Showing posts with label certification process. Show all posts
Showing posts with label certification process. Show all posts

LEED Automation Allows Third Party Companies to Integrate Directly With LEED Online

Though largely overshadowed in press by the hubbub around the Center for Green Schools launch, in my opinion the biggest news for practicing LEED APs is the relatively obscure technical development of a platform for third party companies to integrate directly with LEED-Online. The USGBC is calling it LEED Automation (official press release here), and it will hopefully result in an exponential increase in innovation in the way LEED projects are documented. After "$10 million in total investment in LEED-Online" (Chris Smith, COO of USGBC's words), many users still find it a frustrating tool (my words). "From the very start, LEED-Online was never intended to be a USGBC tool... It was intended to be a plug-and-play platform for others to build on." (Chris Smith again).

Now think about how the open iPhone and Android app markets make their phones far more useful than Apple or Google could do on their own. That is the goal of LEED Automation in a nutshell. Mike Opitz indicated that they ultimately wish to open a "USGBC App store"... In his words "The world of LEED execution just got faster, cheaper, and easier."

Where Does It Stand Today?

I'm going to profile a few projects that were used as case studies of what can be done with the data and integration capabilities that are now available.

Lorax Pro - This is a 'virtual LEED consultant' that has already been around for awhile, and one I've been meaning to profile for some time (sorry... still doing this in my spare time!). In a nutshell it's a tool to organize, schedule, and assign work to the various parties in more detail than offered by LEED-Online (e.g. your project is mapped on Google and can automatically calculate things like access to transit and community connectivity at the click of a button). Again, this has already been around for awhile, but the news here is that now their online software can translate your work DIRECTLY into LEED-Online without having to force you to pull everything down manually and re-enter data. Taken to the extreme, you could potentially mean that you'd never have to work directly in LEED-Online again!

O+M Track - Green Building Services is a consulting company has developed a tool that will be extremely helpful for those pursuing LEED-EB O+M. Basically this is a management tool for your performance periods, where a facilities manager is provided with scheduled tasks to ensure they are keeping all of their ongoing performance measurements for the life of the building, greatly facilitating recertification efforts that are needed to be performed every five years. Again, the news here is that work entered into their system can be directly loaded into your LEED-Online project, helping to reduce the overhead and costs associated with compliance.

Building Dashboard - This is a web-based software developed by Lucid Design Group that allows real-time updates of a building's performance along various metrics, largely centered around utilities. Other vendors offer similar services, and it was unclear from their presentation how this will affect those working on LEED projects today. On the other hand, if they work out directly updating these results into a LEED-EB certification/recertification similar to the GBS tool, it could mean huge reductions in overhead for those pursuing such projects.

WorkFlow Pro - is a service from GreenWizard.com that harnesses the wealth of material data embedded in their system and allows the population of those onerous MR credit templates if you build a project in their system, making the lives of specifiers and contractors that much easier.

Green Building Information Gateway - This is a pilot project led by Dr. Chris Pyke, VP of Research for USGBC in conjunction with ESRI. It is a comprehensive map of LEED projects in Chicago, but it contains a wealth of additional layers that is pulled directly from a stream of data that the USGBC is now making public. The information from any specific project is compared live against the performance of every building in the set. Basically this is a benchmarking tool designed to allow designers to show their clients how their design might stack up against others in the area. There's even a trend tool that allows you to view this data over time. It's based on a post-certification data stream, so it's applicability to those working on current projects likely won't be huge, but it could be very helpful for banks and others trying to make a business case or valuation assumptions measuring the impact of LEED certification or even individual LEED credits.

What's On the Horizon?

It's hard for me to explain how huge the potential of this. I see Trane Trace and other energy modeling software allowing direct uploads of model results into LEED without the very significant data entry headache that exists now. Revit could directly upload daylighting calculations without the architect ever having to open up a credit calculator.

Mike Opitz indicated that there's still kinks that need to be worked out, specifically citing energy modelling. At the core, there is the issue of standardizing data exchange protocols to ensure that everything is accurate, and not just easy. As energy modeling is so critical to the performance of a building, they cannot sacrifice

So What's the Catch

Well... all this innovation does not come free. In the same way that there are paid apps on the iPhone and Android marketplaces, some of the case studies above have subscription fees or other charges that will be in addition to what you're paying the GBCI for certification fees. Don't want to pay extra? You're welcome to stay with the current LEED Online, but I suspect that many firms will find that the productivity gains of these tools will far exceed the costs.

As this market get's more sophisticated, I suspect we'll see a profusion of micro-tools that may be ad supported and offered for free, but time will tell whether the development process is easy enough for such small scale tools to be worth their development costs.

I'm sorry to the other companies that demo'd their automation innovations that I did not include here... I can only type so fast! If you have a new product that harnesses this technology please don't hesitate to let me know, as this blog is all about providing readers with tools that will make their live's easier.

*FULL DISCLOSURE - GreenWizard.com is a sponsor of this site.

GBCI Extends Utility Reporting Requirement to 20 Years?

UPDATE (11.05.10) I just received a comment from Bruce DeMaine, Vice President of Certification for GBCI. He confirmed, as others noted in the comments below, "that the 20-year figure is a typo. The utility reporting time period was decreased to 5 years shortly after the introduction of the LEED 2009 Minimum Program Requirements. We are working with our information technology staff to correct this error as soon as possible." He also addressed other concerns I've raised below, and I've added his response to the end of the post in it's entirety. I'd like to personally thank him for reaching out to clear up this issue! I've left the remainder of the post as it was originally published:

Alert reader Eric Johnson of Gardiner & Theobald just pointed out that the latest edition of the LEED Certification Policy Manual (September 17, 2010 Release) has increased the period for which you must allow the GBCI access to utility data from a minimum of 5 years to at least 20 years:

"It is the intent of GBCI to review ongoing project performance to assess project compliance with LEED Green Building Rating System requirements. Project owners authorize GBCI to access and review their project’s Energy and Water Usage Data from the utility service provider and/or the whole-project metering facility where such meters are in place. This authorization shall be maintained for a period of twenty (20) years following the date the project achieves LEED certification."

This rather significant change has not been publicized in any way that I can see (the most recent LEED Update newsletter dated 10/29/10 doesn't mention the change), and it doesn't appear that the GBCI has informed the USGBC or its own legal department, as the Minimum Program Requirements (MPRs) document provided by the USGBC still shows the five year requirement (see page 4), as does the LEED Registration Agreement that was updated three days after the certification policy manual was changed (see page 6).

A New Process Needed

My biggest complaint with the LEED system right now is how these administrative changes are handled. Changes to LEED credits themselves are made using a thorough and rigorous comment and voting process from the membership on a regular schedule... and that's a good system. On the other hand updates to the LEED policy manuals, documentation requirements, reference guides, the MPRs, owner legal agreements, supplementary reference materials, and a vast array of other critical components of LEED certification seem to occur randomly and there's no system to easily see changes as they occur or to determine what requirements are in place when a project is registered.

The mechanisms by which LEED projects are completed must be stabilized. If it were up to me, there would be no changes to these ancillary materials between rating system updates, and ALL materials related to the LEED rating system should be open to comment. I don't have a problem not putting those ancillary materials up to a vote, but I think there is far more concern over things like LEED Certification Agreement and the LEED Project Registration Agreement than the GBCI/USGBC realize, if for no other reason than it's difficult to find these documents and no real path for commenting on them.

Let me use those two legal documents as an example. You can't even access those two documents before going through the registration process unless you happen to know the URLs for them (i.e. they don't appear to show up in any search results or accessible via links on the GBCI site prior to registration). The certification Agreement is in its second edition (09.20.10), and the registration agreement is in its third edition (09.20.10), yet when I log on to my project that was registered in 07.10 I don't have any access to the documents I agreed to at that date. There's no document highlighting the changes that I'm aware of, and the simple fact that they've changed 2-3 times in about a year is alarming in itself. Since these documents aren't mentioned until you start the registration process, I'm sure has made many first time v3 users look foolish to the project owners who are now forced to agree to another layer of restrictions that was not mentioned previously.

At the end of the day, I still believe the content of the LEED rating systems are the best available for a comprehensive assessment of , but the ever increasing warren of support documents and the added requirements they contain must be controlled or at least better organized and publicized. The USGBC and GBCI need to understand that those actually administering LEED projects are greatly impacted by such changes, and every time a change is made without ample notice we're at best unpleasantly surprised and at worst humiliated in front of our clients for appearing to be inept. That's not to say I don't welcome more stringent guidelines over time, and I welcomed the more stringent energy and water baselines in the LEED 2009 system. At the same time, however, it's more important to be predictable and consistent than it is to be 100% perfect. There's always the next edition, and there's absolutely no reason this reporting requirement couldn't wait until LEED 2011...

Please forgive my rant... I'm still VERY excited about Greenbuild and look forward learning more there.

Mr. DeMaine's Response

As Vice President of Certification for GBCI, I’d like to thank you for bringing these issues related to the LEED certification procedural documents and various associated agreements to our attention. GBCI can confirm that the 20-year figure is a typo. The utility reporting time period was decreased to 5 years shortly after the introduction of the LEED 2009 Minimum Program Requirements. We are working with our information technology staff to correct this error as soon as possible. In the meantime, please refer to the LEED Project Registration Agreement and the LEED Certification Agreement, both of which properly represent that this program is limited to 5 years.

To address the stated concerns regarding lack of access to these documents, both before and after participants register and/or certify projects, all of our current contracts and policy manuals are available at the LEED Online website, www.leedonline.com. To access these documents, visitors to LEED Online must register with the website by creating a site user account. The creation of a site user account is a free service by GBCI. Site users may login to LEED Online and access these documents by going to our “Legal” page. The LEED Certification Policy Manuals are also available on the GBCI website, www.gbci.org.

Regarding revisions to these documents, GBCI has pledged to make changes to our program documents and agreements more transparent. The next scheduled release of such documents will occur shortly before Greenbuild. The coming revision is largely being put forth to incorporate the launch of several additional new programs related to LEED. Further, it is our endeavor to summarize our revisions to these documents and future releases in an open and transparent manner. Such summaries will be made available within LEED Online and, to the extent possible, posted to the GBCI website.



On behalf of the organization, thank you for interest in our certification program and commitment to sustainability. If you or any of your readers have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me at bdemaine@gbci.org.

A LEED for Neighborhood Development Project Planning Guide

Today I was tasked with determining the implications that pursuing LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) certification would have on current, preliminary plans for a roughly 100 acre mixed use development including a retail center, offices, and a mix of single- and multi-family residential. Though generally aware of LEED-ND this is the first time I've tried to apply the rating system to a specific project, and I figured many of you will be in the same boat sooner or later. With that in mind, here's what has jumped out at me as the major issues we'll need to discuss with the client. If you have absolutely no idea what LEED-ND is or what it attempts to do, I strongly recommend checking out this short video before continuing.

The Bluth's were never known for their commitment to sustainability

The Bluth's Development would probably not qualify for LEED-ND

To create this analysis and resulting post I've been relying on the rating system document, the LEED-ND Reference Guide, and the nine page LEED-ND Certification FAQ. I would strongly suggest reading the "Introduction" and "Getting Started" sections in the reference guide and the FAQ as they contain a gold mine of administrative issues that you'll want to know about at some point. I'm hitting the high points in this post, but there's a great deal more info that you'll want to at least skim so you don't run into any nasty surprises. If you're not aware already, it's nearly impossible to pursue LEED certification without purchasing the appropriate reference guide for it.

Understanding the Process

Unlike most LEED rating systems, LEED-ND uses a three phase review system, though depending on where you are in the planning stage you may not need all three. Each review follows the same format as the commercial LEED rating systems (i.e. submit review, receive preliminary comments from GBCI, amend as necessary and resubmit, receive final comments from GBCI, and appeal or accept the rating as granted).

Stage 1 - Conditional Approval of a LEED-ND Plan (Optional)

This review is designed to "help the developer build a case for entitlement among land-use planning authorities, as well as attract financing and occupant communities", and can only be pursued if "no more than 50% of the project's total new and/or renovated building square footage has land-use entitlements... for the specific types and quantities of... land uses proposed." According to the rating system language, entitlements are defined as "the existing or granted right to use property for specific types and quantities of residential and nonresidential land uses." I read this a "zoning is in place".

Confused? So was I at first, but basically all this is saying is that if zoning is already in place for more than 50% of your total project as it will ultimately be built, you skip Stage 1 and move to Stage 2. Their definition of entitlements is based on planned building area, not land area. So even though I may have 75 acres out of 100 zoned how I want, if over 50% of my building square footage is in those last 25 acres (perhaps the neighborhood core?) then I'm still eligible for Stage 1. If zoning is not in place for 50% of the total square footage of the project, you may pursue this certification, but you're not required to. The impression I get reading through the guide is that the only people who should pursue a Stage 1 review are those developers who need help convincing local boards or zoning administrators that their plans are indeed sustainable and could benefit from a USGBC seal of approval of said plans.

Stage 2 - Pre-Certified LEED-ND Plan (Optional)

You can't proceed with Stage 2 until 100% of the entitlements are in place (i.e. finish up your zoning then move on). So now you have that in place and all of your design work is completed, but it's going to be quite some time before this place is completely built out... This is the time to submit for Stage 2 Pre-certification!

Similar to the goal of Stage 1, the intent of pre-certification is to aid the developer in marketing, except this time to potential tenants and not zoning boards. Since many projects have long timelines for development, it's likely that more than a few will pursue Stage 2 pre-certification and stop there. One developer who participated in the pilot project system with a 25 year development timeline indicated that this is a likely outcome for them.

Stage 3 - LEED-ND Certified Project

This stage is the real deal, and once you reach it you finally have a certified project and a plaque to put somewhere. One question I have is that based on the information provided in the reference guide and other supporting documents, it's not clear whether a well prepared Stage 1 or Stage 2 documentation set would look much different than what's provided for Stage 3. Multiple sections of these documents suggest that more information and guidance on the matter is provided on LEED-Online, but at the moment I don't have access to that info. I've sent inquiries to the USGBC on this matter and will update this post when I hear back.

Now that I've likely thoroughly confused you about the different stages, here's a graphic from the reference guide that should make it much clearer. The introductory sections provide much more guidance and helpful charts regarding site drawings and documentation that is not found in the free rating system document:

LEED Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) Stages Explained

Click to view full size

Fees

As mentioned in an earlier post, LEED-ND fees aren't exactly cheap, but when you start to divide the cost over every building it starts to look much more favorable compared to certifying each building independently.

For the 100 acre project I'm examining the total direct certification fees paid to GBCI (i.e. not including consultant costs) for one stage would be $1,500 registration + $18,000 for the first 20 acres + $350 * 80 additional acres = $47,500. That sounds steep, but when you consider that the cachet of LEED will fall upon the 334 buildings (34 commercial + 300 residential) within this area, likely a significant marketing bonus for all properties, that breaks down to only $142/building. If two stages are pursued (in this instance Stage 2 and Stage 3 are most likely), the total fees rise to $85,500 for both, or $255/building.

When I wrote the previous post I was under the impression that a project was forced to seek all three stages of certification at considerable cost, but looking into the matter further it appears that a project may only need to complete one or two stages and can save significantly. I'm not 100% clear on this and have sent a request to the USGBC for clarification and will update this post when I have confirmation. It's important to note though that at least one building must achieve LEED certification of some form in order to satisfy a prerequisite, and additional points may be earned for additional certifications under the Green Infrastructure and Buildings category.

Who's on the Team?

Far more than any other LEED rating system, a good civil engineer or formal planner, ideally with a fair amount of GIS mapping experience, is critical to making the LEED-ND certification efforts proceed smoothly. You will be creating a LOT of site and vicinity maps to comply with Smart Location and Linkage and Neighborhood Pattern and Design prerequisites and credits. I admit that a layperson could likely handle most of this, but it will be very time consuming without a working knowledge of GIS software.

One of the Green Infrastructure and Buildings prerequisites requires that all commercial buildings be designed to exceed ASHRAE 90.1-2007 (by 10% for new buildings or 5% for renovations) or smaller structures can meet detailed prescriptive requirements. Residential buildings must comply with Energy Star ratings. All projects must certain plumbing efficiency requirements. For this reason, it's likely that an MEP engineer will need to be involved in the documentation process as well, but not to the same extent as the single building LEED systems.

A developer who handles most of the design in-house can probably survive certification without needing an additional consultant, but if they don't have some of the skills mentioned above it will be a very frustrating process. Alternatively, an architecture or planning firm could also provide a great deal of the documentation for a developer. At the end of the day it will come down to who can do the paperwork most efficiently, and in my opinion that is almost always the person handling the design the first place.

What to Look for First

Unlike other LEED systems where the prerequisites can generally be achieved on any site, it's very likely that it will be impossible to certify greenfield, surburban sites if there's very little or poorly connected infrastructure. The project I was tasked with examining will very likely not qualify for certification due to the fact that the neighboring sites are not very dense and it's bordering undeveloped parcels for much of the site boundary. Internally, the developer must be willing to commit to certain density requirements and also pursue a very urban style infrastructure with building frontages bordering streets instead of vast arrays of parking. For your convenience, I've briefly summarized the most critical prerequisites below so you can check to see if your plan will qualify. There are other prerequisites to consider, but these are the ones you need to know about before you pay a registration fee... For more detailed descriptions of the credits, download a pdf copy of the rating system itself.

Site Location and Linkages

SLLp1: Smart Location - This is the one that will prohibit greenfield, urban fringe projects from qualifying. The site must be currently served by water and wastewater service or "within a legally publicly planned water and wastewater service". In addition to that requirement the project must be an infill site (see credit for details, but it's pretty much what you'd expect), OR at least 25% of the project boundary must be immediately adjacent previously developed property while land within a 1/2 mile radius contain an average of 90 intersections/square mile. Confused? Even the free rating system pdf has good maps clarifying the credit.

SLLp3: Wetland and Water Body Conservation - Want to fill in some wetlands on the site? Not going to happen... It's going to be very difficult even building within 50 feet of wetlands or 100 feet of water bodies (beyond minor improvements like paths), which is prohibited unless you meet stringent stormwater management and density requirements.

SLLp4: Agricultural Land Conservation - There are significant restrictions to building on land "within a state or locally designated agricultural preservation district".

SLLp5: Floodplain Avoidance - If your site is within a 100-year floodplain, it better be an infill project or previously developed, otherwise you're not going to be able to build there at all.

Neighborhood Pattern and Design

NPDp1: Walkable Streets - Technically you don't need to know this prior to design starting, but the developer should probably be warned as these will significantly shape their project. 90% of all new building facades must directly border "public space, such as a street, park, paseo, or plaza, but not a parking lot, and is connected to sidewalks..." Additionally, sidewalks must be provided on both sides of 90% of internal streets or frontage, and no more than 20% of street frontages can be faced by a garage door. There are also street width to building height ratios that must be followed for at least 15% of the development.

NPDp2: Compact Development - For projects located within walking distance of a transit corridor, you must build to a minimum density of 12 units/acre residential and .80 FAR for commercial spaces. Projects not within walking distance of a transit stop must build to a minimum 7 units/acre residential and .5 FAR for commercial.

NPDp3: Connected and Open Community - Internal streets within a project must average at least 140 intersections/square mile and there must be "at least one through-street and/or nonmotorized right-of-way intersecting or terminating at the project boundary at least 800 feet." No one way in, one way out developments here!

Green Infrastructure and Buildings

This category has three prerequisites, but they are all to be tackled much later into the design process. Basically you have to have at least one LEED certified building within the LEED-ND project, and all buildings in the development must meet minimum energy and water efficiency requirements.

Use at your own risk!

It's important to note that this is my first review of these credit requirements, and though I work to ensure this blog is as accurate as possible, I shortened many complex credit requirements down to only hit the big spots. I may have also overlooked small details that would provide exceptions to the statements below. This post is intended to get someone who hasn't cracked the book up to speed about LEED-ND as quickly as possible, but it's ultimately up to you to read the reference guide and meet all of the requirements. Please call out any mistakes or differing opinions in the comments and I'll update the post ASAP.

Informative Hypothetical LEED-ND Project Walkthrough

Kaid Benfield over at the NRDC just posted about a video a colleague of his, Eliot Allen of Criterion Planners, created showing how a sustainable development he studied would be scored if it pursued LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND). The video does a great job of breaking complex calculations into a simple, easy to understand format that would be excellent to forward to clients considering the system...

Know of other great videos online? Let us know by leaving a comment.

GBCI: 94% of LEED Reviews are Currently On Time

Tristan Roberts of Environmental Building News* recently wrote an article about how the GBCI is shifting LEED reviews back to the GBCI in an effort to reign in "inconsistencies and poor service that have been frustrating to LEED project teams." I was more interested in a statistic cited later in the article, where GBCI President Peter Templeton "cited internal figures showing that 94% of reviews are currently on time, which is up 45% from the start of 2009." You may remember from earlier posts that the delays in 2008 and 2009 could be pretty long, and I'm glad to see USGBC/GBCI's commitment to improving customer service is paying off!

Cracking the whip!

Cracking the Whip on the LEED Reviewers**

Recent personal experience with LEED reviews confirms that this is true... Normally the initial review appears to be taking most of the 25 business days, but we've found relatively quick turnaround on final reviews.

*Full Disclosure: EBN is owned by parent company BuildingGreen, a sponsor of this site.

**No LEED reviewers were harmed in the making of this post... or even really featured in this picture

Learning from the LEED-Homes Platinum 100K House

A few years ago, Chad Ludeman and Nic Darling of Postgreen embarked on a journey "to build a LEED Platinum home for $100,000 in hard construction costs." Lucky for you, they not only succeeded but documented the entire process on their popular 100K House blog!

100K House

Image credit: Postgreen

While their blog covers topics beyond the original project and is definitely a recommended read as a whole, I wanted to highlight some of the posts I found most helpful for LEED APs embarking on a LEED-Homes project... or you could just go directly to the 20 posts under the LEED category:

New readers may not be aware of a similar that that I profiled a over a year and a half ago (has it been that long???), The Lambert LEED Home. Know of other great LEED Homes resources that deserve attention? Let us know by leaving a comment.

The LEED Size Gap: When a Renovation Is Ineligible for LEED Certification

A few days ago I got a very interesting email from my new best friend Dan Overbey of Browning Day Mullins Deirdorf Architects. He relayed a story about a client who was building a 16,000 sf horizontally attached addition to an existing 25,000 sf building. The client was committed to sustainable design and was very enthusiastic about pursuing LEED. When BDMD was looking at choosing the appropriate LEED system for their scope, they learned that the project appears to be in a strange LEED 'size gap'.

The core of the problem is that limits on registrations for additions on LEED-NC projects are based on the combined footprint of the existing building + the addition, whereas elgibility for including an addition a LEED-EB certification is based only on the footprint of the existing building... and the two are not mutually exclusive. According to the registration walk-through process on the GBCI website, a project is ineligible for LEED-NC if the scope of work is less than 60% of the total project square footage. Additionally, a project is ineligible for current registration for LEED-EB if the scope of the work is greater than 50% of the existing project square footage:

LEED Size Gap

Dan was kind enough to put together a summary of the issue in this convenient paper... Note that it is possible for a horizontal addition to apply for LEED-NC separately from the existing building if (a) the addition is physically distinct from the original (defined as having party walls separating the space along with separate lighting, HVAC, and plumbing systems) AND (b) the addition has a separate address or name than the existing building. This particular project did not meet those requirements, so they went back to the drawing board.

You may have noticed that I used the phase 'ineligible for current registration' when I mentioned LEED-EB above. Ultimately, the project in question is eligible for LEED-EB, but only after the renovation is complete (the whole facility will be 'existing' at that point), meaning they cannot pick up points for good construction practices under the LEED-EB credits MRc3 and MRc9 Facility Alterations and Additions related credits. It also means that their performance periods cannot begin until the addition is complete, causing a long delay between substantial completion and certification.

To the USGBC and GBCI's credit, they have developed fairly effective tools for helping with system selection. Anyone registering a project for LEED 2009 runs into a sort of registration 'wizard' as part of signing up that helps them select the proper system if they're unsure what to use, and running through the same wizard resulted in a LEED-EB suggestion when I answered these questions with this project in mind. Also, the USGBC has released a LEED Rating System Selection Policy that offers additional guidance, though the issue at hand is not discussed in detail.

Making Something Out of Nothing?

I've been trying to get my head around this issue for days now, and I'm trying to figure out if this is a legitimate problem with the way LEED eligibility is determined or whether this specific instance happens to be a rare outlier and that the USGBC can't be blamed for not covering every construction project imaginable... In my mind no LEED system has really been a great fit for partial (in size) but comprehensive (in scope) renovations or additions, and I'm very curious to hear your thoughts about the subject. Are there others out there that had to go back to their client telling them LEED wasn't an option? Is there a need for a system tailored to renovations that's distinct from LEED-CI but more flexible than LEED-NC? Please share your thoughts by leaving a comment!

5 Ways Your LEED Project Can Be Challenged, Cancelled, or *GASP* Revoked!

Though it hasn't received a tremendous amount of attention*, part of the LEED v3 updates included various paths by which LEED project registrations can be cancelled and people can challenge existing LEED certifications and possibly have those projects' LEED status revoked!

If you haven't browsed it yet, I would highly recommend flipping through the GBCI LEED Policy Manual, which lays out the basic regulations surrounding these and other issues that you should know about before starting a LEED project. The following headings are largely copies of the chapters in the policy manual (pgs 12-17), but I've shortened the text to show only the critical requirements in each category

1. Your Project Wasn't Submitted Before the Rating System Sunset Date

With the start of LEED v3 the GBCI instituted a 'registration cancellation policy' that sets a few deadlines that you have to meet or else the GBCI is authorized to void your registration. The "'Sunset Date' refers to the date occurring six (6) years after the close of registration for a rating system version." e.g. Registration for LEED-NC v2.2 closed on June 26, 2009**, meaning that at least a design certification review for a LEED-NC v2.2 project must be submitted by June 26, 2015 or the GBCI can decline to review the project. If you submit a design review before the sunset date you have up to 1 additional year from the date of the design submission to submit the construction review.

I don't really have a problem with this requirement, as the GBCI can't be expected to staff reviewers with knowledge in every version of the rating system since the beginning of the LEED over 10 years ago. 6 years should be ample time even for the longest project schedules (though possibly not LEED for Neighborhood Development). It also appears as though this requirement applies retroactively, as the USGBC closed reviews of LEED-NC v2.0 projects on December 31, 2009. To date, the USGBC has offered free 'upgrades' to new systems as their launched, though there's no guarantee this will happen in the future.

Simply Terrible...

Let's a take a moment to admit that some cancellations are for the best

2. Your Project Has Been Inactive on LEED Online for Too Long

"GBCI reserves the right to cancel any project that, as determined solely by GBCI, remains inactive for a period of four (4) years or more." The note goes on to say no refunds will be provided. I'm not wild about this requirement, as I can't figure the purpose. I suppose it's to prevent crafty LEED administrators from purchasing a bunch of registrations well in advance of actually starting projects so that they may lock in the typically less restrictive requirements of earlier systems. Just because the GBCI can revoke a registration in this manner doesn't mean they will, and I would assume some sort of warning would be announced to the project administrator prior to shutting it down. I still don't like it though, because it seems necessary given the sunset date requirements.

3. You Waited Too Long to Submit After Project Completion

The new rules also state that an NC, CS, or CI project has no more than two years after the "Project Completion Date" to submit for review. I'm also a little unclear about the purpose of this requirement. In every project I've worked on the owner provides plenty of incentive to get the certification finished, and I don't know why the GBCI cares either way how timely the submittal is tied to the completion date. Again it seems like the sunset dates should be the only really necessary restriction.

4. Someone Challenged Your Certification Rating (and They Were Right)

While the registration cancellation policies discussed above are pretty straightforward, the Certification Challenge Policy is an interesting can of worms in that anyone can initiate regardless of their involvement in the project. These challenges occur after a project has completed the certification, and can result in anything from a loss of one or more points to a complete revocation of the certification altogether. It's not just credits that are potentially considered, but also compliance with the Minimum Program Requirements.

A formal investigation can be launched by the GBCI itself without third party complaints or by anyone in the general public, though they cannot do so anonymously... From the policy manual:

Persons desiring to make a complaint may submit a written statement identifying the persons alleged to be involved and the facts concerning the alleged conduct in detail, and, to the extent available, the statement shall be accompanied by any available documentation. The statement shall identify others who may have knowledge of the facts and circumstances concerning the allegation. The person making the complaint shall identify him/herself by name, address, and telephone number.

Once a complaint has been filed, no one less than the GBCI President him/herself reviews the complaint (with the help of their legal counsel, of course), and can either dismiss the complaint immediately if deemed frivolous or initiate an investigation that can potentially include further documentation from the project manager or owner or even include site visits. Should the GBCI determine there was indeed some form of false representation or inaccuracy in the original submittal, there's a whole load of notifications, appeals and such that I'm not going to cover here. I'll assume that should this ever happen to you you're likely to take the time to read the policy manual yourself!

To my knowledge there has been only one certification challenge to date. It was against the LEED Gold certified Northland Pines High School in Wisconsin... The GBCI has at this point denied the challenge and elected to maintain the certification, but a new post today from the Green Building Law Update shows that the five challengers haven't given up... Interestingly, all of those involved in the challenge (an architect, a developer, a contractor, a chiropractor, and a 'local businessman and community leader) served on the building committee for the project. They recently released all of their challenge documentation and a statement about their dissatisfaction with the denial of the challenge. I'm not going into it here, but it gets pretty interesting when you consider their claim that "[The GBCI] based [the denial of the challenge] on reports from two more consulting engineers who said that the building did not meet the prerequisites but concluded that “pretty close” is close enough." I expect that we'll hear far more on this in the near future.

5. You Forgot To Recertify Your LEED-EB Project

LEED for Existing Buildings projects must recertify the project every five years to maintain their certification. It is the only rating system that requires re-certification at this time and this is nothing new... it's always been this way.

*It hasn't been discussed much except by Chris Cheatham, founder of Green Building Law Update, who can't seem to shut up about it lately... Seriously though his coverage of the LEED Certification Challenge policy is a highly recommended read, especially as the ongoing drama surrounding the Northland Pines project develops. The Green Real Estate Law Journal also has some coverage but without as much commentary.

**EDIT 07.12.10 - Thanks to alert reader Mara Baum for pointing out that I had the wrong date for the close of registration for LEED-NCv2.2. I had originally listed April 27, 2009, the day LEEDv3 registrations went live. The date LEED-NCv2.2 registrations closed, however, was June 26, 2009, and that is the day the sunset clock started to tick...

LEED ND Fees Cost HOW Much?!?!?

Christ!

LEED ND Project Certification Rates Effective April 28, 2010

LEED ND Project Application Review Fees
SLL Prerequisite Review $2,250 (flat fee)
Expedited SLL Prerequisite Review $5,000
Initial Stage Review Fees
For Projects under 320 Acres $18,000for the first 20 acres $350 for each additional acre
For Projects 320 Acres or More $123,000 (flat fee)
Expedited Review $25,000
Subsequent Stage Review Fees
For Projects under 320 acres $10,000 for the first 20 acres $350 for each additional acre
For Projects 320 acres or More $115,000 (flat fee)
Expedited Subsequent Stage Review $15,000
Additional Fees
CIRs $220 each
Appeal Review $500 per credit
Expedited Appeal Review $1,000 per credit

I found this out from Jeff Baxter of the Noisette Company. He gave an excellent presentation at SustainSC 2010 (which I'm currently pressuring them to post online) profiling the company's experience with getting the Navy Yard, a 340 acre mixed use redevelopment of a former Navy base, through the LEED ND Pilot system.

As a pilot project, they paid substantially less than they would have needed to under the current system. It would have cost $241,750 to reach the level of certification they have achieved so far (Stage 2 certification... more on that in a later post), and if they were to pursue Stage 3 certification that cost would climb to $356,750! Even the smallest development faces a minimum of $39,500 in fees to complete Stage 3 certification. It's no surprise the USGBC included a free 'introductory call' service as part of their registration process and a $2,250 prerequisite review option that allows developers to check to ensure their site meets the base requirements before having to pony up for the more extensive Stage 1 review.

People familiar with LEED certification fees at the presentation were surprised at the cost, especially when you consider the fact that the documentation required for submission is not that much different in volume or complexity from a typical LEED NC or CS project.

On the other hand, one attendee suggested that if you broke this down to cost per building or cost per square foot the results are likely to show a lower overall cost than if a developer certified each building independently. I would suspect that everything within the development would earn the same marketing cachet as an individually certified facility by virtue of its association with the larger development, so this could possibly end up as a better value than previous options.

As you might suspect, I'm very interested to hear reader reactions to these fees and your thoughts on potential implications... Is this cost justified? Are the costs too high to allow for significant market-share, or will developers see the benefits to be large enough to warrant the investment? Truthfully... I don't really know!

Greenbuild Session Review: Cx & EM – Value, Cost and Project Integration

This session featured quite a few notable minds (the term “dauntingly prestigious” was used at one point) and featured some telling audience surveys, with a packed crowd (somewhere above 1,000) mostly but not exclusively composed of designers and engineers (many owners/facility managers included in the audience as well).

Energy Modeling

  • “Is energy modeling a necessary cost or mandate of LEED?” 70Y 20M 10N
  • “Is energy modeling too expensive for the outcome delivered?” 10Y 45M 45N
  • “Is the scope of energy modeling commonly understood?” 10Y 30M 60N
  • “There aren't enough energy modelers.” 70Y 20M 10N
  • “Energy modeling is not predictive of building performance.” 60Y 30M 10N
  • “There is no passive thermal modeling available.” 85Y 10M 5N
  • “Energy modeling increases standard of care for the design professional.” 50Y 30M 20N
  • “Energy modeling helps justify investments and convince clients.” 95Y 5M 0N
  • “Energy modeling supports integrated project delivery.” 75Y 20M 5N
  • “Energy modeling supports informed choices.” 90Y 5M 5N
  • “Most tools do not reflect the most innovative system designs.” 80Y 20M 0N

The end result of these survey questions was a discussion loosely focused around the following quote: ”Energy models are not particularly good at determining absolute energy use, but do a good job of comparing scheme A to scheme B.” This comment was quickly followed with a discussion about how we need tools to foster energy prediction. There is a strong need to get a detailed and ACCURATE understanding of the schedule of occupancy and how the building will be operated. Ultimately we have to model human nature (How far into Fall are you going to just leave the windows open instead of using a heater/AC? Is that typical?), and there aren't very good metrics or processes for getting this done.

When asked what the USGBC should due to respond to these issues, there was an excellent comment from the panel that right now all of the training is taking place in practice, and as a result there's no time for people to really explore and understand the software. There needs to be an emphasis on getting this training into the college degree programs where there aren't time (read: money) constraints. How the USGBC can foster this is up in the air. ”All of these comments have a common theme: a lack of consistent methodology.”

Commissioning (Cx)

  • “Cx is a necessary component/mandate of LEED.” 99Y .5M .5N
  • “Is Cx too expensive for the outcome delivered?” 0Y 30M 70N
  • “Is Enhanced Cx too expensive for for the outcome delivered?” 0Y 45M 55N
  • “Is Cx too poorly defined in scope to be properly implemented?” 50Y 0M 50N
  • “Are there too few qualified CxA?” 50Y 30M 20N
  • “There is no uniform certification program” 70Y 20M 10N
  • “Contractors don't understand Cx and as a result overcharge.” 60Y 25M 15N
  • “Costs are not standardized (all over the map).” 80Y 15M 5N
  • “Cx is the only way to ensure HVAC, lighting and other energy systems' installation are operating properly.” 70Y 20M 10N
  • “Cx improves project quality.” 95Y 4M 1N
  • “Cx reduces the liability of the design/construction team.” 50Y 30M 20N
  • “Cx saves the client more money than it costs to perform.” 70Y 25M 5N

”The M&V point is the most important LEED credit with regard to reducing the carbon footprint of a facility. The second most important point is enhanced commissioning.” The justification for this is that you can't improve what you don't track (M&V), and that the enhanced Cx credit requires that the CxA train the owner about how the building is to function. Comments from a CxA on the panel indicated he has found hundreds of overrides in retrocommissioning projects that are the result of a facility manager not understanding how their systems operate.

The other major discussion on this topic revolved around the fact that there's wide variability in the scope when all this is asked for in the RFP is to provide LEED fundamental/enhanced Cx services. Fundamental Cx was seen by commenters to be insufficient, as you're really only asking the CxA to provide the 'middle' of the services. They're brought in too late (no substantial design review) and leave too early (insufficient training and verification).

Greenbuild Session Review: LCA into LEED

Life cycle analysis (LCA) is something that's been 'almost ready' to integrate into LEED for some time. Many expected it in the LEED v3 rollouts, but that didn't happen. This afternoon session focused on the new LEED LCA pilot credit (a system which I'll cover in more detail later, for now you can read about it straight from the horse's mouth or rely on the few tidbits I gathered below) and then here was a series of questions/comments from the floor. I apologize for the piecemeal summary you're getting below, but there was minimal presentation and too much 'discussion' that didn't really focus on the topic at hand - getting LCA into LEED. Here's what I learned:

The Basics of the LCA Credit

The pilot credit for LCA is available now, and you can read the draft here. As you might have guessed, there are about a billion issues that go into play when defining life cycle impacts of a product, and defining a system that fairly scores individual products and assemblies was/is remarkably difficult.

The current model is based on the use of the Athena Insitute Ecocalculator, largely due to the fact that they have a system ready to go now. You'll input the products used into their system, which determines the impacts (water, energy, pollution, disposal, toxicity, etc.), and the USGBC has assigned weightings to those categories that determine the scores. The ecocalculator uses an assembly system (wall, roof, floor, etc) where you input your assembly type, then the calculator uses a national average of impacts for the materials comprising that assembly to determine the score. I would suggest reading the Athena site directly if you're interested in more detailed info.

From the manufacturer's end, they have to provide specific product data (embodied energy, greenhouse gas impacts) to the Athena Institute, and then that info is folded into the assembly level data. There was substantial concern in the audience about the transparency and consistency of this process, though there are checks within the Athena Institute.

The Pilot System

"The Pilot Credit system is not currently operational at this point. The way we envisioned it is that project teams would have access to these credits and can use it if they want to." Most notably, you would get awarded a point either way even if you don't earn the point provided the documentation and an additional evaluation that the USGBC would use to modify or streamline the credit process.

Right now only the language for each official credit is online, though the USGBC has developed support materials that will be online later. "We want to give everyone as much notice as possible, and as a result we're releasing thngs in stages... Information on the submission process will be up soon".

Next Steps

Assuming the system is figured out and perfect, it's time to consider what this will replace and how it will fit in to the existing Materials and Resources credit structure. According to the panel, the most likely near term solution will be an either/or 'alternative compliance path'. LCA considers multiple attributes of sustainability all at once, where the current MR credit system focuses on single attributes (recycling, regional sourcing, etc.). In other words you can do the LCA and get 5 points (proposed) OR you could follow the existing credits (the proposal is that it will replace MRc1.1, MRc4, and MRc5) but not both. This is similiar to many compliance paths in LEED-Homes today.

Ugh... Questions

Unfortunately, the session involved a bunch of questions that didn't really clarify what it will take to incorporate this into the LEED project (i.e. the stuff you come here to learn about), and involved a series of passive aggressive comments framed as questions. It's surprising to me how much people focus on the wrong in any given system without seeing the bigger picture of creating a PRACTICAL system for measuring and scoring material impact (of course there were notable exceptions, which were already folded into the comments above).

I'm getting a beer, and anyone who saw the web session I moderated can probably understand why! A special thanks to those of you who stuck it out to the end!

Greenbuild Session Review: How the LEED - EB Certification Process Transforms Your Operations...

This panel featured a mix of facility managers and engineering consultants describing some of the issues they have faced both from a design and documentation standpoint and then balanced that with the owner reports of what did or didn't work on the ground. Due to some last minute planning for my presentation later in the day I showed up late, but here's what they shared while I was there:

Water Issues

Retrofitting low-flow flush valves on older toilets failed miserably, to the point where the flush valves had to be replaced. This jibes well with what I've heard about the importance of bowl design on successful flush ratings.

Use of perennials as a means to water use reductions raised neighborhood complaints about appearances when the plants went into their dormant stages. Calculating landscaping baselines was difficult.

Procurement and Waste

"One of the biggest hurdles of material credits is tracking... Trying to corral 100 different people with purchasing power is like herding geese." Standardized tracking spreadsheets and written example vendor documentation is helpful, but the team is still expecting a large data-entry issue at the end of the performance period.

For large organizations with multiple buildings, problems can arise when certain buildings are forced to use (potentially lower quality) sustainable goods (cough... recycled toilet paper... cough cough) and the other buildings do not. Tenants would literally bring the toilet paper from one building and the other and ask why they were being punished.

The waste audit was alarming in one facility. Before the LEED-EB process began the facility already had a waste management program, but the audit revealed only a 40% recycling rate. That initiated a series of changes, most notably a removal of disposable cups and extremely small waste bins at the desks (about the size of a big gulp cup). The facility monitor actually used the word 'mutiny' at this point... "Just let them complain for two weeks, and then they get over it and even get happy!" The notion was that the biggest complainers soon become the strongest adopters. Despite early complaints, the recycling rate jumped to over 82% within months and eliminated $52,000 a year in styrofoam cups alone.

Indoor Environmental Quality

"Both projects needed to have outdoor air flow rates adjusted... Almost no one is where they should be. They're either too low or too high." This was a surprise to me and I expect this could have big cost implications for some projects, though exemptions are available IF you can find the original design documents showing that the current system can't be modified as required.

There was some excellent guidance about how to handle the occupant comfort surveys, particularly related to including questions correlating what the occupant was wearing and the activities they perform with thermal comfort. If you have people complaining about the cold but are wearing tank tops in the winter, the appropriate solution is to have them put on a sweater and not adjust the thermostat. Complaints need to be investigated to determine the root cause. There were many instances where investigations found closed or locked dampers that wouldn't have been fixed by simple thermostat changes.

Team Management

Food service representatives are vital to be included in the LEED team, even if they're a contracted organization. Food supply and service touches on everything from energy to water to materials and procurement, yet are often under-represented on the team.

"You're going to hear this over and over again today: Educating your occupants is vital to your project success." For one project there was actually a communications team including the company's marketing and facilities departments dedicated to creating materials that rotated regularly (every two months) pushing green initiatives in the facility.

The VSP facility spent 2,200 staff hours towards their LEED-EB implementation efforts, though savings are substantial and included a 5% reduction in insurance premiums. The NEA facility used an anticipated 2,400 team hours while reporting a 19% energy use reduction in the first year and a 13% annual water savings.

What did I miss?

If you were at this session and thought there were some important notes that I missed, please leave a comment and share with everyone!

LEED Charrette Planning Guide

My firm has a new LEED project that I've been asked to help plan a startup charrette, a first for me (though I've participated in a few others). After noticing google mostly just references you to firms providing LEED charrette facilitation services, I thought it would be helpful to compile a list of resources that I found useful in my planning. ...A boring post to be sure, but a necessary one all the same. If you have no idea what I'm talking about right now, I recommend starting with this EDC article that serves as a great intro to the concept.

Charrette Fight

Spontaneous outbreaks of violence are generally a good sign that you've lost control of your charrette

By far the most comprehensive and useful resource I've seen is the Whole Building Design Guide's resource page for charrettes, which led me to a free copy of the NREL's 116 page Handbook for Planning and Conducting Charrettes for High Performance Projects. Between these two resources you can probably figure out 99% of what you'll need to do.

Case Studies and Sample Agendas

  • The Net-Zero Commercial Buildings Initiative of the Building Technology Program from the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Group at the US Department of Energy's (would love to see an org chart on these guys if you know where to find one) page on charrettes lists presentations and 4-5 case study reports on notable sustainable projects.
  • USGBC 1/2 Day Eco-Charrette- This seems like a very good template... introduce the benefits, develop a vision and strategies, and then tally up the LEED points at the end. Most everything I've seen has said the LEED checklist itself can be a poor crutch if pulled out too early. If you can pull it off, I think it's best to get the owner to forget about points and certification levels entirely and just worry about doing what's best for the project.
  • Oregon Sustainability Center- On the other end of the spectrum, this WEEK LONG planning/design charrette includes numerous in-depth group breakouts, presentations, and even a 'blog launch' to help document the process as it continues through construction. I would also highly recommend that blog for anyone planning a living building, or just looking for activities to help facilitate brainstorming. There is a HUGE amount of meat covering why the building design has developed into what it is today. Also, anyone looking for visualization photos won't be disappointed either.

A quick plug for the fine folks at Delta

This has absolutely nothing to do with the content above, but I crafted this post using my laptop and free (trial) in-flight wifi!!! I'm somewhere over Oklahoma the first leg of my Greenbuild supertrip as we speak...

Straight ballin'

Yay netbooks!

LEED-Homes First Impressions... FREAKIN LOVE IT!

The firm I work at has been involved in an affordable housing project seeking LEED-Homes certification for a few months now, and until this morning I was largely uninvolved. Today though I was asked to run through the checklist and start to figure out who does what. Here's what I've learned so far:

  • The LEED-Homes certification process is infinitely more user friendly than the other LEED systems. Instead of a mysterious review team located somewhere in communist Berlin, you can actually pick up a phone to work through documentation issues with your provider!
  • LEED-Homes is remarkably straightforward. It's clear cut, prescriptive, and most anyone can understand the requirements without a PhD in LEEDology. I understand that homes have much more consistent issues than commercial projects that makes this possible, but that doesn't make it any less nice.
  • There seems to be a great balance of design justification and in the field performance verification. I may find that as we enter into the construction phase that I may learn to hate LEED-Homes for the same reason, but we have a quality team and I don't expect that to be the case. Having a HERS rater evaluate the building as constructed in theory sounds like a much simpler way of determining relative energy performance over ASHRAE modeling.
happy about LEED

Where would this blog be without marginally related photos?

ps... the bacon represents LEED-Homes, and I'm the cat.

Now, it's important to understand that our consultants and review team have already done a significant amount of work coordinating the design already, but from a pure documentation standpoint I can't get over how user-friendly this process is. Thanks for indulging my raves... I don't gush very often, but we need to figure out how to make the other LEED systems this simple to use while maintaining their rigor. I don't have an answer for that, but given the litany of issues I've faced recently surrounding project boundaries, I can say for sure a quick call to the review team would likely solve hours worth of headaches. Get on it guys!

...and we're off!!!

Real Life LEED has promised to be a blog for the LEED AP, by a LEED AP (FLAP-BLAP 4 txtrs). For this reason, I've made a policy of not pointing out every new project that earns certification, but please forgive me for announcing that I've officially sent off the first LEED project I've worked on from start to finish to the GBCI for a combined design and construction review! I'm sure that's when most LEED AP's celebrate anyway... We're expecting Gold, so wish us luck, though I've got a number of buffer points saying you won't need to!

I love the smell of green checkmarks in the morning!

I've worked on other projects in a limited role, and have sent off others for reviews, but this is the first one where my name is on the top line of all of my firm's credit submittals. Once the reviews come back, there will be a number of posts discussing some of the issues we faced in design and construction, what I learned corralling paperwork, an update on where the GBCI is falling with review delays, and proper recognition of all involved (my involvement was pretty much limited to LEED paperwork and coordination)!

Coincidently, this project was most of my test-prep for the LEEDv2.2 exam... It was registered originally as a LEED-NCv2.1 project. I was tasked with going credit by credit to determine which would shine more favorably on this particular project, a task that required me reading the reference guides for both 2.1 and 2.2 and writing summaries of the differences. That, along with the online USGBC class was pretty much what comprised my studying for the test.

In Other News

...I've once again slipped into my typical summer non-posting ways! That will change in the next few weeks as I profile some user issues with the new LEED-Online, start planning for my first Greenbuild trip, and update recommendations on how to study for the new v3 series LEED AP exams... if the USGBC's official guides would ever come out (supposedly available October 09... it was September a few weeks ago and "Summer 09" a few months ago). Stay tuned!

Tomorrow (Friday, June 26th) Last Day to Register LEED v2 Projects

Just a friendly reminder... If you don't do it by tomorrow all registrations must be v3 editions (LEED 2009).

The Final Countdown

It's the Fi-nal Count-down!!!

I've heard reports of problems logging into the GBCI website earlier this week, but after checking a few minutes ago they appear to be resolved right now. I'd still recommend getting the project registration on the books today if possible.

Vanishing LEED 2009 Minimum Program Requirement?

UPDATE - 06.12.09 - This issue has largely been resolved... details at end of post.

When I spent all day going through the new LEED 2009 Building Design & Construction reference guide and reporting about the changes, one thing that I noticed was a portion of the Minimum Program Requirements (MPR) referencing that "Registration and Certification Activity Must Comply with Reasonable Timetables and Rating System Sunset Dates". Here's what I said on this subject:

"[This requirement] basically states that if a LEED 2009 project is inactive for 4 years, the GBCI reserves the right to cancel the registration, that all paperwork must be finished within 6 years of the retirement of the system (i.e. 2017 for the LEED 2009 system), and that certification must be complete within 2 years of project occupancy."

Just a day or so ago I had one of my coworkers ask about these requirements in regards to a new project that's got a long time frame, saying he couldn't find that clause anywhere. The MPRs aren't in the reference guides, as they're listed in the free PDF rating systems (see LEED-NC 2009 here). I went back to check (see pages XVI - XVII) and sure enough no such clause is listed???

I know I didn't just invent these requirements out of thin air, but I'm a little troubled at the thought that these requirements and the rating systems themselves are getting tweaked without any notice. No release dates are listed on these documents (that I can find at least), and I'm now curious about how many versions have been updated over time. Unfortunately I didn't save a copy of the rating system on that day, so the only 'proof' I have is the earlier post linked to above. There is also reference to a "LEED 2009 MPR Supplemental Guidance" that I have yet to be able to find which may clear this up.

Has anyone else noticed this or have a copy of the older edition of the rating system? Please let me know I'm not crazy by leaving a comment.

UPDATE - 06.12.09

Thanks to many readers who quite quickly left comments and forwarded documents, this seems to have already been cleared up! There are in fact different editions of the rating system documents. Thanks to Chris Collins of McKenney's Mechanical Contractors and Engineers, you can view the older version of the LEED-EB 2009 rating system here, showing 8 minimum program requirements including the one about sunset dates. The current version with only 7 requirements can be downloaded from the USGBC here.

Furthermore, the requirement still exists according to various readers in the comments section. From what I can tell, the USGBC decided to remove this language from the MPR in favor of having you sign off on the dates as part of registering a project. The language is buried in the legal mumbo-jumbo section (that's an official legal term). See comments for details.

VP of LEED Implementation Explains v3 LEED-Online Upgrades

Mike Opitz (left), Vice President of LEED Implementation for the USGBC has now earned the distinction of being the first ever guest poster on Real Life LEED, an achievement that I would wager (though haven't confirmed) he feels is akin to putting on his pants this morning or walking to the park. I'm quite excited though, and hope to include more guest writers in the near to 'whenever I get around to it' future!

Side Note: Though I generally refrain from simply reposting USGBC press releases and such, there is a good deal of detail in the article below that made me believe you would find this useful to read.

As reading his article raised as many questions as it provided answers, I'm in the process of working out a follow-up interview (no guarantees). For that reason you'll have to wait until then to hear any of my comments on the article below. I'm really curious to hear both your reaction and experience with the new online system to date, as I don't yet have a project registered under v3. If you have a question you'd like to ask Mike, please make sure to leave it in the comments section below in the next few days!

Everything after this line is vintage Mike, with no edits from me. On a personal note, he seems to like bulleted lists about as much as I like parenthetical side comments (See? I'm using them right now). Let's get to it:

Faster, Smarter and More Robust - The New LEED Online

By Mike Opitz, P.E., LEED AP, Vice President of LEED Implementation, U.S. Green Building Council

This April, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) launched LEED v3, the newest version of the LEED green building certification program. A culmination of several years of visioning, planning and development effort by the USGBC community, LEED v3 takes LEED’s ongoing evolution and growth to the next level. LEED v3 is a platform for implementing the improvements and growth in all aspects of the LEED program over the next several years. The three core components of LEED v3 are: LEED 2009 – technical advancements to the LEED credits and points in the rating systems; the re-launch of LEED Online – the tool LEED project teams use to manage the LEED registration and certification processes has been upgraded to be smarter and faster, with many new features; and the new certification model – an expanded certification infrastructure based on ISO standards, administered by the Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) through 10 independent, third-party certifying bodies for improved capacity, speed and performance.

LEED Online – Lessons Learned

For the past three years, USGBC’s LEED Online system has been an integral component of the LEED program. Launched in early 2006, LEED Online offers a paperless, Web-based tool for registering LEED projects, collecting and organizing LEED project documentation, managing project team members, and stewarding projects through the certification review process to final completion. LEED Online’s initial goals were met, but growing pains occurred as LEED’s market uptake accelerated. More specifically, the online system has not performed ideally in two key areas: data transfer speed and reliability. Upload and download times, although manageable in 2006, have increased as the system has absorbed tens of thousands of projects and user accounts. In response to user feedback last year, USGBC committed to a comprehensive, ground-up redesign and reimplementation of LEED Online for the LEED v3 rollout, with the primary goal being improved quality and a better overall user experience. The re-launch of LEED Online is not a mere extension of the previous LEED Online; it’s a completely new system.

The New LEED Online – better, stronger, faster

The new LEED Online is designed and built for speed, expandability and convenience. Core technology improvements make a faster system in real-world use, and USGBC’s robust beta-testing means the system is also more stable. LEED Online’s enhanced user interface makes it easier to use with enough scalability to support LEED for years to come. The system will benefit from regular updates and upgrades over time, just like desktop computer software, and USGBC will publish change histories and release notes with each significant system update.

The reinvention of LEED Online enables a host of new functionality to make users’ lives easier and more productive, setting the stage for success as projects make their way through the certification process. Veteran users of LEED Online will notice several core improvements right away:

  • A cleaner, more attractive user interface.
  • Full integration of user account management – users can update their USGBC profiles directly from within LEED Online.
  • A built-in feedback mechanism for any user to give USGBC comments on LEED Online, available from all screens.

The new LEED Online offers a host of LEED project management improvements, including:

  • Project organization: Any user who is a team member on more than one registered LEED project will be able to sort, view and group projects according to a number of project traits, including location, design or management firm, etc. Projects with similar characteristics can be grouped by those traits and viewed from their own screen.
  • Team member administration: The functionality for adding team roles, assigning them to team members, and making credit assignments is more flexible. Most notably, credits are assigned by team member name rather than by project role.
  • Credit assignments: It is now simpler and easier to assign one credit to several project team members, or to assign several credits to a single team member.
  • Status indicators and timeline: The system explains and displays all the steps in the review and certification process more clearly, especially which steps a specific project has completed. The system displays specific dates associated with each phase and step, including the target dates that each review will be returned to the customer.

The new LEED Online also offers many new features supporting the LEED certification review process itself, as well as enhancements to the functionality of submittal documentation and certification templates:

  • End-to-end process support: The new system shepherds each project team through the entire certification process, from initial project registration through all review phases and through post-certification plaque fulfillment. The registration phase includes extra help for beginners to decide which LEED rating system is best suited for their project type, while allowing experienced users to get through the process quickly.
  • Improved mid-stream communication: During a LEED review, the mid-review clarification page will allow the LEED reviewer to contact the project team through the system if any minor clarifications are needed to complete the review.
  • Data linkages: Some data, such as a building’s gross floor area or full-time equivalent (FTE) occupancy, are required in the documentation for several LEED credits. The new version of LEED Online shares such data within a project, auto-filling it in all appropriate places after the user enters it the first time. This saves the customer re-entry time and helps ensure project-wide consistency.
  • Automatic data checks: A surprisingly large number of LEED applications arrive at USGBC with some required data not complete, causing process delays. The new system will alert users when required data are missing, giving them a final chance to correct the error before submitting the application.
  • Progressive, context-based disclosure of content: Many LEED submittal templates have several options for completing the form, with the customer required to choose and complete only one. The new system will show only the data fields relevant to the customer’s situation once an option has been selected, hiding all the extraneous content. This will reduce customer confusion and submission errors. The full content is still available for viewing at the user’s option.

The new LEED Online leverages technology used by the world’s leading companies – SAP and Adobe – to deliver significant performance, functionality and usability enhancements. It allows continuous system improvement over time and provides a solid platform for project teams.

Looking Forward

LEED v3 enables and stewards the ever-accelerating green transformation of the building design, construction and operations markets. LEED Online, as a key element of that platform, provides essential program resources to LEED customers, LEED reviewers, and USGBC and GBCI staff. Major LEED Online system releases over the next several months include:

  • April 2009: initial system launch with core LEED 2009 rollout (New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core & Shell, Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance and Schools).
  • Summer 2009: launch of the volume certification process for Portfolio Program customers.
  • Summer/fall 2009: launch of upcoming LEED rating systems (Retail, Healthcare, and Neighborhood Development post-pilot).

USGBC has maintained a strong commitment to quality for the reinvention of LEED Online. The new system takes several leaps forward and sets the stage for the success of LEED projects and of the market’s transformation to a sustainable built environment.