Yes, this credit does focus on efficiency, but does still allow the use of non-potable water. Notice that the rating system intent states "To increase water efficiency within buildings...." and does not mention potable water, so please consider the reference guide revisions as neccessary to align with the rating system language.
However, the "Potential Technologies and Strategies" section of the Rating System documents do still include "Consider using alternative on-site sources of water...." and thus it is still a potential strategy for earning this credit. It is an alternative compliance path and the submittal requirements for this will be included in the revised WEp1 Additional Guidance, which will be available soon.
ShaVon Diaz
LEED Specialist, USGBC
Bill Swanson
Sr. Electrical EngineerIntegrated Design Solutions
LEEDuser Expert
731 thumbs up
July 21, 2010 - 11:05 am
I didn't know USGBC was on here. HI. Thanks for the info.
77 thumbs up
July 21, 2010 - 11:07 am
I guess that answers it. Thanks for the clarification. Is the language meant to say that the definition of "Design Case" is the flow rates of the fixtures alone before taking deduction for non-potable water sources?
ShaVon Diaz
U.S. Green Building Council10 thumbs up
July 21, 2010 - 11:29 am
Hi Ben,
This distinction is not necessary. See page 169 of the BD&C reference guide which states, "Once the design case water use has been determined, compare the volumes of water required for each end use with the volumes of alternative sources of water available on-site." Essentially, the design case water use would be adjusted if non-potable water is used.
Abena Darden
Senior AssociateThornton Tomasetti
273 thumbs up
July 21, 2010 - 2:18 pm
Thanks everyone. As a follow-up, I have a simpleton-type question, so bear with me if this is obvious. What are the mechanics of actually entering the volume of non-potable water onto the template? I am looking at one now and there seems to be no area to enter that figure and hence have the points tally properly.
Shannon Gray
ConsultantYRG sustainability
228 thumbs up
July 21, 2010 - 3:19 pm
Marian,
Unfortunately, you will have to provide additional and separate calculations. So, you can't actually input the information into the credit form. The points will likely be updated and tallied by the review team.
Shannon
Abena Darden
Senior AssociateThornton Tomasetti
273 thumbs up
July 21, 2010 - 3:22 pm
Thanks, Shannon.
Andrea Traber
Director, Sustainable Buildings and OperationsKEMA
62 thumbs up
July 22, 2010 - 8:33 pm
Very glad to hear non-potable water was not eliminated as an option for this credit. I question why non-potable water use was relegated to an alternative compliance path and not included on the template causing an extra piece of documentation to be created by the team. My concern is that since this strategy is an alternative path it will not be used as frequently, and the documentation process got more difficult rather than simpler, which is the goal of LEED streamlining. Do you have any insight as to why this issue went this way or if it will be streamlined again in LEED 2012?
ShaVon Diaz
U.S. Green Building Council10 thumbs up
July 26, 2010 - 12:04 pm
The focus of WEp1 is efficiency which is basically why the use of non-potable water is relegated to an alternative compliance path. All sources of water should be used efficiently. We have appropriately and completely addressed this issue in LEED 2012, so please keep an eye out for the public comment period to provide comments/feedback.