Interior Lighting Control

For some guidance I think you can look into the LEED v2009 IAQ Space Matrix or the EQ Overview Section in the v4 Reference Guide.

My interpretation is that that "occupant spaces" means both "individual occupant spaces" and "shared multi-occupant spaces" as defined in the glossary usgbc.org/glossary

I just got fussed at this week for mentioning the v3 IEQ Matrix. LEED Coach told me to only use the EQ section overview.

I found it to be too vague, so I questioned them about a specific space type and context that wasn't explicitly defined in their bullet list.
If anyone's interested, laboratory spaces in regular lab/office settings (not hospitals, and not higher ed) are also considered multioccupant...so that clears up our questions regarding task light and desktop fan needs per workstation.

I had the same question as Jennifer for the v4.1 version of the Credit.

I've chosen to assume v4.1 Option 3-Lighting Control: "Provide dimmable or multilevel lighting for 90% of occupant spaces" was derived from v4 Option 1-Ligthing Control: "For at least 90% of individual occupant spaces...for all shared multioccupant spaces..."

Several entries from v4 Ref Guide EQ Section (pages 612-613) lead me to use the following for my next Design Review: an "occupant space" in v4.1 Interior Lighting Credit Option 3 is a regularly occupied, individual or shared multioccupant space, with the attendant USGBC definition of each term.

I'm inclined to agree with Glenn's description, which I think also aligns with Justin's explanation. 

Here is my correspondence with GBCI today on this issue:

Under Section “Occupied space subcategories” of the v4 reference guide EQ Overall (which applies to v4.1), it states that “Occupied spaces that are not regularly occupied or not used for distinct or collaborative tasks are neither individual occupant nor shared multioccupant spaces.

As such, break room, corridors, restrooms, stairways are not individual or multiple occupant space.

LEED dept. will publish something to clarify the spaces required for v4.1 EQc Interior Lighitng Option 3.

further guidance provided to me by GBCI today:

v4.1 NC Eqc Interior Lighting
Option #3. Lighting Control requires dimmable or multilevel lighting for 90% of 'OCCUPANT SPACES'. Does this apply to both regularly occupied and non-regularly occupied spaces?

GBCI Reply:

This applied to both individual and multiple-occupant spaces. Based on v4 EQ Overview which applies to v4.1, occupied spaces that are not regularly occupied or not used for distinct or collaborative tasks are neither individual occupant nor shared multi-occupant spaces.

Today GBCI has further confirmed that "90% of occupant spaces" = number of rooms. 

90% of floor area is NOT able to demonstrate compliance, nor is 90% of connected lighting load able to demonstrate compliance. 

David,

OK, but....

Individual Occupant Spaces aren't necessarily individual rooms. They could be multiple workstations within an open office "room". Do we count each individual occupant space (workstation) or just each "room" that contains individual occupant spaces (workstations)?

good catch Glenn.

In the 'Open Office with multiple workstations' scenario you would consider the 'work station' as the "Occupant Space". So if there were (10) workstations in one open office room, then (9) of the (10) work stations would need to be provided with dimmable or multilevel lighting control. 

Trying to follow this discussion about occupied vs individual & multi-occupant vs regulary occupied.  I assume all individual and multi-oocupent regularly occupied spaces must have lighting controls like v4.  But what non-regularly occupied individual & multi-occupant spaces need lighting controls?  Corridors, restrooms, break rooms, copy rooms, storage?  I can see break rooms and copy rooms being included.  But corridors, restrooms, storage spaces?

The controls requirements apply to "individual occupant spaces" and "shared multi-occupant spaces", per LEED definition. It doesn't appear that regularly occupied or not makes a difference. Using your examples, in my personal opinion, I think a break room would be a "shared multi-occupant space", but I think that storage rooms, corridors, restrooms, and copy rooms would be neither multi-occupant or indididual occupant spaces.

https://usgbc.org/glossary#individual-occupant-space

https://usgbc.org/glossary#shared-multioccupant-space

For each of the options, in v4.1, the USGBC seems to have very intentionally moved to the language "occupied spaces" and away from the "individual occupant space" or "shared multi-occupant space" that we've all been accustomed to in the past. This has me scratching my head a bit in terms of how to document, as it clearly has others on this thread, specifically for spaces that have a number of workstations within. The v4.1 Reference Guide is silent on the distinction between a catch-all "occupied space" and the more specific "individual vs shared multi-occupant" descriptors of the past. 

So I went to the glossary.  First I looked for "occupant space" (which is what the v4.1 credit language actually says for the lighting control path I was documenting).  While the term "occupant space" used in the credit language is not defined, the term "occupied space" used on the credit form is (https://usgbc.org/glossary#occupied-space).  And within the definition it includes sub types - yep - individual and shared multi-occupant.  So if the authors of the credit language wanted to keep that distinction in v4.1, I think they would have.  I don't personally think this was an oversight that the credit language uses the broader term only.  

So, my question here is whether any team has successfully submitted documentation wherein they have considered a space with multiple workstations as a single occupied space in the context of option 3 lighting control... and, if so, what was the review outcome? 

All - 

We recently asked the USGBC for some clarification as to how workstations in an open office plan are treated under LEEDv4.1. Here is the response we recieved:

"For the LEED v4.1 credit, open offices are considered one "occupant space", and individual lighting controls are not required for the individual workstations. An open office space would be considered compliant if a single dimming or multilevel lighting control is provided and accessible to the space occupants."

Thank you Brad! We were on the fence regarding whether v4.1 option 3 had the same individual occupant spaces requirement as in v4. We understood that v4.1 was much more feasible since it considered controrls in occupant spaces, and not by individual workstation.

Your feedback was just what we needed.

Thank you Brad. This seems like a HUGE change of direction! And certainly moves away from occupant satisfaction in my humble opinion. Do you believe there will be  addendum or interpretation issued on this? (Because it also fells like v4.1 is done in its current form and v5 that is in the works will be the next adoption...

Refering to Erin Holdenried's comment from 9/22/21 and pages 598 - 599 of the LEED v4 reference guide: I too am asking, what about corridors and restrooms. The paragraph under "Regularly versus nonregularly occupied spaces" on page 598 indicates that all nonregularly occupied spaces are part of the occupied spaces in a building which includes locker rooms, stairways, restrooms, stockrooms, corridors...
If I follow this guidance, I'd be providing dimming in a locker room and restroom. This does not make sense. What is the intent? 

Look at David Hubka's posts 22 July 21, and 17 August 21

Glenn, the August 17, 2021 comments does not address my question. It is still not clear if the requirement applies only to regularly occupied spaces.
Strategy 1, 2 and 4 explicitly say "regularly occupied" but strategy 3 omits the word. The GBCI response seems to suggest they meant for Strategy 3 to be just regularly occupied (combining individual and multi-occupant), but that's not what the 8/17 note says.   

My understanding is the credit does not apply only to regularly occupied spaces.  You have to included more spaces like break rooms, copy rooms, waiting areas that are not usually "regularly occupied".  Corridors, restrooms, storage, mechanical rooms are still excluded. I recommend looking at the 2009 IEQ Space Matrix (https://www.usgbc.org/resources/environmental-quality-space-type-matrix).  It has a list of space types and identifies Occupied vs Nonoccupied spaces.

The good news for the v4 and 4.1 requirements: "individual occupant" spaces is no longer a thing.  So, you don't have to provide lighting controls for every workstation (like task lighting) in a open office.  An open office needs lighting controls as a multi-occupant space.  For a very large open office a GBCI reviewer my want to see additional zone controls, but I haven't tested this theory.

Hi,

One more question to v4.1. What about the situation when I have two kinds of lighting fixtures in the room and just one of them (main one) is dimmable? Also, does the control panel have to still be in the same room as the fixture like it was in 4.0 or does the 4.1 description means that we just need controlable light source in the room and that's it? 

1. In my opinion you certainly have lighting that is "dimmable or multilevel lighting".

2. I think it's implied that you have to have manual control in the room so that the users can adjust the lighting to suit their needs -- that's the whole point. Why wouldn't you be able to have any manual controls in the room?

Based on Brad's GBCI response from January 2022, regarding open offices being one occupant space, does anyone know whether an open residential living space would be treated the same way? In a studio apartment, or even an apartment with closed bedrooms, there are often many uses in the main living space: kitchen, dining room, living room, office/nook - would 1 overhead light on a dimmer in an area with these 4 uses be enough? Would it be enough to have (for example) 3 light fixtures for 4 uses, if one was dimmable? I was hoping to understand what kind of feedback we could expect from our reviewer. 

I assume the answer would probably be different from v4 to v4.1 as well, given the above discussion regarding occupant spaces vs. individual occupant spaces?