This prerequisite requires you to write a sustainable purchasing policy to establish guiding principles for the purchase of environmentally preferable products and materials when economically feasible. Switching to environmentally preferable purchasingA United States federal-wide program (Executive Order 13101) that encourages and assists Executive agencies in the purchasing of Environmentally Preferable Products and services. (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.) may ultimately add costs for some purchases, but project teams can determine on a product-by-product basis whether the environmentally-preferable option is cost-effective. This EPP policy can be created by in-house staff without any capital investment.
To meet the prerequisite, your EPP policy must adhere to the specifications of the USGBC’s Policy Model for LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems.. You can download these guidelines from the Resources tab. The EPP policy 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.
The most common mistake with this prerequisite is to write a policy that does not adhere to all of the criteria in the Policy Model. Non-compliant EPP policies often fail to indicate the policy’s time period, establish a quantifiable performance metric, or assign key tasks to the responsible parties.
However, you do not have to document compliance with the policy established for any of those credits. Additionally, in multi-tenant buildings, project teams are not expected to address purchases that are outside of the building and site management’s direct control, although they must identify those areas of the building that are outside the scope of the EPP.
You can submit an existing policy with an amendment or attachment that addresses the missing requirements, as long as all new sections are officially adopted along with your existing policy. You may want to consider highlighting the required elements that are covered in your existing policy so that the LEED review team can easily confirm that you’ve addressed everything.
You do not need to attempt or achieve any purchasing credits to earn the prerequisite. Achievement of this prerequisite is based only on whether you create a compliant policy; no purchasing activity or documentation of compliance with the credits is required.
No, the policy only has to cover purchasing performed by the building and site management. You don’t need to impose purchasing requirements on your tenants. Be sure to state the scope of your policy clearly to avoid confusion (in this case, purchases under the building management’s control). Remember that you do have to account for tenant purchases if you attempt any of the credits (with the exception that you can exempt up to 10% of the building’s floor area). Giving a copy of the purchasing policy to tenants and explaining its purpose and benefits can help you achieve the purchasing credits.
Create an EPP policy that guides sustainable purchasing for those products purchases that are within the building and site management’s control. Make sure that the EPP policy specifically covers each aspect of the USGBC Policy Model.
The EPP Policy may be part of a larger building sustainability policy or a document that pre-dates the LEED project time period. If the EPP policy is part of a larger document, highlight the sections relevant to this prerequisite (and which address each core element of the USGBC Policy Model) to help the reviewer easily locate this language.
In-house staff can develop the EPP policy, thus avoiding additional costs.
The EPP policy must cover purchases of ongoing consumables—the requirements for these purchases are described in MRc1: Sustainable Purchasing—Ongoing Consumables. Use the same policy to cover the requirements for at least one of the following credits: MRc2: Durable Goods, MRc3: Facility Alterations and Additions, or MRc4: Mercury-Containing Lamps.
The EPP policy must cover those product purchases that are within the building and site management’s control. Tenant purchases do not need to be covered, but the project team must identify in documentation the portions of the building that are not governed by this policy.
Furniture purchases, as well as electronics and office equipment, is part of sustainable purchasing of durable goods. Project teams often make the mistake of focusing only on electronic equipment and ignore the importance of selecting environmentally preferable furniture.
Issue copies of the EPP policy to all relevant personnel. Ensure that requirements are communicated to product vendors, and collaborate with vendors and contractors to identify preferred products that are competitive with conventional choices on both cost and performance standards. Engage vendors as early as possible to smooth transitions and identify opportunities.
Go beyond the requirements of the USGBC Policy Model to create an actual list of preferred products. Identify the most commonly purchased ongoing consumable items for the building and attach them to the EPP as “approved items for purchase.” This will help ensure that the policy is practical for those using it.
Vendor contracts from product suppliers often discuss how their products comply with LEED criteria, but these documents will not be accepted by LEED reviewers as credit documentation. The EPP policy must still be completed.
Cost premiums for environmentally preferable products will vary depending on the nature of the product and available manufacturers; however, the prerequisite allows the project building to determine whether or not an alternative purchase is economically feasible. The prerequisite defers to the judgment of the project team to define an econmic feasibility standard.
The purchasing goals in your policy do not need to match the required thresholds in the corresponding credit. For example, to earn MRc3: Sustainable Purchasing—Facility Alterations and Additions you must achieve sustainable purchases for 50% of total purchases by cost. You can set your policy goal at any level (above or below 50%) that makes sense for your particular project.
Ensure that the EPP policy is in place and that responsible parties are using it as a guideline for any purchases made during the performance period. However, the project team is not required to document compliance for any of the purchasing credits for the purposes of this prerequisite.
Actively engage purchasing agents or other individuals overseeing significant spending to ensure that the EPP policy will be successful and that compliance will be realistic and sustainable.
Excerpted from LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance
To reduce the environmental harm from materials purchased, used, and disposed of in the operations within buildings.
Have in place an Environmentally Preferable PurchasingA United States federal-wide program (Executive Order 13101) that encourages and assists Executive agencies in the purchasing of Environmentally Preferable Products and services. (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 that includes, at a minimum, product purchasing policies for the building and site addressing the requirements of MR Credit 1: Sustainable Purchasing—Ongoing Consumables. This policy must adhere to the LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance policy model (see Introduction). At a minimum, the policy must cover those product purchases that are within the building and site management’s control.
Additionally, extend the EPP policy to include product purchasing policies for the building and site addressing the requirements of at least 1 of the credits listed below. This extended policy must also adhere to the LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance policy model and specifically address the goal, scope and performance metric for the respective credit:
This prerequisite requires only policies, not ongoing actual sustainable performance.
Evaluate the items that are purchased for the building, identify more environmentally friendly alternatives and establish a policy to purchase these alternatives when economically feasible. Work with suppliers to identify environmentally preferable products that meet the needs of the building.
Developed to help federal purchasers, this site can help green vendors, businesses large and small, and consumers. An index makes it easy to find and evaluate information about green products and services, calculate the costs and benefits of purchasing choices, and manage green purchasing processes.
USGBC provides a description of the definitions, requirements, and structure of a policy, program or plan as they relate to EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems. submittals.
The Energy Star website provides resources designed to assist procurement officials in making smart purchasing decisions.
The Sustainability Purchasing Network is a learning resource for corporate, nonprofit, academic, public, and private organizations. It offers presentations on reducing purchasing-related carbon emissions, integrating sustainability into purchasing, and the business case for a sustainable procurement policy.
This program is part of EPA’s effort to promote the use of materials recovered from solid waste. It provides comprehensive procurement guidelines and recovered-materials advisory notices, which recommend recycled-content levels for construction products, landscaping products, non-paper and paper products, and other items. It includes a searchable database of suppliers.
This comprehensive site offers information about mercury emissions, the use of mercury in manufactured products, human and environmental health effects, and applicable laws and regulations.
Complete LEED Online documentation for achievement of MRp1 on a certified Gold LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems. 2009 project in Denver, Colorado.
Create an 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 that guides sustainable purchasing for those products purchases that are within the building and site management’s control.
Your LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems. plans must include all required elements of the Program & Plan Model, which is described in this USGBC document.
Sample LEED Online forms for all rating systems and versions are available on the USGBC website.
I have received a review comment on MRpr1 that indicates that I only addressed "a portion" of the credit requirements for MRc1, 2 and 3 and need to address the full credit. I am confused. Since each of those credits requires compliance with only 1 of the possible attributes listed, why would I need to include in my policy dozens of bullet items of sustainable characteristics our building doesn't intend to pursue via purchasing? I thought the point was to customize the plan to reflect the types of purchases we actually intend to focus on, not everything that is possible in the reference manual for credit compliance.
To avoid including a whole bunch of sustainable characteristics that we don't intend to purchase for, I would have to delete things we are going to do because they aren't comprehensive. For example, I am inclined to delete references to purchases for Electric Powered equipment because I don't want to include references to Furniture. Both compliance paths can be pursued independently in MR2. So I could achieve MR2 by only purchasing appropriate electric powered equipment, but I can't achieve MRpr1 using MR2 unless I include both compliance paths?
This seems like a disincentive to me to include purchasing practices in the plan that we might actually want to pursue, in favor of just reiterating everything possible listed for the credit. Surely that can't be what the reviewer means. Can anyone help clarify?
Hi Michelle, in this situation I think you could create an appendix that includes the full sustainability criteria and all products/materials types covered by each credit included in your policy, so that all the information is there for reference. Then in the main part of your policy you could bullet out the products and sustainability criteria you intend to focus on. I think this could address the review comments but also create a document that’s more usable for your purposes.
Does a specific goal need to be addressed for the policy or would a prescriptive description of the goal be used such as that “the goal is to, at a minimum, maintain the current environmentally preferable purchasingA United States federal-wide program (Executive Order 13101) that encourages and assists Executive agencies in the purchasing of Environmentally Preferable Products and services. policy and work towards increasing the sustainability of future 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. etc.” meet the requirement?
A specific goal (target percentage) is required for each of the category areas addressed by the sustainable purchasing policy, and it's important that you specify the performance measurement method.
An example would be for 75% (based on cost) 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. purchases to meet the sustainability criteria.
We are working with a city government to certify several buildings under LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems.. The client has suggested that if we actually use the word "Policy" in the title of our documents, this will elongate the process of approval simply thus elongating the performance period and certification process. What other terms does LEED accept for these documents. I assume "Plan" and "Program" are both appropriate for all plans and policies being adopted and implemented? Guideline also seems appropriate but might be too vague...
I wouldn't see an issue if you wanted to title your policy "Sustainable Purchasing Program". The bigger thing would be to make sure it still complies with the LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems. Plan and Policy Model requirements. You can always include a supplemental narrative with the submission to the review team which clarifies that, while it's titled "Program" for client-purchases, it follows the standard "Policy" requirements per LEED.
Sara, it's the content not necessarily the title that is the main driver here. However once you agree the 'policy' in these few buildings they could be rolling that out in all the other buildings at a later date...so I don't see the problem going away.
We have a corporate Sustainable purchasing policy. With the policy came this note:
"LEED-EB version 3 requires Green Purchasing to include office supplies, stationary and other products as part of the Green Purchasing Policy which are not under the control of Global Facilities Services. As such, for purposes of this manual, Our Facility will remain under the version 2 Green Purchasing Policy adopted in December 2009 revised to include all facilities that control procurement of building maintenance supplies. While this existing policy does not conform to the version 3 requirements it is felt that the version 2 policy better reflects the products that Global Facilities Services has procurement authority over. For the purposes of the Global Facilities Services Sustainability Program, only products and materials purchased directly by building management shall be considered to determine compliance with this policy. Purchasing of general office supplies and computer equipment, etc. not purchased directly by building management staff are covered by policies within Corporate Sourcing and Technology Services. These other entities must be contacted for input whenever a PUCC listed property applies for LEED-EB certification. Cleaning supplies and paper products used in the housekeeping operation are excluded, since they are accounted for in the Green CleaningGreen cleaning is the use of cleaning products and practices that have lower environmental impacts and more positive indoor air quality impacts than conventional products and practices. Policy and Procedures."
My question is that since we do not have control over some aspects of the requirement do we still have to state this in our policy eventhough we have no control? If yes would a new policy have to be made?
Hi David, apologies that this response is so delayed. I’m guessing that you’ve already sorted this issue out - what did you ultimately decide to do and what was the reviewer's response?
Any chance we could downgrade the Version 4 PDF forms above? I don't want to upgrade Adobe Reader to 11 for fear it will not be compatible with LEED Online and I can't open these with 10. I love how nothing is easy!
Ryan, you could probaby arrange this by contacting GBCI.
Does MRc5 count as an alternative to MRc2-4 or not? It seems like it does, however in the MRp1 policy document template it says it doesn't.
Could someone please clarify?
It's funny, but I don't think it does. Your policy must cover MRc1, and then you have to choose at least to address at least one of the following: MRc2, MRc3, or MRc4. For some reason, the rating system language leaves MRc5 out of the mix when outlining your options for the Purchasing Policy and there have not been any addenda to adjust this. To be safe, I would still address at least one of the three specified credits in your policy, in addition to MRc5. Remember that the high-level language outlined in your policy does not require you to actually earn (or even attempt) the credit itself as part of your LEED application, so feel free to set goals and strategies for as many categories as possible in your policy.
Along the same lines . . . We are pursuing MRc5 but the reference guide apparently does not require a specific policy for this credit and it seems to exclude MRc5 from the prereq. Can we mention Sustainable Food in the prereq and start documenting our purchases? As a state agency we are rarely allowed to pay for food services, but we do have a couple of opportunities a year - including one in March. Thanks.
p.s. The sustainable food credit also doesn't mention appropriate packaging, utensils, plates, etc., which we would like to tack on to the credit. No use serving Fair Trade coffee in a Styrofoam cup.
Hi Lee Ann,
You're free to include or exclude food from your MRp1 policy at your discretion. I recommend including it though if you're even a little bit interested in selecting sustainable food options or are thinking of attempting MRc5. It's nice to have all your sustainable purchasing criteria laid out clearly in one place.
You're right about MRc5 not being concerned with packaging. However, those kitchen supplies you mention, like disposable cutlery and dinnerware, can be tracked in MRc1 as 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.. You can find a little more information about that under MRc1.
The example provided for each policy specifically states measured values, for example 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. Procurement measured value is within a given year at least 40% of the purchase shall be energy star qualified. Could we remove the measured value from the policy? Our approach would be to meet the client request, rather than a qualitative approach a quanatative approach, We would then apply the necessary measured values within our tracking/audit documentation.
Per the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems. 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 systems. 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.
Silly question I know, but when utilizing the "template" for the Sustainable Purchasing Policy, should we delete the header and footers related to LEED User?
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.
If we are the property management team of an office building, we only address purchases made by the building. The only purchases are made for janitorial, maintance, facility alterations etc.. which are described in other credits. My question relates to the first 'questions to consider' comment above, "What types of purchases are within the building and site management’s control?" I understand this must talk to MRc1 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. but do not know if we have any ongoing purchases as the property manager outside what is talked about in other credits already and are not sure as to what possible purchases to include? Thanks in advance.
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.
My questions are for MRc1 Sustainable purchasing, in a machining facility our highest volume purchases are in raw material and tooling. The bulk of our solid waste comes from the metal chips produced from the process, which is recycled back through the foundry.
1. Does raw product that is purchased to make a finished good qualify as an ongoing consumable? My initial thoughts are that it is no different than paper documents that are produced in an office environment.
2. Would the recycled waste (metal chips) qualify as a post industrial material?
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.
I would like to amend or delete the performance evaluation provided on the template. Will this jepordize meeting the requirements of the prerequisite?
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 systems. Policy Model links both metric and evaluation in that section as well).
Purchasing Period Question: Should purchases be tracked in the period ordered, received or paid for? Or is it OK as long as it is consistent across all credits where purchases are involved?
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.
I am currently working with vendors trying to get information showing compliance with MRc2. According option 2. Furniture., products are considered sustainable if they contain a certain percentage of recycled material or rapidely renewable material...Is this by total product or by specific material. For instance, for a chair seating is a composite product. For the portion of the product that has foam, are you looking for the percentage of all foam used in the product that is 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)., or the percentage of foam that is rapidly renewable in relationship to the accumulated amount of materilas in the entire product? The question can also be applied to FSCIndependent, third-party verification that forest products are produced and sold based on a set of criteria for forest management and chain-of-custody controls developed by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), an international nonprofit organization. FSC criteria for certifying forests around the world address forest management, legal issues, indigenous rights, labor rights, multiple benefits, and environmental impacts. certified woodWood from a source that has been determined, through a certification process, to meet stated ecological and other criteria. There are numerous forest certification programs in general use based on several standards, but only the Forest Stewardship Council's standards, which include requirements that the wood be tracked through its chain-of-custody, can be used to qualify wood for a point in the LEED Rating System. and recycled plastic. If only a portion of the product is wood, are you looking for the total percentage of wood that is FSC certified or overall product?
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 generated by end users (households or commercial, industrial and institutional facilities) of a product no longer able to be used for its intended purpose that is recycled into raw material for a new product. 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 systems.? The credit does not seem to suggest this as it does in LEED NC.
I have the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating systems. reference guide first edition. My situation is I cannot find a particular on regional priority credits. Is there an addenda or how can I get more information on these credits? Does any one Know? Help please. Thanks Don
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 systems..
Ackerstein Sustainability, LLC
Copyright 2016 – BuildingGreen, Inc.