-
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.
CI 2009 WEp1: Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction
Get LEED Updates
Subscribe to "On Your Team", the LEEDuser email newsletter
9 Comments
Core fixtures included?
I'd like to hear other people's opinions on this direction included above:
"Commercial Interiors projects must include in the water-use calculations any water fixtures that are being used by occupants, even if the installation of the fixtures is not within the scope of the project. For example, an office project that is not updating the base buildingwill still need to include the core bathroom fixtures in the LEED water use calculation."
I've heard from numerous sources that core fixtures only count towards this calc with a full floor tenant. For tenants who are only in part of the floor, you only need to include the fixtures within their tenant space (eg their scope of work), not the core.
Devon Bertram replied Consultant, YRG sustainability Sep 11 2009
GBCI has confirmed that all fixtures used by the occupants need to be included in the calculations. The following email was received from GBCI:
"Existing fixtures and/or those in common areas of the buildings are still to be included in the LEED 2009 WEp1 calculations (as they were in the LEED-CIv2.0 WEc1 calculations) if they are used by the occupants of the LEED-CI tenant space regardless of whether or not other tenants share these fixtures."
Common area toilets
Requiring tenants to include base building toilet fixtures in their calculations will ultimately discourage some tenants from pursuing LEED. We have recently renewed our lease and intend to pursue LEED Gold for our new space build-out. Unfortunately, we have no control over the base building plumbing fixtures. Since we are committed to a "green" design, we will still pursue whatever points we can, even if we are unable to obtain LEED certification because we can't meet this pre-req.
Less committed tenants may decide that a green design is not worth the effort if they have no chance to obtain certification. What a shame.
Devon Bertram replied Consultant, YRG sustainability Oct 14 2009
There may opportunity to work with landlords and negotiate renovations to base building fixtures in efforts to install more efficient fixtures, especially if a project is pursuing a "green" design or LEED certification. This has benefits for both the tenant and the landlord.
Even if base building plumbing fixtures are out of your scope, you can incorporate water efficient fixtures in your pantries, kitchens, etc. that do fall within your scope. Additionally, aerators are a low-cost strategy that can be easily installed, and may be easily ok'd by the landlord and incorporated into base building faucets to help the project achieve WEp1.
USGBC provides additional guidance
The USGBC just posted a new document providing additional guidance on WEp1 and WEc3. This document covers fixture groups, daily use calcs, dual flush flow rates, and autocontrol faucets. Link here: http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6493
Dave Intner replied Firmitas Architecture & Planning Dec 21 2009
The document doesn't clarify the use of Janitorial/ Mop sinks very well. We have a project that is tracking just barely above 40%, but how we treat the janitor sinks could drop us a hair below that. Four points (including an RP bonus point) are on the line for us.
There's only a brief mention of janitor sinks in the reference guide (it shows up in Table 1 on pg. 103, grouped with Kitchen faucets, and is mentioned peripherally in the implementation section on pg. 102). Perplexingly, there's no "janitor sink" pull-down in the LEED Online template (there was in v2.2), so I'm thinking we just use the Kitchen tab? Then for usage, we were thinking we would have the owner estimate the number of days the maintenance staff comes to clean, how many times they'd fill a bucket during a typical shift, and how big the bucket is (assume 80% of capacity used, to account for cleanser concentrate and the fact that you can't move a bucket that's filled to the brim without it spilling everywhere). Does this approach seem sound?
Devon Bertram replied Consultant, YRG sustainability Jan 05 2010
Your approach for calculating the janitor sink usage is reasonable, but it seems you don't need to include janitor's sinks in the calculations. The NC, Schools, and CS requirements state that calculations include “water closets, urinals, lavatory faucets, showers, kitchen sink faucets, and pre-rinse spray valves.” As there is no drop-down and they aren't included in the list above, not including them in the calculations should be ok.
USGBC does reference that some faucets with low flow rates are not appropriate, especially where the volume of water is predetermined (p. 102 of ID+C 2009). For best practice, you can maximize the efficiency of the janitor's sink with a high efficiency faucet or a foot pedal-operated faucet.
Janitor Sinks
The EPAct of 1992 does not include Janitor’s Sinks in its regulation. See the addenda posted on November 2, 2009. For the UPCUniform Plumbing Code and IPCInternational Plumbing Code Standards Tables shown in the 2009 Reference guides, it states to remove the text “and janitor” so it becomes “Kitchen sink faucets”.
Dave Intner replied Firmitas Architecture & Planning Feb 26 2010
Thanks, Eric; I'd missed that in the addenda. So... based on that, it appears that janitor sinks are no longer required to be tracked for LEED? I guess maybe they're now considering this a "process" water use whereas in previous versions it was base building. It doesn't much matter in our case either way... the 30 or so gallons projected to be used by our project's janitorial staff is a drop in the proverbial (and literal) bucket; it barely moves our calculations by a percentage point.
Please register to use the forum.