidable siting problem.
Estidama's Pearl Building Rating System: Design and Construction, Version 1.0 of April 2010, required credit LBi-R1 Healthy Ventilation Delivery points to sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the 2007 edition of Standard 62.1 for the outdoor-air survey. This is a fixed-edition reference and should be read as such. It does not automatically update when a later edition of the standard is published.
The same Estidama credit requires separation distances to comply with the referenced edition or with local code, whichever is more stringent. That comparison must be made without blending requirements or selecting the less demanding source. The design record should identify the separation basis used for each relevant intake-source relationship.
By contrast, Al Sa'fat, the Dubai Green Building System, 2nd edition, January 2023, clause 401.01 requires the latest edition of Standard 62.1 without attaching an edition year. Dubai Municipality's Technical Guidelines for Indoor Air Quality for Healthy Life, DM-HSD-GU119-IAQ Version 4 of 11 December 2024, also references Standard 62.1 without an edition year. The applicable project record should therefore distinguish fixed references from references that do not name an edition.
Edition years matter here more than they usually do, because UAE instruments reference these standards in two incompatible ways. Al Sa'fat, Dubai's green building system, whose Silver Sa'fa requirements are mandatory for new buildings, requires the latest edition of Standards 62.1, 62.2 and 170 and deliberately attaches no year, so the applicable requirements move as the standards are revised. Estidama's Pearl Building Rating System, Version 1.0 of April 2010, does the opposite: it names specific editions — the 2007 edition of Standard 62.1, the 2007 edition of Standard 62.2, the 2004 edition of Standard 55 and the 2007 edition of Standard 90.1 — so the requirements it imposes are frozen at those editions regardless of what has been published since. Dubai Municipality's Technical Guidelines for Indoor Air Quality for Healthy Life, Version 4 of 11 December 2024, references Standard 62.1 without giving an edition year. Anyone reading a requirement should therefore establish which instrument imposes it and whether that instrument names a year, before establishing what the current edition says.
Al Sa'fat §401.01 (2nd edition, January 2023) requires the latest edition and attaches no year — Estidama PBRS Version 1.0 (April 2010) names fixed editions
The required quantity and the suitability of the source air are connected design questions. If the proposed intake is exposed to a material regional or local source, the project may need a different location, treatment strategy or operating basis. Discovering that issue after sizing and coordination can make the response more difficult.
No. Regional information may describe broad conditions but miss neighbouring exhausts, service yards, roof discharges, traffic patterns or planned site activities. The local observational survey adds the building-specific context needed for intake design.
Treatment can form part of the response, but the standard's logic is to avoid preventable exposure at the intake where practicable. Filtration also does not address every type of source in the same way. Intake location and treatment should be considered together rather than using treatment to excuse an avoidable conflict.
No. Required credit LBi-R1 points to the named sections of the 2007 edition of Standard 62.1. That fixed reference differs from Al Sa'fat's requirement for the latest edition and from the Dubai Municipality guideline's undated reference.
This is an independent information resource. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected to ASHRAE. ASHRAE and the names of its standards are the trademarks of their respective owners and are used here only to identify the standards described.