This sounds like it could either be a very successful approach if each contractor is committed to doing a good job and taking responsibility for their piece. On the other hand if they don't understand the requirements all that well or don't follow them closely, it could turn out not so well.
To document it, you'd need to decide whether to track waste by weight or volume, and establish some system for documenting the waste that leaves the jobsite with each sub, and what they do with it.
Does the GC have any documentation of his past success in terms of diversion rates for the project?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
That is what I need to find out. The GC is working with a LEED consultant and she has used this method in the past and it's worked for her. I need to find out exactly how it was documented. When I first heard this, it raised some flags, and I just wanted to check others opinions. I know LEED is meant to be able do be flexible when dealing with different locales and regions, but I also don't want to worry about any rules being bent or manipulated to satisfy a credit intent.
I think you are safe in terms of meeting the credit intent and requirements, as long as you can find a way to document it effectively and to make sure that the waste is actually diverted.
Add new comment
To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.