OK...so I feel kind of dumb asking this question because it seems like I should be able to figure out the answer from the 2009 User Guide but of course it's clear as mud so I humbly ask for clarification on the intent of credit EA-1 as it applies to LEED CS. By the way this is a two part question.

1. When pursuing LEED CS which of the following applies?
a.) Model energy use of both common area and tenant areas but only include energy cost of common areas in final EA-1 percentage savings calculation. This seems to be the common sense answer and the reason for stipulating that tenant and common areas be modeled on separate utility meters.
b.) Model energy use of both common area and tenant areas and calculate EA-1 energy cost savings including both common area and tenant area energy costs. If this is the answer why would I need to take the step of modeling common area and tenant areas on separate meters if I am including ALL energy costs in the final answer?
c.) Some other reasonable explanation

2. The 2009 User guide appears to have a contradiction with regard to how tenant area lighting is to be treated. The Table in the Option 1 section of the User Guide for Credit EA-1 says to model as-designed tenant area lighting in the proposed design model and Code baseline lighting in the baseline. However two pages later the paragraph at the top of the page says that energy measures applied to tenant areas must be stipulated in the tenant lease in order to qualify for credit.

Which of the following is the correct interpretation if I have a project where the tenant area final lighting design has been completed during design but the performance of that lighting system is not included in the tenant lease?
a.) When final tenant space lighting (not temporary lighting) is designed as part of the core and shell design, savings from the final fit-out lighting design can be claimed even though the performance is not stipulated in the lease.
b.) If final tenant lighting is designed the savings cannot be claimed unless the design performance is stipulated in the lease, therefore the tenant area lighting should be the same as the baseline and the table is incorrect.
c.) There is another perfectly logical interpretation.
d.) We purposefully intended to make it confusing so that GBCI would be confused and therefore review comments would be inconsistant and engineers would curse our names while we chortle under our breaths at the pain they now must endure.

Thanks for your prompt help and best wishes for the Holidays.

PS: For purposes of full disclosure this post does include sarcasm.