We've attempted to earn an innovation credit by citing the owner's initiative to recycle materials (batteries, motor oil, electronics, cooking oil, and other fluids from industrial equipment) beyond those required by MRp1. The review team has directed us to meet the requirements found in LEED Interpretation 3920: 1. average recycling rate of 40%; 2. double MRp1 materials benchmark (by weight, volume, or recycling rate); and 3. don't include landscape/regulated waste in calculations.
The landscape and regulated waste requirement is straightforward, but I would like clarification on the other two. Is a waste audit needed to determine the recycling rate? Since it is very unlikely that the additional materials would double the MRp1 benchmark by volume or weight, doubling the recycling rate seems like the only viable option. Am I right to assume this essentially means that if 40% is the average recycling rate for the materials required by MRp1, then a rate of 80% of additional materials diverted from the waste stream would qualify for the credit?
Any suggestions are appreciated.
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for
Eric Carter
Intern ArchitectMethod Studio, Inc.
February 19, 2014 - 1:45 pm
We're nearing the completion of our documentation for final construction review and would like to include this credit: anyone have some advice for us?
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
February 19, 2014 - 4:15 pm
Eric, while that LEED Interpretation is applicable to LEED 2009, I think it's a bit dated with respect to the model that it is providing. I would look at EBOM 2009 MRc7 as your model for compliance here and focus on meeting those requirements (doubling the base requirements of an EBOM credit is typically not required for an NC IDc1 approach).Is this helpful?
Eric Carter
Intern ArchitectMethod Studio, Inc.
February 20, 2014 - 3:58 pm
Tristan, your comment is helpful: I can see why the requirements in EBOM 2009 MRc7 are applicable and attainable, but I wonder whether the review team would find them acceptable since they directed us to such a specific LEED Interpretation. Do you have any suggestions for how we might make a case for substituting one set of requirements for the other?
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11478 thumbs up
February 20, 2014 - 4:18 pm
It is very common and pretty accepted to use an EBOM credit for an NC ID credit. I don't think you need to make this case. I am a little surprised the review team pointed you to this older Interpretation when the EBOM path is more clear. You can even us the EBOM templates and forms!For backup, see GBCI's submittal tips doc. Actually based on that I might amend my original comment and point you to EBOM MRp2.