CI 2009 WEp1: Water Use Reduction—20% Reduction

Rick, yes, I would say you could exclude that, since it's not really a lav faucet and efficiency of its flow rate is not relevant.

You are required to work with the project FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories.. Work with the Architect/Owner to set a FTE for the building. LEED has you use 10% of the FTE for showers for the calc. Which should be low for a gym where I would assume more than 10% of the people will use the shower.

Create two separate user groups (20%/80%)for the faucets and apply their actual flow rate to it.

I worked on a Medical Office Building, where there were exam room sinks. These were excluded from the WEp1 and WEc3 calculations as a process waterProcess water is used for industrial processes and building systems such as cooling towers, boilers, and chillers. It can also refer to water used in operational processes, such as dishwashing, clothes washing, and ice making. use. We submitted and received a point for an ID credit, "Process Water Use Reduction," in which we separately accounted for water efficiency in the exam room sinks through use of low-flow faucet outlets and footpedal controls. I expect that this application would be considered similar to a Laboratory situation.

If the fixtures are part of the project scope, then they should be included in the water use calculations. Are they part of the design and just delayed in installation?

Yes, the fixtures are delayed on install. So the question is whether move-in and use of existing standard fixtures would affect the calculations.

Hello,

I don't have a clear picture on this yet so maybe someone can help! Let me clarify the situation. Move-in has already occurred, but the project has not yet submitted. Certain plumbing fixtures have not been renovated and now there is an interest in doing so.

Is it still possible to renovate these fixtures and include the new flow rates in the calculations as you would normally? Thanks!

Raymond, I think this question can be answered by reviewing the additional water guidance for LEED document and applying it to your situation.

These would be considered public if there are multiple people using the fixtures. Even if the ownership of the space is private, an office is considered a public usePublic or public use applies to all buildings, structures, or uses that are not defined as private or private use., as would a lab or product testing area.

In the reference guide on page 99 and the credit language included page above, "private" is limited to hotel guest rooms, hospital patient rooms, and residential bathrooms. In an office building, you could possibly classify a lavatory as private if it is accessible only to a private office such as an executive, where no other building users would typically have access.

Thank you for the reply David. Just for more clarity, do we have to consider process use in all commercial interior project? Since this project mainly consists of volunteers coming and testing the shampoo and other products manufactured by the company. Does this mean the salon area is part of the process use and can this water usage be excluded from water calculations? kindly request for clarification..

To satisfy the prerequisite you need to demonstrate a 20% water use reduction in your tenant space. However, once you do this you no longer qualify for any of the points available in WEc1 in which you must include all fixtures that the occupants would utilize. The hinge word here is space as opposed to scope. Before the semantic change full floor occupants could claim that the core bathrooms were not in their project scope.

so, just to confirm, if we are just attempting WEp1 (not attempting WEc1), we just use our breakroom faucet, we do not include core bathroom fixtures or the shower in our WEp1 calculations. is that correct?
we are pursuing SSc4.2 so we will require use of the core showers.

per your direction above, i completed the WEp1 form showing only our new kitchen faucet. the form will not show "compliance documentation" as "Y" without somethng filled in for flush fixtures. if i don't have to include the core building toilets, then why isn't the form showing "Y" for complete?

Norma- I have a very similar situation which I am trying to find a solution to. Did you receive a definate answer on this? I have a base building which was originally several historic warehouses and is now a multi-use retail/business building. The owner's of this property would like to encourage new tenants to pursue a LEED CI certification, but they recently replaced the base building fixtures with fixtures which do not produce a water use reduction and they do not want to have to replace the fixtures again. Can a tenant having only a break-room sink achieve the water-use reduction prerequisite by decreasing the flow rate of only that fixture and not addressing the base building fixtures that will be used by the occupants but are not within the tenant space?

Jessica, have you seen the Water Use Reduction Additional Guidance document dated 12/1/09 and updated 11/1/11 (http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6493)? Your project appears to fall under Case 4. Given that you only have a (presumably low-flow) breakroom sink within your tenant space, prerequisite achievement will be based solely on the water savings of that fixture. However, keep in mind that projects identifying with Case 4 cannot achieve WEc1 points since their water savings will be based on the water savings of the tenant fixture alone and not for all of the fixtures necessary to meet the needs of the tenant occupants.

Karen-
Thank you for the help! I had not seen that document. Do the instructions for how to fill out the prerequisite form essentially ensure that if your project falls (as outs does) into case 4 and is documented accordingly, you will achieve the prerequisite with only the reduction of water at the kitchen faucet? We would hate to encourage a client to pursue LEED certification and have them be disqualified due to a misinterpretation. Also, I have not tried to file WEp1 without filling in the flush fixture data. It doesn't seem that it would allow you to mark the form complete. Have you done this yet?

This seems to be a frustrating request. If all toilets are the same GPF then in theory you'd be fine. I had one project where we installed an ADA toilet but all others were a different flush rate, we totaled up the quantity of toilets to arrive at a percentage of all on the floor and assigned that percentage of my FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. to that toilet. This method was accepted but I did not have to assume urinal needs attributed to that device. The reviewer seems to be asking for something that you cannot qualify. The EPA standards are estimated uses per device type, not estimated uses per "how I feel like looking at it today based on an unknown delta". You could argue back that all of these users are averse to sitting down on public toilets and hold it until they get home, another group you couldn't qualify. I would agree that one would not utlize that bathroom for urinal needs. I would really re-read the calculation requirements and submit a feedback query, then copy your LEED review team on the feedback request. That is sometimes one way to bring confusing requests to closure with assisted oversight from GBCI for consistency across all projects. Good luck with this one and let us know how it turns out.

I actually did email the reviewer to clarify the request and explained that there are no handicapped people working there and that we feel our approach reflects the actual use/ user behavior. But if the reviewer still wants us to apply a group of people, could they provided percentage of people that we should consider using this toilet. The reply was this:
"The primary issue outlined in the Preliminary Review comment is that 100% of male occupants are counted as using a urinal twice per day and a water closet once per day. This scenario is only applicable if all restrooms in the project include urinals. In this case, the project includes a unisex restroom (114) without a urinal. Therefore, male occupants (FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. and visitors) using the unisex restroom will not be able to use urinals. All male occupants expected to use the unisex restroom must be counted as having three water closet uses per day and zero urinal uses per day. This is why it is suggested that the project creates a separate fixture usage group for occupants who will use the unisex restrooms without urinals, or adjust the total daily (water closet vs. urinal) uses. The project should estimate how many occupants are expected to use the unisex restrooms and adjust the calculations accordingly. A narrative should be provided to describe how each fixture usage group was determined. Most importantly, each male FTE must be attributed three flow fixture uses per day (3 WC, or 2 UR and 1 WC). Note that the sum of occupants in all fixture usage groups must equal the total project occupancy, and occupants may not be counted in more than one fixture usage group."
I very much disagree with the reviewer on this. I made it pretty clear that all men have access to the restrooms with urinals. There is no reason for separating out a group. Besides even if 50% of the men use just the ADA restroom and therefore would be using the toilet as a urinal, we would still get the same points.
Anthony, thanks for the advise. I'll try to get a response from the GBCI directly on this one.

Susann, I'm having similar problem on my project - we've got one restrooms for handicapped people on each floor and the reviewer asked us to clarify who will be able to use them (we stated that 100% of male restrooms have urinals, while ADA restrooms don't). Even though we haven't submitted any space plan for the Water Efficiency credits, they dig it out from Daylight and Views layouts where we show all the restrooms. I just don't know how to cope with that. Have you already solved it on your project? I would apreciate your advice...

Laurie, I have a more basic question—why are you using LEED-CI on this project? Is the floor area being altered 40% or less?

In any case, it seems odd to exclude the bathrooms if the whole building is otherwise in your scope of work. Also, the "tenant space" is the driving factor in whether those fixtures should be considered, and it sounds like the bathrooms are in your space.

Thanks Tristan, I spoke with a couple of LEED project reviewers who also agreed that in the case of this project the restrooms could not be exempt from WEpr1. So we'll be replacing the fixtures in the restrooms to meet the prerequisite.

This project could almost go either way with LEED NC or LEED CI (CI was chosen before I got involved). The Rating System Selection Guidance advises not to use CI when there is "major renovation in 40% or more of the gross floor areaGross floor area (based on ASHRAE definition) is the sum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building, including basements, mezzanine and intermediate‐floored tiers, and penthouses wi th headroom height of 7.5 ft (2.2 meters) or greater. Measurements m ust be taken from the exterior 39 faces of exterior walls OR from the centerline of walls separating buildings, OR (for LEED CI certifying spaces) from the centerline of walls separating spaces. Excludes non‐en closed (or non‐enclosable) roofed‐over areas such as exterior covered walkways, porches, terraces or steps, roof overhangs, and similar features. Excludes air shafts, pipe trenches, and chimneys. Excludes floor area dedicated to the parking and circulation of motor vehicles. ( Note that while excluded features may not be part of the gross floor area, and therefore technically not a part of the LEED project building, they may still be required to be a part of the overall LEED project and subject to MPRs, prerequisites, and credits.) of the building." Based on LEED's definitions of "alteration" vs. "major renovation" it was decided that what is being done is alteration not major renovation. It's basically a TI project where the owner happens to own the building. Hopefully this approach is correct.

Brandon, the baseline is 1.6 gpf—per the credit language. It would be great to take credit for reductions from existing conditions but LEED doesn't allow for that!

Kirstin, the fixtures covered by this credit are those regulated by the EPAct 1992, so that includes lavatory sinks. If the sinks in those rooms are lav sinks, they would be counted.

As for uses per day, would the tenant be able to give you an idea of that based on how many sessions take place per day, and how many times the sink is used per session, or some such method?

Matt, it is acceptable for hotel guests to be classified as residential occupants in the WEp1 Water Use Reduction template.

Roberto, I would recommend reviewing the discussions below. To earn points for WEc1, you may also have to account for fixtures used by the project, not just witin the project scope.

Hi Jay –

It is my understanding that - yes - you can take full credit for the kitchenette sink if all 300 FTEs have access to the fixture. The calculator in the template will use a default fixture use of (1) 15 second use per day for each office FTE.

If for some reason the fixture will only be used by a certain population of office users (e.g. executive suite) then you will have to create a separate Fixture Group.

I think you’ll find that changing the WC will still have a larger impact then the kitchenette faucet based on overall annual kGals, but every bit of savings certainly helps! We have seen projects use a 0.5gpm kitchen faucet with success. A bunch of manufacturers offer 0.5gpm restrictors as options. I hope this helps.

Michelle, you are correct that it is "space" and not "scope." Key distinction. I have edited our language accordingly.

This is not entirely accurate. We just received clarification, directly from the USGBC on this issue.

the customer’s questions below, relative to LEED-CI 2009 water credits:

"If water fixtures are not included in the tenant’s scope of work, then there is no criteria that must be met for WEp1."
"WEc1 – however – must include all fixtures used by the tenant, not just those included in the tenant’s scope of work."

Monique Caron, LEED® AP BD+C
Account Manager | US Green Building Council

Breeze,
Was there any direction about documenting this distinction? Since WEcr1 results are now a simple output of WEpr1, how would you exclude the fixtures from the WEpr1 calculation but include them for WEcr1?

Not sure I entirely follow. This distinction fundamentally applies to WEp1, which then carries over to WEc1. Within the LEED templates for each, I would choose the alternate compliance route (otherwise you'll be unable to submit the forms, and project).

Why would you want to exclude the fixtures from the prerequisite, but include for the credit? If your scope does not include fixtures, then you are excluded from the prerequisite, and can not attempt the credit.

I submitted WEp1 (LEED CI v3) using a combination of existing and new water fixtures in the project space. The existing fixtures are: 3 urinals, 3 water closets and 6 faucets. The new fixtures are: 3 water closets, 3 faucets and 1 kitchen faucet. In the GBCI's preliminary review comments they will not allow the project to include the existing fixtures, only the new fixtures, even though all are located in the tenant space. I need to submit my clarification documentation soon. Any suggestions?

Per Appendix A in the Water Use Reduction Additional Guidance document dated December 1, 2009 (Updated August 16, 2010), Case 4 is applicable to those projects that have fixtures and fittings both within the tenant space and outside of the tenant space. As you indicated, the project is only eligible to pursue WEp1 since water savings can only be claimed for the fixtures and fixture fittings located inside the tenant space. Since this is a CI project, the FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. and transient occupant count of the tenant/project space would be used to calculate the water savings, not the FTE and transient count of the entire building. Thus, if you input the FTE and transient occupant count for the project space and only include the fixtures and fittings that are located inside of the tenant space, you should be able to determine the project’s water savings for WEp1.

The 10 floors is the project scope (there are another 15 in the building) but only two of the 10 have toilet facilities within the scope. The tenants on the 8 other floors will have to use the landlord toilets (outside of our scope). Do you think that its sufficient to reduce the FTEFull-time equivalent (FTE) represents a regular building occupant who spends 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) in the project building. Part-time or overtime occupants have FTE values based on their hours per day divided by 8 (or hours per week divided by 40). Transient Occupants can be reported as either daily totals or as part of the FTE. Residential occupancy should be estimated based on the number and size of units. Core and Shell projects should refer to the default occupancy table in the Reference Guide appendix. All occupant assumptions must be consistent across all credits in all categories. to 20% and do the calcs on that basis - I assume that a narrative will need to be included to do this as well.

thanks

Even though they are water-using, and similar to toilets, bidets are not covered by WEp1. It may be possible to optionally include them in WEc3 for the purposes of Exemplary PerformanceIn LEED, certain credits have established thresholds beyond basic credit achievement. Meeting these thresholds can earn additional points through Innovation in Design (ID) or Innovation in Operations (IO) points. As a general rule of thumb, ID credits for exemplary performance are awarded for doubling the credit requirements and/or achieving the next incremental percentage threshold. However, this rule varies on a case by case basis, so check the credit requirements. calculations only.

As per the guidance in the Water Use Reduction Additional Guidance document dated December 1, 2009 and updated August 16, 2010, “When using a metering (or autocontrol) faucet, please select the Metering Lavatory fixture in the Fixture Type pull-down menu of the Flow Fixture Data table. The Baseline case flow rate for a metering faucet is .25 gallons per cycle (gpc). Since the flow rate is measured in gallons per cycle, the duration is not necessary. Therefore the Duration can be disregarded and should not be modified for the metering lavatory fixture type. The “Installed” flow rate must also be entered in gallons per cycle. If the flow rate in gallons per cycle is not known, the value must be determined through a separate conversion calculation and then entered into the table. The flow rate is determined using the flow rate in gallons per minute (gpm) and the duration setting (in seconds) for the metering faucet. The typical duration setting for the installed metering faucet is 12 seconds, however a different duration may be used if supported by manufacturer’s specifications.” To sum, the baseline case flow rate for a metering faucet is 0.25 gallons per cycle (gpc). The design case flow rate should also be entered into the LEED Credit Form in gpc. However, if gpc is unknown for the design case, the project team may calculate the gpc by multiplying the flow rate times the duration, and divide that number by 60 seconds.

The guidance refers to metering and "autocontrol" faucets. I checked the faucet I am using today; The Sloan Solis is an "on demand" faucet, so it runs when you put your hands in the sensor path, and shuts off when you remove your hands. Another faucet I use, the American Standard Selectronic has an adjustment from 3 to 240 seconds. If the faucet is on demand or adjustable, how can you document the cycle time? Perhaps using 12 seconds for the average is a safe guess? With a flow control at 0.5 gpm and 12 second cycle time, the cycle usage is 0.1 gallons per cycle which can result in considerable savings over the 0.25 gpc baseline.

Carl, did you ever receive any guidance on the assumption of using 12seconds as the average for the "on demand" lav's? Please advise

Carl and/or Lorey,

I have the same question about the assumption of 12 seconds average for the "on demand" faucets. Please let me know if you've got any info.
Thanks!

Yes, you do, if this is a new LEED-CI certification under LEED 2009.

The credit is intended mainly to reward efficiency through fixture and fitting selection, compared against a baseline case. If the water pressure available to your project is low, then I don't see how you could justify using the lower pressure for your design case but not your baseline case. Do you?

Under earlier versions of LEED there were a number of CIRs about this question specifically, and the responses were consistently in line with Tristan's - the pressure listing is for consistency in calculations, you need to find fixtures that do better than the baseline fixtures, calculated at the pressure listed.

I agree that having a lower available street pressure does not qualify because the baseline and design case would be the same. It does seem to me that adding a pressure reducing device in the system to lower the pressure should qualify as reduction overbaseline. Adding a pressure reducing valve where required by code is not acceptable because it also would have the same baseline and design case pressure. The plumbing codes I am familiar with require pressure to be reduced to 80 psi or less. I believe one could argue that 80 psi baseline could be argued against a lower psi design case. It would be complicated to verify the final flow rates, because the pressure drop in the system would need to be calculated for each fixture. One would then need to have the fitting (shower head, etc) tested at the lower pressure and determine the actual flow rate at that pressure for each fixture.
I would be more inclined to reduce flow rate at the fixtures using orifice plates or some similar device. ITT Bell and Gossett makes a lead free flow setter which is adjustable to whatever flow you set, and it can also be used as a service valve. See model RF-1/2/S LF. Another option is to place a disc with an orifice in it before the aerator or fitting. The orifice size will dictate flow rate according to pressure. For example, a 1/16" diameter orifice will flow 1.05 gpm at 80 psi and 0.74 gpm at 40 psi.

Following your logic it seems clear that 6 customers can be entered for the restroom, and you can assume a 1:1 ratio so half will be relevant to the urinal.

Per the Water Use Reduction Additional Guidance document (dated December 1, 2009 and updated August 16, 2010), your project would appear to fall under Case 4. As such, you would not have to include the shower in your WEp1 calculations, but you also would not be eligible for any Water Use Reduction points under WE credit 1.

Karen, I have a similar question about commercial buildings: there are showers in the tenant's space that serve a small gym. Can we include the shower flow rates in the calculations? We are also pursuing SSc3.2.

Another question: if some of the water faucets are not complying with the LEED requirements, but others overcompensate for these, would our project still meet the WEp1?