Upgrade to LEED 2009? How to Choose for Your Project

LEED 2009 launched

USGBC launched the new LEED 2009 rating systems (NC, Schools, CS, EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems., CI) in April 2009 as part of its LEED version 3 initiative. Thousands of LEED-hopeful projects, however, were previously registered (or continued to register until the June 26, 2009 deadline) for the earlier version of the applicable rating system—mostly LEED for New Construction v2.2.

Although projects registered prior to the LEED 2009 rollout are under no obligation to switch to LEED 2009, USGBC has been encouraging them to do so. Among other things, USGBC allowed projects to transfer into the appropriate LEED 2009 rating system at no additional charge until December 31, 2009.

Should your project consider switching?

Switching to LEED 2009 offers:

• A system in which the technical basis and credit weighting have been evaluated in a more scientific manner, which has resulted in some LEED categories having more importance, and others less, than in previous versions.
• The potential of up to four bonus points for RPc1: Regional Priority.
• Use of the most up-to-date industry standards such as ASHRAE 90.1-2007.
• Use of improved templates (now called “credit forms”), the new LEED Online 3 system with better technical support, and a streamlined certification review process. 
• Expanded and improved Reference Guides.  
• Fewer credit interpretation rulings (CIRs) to keep track of, because many previous CIRs have been inserted directly into the new credit requirements. New CIRs will be managed differently, as “errata” to the rating system. 
• Many similarities with LEED v2.2. Even with all these improvements, the requirements for the majority of credits have not changed substantially, so you can take most of your existing LEED work on a project with you.

Why would a project want to stay with pre-2009 systems like LEED-NC v.2.2?

• Rely on your design team’s knowledge of the old, familiar system and the already-determined certification goals and expectations for each responsible party.
• Avoid the new Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs), which include a minimum building size of 1,000 square feet, and mandatory sharing of whole-building energy and water data.
• Although a project might not yet have begun the certification process under the older rating system, lots of preparatory work may have been completed, and consulting fees spent.
• Avoid having to reevaluate against newer standards for certain credits. EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance, in particular, needs to be reevaluated against the upgraded ASHRAE 90.1-2007 guidelines, which may involve a new round of energy modeling. In California, EAc1 can still be evaluated against Title-24-2005, but doing so creates version issues and may require additional modeling to prove compliance.
• More on this below, but you might be able to achieve a higher certification level (such as Gold versus Silver) by staying with a pre-2009 system. Usually, the system under which a project is certified is not as important to the owner and the public as the certification level. 

There are good arguments on either side of switching. Your decision will probably be tipped in one direction or the other by your project specifics. Now, on to the numbers.

Recalibration and credit weighting

All LEED 2009 rating systems use a basic 100-point scale embellished with 110 as the theoretical maximum score, with 10 additional points for innovation and for regional priorities.

Using LEED 2009, six geographically specific Regional Priority (RP) credits per rating system are identified (by zip code) and are worth one point each. A maximum of four RP points may be earned. 

Within the new LEED 2009 100-point system, the distribution of all points is based on the potential environmental impacts and human benefits of each credit. Impacts are defined as “the environmental or human effects of the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of a building,” such as:

• greenhouse gas emissions
• fossil fuel use 
• toxins and carcinogens 
• air and water pollutants
• indoor environmental conditions

The point distributions in LEED 2009 systems were established using a combination of approaches, including energy modeling, life-cycle assessment1. Life-cycle assessment is an analysis of the environmental aspects and potential impacts associated with a product, process, or service. 2. The practice of quantifying and characterizing all the resource and pollution flows associated with a process or product, for the purpose of documenting its environmental impact. It is defined by the International Organization of Standardization (ISO) as "a compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life-cycle.", and transportation analysis. USGBC now awards more points for strategies that encourage energy efficiency and carbon emission reductions. Consequently, LEED-NC 2009  Sustainable Sites (SS) and Energy and Atmosphere (EA) credits can now contribute much more toward certification than before, while total credits in the Materials and Resources (MR) and Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) categories are relatively less weighted.

LEED certification thresholds changed

With the change to the LEED point scale, the certification thresholds have also changed. (See table at right.)

For a “Certified” rating under LEED-NC v2.2, 26 points are needed, so each point represents 1/26 or 3.85% of certification. Under LEED 2009, 40 points are needed so each point is worth only 1/40 or 2.5%. The earning power of each individual point has been devalued in LEED 2009. In practical terms, this means that a credit that was worth one point in older rating systems, and that is still worth one point in LEED 2009, contributes less value towards certification than before.

Where will the additional 14 points needed for basic certification come from? A number of LEED 2009 credits now carry additional points, and become attractive potential targets for projects when applicable. If you’re considering switching to LEED 2009, start by assessing the likelihood of achieving these credits: 

• SSc2: Development Density and Community Connectivity +4 pts
A credit typically achieved in more developed or urban sites or on campuses.

• SSc4.1: Alternative Transportation: Public Transportation Access +5 pts
A credit typically achieved in more developed, urban sites or on campuses.

• WEp1: Water Use Reduction: 20% Reduction
This is a new prerequisite, 

• EAc1: Optimize Energy Performance +9 pts
Projects need to demonstrate improved energy performance in order to be certified under LEED 2009. Before any points are earned, you must earn LEED 2009 EAp2: Minimum Energy Performance, which calls for a 10% improvement over ASHRAE 90.1-2007. This standard is also more stringent than ASHRAE 90.1-2004, the baseline for LEED-NC 2.2. 

• EAc2: Renewable Energy +4 pts  
Even with incentives, a significant economic investment is typically involved to achieve some of these points, usually with solar photovoltaics (PV), although it has now become easier to achieve at least one point under EAc2 as the threshold for one point has gone from 2.5% to 1%.  

• RPc1: Regional Priority +4 pts
No additional work is necessary to earn regional priority credits. Up to four points are simply available if at least four specific credits specified for that zip code are achieved by the project. An analysis of several building types shows that many projects can expect 2–3 points here without much added effort.

System comparisons

It may be worth doing an analysis for your project, comparing LEED 2009 with older systems, side by side. An excellent free online calculator is available in the Resources section to help with this.

The consultants at the Sustainable Design Collaborative in New York did a comparison for a LEED-NC v.2.2 project that received a Gold rating with 41 Points. The project building was less than 30,000 ft², an educational center with lodgingLodging are facilities that provide overnight accommodations to customers or guests, including hotels, motels, inns and resorts., located on a rural site in the Northeast U.S. Under LEED 2009, the project was evaluated at 49 points. However, even with the increase in total points projected to earn, it would only reach Certified level—one point shy of a Silver rating. This is an example of a specific, non-urban project scoring very differently under the two systems. 

The initial comparisons conjure up several preliminary generalities for projects:

• Suburban and rural projects submitting to LEED 2009 will often not rate as high as with LEED-NC v.2.2 because they don’t qualify for the added points related to access to public transit. 
• Urban projects that achieve the key Sustainable Sites credits (SSc2: Development Density and Community Connectivity and SSc4.1: Alternative Transportation—Public Transportation Access) generally experience relative equality between LEED 2009 and LEED-NC v.2.2 ratings.
• The balance for LEED for Commercial Interiors (LEED-CI) projects, on the other hand, often skews more in favor of higher ratings under LEED 2009. The key points are for EAc1.3: Optimized Energy Performance—HVAC and  EAc2: Enhanced Commissioning.  Interior projects in urban areas often fare even better.
• Watch out for the new water efficiency prerequisite, WEp1, which requires a 20% water use reduction compared with the typical low-flow fixture base case. This is more of a challenge than it might first appear, because the baseline for lavatory faucets changed from 2.5 gallons per minute to 0.5. This change also makes it harder to earn points in WEc3: Water Use Reduction.

Finally, be thoughtful and careful when you consider upgrading from an earlier version to LEED 2009. The presence or lack of just a few well-rewarded credits can make all the difference between a Silver or Gold rating.