International Projects - alternative compliance path

Try SI for HVAC&R-ASHRAE-May 1999
Multiply-By-To Obtain
Btu·ft/h·ft2·°F-1.731-W/(m·K)

We used the same as Eric gives you.
Also to find :
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470661093.app1/pdf

look under Thermal conductivity

Good luck in unit conversions generally! ;)

Thank you very much!! This was really helpfull.

Stefanie, could you please post this question to our EAp2 forum? Thanks.

Hi Tristan,

I did post it to the EAp2 forum already and talked about it with a couple of people. But it wasn't helpful because no one had experience with international projects so I thought I'll try it again here.

Stefanie.
We recently completed certification for LEED EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. large banking & finance office building in Hong Kong, using Energy Star. This is possible because ES has the weather file data for Hong Kong. Our project include small data centers so is relatively energy intensive, yet with the right building data, including number of PCs, the ES score was reasonable.
My understanding is that ES compares with comparable CBECsThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits. buildings, defined by type and size, rather than across the whole range.
If no weather file for your project's location, try a similar US location. This will give you an indication of EUI and EAp2 compliance.

Hi John,
thank you for your reply!
There is weather data available for Helsinki but when I compare average monthly temperature data to our project location it sometimes differs up to 10 degrees (Celcius). Also average rainfall differs. Does that count already as "similar weather data"?
If not how would I find a U.S. location with more similar climate?

how much historical data are you looking at for your average? weather can vary drastically from year to year. CDDA measure of how hot a location was over a period of time, relative to a base temperature. In this report, the base temperature is 65 degrees Fahrenheit, and the period of time is one year. The cooling degree-day is the difference between that day's average temperature and 65 degrees if the daily average is greater than 65; it is zero if the daily average temperature is less than or equal to 65. Cooling degree-days for a year are the sum of the daily cooling degree-days for that year. and HDD can vary up to 40% from one year to the next. This is the point of TRY weather data. It is not actual weather data AMY. The available set of international TRY weather data from ASHRAE is usually good enough. if you need more info or explanation in this regard, contact the folks at whitebox technologies or weather analytics.

Hi Jean,
sorry for the late reply. I just checked the internet for weather data so this was probably not that reliable. In the meantime we also dropped the project since we don't meet EAp2 and the weather data was my last attempt to find a reason for our high energy consumption figures.
But thank you for your info anyways!

Thank you for your question. As the FAQ guidance suggests, entire documents do not need to be translated into English, only the portions that are relevant to ensuring that the project has met the requirements of a given credit or prerequisite. In your example for Enhanced Commissioning (EAc3), the entire systems manual would not need to be translated. Please see the LEED 2009 Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction (updated 2010) for the full list of credit requirements. Additionally, it is required that any information found in the Project Information Forms is also translated into English. Mark-ups of these documents and any contracts (as long as they are easily legible) are considered sufficient translation for the purposes of a review. It is noted that the reviewer may ask for additional translations to portions of these documents in the effort to confirm credit compliance.

Please let us know if you have any additional questions.

Best,
Sean

Thanks Sean.
When you said to refer to the full list of credit requirements, I assume that you are talking about the EAc3 credit.
Because I have only the first edition of LEED 2009 guide. Does the Reference guide updated in 2010 have additional information related with the documentation langage?

Hi Saliha,

I was referring to EAc3 when mentioning the full list of credit requirements. As for updates to the reference content, I recommend using the LEED Addenda and Interpretations database, available at https://www.usgbc.org/leedinterpretations/LILanding.aspx to search for any reference guide addenda for this and any other credit. Search the database for the appropriate credit (in this case, EAc3) and it will provide you with all updates that have been made via reference guide addenda.

Best,
Sean

From the USGBC website -
"Batya Metalitz, U.S. Green Building Council
The ACPs can be downloaded in the resources section and include both the July 6th releases and the new releases (Healthcare, Commercials Interiors, Retail - CI and Retail - NC), dated October 1. The language has also been incorporated into the credit library."
https://new.usgbc.org/resources?title=Global%20ACP

Hi Alexander,

Eric is correct. The global ACPs are available for CI projects (as well as the other rating systems mentioned). The global ACPs for these rating systems were developed to align with those already created for NC, CS, Schools and EB:O&M. No new ACPs were developed in this process. To view the available resources for all global ACPs, please visit the resources page of the USGBC website: https://new.usgbc.org/resources?title=Global%20ACP.

Thanks,
Sean

Jens,

Try here - http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2628
According to the webinar last week the "The Global ACPs have been fully integrated into LEED Online forms for added functionality." and "Offline calculators have been added and modified to include the Global ACPs. These are available in the Credit Resources page in LEED Online."

Thanks Eric. Maybe both the forms and offline calculators are available in newly registered projects or after a project form update by the GBCI.
If the ACPs are in the forms, shouldn't there be new sample forms (v05?).

Jens,

Good question, I browsed around LEED Online and if you download the excel file named "LEED Online v3 Form Fix Log" and filter to 2012 you can see that there are indeed version 5 forms listed there. It would be nice if they updated the release notes in the Help section.... If you read the help section for LOv3 Form updates you will also find that you need to request new forms if you want them. "The latest version of the form is automatically provided to all projects registered after the release date and any other projects that have not yet saved data on the specific form. Projects with an older version of the form may request the latest version (see instructions below)."

As the end results are in %, it really doesn't matter...to be consistant I would stick to dollars.

It's worth a try submitting in EUR. If the review team objects then you can always do the conversion for the final submission. I just submitted the cost analysis for an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project (IOc3) in EUR - let's see how that is met. Be sure to note that you have submitted in EUR rather than USD.

We have submitted a few projects. You will be asked by the reviewer to submit in dollar. However there is no requirements for a certain conversion rate. So we applied 1 EUR = 1 Dollar, which is reasonable if you compare the buying power of EUR to dollar (That's actual a more realistic value anyway). Also as Jean was pointing out the percentage stays the same either way. However you are required to provide it in dollar. Some reviewer may not have an issue with you using EURO, but we did have review comments asking us to provide dollar values.

Hi Angela,

Thank you for your question. When completing the documentation for all credits, please be sure to follow the directions given in the "ACP Guidance for Projects Outside the U.S." document located on the USGBC website at https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=10341.

Generally, you will need to fill out at least part of the original form in order to properly document compliance with the credit.

I hope this helps.

-Sean

Hi Sean!

Thanks for your answer. I've read this document and I saw that some credits require filling the original form and others don't, that's why I've had this question.

But your answer just confirm what we actually thought!

Thanks again!

Hi Tobias
I agree with you that it is a bit fuzzy in this text: http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8870 But case 2 is definately a case you can use. It's whats in the full version of the Reference Guide. I use it in Sweden!
However it is not an ACP. There is no ACP for SSc5.1 that I can see. You can see at the top of this page which credits have ACP's. Good luck!

Hi Tobias,

Maria is correct. The box does refer to the text below, and that case is absolutely available to projects outside the U.S. Good luck with your project!

You will probably be one of the first to try this. Have you looked at the LEED Online forms for ACPs in regards to what's required?
I know that the USGBC is working really hard to give you all more guidance in that regards. I have done a lot of projects in Europe and dealt with the US vs Europe differences and am helping the USBGC to figure out a good way of comparing the standards.
If I were you I would document CEN compliance in regards to the same criteria, which ASHRAE is looking at such as outside air supply per room. Use the CEN room types. But pay also close attention to the other requirements in 62.1. such as toilet exhausts and controls.

Good luck with your project.

Susann, How would you do regarding IEQc2? We want to do that one according to ASHRAE.
And where can I find the LEED Online forms for ACPs? I have never seen one of those and have no idea where to find them. If there was one for IEQp1 it would really help. Currently we are making our own tables. Thanks!

Maria,
The ACP forms can be found at the USGBC web site under each rating system information page.

For example see: Resources-International-ACP Documentation Guidance for Projects outside the U.S. (PDF) -- Step-by-step guidance on documenting compliance with the Alternative Compliance Paths (ACPs) for each credit.

http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220

If you review the Submittal Guidance for using Alternative Compliance Paths for projects Outside the U.S. it will tell you how to document compliance with the CEN standards.

Eric, thank you for showing me where the forms are. Unfortunately there are no forms for IEQp1 and c2, which we need. The step-by-step guidance I had already. The problem with the guidance is that it is unclear how to show compliance. It says "upload, as needed, alternative tables or calculations". We have now made our own calculator. However ASHRAE and CEN have a very different way of showing things so it's a bit fuzzy what they want. We will just have to submit and get feedback.
Does anyone know if there will be "real" LEED Online forms for all ACPs? Like a button or check box in the current form if you want the ACP for international projects?

Hi Maria,

We are currently working on integrating the ACP language into our existing LEED Online forms. We will be sure to update you here on LEED User when those forms are available. Thanks for your question!

Maria, If you are planing on using ASHRAE for IEQ c2 than you might as well use ASHRAE for IEQ P1 also, because you will determine minimum compliance for ASHRAE 62.1-2007 for IEQ P1 and than show how much you are exceeding it.
Some critical items are toilets / restrooms, waste rooms and operating rooms, which require lower outside air rates/exhaust rates in CEN vs ASHRAE, so pay attention to that.
If you are using a lower air quality class in the building for CEN compliance than you certainly have to look at more space types and increase their air supply.
Good luck with your project.

Sean, thank you. Looking forward to that!
Susann, we have 100 % outdoor air throughout the building. No problem complying with CEN standard as it is has the status of a Swedish standard. The problem with using ASHRAE for IEQp1, for several of my projects, is that they have garages. And by checking the box that we comply with ASHRAE sections 4 through 7 we would say that we have exhaust rates of 3,7 l/s and m2 in the garage. No Swedish project that I know of would have exhaust rates that high. The rest of ASHRAE is not that hard for our projects to comply with. So we want to use CEN for that reason.
Also see my thread on: http://www.leeduser.com/credit/NC-2009/IEQp1 from sep 27, 2011.

We had that issue also in some projects. First thing you want to look at is, if your garage is open to the surroundings, because it is a bit different if that the case. We have had projects with no exhaust but jet vans to move the air through the garage to the outside.
Another way is to include the volume of the smoke exhaust system in the garage in the equation, which you can do if it's triggered by CO2Carbon dioxide (not just CO) sensors. That basically a two stage demand controlled ventilation.
It's really a common problem and mostly results from the big differences in car emissions in the US vs. Europe. In Europe there is no need for that much exhaust, because the emissions aren't that high. In the US you really need that kind of exhaust rate. I hope that helps.

Hi Susann,

Did I got this right: If my underground parking has demand controlled ventilation with maximum exhaust rate over 3.7 l/s,m2 it would fulfill the requirements of ASHRAY, even though the average exhaust rate would be much lower?

Yes. If your system can handle 0.75 cfm per sf even if the CO2Carbon dioxide sensors make it run at much lower levels all the time, it is OK for ASHRAE. Just make sure to set CO2 levels triggering the sensor appropriately.

Hello Sean,

I am currently working with LEED certification in France for an office building.

It is mentioned in the ACP guidance for IEQ P1 :
“For “Upload IEQp1-1”, upload the ventilation rate calculations for all applicable spaces including the design
outdoor ventilation rate based on the requirements of Annex B of Comité Européen de Normalisation (CEN)
Standard EN 15251 ».

As Maria said before, CEN standard has 8 areas where ASHRAE 62.10 has more than sixty ; therefore is it compliant to provide an homemade tool with same parameters as the VRP calculator (based on this 8 areas) ?

Morever, do we need to comply with the entire ASHRAE 62.10 or just with the ventilation rate ?
(as mentioned in the ACP guidance for IEQ P1 : “Under “Mechanical Ventilation”, check the box with the declaration of “Mechanical ventilation systems are designed
using local code, which is more stringent than the ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 Ventilation Rate Procedure”.” ; this sentence is quite disturbing…)

Thanks for your answer,

Review Response to ACP for IEQp1

I have received response for my project now. The home made tool was accepted! The only comment we got, that resulted in “pending”, is that they wanted the Ventilation Systems Designer sign the ASHRAE-box although we are not using ASHARE. I have no idea why. So we are going to sign, but write in special circumstances that our signature means that we comply with CEN and not ASHRAE as far as we are concerned. (Of course we comply with the whole of ASHRAE too, except for exhaust rates in the garage, which we refuse to alter).

Just wanted to let you all know.

The known get-around for exhaust rates in the parking garage has been to install a CO2Carbon dioxide Demand Ventilation System. Usually those axial "jet" fans are part of the smoke exhaust scheme.

Thanks for this prompt answer Maria,

So you use ASHRAE for both IEQ P1 and IEQ C2 or only CEN standard ? i didn't quite understand your last sentence : "Of course we comply with the whole of ASHRAE too, except for exhaust rates in the garage, which we refuse to alter"

Thanks

Loïc, in this case we used CEN on both. The problem with garages is that ASHRAE uses four times higher exhaust rates than we do here. We have lower emissions, and in a cold country we can’t over-ventilate. This is the only reason we use CEN instead of ASHRAE. Since we have 100 % outside air in our offices it is no problem complying with ASHRAE in all other senses.

Jean, in another of my projects we said that we comply with everything in ASHRAE, except for in the garage, where we instead install CO-monitors, (which we always have). This was also ok according to reviewers.

So we are just testing options for the same problem that I have in all my inner city projects and that has caused us a lot of concern

Maria,
While the vehicle emissions might be lower in Europe every time I leave a parking garage here I always seem to take with me a cough, teary eyes, and "eau de exhaust" on my clothes. Maybe it's just my allergies?

Maria,
If you go to the USGBC site. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2346 it looks like CI is not included yet.
See below
Learn more about ACPs for specific rating systems:
New Construction
Schools
Existing Buildings: Operation & Maintenance
Core & Shell

Eric is right, but if the credit is very similar to the NC/CS credit and the standard approach doesn't work then I would encourage you to at least try it.

There doesn't seem to be too much international customization in the LEED 2012 documentation yet, but I saw a few things (particularly related to VOC testing) that could prove useful. Again, not guaranteed, but if you are following their rules and fulfilling the credit intent then you should have a strong case.

Thanks a lot!
I knew that CI was not included, but just in case someone had heard anything about ACPs for CI.
Thanks again!
María

Hi Susann,

Thanks for your comment. As Deon mentioned below, we are currently seeking feedback on the LEED 2009 ACPs for Projects Outside the U.S. via a quick feedback form on our website. It would be wonderful if you could also make your comments in the forms!

You can view the feedback forms on the LEED NC, CS, Schools & EB:O&M rating system pages through this link: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=222 or through the LEED International Program page here: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2346.

Using the feedback forms allows us to more easily track user comments and suggestions, enabling us to integrate your feedback more efficiently. Thanks again!

Hello Eirini,

You are correct. All non-US projects registered under the LEED 2009 rating systems with ACPs for projects outside the US may use either the original credit requirements or the ACPs. Because ACPs are alternative compliance paths they are merely additional options for projects and not required for use. If the original credit language is more applicable a project may use that path.

Many thanks for your prompt reply Deon.

This approach will help us a lot for a project we have in Europe and struggling a bit with the floorscore....

Deon,
Welcome to the international market. It's great to hear there will be a feedback form for us to provide input on the ACP's. For the most part the items I have reviewed are a good step forward.

Thanks a lot for sharing the information.

Many users will love to here that they are being heard. I know Jean and I have had many headaches applying an US rating system to projects in another country.
I personally will be more than happy to share experiences, suggestions and improvement idea from past and future projects.
Please also feel free to ask us questions. Many user here are dealing with the LEED documentation of international project every day and know what will or will not help them.

Happy Friday everyone! As promised, we finally have feedback forms for the LEED 2009 ACPs for Projects Outside the U.S. available for you on the USGBC website. LEED is built on the input and feedback we receive from the green building community, and this dialogue allows LEED to remain flexible and responsive.

You can view the feedback forms on the LEED NC, CS, Schools & EB:O&M rating system pages through this link: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=222 or through the LEED International Program page here: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=2346. We hope to hear from you soon!

Alternative compliance paths are included for the following credits/prerequisites:
SS c4, SSc6,
WEc3, WEc4.1-4.2,
EAp2, EAc1, EAc6,
MRc1, MRc2.1, MRc2.2, MRc3, MRc4, MRc5,
IEQp1, IEQp2, IEQc1.2, IEQc1.3, IEQc1.4, IEQc1.5, IEQc2.3

Not yet, but they did say they are working on it and it is about time. These issues have been very time consuming and cost prohibitive for no good reason. It would be nice if the USGBC starts rethinking it's requirement for cooling in a building. If I even have an IT closet in the building or a big conference room with cooling I have to consider the whole building to be cooled even though it is not and never will be. There are a lot of things under EA P2, which I think need to be critical revisit with an international view of building practice.

i haven't seen this per se - where is this documented? would be very keen to see this, since this would potentially affect us as well (haven’t run the numbers yet).

my understanding so far has rather been that international projects are now ALLOWED to use Option 2 to demonstrate compliance, which may make it a whole lot easier for some projects, while maybe not for others? international projects have never been able to use the ES PM other than for benchmarking, providing a score rather than a certificate.

Jutta,
The documentation is constantly changing and conflicting, but the original ACP EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. documentation released around October 9th states the following:
CASE 1. Projects Eligible for Energy Star Rating-This CASE is not available to Projects outside the U.S.
CASE 2. Projects Not Eligible for Energy Star Rating OPTION 1-This CASE is not available to Projects outside the U.S.
CASE 2. Projects Not Eligible for Energy Star Rating OPTION 2-Note for Projects Outside the U.S. - Projects outside the U.S. can use Option 2 but are limited to Option 2B or 2C, as outlined in the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Operations & Maintenance, 2009 Edition.
The original LEED EBOM manual states this:
"For building types covered by ENERGY STAR but located outside the United States, use Case 1 to obtain an ENERGY STAR rating. The Portfolio Manager tool provides a list of locations outside the United States, but it is not complete. If the location for an international project is not listed, consult ASHRAE 90.1-2007 Appendices B and D to determine a comparable US city."
The issue is that there is no national energy data available outside the US, like CBECSThe Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) is a national sample survey that collects information on the stock of U.S. commercial buildings, their energy-related building characteristics, and their energy consumption and expenditures. Commercial buildings include all buildings in which at least half of the floorspace is used for a purpose that is not residential, industrial, or agricultural, so they include building types that might not traditionally be considered "commercial," such as schools, correctional institutions, and buildings used for religious worship. CBECS data is used in LEED energy credits.. See the excerpt from an EU energy research committee.
"Breakdown of Energy Consumption
Information on the average breakdown of total energy consumption for different end-uses in nonresidential buildings is not available for most countries or is limited for the other countries. In cases when information is available, most of the data refer to the last decade.
Breakdown of Energy Consumption in Different End-Use Buildings
Information on the average breakdown of total energy consumption for different end-uses in nonresidential buildings is not available for most countries or is limited for the other countries."

The problem with Options 2B and 2C is the following:
"Enter at least 3 consecutive years of historical energy use data into Portfolio Manager, in addition to the current year's data."
ACP Problems:
OPTION 1. Benchmark Against Comparable Typical Building CASE 1. National Energy Data Available - No Data available
OPTION 1. Benchmark Against Comparable Typical Building CASE 2. National Energy Data Not Available - Finding three typical, comparable buildings with permission to use their energy bills. Requires 12 months of data.
OPTION 2. Demonstrated Energy Efficiency Improvement-The building must have at least four consecutive years of site energy data.
The certification process for some buildings just jumped from 12 months to 48 months or longer for buildings that are a few years old but didn't LEED certify previously....

thanks for the posting and this doesn't sound very encouraging at all!

i hadn't seen these and hadn't actually delved into these, since from all i heard at toronto and from all i read in the documentation guidance and on the usgbc website is that following the ACP remains optional: we may either use the ACP or the original credit requirement. maybe a formal clarification from international@usgbc.org would help sort this out?

Jutta,
I plan on submitting a rather lengthy document to the USGBC once I review all of the conflicting documentation detailing my view on the impacts.
The current ACP document is totally different from the previous form. It would be nice if they would put version numbers on documents rather than October 2011.

Good news. Looks like it was just a mix up.
"Thanks for your question about EAp2 and EAc1 for EB projects outside of the U.S. The language stating that Case 1 was not available to projects outside of the U.S. was erroneously included in the Rating System with ACPs. The case IS available to projects outside of the U.S. and the box stating otherwise has been removed from the Rating System."

Thanks for posting that response, Eric. Also, thank you for noticing that the language is still included for EAc1. We will work to remove that language as soon as possible and update the rating system to reflect this.

Sean,
Thanks for the quick response.

Just to say, I've completed the process now with Energy Star for an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. project in Vietnam. A few small bumps but I received my rating and the energy intensityThe ratio of consumption to unit of measurement (floorspace, number of workers, etc.) Energy intensity is usually given on an aggregate basis, as the ratio of the total consumption for a set of buildings to the total floorspace in those buildings. Conditional energy intensity and gross energy intensity are presented. The energy intensity can also be computed for individual buildings. score as required. I did get confused due to some aspects of the Energy Star site. They said that my project could apply for the Energy Star Rating, but following that link, I quickly found that it is really only possible with US projects, or US Government-owned projects. It must be signed off by a US-registered architect or engineer. LEED on-line reponses clarified: What you need for LEED is only to generate the energy intensity and the comparison with other projects and that is done automatically and can be documented in a PDF format called an SEP, which is provided via another link on the Energy Star summary page for your project. This SHOULD also show the carbon emissions, but like others I found that it didn't show up on the SEP so I used a screen shot of the relevant part of the summary page to record the CO2Carbon dioxide data. By sharing data with the GBCI I assume the rest is straightforward. The only other quirk I noted was that for some reason choosing my final data month didn't work (February), I had to choose January as my end month. I still don't know why, but this allowed me to generate the report as required. I have no idea if that last quirk was temporary/to do with my data/or otherwise, but its effect was minor. Hope that helps.

Hi Reinhard,

It appears as though you are referring to the ACP Documentation Guidance Document. To be clear, this document is designed to assist project teams using ACPs to prove credit compliance in LEED Online. To view the ACPs themselves, please visit our website at www.usgbc.org/leed.

I hope this clears things up a bit!

Jean,

This is the opposite situation here in the US, the MR credits are fairly easy. How are these credits major headaches? Is it a lack of alignment with the CSI formats?

It starts with CSI categories being different from European categories, it goes on with contractors being unfamiliar with the process and definition of for instance post vs pre consumer recycled content and translation into English. For the regional materials, it's more so the level of detail for documentations, which makes projects shy away from it. Most projects have no problem using materials within 500 miles. The majority does that anyway.
Looking at LEED 2012 this isn't getting any easier.

However the costs are categorized for a building they still all have the same material elements. Carpet is carpet in Germany, the UK, or the US. Revising the material cost budget may be an additional step that seems unnecessary, but it doesn't seem as difficult as completing an energy model or convincing the project to go greener?

I agree, translating ASHRAE standards to other standards does seem more difficult. But the MR discussion reminds me of the early days of LEED (2001 - 2002) and calling every manufacturer, explaining LEED and asking questions. I know I wasn't the only one. But now we have manufacturers who understand the program and address it up front.

Here is a link to the MasterFormat sections names by Division. It is a long document and it is only in English but maybe it starts to help with the MR problem.
http://www.csinet.org/Home-Page-Category/Formats/MasterFormat/About-MF/n...

I disagree. Usually costing is done by a Qualified Quantity Surveyor. I'm not one of them, and the architectural firm doesn't have one that is familiar with the costing splits. Yes, a carpet remains a carpet, but into which category it falls is a problem. We in Europe simply have big problems with this. Architects working for the client often want as little to do with LEED as possible and are often downright unwilling to cooperate. If I, the LEED AP can't do it, it doesn't get done. That is the real life situation.

Jean,

I know a European QS firm who would be happy to provide you the costing service. :)

Could you post me a web-link please? I'll follow it up. Thanks.

Jean,

You can contact me through LEEDuser if you want and I'll get back to you.

Jean,
It seems like the USGBC has just provided a tool to help with the conversion process.
"Complete all your metric (SI) to imperial (IP) unit conversions for LEED documentation, with one consolidated tool." - http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220

Hi Jean,
I believe you stand correct: GBCI now accepts metric measures not only for the ACP but also for the drawings. I have inquired about this in an official e-mail.

Maria,
I will jump for joy when metric units are accepted! I do see that some of the ACP forms (7 out of 49 credits) will accept both units; however I don't see an explicit statement allowing this in the website documentation and the November 1, 2011 LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction Addenda, for example, still reference the following language "Units of Measurement Guidance
In order to facilitate certification review by U.S. based reviewers, it is necessary to submit pertinent aspects of review-related documentation in English and convert units to U.S. Standard (i.e. Imperial) units of measure, unless noted otherwise in the credit or prerequisite description. It is not necessary to translate every aspect of every construction document into English and imperial units, but only those necessary for evaluation of criteria. The project team should be prepared to provide additional translation(s) if requested by the reviewer in their preliminary review comments." from 11/3/2010. Perhaps it's just a case of not coordinating the official documents? Please share any official response you receive.
By the way did you see the requirements for EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. energy benchmarking? It might be a really big problem for European projects....

Additional information
I was re-reading the LEED 2009 for Existing Buildings Operations and Maintenance  With Alternative Compliance Paths For Projects Outside the U.S. and on page iii is the following:
"Please note that LEED Online is written in English and that all metrics used within LEED online are Imperial (IP) units. All projects are required to submit documentation in English, using Imperial units., Project teams that typically work in Metric (SI) units should use the ACP Conversion Tool to convert measurements to Imperial units."
Dear USGBC / GBCI please clarify the metric-imperial issue?

Hi Eric, here is the response I got on the question regarding drawings and metric system:
"To answer your question, projects can now submit their documentation in Metric units. We understand that most projects outside of the U.S. use Metric, so we want to be as accommodating as possible to these project teams. Please note that we have not been able to convert all of our LEED Online forms to Metric, therefore, we have created a conversion tool that should help teams using Metric convert any measurements to Imperial units for use in the forms."
I believe we can submit the drawings with metric, but still convert the forms and calculations to imperial.

One of my colleagues recently asked USGBC International the following question:

Considering the fact that the update introduces metric conversions for all current LEED measurements, is it already acceptable by reviewers to provide project documentation and drawings in metric system? Or it is still a subject to discussion with the respective reviewing team.

The response was as follows:

To answer your question, projects can now submit their documentation in Metric units. We understand that most projects outside of the U.S. use Metric, so we want to be as accommodating as possible to these project teams. Please note that we have not been able to convert all of our LEED Online forms to Metric, therefore, we have created a conversion tool that should help teams using Metric convert any measurements to Imperial units for use in the forms.

We interpret this to mean that the LEED On-line forms still need to be filled out with imperial measures but that metric drawings are now accepted.

Maria and Michael,
I sent an e-mail to Deon and Sean and hopefully they will clarify the issue for us. I asked them to post the answer back here.

Eric, it was exactly Sean who replied to our inquiry. Will be interesting to hear their comment on the rest of the documentation and submittals. Thanks!

Hi everyone,

Maria is correct, projects are now allowed to submit supporting documentation in Metric units (plans, specifications, etc.). As mentioned previously, we have not been able to convert all of our LEED Online forms to Metric, therefore, we have created a conversion tool that should help teams using Metric convert any measurements to Imperial units for use in the forms.

We will be sure to clear up any confusing language in the rating systems.

Thanks!

Thanks for the clarification. It's a great step forward to be able to submit the supporting documents in metric units!

At one stage we had to regenerate the reports - one in metric, and one in imperial. We then submitted the two Trane Trace reports.

If the LEED system did the conversion in the background back to imperial for the US-based invigilators, then no one would be disadvantaged.

Hello,

We are currently developing an office building near Paris, and our client is considering LEED as an important option for its project.

I have two questions concerning the gross floor areaGross floor area (based on ASHRAE definition) is the sum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building, including basements, mezzanine and intermediate‐floored tiers, and penthouses wi th headroom height of 7.5 ft (2.2 meters) or greater. Measurements m ust be taken from the exterior 39 faces of exterior walls OR from the centerline of walls separating buildings, OR (for LEED CI certifying spaces) from the centerline of walls separating spaces. Excludes non‐en closed (or non‐enclosable) roofed‐over areas such as exterior covered walkways, porches, terraces or steps, roof overhangs, and similar features. Excludes air shafts, pipe trenches, and chimneys. Excludes floor area dedicated to the parking and circulation of motor vehicles. ( Note that while excluded features may not be part of the gross floor area, and therefore technically not a part of the LEED project building, they may still be required to be a part of the overall LEED project and subject to MPRs, prerequisites, and credits.) definition.

1/ Should I consider the US gross floor area definition since we are using a similar definition in France
(with one difference : a headroom height of 1.8 meters or greater)?

2/ If I have to use the US gross floor definition, should I consider a headroom height of 2.2m (LEED) or 2.3m (ASHRAE) ?

In the LEED document : “Rating System Selection Guidance, version 4, last update 1 September 2011”, the gross floor area is defined as :

"Gross Floor Area: (based on ASHRAE definition) Sum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building, including basements, mezzanine and intermediate-floored tiers, and penthouses with headroom height of 7.5 ft (2.2 meters) or greater. Measurements must be taken from the exterior faces of exterior walls OR from the centerline of walls separating buildings, OR (for LEED-CI certifying spaces) from the centerline of walls separating spaces. Excludes non-enclosed (or non-enclosable) roofed-over areas such as exterior covered walkways, porches, terraces or steps, roof overhangs, and similar features. Excludes air shafts, pipe trenches, and chimneys. Excludes floor area dedicated to the parking and circulation of motor vehicles. Note: while excluded features may not be part of the gross floor area, and therefore technically not part of the LEED project building, they may still be required to be part of the overall LEED project and subject to MPRs, prerequisites, and credits."

While it is defined in the ASHRAE 90.2007 as : ANSI / ASHRAE STANDARD 90.1-2007 :

"the sum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building, including basements, mezzanine and intermediate-floored tiers, and penthouses with headroom height of 2.3 meters or greater.
It is measured from the exterior faces of exterior walls or from the centerline of walls separating buildings, but excluding covered walkways, open roofed-over areas, porches and similar spaces, pipe trenches, exterior terraces or steps, chimney, roof overhangs, and similar features."

Thanks for your help !

Hi Loic,

When determining the gross floor areaGross floor area (based on ASHRAE definition) is the sum of the floor areas of the spaces within the building, including basements, mezzanine and intermediate‐floored tiers, and penthouses wi th headroom height of 7.5 ft (2.2 meters) or greater. Measurements m ust be taken from the exterior 39 faces of exterior walls OR from the centerline of walls separating buildings, OR (for LEED CI certifying spaces) from the centerline of walls separating spaces. Excludes non‐en closed (or non‐enclosable) roofed‐over areas such as exterior covered walkways, porches, terraces or steps, roof overhangs, and similar features. Excludes air shafts, pipe trenches, and chimneys. Excludes floor area dedicated to the parking and circulation of motor vehicles. ( Note that while excluded features may not be part of the gross floor area, and therefore technically not a part of the LEED project building, they may still be required to be a part of the overall LEED project and subject to MPRs, prerequisites, and credits.) for your project, please use the ASHRAE height of 2.3 meters or greater for headroom.

Please contact GBCI technical customer service at http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact/Contact-Us/Project-Certification-Que... if you have any further questions about which space types should be included in the gross floor area for your project.

Hello Sean,

Thanks for your answer, actually i have sent this question to GBCI and waiting the answer.

Agreed. A lot of projects have way more outside air than required by ASHRAE 62.1, a lot of dedicated outside air systems and 100% OA but the toilet exhaust is less.

I appreciate the new possibilities given by the ACP for projects outside the U.S. Is it possible to use the EN 15251 and EN 13779 for the IEQ category and ASHRAE for EAp2 and c1? Then two regulations will be applied to one project. What is your opinion?

Hello Bernadette, thank you for your question and your thoughts on the ACPs. The LEED 2009 ACPs may be used individually by project teams as they are needed. This means that projects may use the ACP for IEQp1 but not for EAp2 if teams wish. Therefore, the CEN Standard EN 15251 & EN 13779 may be used for the related credits in IEQ and ASHRAE 90.1-2007 may be used for the related credits in EA.

Dear Deon,
Is it possible to opt for ACP after preliminary design review feedback has been received. The ACP for int. project were issued after we have submitted for design review.
Any feedback is welcome. Thanks in advance!

Hello Maria, and thank you for your question. Project teams are able to apply the LEED 2009 ACPs to their project even after their design review is complete. However, each credit will still only be given two rounds of review (preliminary and final) before an appeal is required. This means if a credit was reviewed without using the ACP during the preliminary design review phase and the ACP strategy was applied during the final design review phase the ACP strategy will only be reviewed once before an appeal is required.

We hope this resolves your issue. In the future please feel free to submit your questions on the certification and review process by going directly to http://www.gbci.org/contactus. This will allow you to submit your project information so GBCI can review your project when answering your inquiry and giving you a more detailed answer.

Dear Deon, dear all,

when following ACP EN 13779:2007 in CS.IEQp1 and CS.IEQc2 we do experience a very uncertain conditions given by this method in terms of IAQIndoor air quality: The quality and attributes of indoor air affecting the health and comfort building occupants. IAQ encompasses available fresh air, contaminant levels, acoustics and noise levels, lighting quality, and other factors. – fresh air supply. Acc. to EN 13779:2007 it is possible to set classes from low to high IAQ (IDA 4 – IDA 1). This is then significantly implying the amount of fresh air needed.

Is this really flexible for us/investor to freely set the targeted class of IAQ or is it somehow more specified? I did not find any further specification what class should be taken.

What is the implication on the credit IEQc2 of the classes IDA 1-4 + 30%? Also very flexible then plus the credit makes no sense then if it is free to set IDA class of IAQ.

Please could somebody clarify this?

Thanks,
Petr

Petr, I would recommend posting your question to our IEQc2 forum. Thanks.