EBOM 2009 EAp1: Energy Efficiency Best Management Practices—Planning, Documentation and Opportunity Assessment

If you are working with an energy auditor, they should be experience in coming up with reasonable estimates for the various energy loads in the building. When submeters aren't installed, you can either base the breakdown on calculations (power drawn multiplied by the runtime of that equipment), or use portable meters to take spot measurements and extrapolate out or an annual time period (taking into account any seasonal variation, of course).

Paola - in my experience, this depends on which credit you're talking about and whether you are planning to extend the performance back in time or extend it in the other direction. In most cases, if you said your performance period was, for example, 8.4.10-8.4.11, it would be not problem to revise the documentation after the preliminary review to show the performance period as 8.4.09-8.4.11, since for first time certifications you can have up to a two year performance period.

Jenny,
I believe your example answered our doubts.
Our previous performance period was, for credit EA 1 and Pre requisit 1, from 1.2.10 - 31.1.11, but it had to be 1.2.09 - 31.1.11. Therefore we will write a narrative explaining the situation just to have them to know what happened. Thus, you are a expert, and what you said confirmed what we believe. Thank you!

LEED 2009 does not require the energy auditor to have any credentials. Adherence to the ASHRAE method, as oulined in "Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits" will allow achieve of EAp1 and EAc2.1.

The target EUI is arbitrarily selected by the energy auditor. It must be chosen to be higher than the current score.
Performance period must be at least 12 months and up to 24 months for EAp1. You can not submit the 2007 SEP if you are pursuing LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. certification at this time. Also, LEED EBOM requires a minimum score of 69.

Hope this helps.

Yes, if you've completed and documented the requirements for both Levels I and II, that works.

Tough question Michelle - The USGBC doesn't establish specific parameters as to exactly what a PM plan should look like, largely because they want folks to make their PM plans work effectively for the buildings, not just for LEED purposes. That being said, the expectation is that all aspects of a given system are maintained over some time horizon, even if it is a longer horizon. So I would recommend that the PM plan for lighting systems include all aspects within reason - fixtures, panels, switches, etc... - even if not every item is attended to monthly, quarterly, or even annually. The exhaust fan example in the Reference Guide is a useful illustration - checking key elements and attending to things that will benefit from regular attention. Sorry there isn't a more hard & fast rule. Hope this helps a bit.

James, in my experience it would definitely be better to show these measures as identified in the initial report and implemented, rather than just show the remaining measures.

Also, you could extend your performance period back two years (and maybe five) to just take credit via that initial audit. The language in the RG for EAc2.1 gives the five year allowance, which in theory should be applicable to the EAp1 criteria to. It says: "It is recommended, but not mandatory, that project teams conduct the Level II analysis during the performance period. Projects that have completed a Level II analysis before the performance period...but within the past 5 years are not required to repeat the analysis to comply with this credit. However, the audit report and findings must be updated to integrate any significant changes in operating practices or building systems and to reflect changes in energy costs since the original audit was complete." pg. 172 of the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. v2009 RG.

Michael, I think in practice most teams are refining these documents on a continuous basis (which is kind of the idea), so I wouldn't worry if they change/evolve/develop over the performance period.

There is a nice sample on LEED User. Check the sample docs in credit.

Do you have a sense of the number of days per year the building tends to be operating at in each category (e.g., low, med, high)?

Ideally you would be able to come up with reasonable annualized savings by having some sense of the typical number of days associated with each main operation state. You could calculate savings for each operational state, and then annualize according to the presumed number of days associated with each state.

Not exactly, no. All of the topics you mentioned are covered by regular (not Innovation) LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. credits, so there is not a rationale for getting Innovation credit for them. However, doing the things you mention will only help you when it comes time to earn those credits.

Feel free to post back with more specific questions.

You might want to check out the criteria for EQp1. Building's with HVAC systems physically capable of meeting 62.1-2007 OA rates must demonstrate they are doing so during the performance period. Assessing compliance against an older version of the standard would not be allowed, though some building's that can't meet ASHRAE 62.1-2007 can use the other compliance path to show at least 10 CFM / person.

Hi Adam,

Are you wondering about the performance period timing for the ASHRAE Level 1 Audit (EAp1) or the Energy Star benchmarking (EAp2/EAc1), or both?

Either way, you have some options. For EAp2/EAc1 the normal strategy is to benchmark based on 12 months of consecutive utility data, with the end date of that period meeting the standard performance period timing rules:

a) within a shared 30-day window when performance periods for all prereqs/credits must end, and;
b) the end of that 30-day window landing no more than 60 days prior to the date of submission

If you have an official Energy Star label, meaning that you've had a PE evaluate your benchmarking, sent an application to Energy Star, etc. you can take the streamlined approach for documentation EAp2/EAc1 by simply using the score associated with that label, as long as the label was issued within 1 year of the application date.

For EAp1, the audit generally has to be performed within 2 years of the performance period end date for that prereq (which would need to meet the general rules for performance period timing from above). If you have an older ASHRAE audit you want to use, see the Reference Guide to determine if the exception to this guideline applies to you. The timing of the ASHRAE audit doesn't really need to correlate to the Energy Star benchmarking period in any specific way beyond the standard performance period timing rules.

Anyway, if you have your other ducks in a row and an official Energy Star label, you can use that score of 85 as long as you submit your LEED application before the year is up.

Thanks for the comment. What I am really concerned about is the 12-month performance period for all my EA credits. Being that all my other performance periods need approx 3 months and they need to end within 30 days of eachother. Doesn't it make sense to use our renewal date for Energy Star of March 2011 to end the performance period for everything? Then within that time I can do my ASHRAE audits 1 and 2 and get the commissioning credits going as well.
I hope this clears up my concern. Any advice is appreciated.

Hmm, you could shoot for March 2011 and have until then to use your official label. But, if you're going through the trouble of energy audits/Cx1. Commissioning (Cx) is the process of verifying and documenting that a building and all of its systems and assemblies are planned, designed, installed, tested, operated, and maintained to meet the owner's project requirements. 2. The process of checking the performance of a building against the owner's goals during design, construction, and occupancy. At a minimum, mechanical and electrical equipment are tested, although much more extensive testing may also be included., you'll probably start saving energy and therefore start seeing improvements in your Energy Star score, so you may no longer want to use the official label/associated score.

I feel like I'm hashing the point here...but I'd like to clarify the timing between the two performance period lengths (12 months and 3 months). Assuming they all have to end within 30 days of each other then would this scenario make sense as an example:

Start the EA performance period in January and start all other performance periods in October and finish everything at the end of December.

So essentially start the EA 9 months before everything else so they can finish together? Or am I making this too complicated?

John, this is not an uncommon strategy and grouping the documents together isn't usually a problem in my experience. You may want to label the file in a way that makes it clear that the content for for all three key components is included within, and also make it clear within the document where the various content lies. Where reviewers have trouble is a if a really, really long document isn't separated into clearly label ed sections that map to the main keywords (e.b., BOP, Sequence of Ops, etc..

Is your question about the ASHRAE 62.1 calculations for EQp1? I'm not sure what aspect of the EAp1 requirements this question would relate to.

In my experience, most teams perform the preliminary energy use analysis (which is a prelude to the Level I audit) based on an energy use intensity value (e.g., kbtu/sf). Maybe you could take historic campus data to create an EUI that will allow you to perform the analysis and still have a comparison point once your submeterSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy or water use within a building attributable to specific end uses such as tenant spaces, or subsystems such as the heating component of an HVAC system. is set up for building specific data (this isn't perfect in terms of establishing a history, but might be workable).

Also, the ASHRAE Procedurs for Commercial Building Energy Audits document states that you need utility data for at least a one-year period (page 6), which is the same as what you'll need to do the EAp2/EAc1 benchmarking. Where are you seeing the 2-year requirement?

Rachael,

How are you addressing the lack of energy data for EA Prereq 2 & Credit 1?

Are the two buildings that share the meter similar in size and function?

I'll work on digging farther into this so hopefully you won't have to avoid the credit...

Igor-
The metering data I'm referring to is for EA Prereq 1 where it is required to have metering data for the ASHRAE Level I walkthrough analysis. Thanks for your help.

Jenny-

The ASHRAE Procedure for Commercial Building Energy Audits document where it specifies two years is one page one under OUTLINE, under number one. it says "Analysis of two or more years of utility consumption and cost". In your opinion, do you think I should consult with USGBC? Since this is a prerequisiste I don't want to end up having them reject our application if they don't accept an estimation of the utility data. Thanks for your help.

Rachael,

I was wondering what data you are using for Prereq 2 because that is the same information you'll be analyzing through the Audit process for Prereq 1.

Hi Igor-

We will have to get the building sub-metered and start inputing the data over 12 mo. period (performance period) so we can get a rating for EA prereq 2. We are attempting to complete the Energy Audit now so we can identify energy improvements we can make before the performance period starts.

Rachel,

Ok - now I understand. You technically have the utility bills for the property... You just happen to have them for multiple units on the property that aren't necessarily being certified at the same time. I think analyzing the bills as you have them as well as doing an audit of the systems to discover expected load for each of the energy using systems will suffice for the "walk-through" audit. To be safe and diligent you will want to compare those expected loads to actual when you start submeteringSubmetering is used to determine the proportion of energy use within a building attributable to specific end uses or subsystems (e.g., the heating subsystem of an HVAC system)..

Aileen, that means "fan-coil" units in this context, although "fc1. A footcandle (fc) is a measure of light falling on a given surface. One footcandle is defined as the quantity of light falling on a 1-square-foot area from a 1 candela light source at a distance of 1 foot (which equals 1 lumen per square foot). Footcandles can be measured both horizontally and vertically by a footcandle meter or light meter. 2. The non-metric measurement of lumens per square foot, one footcandle is the amount of light that is received one foot from a light source called a candela, which is based on the light output of a standardized candle. A common range for interior lighting is 10 to 100 footcandles, while exterior daytime levels can range from 100 to over 10,000 footcandles. Footcandles decrease with distance from the light source. The metric equivalent of a foot candle is 10.76 lux, or lumens per square meter." can also stand for "footcandles," a relevant measurement for light pollution reduction and other lighting issues.

Rachael, unfortunately LEEDuser can't answer your fee question because, well, it's tough to answer because of the specifics involved in a project, but also because  we can't be seen as dictating what a fee "should" be.

I do think that HVAC companies may have staff with the qualifications to do an audit, just keep an eye out for biases. And if you don't like the quote you get, see if you can shop around a bit. A lot of this also depends on your location and what's available.

Check with the building's utility provider - our electric utility did the Level 1 Audit free of charge and also helps us get rebates for lighting upgrades.

Thomas, there are are samples of the Building Operating PlanA general documentation summarizing the intended operation of each base building system described in the systems narrative; the building operating plan may also be known as "Owner's Operating Requirements" or similar. The operating plan includes the time-of-day schedules for each system for each of the eight day types (Monday to Sunday plus holidays), the mode of operation for each system when it is running (occupied vs. unoccupied; day vs. night, etc.), and the desired indoor conditions or setpoints for each schedule or mode. The operating plan accounts for any differences in needs or desired conditions for different portions of the project building, as well as any seasonal variations in operations patterns. The plan accounts for all the monitored space conditions used to control the base systems, i.e., air temperature, relative humidity, occupancy, light level, CO2 levels, room pressurization, duct static pressure, etc. and Sequence of Operations in the LEED for Green Building: Operations & Maintenance Reference Guide (v2009) that you can use as starting points; there are also very comprehensive descriptions of the criteria for the other documents in the Reference Guide as well. A Building Operating Plan is typically built out in an Excel spreadsheet or simple table format, whereas the other documents are usually in a plain written format. We don't provide templates for these documents because they are typically so customized to the conditions and procedures at each individual project building. Start off by spending some time looking through the Reference Guide; the information for EAp1 is actually pretty thorough and can be very useful.

Bob, you're correct. You generally need to register the project and then in LEED Online indicate that you are pursuing that credit (this just means marking it in LEED Online as attempted - you don't actually need to compile or submit any aspects of your LEED application at this stage). This will allow you to submit the CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide through the online platform, and the fee for CIRs is $220.

If you haven't registered the project yet, there still may be a way to submit the CIR, but I'd recommend getting in touch with the GBCI help folks for the details on if and how it works.

And, in case you haven't checked out this portion of the GBCI web site yet, here's a link to the policy and fees information around CIRs: http://www.gbci.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=168

Robert - you're right about Energy Star not rating manufacturing spaces. But, the good news is that USGBC has established a path for these unusual building types to perform energy benchmarking to meet EAp2 and earn points under EAc1. If you haven't already, I'd recommend checking out the EAc1 EBOM2009 Case 2 Calculator, which can be downloaded from LEED Online under the Credit Resources for EAc1 (the Reference Guide offers further info about how to use it).

This is the tool that I've seen other building's with big manufacturing spaces use, and the number of points you'll be eligible for will depend on which of the benchmarking options you choose.

In my opinion, you wouldn't be allowed to declare the manufacturing space as a warehouse for the purposes of getting an Energy Star rating because this other benchmarking path already exists and is specifically to help teams benchmark manufacturing spaces. If you do want to try the other route though, I definitely recommend using a Credit Interpretation Request (CIRCredit Interpretation Ruling. Used by design team members experiencing difficulties in the application of a LEED prerequisite or credit to a project. Typically, difficulties arise when specific issues are not directly addressed by LEED information/guide) to get an official opinion before proceeding.

Althought I don't recall the actual submission wording but you are permitted to use the Energy Star Portfolio Manager, and one of the options is produce a Certificate of Performance. You select for uses other than Energy Star ratings and it will produce a report with comparative data. It's the document that LEED approves of. It must be stamped by a licensed professional, however.

And no, you cannot call the manufacturing area a warehouse. You must call it manufacturing and use the alternative submission path for Energy Star if you'd like to use the portfolio manager. You can do it long hand too, but I recommend using the aternative Energy Star method.