-
What’s considered “regional”?
Regional materials are those that are extracted, harvested, or manufactured within 500 miles (as the crow flies) of your project site.You may already be aware of the materials that are produced in your region, and in some areas this is easy—it’s no surprise, for example, that the town of Gypsum, Colorado, extracts the raw materials to make drywall, and projects within 500...
Step-by-step credit help
Got the gist of the LEED credit but not sure how to actually achieve it? LEEDuser gives step-by-step help. Members get:
- Checklists covering all the key action steps you'll need to earn the credit.
- Hot tips to give you shortcuts and avoid pitfalls.
- Cost tips to assess what a credit will actually cost, and how to make it affordable.
- Ideas for going beyond LEED with best practices.
- All checklists organized by project phase.
- On-the-fly suggestions on useful items from the Documentation Toolkit, Resources, and Credit Language.
-
Credit language straight from USGBC
Need to check up on the exact LEED credit language from the LEED Rating System on the fly? LEEDuser includes the verbatim language. Members get:
- Easy access to the official LEED credit language with just a couple of clicks.
- On the jobsite without your bulky LEED Reference Guide? Check up on the credit language details here.
- Credit language content is used by permission of the U.S. Green Building Council.
Your credit-by-credit reference library
Why waste time chasing down referenced standards and supporting resources when LEEDuser links you directly to the ones you need? LEEDuser has gathered all the best tools out there and organized them by credit for easy reference. Members get links to:
- Organizations that can give information or help on a credit.
- Standards or studies that are key reference points for credits and prerequisites.
- Articles that help explain important topics.
- Key documents or references for credit inputs.
- Software tools you can use to run calculations or simulations.
Documentation Toolkit
In the end, LEED is all about documentation. LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit saves you time and helps you avoid mistakes with:
- Calculators to help assess credit compliance.
- Tracking spreadsheets for materials purchases.
- Spreadsheets and forms to give to subs and other team members.
- Guidance documents on arcane LEED issues.
- Sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions.
- Examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects.
43 Comments
Components to be included in the calculations for MRc5
Should lighting be included in the calculations? It is neither a Division 12 component, nor a construction material. However, p.256 of CI Ref.Guide includes "Ceiling light fixtures" in the sample spreadsheet.
Sprinklers should not be included in calculations, as they are a part of mechanical system, right?
What CSI Master Format division numbers are to be included in this calculation?
Thanks in advance!
Diana, MF divisions 3 through 10, and 31 and 32 are to be included. I don't know why light fixtures show up on that example—they shouldn't. Sprinklers would also be MEP, and not included.
Thank you, Tristan! Hope next version of the CI Ref.Guide will be more clear on this.
MRc5 Metal Stud... Assembly? Reused Furniture Manftr AND Extrxn?
In review comments recently received by our team for a LEED-CI Retail project, the following portions have confused us:
1. "Products from _____ vendor... have the same extraction and manufacture distance. It is not clear that the products would be extracted and manufactured from the same location."
This comment is in reference to furniture that is 100% reused, relocated from one of the client's existing office locations. None of these items were purchased new for the project, however, a price quote from the original vendor was provided as a value reference to help calculate the % of reused furniture.
Are we incorrect to list both the manufactured and extraction location as the identical address of the previous office where the furniture was located?
2. "Several of the materials appear to be assemblies and the individual raw components of the product are not separated by the weight of the material (.... Metal Stud, Ceiling Frame...)"
We understand that we must separate the listed assemblies now within our documentation, but both our metal studs and ceiling frame (grid between ACT) are all metal materials.
Are we supposed to provide an assembly breakdown for a metal stud?
Any guidance would be appreciated!
Jason, I may be missing something, but I would have thought that this credit was documented properly based on what you describe.
Jason, according to the LEED 2009 ID+C Reference Guide (pg 255), “Use the location from which [the reused and salvaged materials] were salvaged as the point of extraction, and use the location of the salvaged goods vendor as the point of manufacture.” Based on this information, you will need to revise the manufacture distance listed on the template to the location of the vendor. It may be worth providing the language from the Reference Guide in your response to the GBCI reviewer.
In response to your 2nd question, you do not need to breakdown the assembly of a metal stud. The assembly needs to be broken down into subcomponents only (using the weight of the component elements). In a ceiling assembly this would be ceiling frame, ceiling tiles, etc.
To avoid an appeal, you may wish to contact your GBCI review team directly by clicking on the Feedback link in LEED Online. Be sure to specify the project name and ID number.
Thank you both for your input.
We have revised the re-used furniture manufacturing and extraction distances as you've suggested.
However - for the metal studs and the ceiling frame, these items are all metal. The ceiling frame is listed separately from the ceiling tiles as you've mentioned. We have already used the contact links within LEED online to submit this question to our reviewers, but have received zero response in over a week.
We will just have to move forward with the metal items (non-assemblies) and hope for the best.
Hi Jason,
Did you use the "message" system within LEED-Online v3 to communicate with your review team? Because I recently tried this, waited a week, recieved no response, sent an email to the review team from my work email and got a response the same day.
So I'd suggest contacting them with the email address you'll find in the message center from you're own email if you've waited longer than a week. Hope this helps!
Stones
I was wondering how to determine the regionality of stones as granites, marbles and others. These kind of material chain is composed of at least 3 suppliers, begining 1st with the extraction supplier, who takes huges stones blocks in one state (most of them more than 500 miles). After the extraction, a 2nd supplier from another state buys this block and cut it in various slices (sometimes more, other not than 500 miles). And finally a 3rd supplier processes the slices to fit in our project needs (shape, size, roughness, others). This 3rd supplier is always within 500miles from the project.
The question is:
1) as we buy the produtc from the 3rd supplier that is regional, I understand that the product is manufactured regionally. Do you agree that this interpretation is correct?
2) About extraction, as there are 2 other suppliers I understand that I can only consider regionality if both (extraction 1st and process 2nd) are within 500 miles. Is that correct?
Thank you
Juliana, it sounds to me like this product is manufactured but not extracted regionally. That would allow you to get partial credit under CI MRc5.
Cut Sheets with % Local vs. Assembly Calculations
My question is for 2.0, but I think the content is still relevant to 2009.
We have been asked to provide calculations for how the raw materials were determined for some products and told to reference the assemblies’ information from MRc4 to do so. Manufacturers’ letters or cut sheets have also been requested.
The documentation for these products states that xx% was manufactured (or extracted) within 500 miles. Is this sufficient? Also, the credit asks for product cost but not material cost. If 98% of the product was extracted locally, do I input the whole cost towards the credit or just 98% of the cost? Thanks!
G, the following instructions from the LEED Online form for the 2009 version of this credit should answer your questions, I think:
"In lieu of exact distances, estimated distances may be used. If estimated distances are used, upload the manufacturer's letter stating that the material/
product was manufactured and/or extracted/recovered/harvested within 500 miles of the project site. For items that are regionally manufactured but only partially regionally extracted, split the material/product into two rows. Determine the cost for each row using the percentage by weight of each regional criterion."
Document Checklist
Can we use the forms attached in document checklist for tracking purposes?
Sheela, yes, that is their intended purpose. Note that you will need to copy the data into the LEED Online form when you upload it, but the spreadsheet gives you a convenient way to track compliance prior to the LEED Online documentation phase.
Documentation- No Extraction Location Data
I may have missed this but, what does the project team input in the template if there is no extraction data provided from the manufacturer but they have the manufacturing distance and wish to apply that product for the manufacturering portion of the credit? Do you have to supply distances for materials that you are not counting toward the credit but show up in the template because you applied them in the recycled content credit that is linked? The same lack of extraction data question applies to this instance as well.
We simply enter 501 miles and had never had a problem with it. Problem solved.
Thanks! I will advise my contractor to do this for our current project.
IDC Material and Resource Calculator (June 2011).xls
In June 2011, a new credit template upload requirement was added, the USGBC version of the materials data spreadsheet. We're running into a problem when we try to add more rows to the spreadsheet using the ADD MATERIAL macro. I've tried it on several different computers (albeit all running Microsoft Excel 2007) and we keep getting a Run-Time Error "1004". Anyone else getting this?
Alternatively, does anyone have the password to this spreadsheet so that we can add more lines manually?
I am having the same issue. Any progress?
Are you each selecting the "enable macros" option when you open the spreadsheet?
% Regional
For this credit the form has three columns -
Column 1 - % Regional
Colum 2 - Extraction Miles
Column 3 - Manufactured miles
We are not going for the regionally extracted point only the regionally manufactuered point. What is the % Regional credit for? How do you calulate the % Regional?
Beth, the % regional input indicates the portion of the given product/material that you are calling "Regional." If the whole product is considered regional, it's 100%. If half of it is from the region, and half is not, it's 50%. Regional is then broken down by extraction and/or mfr. location.
We have had the same problem with the %. But when we split the costs based on the % contributing the calulation seemed to make more sense.
MRc5- Regional EXTRACTED
On the LEED-online template- there is a small note at the bottom of the table that reads "For items that are regionally manufactured but only partially regionally extracted, split the material/product into two rows. Determine the cost for each row using the percentage by weight of each regional criterion." It seems to me that if you have a product that is 100% regionally manufactured, and 50% regionally extracted, that the cost of the total materials will become skewed, if you have to plug in 100% percent of the cost on one line, and 50% of the cost again in a second row for the same material. Can someone please explain to me how they have properly documented material that fall within this context of full contribution to manufactured and partial contribution to extracted?
I think there's a method behind the madness...
On one line the material cost is counting toward Option 1 of MRc5. On the other line the material cost is counting toward Option 2. So you're not double-counting the cost because it's basically going toward different requirements.
Tristan, it would help if the sample in the Toolkit demonstrated this split entry (i.e. use a harvest distance beyond 500 miles) approach because it just seems like the template is programmed to auto-sum entries and is not able to ignore duplicate entries of items which would skew the overall materials value total. Thanks again LEEDuser for clarifying grey LEED matter, John
John, I don't totally follow you.... I don't see that the template wants you to duplicate entries. Just enter each item once and it calculates individual sums for extraction and manufacturing distance. The template correctly gives credit for an item that is manfactured but not extracted regionally. Make sense?
I am having the same problem with the LEED Online template. My example is building insulation 100% manufactured within 500 miles but only 78% extracted within 500 miles. So I broke it into 2 rows on the form with the first one filled out 100% and the number of miles and the second one 78% and number of miles. The problem is that the form is double counting in the totals. So my total is giving 100x(cost) plus 78x(cost) in both columns. Should I address this with LEED Online directly? How do I do that?
Opp, just found the feedback link. I will update here if I get a response.
I don't understand this issue. There are separate columns for extracted and manufactured difference, so you can enter that data separately without having to duplicate the item. Maybe I'm missing something, though, if both of you see this same issue.
There seems to be a problem with the online form. When I submitted it to LEED I received the following response:
"Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The issue you have described will be addressed in the newest version of the form. Please use the attached spreadsheet to document compliance with MRc5. "
I am happy to share the form if it is permitted. (It's an Excel file)
James, I'd love to take a look at the MRc5 spreadhseet the reviewer provided you since we have had a problem with this credit calcs also-- my email is jalbrecht@nelsononline.com. Thanks, John
Here's a recent feedback from GBCi on our problem with the MRc5 template:
"Thank you for the message regarding the issues you received when trying to use the LEED CI MRc5 form for project # ......
Issue:
I see in the MR cr5 form that the regional values should be broken up into separate line items for those that have less extracted value than mfg value. No matter what way I slice it, I cannot get the totals to calculate correctly. .... By splitting up the regional quantities, the total materials budget becomes skewed and therefore depletes the recycled content values. Please provide explanation, with detail and examples, or how we might use this form. OR
Provide a new form with the Regional extraction values calculating correctly. OR Please let us know if we can simply submit our own form.
Response:
The issue you have described has been addressed in the newest version of the form. While this version has not yet been released, we recommend that you wait until the fixed form becomes available to submit for review. We anticipate that the fixed form will be available in 8-12 weeks. If, however, it is not feasible for you to wait until this form is released, please simply use the special circumstances section of your current form to indicate any issues/workarounds. When creating your project-specific documentation, please use the table below as an example.
For Option 1, whatever percentage of the cost which meets Option 1 counts for Option 1. For Option 2, whatever percentage of the cost meets Option 1 AND Option 2 counts toward Option 2. For example, if 50% was manufactured within 500 miles and 50% of this quantity was also extracted within 500 miles, then you may only count 50% of the cost of the 50% which was manufactured within 500 miles (see table below).
[sorry but the sample table would not copy well into this box] Option 1 Option 2
Item Material Cost % Regional Manufacture Distance Option 1 Sustainable Criteria Value % Regionally Mfr that is also Regionally Extr. Extraction Distance Option 2 Sustainable Criteria Value
(miles) (miles)
Paneling $1,000.00 50% 400 $500.00 50% 75 $250.00
Total Materials Cost $1,000.00 % of Total 50% % of Total 25%
We apologize for the inconvenience and thank you for your continued patience, Bess"
This feedback helped us out of a puzzling situation and maybe others will appreciate it too.
LEED Customer Service
U.S. Green Building Council
1.800.795.1747 | www.usgbc.org
The text above represents a staff opinion of a particular issue, and does NOT set any precedent to be upheld during a LEED Certification Review. For questions about the LEED Certification process, please contact GBCI at www.gbci.org/ContactUs. Get the latest must-have LEED news. Subscribe to LEED Update, a quarterly e-newsletter from USGBC and GBCI.
Reused furniture from old office
Hello,
I am working on a few LEED-CI projects that are reusing furniture from an older (nearby) office to use in their new office. I believe this to be a very sustainable effort that deserves credit from LEED.
The Reference Guide seems to allude to the ability to obtain credit for reused items by stating that: "Reused and salvaged materials that satisfy the requirements of MR Credit 3 may also contribute to MR Credit 5. Use the location from which they were salvaged as the point of extraction, and use the location of the salvaged goods vendor as the point of manufacture." This language kind-of confuses me. Our salvaged goods are coming from our old office and not a recycled goods vendor.
In the case where we have the office furniture coming from an old office that is 7 miles away can we count that 7 miles as the "manufacturing location"? The furniture originally was purchased from a vendor over 2,000 miles away so I'd assume that we'd call the 2,000 miles the "extraction location"? In LEED-CI projects, one point may be obtained by having 20% of your material cost come from products that are manufactured locally and so I am hoping that the furniture helps with that one point.
I feel like that the approach I describe meets the intent of the credit but I don't think this exactly meets the way the credit is written.
Anyone else experience this situation?
Thanks,
Lauren
Since you are not buying the salvaged goods through a middle-man, the location of the office building from which you are salvaging them should be considered the point of extraction AND manufacture. Your method, while more conservative, doesn't fit the language of the credit and actually penalizes you needlessly.
Thanks Patrick.
Have you taken this approach before on another project? You're basically saying that I should list the manufacturing and extraction location as the distance from the old office to the new office?
Correct:
"Use the location from which they were salvaged as the point of extraction" - They are salvaged from your existing building (7 miles away)
"Use the location of the salvaged goods vendor as the point of manufacture" - They are coming directly from the old office and not through an intermediate warehouse or distributor (7 miles away)
We are working on a CI project right now that has a very similar situation and this is the approach we are taking. The tenant is relocating from another building just a few blocks away and reusing most of their existing systems furnitureSystems furniture includes panel-based workstations comprising modular interconnecting panels, hang-on components, and drawer and filing components or a free-standing grouping of furniture items designed to work in concert.. I'll let you know if we run into any issues during our review...
thanks!
Calculating % Regional per product
The form on LEEDonline asks for Extraction Distance, Manufacturing Distance and % Regional for MRc5. How do we determine % regional for a particular product if, for example, it was extracted 2,200 miles away and then manufactured 179 miles away from the project site?
Also, what is the 20% Cut column all the way on the right side of the table meant for?
Thank you!
Emily, that percentage calculation is intended for products where multiple components are combined, and some of the components are compliant with the credit requirements, and some are not.
However, there is no partial credit for components that comply with manufacturing but not extraction requirements. In the situation you're describing, the product is non-compliant.
LEED Online requires you to upload cut sheets to document 20% of the products listed for this credit—so that's what the column is used to keep track of.
Actually, LEED-CI does give "partial credit". LEED-NC does not.
For LEED-CI, the example product described by Emily complies under Option 1 (manufactured regionally), but does not comply with Option 2 (manufactured AND extracted regionally).
For LEED-NC, all products counted toward achievement of MRc5 must be BOTH regionally manufactured and regionally extracted.
You're absolutely right. Thanks for correcting me.
Taxes and Other fees
Are taxes and transportation fees included in the values used for the MR credits? Or do we just use the cost of the material itself?
Please register to use the forum.