Following on this page are screen captures that show in blank form all of the inputs and outputs you'll see when documenting EAp2: Minimum Energy Performance in LEED Online for LEED-NC version 2009. Some comments and explanations are interpersed. The following is displayed with permission of the USGBC.
Also see these pages on LEEDuser:
It's important to understand that the LEED Online form for EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance is simple by comparison with EAp2. In LEED Online, the EAc1 form is automatically populated by the EAp2 form, so there is minimal information to enter for EAc1.
The form starts with input of information from EPA's Target Finder. This does not affect credit compliance but is included for reference.
The LEED Online v3 forms are dynamic, in that when you come to a "radio button" on the form, different information or data inputs may follow depending on which option you choose. The options we display here are based on choosing Option 1.
For more on choosing options, see our EAp2 guidance page. Option 1 calls for computer modeling of energy performance, which offers the following key advantages:
Once you have selected Option 1, you'll be prompted to supply a lot of information on your energy modeling process.
Be sure to check both boxes here. Select your energy simulation program from the drop-down menu, or if it's not listed, type in your program. The choices offered are eQuest, VisualDOE, EnergyPlus, EnergyPro, HAP, Trace, or other.
In "principal heating source," select "Fossil fuel" unless you're using some kind of renewable resource.
The ASHRAE addenda field here will often be left blank, unless you used an addenda for the project, in which case you should note them here.
This option calls for meeting the mandatory provisions of ASHRAE 90.1-2007, including the envelope, HVAC, lighting, and domestic hot water. ASHRAE 90.1 has had some changes and new mandatory requirements since the 2004 version, which was referenced on previous LEED systems, so be sure to review the standard carefully.
The Interactive Compliance Forms requested below are available with the ASHRAE 90.1-2007 standard or user's guide.
For the space summary, one row is sufficient for buildings with one space type, such as "office." A building with retail on the ground floor would include a second row for that, etc.
The following advisory messages are available in DOE 2.0 or eQuest programs. You may have to look for it in other simulation programs.
For the "unmet load hours compliance row," refer to ASHRAE 90.1-2007, Appendix G 220.127.116.11.
The new Excel spreadsheet for Section 1.4 provides a more detailed list of data required for each of the energy systems in the building. This form should help to alleviate some of the confusion around what the review team needs for each of the system inputs.
Section 1.5 has been modified from the NC-v2.2 template to accommodate projects that incorporate demand reduction strategies that effectively change the energy cost, such as district energy systems and thermal energy storage.
The following form compiles baseline energy use for the four baseline energy models. All lighting, water heating, and process loads will usually be consistent across all four baseline cases. Ensure that each cell is filled in.
Mark process loads with an "X." These will be the same for all baseline cases.
For "Receptacle Equipment," the project team will often choose to have the same amount for the design and baseline cases.
Be sure to provide supporting documentation and narratives for savings observed in the proposed case over the baseline case. For all equipment, provide cut sheets with efficiencies and part-load curves, to support the inputs and outputs in the form.
The baseline and design-case models you've entered above typically assume identical plug loads. If your project is deliberately attempting to reduce plug loads, demonstrate this by following the exceptional calculation method (ECM), as described in ASHRAE 90.1-2007, G2.5. Incorporate these results in the model to determine energy savings. Here is the area on the form to enter ECM information, or if you're not pursuing ECM, it can be skipped by selecting the appropriate option.
If you are using an elevator or computer systems that are more efficient than systems on conventional buildings, or if your building has a large share of plug loads, you can demonstrate savings in those areas by using the Exceptional Calculation Methodology (ECM). These savings can contribute to total energy savings under EAc1.
If your project is using on-site renewable energy, here is the place to enter that information—or skip it if you're not using it.
Don’t plan on using on-site renewable energy generation to make your building energy-efficient. It is almost always more cost-effective to make an efficient building, and then to add renewables like photovoltaics as the “icing” on the cake. However, if it is cost-effective for your building, you can "double-dip" with it in LEED by using it to offset your energy use under EAp2 and EAc1, while also earning points under EAc2: Onsite Renewable Energy.
If the project has onsite renewable energy and has a power purchase agreement with a service provider, it still qualifes to use onsite renewable enegy here.
Most projects select the "Automatic cost calculation" option here, so that the design case energy model and the renewable energy system use the same rate. If you select the "Manual Cost Input" option, plan on providing supporting documentation of the utility rate.
Here your documentation effort is wrapped up, and you learn how you will perform under EAp2 and by extension, EAc1. Points in these credits are awarded on a cost basis, not a percentage of Btus saved per area, which can create some unexpected results.
Download input tables and output summaries from your software to upload here. Make sure to submit plenty of supporting documents to avoid skipping any information.
I have a Retail Space within an existing Shopping Mall pursuing LEED CI certification. The shopping mall is served by a central plant. The retail space which is our scope of work has its own Air Handling Unit providing conditioned air. The Retail space receives unconditioned ventilation air from the base buildingThe base building includes elements such as the structure, envelope, and building-level mechanical systems, such as central HVAC, and materials and products installed in the project (e.g., flooring, casework, wall coverings)..
If I follow the LEED V4 guidelines, Method 2 under the 'Contribution of the Base Building HVAC and Service Water Heating Systems', is it sufficient to model only our scope of work (Retail Space) and pro-rate the central plant capacity based on the area ratio of our scope versus whole building?
Keeping the above in mind, please confirm that this project will not require to identify different occupancies by type and square footages and determine peak heating and cooling loads etc for other occupancies listed under the method 2 as that is outside our project scope of work.
Dear LEED users,
We are currently documenting the baseline and proposed design energy model inputs through the table 'EApr2 Section 1.4'. Our proposed building's HVAC system consist of an hydronic heating system with purchased district heat and a cooling system with water-cooled chillers to FCU (both water-side HVAC). The following questions arose when filling up the table:
1. Considering we have an hydronic heating system but no boilers are present, in which section is appropriate to introduce the heating capacity of our system? In the air-side total heating capacity or in the water-side total boiler capacity?
2. Similarly with chillers... Total chiller capacity has been introduced in the water-side HVAC details. Should this also be considered in the air-side HVAC total cooling capacity?
Thanks in advance for your comments.
Make sure you use the latest version of the Table 1.4 spreadsheets. Once you complete the general HVAC tab you would go to the water-side tab and click on the botton at the top right. The form should then show the inputs you need to provide for the HVAC system selected. The heating and cooling capacity should go in the water-side table.
Dear LEED Users,
We are currently filling up the credit form for EAp2. In our case the project is outside of the US and due to the complexity and size of the project it is relatively hard to fill up these interactive compliance forms. Seems that the interactive forms are not scalable to the amount of HVAC systems, luminaires, etc that we have.
Is it advisable to fill up the ASHRAE Compliance Documentation or it really has no effect on the compliance of the prerequisite?
Thank you very much in advance for your comments.
They are entirely optional. At best they confirm modeling inputs which should be summarized elsewhere in the documentation. At worst they contradict a modeling input and call it into question. On balance they really do not add much value to the submission so we do not complete them for our projects.
I'm filling out EAp2 and my process energy load ends up being 33%. In section 1.7 - Exceptional calculation measure summary, I've clicked the 2nd option (the energy analysis does not include exceptional calculation methods). And at the bottom of the form in the summary section, when I click the check compliance button at the bottom of the form, I see where I'm not compliant. I've uploaded all supporting documents and the only red on my template is "Energy savings from process energy should be claimed via Section 1.7 Exceptional Calculation Methodology. Please recheck and revise values as appropriate.". Can someone help shed light on this and what I should do?
Is there any difference in the energy use of items indicated as process in Table EAp2-5? Even a slight difference will trigger this comment.
Yes, that was it. Stupid typo.
I am filling my first LEED form, my project has 2 Retail stories and 8 Residential stories.
I am assuming the Primary Function of the project is "MultiFamily Housing"!
or Shall I mark it on the form as the Target Finder doesn't support my the Primary Function type of my project, then I avoid doing this step
You are going to want to mark it as multi-family housing. If you click the link that takes you to the definitions, it makes allowances for high rise residence:
I know they say it is optional, but be proactive and explain why if your score comes back less than EnergyStar rating to save a possible review comment.
In some cases Target Finder has the ability to have you enter two or more space types. Make sure to check and see if you can do it first before you just skip it.
I get this message (There is no national median information available for this property's calculated type). I always get it as long I am using a Primary Function of my project is "Multifamily" or "Mixed use".
Do I skip and explain why in the LEED Form?
Yep if you can't get a rating then you skip it.
I'm working on a project that has the beta version of EAp2. It is completely filled out, but has no check compliance button at the bottom and doesn't carry over information to the EAc1 form. If I update the EAp2 form to a later version, will I lose all data and have to re-enter, or will the data carry forward to the new version?
you'll lose it. It will not carry forward.
Does anyone know what to use in section 1.1A for the principal heating source if we are using purchased hot water?
the only choices are: Electricity, Fossil Fuel or solar/site renewed...
Select fossil fuel assuming that the fuel used at the heating plant that provides the hot water uses some fossil fuel and is not 100% electric or renewable.
Perfect, Thanks Marcus!
I was told by an Energy Modeler that 'HAP doesnt require boiler capacity, loop flow, or pump power. Boilers are autosized by the propram and modeled as two equally sized boilers.'
would this fly with LEED reviewers? I haven't used HAP and only have looked at some eQuest models so I am not familiar at all with this topic. It was questioned in our preliminary review.
It really depends on what version of HAP they are using and if the reviewer is questioning how the hot water plant was modeled in the baseline or the proposed.
For versions of HAP 4.6 and higher you have the ability to specify the number of boilers and how their sizes relate, so you probably should just make the model match the ASHRAE requirements.
For earlier versions of HAP you can only assign one boiler to each plant. For the baseline, since the efficiency of the boilers are assumed to be constant and have no parasitic losses you can make the argument that only modeling one boiler does not effect results. If they are questioning a proposed plant then the modeler should have made a non-constant efficiency curve for a single boiler.
No matter what version of HAP 4.3 and higher you are not able to input the water flow, instead you specify a delta T and the software calculates the gpm. You can then either input pump power as a W/gpm or a straight kW, but you only get a single primary pump input, and a single secondary pump input. If your proposed plant has some funky pump setup the modeler should make their best approximation based upon controls or try and create several heating plants with different pump configurations.
The version 4.0 of EAp2 still has a section labeled "Mandatory Requirements", however the form no longer matches the screen shots above; both the signatures and the interactive compliance forms are now labeled as "optional." What is mandatory in this section now?
The signatures and compliance forms are all optional so nothing is mandatory related to the documentation. Someone still needs to check the boxes regarding the compliance with the mandatory provisions of 90.1.
Could you be more specific as to which section of that form contain the boxes that still require the checks? It appears that everything in the "Mandatory Requirements" section is labeled as optional now.
I am confusing v4 and v5 of the form. I would suggest that if you are using the v4 form that the optional signatories should be provided to avoid any confusion about the implementation of the mandatory provisions.
There is a very significant distinction in how process energy is calculated when comparing the LEED 2009 for Retail New Construction and Major Renovations to the LEED 2009 for (non-retail) New Construction and Major Renovations rating systems as follows:
1) The LEED 2009 for Retail New Construction and Major Renovations rating system makes the following clarification on the first page of EA Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance (page 28), in the third bullet point on the middle of the page as follows: “There is no default process energy cost”. Then, again on the second page of EA Credit 1: Optimize Energy Performance (page 32), in the third bullet point near the top of the page as follows: “There is no default process energy cost”.
2) This statement in the retail rating system is in contrast to the LEED 2009 for (non-retail) New Construction and Major Renovations, which at the same points of the same corresponding pages makes the following statement in the same spots on the same pages: “The default process energy cost is 25% of the total energy cost for the baseline building.”
This difference between the two rating systems has significant ramifications and appears to have this intent.
However, page 9 of the LEED On-Line EA Prerequisite 2 Minimum Energy Performance form, there is a Process Energy Modeling Compliance requirement that states as follows:
“Annual process energy costs must be at least 25% of the total energy costs for the proposed design. This form determines compliance using cost calculations from Section 1.9. Process Energy Costs should be modeled to accurately reflect the proposed building. Process Energy must be the same in the baseline and proposed cases, unless an exceptional calculation is used. Process energy costs must be at least 25% of the total baseline energy costs. Any exceptions must be supported by a narrative and/or other supporting documentation.”
This process energy requirement in the LEED On-Line form for LEED 2009 for Retail: New Construction and Major Renovations EA Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance appears to contradict the statement in this rating system that “There is no default process energy cost” and in effect makes the different described process energy requirements the same for the retail and non-retail rating systems. Please clarify how to reconcile this apparent contradiction between the LEED On-Line form and the rating system requirements.
This issue seems to cause the most confusion but it is really a very simple matter. The distinction you see is really not significant at all.
In any LEED project - model the proposed building as accurately as possible including all energy within and associated with the project. This includes process (or unregulated by 90.1) loads. Does not really matter if it is retail or something else. The baseline energy use for process loads should be identical to the proposed unless claiming saving through the exceptional calculation method. If the process load is at least 25% of the baseline energy cost, do nothing. If it is less then provide an explanation and/or data to support why it is less.
The key is to model everything in the building even if it was not a part of your design. This requires a conversation with the owner about equipment which will be installed and used. If the owner does not know there are several sources of equipment power densities by building type and equipment (ASHRAE 90.1 User's Manual, COMNET, LEED for Retail, etc.) which can be used.
The biggest mistakes modelers make on this issue is to fudge the process loads by incrementally increasing plug loads, for example, to get the results over 25% or to add 25% process to their baseline modeling results. Do not do either one. Just model the building as accurately as possible including all of the loads. If you are under 25% explain why.
The language makes this issue sound farFloor-area ratio is the density of nonresidential land use, exclusive of parking, measured as the total nonresidential building floor area divided by the total buildable land area available for nonresidential structures. For example, on a site with 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of buildable land area, an FAR of 1.0 would be 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of building floor area. On the same site, an FAR of 1.5 would be 15,000 square feet (1395 square meters), an FAR of 2.0 would be 20,000 square feet (1860 square meters), and an FAR of 0.5 would be 5,000 square feet (465 square meters). more significant than it is in practice and in the LEED review process.
I do not completely understand. If the process energy is over 25% of the baseline energy cost, can I use the 25% for the process energy cost, and use the actual process load for the simulation?
Not sure I understand the question.
If, after you have modeled the process load as accurately as you can, the process is more than 25% of the Baseline energy cost, then you do not need to do anything but list your gross assumptions in Table 1.4.6. You cannot lower the process to 25% if it is over.
If it is less than 25% explain the assumptions that went into determining the process loads in more detail than required in Table 1.4.6.
how do I deside what is a process load? Are pumps in my heating plant process loads. What if they include supply potable hot water pumps or sewage pumps as well as hvac equipment. Garage fans don't nessesarily condition a garage...are they process loads. Same could be said for many things...some are regulated (metered) some are not.
Process loads are the same as unregulated loads in most cases. Anything that 90.1 does not cover or establish a baseline for is typically a process load. See also the definition of process energy in 90.1 which indicates it is anything which does not relate to conditioning spaces or maintaining comfort and amenities for occupants. LEED has had to make certain judgments on what is considered process when the line is not clear.
So the supply hot water pumps in your heating plant are regulated and are not process. Sewage pumps are process even though the motor efficiency might be covered. Ventilation fans which operate intermittently (and not in conjunction with continuous required ventilation) are considered process if they are separate from conditioning equipment. Garage fans are considered process though even though them may operate continuously.
I will admit this is often a fuzzy grey area in some situations.
This table is automatically calculated some how. I am trying to understand the logic behind this table. The space heating is calculated as 7,466.031 (third column - end use energy saving %). Does is percentage saving makes sense? The corresponding value for baseline column is 3,197.932 and proposed design is 2,625.74. How are these values calculated? Does not seem right to me. Any feedback?
The forms have issues. Most are known by GBCIThe Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) manages Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building certification and professional accreditation processes. It was established in 2008 with support from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). and the reviewers.
Use the latest forms (v4) where possible.
Is refrigeration energy consumed in a supermarket building a process load? Refrigeration energy can be 30-50% of total energy. If the answer is yes, then can this be used to meet minimum 25% process energy requirement for LEED modeling (EAp2)? Thanks.
Refrigeration is a process load.
There is no 25% minimum process!!! Model what you have designed, including process loads, as accurately as possible within budget constraints. If over 25% do nothing. If under 25% provide an explanation and/or data to support that you have included all of the process loads.
Thanks Marcus! Can you please comment on my "Check Compliance" problem below. I have hit the wall now. Don't know what to do. Thanks.
When I press "Check compliance" button at the end of form EAP2, it always shows "N". The help tip says you should see the "Non-compliant" entry highlighted in red. I scrolled through every box (at least 5 times and also had another colleague re-check) and we can't find anything highlighted in red. Did anyone had similar problem lately? How did you resolve it? Thanks.
Check if you need to upload files under "Input & Output Summaries" (page 13 or 14).
I have three files loaded under that section (EAp2-11). Still have the same "N" message showing up under "Check compliance". Any other ideas? Thanks for the suggestion though.
Page 3, if the same gross sq. footage enter 0. All required Signatory, should be the person included in the Assigned Team Member. In Sec 1.5, Narrative (yellow box) type 'None' or 'No significant variation'. Enter "0" in schedules for unused items. Basically, all Box shaded yellow has to have an entry.
Still no luck. Are you saying - like Table EAP2-4 has some end use that does not apply to my project such as "Fans-Parking Garage" and I should not leave the field blank and put 0 in all the fields?
Is it possible that I had Adobe 10.1.2 and had to downgrade to 10.1.1 to make forms work and can cause this bug? Thanks for your help.
Yes, you should fill in all the yellow boxes.
Just entered "0" in every field that has yellow boxes and still no luck. What happens if the check compliance is "N" and we submit the form saying complete. Will that have any effect?
This button needs little improvement. It says if compliance is N, it will highlight the box with red highlight and it does not show anything red. Is there anyway to check the logic behind the "check compliance" button? Like is there a plain text script that says what rule was broken that makes it "N". I am almost stuck. Thanks for your help so farFloor-area ratio is the density of nonresidential land use, exclusive of parking, measured as the total nonresidential building floor area divided by the total buildable land area available for nonresidential structures. For example, on a site with 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of buildable land area, an FAR of 1.0 would be 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of building floor area. On the same site, an FAR of 1.5 would be 15,000 square feet (1395 square meters), an FAR of 2.0 would be 20,000 square feet (1860 square meters), and an FAR of 0.5 would be 5,000 square feet (465 square meters)..
The reviewers know the forms have problems. Just make sure the form is completely filled out and ignore the "N".
Thanks Marcus. Thats is what we are going to do.
I think I am having the same problem.....My Process Energy is at 27%, all the field have been filled and files uploaded..... still getting "N"for Compliance? I have read that reviewers know that there are some problems with the form but if I submitt the project for revision with a Non compliance in the pre-requisite, what would happen with EAc1 then?
Help & Thanks.
My engineer is having the same problem. He says that the forms are complete and has reviewed them multiple times. He honestly feels that there is a glitch with the form. Has anyone else submitted this credit with a N in the compliance and the credit has been granted??
The "N" on the form does not affect anything within LEED Online.
I was working over the weekend with a v04 version of EAp2's form. I just wanted to share that our form was showing N in the Check Compliance box but there were no orange boxes to indicate where the problem was. It turned out that the problem was in Table EAp2-5, where the Energy Type for the Design was selected incorrectly and the savings % was really off (-2383%). I also noted that Check Compliance showed N but again no orange boxes to indicate where the problem was when there were process loads that were not equal in Table EAp2-5 as compared to the values for the Baseline from Table EAp2-4.
I have completed LEED 2009 for Retail: New Construction and Major Renovations EA Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance form. Table EAp2-16 shows the result of 6 EA Credit 1 Points Documented. I have filled out all remaining aspects of this form correctly as well as farFloor-area ratio is the density of nonresidential land use, exclusive of parking, measured as the total nonresidential building floor area divided by the total buildable land area available for nonresidential structures. For example, on a site with 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of buildable land area, an FAR of 1.0 would be 10,000 square feet (930 square meters) of building floor area. On the same site, an FAR of 1.5 would be 15,000 square feet (1395 square meters), an FAR of 2.0 would be 20,000 square feet (1860 square meters), and an FAR of 0.5 would be 5,000 square feet (465 square meters). as I can tell. However,there is no "Check Compliance" box available on the form and an "N" remains in the "EA Prerequisite 2: Minimum Energy Performance Compliance Documented" box. I can't get a "Y". Is this because there is no "Check Compliance" button available? Why is there no "Check Compliance" button available?
I have the check compliance button but it always shows "N" and I have scrolled through every box carefully to see highlighted red box but can't find any. I am hitting a wall and don't know what to do. Did you resolve your problem? Thanks.
Yes I did. I found out that LEED changes the forms periodically and that the form needed to be updated. We requested an update of all of the forms in our scorecard from LEED. After the new updated forms were populated for this project, the Check Compliance button came up and it worked.
I did not see a place on the form for the LP to claim exemption from some submittals even though the leedonline "Table of contents with LPE" indicates this is one of those credits. I see that the A, ME and EE are required signatories, but see nothing about LPs. Am I just missing it? Thanks.
Which licensed professional would you like to sign off with?
'LPE' stands for 'Licensed Professional Exemption'. The professionals included in that general category are architects, Mechanical engineers, civil engineers, electrical, etc. If a form requires any of the licensed professionals to sign off, then it is listed in the 'Table of contents with LPE' on LEED Online. This requirement is not for a LEED AP to sign, but rather a design professional who has got his license to practice.
Hope this helps?
A large number of credits had the LPE originally but it was removed as an option for many of them. This one included.
My Process Energy is at 27%, all the field have been filled and files uploaded..... still getting "N"for Compliance? I have read that reviewers know that there are some problems with the form but if I submitt the project for revision with a Non compliance in the pre-requisite, what would happen with EAc1 then?
Help & Thanks.
Copyright 2017 – BuildingGreen, Inc.