This question is regarding the Energy and Atmosphere prerequisite Minimum Energy Performance and associated credit Optimize Energy Performance under the LEED v4 Interior Design and Construction rating system, specifically as it applies to Commercial Interiors projects.
Option 2: Prescriptive Compliance offers tenant improvement projects a certification path based on compliance with all mandatory and prescriptive requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2010, along with connected lighting load reductions and the use of ENERGYSTAR equipment. In the case that an element of the design does not strictly meet the mandatory and prescriptive requirements of 90.1-2010, the project must utilize Option 1: Tenant Level Energy Simulation to demonstrate overall compliance by achieving at least 3% improvement in energy performance compared to the ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Appendix G baseline.
The LEED v4 Reference Guide for Interior Design and Construction indicates that “Areas and systems that are not part of the tenant scope of work are exempt (from meeting the above requirements). However, modifications to base building systems that serve the tenant space must comply with the ASHRAE 90.1-2010 prescriptive requirements if they are completed by or on behalf of the tenant.”
Can anyone clarify what constitutes a “modification” to areas and systems outside the tenant scope of work.
What precisely constitutes a modification to base building systems that serve the tenant space?
When modifications are made by or on behalf of the tenant, is only the modified component(s) subject to the requirements of 90.1-2010, or the whole system?
For example, in a building with an existing envelope system with a window to wall ratio in excess of 40%, or component U-values or solar heat gain coefficients not in compliance with Table 5.5, would the addition or relocation of a door or window, or installation of interior shading devices constitute a modification to the envelope system that requires the project to utilize Option 1 and energy modeling to show overall compliance?
As a second example, if a tenant is installing new variable air volume boxes, chilled beams, fan coil units, heat pumps, or other terminal air devices served with primary or outdoor air from by a base building air handling unit, does rebalancing or adjusting the operating parameters of this air handling unit constitute a modification which requires the existing unit to meet the prescriptive requirements of ASHRAE 90.1-2010, or the use of Option 1 and energy modeling to demonstrate overall compliance?
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
June 20, 2017 - 9:35 am
A modification would be a physical change to a system or its components that is regulated by 90.1. The precise modifcation may vary depending on the system. for example, suppose the gpm flow rate of the system was not adequate and a new pump was installed.
In alignment with the way the standard is applied in general only the component changed is subject to 90.1 compliance.
Replacement or relocation of one door or window could require compliance for that one door or window but that would not apply to all doors and windows. Shading devices would not trigger Option 1.
Rebalancing or adjusting airflows would not be a modification that requires prescriptive compliance or the use of Option 1.
Grace Ming
Senior ESD Consultant95 thumbs up
September 13, 2017 - 5:29 am
Thanks Todd for posting this and Many thanks for Marcus for advice.
We have one project facing similar issue. We are at preliminary design stage and looking to add additional windows at one of the facades. The base building existing envelope system has WWR more than 40% and the solar heat gain coefficients of the existing glazing does not in compliance with Table 5.5. In this case, do we need to show the compliance by using Option 1?
Appreciate your kind advice. Thank you.
Marcus Sheffer
LEED Fellow7group / Energy Opportunities
LEEDuser Expert
5909 thumbs up
September 13, 2017 - 9:51 am
You are only required to comply with the components that are in your scope of work. The 40% WWR is not a prescriptive part of the standard. Existing SHGC is not in your scope. So far I don't see a reason to have to use Option 1.