Template Rounding for Design Case-Urinal

I was hoping to see a response to this question. We have a similar situation where the template is rounding our water closet flush valve from 1.28 gpf to 1.3 gpf. That small rounding adds an additional 10kGal+ to our annual water use and is costing us points. Curious if anyone has attempted submitting there own spreadsheet with narrative, and been successful?

Hi Rebekah,

We ended up finding additional points elsewhere, so we elected not to fuss over the rounding in the template. But, for future reference, I'm curious if you had success with the approach. Have you submitted, and gotten feedback yet?

Thanks,
Will

We have a similar situation in our project. I hope we can get an update soon

Hi Rebekah, et al.

While the WEp1 form calculations indicate a 39.97% savings, the associated WEc1 form should reflect a 40% savings. I'm fairly certain this is the case for NC projects in LEED Online so it should be similar for CI. Is the WEc1 form not rounding up?

Hi Carlie,

This still appears to be an issue with the CI credit template. On a current project, we are using 0.125gpf urinal flush valves. The template is rounding the flush rate to 0.13gpf. With 14 daily uses and 255 annual days of operation, the template is calculating the annual usage for the urinal to be 0.464kGal at 0.13gpf. However, at 0.125gpf, the annual water consumption should be 0.446kGal. While a negligible difference, that small amount is preventing us from achieving the 40% threshold.

Hi Will,

Yes, the form does round the individual flush fixtures up as you noted (i.e. 0.125 gpf urinal = 0.13 gpf); however, the total overall savings in WEp1 should also round up in the associated credit form (i.e. 39.97% in WEp1 should reflect 40% in the WEc1 form).

If this small difference is still prohibiting you from achieving the 40% you could submit supporting calculations with your documentation, but I would also suggest you contact GBCI about this first to receive feedback.

I pushed this issue to GBCI and Mahesh and have received the following response:

"Thank you for your inquiry regarding the LEED-CI v2009 WEp1 Credit Form and the issue you are experiencing with how the form rounds performance values. We are currently working on an update to this credit form to allow for values that round to three decimal places. In the meantime, GBCI will accept independent calculations using the actual flush rate of 0.125 GPF in order for the team to document the correct water use reduction threshold for this project. Please select the 'Additional Details - Special Circumstances' checkbox at the end of the WEp1 form, and upload separate calculations."

I am working on a project where the water reduction is just under the reduction threshold - 29.7%. However, the credit template shows points documented when i hit the "check compliance" button and so I assumed it rounded up. I have just received notice that the credit was denied - why is the credit acceptance not consistent with the credit template documentation?