EBOM 2009 MRp1: Sustainable Purchasing Policy

Per the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Policy Model, you must include an appropriate goal and performance metric in the Sustainable Purchasing policy. However, those goals do not need to match the thresholds required by MRc1-4. Does that answer your question?

I think Brittany is right to observe that the goals don't need to match EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. thresholds, but I also do think that the point behind requiring a goal and metric is to establish clear, quantitative goals that are easily understood and evaluated. A goal of meeting client needs may be the functional reality, but its a lot harder to define success or failure around. Given that the goals in these policies are essentially non-binding, I think your path of least resistance is to establish a quantitative goal, even if its one that seems easily reachable, and include more qualitative supplemental goals. Hope that helps.

Dan

As a reviewer, I am always looking for signs that a project has legitimately adopted and implemented the policies and programs that they claim to have put in place. One sure way to cast doubt on that issue is to submit a policy that is boilerplate from another source. So in addition to the changes, revisions, additions and subtractions you make to the content of the policy to ensure that is it accurate and useful for your facility, I would definitely recommend making cosmetic changes that reflect the document's integration with your other management tools and guiding policies.

Nice reply Dan, thanks for the input. The template certainly helps the process and I agree 100% with avoiding the boilerplate mentality.

I would suggest writing your MRp1 policy so as to encompass all ongoing or possible future purchases within the scope of purchasing described by the credit. That is, even if you don't currently purchase any ongoing consumablesOngoing consumables have a low cost per unit and are regularly used and replaced in the course of business. Examples include paper, toner cartridges, binders, batteries, and desk accessories. as the property management, ensure that the policy covers any purchases that might occur in the future if circumstances change. The same applies to durable goodsDurable goods have a useful life of 2 years or more and are replaced infrequently or may require capital program outlays. Examples include furniture, office equipment, appliances, external power adapters, televisions, and audiovisual equipment. and the rest - your policy will be the formal document that guides your performance; that performance will then be documented within the specific credit. Hope that helps.

Jay, this is a really good question that I don't believe has a definite answer. I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that a manufacturing process is outside the scope of the MR prerequisites and credits and should be viewed as distinct from the existing category structure, which is clearly designed with a certain subset of items in mind. On the other hand, I have heard that in the past, reviews for hotels (for example) have required the inclusion of what I would think of as similar 'process' type items like sheets/towels/etc... in purchasing analyses. My advice to you would be to make the case you find most logical and compelling, and make it consistently (all purchasing and waste credits). But be prepared to respond to a review comment that requests data on that road not taken. . . Or, if its critical to your strategy, fire off a 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.

in addition to item #2 (small technicality), the existing policy (since it is encompassing) only mentions the position in general (purchasing officer, etc) and not the name/identity while LEED needs the identity/identities. so my question:
3) will it be sufficient to just have a list of people in the concurrent positions in a separate document/narrative or do their names need to be part of the policy?

1) This is never an issue. The performance period doesn't require that you 'start' doing things during the 2-year period, only that you are doing them. If you have had an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.-compliant purchasing policy for the last 40 years, fantastic - we'll take it.
2) Although I think a revised policy/plan is the best case scenario, my experience has been that the USGBC is more interested in function than form. If you submit a policy with an amendment or attachment that articulates performance measures or identifies responsible parties, as long as that document is clearly a formal and officially adopted element of corporate guidance, you should be fine.

Thank you Dan and regards :-)

An amendment is certainly acceptable; deleting that section is also feasible as long as your 'Performance Metric' section articulates your processes for using the data you collect relative to purchasing to inform behavior. Having a program and a performance metric is, of course, not terribly helpful if noone is collecting data and reviewing it on a regular basis. So folding the portion of your policy that describes what you do with the data into the Performance Metric section makes a lot of sense (and you'll note that the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. Policy Model links both metric and evaluation in that section as well).

Ryan, the reference guide language isn't explicitly clear on this point, but to be safe, we suggest that you consistently track purchases in terms of when they are paid for. Additionally, make sure that you use a consistent approach to either include or exclude the amounts for sales tax and shipping & handling - again, it doesn't matter which way you do it as long as you're consistent.

Thanks Jason!

That's right. The EPPEnvironmentall preferable products (EPP) are those identified as having a lesser or reduced effect on health and the environment when compared with competing products that serve the same purpose. policy for this credit must cover the products and materials addressed in MRc1: Sustainable Purchasing—Ongoing Consumables, and at least one of the other purchasing credits: MRc2: Sustainable Purchasing—Durable Goods, MRc3: Sustainable Purchasing—Facility Alterations and Additions, or MRc4: Sustainable Purchasing—Reduced Mercury in Lamps.

However, you do not have to document compliance with the policy established for any of those credits.

You're fast! Thank you kindly :)

Hi Sheri - The approach is the same for MRp1 and MRp2 in LEED-EB: O&M. The prerequisites are evaluated solely on the project team creating a policy meeting LEED requirements; the project team is not required to document compliance with the policy to earn the prerequisites. In addition, LEED does not mandate a specific level of performance for the policies; project teams are free to establish purchasing and waste diversion goals appropriate for their site. MRp1 and MRp2 set the stage for the team's approach to purchasing and solid waste management, and MR credits 1-9 document actual performance.

For MRp1, this is stated on page 287 of the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Operations and Maintenance, which states, "The establishment of a purchasing policy alone fulfills the requirements for this credit; no purchasing is required."

Thanks, Corinna. This was our interpretation from the start but since we're wrapping up some submittals, I wanted to make sure we're on the right track. Thank you so much for verifying this.

Matthew, the prerequisite requirement for green purchasing has been strategically written for just this situation where in multitenant buildings it is unreasonable to impose purchasing requirements on tenants. Unlike the credits, where you can only exempt a maximum of 10% of the floor area, this and certain other prerequisites allow you to focus only on elements within building and site management control.

You will just need to clearly state in your policy the scope covered (in this case purchases at the project building under the building manager's control), and then click the box in LEED Online. No need in the prereq to tally up the square footage associated with the tenants who are not participating.

I want to make sure I am understanding this correctly. Both MRp1 and MRp2 are policies to be written addressing the purchasing credits and waste management credits respectively. In our situation we do not plan to pursue any of the purchasing credits as it would prove very difficult with multiple tenants. But in writing the prereq. policy we would assemble a policy in case we were to one day pursue those credits.

My concern is in MRp1 it states to ONLY consider materials within building/site mgt. control, which in our case would be almost nothing. But in MRc1 it states must document for all tenant purchases. I just want to make sure as the policy written for MRp1 will not talk to tenant purchases and thought the purpose of the pre-req's was to write the policy for if a company were to pursue those credits.

"Can be tough for multi-tenant buildings
In multi-tenant buildings, purchases of ongoing consumablesOngoing consumables have a low cost per unit and are regularly used and replaced in the course of business. Examples include paper, toner cartridges, binders, batteries, and desk accessories. must be documented for all tenants. Purchase rates can be extrapolated for tenants who do not participate in tracking, but all estimated purchases are assumed to be non-compliant. That means that other tenants must raise their threshold of environmentally preferable purchases to help earn the credit threshold.

If you have a large anchor tenant or an unusual level of tenant cooperation, you should be in good shape; otherwise, this credit may be more trouble than it’s worth."

Thanks in advance.

That's correct Paul - in a multi-tenant situation, most buildings will write an MRp1 purchasing policy to encompass the (admittedly small) amount of purchasing performed by management for the spaces of the building under their management/control. This usually includes a building office of some sort and common areas like lobbies, restrooms, mechanical spaces, storage, etc... It's honestly not a lot of stuff. The policy doesn't need to deal with tenant purchasing in any way, shape or form -its just about the spaces you control, and purchasing/tracking as if you were going to pursue MRc1 for those spaces alone (which you obviously aren't, but the same principles apply). MRc1 is entirely distinct in that compliance for that credit MUST include the tenants. Hope that helps.

Thanks Dan for the quick response.

Barbara, you're off the hook. The EPPEnvironmentall preferable products (EPP) are those identified as having a lesser or reduced effect on health and the environment when compared with competing products that serve the same purpose. policy you write for MRc1 simply has to cover the products addressed by those other areas, such as lamps. You can set threshold targets if you want but you won't be held to them unless you pursue those credits.

In other words, the prereq just means you have to write a policy for the products and materials covered by the credit. The way you put it in your comment is a good example of how to do that. The credits themselves are where the rubber meets the road.

Thank you!

Good question, and the calculations get a little sticky when only components of a product comply. The LEED for Operations & Maintenance Reference Guide does not address this as directly as LEED for New Construction Reference Guide, which states that the recycled content (or rapidly renewableTerm describing a natural material that is grown and harvested on a relatively short-rotation cycle (defined by the LEED rating system to be ten years or less)., regional, etc.) value of a material assembly is determined by weight. The recycled fraction of the assembly is then multiplied by the cost of the assembly to determine the recycled content value of the entire product.

For example, if a $10 product weights 10 pounds, 5 pounds each of plastic and wood, and the plastic portion contains 50% post-consumerWaste material generated by households or by commercial, industrial and institutional facilities in their role as end-users of the product, which can no longer be used for its intended purpose. This includes returns of materials from the distribution chain (source: ISO 14021). Examples of this category include construction and demolition debris, materials collected through curbside and drop-off recycling programs, broken pallets (if from a pallet refurbishing company, not a pallet-making company), discarded products (e.g., furniture, cabinetry and decking) and urban maintenance waste (e.g., leaves, grass clippings, tree trimmings, etc.). recycled content, the overall recycled content value is $2.50 (the recycled fraction is 50% of 50% = 25%, multiplied by $10 = $2.50).

Yes, but is this the case for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.? The credit does not seem to suggest this as it does in LEED NC.

You have to go to the USGBC website and find the regional priority page, which is hidden away here: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1984

This lets you download a spreadsheet, by state, that lists the regional priority credits for each zip code in that state. There are tabs for the different rating systems: NC, CS, CI, S, EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems..