LEED and Passive House

Humbly submitted from a mechanical engineer:  I'm following up on Douglas's post in case anyone has experience with envelope testing and comissioning scope overlaps between Passive House (PHIUS and/or PHI) and LEED v4/4.1.  Now that Massachusetts' new Stretch Energy Code and Specialized Opt-In Code are going into effect, multiple projects are pursuing both LEED (often local or institutional requirements) and Passive House (now an energy code compliance pathway), and I'm trying to help a client avoid duplicating efforts and expenses, and make sure there is a streamlined process and clear responsibilities between different consultants.  Any resources or advice would be appreciated!

Patrick, you probably already know that Passive House certification automatically gets you Optimize Energy Performance points under v4 (for multifamily only, so far) and also qualifies you for the Passive Survivability pilot credit. I’ve seen nothing about Enhanced Commissioning and PH, but I think it might be worth requesting an interpretation that could help future projects meet the requirements, at least for BECx if not for the entire Cx credit. There is a PH forum  on LEEDuser that you could try, but it’s currently pretty inactive. As people start to ramp up PH in new jurisdictions, though, that could change! I guess the short answer is … you are likely the early adopters in this case, which means your clients will probably bear costs that others eventually will not. I hope things move rapidly to toward alignment. === Paula Melton, she/her, LEED AP BD+C Editorial Director BuildingGreen , Inc. 122 Birge St. #30 Brattleboro, VT 05301 Email: paula@buildinggreen.com LinkedIn | Twitter | Facebook BuildingGreen champions the changemakers in sustainable design and building with trusted insight, unparalleled education, and communities that are transforming the industry.

The issue we have come across -- as discussed with our envelope-design consultant -- is the LEED BECx rule requiring a 3rd party within their own consulting firm, and the additional detailed documentation required for the credit. The good news I suppose, is that the additional fee being proposed for the BECx -- on top of their same-firm's envelope-design work -- is much, much less than if they were only doing BECx. Nevertheless, this still is too patchwork, and costly, not a satisfactory system.

Thinking more about this one. Did anyone ever submit an Interpretation? I'd be happy to help draft something, because though the requirements and standard references are fundamentally different there are certainly obvious overlaps in equivalency. I just haven't had a specific project pursut both certifications (yet).