Log in
LEED v2009
New Construction
Sustainable Sites
Alternative Transportation—Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles

LEED CREDIT

NC-2009 SSc4.3: Alternative transportation - low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles 3 points

See all forum discussions about this credit »

Credit achievement rate

XX%

Upgrade to LEEDuser Premium to see how many projects achieved this credit. Try it free »

LEEDuser expert

Ellen Mitchell

LEEDuser’s viewpoint

Frank advice from LEED experts

LEED is changing all the time, and every project is unique. Even seasoned professionals can miss a critical detail and lose a credit or even a prerequisite at the last minute. Our expert advice guides our LEEDuser Premium members and saves you valuable time.

Credit language

USGBC logo

© Copyright U.S. Green Building Council, Inc. All rights reserved.

Requirements

Option 1: Preferred or discounted parking
Provide preferred parking1 for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles2 for 5% of the total vehicle parking capacity of the site. Providing a discounted parking rate is an acceptable substitute for preferred parking for low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles. To establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available to all customers (i.e., not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity), publicly posted at the entrance of the parking area and available for a minimum of 2 years.

OR

Option 2: Alternative fuel
Install alternative-fuel fueling stations for 3% of the total vehicle parking capacity of the site. Liquid or gaseous fueling facilities must be separately ventilated or located outdoors.

OR

Option 3: Provide vehicles
Provide low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles for 3% of full-time equivalent (FTE) occupants. Provide preferred parking for these vehicles.

OR

Option 4: Vehicle sharing program
Provide building occupants access to a low-emitting or fuel-efficient vehicle-sharing program. The following requirements must be met:
  • One low-emitting or fuel-efficient vehicle must be provided per 3% of FTE occupants, assuming that 1 shared vehicle can carry eight persons (i.e., 1 vehicle per 267 FTE occupants). For buildings with fewer than 267 FTE occupants, at least 1 low emitting or fuel-efficient vehicle must be provided.
  • A vehicle-sharing contract must be provided that has an agreement of at least two years.
  • The estimated number of customers served per vehicle must be supported by documentation.
  • A narrative explaining the vehicle-sharing program and its administration must be submitted.
  • Parking for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles must be located in the nearest available spaces in the nearest available parking area. Provide a site plan or area map clearly highlighting the walking path from the parking area to the project site and noting the distance.



  • 1For the purposes of this credit “preferred parking” refers to the parking spots that are closest to the main entrance of the project (exclusive of spaces designated for handicapped persons) or parking passes provided at a discounted price. To establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available to all eligible customers (i.e. not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity), publicly posted at the entrance of the parking area, and available for a minimum of 2 years.2For the purposes of this credit, low-emitting vehicles are defined as vehicles that are classified as Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by the California Air Resources Board. Fuel-efficient vehicles are defined as vehicles that have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide [Europe ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles] [South America ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles].

    Alternative Compliance Paths (ACPs)

    Europe ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
    Projects in Europe may use vehicles meeting the Euro 6 limit values of Regulation (EC) No. 715/2007.[view:embed_resource=page_1=4887966]
    South America ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
    Vehicles in South America may qualify as low-emitting and fuel-efficient by meeting both of the following conditions:
  1. A score of Four Stars or above from IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis - Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) Nota Verde Program.
  2. An A from INMETRO (Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia - National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology) Brazilian Labeling Program for Vehicles.
[view:embed_resource=page_1=4908164]
SITES-LEED Equivalency
This LEED credit (or a component of this credit) has been established as equivalent to a SITES v2 credit or component. For more information on using the equivalency as a substitution in your LEED or SITES project, see this article and guidance document.
See all forum discussions about this credit »

What does it cost?

Cost estimates for this credit

On each BD+C v4 credit, LEEDuser offers the wisdom of a team of architects, engineers, cost estimators, and LEED experts with hundreds of LEED projects between then. They analyzed the sustainable design strategies associated with each LEED credit, but also to assign actual costs to those strategies.

Our tab contains overall cost guidance, notes on what “soft costs” to expect, and a strategy-by-strategy breakdown of what to consider and what it might cost, in percentage premiums, actual costs, or both.

This information is also available in a full PDF download in The Cost of LEED v4 report.

Learn more about The Cost of LEED v4 »

Frequently asked questions

Do all hybrid vehicles automatically qualify for this credit?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

Can a project pursue this credit via a combination of Option 1 (preferred parking) and Option 2 (alternative fueling stations)?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

How should the signage read for preferred parking spaces?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

For electric vehicle charging stations, how are the parameters established for fueling capacity?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

I am working on a project with no parking spaces allocated. Can I earn this credit?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

Our project is outside the U.S., and the LEED-approved ACEEE Green Score and CARB ratings and classifications don't apply to many vehicles. Is there another approach that is accepted?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

Should I consider motorbikes and parking spaces for them under this credit? What about fleet vehicles?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

See all forum discussions about this credit »

Addenda

10/1/2014Updated: 3/29/2018
Regional ACP
Description of change:
Add the following below the footnotes for this credit:

"Vehicles in South America may qualify as low-emitting and fuel-efficient by meeting both of the following conditions:
1. A score of Four Stars or above from IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis - Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) Nota Verde Program.
2. An A from INMETRO (Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia - National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology) Brazilian Labeling Program for Vehicles."

**Updated on 4/1/2015 to include applicability to LEED v4
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
11/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
(1) Change the California Air Resources Board (CARB), Certified Vehicles List website to "http://www.arb.ca.gov/" (2) Change the California Air Resources Board (CARB), Cleaner Car Guide website to "http://www.driveclean.ca.gov/"
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Rating System Correction
Description of change:
Change footnote text to, "For the purposes of this credit, low-emitting vehicles are defined as vehicles that are classified as Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by the California Air Resources Board. Fuel-efficient vehicles are defined as vehicles that have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide."
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
In the first line of the first paragraph, replace "5" with "2" so the text becomes "This credit can be achieved under Option 2 by specifying..."
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
In the box header, replace "Option 5" with "Option 2"
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
Change footnote text to, "For the purposes of this credit, low-emitting vehicles are defined as vehicles that are classified as Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by the California Air Resources Board. Fuel-efficient vehicles are defined as vehicles that have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide."
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Rating System Correction
Description of change:
Switch the footnote numbers so the text becomes the following:Provide low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles? for 3% of full-timeequivalent (FTE) occupants.Provide preferred parking? for these vehicles
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
Switch the footnote numbers so the text becomes the following:Provide low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles? for 3% of full-timeequivalent (FTE) occupants.Provide preferred parking? for these vehicles
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
8/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
Change the California Air Resources Board, Certified Vehicles List website from "http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ccvl/ccvl.htm" to "http://www.arb.ca.gov/".
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
4/2/2014
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Can a project located in California achieve Option 1 of SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation - Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and/or SSc4.4: Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity by meeting the requirements of the CalGreen building code?

Ruling:

New construction projects in California can use CALGreen’s “Clean Air/Vanpool/EV” signage as a substitute for both the low-emitting and fuel efficient vehicle signage and the carpool/vanpool signage requirements of SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation - Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and SSc4.4: Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity. Projects must meet a 10% threshold for “Clean Air/Vanpool/EV” parking, since CALGreen signage refers to both vehicle classifications, to ensure the appropriate parking capacity has been provided. Note that this requirement also applies to LEED-CS and LEED Schools projects. For additional information, reference LEED Interpretation 2292. All other applicable LEED requirements must be met to achieve SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation - Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and/or SSc4.4: Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity.

Campus Applicable
Yes
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
7/5/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The project, located in New York City, is a 480,000 SF office building with 90,000 SF of retail, applying under LEED Core and Shell v.2.0. The project has 52 valet parking spaces consisting of mechanically stacked parking. We seek to achieve Credit SS-4.3 through Option 1, providing preferred parking for 5% of the spaces (3 spaces total) for low-emission vehicles. Because of the valet parking, the usual approach to preferred parking (locating it conveniently and reserving the spaces) is not straightforward, and we seek your guidance on how to proceed. 1. The approach that most closely approximates that used for self-parking is for the three preferred spaces to be at grade level and close to the valet station, thus shortening the wait. 2. A second form of preference would be that the owners of preferred spaces would be served first if more than one owner is awaiting valet service. 3. A third approach is to offer a discount to owners of low-emission vehicles, up to a number of owners equal to 5% of the parking spaces - our case 3 owners. We assume that the discount would be 5% of the value of the parking fee. We request your judgment as to whether any or all these approaches would achieve the Credit.

Ruling:

The applicant has requested confirmation of three different approaches as acceptable substitutes for preferred parking for low-emitting/fuel efficient vehicles. 1. Locating the preferred spaces so as to provide the shortest wait does meet the intent of preferred parking. 2. Allowing owners of preferred spaces to move to the front of the valet line is *not* an acceptable alternative to preferred parking. 3. Providing discounted parking rates is an acceptable approach. In order to establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available for all customers (not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity) and publicly posted at the entrance to the parking deck. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
12/2/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The intent of Sustainable Sites credit 4.3 is to, "Reduce pollution and land development impacts from automobile use," while the intent of SSc4.4 is to, "Reduce pollution and land development impacts from single occupancy vehicle use." Both of these credits offer compliance paths (SSc4.3 Options 1-2 and SSc4.4 Options 1-3) that require providing "preferred parking" for low-emitting/fuel-efficient or carpool vehicles. "Preferred parking" is defined as, "...parking spots that are closest to the main entrance of the project...or parking passes provided at a discounted price." We believe that proximity is not the only characteristic for a preferred parking space and that the protection from the elements offered by covered surface parking is also a qualifier for preferred status. (Have you ever seen a car parked on a hot day in the shade of a tree, even though there are many parking spaces available between the shade of that tree and a building\'s entrance?) Parking consumers have shown an increased willingness-to-pay for covered surface parking in both hot and cold climates, as customers of off site parking lots (at an airport for instance) willingly pay more for covered parking than uncovered parking. In hot climates shade for parked vehicles is highly desirable, while in cold climates protection against snow and hail is also desirable. One study verified that in shading a vehicle\'s cabin, interior temperatures were reduced by an average of over 45

Ruling:

No, covered surface parking is not an acceptable characteristic for preferred parking for the purposes of this credit. Covered parking may be considered "preferred" by some people in some locations and/or seasons, but it would not always be considered "preferred." For example, when it is raining it would likely be preferred to be parked closer to the building entrance than to be parked farther away from the entrance even if the car were covered. Regarding your second question about SSc7.2: roof structures used to shade parking would need to be included as roof area in calculations for SSc7.2. All relevant requirements and calculation methodologies would apply. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
7/1/2012
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

This Core and Shell v2.0 project includes 12 stories of parking within a 40 story commercial office building. There will be a total of 1,454 parking spaces in the building. Of these, 73 spaces will be designated as Low-Emitting/Fuel Efficient vehicle parking to meet SSc4.3 credit requirements. Only building workers/employees will be permitted to park in the garage, and all visitors will be required to use the garage valet service. To enter the building, employees must park in the garage and then take an elevator to the main floor entrance. Occupants may not enter the building at any entrance other than the main ground level entrance. Building tenants will need to pay for parking spaces for their employees and will have the choice to purchase non-assigned parking spaces or assigned spaces (assigned spaces will be "preferred" and also more expensive). The owner considers the designation of "preferred" spaces closest to the elevator vestibules for LE/FE vehicles to be a market barrier. Users pay a premium to park close to elevators in this market, and revenue generated is essential to funding building operations. As stated in the USGBC LEED CS Reference Guide v2.0, "For projects that demonstrate market barriers to the definition of \'preferred parking closest to the main entrance,\' alternatives to may be considered on a case-by-case basis." The project proposes to provide dedicated parking spaces for LE/FE vehicles within 100 feet of the elevator vestibules. The farthest parking space from the elevator vestibule is 260 feet. We feel this approach is able to provide preferred spaces for green cars without cutting into the revenue the owner needs to generate from the premium slots closest to the elevators. In total, at least 73 spaces(5%) within 100 feet of the elevator vestibules will be designated parking for LE/FE vehicles.

Ruling:

The project team proposes that locating LE/FE parking spaces in preferred locations directly adjacent to elevator vestibules is a market barrier, since it displaces "premium" preferred parking that is provided at additional costs and whose revenue supports the building owner\'s operational budget. Current design calls for 1,454 parking spaces on twelve floors, with 73 preferred spaces necessary to comply with credit requirements. The project team proposes that LE/FE vehicles would be located adjacent to, but beyond these "premium" preferred parking spaces, clustered around the elevator vestibule of each of the garage\'s twelve stories and within 100\' (of a possible 260\') from the elevator vestibules. No, this situation does not constitute a market barrier to the creation of truly preferable LE/FE parking spaces. Parking spaces located near distant elevator vestibules on far away parking levels are generally not considered preferred spaces. Typical credit compliance would have all LE/FE parking spaces clustered around the first elevator vestibule that is encountered upon entering the garage, as the elevator vestibule represents the main entrance to the building. Therefore all 73 parking spaces should be provided on the main floor of the parking garage. Alternately, the project team can distribute preferred parking on more than one level away from the garage\'s main entrance, as long as it is no more than 1 level away from this main entrance and the majority of the preferred parking is available on the main floor of the parking garage. Since it is assumed that each floor of parking will provide approximately 120 parking spaces (1454/73) and the submittal indicates that distributing "premium" preferred parking near elevator vestibules on multiple parking levels is a viable option, it does not appear that providing all of the LE/FE preferred parking directly adjacent to elevator vestibules on the main garage entrance level, disabled parking withstanding, represents a true market barrier. Elevating the importance of LE/FE vehicles above premium parking speaks directly to the incentive that credit requirements aim to create.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
2/26/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

We have four LEED Registered projects within a prison expansion phase construction. We wish to determine how best to define our projects for LEED purposes as follows: Administration Building "A" (a building outside the secure perimeter) Close Custody Housing "D,E,F, & G" (High Security cell blocks, 4 identical buildings registered as one project) IMU/Seg Housing "C" (cell block with Maximum Security/special needs inmates) Core Facility "H" (multiple use building) Each of these buildings will share one new large parking (400+ spaces) lot and can be used to qualify each of these four projects for SSc4.4 (Parking Capacity), appropriately treating this expansion for LEED calculations as a campus environment. We would like to investigate whether our projects can earn SS Credit 4.3 - Alt Fuel Vehicles. There are two potential paths we are considering: providing bio-diesel vehicles and/or installing a biodiesel refueling station. We need information on the quantity of bio-diesel vehicles and how many preferred parking spaces would be required. We presume that one on-site bio-diesel refueling station servicing the fleet will suffice. We have FTE figures which include employees and visitors. For LEED calculations we do not consider inmates as "building occupants" since they do not leave the premises and therefore cannot commute.

Ruling:

As this project is a campus project, it could comply with the requirements of either the LEED-NCv2.1 Rating System or the LEED-NC Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects. Based on this Application Guide, the project would need to provide alternative fuel vehicles (such as bio-diesel), low-emissions and/or fuel efficient vehicles for 3% of the full time employees (FTE) in the buildings, AND provide preferred parking for these vehicles, AND have access to a nearby alternative fueling station. Alternatively, if fleet vehicles are provided for the project, at least 50% of the vehicles must be alternative fuel vehicles.Update April 15, 2011: Please note that all 2009 projects in multiple building situations must follow the 2010 Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects, located here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=7987. 2009 project teams should check this document for up to date guidance on all multiple building issues. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
10/9/2006
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Introduction: The David Brower Center is comprised of a small conference center, restaurant & rental office space for environmental non-profits. It is being constructed on a site containing three (3) distinct projects: The Brower Center; a residential project; and a city-owned public parking garage. The project is being constructed on the site of an existing City owned and operated surface parking lot, which currently provides public parking for local merchants. Below grade parking will be constructed to replace the City\'s surface lot, therefore the majority of the Brower Center will be built above a City of Berkeley public parking garage. There will also be a 96-unit residential project constructed adjacent to the Brower Center, also located over the parking garage. Additional parking will be dedicated to the residential project. There will be an air-space subdivision, which will legally define the city garage, the David Brower Center, and the adjacent residential project as separate deeded properties. The three properties will be owned and operated by three separate entities. Parking Requirements and Capacity: The Berkeley Zoning ordinance would typically require the Brower Center to have 68 parking spaces (1.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of commercial space). The City of Berkeley has waived this requirement, because of the proximity to public transportation, therefore the Brower Center is not required to include any parking and, in fact, will not construct any parking. (The project is within 600 feet of 6 bus lines and 1 subway (BART) station). Since the property will not own any associated parking, the Brower Center will enter into an agreement with the City of Berkeley to lease parking spaces in the City Garage to satisfy various aspects of SS Credit 4.3. The project is seeking approval of an alternative compliance path, based on the CIR\'s dated 1/26/05 and 9/6/05. The project team proposes the following components to meet the intent of this credit: 1) The project will achieve SSc4.1. As noted above, the project is within 600 feet of 6 bus lines and 1 subway (BART) station. This will provide ample opportunity for tenants or employees to access the site via public transportation. (per CIR dated 1/26/05) 2) The project proposes to provide one (1) hybrid (AFV) carshare vehicle to satisfy the requirement for alternative fuel vehicles. The CIR dated 9/6/05 establishes that one carshare AFV is required per every 267 FTE occupants. The Brower Center will have 132 FTE\'s and therefore will provide one (1) hybrid carshare vehicle. The project will establish a 2-year carshare agreement with either City Car Share or Zipcars. 3) Information about the car share program will be distributed to all of the building occupants, and will be available in the lobby. 4) Since the Brower Center will not construct or own any parking, the project will lease the one (1) parking space needed for the carshare program from the City owned garage that is directly below the building. The Brower Center property is approximately 85\' from the pedestrian entrance to the city garage elevator lobby. This will provide safe, convenient access to the cars in the carshare program.

Ruling:

Your proposal adheres to previous credit rulings and is acceptable.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
2/14/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our LEED-NC v2.1 registered project is an office/laboratory building located on a 738 acre university campus. To meet the requirements of SSc4.3, the Reference Guide indicates that the university must ".provide alternative fuel vehicles for 3% of building occupants AND provide preferred parking for these vehicles." 220 total FTE occupants are assigned to this building, so 7 alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) are required per this calculation. The LEED-NC Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects (AGMBC - October 2005) indicates that it is possible to meet the requirements for SSc4.3 by providing ".low-emission and/or fuel efficient vehicles* for 3% of the full time employees (FTE)", and that these vehicles must be classified as Zero Emission Vehicles by CARB or have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the ACEEE annual vehicle rating guide. A 9/6/2005 CIR Ruling for SSc4.3 states that ".implementing car-share programs with alternative fueled vehicles (AFVs), such as Zipcars or Flexcars. Is applicable to a campus situation, and it is therefore reasonable to assume that (a).car-share strategy would meet the intent of the credit." The Ruling further indicates ".that it is reasonable that 8 building FTE occupants are served per shared-use alternative fuel vehicle." Therefore, for our project, 1 car-share AFV would be required to meet the requirements of this credit per this calculation. The university proposes to purchase one low-emission/fuel-efficient vehicle that meets CARB or ACEEE requirements stipulated in the AGMBC. This car-share vehicle will be reserved for use only by the 220 FTE occupants of our LEED registered building. It will be parked in a preferred and marked parking space near the building. A car-share program will be created to promote and manage the use of this vehicle for all FTE occupants. This university program will provide more benefit than those created by a third-party car-share program because: - The individual FTE occupants will not be required to rent the vehicle and so will be more apt to use it, and - The AFV will be available to building occupants for many years beyond the minimum two-year contract period that is recommended in the 9/6/2005 CIR Ruling. We propose to submit proof that the vehicle meets low-emission/fuel-efficient vehicle requirements, proof of purchase, a copy of the car-share plan, and a map showing the location of the preferred parking space and proximity to the building. We are seeking LEED Platinum certification and, consequently, each point is critical. We want to be sure that we execute this properly. Therefore, will this credit strategy be sufficient to earn the SSc4.3 point?

Ruling:

Yes, based on the description provided above it appears that the strategy being proposed meets the intent and requirements of SSc4.3. As the applicant has indicated, a LEED NC v2.1 SSc4.3 ruling dated 9/6/2005, states that implementing car share programs with alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs), such as Zipcars and Flexcars, is applicable on a campus situation. In this case, the car share program would be developed and administered by the university and not a third party. This is consistent with the intent of the credit so long as the program is administered as described above and: 1) the car is owned by the university 2) the car is not assigned to any one person, but rather available for use by any and all of the occupants of the building 3) the program will be in place for at least two years. In addition, per the LEED NC v2.1 SSc4.3 ruling dated 1/26/2005, since this project is an office/laboratory building, to earn this credit using this approach, the project must also achieve SSc4.1, so that the building occupants can access the building without commuting by car. As the applicant has indicated the LEED NC v2.1 SSc4.3 ruling dated 9/6/2005 also states that it is reasonable that 8 building FTE occupants are served per shared-use alternative fuel vehicle. In addition to the documentation listed above, the project team should also provide the FTE occupancy for the project and calculations demonstrating that AFVs are provided for at least 3% of the FTE occupants (assuming that 8 FTE occupants are served per shared use vehicle). A narrative explaining the car share program and its administration should also be provided. Update April 15, 2011: Please note that all 2009 projects in multiple building situations must follow the 2010 Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects, located here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=7987. 2009 project teams should check this document for up to date guidance on all multiple building issues. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
10/2/2006
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our project is the renovation of a large classroom building on a university campus and we would like to achieve credit SSc4.3 on a campus-wide basis. We are using LEED NC v.2.2 for this credit. We would like to reserve spaces for low-emission and fuel-efficient vehicles on an on-demand basis, since all campus parking is permit-based (SSc4.4 Ruling 10/03/05). When a fuel efficient vehicle permit is obtained, we will consult with the permit holder and determine what constitutes "preferred" parking for that vehicle and reserve a space accordingly as not all commuters consider the same spaces preferable. We will actively promote the preferred parking program to faculty, staff and students. For the purpose of this credit, the USGBC has defined low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles as those that have a minimum score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide. While we appreciate the work done by ACEEE in compiling their lists, we feel this guide will not be able to meet the needs of our program. This is primarily because the ACEEE ratings are only released once a year in February, nearly a year after the first of the new model year vehicles are released. If we structure our policy around the ACEEE guide, no one buying the newest cars on the market will know if their vehicles qualify for preferential parking at the time of purchase. University commuters will have to purchase a vehicle and hope it makes the list. To address this problem, we would like to use EPA MPG ratings as the qualifier for preferential parking. EPA MPG ratings are constantly updated on their website (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/) and are required of all new vehicles. EPA MPG ratings have the added benefit of being well publicized when a consumer is purchasing a new vehicle, as opposed to ACEEE ratings, which are more obscure. For the 2006 model year, the average fuel efficiency for the 20 vehicles with an ACEEE rating of 40 is 24.4 MPG city (ranging from 22 to 28 with a median of 24) and 32.1 MPG highway. We suggest offering preferential parking to all vehicles with an EPA MPG rating of 25 MPG (city) or greater. Admittedly, the ACEEE rating has the added benefit of combining fuel efficiency data with emissions data, but in general the vehicles that are the most fuel efficient will emit the fewest pollutants. We believe that using EPA MPG ratings instead of ACEEE green scores increases the likelihood of long-term success for this program and helps achieve the goals of mitigating pollution from automobile use and encouraging the purchase of low-emission and fuel-efficient vehicles. Having an up-to-date website is necessary for University commuters and the parking office to confirm preferred parking eligibility. We welcome any suggestions.

Ruling:

The applicant is seeking approval to use the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Miles per Gallon (MPG) ratings instead of the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide as an alternative reference standard for Option 2 of SSc4.3 under LEED-NC v2.2. An acceptable compliance path is the "US EPA Certified SmartWay Elite" (http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/all-rank-06.htm). Please note that this allowance is specific to the "Elite" designation (not simply "SmartWay"), which has been confirmed as more stringent than the ACEEE Green Score of 40. The "SmartWay Elite" standard will provide purchasers of new vehicles up-to-date information on car models that meet the intent of this credit.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
4/1/2015
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The applicant is requesting a ruling on whether a combination of Options 1 and 2 of SSc4.3 Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles is sufficient to meet the credit requirements. The applicant proposes that the credit requirements are met if the number of preferred parking spaces divided by .05 plus the number of charging stations divided by .03 is equal to or greater than the total parking capacity. This approach meets the credit intent and may be used to document credit achievement.

Ruling:

Yes, projects may achieve this credit using a combination of Option 1 and Option 2. Preferred parking for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles must be provided for 5% of the total parking capacity, as required in Option 1. Fueling stations may be substituted for preferred parking spaces to meet this threshold, such that one fueling station is equivalent to 1.67 preferred parking spaces. All other credit requirements (such as the location of preferred parking spaces and the capacity of fueling stations) apply. The special circumstances section should be used for additional documentation.

Campus Applicable
Yes
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
9/10/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Of over 3500 parking spaces available, 5%, or 102 spaces, is to be dedicated to low emitting vehicles in preferred locations in order to meet the credit requirements. The most preferable spaces available are metered spaces directly in front of the retail spaces. There are a total of 140 metered spaces. According to International Council of Shopping Centers Research Review, VOL. 13, No. 2 published in 2006, the average amount of time spent by a visitor in the retail center is 81.5 minutes. If the low emitting vehicles were allowed 90 minutes free parking in all metered spaces, which exceeds the 5% credit requirement and would allow the typical visitor adequate time to complete their trip according to the ICSC study, would the intent of the credit be met and provide an adequate alternate compliance path for obtaining the point?

Ruling:

Preferred parking must be located within the LEED project boundary and provided at no charge. If the metered spaces are owned by the municipality and/or fall outside the project boundary, the preferred parking spaces must be selected from parking provided within the project boundary. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
5/9/2011
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Most of our preferred parking spaces go unoccupied throughout the day and are putting a strain on our parking resources. Can we put all of the spaces for our campus in one location?

Ruling:

Yes, follow AGMBC to allocate spaces on a campus level. If further than 1/4 mile from a building, provide a shuttle. Or, provide drivers with a discounted rate so that the spaces don\'t have to be reserved. Applicable internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
4/9/2008
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our project is on a previously developed site where multiple buildings share one parking garage. No new parking will be provided specifically for our building, or in our project boundary, since the parking garage is existing. We would like to take the campus approach specified in CIR Ruling 2/26/2007: "If parking is being provided for the project in an existing parking garage on campus (not part of the project design and construction scope), it would be possible to attain this credit based on providing preferred parking spaces for 5% of the total vehicle parking capacity assigned for use of the project only (i.e. the number of spaces dedicated for use of the occupants of this project)." It is unclear at this time if all of the buildings that utilize the garage will pursue LEED. If all buildings pursue LEED, can the parking garage provide preferred parking without "assigning for the use of this project only" or do we have to have different signs for different buildings per the previous credit ruling? If only some but not all of the buildings pursue LEED, can the garage provide enough preferred fuel efficient parking for the LEED buildings, or for all of the buildings (including non-LEED) and not have to "assign for the use of a specific project"?

Ruling:

The CIR is inquiring if a project\'s parking is located in an existing shared structure (or lot) that is not a part of the project\'s LEED boundary, can parking for preferred vehicles be designated within this structure to support achievement of this credit. The referenced LEED-CS CIR Ruling for SSc4.3, dated 2/26/2007, indicates that projects using shared parking facilities may qualify for this credit if preferred parking spaces are provided within the structure or lot. The number of spaces must be at least equal to 5% of the total vehicle parking capacity assigned for use of the project only (i.e. the number of spaces dedicated for use of the occupants of this project). The spaces must be clearly identified for use by low-emitting, fuel-efficient vehicles and there must be a means for only occupants of the subject building to be able to park in the designated spaces. If the project does not want to limit access to these spaces to only occupants of the LEED building(s), then it must provide preferred parking for 5% of the total parking capacity for low emitting/fuel efficient vehicles. This approach would allow future buildings that use this parking garage to achieve this credit should they decide to pursue LEED certification. Please note that, per the previous CIR ruling, the existing parking facility must be located within 0.25 miles of any project that wishes to adopt this shared parking approach or must be serviced by a shuttle bus. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
10/1/2012
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Many cars in Brazil are fuel efficient and low-emitting yet do not meet the requirements of two credits (BD&C SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation: Low Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and O&M SSc4: Alternative Commuting Transportation) because the vehicles have not been evaluated by CARB or ACEEE. This hinders the ability of many Brazilian projects to achieve the credit. We propose that the following Brazilian standards be included in determining whether a vehicle is considered fuel-efficient or low-emitting:a. Any vehicle achieving Four Stars in the IBAMA Nota Verde (Green Note) system, the ratings for vehicles in this system can be found at: http://servicos.ibama.gov.br/ctf/publico/sel_marca_modelo_rvep.php. This system awards stars based on a vehicle\'s emissions reductions and fuel type. The first three stars are earned via relatively low emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and hydrocarbons. The fourth star is awarded for vehicles that have a CO2 emissions rate of less than 80g/km (128 g/mi). The fifth star is awarded for vehicles using alternative fuels (gasoline-ethanol mix, hybrid electric, and all-electric). b. Any vehicle receiving an A or B in the Brazilian Energy Program (PBE) of INMETRO (National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology) of the Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade. This program uses many of the same techniques that the U.S. EPA has used to evaluate fuel efficiency in American vehicles. A full description of the program is available at http://repositorios.inmetro.gov.br/bitstream/10926/1290/1/2010_Novgorodc....

Ruling:

The applicant has requested that vehicles in Brazil receiving Four Stars in the IBAMA Nota Verde (Green Note) program or vehicles receiving an A or B in the INMETRO Brazilian Labeling Program for Vehicles (PBEV) be classified as low-emitting and fuel-efficient for the purposes of LEED NC 2009 SSc4.3 and LEED EB 2009 SSc4. Vehicles in Brazil may qualify as low-emitting and fuel-efficient by earning both of the following conditions:1. A score of Four Stars or above from IBAMA. This is the highest score for vehicles that are low-emitting but not necessarily fueled by alternative fuels (as research indicates that not all alternative fuels ensure improved environmental performance).2. An A from INMETRO. INMETRO uses relative criteria for different vehicle classifications. This differs from the absolute standards used by the ACEEE methodology. Since, in this instance, the USGBC preference for absolute metrics cannot be met, only the highest INMETRO score is accepted. This will ensure that the credit rewards the best fuel-efficiencies in current and future vehicles.Because the Brazilian labeling programs measure emissions differently, both programs are required to verify that a vehicle meets the low-emitting and fuel-efficient requirements. Vehicles receiving a qualifying score from one agency but not the other will not be considered eligible.Applicable Internationally; Brazil.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
9/10/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The project is a LEED NCv2.1, 14-story residential high rise condominium. The project team would like to achieve SSc4.3 via the alternative fuel recharging station option. The project will supply electric vehicle recharging stations for 3% of the occupants equaling seven stations. The strategy was chosen based on the fact that a prospective penthouse buyer stipulated that he would only purchase the unit if the owner installed a 120v outlet for his electric car. As you know, this is a standard electric outlet, which by existing CIR\'s (dated 2/7/2003 and 1/6/2004) is not allowed to achieve this credit. However, as you also know, electric vehicle technology is moving away from manufacturing electric vehicles that require the standard 240v recharging station and designing them to simply require the standard 120v outlet. In light of this market turn, the owner is interested in supplying five 120v outlets and two 240v outlets. This will satisfy the penthouse buyer and provide an additional four outlets for other interested condo owners. To ensure that the other residents are aware of the amenity, the owner will market the outlets and educate residents and prospective buyers that they are available should they own or choose to buy an electric vehicle. This may be accomplished via pamphlets in new residents\' welcome baskets or in a similar type of marketing material. Since the electric vehicle market is in transformation, and cars that require a 240v outlet do still exist, the owner will abide by installing electric vehicle recharging stations for the remaining two 240v outlets IF necessary. In other words, if a resident requires a 240v recharging station for their electric vehicle, the owner will purchase a recharging station to accommodate one of the 240v outlets. This owner\'s requirement will be documented in a signed letter to USGBC for submittal with the other documentation for the credit. Will this alternative strategy earn SSc4.3?

Ruling:

No. While it is increasingly apparent that many OEM PHEVs will have the capacity to utilize a 120v outlet for a slow charge, many of these vehicles may also end up accepting a 240v quick-charge. Quick charge capacity is viewed as desirable as it is likely to increase the rate of all-electric usage. Per the CIR Rulings dated 9/14/2006, if you provide both a 120v outlet and a 240v conductive power supply (or inductive charger) in all seven locations, you will meet credit requirements. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
9/14/2006
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our project is a new branch library for the City of Dallas. The project is registered under LEED-NC version 2.1. The project has a total of 102 parking spaces. 4 of these spaces will be designated for electric vehicles (long range level II electric vehicles). Each of the 4 EV spaces will be equipped with an "EV Power Pak" by Avcon Corporation to provide power to the electric vehicle. The unit provides up to 32 amps at 240 volts AC. The EV Power Pak is a power control station w/ cable and connector for EVs that have on-board chargers. Our research indicates that all new production electric vehicles are equipped with on-board chargers. Also, the EV Power Pak is identified as a compatible power source for vehicles developed by Commuter Cars Corporation. Although not readily available, the development of the plug-in hybrid will also require a power source and not a charging station. We believe providing these power control stations instead of EV Battery Chargers meet the intent of the credit. Will this approach fulfill the requirements for LEED-NC version 2.1 SS Credit 4.3? If not, please advise.

Ruling:

Yes, the provision of this type of power station, which includes a cable and connector and is endorsed by state agencies and EV associations, meets the intent of the requirement for providing EV charging stations. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
See all forum discussions about this credit »

Checklists

Step by step to LEED certification

LEEDuser’s checklists walk you through the key action steps you need to earn a credit, including how to avoid common pitfalls and save money.

See all forum discussions about this credit »

Documentation toolkit

The motherlode of cheat sheets

LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit is loaded with calculators to help assess credit compliance, tracking spreadsheets for materials, sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions, and examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects for you to check your work against. To get your plaque, start with the right toolkit.

Credit achievement rate

XX%

Upgrade to LEEDuser Premium to see how many projects achieved this credit. Try it free »

LEEDuser expert

Ellen Mitchell

Get the inside scoop

Our editors have written a detailed analysis of nearly every LEED credit, and LEEDuser premium members get full access. We’ll tell you whether the credit is easy to accomplish or better left alone, and we provide insider tips on how to document it successfully.

USGBC logo

© Copyright U.S. Green Building Council, Inc. All rights reserved.

Requirements

Option 1: Preferred or discounted parking
Provide preferred parking1 for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles2 for 5% of the total vehicle parking capacity of the site. Providing a discounted parking rate is an acceptable substitute for preferred parking for low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles. To establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available to all customers (i.e., not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity), publicly posted at the entrance of the parking area and available for a minimum of 2 years.

OR

Option 2: Alternative fuel
Install alternative-fuel fueling stations for 3% of the total vehicle parking capacity of the site. Liquid or gaseous fueling facilities must be separately ventilated or located outdoors.

OR

Option 3: Provide vehicles
Provide low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles for 3% of full-time equivalent (FTE) occupants. Provide preferred parking for these vehicles.

OR

Option 4: Vehicle sharing program
Provide building occupants access to a low-emitting or fuel-efficient vehicle-sharing program. The following requirements must be met:
  • One low-emitting or fuel-efficient vehicle must be provided per 3% of FTE occupants, assuming that 1 shared vehicle can carry eight persons (i.e., 1 vehicle per 267 FTE occupants). For buildings with fewer than 267 FTE occupants, at least 1 low emitting or fuel-efficient vehicle must be provided.
  • A vehicle-sharing contract must be provided that has an agreement of at least two years.
  • The estimated number of customers served per vehicle must be supported by documentation.
  • A narrative explaining the vehicle-sharing program and its administration must be submitted.
  • Parking for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles must be located in the nearest available spaces in the nearest available parking area. Provide a site plan or area map clearly highlighting the walking path from the parking area to the project site and noting the distance.



  • 1For the purposes of this credit “preferred parking” refers to the parking spots that are closest to the main entrance of the project (exclusive of spaces designated for handicapped persons) or parking passes provided at a discounted price. To establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available to all eligible customers (i.e. not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity), publicly posted at the entrance of the parking area, and available for a minimum of 2 years.2For the purposes of this credit, low-emitting vehicles are defined as vehicles that are classified as Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by the California Air Resources Board. Fuel-efficient vehicles are defined as vehicles that have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide [Europe ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles] [South America ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles].

    Alternative Compliance Paths (ACPs)

    Europe ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
    Projects in Europe may use vehicles meeting the Euro 6 limit values of Regulation (EC) No. 715/2007.[view:embed_resource=page_1=4887966]
    South America ACP: Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
    Vehicles in South America may qualify as low-emitting and fuel-efficient by meeting both of the following conditions:
  1. A score of Four Stars or above from IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis - Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) Nota Verde Program.
  2. An A from INMETRO (Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia - National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology) Brazilian Labeling Program for Vehicles.
[view:embed_resource=page_1=4908164]
SITES-LEED Equivalency
This LEED credit (or a component of this credit) has been established as equivalent to a SITES v2 credit or component. For more information on using the equivalency as a substitution in your LEED or SITES project, see this article and guidance document.

XX%

Upgrade to LEEDuser Premium to see how many projects achieved this credit. Try it free »

Got the gist of SSc4.3 but not sure how to actually achieve it? LEEDuser gives step-by-step help. Premium members get:

  • Checklists covering all the key action steps you'll need to earn the credit.
  • Hot tips to give you shortcuts and avoid pitfalls.
  • Cost tips to assess what a credit will actually cost, and how to make it affordable.
  • Ideas for going beyond LEED with best practices.
  • All checklists organized by project phase.
  • On-the-fly suggestions of useful items from the Documentation Toolkit and Credit Language.

In the end, LEED is all about documentation. LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit, for premium members only, saves you time and helps you avoid mistakes with:

  • Calculators to help assess credit compliance.
  • Tracking spreadsheets for materials purchases.
  • Spreadsheets and forms to give to subs and other team members.
  • Guidance documents on arcane LEED issues.
  • Sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions.
  • Examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects.

Do all hybrid vehicles automatically qualify for this credit?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

Can a project pursue this credit via a combination of Option 1 (preferred parking) and Option 2 (alternative fueling stations)?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

How should the signage read for preferred parking spaces?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

For electric vehicle charging stations, how are the parameters established for fueling capacity?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

I am working on a project with no parking spaces allocated. Can I earn this credit?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

Our project is outside the U.S., and the LEED-approved ACEEE Green Score and CARB ratings and classifications don't apply to many vehicles. Is there another approach that is accepted?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

Should I consider motorbikes and parking spaces for them under this credit? What about fleet vehicles?

The answer to this question is available to LEEDuser premium members. Start a free trial »

(If you're already a premium member, log in here.)

10/1/2014Updated: 3/29/2018
Regional ACP
Description of change:
Add the following below the footnotes for this credit:

"Vehicles in South America may qualify as low-emitting and fuel-efficient by meeting both of the following conditions:
1. A score of Four Stars or above from IBAMA (Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e dos Recursos Naturais Renováveis - Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) Nota Verde Program.
2. An A from INMETRO (Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Qualidade e Tecnologia - National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology) Brazilian Labeling Program for Vehicles."

**Updated on 4/1/2015 to include applicability to LEED v4
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
11/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
(1) Change the California Air Resources Board (CARB), Certified Vehicles List website to "http://www.arb.ca.gov/" (2) Change the California Air Resources Board (CARB), Cleaner Car Guide website to "http://www.driveclean.ca.gov/"
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Rating System Correction
Description of change:
Change footnote text to, "For the purposes of this credit, low-emitting vehicles are defined as vehicles that are classified as Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by the California Air Resources Board. Fuel-efficient vehicles are defined as vehicles that have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide."
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
In the first line of the first paragraph, replace "5" with "2" so the text becomes "This credit can be achieved under Option 2 by specifying..."
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
In the box header, replace "Option 5" with "Option 2"
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
Change footnote text to, "For the purposes of this credit, low-emitting vehicles are defined as vehicles that are classified as Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by the California Air Resources Board. Fuel-efficient vehicles are defined as vehicles that have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide."
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Rating System Correction
Description of change:
Switch the footnote numbers so the text becomes the following:Provide low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles? for 3% of full-timeequivalent (FTE) occupants.Provide preferred parking? for these vehicles
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
11/3/2010Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
Switch the footnote numbers so the text becomes the following:Provide low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles? for 3% of full-timeequivalent (FTE) occupants.Provide preferred parking? for these vehicles
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
8/1/2011Updated: 2/14/2015
Reference Guide Correction
Description of change:
Change the California Air Resources Board, Certified Vehicles List website from "http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ccvl/ccvl.htm" to "http://www.arb.ca.gov/".
Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
4/2/2014
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Can a project located in California achieve Option 1 of SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation - Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and/or SSc4.4: Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity by meeting the requirements of the CalGreen building code?

Ruling:

New construction projects in California can use CALGreen’s “Clean Air/Vanpool/EV” signage as a substitute for both the low-emitting and fuel efficient vehicle signage and the carpool/vanpool signage requirements of SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation - Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and SSc4.4: Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity. Projects must meet a 10% threshold for “Clean Air/Vanpool/EV” parking, since CALGreen signage refers to both vehicle classifications, to ensure the appropriate parking capacity has been provided. Note that this requirement also applies to LEED-CS and LEED Schools projects. For additional information, reference LEED Interpretation 2292. All other applicable LEED requirements must be met to achieve SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation - Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and/or SSc4.4: Alternative Transportation - Parking Capacity.

Campus Applicable
Yes
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
7/5/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The project, located in New York City, is a 480,000 SF office building with 90,000 SF of retail, applying under LEED Core and Shell v.2.0. The project has 52 valet parking spaces consisting of mechanically stacked parking. We seek to achieve Credit SS-4.3 through Option 1, providing preferred parking for 5% of the spaces (3 spaces total) for low-emission vehicles. Because of the valet parking, the usual approach to preferred parking (locating it conveniently and reserving the spaces) is not straightforward, and we seek your guidance on how to proceed. 1. The approach that most closely approximates that used for self-parking is for the three preferred spaces to be at grade level and close to the valet station, thus shortening the wait. 2. A second form of preference would be that the owners of preferred spaces would be served first if more than one owner is awaiting valet service. 3. A third approach is to offer a discount to owners of low-emission vehicles, up to a number of owners equal to 5% of the parking spaces - our case 3 owners. We assume that the discount would be 5% of the value of the parking fee. We request your judgment as to whether any or all these approaches would achieve the Credit.

Ruling:

The applicant has requested confirmation of three different approaches as acceptable substitutes for preferred parking for low-emitting/fuel efficient vehicles. 1. Locating the preferred spaces so as to provide the shortest wait does meet the intent of preferred parking. 2. Allowing owners of preferred spaces to move to the front of the valet line is *not* an acceptable alternative to preferred parking. 3. Providing discounted parking rates is an acceptable approach. In order to establish a meaningful incentive in all potential markets, the parking rate must be discounted at least 20%. The discounted rate must be available for all customers (not limited to the number of customers equal to 5% of the vehicle parking capacity) and publicly posted at the entrance to the parking deck. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
12/2/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The intent of Sustainable Sites credit 4.3 is to, "Reduce pollution and land development impacts from automobile use," while the intent of SSc4.4 is to, "Reduce pollution and land development impacts from single occupancy vehicle use." Both of these credits offer compliance paths (SSc4.3 Options 1-2 and SSc4.4 Options 1-3) that require providing "preferred parking" for low-emitting/fuel-efficient or carpool vehicles. "Preferred parking" is defined as, "...parking spots that are closest to the main entrance of the project...or parking passes provided at a discounted price." We believe that proximity is not the only characteristic for a preferred parking space and that the protection from the elements offered by covered surface parking is also a qualifier for preferred status. (Have you ever seen a car parked on a hot day in the shade of a tree, even though there are many parking spaces available between the shade of that tree and a building\'s entrance?) Parking consumers have shown an increased willingness-to-pay for covered surface parking in both hot and cold climates, as customers of off site parking lots (at an airport for instance) willingly pay more for covered parking than uncovered parking. In hot climates shade for parked vehicles is highly desirable, while in cold climates protection against snow and hail is also desirable. One study verified that in shading a vehicle\'s cabin, interior temperatures were reduced by an average of over 45

Ruling:

No, covered surface parking is not an acceptable characteristic for preferred parking for the purposes of this credit. Covered parking may be considered "preferred" by some people in some locations and/or seasons, but it would not always be considered "preferred." For example, when it is raining it would likely be preferred to be parked closer to the building entrance than to be parked farther away from the entrance even if the car were covered. Regarding your second question about SSc7.2: roof structures used to shade parking would need to be included as roof area in calculations for SSc7.2. All relevant requirements and calculation methodologies would apply. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
7/1/2012
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

This Core and Shell v2.0 project includes 12 stories of parking within a 40 story commercial office building. There will be a total of 1,454 parking spaces in the building. Of these, 73 spaces will be designated as Low-Emitting/Fuel Efficient vehicle parking to meet SSc4.3 credit requirements. Only building workers/employees will be permitted to park in the garage, and all visitors will be required to use the garage valet service. To enter the building, employees must park in the garage and then take an elevator to the main floor entrance. Occupants may not enter the building at any entrance other than the main ground level entrance. Building tenants will need to pay for parking spaces for their employees and will have the choice to purchase non-assigned parking spaces or assigned spaces (assigned spaces will be "preferred" and also more expensive). The owner considers the designation of "preferred" spaces closest to the elevator vestibules for LE/FE vehicles to be a market barrier. Users pay a premium to park close to elevators in this market, and revenue generated is essential to funding building operations. As stated in the USGBC LEED CS Reference Guide v2.0, "For projects that demonstrate market barriers to the definition of \'preferred parking closest to the main entrance,\' alternatives to may be considered on a case-by-case basis." The project proposes to provide dedicated parking spaces for LE/FE vehicles within 100 feet of the elevator vestibules. The farthest parking space from the elevator vestibule is 260 feet. We feel this approach is able to provide preferred spaces for green cars without cutting into the revenue the owner needs to generate from the premium slots closest to the elevators. In total, at least 73 spaces(5%) within 100 feet of the elevator vestibules will be designated parking for LE/FE vehicles.

Ruling:

The project team proposes that locating LE/FE parking spaces in preferred locations directly adjacent to elevator vestibules is a market barrier, since it displaces "premium" preferred parking that is provided at additional costs and whose revenue supports the building owner\'s operational budget. Current design calls for 1,454 parking spaces on twelve floors, with 73 preferred spaces necessary to comply with credit requirements. The project team proposes that LE/FE vehicles would be located adjacent to, but beyond these "premium" preferred parking spaces, clustered around the elevator vestibule of each of the garage\'s twelve stories and within 100\' (of a possible 260\') from the elevator vestibules. No, this situation does not constitute a market barrier to the creation of truly preferable LE/FE parking spaces. Parking spaces located near distant elevator vestibules on far away parking levels are generally not considered preferred spaces. Typical credit compliance would have all LE/FE parking spaces clustered around the first elevator vestibule that is encountered upon entering the garage, as the elevator vestibule represents the main entrance to the building. Therefore all 73 parking spaces should be provided on the main floor of the parking garage. Alternately, the project team can distribute preferred parking on more than one level away from the garage\'s main entrance, as long as it is no more than 1 level away from this main entrance and the majority of the preferred parking is available on the main floor of the parking garage. Since it is assumed that each floor of parking will provide approximately 120 parking spaces (1454/73) and the submittal indicates that distributing "premium" preferred parking near elevator vestibules on multiple parking levels is a viable option, it does not appear that providing all of the LE/FE preferred parking directly adjacent to elevator vestibules on the main garage entrance level, disabled parking withstanding, represents a true market barrier. Elevating the importance of LE/FE vehicles above premium parking speaks directly to the incentive that credit requirements aim to create.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
2/26/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

We have four LEED Registered projects within a prison expansion phase construction. We wish to determine how best to define our projects for LEED purposes as follows: Administration Building "A" (a building outside the secure perimeter) Close Custody Housing "D,E,F, & G" (High Security cell blocks, 4 identical buildings registered as one project) IMU/Seg Housing "C" (cell block with Maximum Security/special needs inmates) Core Facility "H" (multiple use building) Each of these buildings will share one new large parking (400+ spaces) lot and can be used to qualify each of these four projects for SSc4.4 (Parking Capacity), appropriately treating this expansion for LEED calculations as a campus environment. We would like to investigate whether our projects can earn SS Credit 4.3 - Alt Fuel Vehicles. There are two potential paths we are considering: providing bio-diesel vehicles and/or installing a biodiesel refueling station. We need information on the quantity of bio-diesel vehicles and how many preferred parking spaces would be required. We presume that one on-site bio-diesel refueling station servicing the fleet will suffice. We have FTE figures which include employees and visitors. For LEED calculations we do not consider inmates as "building occupants" since they do not leave the premises and therefore cannot commute.

Ruling:

As this project is a campus project, it could comply with the requirements of either the LEED-NCv2.1 Rating System or the LEED-NC Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects. Based on this Application Guide, the project would need to provide alternative fuel vehicles (such as bio-diesel), low-emissions and/or fuel efficient vehicles for 3% of the full time employees (FTE) in the buildings, AND provide preferred parking for these vehicles, AND have access to a nearby alternative fueling station. Alternatively, if fleet vehicles are provided for the project, at least 50% of the vehicles must be alternative fuel vehicles.Update April 15, 2011: Please note that all 2009 projects in multiple building situations must follow the 2010 Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects, located here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=7987. 2009 project teams should check this document for up to date guidance on all multiple building issues. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
10/9/2006
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Introduction: The David Brower Center is comprised of a small conference center, restaurant & rental office space for environmental non-profits. It is being constructed on a site containing three (3) distinct projects: The Brower Center; a residential project; and a city-owned public parking garage. The project is being constructed on the site of an existing City owned and operated surface parking lot, which currently provides public parking for local merchants. Below grade parking will be constructed to replace the City\'s surface lot, therefore the majority of the Brower Center will be built above a City of Berkeley public parking garage. There will also be a 96-unit residential project constructed adjacent to the Brower Center, also located over the parking garage. Additional parking will be dedicated to the residential project. There will be an air-space subdivision, which will legally define the city garage, the David Brower Center, and the adjacent residential project as separate deeded properties. The three properties will be owned and operated by three separate entities. Parking Requirements and Capacity: The Berkeley Zoning ordinance would typically require the Brower Center to have 68 parking spaces (1.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of commercial space). The City of Berkeley has waived this requirement, because of the proximity to public transportation, therefore the Brower Center is not required to include any parking and, in fact, will not construct any parking. (The project is within 600 feet of 6 bus lines and 1 subway (BART) station). Since the property will not own any associated parking, the Brower Center will enter into an agreement with the City of Berkeley to lease parking spaces in the City Garage to satisfy various aspects of SS Credit 4.3. The project is seeking approval of an alternative compliance path, based on the CIR\'s dated 1/26/05 and 9/6/05. The project team proposes the following components to meet the intent of this credit: 1) The project will achieve SSc4.1. As noted above, the project is within 600 feet of 6 bus lines and 1 subway (BART) station. This will provide ample opportunity for tenants or employees to access the site via public transportation. (per CIR dated 1/26/05) 2) The project proposes to provide one (1) hybrid (AFV) carshare vehicle to satisfy the requirement for alternative fuel vehicles. The CIR dated 9/6/05 establishes that one carshare AFV is required per every 267 FTE occupants. The Brower Center will have 132 FTE\'s and therefore will provide one (1) hybrid carshare vehicle. The project will establish a 2-year carshare agreement with either City Car Share or Zipcars. 3) Information about the car share program will be distributed to all of the building occupants, and will be available in the lobby. 4) Since the Brower Center will not construct or own any parking, the project will lease the one (1) parking space needed for the carshare program from the City owned garage that is directly below the building. The Brower Center property is approximately 85\' from the pedestrian entrance to the city garage elevator lobby. This will provide safe, convenient access to the cars in the carshare program.

Ruling:

Your proposal adheres to previous credit rulings and is acceptable.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
2/14/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our LEED-NC v2.1 registered project is an office/laboratory building located on a 738 acre university campus. To meet the requirements of SSc4.3, the Reference Guide indicates that the university must ".provide alternative fuel vehicles for 3% of building occupants AND provide preferred parking for these vehicles." 220 total FTE occupants are assigned to this building, so 7 alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) are required per this calculation. The LEED-NC Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects (AGMBC - October 2005) indicates that it is possible to meet the requirements for SSc4.3 by providing ".low-emission and/or fuel efficient vehicles* for 3% of the full time employees (FTE)", and that these vehicles must be classified as Zero Emission Vehicles by CARB or have achieved a minimum green score of 40 on the ACEEE annual vehicle rating guide. A 9/6/2005 CIR Ruling for SSc4.3 states that ".implementing car-share programs with alternative fueled vehicles (AFVs), such as Zipcars or Flexcars. Is applicable to a campus situation, and it is therefore reasonable to assume that (a).car-share strategy would meet the intent of the credit." The Ruling further indicates ".that it is reasonable that 8 building FTE occupants are served per shared-use alternative fuel vehicle." Therefore, for our project, 1 car-share AFV would be required to meet the requirements of this credit per this calculation. The university proposes to purchase one low-emission/fuel-efficient vehicle that meets CARB or ACEEE requirements stipulated in the AGMBC. This car-share vehicle will be reserved for use only by the 220 FTE occupants of our LEED registered building. It will be parked in a preferred and marked parking space near the building. A car-share program will be created to promote and manage the use of this vehicle for all FTE occupants. This university program will provide more benefit than those created by a third-party car-share program because: - The individual FTE occupants will not be required to rent the vehicle and so will be more apt to use it, and - The AFV will be available to building occupants for many years beyond the minimum two-year contract period that is recommended in the 9/6/2005 CIR Ruling. We propose to submit proof that the vehicle meets low-emission/fuel-efficient vehicle requirements, proof of purchase, a copy of the car-share plan, and a map showing the location of the preferred parking space and proximity to the building. We are seeking LEED Platinum certification and, consequently, each point is critical. We want to be sure that we execute this properly. Therefore, will this credit strategy be sufficient to earn the SSc4.3 point?

Ruling:

Yes, based on the description provided above it appears that the strategy being proposed meets the intent and requirements of SSc4.3. As the applicant has indicated, a LEED NC v2.1 SSc4.3 ruling dated 9/6/2005, states that implementing car share programs with alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs), such as Zipcars and Flexcars, is applicable on a campus situation. In this case, the car share program would be developed and administered by the university and not a third party. This is consistent with the intent of the credit so long as the program is administered as described above and: 1) the car is owned by the university 2) the car is not assigned to any one person, but rather available for use by any and all of the occupants of the building 3) the program will be in place for at least two years. In addition, per the LEED NC v2.1 SSc4.3 ruling dated 1/26/2005, since this project is an office/laboratory building, to earn this credit using this approach, the project must also achieve SSc4.1, so that the building occupants can access the building without commuting by car. As the applicant has indicated the LEED NC v2.1 SSc4.3 ruling dated 9/6/2005 also states that it is reasonable that 8 building FTE occupants are served per shared-use alternative fuel vehicle. In addition to the documentation listed above, the project team should also provide the FTE occupancy for the project and calculations demonstrating that AFVs are provided for at least 3% of the FTE occupants (assuming that 8 FTE occupants are served per shared use vehicle). A narrative explaining the car share program and its administration should also be provided. Update April 15, 2011: Please note that all 2009 projects in multiple building situations must follow the 2010 Application Guide for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects, located here: https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=7987. 2009 project teams should check this document for up to date guidance on all multiple building issues. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
10/2/2006
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our project is the renovation of a large classroom building on a university campus and we would like to achieve credit SSc4.3 on a campus-wide basis. We are using LEED NC v.2.2 for this credit. We would like to reserve spaces for low-emission and fuel-efficient vehicles on an on-demand basis, since all campus parking is permit-based (SSc4.4 Ruling 10/03/05). When a fuel efficient vehicle permit is obtained, we will consult with the permit holder and determine what constitutes "preferred" parking for that vehicle and reserve a space accordingly as not all commuters consider the same spaces preferable. We will actively promote the preferred parking program to faculty, staff and students. For the purpose of this credit, the USGBC has defined low-emitting/fuel-efficient vehicles as those that have a minimum score of 40 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide. While we appreciate the work done by ACEEE in compiling their lists, we feel this guide will not be able to meet the needs of our program. This is primarily because the ACEEE ratings are only released once a year in February, nearly a year after the first of the new model year vehicles are released. If we structure our policy around the ACEEE guide, no one buying the newest cars on the market will know if their vehicles qualify for preferential parking at the time of purchase. University commuters will have to purchase a vehicle and hope it makes the list. To address this problem, we would like to use EPA MPG ratings as the qualifier for preferential parking. EPA MPG ratings are constantly updated on their website (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/) and are required of all new vehicles. EPA MPG ratings have the added benefit of being well publicized when a consumer is purchasing a new vehicle, as opposed to ACEEE ratings, which are more obscure. For the 2006 model year, the average fuel efficiency for the 20 vehicles with an ACEEE rating of 40 is 24.4 MPG city (ranging from 22 to 28 with a median of 24) and 32.1 MPG highway. We suggest offering preferential parking to all vehicles with an EPA MPG rating of 25 MPG (city) or greater. Admittedly, the ACEEE rating has the added benefit of combining fuel efficiency data with emissions data, but in general the vehicles that are the most fuel efficient will emit the fewest pollutants. We believe that using EPA MPG ratings instead of ACEEE green scores increases the likelihood of long-term success for this program and helps achieve the goals of mitigating pollution from automobile use and encouraging the purchase of low-emission and fuel-efficient vehicles. Having an up-to-date website is necessary for University commuters and the parking office to confirm preferred parking eligibility. We welcome any suggestions.

Ruling:

The applicant is seeking approval to use the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Miles per Gallon (MPG) ratings instead of the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) annual vehicle rating guide as an alternative reference standard for Option 2 of SSc4.3 under LEED-NC v2.2. An acceptable compliance path is the "US EPA Certified SmartWay Elite" (http://www.epa.gov/autoemissions/all-rank-06.htm). Please note that this allowance is specific to the "Elite" designation (not simply "SmartWay"), which has been confirmed as more stringent than the ACEEE Green Score of 40. The "SmartWay Elite" standard will provide purchasers of new vehicles up-to-date information on car models that meet the intent of this credit.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
No
4/1/2015
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The applicant is requesting a ruling on whether a combination of Options 1 and 2 of SSc4.3 Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles is sufficient to meet the credit requirements. The applicant proposes that the credit requirements are met if the number of preferred parking spaces divided by .05 plus the number of charging stations divided by .03 is equal to or greater than the total parking capacity. This approach meets the credit intent and may be used to document credit achievement.

Ruling:

Yes, projects may achieve this credit using a combination of Option 1 and Option 2. Preferred parking for low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles must be provided for 5% of the total parking capacity, as required in Option 1. Fueling stations may be substituted for preferred parking spaces to meet this threshold, such that one fueling station is equivalent to 1.67 preferred parking spaces. All other credit requirements (such as the location of preferred parking spaces and the capacity of fueling stations) apply. The special circumstances section should be used for additional documentation.

Campus Applicable
Yes
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
9/10/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Of over 3500 parking spaces available, 5%, or 102 spaces, is to be dedicated to low emitting vehicles in preferred locations in order to meet the credit requirements. The most preferable spaces available are metered spaces directly in front of the retail spaces. There are a total of 140 metered spaces. According to International Council of Shopping Centers Research Review, VOL. 13, No. 2 published in 2006, the average amount of time spent by a visitor in the retail center is 81.5 minutes. If the low emitting vehicles were allowed 90 minutes free parking in all metered spaces, which exceeds the 5% credit requirement and would allow the typical visitor adequate time to complete their trip according to the ICSC study, would the intent of the credit be met and provide an adequate alternate compliance path for obtaining the point?

Ruling:

Preferred parking must be located within the LEED project boundary and provided at no charge. If the metered spaces are owned by the municipality and/or fall outside the project boundary, the preferred parking spaces must be selected from parking provided within the project boundary. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
5/9/2011
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Most of our preferred parking spaces go unoccupied throughout the day and are putting a strain on our parking resources. Can we put all of the spaces for our campus in one location?

Ruling:

Yes, follow AGMBC to allocate spaces on a campus level. If further than 1/4 mile from a building, provide a shuttle. Or, provide drivers with a discounted rate so that the spaces don\'t have to be reserved. Applicable internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
4/9/2008
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our project is on a previously developed site where multiple buildings share one parking garage. No new parking will be provided specifically for our building, or in our project boundary, since the parking garage is existing. We would like to take the campus approach specified in CIR Ruling 2/26/2007: "If parking is being provided for the project in an existing parking garage on campus (not part of the project design and construction scope), it would be possible to attain this credit based on providing preferred parking spaces for 5% of the total vehicle parking capacity assigned for use of the project only (i.e. the number of spaces dedicated for use of the occupants of this project)." It is unclear at this time if all of the buildings that utilize the garage will pursue LEED. If all buildings pursue LEED, can the parking garage provide preferred parking without "assigning for the use of this project only" or do we have to have different signs for different buildings per the previous credit ruling? If only some but not all of the buildings pursue LEED, can the garage provide enough preferred fuel efficient parking for the LEED buildings, or for all of the buildings (including non-LEED) and not have to "assign for the use of a specific project"?

Ruling:

The CIR is inquiring if a project\'s parking is located in an existing shared structure (or lot) that is not a part of the project\'s LEED boundary, can parking for preferred vehicles be designated within this structure to support achievement of this credit. The referenced LEED-CS CIR Ruling for SSc4.3, dated 2/26/2007, indicates that projects using shared parking facilities may qualify for this credit if preferred parking spaces are provided within the structure or lot. The number of spaces must be at least equal to 5% of the total vehicle parking capacity assigned for use of the project only (i.e. the number of spaces dedicated for use of the occupants of this project). The spaces must be clearly identified for use by low-emitting, fuel-efficient vehicles and there must be a means for only occupants of the subject building to be able to park in the designated spaces. If the project does not want to limit access to these spaces to only occupants of the LEED building(s), then it must provide preferred parking for 5% of the total parking capacity for low emitting/fuel efficient vehicles. This approach would allow future buildings that use this parking garage to achieve this credit should they decide to pursue LEED certification. Please note that, per the previous CIR ruling, the existing parking facility must be located within 0.25 miles of any project that wishes to adopt this shared parking approach or must be serviced by a shuttle bus. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
10/1/2012
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Many cars in Brazil are fuel efficient and low-emitting yet do not meet the requirements of two credits (BD&C SSc4.3: Alternative Transportation: Low Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles and O&M SSc4: Alternative Commuting Transportation) because the vehicles have not been evaluated by CARB or ACEEE. This hinders the ability of many Brazilian projects to achieve the credit. We propose that the following Brazilian standards be included in determining whether a vehicle is considered fuel-efficient or low-emitting:a. Any vehicle achieving Four Stars in the IBAMA Nota Verde (Green Note) system, the ratings for vehicles in this system can be found at: http://servicos.ibama.gov.br/ctf/publico/sel_marca_modelo_rvep.php. This system awards stars based on a vehicle\'s emissions reductions and fuel type. The first three stars are earned via relatively low emissions of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and hydrocarbons. The fourth star is awarded for vehicles that have a CO2 emissions rate of less than 80g/km (128 g/mi). The fifth star is awarded for vehicles using alternative fuels (gasoline-ethanol mix, hybrid electric, and all-electric). b. Any vehicle receiving an A or B in the Brazilian Energy Program (PBE) of INMETRO (National Institute of Metrology, Quality and Technology) of the Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade. This program uses many of the same techniques that the U.S. EPA has used to evaluate fuel efficiency in American vehicles. A full description of the program is available at http://repositorios.inmetro.gov.br/bitstream/10926/1290/1/2010_Novgorodc....

Ruling:

The applicant has requested that vehicles in Brazil receiving Four Stars in the IBAMA Nota Verde (Green Note) program or vehicles receiving an A or B in the INMETRO Brazilian Labeling Program for Vehicles (PBEV) be classified as low-emitting and fuel-efficient for the purposes of LEED NC 2009 SSc4.3 and LEED EB 2009 SSc4. Vehicles in Brazil may qualify as low-emitting and fuel-efficient by earning both of the following conditions:1. A score of Four Stars or above from IBAMA. This is the highest score for vehicles that are low-emitting but not necessarily fueled by alternative fuels (as research indicates that not all alternative fuels ensure improved environmental performance).2. An A from INMETRO. INMETRO uses relative criteria for different vehicle classifications. This differs from the absolute standards used by the ACEEE methodology. Since, in this instance, the USGBC preference for absolute metrics cannot be met, only the highest INMETRO score is accepted. This will ensure that the credit rewards the best fuel-efficiencies in current and future vehicles.Because the Brazilian labeling programs measure emissions differently, both programs are required to verify that a vehicle meets the low-emitting and fuel-efficient requirements. Vehicles receiving a qualifying score from one agency but not the other will not be considered eligible.Applicable Internationally; Brazil.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
9/10/2007
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

The project is a LEED NCv2.1, 14-story residential high rise condominium. The project team would like to achieve SSc4.3 via the alternative fuel recharging station option. The project will supply electric vehicle recharging stations for 3% of the occupants equaling seven stations. The strategy was chosen based on the fact that a prospective penthouse buyer stipulated that he would only purchase the unit if the owner installed a 120v outlet for his electric car. As you know, this is a standard electric outlet, which by existing CIR\'s (dated 2/7/2003 and 1/6/2004) is not allowed to achieve this credit. However, as you also know, electric vehicle technology is moving away from manufacturing electric vehicles that require the standard 240v recharging station and designing them to simply require the standard 120v outlet. In light of this market turn, the owner is interested in supplying five 120v outlets and two 240v outlets. This will satisfy the penthouse buyer and provide an additional four outlets for other interested condo owners. To ensure that the other residents are aware of the amenity, the owner will market the outlets and educate residents and prospective buyers that they are available should they own or choose to buy an electric vehicle. This may be accomplished via pamphlets in new residents\' welcome baskets or in a similar type of marketing material. Since the electric vehicle market is in transformation, and cars that require a 240v outlet do still exist, the owner will abide by installing electric vehicle recharging stations for the remaining two 240v outlets IF necessary. In other words, if a resident requires a 240v recharging station for their electric vehicle, the owner will purchase a recharging station to accommodate one of the 240v outlets. This owner\'s requirement will be documented in a signed letter to USGBC for submittal with the other documentation for the credit. Will this alternative strategy earn SSc4.3?

Ruling:

No. While it is increasingly apparent that many OEM PHEVs will have the capacity to utilize a 120v outlet for a slow charge, many of these vehicles may also end up accepting a 240v quick-charge. Quick charge capacity is viewed as desirable as it is likely to increase the rate of all-electric usage. Per the CIR Rulings dated 9/14/2006, if you provide both a 120v outlet and a 240v conductive power supply (or inductive charger) in all seven locations, you will meet credit requirements. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes
9/14/2006
LEED Interpretation
Inquiry:

Our project is a new branch library for the City of Dallas. The project is registered under LEED-NC version 2.1. The project has a total of 102 parking spaces. 4 of these spaces will be designated for electric vehicles (long range level II electric vehicles). Each of the 4 EV spaces will be equipped with an "EV Power Pak" by Avcon Corporation to provide power to the electric vehicle. The unit provides up to 32 amps at 240 volts AC. The EV Power Pak is a power control station w/ cable and connector for EVs that have on-board chargers. Our research indicates that all new production electric vehicles are equipped with on-board chargers. Also, the EV Power Pak is identified as a compatible power source for vehicles developed by Commuter Cars Corporation. Although not readily available, the development of the plug-in hybrid will also require a power source and not a charging station. We believe providing these power control stations instead of EV Battery Chargers meet the intent of the credit. Will this approach fulfill the requirements for LEED-NC version 2.1 SS Credit 4.3? If not, please advise.

Ruling:

Yes, the provision of this type of power station, which includes a cable and connector and is endorsed by state agencies and EV associations, meets the intent of the requirement for providing EV charging stations. Applicable Internationally.

Campus Applicable
No
Internationally Applicable:
Yes

LEEDuser expert

Ellen Mitchell

See all LEEDuser forum discussions about this credit » Unsubscribe from discussions about NC-2009 SSc4.3