IEQ Space Matrix

Hi Kim, I understand your frustration. It looks like the document was originally issued last November (http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220). When was your hospital project registered with the USGBC? I would take a look at that date and then I would suggest potentially making a case for your project team lacking access to this document when you were making important early design decisions. For instance, if you started your hospital's design a couple years ago (which I find is often the case for large hospital projects) then I think you could make a strong case for being unfairly held to this new guidance document. "Space Type Classification (ZIP) -- This spreadsheet categorizes the spaces from IES Lighting Handbook, 10th Edition (ISBN # 978-0-87995-241-9) for applicability to Indoor Environmental Quality credits. These lists should be used along with the definitions provided in the Reference Guide glossary. Exceptions to these classifications will be accepted on a case-by-case basis for spaces with atypical uses or those in which strategies required for compliance may compromise the function of the space. This is not an exhaustive list. If a space is not listed, project teams should try to find a similar space type and follow that guidance. (11/1/2011)"

Just as a quick note for this comment, and all of my comments, this is my suggestion but I cannot absolutely guarantee that this approach with pass with the USGBC. Ultimately it is the reviewer's final ruling that matters.

Hi Kim, Good luck. To me it just seems to be a "reference" document and not an official addendum to the Reference Guide but I could be wrong? http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=19222

The LEED HC guide says controls in every single patient (sleep) room and individual controls for 50% of the remaining building and to provide comfort system controls for all shared multi-occupant spaces. No specific reference of the document discussed here but the HC guide does refer back to the NC guide for shared multi-occupant spaces. So all LEED HC projects are required to use the IEQ space matrix guide. Kim, I know you said your project was NC but does this interpretation for hospitals help you out? It does seem like a very broad definition of multi-occupant space. How do they even consider the clean and soiled hold rooms occupied space?

I'm apoplectic. Do they know how this can or can not be implemented? How do you implement controls for all the people in an OR? What if the procedure requires a low temperature? Will they now try to tell me how many people are in each room? So an exam room can potentially have 4 or more people in it (nurse, doc, patient, support person). Does this mean that you need to have 2 t stats in the room? Does this make sense in a 150 s.f. room? My only suggestion for you is to fight the soiled, clean, med, pantry and other similar spaces to be individual space. The RG states that group multioccupant spaces are 'places of congregation' and all those spaces are not intended to have people congretating there.

This space matrix document is very confusing. I always thought that total of the regularly occupied space (ROS) had to be the same across all credits? This matrix says that some spaces can be exempt in some credits, but not others. How do you exempt a space without taking it out of the total ROS? Do you give it 100% compliance with the credit that you are exempting it from?

Hi Jill, I understand why it's confusing. However, you can have different ROS across credits if you have justification for it. A good justification, of course, would be in referencing this space matrix. When certain spaces are exempt or if all spaces happen to exempt in your project context that does not warrant 100% compliance. It either means that those spaces are simply excluded from your calculations for that credit's compliance or, in the case where all spaces are exempted in your project, then you wouldn't be eligible to pursue that point.

This is more than just confusing. It is actually changing the intent of the credit. Kim's point about the multi-occupant space designation and the requirement that ALL spaces (regularly and non-regularly occupied) need to be considered in the credit is very significant. According to the matrix, corridors, lobbies and stairs all are considered multi-occupant and would ALL have to have thermal comfort control for the credit to be achieved. This can't possibly be what they mean - can it? What about non-conditioned spaces like parking garages? I appreciate the effort that must have gone into this matrix, but it only seems to have made things worse. It is unacceptable to me the extent to which credit requirements and even credit intents are changing mid-rating system. We need to be able to rely on certain things. For the past couple of years it seems that everything is a moving target -and it is only getting worse. Is there anything that can be done? I know others are frustrated too.

Technically speaking, the credit has always included regularly occupied and non-regularly occupied spaces. If you look back at the reference guide from LEED-NC v2.2 you can see that it was the same there as well or perhaps just as confusing there as it is here. Another way to put it is that the RG always just refers to "building occupants" for the requirement of individual lighting controls and multi-occupant controls. I believe that regularly-occupied and non-regularly occupied are only referenced within the definition section of the credit and not within the credit's description. To me it was assumed that regularly and non-regularly occupied spaces were to be included but that non-occupied spaces were to be excluded. Non-occupied spaces are closets, janitorial, storage and equipment rooms. Confusion, in my opinion, also stems from their examples. Their examples for multi-occupant spaces in the RG refer to "conference rooms, classrooms, and other indoor spaces as a place of congregation for functions such as presentations and training". These spaces are much different in use than, say, a stairwell or corridor which - as you've noted - appear in the IEQ Space Matrix. A stairwell is rarely a place of congregation. If someone from the USGBC or GBCI could chime in that would be great. Would be good to hear their opinion. The Space Matrix is trying to be helpful and I believe it was originally intended to be used as a guide for project teams. However, if reviewers use it as the new requirements then you can see how project teams would run into trouble. The IEQ Space Matrix does state that "exceptions will be accepted on a case-by-case basis for spaces with atypical uses or those in which strategies for compliance may compromise the function of the space". If I were a project team, I might refer to my reviewer to this language. A good forum for stating your suggestions for LEED's improvement would be the public comment period for the system's updates.

Good clarification on the the occupant vs. space issue. It is true that the credit language has always been based on building occupants - not spaces. That implies to me that non-regularly occupied spaces would not be included - but that was an assumption on my part. Perhaps that is where the confusion is coming in. The matrix and the credit form goes space by space, but that does not match up with the language about occupants. Although we have been closely tracking rating system updates and actively contributing during the comment periods, my concerns relate to the process of refinements being made within an approved rating system. The huge number of addenda, the lack of a single resource with the most current information and the constant changes to the credit forms make it exceedingly difficult to adivise project teams of compliance requirements. I will try to find a better place to express these concerns.

Hi Nancy, Trust me, I understand! Feel free to place your concerns here as well. I think it's good for us to share our confusions. I just wish I knew how to fix it for us all! That's great that you have been actively contributing during the comment periods. I am going to try to continue to do so as well.

Can I say how much I'm enjoying that the autopsy and morgue areas are multi-occupant and regularly occupied? It is really going to be difficult to get those thermal verification surveys back from the patients. :) I'm going to have a lot to say during the next comment period on this one.

Susan, your last comment really made me chuckle...and got my attention. Kim, per the "rules" your project cannot be required to comply with the July 2012 addenda. Although as we've seen, GBCI sometimes makes up its own rules. That being said, here's what I recommend: Make the case that the applicable spaces are not "occupiable spaces" per the definition of ASHRAE 62.1-2007 which is as follows, "occupiable space: an enclosed space intended for human activities, excluding those spaces intended primarily for other purposes, such as storage rooms and equipment rooms, that are only occupied occasionally and for short periods of time." This would cover the corridors, autopsy, morgue areas and other similar spaces. As for the "shared multi-occupant spaces", you may try to make the following argument. If the thermal zone includes more than one area (note, I did not use the term space) bounded by walls but sharing the similar load profiles and occupancy schedules, then these areas constitute one space and one "occupied zone" (per ASHRAE 55) and one ventilation zone (per ASHRAE 62.1). The credit requirement is that the group within the shared multi-occupant spaces can has comfort system controls. There is nothing in the credit requirement that says the group has to be in the same room. I know its a bit of stretch and is cutting the semantics pretty finely, but it just may work. Good luck with it. I hope for the best for your project.

Thank you for bringing these issues to our attention. We are currently working on an updated version of the IEQ Space Matrix. The updated version will: 1. Clarify how multi-occupant spaces apply to IEQc6/6.1/6.2 (for example circulation spaces and restrooms ARE excluded), 2. Update the Healthcare sections to align with the Healthcare supplement, LEED credit form, and original credit intent. We apologize for the confusion with multi-occupant spaces and hope to have these issues updated with the next addenda release (October 1st). Currently, the IEQ Space Matrix is a reference document that is intended to provide helpful guidance. USGBC is continuously working to make the IEQ Space Matrix as available and helpful as possible and welcome the feedback. Feel free to submit future issues to https://www.usgbc.org/ContactUS/LEEDContact.aspx?CMSPageID=2433, select 'General LEED Questions' then 'LEED Resources'), and to contact GBCI regarding any issues encountered during your project review. Also note that the healthcare section is especially applicable to the following footnote from the document: "Due to the varied nature of this space type, project teams are to use best judgment when applying the space type definitions and the pursuant prerequisite or credit requirements. When in conflict, code requirements that are meant to protect health, safety and welfare of occupants must take priority over the LEED requirements. Credits that are in conflict with these requirements should not be pursued. In order to comply with a prerequisite, alternative standards or guidelines that are not in conflict must be presented and complied with, in lieu of the LEED referenced standard or guideline"

I have noticed that several area use types in the IEQ Space Matrix are listed as being both individual occupant and multi-occupant spaces. Open office spaces in particular caught my attention. I received a review comment for IEQc6.2 regarding a room with two desks which states “Note that in individual occupant spaces, workers use standard workstations to conduct individual tasks. Examples are private offices and open office areas with multiple workers. Shared multi-occupant spaces include conference rooms, classrooms, and other indoor spaces used as places of congregation……….Refer to the IEQ Space Matrix for a list of individual workstations and multi-occupant spaces applicable to this credit.” It appears that an open office area with multiple work stations would be considered as one individual occupant space. Is this correct?

Hi Baoquy, Sorry if it's not clear from the Reference Guide but your reviewer is trying to say that an open office work area is comprised of multiple workstations that are each accounted for as "individual workstations". So, if you have an open office work area with two desks they would each count as individual workstations in that space. Hope that helps.

Hi LEEDuser team members, What kinds of things would you like clarified in the IEQ Space Matrix? Please post them here so I can make sure to try to mention them on my call with the GBCI today. Itemized lists are encouraged. Thanks.