<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16890" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 12pt Tahoma">
<DIV>Julia,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Well said. We were just discussing this today and share your concerns, especially the lack of transparency considering past inconsistencies. In addition to filing our grievances with the USGBC, we're also open to the notion of sharing CIR submittals and responses in some forum, possibly BLDG-RATE. If we're forced to buy interpretations for any/every project, we might as well share with the modeling/LEED-hurdling community to provide efficiency for all and, ultimately, accountability of the CIR process.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Paul</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Paul Erickson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Sustainable Practice Leader</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Affiliated Engineers, Inc</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://www.aeieng.com/"><FONT size=2>www.aeieng.com</FONT></A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>608.236.1112</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>303.859.7523 - c</FONT></DIV><BR><BR>>>> Julia Beabout <juliabeabout@yahoo.com> 8/18/2009 11:09 AM >>><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV>Hello All,</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thought I'd bring the new policy regarding CIRs for LEED 2009/v3 projects to the Bldg-sim community's attention for discussion and potential action. It's a big change. (The following is copied from the new GBCI Policy Manual).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><EM>All CIR rulings that are generated in response to a CIR submitted on or before June 26, 2009, and pertain to a pre-LEED 2009 Rating System, are precedent setting. Such rulings will be referenced in the CIR database. Accordingly, the CIR ruling will carry forth and apply to other pre-LEED 2009 projects submitted by the same Project Team and also be available as a ruling for other pre-LEED 2009 projects registered by other project teams. <BR><BR>All CIR rulings that are generated in response to a CIR submitted after June 26, 2009, for all rating systems including pre-LEED 2009 and current versions, will be project specific. As a result, the ruling will only apply to the project for which the CIR was submitted, and there will be no corresponding entry in the CIR database. Accordingly, the CIR ruling will not be precedent setting and will not carry forth and apply to other projects submitted by the same Project Team nor be available as a ruling for other projects registered by other project teams. <BR><BR><B>Please Note: </B>THE CIR DATABASE THAT WAS CREATED FOR PRE-LEED 2009 RATING SYSTEMS MAY NOT BE REFERENCED OR RELIED UPON BY PROJECT TEAMS PURSUING CERTIFICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LEED 2009 RATING SYSTEMS. <BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></EM>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In my opinion, this departure from a historical, precedent-setting CIR database is concerning and is a move in the wrong direction - especially with respect to CIRs related to energy modeling for LEED NC EA Pr2 and EACredit 1.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Most of the LEED energy models I have performed have been for laboratory and health-care building types using the ASHRAE 90.1-<U>2004</U>, Appendix G, modeling protocol. I have found the historical CIR database invaluable with respect to interpretations, application and substantiation for certification submittals. As many of you may be aware, there were many holes in the 2004 edition regarding the application of the standard to these project types (not to mention others). Judging by Bldg-sim traffic and my own experience, this caused much confusion and consternation amongst energy modelers. The posting of CIR rulings on subjects relevant to laboratory and healthcare buildings greatly improved the consistency in applying the standard across proejcts as well as the consistency of the rulings by subsequent CIR responders and LEED reviewers. They also lessened the extra financial (and time) burden these project types potentially faced by eliminating the need to submit repeated CIRs on the same topics for each model/project.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>LEED 2009 uses ASHRAE 90.1-<U>200<STRONG>7</STRONG>,</U> Appendix G. In my estimation, while the 2007 edition has made improvements in addressing the unique modeling requirements for laboratories (and to a lesser degree health-care), there are still many unaddressed specifics for these building types. By eliminating reliance upon a historical, precedent-setting CIR database and making each project submit CIRs, LEED/GBCI will unfairly increase the financial (and time) burden of LEED certification for laboratory and health-care projects. It will force us to unnecessarily submit and receive approval on CIRs that come up on almost every laboratory and health-care building. Additionally, it is very likely to increase the inconsistency in which the standard is applied across these project types. Based on my experience with LEED certification submittals, there is a lack of consistency amongst USBGC CIR responders as well as LEED reviewers. This is understandable given the complexity of the standard and its application across such a broad range of building types. However, this reality is unfortunate at best and unfair and unreasonable at worst. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If you have concern about this new direction on CIRs, I encourage you to "write your congressman" by emailing LEED and encouraging them to reconsider this approach.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Julia</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>