We're starting the audits for an EBOM project that is a university building. They have approved a renovations program over 4 years, area by area (roughly floor by floor) that will be influenced by our audit. However they must stay operational and its not possible to carry out all the mechanical improvements at once, furthermore new chillers will be implemented last due to remaining life of the existing ones. Do you think its possible to implement all low-cost or no cost improvements to the particular phase that we have selected for the EBOM certification and not throughout the whole building? This has numerous advantages including testing the impact of each improvement--which might be tweaked for a later phase. Secondly some of the items that would be low-cost replacements would not longer be if they are scheduled for full replacement soon--for example replacing a lamp now when both the lamp and its fitting will be replaced in 2 years. We're choosing on purpose the earliest phase which also has the least impact on occupancy and operations. My rationale would be that, with the lamp example, replacing twice is no longer low cost so only improvements scheduled for each phase are actually "low cost". But by showing that some of the higher-cost improvements are also being implemented during the performance period, and publishing the full construction phasing, I hope to show a commitment to the full implementation over all the phases. Otherwise we have to wait 5 years or longer to do the full certification and we miss the chance to make operational and behavioural changes now while the longer phased improvements are ongoing. We'll have a similar issue with EAc2.3. Any thoughts?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - SustainabilityEUA
LEEDuser Expert
494 thumbs up
April 14, 2016 - 8:30 am
Hello Melissa,
While the credit language requires all no-cost and low-cost energy conservation measures to be implemented during the performance period there is some leniency in instances such as yours. My advice would be to implement all the no-costs of the entire building (this typically includes adjustments to equipment runtimes) during the performance period and be strategic in how you determine the upper cost limit for "low-cost" improvements.
It would be best to provide your plan for energy improvements to GBCI with your submission.
We have struggled with EAc2.2 and 2.3 on projects where energy improvement projects where already underway however we've always achieved both credits on such projects. As always, provide a detailed yet succinct narrative with your submission.
hope this helps!
Melissa Merryweather
DirectorGreen Consult-Asia
245 thumbs up
April 15, 2016 - 4:00 am
Yes David, it does. I think its going to be too much of a reach to go for EAc2.3 since it would require retrocomissioning outgoing equipment in the rest of the building, but we'll do the Option 2 version of EAc2.1 and EAc2.2 using this strategy. It seems a reasonable way through a tricky project. Thanks again.
Scott Bowman
LEED FellowIntegrated Design + Energy Advisors, LLC
LEEDuser Expert
519 thumbs up
April 25, 2016 - 12:17 pm
I agree with David, but will add one comment. Take a close look at the "low cost" items. Your example of a lamp is interesting. What if the replacement is going to an LED? The payback might be less than a year, and once the area is renovated, the lamp could be salvaged, and used in another building easily. There are many other examples where this would not be appropriate, but wanted to plant this idea on one reason to do work in an area even if it will be renovated.
I really like your idea of getting certification sooner than later, even if the plan is for 5 years. The timeline corresponds nicely with renewal, so you could get certification now at a more basic level, then gain a higher level in 5 years. You might want to consider v4 as well, with this kind of plan.