Hello everyone, I am currently working on a project which consist of 8 buildings(3 main buildings and 5 supportive building, all are between 8000 to 60,000 sq ft), we are targeting certification level only due to site constraints to achieve more points. when we started to form strategy for EAP2 and EAC1, we came out with three options which are given below, Strategy 1 - Whole building energy modeling for 3 main building + prescriptive approach for other buildings Strategy 2 - prescriptive approach for all the buildings Strategy 3 - whole building energy modeling for all the buildings. The project registration is made after April 8, 2016 which put me in raising this questions here. I am pasting 2 links below which is kind of confusing to understand and expecting your help for the same. Link 1: http://www.usgbc.org/credits/core-shell-new-construction/v2009/eap2 this link says that, for projects getting registered after April 8, 2016, option 2 and 3 (prescriptive compliance path) is not an eligible option Link 2: http://in.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/LEED%202009%20energy%20update%20-%20redline%20150901.pdf the PDF in this link says that, *Please note that Option 2 & 3 currently is not an eligible compliance option for projects that registered after XX/XX/XX to meet the four point mandatory minimum. Both the Links says, that projects registered after April 8th 2016, should show a minimum of 18% for NC and 14% for existing pursuing whole building energy simulation approach. Please comment and clarify my understandings and doubts given below. 1. Do both the links says we cannot go for prescriptive approach for any project registered after April 8th 2016? please clarify, 2. If my understanding in the above question is correct, then i can go with Strategy 3(energy modeling for all buildings) only. Am i correct. 3. The document in the Link 2 also gives me a different understanding that, there is no requirement to show 4 point mandatory for projects pursuing option 2 or 3 as there are only a maximum of 3 point available with these options. is my understanding correct? 4. If my understanding in the 3 que is correct, i can opt for Strategy 1. where i can go with both the path(prescriptive and whole building simulation) in the project for different set of buildings. In this case, how can i report the total points achieved for the project under EAC1. 5. If Strategy 1 is not possible due to any issues in documenting EAC1. can i go with Strategy 2 (prescriptive approach for all the buildings) Prompt reply is much appreciated.
LEEDuser Basic Member
0 thumbs up
