The new Option 2 of MRc5 which was deemed to be applicable in the July 6, 2012 Addendum qualifies products and the raw materials used to make them based on the actual distance of the route they travel to the job site. That works fine for the PRODUCT but how does it work for the RAW MATERIALS used to make the product? The RAW MATERIALS are never shipped to the job site - they are shipped to the manufacturing facility. So how does one determine whether the RAW MATERIALS used to make a product qualify or not?
Option 2 reads as follows:
Building materials or products shipped by rail or water have been extracted, harvested or recovered, as well as manufactured within a 500 mile (800 kilometer) total travel distance of the project site using a weighted average determined through the following formula:
(Distance by rail/3) + (Distance by inland waterway/2) + (Distance by sea/15) + (Distance by all other means)
Zachary Guren
LEED AP BD+C14 thumbs up
December 14, 2012 - 12:02 pm
I am not an expert either, but I would interpret the wording to mean that I need to know the extraction location, the mode of transport to the manufacturer, the manufacturer's location, and the mode of transport to the site. I would calculate the distances as the crow flies, not the actual routes taken, in order to be consistent with the method used in Option 1. Based on the wording "500 mile total", I would add the two distances together after using the weighted formula. If that total is less than 500, then I would count it as a regional material.
Personally, I disagree with how this whole credit is setup/worded (as I explained in my post on this forum on October 31), and I completely understand the confusion with the new option. I don't work for LEED User, but I typically look/ask here for answers to confusing questions like this one. If there doesn't seem to be a satisfactory answer, I would definitely consider filing a CIR to get an official ruling.
Charles Clark Jr
Brick Industry Association15 thumbs up
December 14, 2012 - 12:35 pm
Zachary: Thanks for your thoughts. I would think that for Option 2 you would have to use the actual route taken by both the product and the raw materials since the requirement reads "within a 500 mile (800 kilometer) total travel distance of the project site." The words "total travel distance" are different than in Option 1 where the word "radius" is used instead. If it was as a crow flies, it would be a radius. That being said, it is very difficult to document this. Seldom is a contract with a supplier or a transport provider written to stipulate the actual route traveled by the raw material to the manufacturing facility or by the product to the job site.
John Casciato
17 thumbs up
December 14, 2012 - 12:30 pm
I would agree with you that the total distance traveled would include all the zig-zags.
Has anyone ever received documentation from a supplier or vendor for any of the travel information successfully?