If the first building is entirely complete and is already certified under New Construction, then you will keep the certification even though there is further work happening which is outside of the original project scope. If, however, you're talking about EBOM that's a different story.

No. The 1/2 mile radius includes what it includes.

Dana,
I recently recieved this response from GBCI:
"If you do not wish to submit the ID credit in
your Design Final review, do not mark the credit "complete" and do
not select it for review when submitting the project within the timeline tab." 
This was a question about design final review, but it also applied to the initial design review. There is no longer a button to defer a credit. Now you just don't mark it complete or select it when submitting for review.
Hope this helps!

Ashraf, congratulations on being a LEED AP, and it's great that you want to lead an educational effort there.
I"m not sure exactly what your question is, however -- can you clarify?

Hi Puteri,
Your wording is a little confusing. I think what you are trying to ask is what LEED Rating system would use for a new construction District Cooling Plant? If that's it then your answer is LEED New Construction.

If you are working on a current project and need guidance for buildings that are on a District Cooling see this here...http://www.leeduser.com/topic/new-district-energy-guidance-leed-released...

Sita, if you are not already familiar with the LEED Minimum Program Requirements, including the supplemental guidance, I would start by studying that document.

My observations, from an international point of view, are as follows :-

1) A hard copy, in the form of a comitment by the engineer on a company letterhead with his full signature, will always command more respect. We cut and pasted the data from the electronic forms onto paper and had the Professional Team sign that. It protects my client, and indirectly the USGBC.

2) The electronic signature still has some way to go before it is legally binding ? But its a good starting point and should be continued.

3) Required Signatory – Eap2 – Credit Form

In our case there is no ONE single Design Engineer than could sign off on the ALL the ASHRAE 90.1 aspects of the building, as required by the electronic form.

We therfore used a hard copy approach and had the Professional Team sign off as follows

5.4 Building Envelope - Architect
6.4 HVAC Systems - Mech Engineer
8.5, Power - Electrical Engineer
9.4 Lighting - Electrical Engineer
7.4 Service Water Heating - Electrical Engineer
10.4 Other Equipment - Electrical Engineer

Lastly, given the rather slow LeedOnline website ( it may be because we are on the other end of the earth, and it may be faster in the USA ? ) and its rather delicate state, we decided not to risk having others chopping and changing data, and possible introducing errors. We prefer to enter all data ourselves.

I've not heard of re-submitting an already certified building other than pursuing EBOM. For starters, you may want to go to LEED online v3 and go thru the "Register a new project" steps - if you choose the option that helps select a rating system you'll get a series of "wizard" screens with questions on the extent of the work scope that may help answer your question. Make sure you follow the "more..." links for additional tables.

If the new work is extensive enough to count as a "major renovation," it would probably mean pursuing NC for the renovated area. You might not have to exclude the addition as you described, since you'll probably be documenting the whole building performance for energy, lighting, and ventilation. If the work is less extensive, you might pursue CI for the new renovation work only. You might also consider pursuing LEED EB-OM for the whole building, and the renovation work would count toward the few credits that deal with facility alterations.

Hopefully the MPR supplemental guidance document and the LEEDOnline wizard will give you enough information to answer this; feel free to follow up here if it doesn't.

I think Owner Required Signatories is a great addition for many of the prerequisites and credits where it is used. It has been a breath of fresh air to get owners on board with the requirements. It has definitely increased communication and understanding. The biggest challenge is helping them become more skilled in using LOv3.

While you are not asking for feedback about this, I thought I would include it since it is on the subject of required signatories.

I have also appreciated the LOv3 Help item on required signatories – specifically the table of credits. (https://www.leedonline.com/irj/go/km/docs/documents/usgbc/leed/config/co...) I realize that USGBC has added a disclaimer at the top of the Table stating “Note: Actual presence of required signatory depends on compliance path/option selected within the LEED Credit Form.” since I last looked at the list in January, which is helpful.

But it would be great if USGBC could update the LOv3 Help Table (maybe via footnote) to determine which compliance path is requiring the signature. Just today, I had to explain to a new owner, which forms there going to have to sign vs. complete. I had to open all the forms to make sure that I was telling them correctly to ensure I had the right compliance path.

In January, I had copied the table to Word and inserted comments to indicate which compliance path triggered the signatory. That method is really not a practical for keeping up to date on my end with all the form updates. Having USGBC footnote the chart would be my preference.

Yes, it does—if those things are in the scope.