Aisle Containment Structures

Declaration details

Manufacturer

Maysteel Industries

Program operator

Smart EPD

Declaration number

SmartEPD-2026-129-0849-01

Date of issue

April 30, 2026

Valid until

April 30, 2031

Product category rules (PCR)

Smart EPD® Part A Product Category Rules for Building and Construction Products and Services, 1000, v1.2 (version 1.2)

Standard

ISO 14025:2006 and ISO 21930:2017

Declared unit

1 unit of product 1 aisle assembly

System boundary

Cradle to gate (A1 - A3)

Product specificity

Product Specific

Manufacturing specificity

Manufacturer Average

Manufacturing plants

Allenton (6199 County Rd W, Allenton, WI, USA); Garland (701 S International Rd, Garland, TX, USA); Lynchburg (3726 Cohen Place, Lynchburg, VA, USA)

Product category

NetworkInfrastructure › CabinetsRacksAndEnclosures

Product SKU

#667492 - HOT AISLE ASSEMBLY 1.2-A #667493 - HOT AISLE ASSEMBLY 1.2-B #667505 - HOT AISLE ASSEMBLY 1.2-C #667506 - HOT AISLE ASSEMBLY 1.2-D

Verifier

Hong Jin, AmSpec LLC

LCA software

openLCA 2.4

Program instructions

Smart EPD General Program Instructions v.2.0, March 2025

Life cycle assessment results

Results per 1 unit of product 1 aisle assembly.

Environmental Impact Assessment Results

Resource Use Indicators

Waste and Output Flow Indicators

ND = not declared. Life cycle modules: A1-A3 product stage, A4-A5 construction process, B use stage, C end of life, D benefits and loads beyond the system boundary.

Material composition

Hazardous substances

No regulated hazardous or dangerous substances are included in this product.

Product description

This Environmental Product Declaration (EPD) covers Aisle Containment Structure (or Aisle Assembly) products #667492, #667493, #667505, and #667506, all manufactured by Maysteel in the United States. The products are a combination of powder-coated steel structures and panels composed of an extruded aluminum frame with acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) corners and polycarbonate windows, varying slightly in configuration but ultimately serving the same purpose. All the products are manufactured at three Maysteel facilities: Allenton, WI, Garland, TX, and Lynchburg, VA. The material composition remains consistent between facilities, but slight differences in the process material types and quantities exist. While the EPD is assessed per single aisle assembly, given that many of these products are custom in nature, a table of results per kilogram is also provided so that life cycle impacts for different product configurations may be calculated.

The product masses & dimensions are as follows:

#667492: 4,401 kg, L: 65’-7.5”, W: 65’-7.5”, H: 15’-4.0”

#667493: 3,751 kg, L: 66’-3.5”, W: 7’-7.6”, H: 15’-4.0”

#667505: 4,792 kg, L: 84’-7.5”, W: 13’-3.7”, H: 15’-4.0”

#667506: 3,752 kg, L: 85’-3.5”, W: 7’-1.6”, H: 15’-4.0”

Interpretation

The results indicate that the largest sources of impact are Raw Materials (A1) or Manufacturing (A3) for all indicators. Raw Material (A1) GWP impacts come primarily from bent & formed steel tube (48-67%), followed by steel unistrut (15-22%). Manufacturing (A3) GWP impacts are driven largely by utility consumption, where 38-45% of A3 impacts come from electricity consumption and 39-45% come from natural gas consumption. The impacts vary slightly but are generally comparable between products. GWP ranges between 18.2 and 23.8 metric tonnes CO2 eq per unit. Across all indicators, Product 3 has the largest impacts, while Product 2 has the smallest impacts. Finally, the product with the highest emissions intensity when manufacturing locations are averaged is Product 2 with 164.2 kg CO2 eq/kg, while the product with the lowest emissions intensity is Product 3 with 78.4 kg CO2 eq/kg. This general trend is observed across production facilities, but products manufactured at Lynchburg, VA facility generally have the highest emissions.

Projected manufacturing burdens were calculated for the Garland, TX and Lynchburg, VA manufacturing locations as production did not occur at these locations during the year of study. Maysteel has confirmed the manufacturing activities at the Garland, TX and Lynchburg, VA manufacturing facilities will be similar in nature to that of Allenton, WI. Moreover, the Allenton, WI facility intends to remain the largest producer of each of the aisle assembly products in CY2026 and beyond. Together, the facts above will aid in reducing the uncertainty in the manufacturer-average results presented herein; however, lack of actual production data for the Garland, TX and Lynchburg, VA manufacturing locations is an inherent limitation of the study.

Also, allocating manufacturing burdens on a “per kg of inbound raw material” basis adds an additional degree of uncertainty to the results presented herein. This method would be most accurate in the case where the raw materials are used in similar manufacturing processes to manufacture all products at the facility; however, this is not the case as Maysteel produces a multitude of different product types. Given that the aisle assemblies are some of the larger products manufactured at the facility in terms of mass it is plausible that the portion of the manufacturing burden assigned to it is overly conservative.

Additionally, precise scrap rates for polycarbonate and ABS corner material per material input at each facility were not available. JBE and Maysteel agreed on a conservative 10% scrap rate for these materials. Furthermore, the steel and aluminum scrap rates calculated for the Allenton, WI facility were used as a proxy for the Garland, TX and Lynchburg, VA manufacturing facilities given that the products were only manufactured at the Allenton, WI facility during the year of study. The steel scrap rate also assumes that the various steel materials have the same manufacturing scrap rate, which may not be the case in reality. This also assumes that the scrap rate for steel and aluminum materials is the same across each product manufactured at the facilities. This is therefore a limitation of the study.