We are working on a project where the entire site needs 50'-0" deep compaction grouting at 6'-0" o.c to stabilize it.Then this public project will be pile supported. Given that the compaction grouting is almost 22% of the entire project cost with limited recycled content or regional value (which skews our calculations) is there a way to divorce the underground site stabilization from the project calculations? Thanks for any insight
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Joseph Ford, AIA
ArchitectRSP Architects Ltd.
17 thumbs up
January 25, 2013 - 12:39 pm
Brian, The reference guide stipulates which MasterFormat 2004 sections should be included in the MR calcs, see p. 372. In Div 31, the only section required is 31.60.00 Foundations. Per MasterFormat, compaction grouting is specified under 31.40.00 Shoring and Underpinning. Based on that my take would be that you should omit compaction grouting from the MR calcs. You would still have to include the piles since they are in 31.60.00.
Tim Crowley
LEED AP / Founderwww.BCdesignbuild.com
60 thumbs up
January 28, 2013 - 2:24 pm
Brian and Joseph - I have had similar questions within this forum regarding lean fill and imported fill and was given the following advice which I have leaned on from Michelle Rosenberger:
__________________________________________________________
A small note from the application side of this issue. The previous rating system's neat declaration of CSI Div 2 - 10 for these credits worked fairly well to determine what was in and what was out of the calculation.
However, the new CSI divisions don't split so nicely. Architects are now placing items that we have seen in the past as part of Div 2-10 in sections not identified specifically by LEED. While I am usually the most literal of people, in this case, we have returned to intent.
If the material is permanently installed and would reasonably be something we have counted in the past like imported fill or lockers, we include it regardless of the actual specification section. We assume that as long as we are incorporating the cost on both sides of the equation and sticking to intent that we are in compliance.
This is one of many areas where LEED simply can't provide that one size rule that fits all. Design teams can specify materials where it makes sense to them, regardless of LEED's druthers, and we don't believe a project should be penalized for choosing a different spec section. Especially when they go to the trouble of sourcing recycled or regional content.
The newest BDC calculator does include CSI division but it's optional, so LEED reviewers are basically relying on your assessment anyway, as they already must for overall project building materials cost.
And as this thread started, there are trade offs if you do this right that should take care of any questionable inclusions.
________________________________________________________
Reading through these comments above by Michelle - I would think that grouting used for soil stabilization could be included in the calculations. Also, you should be able to get some recycled content value out of the SCMs of the concrete used in the grouting and would likely get regional materials credit for this work.
RETIRED
LEEDuser Expert
623 thumbs up
January 29, 2013 - 3:04 pm
While I agree that it is up to the discretion of the teams to assess where materials should be specified and which ones should be included, I take the divisions and sections in LEED v2009 pretty literally.
Granted more things were included in v2 related to site, but I think it is better to err on the side of following the current requirements than falling back on how we used to do it or worse, placing items incorrectly so as to gerrymander the MR credits. Either of which would be hard to backup if a reviewer had concerns.
Since you have analyzed that compaction grouting is 31 40 00, then have justification as to why it is not included in the MR calculations (since it is not in the delineated divisions and sections). I agree with your thoughts about the piles. If you look at 31 60 00 in MasterFormat 2004, its real title is Special Foundations and Load-Bearing Elements. Underneath that are Driven Piles, Bored Piles, Caissons, Special Foundations, and Foundation Anchors.
Tim Crowley
LEED AP / Founderwww.BCdesignbuild.com
60 thumbs up
January 29, 2013 - 3:23 pm
MasterFormat 2004 vs. 1995 versions used in project specifications also complicates this matter. A similar discussion regarding this lead to a comment from Nadav Malin that:
_______________________________________________________
I happen to have a handy cross-reference table that CSI put out when they first introduced MF04 back in, yes, 2004. Here's what that has to say for the relevant sections:
31 60 00 is "Special Foundations and Load-Bearing Elements", corresponding to nearly everything in MF95 02450-02490
32 10 00 is "Bases, Ballasts, and Paving", corresponding to MF95 sections 02700-02790 & 02335 (subgrade work)
32 30 00, "Site improvements" covers fences and barriers. Corresponding MF95 sections are 02820-02830 and 02850-02860.
32 90 00, "Plantings": 02905, 02910, 02920, 02930, 02945, and 12810 (interior plants)
____________________________________________________________
That having been stated; I have been told on projects I have worked on that compaction grouting stabilization falls under Division 2 - Site Work, 2450 Mine Stabilization and for that reason should be included in the LEED calculations.
RETIRED
LEEDuser Expert
623 thumbs up
January 29, 2013 - 3:45 pm
I have not seen a GC or CM yet who is using MasterFormat 2004. So every contractor or sub will tell you something like this is in Division 2, which is the old MasterFormat 1995 designation.
I have the conversion maps that Nadav is referencing but they are no longer available on CSI’s website, which is unfortunate but I’ve found this online conversion tool useful - http://www.masterformat.com/transitionguide/. Shoring and Underpinning (31 40 00) does not have a backwards map to MF 1995 and probably used to be included in 0245X.
Tim Crowley
LEED AP / Founderwww.BCdesignbuild.com
60 thumbs up
January 29, 2013 - 4:35 pm
Michelle - I like the transitionguide. Thanks for the link. When I went to it and put in 2450, which is the spec section that the architect and the contractor tell me the work is under, it transitions that to 31.60.00
So, I should be including the Stabilization Concrete Grouting in the LEED calculations, right?
RETIRED
LEEDuser Expert
623 thumbs up
January 29, 2013 - 5:24 pm
Tim - I am not a MasterFormat expert but as I noted, according to Joseph’s analysis, he believes that compaction grouting is now in 31 40 00 in MF 2004. 31 40 00 does not have a backwards map to MF 1995 but was in 02250 in MF 1995. (FYI - Shoring and Underpinning includes Shoring, Concrete Raising, Vibroflotation and Densification, Needle Beams, and Underpinning.) I think Joseph was associating this with pressure grouting for concrete raising (31 43 13).
When I looked closer at MF 2004, I think compaction grouting could actually be in 31 32 00 Soil Stabilization of which 31 32 23 is Pressure Grouting Soil Stabilization. I can’t find backwards mapping to this area either in MF 1995 but checking another resource, I see that shoring and underpinning and soil stabilization were in 02250 in MF 1995. That section, 02250, has been split into a long list of sections including 31 40 00 and 31 32 00 but not to 31 60 00 (or any subsections of it). Regardless, specifying it in either 31 40 00 or 31 32 00 in the version of MF we are working with in LEED 2009, neither would NOT be included in the MR credit calculations.
Tim Crowley
LEED AP / Founderwww.BCdesignbuild.com
60 thumbs up
February 19, 2013 - 3:56 pm
Michelle - Thank you so much for your input on this item and your prompt responses. I meant to write this thank you to you long ago. So much for a prompt thank you...