<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc="http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:Repl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda="http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi";
panose-1:2 11 7 3 2 1 2 2 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Forgot to put the CIR in. Also,
I’m just realizing that at the bottom of the CIR it states that addenda have
now been approved for use in LEED. Wouldn’t this invalidate #9, as Appendix G
addenda a allows for the use of low-flow fixtures?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><b>“4/25/2007 - </b> <b>Credit Interpretation
Request</b><br>
The adoption of Appendix G under LEED 2.2 raises all sorts of interesting questions
with respect to the energy modeling protocol. <br>
<br>
Please clarify for us and the world of LEED users out there the following:<br>
<br>
1. Appendix G Addendum a<br>
Would USGBC for LEED 2.2 adopt the published Addendum a to 90.1-2004 Appendix G
which changes a number of areas?<br>
<br>
2. Building Orientation<br>
May we choose to not implement in our baseline model ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Appendix
G Table G3.1 5. (a) orientation rotation which requires rotating the model to 4
cardinal directions, and averaging the results. For our project, orientation
with the long axis of the building East-West was not optional. <br>
<br>
3. Baseline Fenestration Area and Location<br>
Would the USGBC eliminate the provision under ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Appendix G Table
G3.1 Baseline 5.(c) that requires dividing out the entire design window area,
up to the 40% maximum window to wall ratio, and defining it as horizontal bands
with average window to wall area on all facings and floors? This change is also
proposed under Addendum a to 90.-2004. The addendum references the section
numbering from an earlier version of the Standard prior to the creation of
Table G3.1 in the current version of the Standard. <br>
<br>
4. Residential Designed Lighting Baseline<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2 adopt the same rules adopted under LEED 2.1 CIR rulings
that established a residential lighting baseline, for designed fixed lighting?
ASHRAE 90.1-2004 still treats residential living area lighting as exempt (9.1.1
Exception b), and Appendix G does not define a baseline for this lighting. The
rulings defined a process of mapping from the designed lighting to baseline
lighting with conventional incandescent lighting, with a maximum baseline
lighting power density of 2.0 W/s.f. The rulings also established a 750 hour
full load equivalent operating schedule to be the same in design and baseline. <br>
<br>
5. Residential Receptacle Lighting<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2 accept 90.1 Addendum a) change to table G3.1 Design 6
(d) so that receptable lighting energy usage is not subtracted out from the
design and baseline models. This is an inconsistency the addendum corrects, and
is the only case where non-regulated energy is not counted under the new
standard. <br>
<br>
6. Lighting Controls<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2. allow Exceptional Calculations regarding energy
savings for occupancy sensor and time-of-day controls that exceed ASHRAE 90.1
code requirements that are greater than the Appendix G Table G3.2. For example,
LEED 2.1 rulings appeared to allow greater than 10% allowed by Appendix G for
occupancy sensors controlling normally 24 hour interior stair lighting in a
multi-family high-rise that would be occupied only a small fraction of the
time. <br>
<br>
7. Exterior Lighting<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2 allow credit for exterior lighting that is more
efficient than the new mandatory provision for exterior lighting in 90.1-2004
section 9.4. Appendix G does not address how exterior lighting should be
modeled for the baseline, and therefore the default is that it should be
modeled the same as the design and no credit for savings could be taken. <br>
<br>
8. Residential Appliances and Exhaust Fans<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2. allow for Energy Star rated appliances and exhaust
fans an Exceptional Calculation approach (similar to previous LEED 2.1 rulings
for an appliance ID credit) to calculate energy cost savings for EAc1?
Exceptional calculation would be based on Energy Star data to define design and
baseline energy usage? <br>
<br>
9. DHW Usage Reduction<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2. allow the approach to claim domestic hot water energy
cost reduction based on low flow fixtures, relative to EPACT standard allowed
fixture flows from earlier LEED 2.1 rulings. Another approach would be to adopt
90.1-2004 addendum a) revision to Table 3.1 Baseline 11. labeled as a revision
to G4.3 under the older numbering convention. <br>
<br>
10. Heat Recovery from Condenser Loop<br>
Will USGBC for LEED 2.2 allow the baseline adjustment for heat recovery from
condenser loops to DHW as required in section 6.5.6.2 to be done with
assistance of spreadsheet analysis outside of the model, or will the provision
at Appendix G Table 3.1 Baseline 11 (f) exception that requires the proposed
design to actually include the heat recovery equipment in the real building, if
the modeling software cannot model it. The design feature cannot be modeled
under DOE-2.2 and its interface eQuest, one of the most widely used and
otherwise versatile programs. This provision, if enforced, requires a
significant expense for the project that may not be cost effective compared to
alternatives. This would be a penalty on the subset of projects that fall under
the rules at 6.5.6.2. Normally, the design does not have to meet the
prescriptive requirements of ASHRAE, but is allowed to make trade-offs to
achieve overall energy cost savings. <br>
<br>
11. Solar Hot Water-Clarify Eligibility for EAc1&2<br>
Will USGBC state that solar hot water generation, that does not generate any
electricity is eligible for credit under EAc1 and EAc2? Requirements language
paragraph 1 for EAc2 does not state if energy generated from a renewable source
is electric or thermal, although other parts of the chapter allow for solar hot
water, but the second paragraph refers to a method to just estimate electricity
generation. Just want to be sure there is no question that solar hot water
generation is eligible for both EAc1&2. <br>
<b>4/25/2007 - </b> <b>Ruling</b><br>
[REVISED 10/30/07 to allow energy savings for exterior lighting.]<br>
<br>
1. No. Since multiple projects are already in process and the LEED-NC v2.2
Reference Guide specifically mentions that ASHRAE 90.1-2004 is applicable
without addenda; any addenda not included in the completed standard will not be
accepted at this time.<br>
<br>
2. No. The Appendix G method of distributing the glazing equally on all
orientations normalizes this issue. The question raised by Appendix G is – Is
your building designed to respond to the specific solar orientation?<br>
<br>
3. No. See points 1 and 2 above.<br>
<br>
4. Yes. The calculation methodology should be considered equivalent for LEED-NC
v2.2.<br>
<br>
5. The LEED modeling protocol addresses this issue by setting the process load
as 25% of total energy by default, unless it is a process dominated building.
For a typical residential building, process loads will never be above 25% and
therefore should not be an issue.<br>
<br>
6. Exceptional Calculation for any measure that is not accounted for in the modeling
protocol is accepted on a case-by-case basis.<br>
<br>
7. Yes, project teams can take credit for efficient exterior lighting within
ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G. Credit may only be taken for the tradable surfaces
listed in ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Table 9.4.5. All other exterior lighting must be
modeled identically in the Baseline and Proposed case. The Baseline case
exterior lighting power allowance should be calculated using the methodology
outline in Section 9.4.5. <br>
<br>
8. Yes. Page 184 of the LEED-NC v2.2 Reference Guide describes Exceptional
Calculations for residential appliances.<br>
<br>
9. No. Credit for saving water is already granted in the Water Efficiency
section of the LEED Rating System. The Domestic Hot Water (DHW) loop will be
sized for design flows and the PRM does not allow credit for changing loop
flows for DHW.<br>
<br>
10. No. The requirements for the loop sizing have been set in Appendix G and to
maintain integrity of the modeling protocol, such exceptions cannot be taken. <br>
<br>
11. Yes. On-site energy generated can be taken credit for using the Exceptional
Calculations under EAc1, Optimize Energy Performance, and as percent of total
energy for EAc2, On-Site Renewable Energy.<br>
<br>
<br>
Note: ASHRAE Addenda have been approved for use in LEED projects, as stated on
our website: http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=2664”<span
style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Robby Oylear,</span><span style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";
color:#004080'> </span><span style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";
color:navy'>LEED</span><span style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";
color:navy;position:relative;top:-2.0pt;mso-text-raise:2.0pt'>®</span><span
style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";color:navy'> AP</span><span
style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";color:#004080'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:navy'>Mechanical
Engineer<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:navy'>direct:
206.788.4571<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:navy'>cell:
206.354.2721<o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><u><span style='font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:blue'>www.</span></u><span style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><a href="http://www.rushingco.com/"
title="blocked::http://www.rushingco.com/"><span style='font-size:7.5pt'>rushingco.com</span></a></span><span
style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org
[mailto:bldg-sim-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Robby
Oylear<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 01, 2009 9:09 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> bldg-sim@lists.onebuilding.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Bldg-sim] Low-flow Fixtures and LEED<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Based on a LEED CIR dated 4/25/2007 (see below) domestic hot
water savings cannot be claimed for the use of low-flow plumbing fixtures, even
though Appendix G addendum a specifically states that credit may be taken
through calculations. Have there been any changes to LEED review
methodology since this CIR was released that allows credit to be taken?
Previously we have taken credit for low-flow fixtures and it has been accepted
by the reviewer, but have recently come across this CIR which seems to state
otherwise.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>The reasoning behind not allowing it doesn’t make a whole
lot of sense. Water efficiency and energy efficiency are two separate
animals, and getting credits under WEc3 Water Use Reduction does not equate to
getting energy efficiency credit under EAc1. It’s not like this would be
the first time LEED has allowed double dipping (EAc2 Renewable Energy is
allowed to be used under EAc1 as well).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Is there a legitimate way to take credit for the energy reduction
of low-flow fixtures for LEED?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif"'>Robby
Oylear, LEED</span><span style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif";
position:relative;top:-2.0pt;mso-text-raise:2.0pt'>®</span><span
style='font-family:"Franklin Gothic Demi","sans-serif"'> AP<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Mechanical Engineer</span></i><i><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>direct: 206.788.4571<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>cell: 206.354.2721</span><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:3.0pt'><u><span style='font-size:7.5pt;
color:blue'>www.</span></u><span style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><a
href="http://www.rushingco.com" title="blocked::http://www.rushingco.com/"><span
style='font-size:7.5pt'>rushingco</span><span style='font-size:7.5pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'><img
border=0 width=95 height=41 id="Picture_x0020_1"
src="cid:image001.jpg@01C9FA2B.F72E6380" alt="Logo_B&W_1"></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>