I see that the 2003 LI #532 is still being applied as a requirement to v2009 projects. We are applying for the Exemplary Performance using the Comprehensive Transportation Management Plan. The Preliminary review comment back was that "At least three of the SSc4 suite credits have not been earned, as required. Provide the requested clarifications for the SSc4 suite credits, and demonstrate that at least three of these credits have been earned."
Searching this site I see that others have experienced this same issue. I'm a bit surprised that it is still happening. I foresee myself taking this up the chain of command at GBCI when the Reviewer rejects it again. Below is the reasoning I am applying to this ruling.
In the preface to the Reference Guide for NC v2009, under Updates and Addenda it states, “USGBC
cannot be held liable for any criteria set forth herein that may not be applicable to later version of LEED
rating systems, and GBCI reserves the right to modify its policies from time to time. Updates and
addenda will be accumulated between revisions and will be formally incorporated in major revisions.”
NC v2009 was a major revision over v2.1. It is commonly referred to as v3. The entire scoring and value
system of LEED was updated in v2009 when it went to the 100-point scale. The Reference Guide states
that all accumulated updates will be incorporated in major revisions and that criteria may not be
applicable to later versions of LEED. Updates and addenda will be accumulated “between” revisions.
This 2003 interpretation was years “before” v2009 and was not formally incorporated into the major
revision what was v2009.
Years ago, the USGBC website had an “applicability tab” for how strongly certain interpretations were
applied to various versions of LEED. #532 applied to v2 credits such that “the ruling was written for
projects using this rating system and must be applied based on the project’s registration date.” But for
v2009 credits the applicability only indicated that “project teams and reviewers may refer to the ruling for
projects using this rating system, if reasonable and appropriate.” This interpretation #532 was never
applied as a “must” for v2009 projects, only a “may if appropriate”. This project team is not applying that
v2 interpretation to this v2009 project.
Summer Minchew
Managing PartnerEcoimpact Consulting
LEEDuser Expert
170 thumbs up
March 14, 2018 - 11:48 am
Following this thread. I received a similar comment during review of our attempted Comprehensive Transportation Management Plan. "The project has earned at least three SSc4 credits." The LI was not referenced in the comment but I thought it was curious as well. The reviewer did ask for the following additional information, "list of transit strategies,
official documentation for at a least a five-year commitment to the programs, documentation for the number of
employees that are initially provided program information, documentation of the policies and procedures that ensure the
same service for new employees. Refer to the Operations and Maintenance Considerations within SSc4.1 of the LEED
BD+C v2009 Reference Guide for possible strategies." I would welcome your insight as to whether you've seen this kind of comment as well.
Bill Swanson
Sr. Electrical EngineerIntegrated Design Solutions
LEEDuser Expert
734 thumbs up
March 14, 2018 - 11:57 am
Yes, I got those identical comments. These are all originated in LI #532. Looks like a standard boilerplate response from their checklist. I can't imagine how many hours globally teams have had to add to address these comments. I thought all of these were addressed in the original submittal just from the fact that the client has a long established website to provide employees with information on alternative transport options. It's a public website. everyone has access. From the usage data, most people do use it. I don't have an exact number of employees that are initially provided program information. I'm just saying everyone has the information.
Bill Swanson
Sr. Electrical EngineerIntegrated Design Solutions
LEEDuser Expert
734 thumbs up
April 11, 2018 - 9:56 am
So the word from on high at GBCI is that this 2003 LEED Interpretation is still applicable to v2009 projects. Because when they got rid of the applicability tab to know which interpretations "could" be applied to a project and which ones "must" be applied, they just made everything a "must" be applied.
I found the old press release when v2009 was first announced.
"In addition, a scrub of the existing Credit Interpretation Rulings (CIRs) was conducted and necessary precedent-setting and clarifying language has been incorporated into the prerequisites/credits."
Obviously the language was not incorporated into the credits nor into the Reference Guide. Because work not done which was promised, we have many more years of baggage to sort thru.
I find it incredibly difficult to stay up to date with all of the nuances and interpretations for the Light Pollution credit. Just a single credit. To have 15+ years worth of interpretations and revisions for all credits is impossible. I have no confidence in any score card. Nearly every credit is a maybe, and customers don't like maybes.
GBCI needs to release the checklists that their Reviewers use. That is probably the best available conglomeration of all applicable Interpretations. Because searching thru the LI database is time consuming and inconsistent.
Dave Hubka
Practice Leader - SustainabilityEUA
LEEDuser Expert
530 thumbs up
April 11, 2018 - 10:36 am
Hi Bill,
Great post, one of the best I have seen in quite some time.
thumbs up from me!
Dave
emily reese moody
Sustainability Director, Certifications & ComplianceJacobs
LEEDuser Expert
476 thumbs up
August 18, 2018 - 6:04 pm
Dude. We just got the same exact comment, and our extremely diverse and invested transportation management plan rejected b/c the project is currently only able to earn 2 of the SS Cr 4 options available. Very frustrating, and difficult to explain the logic to the client, as to why their robust and costly investment in bringing multiple ways of non-automobile public transportation options to their project building isn't good enough.
And I hear ya on trying to keep track of every little nuanced change across multiple versions, multiple years, regular addenda, and CIRs. It's impossible, and this is pretty much what I do, all day, every day.