-
Eliminate CFC-based refrigerants
This prerequisite focuses on the elimination of CFC-based refrigerants that contribute to ozone depletion in HVAC&R equipment. Although fire suppression systems are covered by EAc4, you're not required to consider them for this prerequisite. Doing so in conjunction with EAc4 is a good idea, however.
The credit covers all space-conditioning and refrigeration systems included in the LEED scope of work, including chillers; unitary HVAC equipment (split and packaged); room and window air-conditioners; computer, data center, and telecom room-cooling units; and commercial refrigeration equipment. The prerequisite does not, however, apply to small units and other types of equipment, such as refrigerators and small water coolers that contain less than 0.5 pounds of refrigerant.
-
Easy prerequisite for new construction
This is an easy prerequisite to meet, since installing equipment without CFC-based refrigerants is now standard practice in new construction. Nearly all industrialized nations have signed the Montreal Protocol, which called for a complete phase out of CFC-based refrigerants by 1995, and HCFCsHydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are refrigerants that cause significantly less depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer than chlorofluorocarbons. by 2030 in developed countries. As a result, compliant, environmentally preferable refrigerants that comply with this prerequisite are the only option available for new systems.
Existing CFC-based equipment must be phased out
If existing equipment or a district chilled water system is being used, it must be CFC-free—or you (or the owner of the system) must commit to phasing out CFC refrigerants through refrigerant conversion or equipment replacement within five years of “substantial completion” of your project. In either case, the annual leakage rateThe speed at which an appliance loses refrigerant, measured between refrigerant charges or over 12 months, whichever is shorter. The leakage rate is expressed in terms of the percentage of the appliance's full charge that would be lost over a 12-month period if the rate stabilized. (EPA Clean Air Act, Title VI, Rule 608). of CFC-based refrigerants must be reduced to 5% or less.
If the owner of the district cooling system is unwilling to conduct a phase-out, while the economic analysis suggests that it should, in fact, be done, your project could forfeit LEED certification. In this case, you could install your own cooling system to achieve the prerequisite.
Generally, equipment replacement is economically feasible because older systems are far less efficient than newer ones. However, an exemption can be granted if a third-party analysis shows that the replacement or conversion of the system is not economically feasible by nature of having a simple payback greater than ten years.
FAQs for EAp3
What does third-party mean, with regards to the phase-out analysis? Can our HVAC consultant do it?
Yes. Third party in this case means not the owner.
My project will not use any mechanical ventilation system. Does that satisfy the requirements of this credit?
Yes, if you also avoid CFC-based refrigerants in any fire suppression systems.
Legend
- Best Practices
- Gotcha
- Action Steps
- Cost Tip
USGBC
Excerpted from LEED 2009 for New Construction and Major Renovations
EA Prerequisite 3: Fundamental refrigerant management
Required
Intent
To reduce stratospheric ozone depletion.
Requirements
Zero use of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-based refrigerants in new base building heating, ventilating, air conditioning and refrigeration (HVAC&R) systems. When reusing existing base building HVAC equipment, complete a comprehensive CFC phase-out conversion prior to project completion. Phase-out plans extending beyond the project completion date will be considered on their merits.
Existing small HVAC units (defined as containing less than 0.5 pounds (228 grams) of refrigerant) and other equipment, such as standard refrigerators, small water coolers and any other equipment that contains less than 0.5 pounds (228 grams) of refrigerant, are not considered part of the base building system and are not subject to the requirements of this prerequisite.
Potential Technologies & Strategies
When reusing existing HVAC systems, conduct an inventory to identify equipment that uses CFC-based refrigerants and provide a replacement schedule for these refrigerants. For new buildings, specify new HVAC equipment in the base building that uses no CFC-based refrigerants.
Organizations
US EPA Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)
SNAP is an EPA program to identify alternatives to ozone-depleting substances. The program maintains up-to-date lists of environmentally friendly substitutes for refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment, solvents, fire-suppression systems, adhesives, coatings, and other substances.
Publications
2007 ASHRAE Applications Handbook – HVAC Applications
To determine the service life of a piece of HVAC equipment.
Refrigerant Conversion Table
If you’re considering a conversion, this chart shows typical refrigerants types and conversion recommendations.
Web Tools
Atmospheric Life of Refrigerant
The table ranks commonly used refrigerants based on their life in the atmosphere which increases the GWP.
Articles
Green Fire Suppression Technologies
Article describing the movement towards Halon free chemicals with a comparative analysis.
Refrigerant Management Calculator
Use this refrigerant management calculator to track and document your compliance with EAp3 and EAc4. You may also use the LEED Online credit form to document compliance, but that form has a finite number of rows, whereas this one can be expanded indefinitely. If you choose to use this calculator, add a narrative in LEED Online about using a supplemental calculator to complete calculations, and upload the document on LEED Online.
LEED Online Forms: NC-2009 EA
The following links take you to the public, informational versions of the dynamic LEED Online forms for each NC-2009 EA credit. You'll need to fill out the live versions of these forms on LEED Online for each credit you hope to earn.
Version 4 forms (newest):
- EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning
- EAp2: Minimum Energy Peformance
- EAp3: Fundamental Refrigerant Management
- EAc2: On-Site Renewable Energy
- EAc4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management
- EAc5: Measurement & Verification
Version 3 forms:
- EAp1: Fundamental Commissioning
- EAp2: Minimum Energy Peformance
- EAp3: Fundamental Refrigerant Management
- EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance
- EAc2: On-Site Renewable Energy
- EAc3: Enhanced Commissioning
- EAc4: Enhanced Refrigerant Management
- EAc5: Measurement & Verification
- EAc6: Green Power
These links are posted by LEEDuser with USGBC's permission. USGBC has certain usage restrictsions for these forms; for more information, visit LEED Online and click "Sample Forms Download."
Design Submittal
Documentation for this credit can be part of a Design Phase submittal.
LEEDuser is produced by BuildingGreen, Inc., with YR&G authoring most of the original content. LEEDuser enjoys ongoing collaboration with USGBC.
34 Comments
Campus setting uploading refrigerant data LEED letter template
Hello,
This is a sort of how to LEED Online question. We have a resort campus setting. There will be several different sizes of guest villas as well as public spaces and staff facilities. We will have many different models of equipment using refrigerant as a result. In the campus setting does the same model with refrigerant that is say being used in 15 buildings of the same type, in the same space, have to have 15 lines entered on the LEED letter template? Or is there a quantity feature in the master site set up? If the same model were used in say 11 different types of spaces I would assume it has to have 11 lines inputted into the Letter template? I am trying to get an idea of the amount of work required for my engineers for the project.
Documents/ details needed for alternative compliance path
We have a project with a central plant with chillers that has R-11 refrigerant. An economic analysis has been performed by a 3rd party that states it is not economically feasible to replace the chillers within 10 years. We will also be providing documentation stating the leakage of the refrigerant is less than 5%.
Besides the backup documentation for the economic analysis and leakage rates, is there any additional information that needs to be provided? Has anyone used this compliance path and can provide us any details on comments GBCI has made during the review that can help us prepare to submit this prereq? We want to be sure we don't encounter any issues during the review, and if necessary, provide more documentation up-front to prevent any issues. Thank you in advance.
Small HVAC Equipment & 0.5 lb rule
Our project has removed all CFC based refrigerants on the main HVAC equipment. However we have some small HVAC equipment that use CFC Refrigerants. They are rated a 0.1 lb of refrigerant, so logically the would be allowable according to the 0.5 lb rule.
The one thing that I am worried about is that there are about 40+ of these equipment. Will this still be acceptable?
I'd appreciate any feedback anyone could provide.
Thank you.
Nathan, your reading of the rule is correct. It is common for large projects to have multiple pieces of equipment that qualify for the exception of < 0.5 lbs of refrigerant, so I wouldn't worry.
HCFC 141b For Interior Pipe Cleaning
Is the complying with the prerrequisite in jeopardy for using HCFC 141b for cleaning the interior of the copper piping previous to installation? The system will be using R-410 for the cycle, but the other compound will be used for pipe cleaning first.
The scope of the prerequisite is the refrigerant actually used while the equipment operates - i.e. the refrigerant that will leak, be replaced, etc. If your mechanical schedules/selection info only reference R-410, you should be in the clear.
SF6 GAS
The LEED NC V3 project we are working on has an electric system that requires an Electric Substation that has cells of medium tension which are protected with SF6 gas (sulfur hexafluoride), which causes the greenhouse effect. We’re wondering if this would fall under the purview of EA P3 : Fundamental Refrigerant management, or if, given the characteristics of the system (it is located far away from the users of the building, and won’t have any gas seepage) it is not considered under this prerequisite. If we are not complying with the prerequisite- any ideas on how we might be able to resolve this issue? Any ideas or experience in this area would be greatly appreciated.
Fortunately, sulfur hexafluoride is neither a CFC nor a refrigerant, so you are in the clear.
Commercial Kitchen Equipment
We are working on a full service hotel project. For the commercial kitchen, it is my understanding that the permanent walk-in cooler and freezer units should be included in the credit. What about the non-permanent equipment that is essentially FF&E and we would move with us if we sold the property? Examples would be pizza prep table refrigerators, sandwich unit refrigerators, reach-in refrigerators--all on wheels/moveable. All the items meet the prereq requirements, just looking for guidance if they should be included in the documentation.
Angie, do you have information about the refrigerant charge in these pieces of equipment? I would let the 0.5 pound rule guide you about whether to document each type of equipment.
Nearly all exceed the 0.5 lb rule. How would you categorize the equipment type? Our engineer said to use "other."
I would also use "other."
custom-made refrigerator for EBOM project
I am working on EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. for an old office building which includes an employee cafeteria. The food service contractors brought in custom made commercial refrigerators and installed these custom made commercial refrigerators in the kitchen.
The property owner staff surveyed these custom made refrigerators and found that all of these refrigerators are charged with non-CFC refrigerant (HFC or R-22). It is hard to tell the refrigerant leakage rateThe speed at which an appliance loses refrigerant, measured between refrigerant charges or over 12 months, whichever is shorter. The leakage rate is expressed in terms of the percentage of the appliance's full charge that would be lost over a 12-month period if the rate stabilized. (EPA Clean Air Act, Title VI, Rule 608). because the cooling unit are assembled by local workshops. The other challenge is the manufacturing year data in the some refrigerators are missing .
Reference guide said that standard refrigerators are not considered part of the base building and are exempt. However, these commercial refrigerators are not "standard refrigerators" because they are custom made. I wonder if we shall input refrigerant related data of these refrigerators in template?
Generally refrigerators are only excluded if they have less than 0.5 lbs of refrigerant., so if an individual refrigerator at your building has more than 0.5 lbs it should be included in the calculation. You should visit the EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. page for this credit http://www.leeduser.com/credit/EBOM-2009/EAp3 The documentation toolkit includes a refrigerant worksheet which should be helpful for you. Whoever services the equipment should be able to provide information about refrigerant charges.
DES and required Leakage Rate Calculations
I have a project on a looped DES with a couple of non-compliant CFC-chillers upstream/on the same loop.
A 3rd-party audit has determined that phase-out is not economically beneficial in 10-years or less, so we will be filing for the alternative compliance path and including this assessment for the reviewers.
BUT, per the DES guidance document "Treatment of District or Campus Energy in LEED . . . 2009-Design & Construction," the owner is also required to reduce any CFC leakages to 5% or less using the EPA Clean Air Act, Title VI, Rule 608.
Using the required EPA calculation (as also explained in the LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. 2009 reference guide on page 148), how do we "set the time" for the calculation?
To be clear, do we perform this calc for each piece of CFC-equipment and set T for time to the last time refrigerant was added OR 365 days, whichever is shorter? Or does the time start at some other benchmark, such as the project registration date?
Please clarify--thanks very much!
Brooks, I'm not sure I understand your question, but I'll try to answer it. First, the calculation is performed for each HVAC&R "system." So this may or may not be the same as each piece of equipment.
In terms of T for time, I think the options are clear: 365 or last time refrigerant was added, whichever is less. It doesn't relate to project registration date.
new project with old HVAC
I would like to know if the following complies with EAp3:
We have a new construction (in process 2011) and the owner is purchasing an old HVAC systems that used R-12. Would we comply with EAp3 credit by changing the refrigerant to R-22?, or would we need to adapt the equipment compressor to use R-134A?
It is not clear in the credit, if I can use older equipment for a NC and the equipment coming from a different source.
Correction to the above question, the refrigerant of the HVAC being purchased is R406A which is a mix of R22 (55%), R142b (41%) and R600 (4%). Would R-406A be acceptable for crdit EAp3? It is not under the drop down menu of the form, but could it be used showing that it has low IDP and GWP values?
Timo, I would say that this is acceptable, as I don't believe any of those refrigerants are CFCsChlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are a compound of carbon, hydrogen, chlorine and fluorine, once commonly used in refrigeration, that depletes the stratospheric ozone layer.. On the LEED Online form, I would probably enter R-22 as the closest fit, and explain in the narrative how you documented it.
Manufacturer Name and Model Number
Hello,
As you know, the LEED online Letter template requires us to input the Manufacturer Name and Model Number of the refrigeration systems being used on the project
The issue we're facing is that the exact models have not been chosen yet. They will be selected and purchased by the contractor based on the performance specifications. The M&E have already specified the max Refrigerant Charges allowed and the fact that CFCsChlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are a compound of carbon, hydrogen, chlorine and fluorine, once commonly used in refrigeration, that depletes the stratospheric ozone layer. are prohibited.
Knowing that this is a design credit, can I upload the excerpt of specs showing the max Refrigerant Charges and the non-CFC requirement ? Or should I wait till the contractor chooses the models (which is at construction phase)
Thanks for help,
I would wait till you have the required information and submit at the construction phase.
On the other hand, you could try entering the information now as best you can, and you'll have a chance to modify it later if the reviewer questions it.
Refrigerant phase-out for DES system
I am working with a client to determine if they will be able to achieve certification using LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.. The building is connected to a district chilled water plant where R-11 is used. My client purchases the water, they do not own the plant, therefore have no influence on chiller phase-out or replacement. Is there any guidance available on how to meet this prerequisite under these circumstances?
If we pursue the economic analysis option, should would be considering stand alone refrigeration equipment for this building replacing connection to the district plant? An analysis for replacing chillers does not seem to apply to my client since they would not own the chillers or finance the replacement.
Sarah, a good starting place may be the DES guidance doc for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems.. I posted a link to it on the EAp1 forum.
Refrigerant Phase Out Feasibility
We are designing a building for a client that will use purchased steam and chilled water from a local central plant. The central plant still has R-11 chillers and we advised them they needed a phase out plan. The client has engaged a third party to prepare a study of two phase out alternatives; replacement and retrofit. Can anyone provide guidance as to the level of effort required by USGBC/GBCI in the study of the feasibility of refrigerant phase out in order to claim exemption from the pre-requisite? At the surface it seems like it won't be hard for the client to squirm out of this pre-requisite.
The latest district energy system guidelines provide the details of compliance with EAp3 Prerequisite. These are copied below, and available at http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=7671
"All applicable upstream systems must either be CFC-free or a commitment to phasing out CFC- based refrigerants must be in place, with a firm timeline of five years from substantial completion of the LEED project. Prior to phase out, reduce annual leakage of CFC-based refrigerants to 5% or less using EPA Clean Air Act, Title VI, Rule 608 procedures governing refrigerant management and reporting.
An alternative compliance path for buildings connected to a central chilled water system requires a third party audit showing that system replacement or conversion is not economically feasible. The replacement of a chiller(s) will be considered to be not economically feasible if the simple payback of the replacement is greater than 10 years. To determine the simple payback, divide the cost of implementing the replacement by the annual total cost avoidance for energy (consumption and demand charges) that results from the replacement and any difference in maintenance costs including make-up refrigerants. If CFC-based refrigerants are maintained in the central system, reduce annual leakage to 5% or less using EPA Clean Air Act, Title VI, Rule 608 procedures
16
governing refrigerant management and reporting and reduce the total leakage over the remaining life of the unit to less than 30% of its refrigerant charge."
Thank you for your reply, we understand the DES rules but my question really had to do with trying to understand the level of rigor required in the audit to confirm the financial feasibility of the refrigerant replacement.
Is there a sample audit that has been previously submitted to USGBC that could be posted as a template to follow. My concern is that the client will commission a third party audit that will not, in my opinion, have the level of rigor suitable for a LEED pre-requisite. I was hoping to gain knowledge of the level of effort required so I can help ensure an audit is performed that meets the rigor of the LEED review process.
Audit maybe a standard walk-through. You can use ASHRAE level II as a process, limited for the chiller. The audit needs to result to answer the questions- how old is the chiller, how much energy it will save if replaced, refrigerants used, leakage rates and supporting documentation to go with it.
Can I use HCFC refrigerant, such as R22 and R123?
What the detailed meaning of CFC-based refrigerant? If I use HCFC refrigerant, can I meet the EA p3 requirement?
Atkins,
Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) is an organic compound that contains carbon, chlorine, and fluorine, produced as a volatile derivative of methane and ethane. Yes, you meet the requirement of this prerequisite if you use HCFC refrigerant such as R22 and R123.
Installation Date
How can this be a design credit yet you must document an installation date for equipment?
Hi Alison, you are right this is a design credit and can be submitted during design phase. For ‘Installed’ date you can put an approximate date the air conditioning equipment will be installed. The field is useful for the review team to estimate available refrigerants at the time of installation. This credit covers all projects including major renovation that may have existing systems.
My project team decided to commit to LEED certification under the NC rating system after our design was completed and scope was purchased. Can the construction team respond to the fundamental phase out requirements referenced in EAp3 (FYI-our MDFMedium-density fiberboard (MDF): Panel product used in cabinets and furniture; generally made from wood fiber glued together with binder; similar to particleboard, but with finer texture, offering more precise finishing. Most MDF is made with formaldehyde-emitting urea-formaldehyde binder. Liebert units were designed to use R22 and were purchased 1 year ago)?
Refrigerant quantities as a % of the overall project equip.????
Our review of EAp3 (v2.2) has asked for a narrative that includes the refrigerant quantities as a percentage of the overall project equipment. Can anyone help us determine what they are asking for?
Hi Sara, EAc4 uses 'Rc' that is refrigerant charge in lbs/ton for each air conditioning equipment. This is pounds of refrigerant required per ton of air conditioning capacity (lbs/tons). It sounds like the reviewer is asking for the same information.
Start a new LEED comment thread