See all forum discussions about NC-2009 MRc5
 Subscribe to new posts about NC-2009 MRc5 Post a new question aboutNC-2009 MRc5
See LEEDuser’s guidance on NC-2009 MRc5»
FAQs about MRc5 :

What is the purpose of the newly added Option 2? Can I pursue both options?

How do we account for materials using the new Option 2 equation?

With steel and aluminum products, why do I often get review comments questioning why my extraction distance is the same as my manufacture distance?

Why can’t I include mechanical, electrical and plumbing components in this credit? What if I consistently include MEP materials in the calculations for all of the MR credits I’m attempting?

We are pursuing IEQc4.5 as an ID credit. Are we thus required to include the cost of furniture in MRc3–7?

What if different parts of a product are manufactured at different locations?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-2009 MRc5:Regional Materials

new FAQ

Profile picture for user tristanroberts
Tristan Roberts
Representative
Vermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
7780 thumbs up

I have just added an FAQ to our guidance above, at GBCI's suggestion. If anyone's wondering why they get questioned when extraction and manufacturing distances are the same for steel or aluminum products, see the answer above!

0
Post a reply

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Profile picture for user keith.lindemulder
Keith Lindemulder
Environmental Business Development- LEED AP BD&C
Nucor Corporation
LEEDuser Basic Member
132 thumbs up

Wed, 05/08/2013 - 22:46

I typed a long response that somehow didn't post...but before I type it again, how many times are projects "questioned" on this issue? I can think of several legitimate situations where the "recovery" location and "final manufacturing" location would be the same. Even more difficult is it's rare that scrap steel is collected in a single location. More often scrap is recovered and processed in MANY locations many of which can be within 500 miles of the job. So there won't be a 'single zip code' to enter into the form. In those cases, I have heard project teams will enter the zip code of the mill in the form. I sincerely wish USGBC and/or GBCI would consult the market before issuing blanket (often vague) guidance......
Profile picture for user tristanroberts
Tristan Roberts
Representative
Vermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
7780 thumbs up

Thu, 05/09/2013 - 14:22

Keith, I don't think GBCI is disallowing this kind of data entry. It just raises a flag for them and they might ask project teams to verify the information. "Yes, I really meant that, and here's why."Not saying this is the best possibly approach, but it's routine for questions like this to come up.

Thu, 05/09/2013 - 20:54

Hello, Keith you are correct that sometimes the extraction and manufacture location are the same, however the more common case found in documentation is that the project team does not know the extraction location and re-enters the manufacturing location incorrectly. This is a red flag for reviewers. Thanks for the FAQ addition Tristan!

Wed, 07/24/2013 - 14:01

Keith - Short answer is every project review recently has been dinged on this exact issue for steel. It is a big deal. USGBC IP - Yes, entering the manufacturing location as the extraction is usually the wrong thing. You're right to question. What I don't understand, particularly in light of LI 100,000,379 that states the 'extraction point for recycled materials is location of the raw material prior to the manufacturing of the final building product' why we get questioned on the coil location as the extraction point and the mill as the manufacturing point.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.