What do you think?

I have both feelings. Intrigued and a little nervous. As a consultant I don't know if all of the knowledge I've accumulated over the years will be necessary for the plug and play aspect of the new LEED. While v4 was ridiculously swayed to the difficult side, this seems to be much easier, but I will not know for sure until I complete a project..Also wondering about the cost aspects: so you have to pay the full certification price year 1 and then the next 4 years you certify for free? Only time will tell if this helps or hinders my business. The funny thing is the USGBC said this wasn't a full version change but it feels like a biggest change they have ever had!

I'm not an O&M user, but the Innovation credit changes caught my eye, assuming they'll carry over to other rating systems -

- LEED AP with specific specialty is now a requirement to earn any Innovation points. Interesting compromise between making it a prereq and leaving it as a kind of meaningless credit with a 100% achievement rate.

- Exemplary performance option is no more. Reducing it to two possible points didn't seem to make a huge difference since v4 raised the thresholds so much anyway, but removing it entirely will be a big shift...especially since the language makes it very clear that Innovation strategies can't be addressed elsewhere in the rating system. No claiming innovation for even a big leap in performance.

Seems to me that 5.0 is a better name.  Removing Schools, Retail, Data Centers, Commissioning, Metering, Renewable Energy, Carbon Offsets, Thermal Comfort, Daylight, Quality Views, Regional Priority AND more than one Innovation Point is quite a change!  There seems to be a fundamental shift in eliminating these that I don't think has been fully explained.  Hopefully more reasoning behind these will become apparent during the Beta period.

I agree with others that v4.1 appears to be more than an “incremental update”.

The biggest unknown of concern for me is whether we will be able to set (and deliver) predictable project goals for our building owners. I am unclear how Arc spins the performance data into LEED points and ultimately LEED certification levels. If Arc has been built upon the short-lived LEED Dynamic Plaque era, my recollection is that it was less than transparent. And from my experience, building owners decide in advance how much they will invest in attaining a particular level of LEED certification. If there are unknowns or unpredictability, that increases risk and could be a disincentive. I hope to learn more about how this will be addressed.

I also get the feeling that in removing LEED credits (especially Commissioning, one of my favorites) and with the use of performance data through Arc, certification may be about getting there in whatever way you can. Does this signal a move away from the LEED roadmap? If so, does that assume that LEED has become best practices in the industry and no specific guidance is needed in achieving high-performance buildings? If this were to be the case, it would be of concern to me.

I look forward to learning more and understanding how the beta will look for BD+C v4.1. 

I think that it's important to embrace change, especially as technology and industry needs shift. That being said, I had no idea that they were doing away with Portfolio Manager for EA. I guess the writing was on the digital wall with the introduction of Arc. I know some larger REITs and property management firms leverage Portfolio Manager heavily, so this will be interesting to see how those organizations react.

I also got the impression from clients and the local industry here that there were two pathways to obtain certification that questioned the worth of O+M. Good thing we have an opportunity now to provide comments, particularly on the transparency of the performance piece. Maybe USGBC could provide a tool that projects performance potential for an operational building?

Also important perspective to have, there are other promising rating systems and tools too: LEED v4 O+M does not have to be the only pathway to sustainability success for existing buildings.

We have been long-time supporters of the performance-based approach of LEED Dynamic Plaque/Arc Performance Score/v4.1. . . . . 

The recertification time frame recently changed from annual to every 3 years and properties now are "encouraged" but not "required" to submit annual data during the off years when they are not recertifying. We are concerned that this change is a regression to the "set it and forget it" model of the traditional approach, rather than encouraging the industry to use Arc to closely monitor performance.

We are also awaiting pricing guidance on the new 3-year cycle and how properties that have previously paid 5-year recertification costs upfront (i.e., for 5 annual re certification reviews) will be integrated into this new 3-year approach.

There appears to still be many kinks to work out and it is becoming increasingly difficult to message these changes to our clients and manage uncertainty in the absence of clear guidance. That said, we are hopeful that the kinks will be worked out of v4.1 during the Beta Period.

I am currently working on two certifications with this version, v4.1 O+M and will have to say it has been a good process so far.  But with the version being in beta, some things are absent and you need to reach out to the technical team for help.  One being a conversion calculator for Indoor Environmental Quality Performance.  But for the most part, Arc is easy and user friendly, uploading the documentation in Arc is also seamless.  But the project still needs to upload documents in LEEDonline as well. So after working with v4.1 for 11 months, I have to say the process has been great with a few frustrating moments here and there, but it is still in beta so that is to be expected. 

Great post!

I am doing some research on LEED v4.1 O+M and I have a number of questions.
I am going to post them here (I know it is a lot) hoping someone knows the answer for a few of them, maybe.

Note: I will also post on specific credit foruns as well.

Questions here: https://leeduser.buildinggreen.com/forum/black-box-or-transparent-benchm...