I suspect I know the answer to this, but I'm wondering if others have any experience with earning Regional Priority points having used an Alternate Compliance Path. Our project is pursuing Pilot Credit 83 Site Development Protect or Restore Habitat Alternative Compliance Path (which refers to the World Fish and Wildlife Fund). Our zip code includes SS 5 Protect or Restore Habitat as a Regional Priority option, but it references the core 2 options, not the ACP. Should I assume that the RP is closed to us bc we're pursuing the Pilot Credit?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
November 27, 2015 - 3:37 pm
Joanna, I would think you're right, though it may be worth checking with GBCI. I see this was posted a while back. Let us know what you've learned!
Stephen Endy
AssociateMahlum Architects
February 6, 2017 - 2:20 pm
Project location: Portland, Oregon, USA Tristan, Have you heard any further about whether Alternate Compliance Paths may count toward Regional Priority points? MRc7 - Certified Wood is one of our Regional Priorities, and I'm curious whether MRpc102 - Legal Wood might also be eligible for the Regional Priority bonus. I realize this is a contentious ACP, and I'm torn about whether to submit this and potentially promote SFI as an alternative to FSC. Hopefully the next round of adoption for legal wood will address the differences between various forest management systems. Thanks, Stephen
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
February 7, 2017 - 12:24 pm
I haven't. I would assume that when the RP info indicates no specific case or option, that any achievement of the credit is kosher, and in this case, the ACP allows you to achieve the credit, so it seems okay to me.