See all forum discussions about CI-2009 EAc1.3
 Subscribe to new posts about CI-2009 EAc1.3 Post a new question aboutCI-2009 EAc1.3
See LEEDuser’s guidance on CI-2009 EAc1.3»
FAQs about EAc1.3 :

If pursuing Option 2, what is the scope of the energy model if the space shares a central plant, and what type of software should be used?

For Option 1, Zoning and Controls, is a thermostat considered an “active control capable of sensing space demand"?

View answers »

Forum discussion

CI-2009 EAc1.3:Optimize Energy Performance—HVAC

One RTU not qualifying the prescriptive requirements

Hi, I am working on a LEED CI project in which HVAC equipments (serving tenant space) are not being replaced ( 5 RTU units), one of the RTU unit is very old and does not qualify Efficiency requirements of Table 6.8.1A. Based on ID#10134, I am understanding that all these 5 units still need to qualify table 6.8.1A and "New Building Institute's Advanced Buildings Core performance" requirements for Option 1(equipment efficiency - 5 points). Is this correct? Can I consider Option -2 to prove 15 % savings?

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 dconnelly
Dylan Connelly
Mechanical Engineer
Integral Group
LEEDuser Expert
342 thumbs up

Thu, 01/23/2014 - 19:10

Sounds like you're asking if you can take 5 points from the prescriptive path (option 1) and 5 points from performance path (option 2). The answer is no. You can do option 1 or option 2. Not a partial of both.

Thu, 01/23/2014 - 19:43

Dylan, Thank you for your reply. My situation is: One of the existing RTU (installed in 1999) serving the tenant space does not qualify CPG requirements (neither qualify efficiency requirements of Section 6.4). My question is: Can this project still be eligible for Option 1 - 5points? I am not planning to apply through both the options. In case, I am not eligible for Option 1, can I go with option 2 if I am able to prove 15 % savings over ECB energy model?
Profile picture for user dconnelly
Dylan Connelly
Mechanical Engineer
Integral Group
LEEDuser Expert
342 thumbs up

Sat, 01/25/2014 - 01:56

Sunayana, Read further down and we talk about your condition. Even if the unit is existing it needs to comply. But also note per LEED Interpretation 10134, only systems that are supplying 60% of the air or heating/cooling need to comply. Yes if you don't comply with option 1 you can try option 2 if you can get your model to show 15% better than code.

Thu, 01/30/2014 - 18:40

Dylan, I am not clear from CPG whether VAV is required for Option1 (Equipment Efficiency - 5 points). I have Constant Volume RTUs serving the tenant space. All of them have supply fan less than 5 HP. Can this qualify under option1? Also latest CPG states that "Packaged unitary equipment shall meet the minimum efficiency requirements in table 2.9.1 and 2.9.2 and be Energy Star labeled." I used to think that either the packaged system has to qualify the above tables or Energy Star but not both. Any views will be appreciated.
Profile picture for user dconnelly
Dylan Connelly
Mechanical Engineer
Integral Group
LEEDuser Expert
342 thumbs up

Mon, 02/17/2014 - 18:50

Are the constant volume RTUs the new units you've installed? It is typically pretty hard to find RTUs that are energy star labeled - perhaps a CIR is appropriate to clarify you are meeting the efficiency requirements at least.

Mon, 02/17/2014 - 18:54

Thanks Dylan. Constant Volume RTUs are already existing ones. No change is being made to the HVAC portion for the tenant space.

Add new comment

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