LEED 2012

Key changes in the the LT section of LEED-NC (part of LEED BD&C) in the third public comment draft of LEED 2012 are discussed below. Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments submitted here during USGBC's third public comment period here will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the third public comment.

The new LT category still consists mostly of credits from the old Sustainable Sites category that aren’t so much about the site itself as they are about where it’s located.

A new LEED for Neighborhood Development Location credit remains in this draft as an alternate compliance path for the whole LT section. Some specifics on certification levels and other details have been changed since the last draft.

As with the second draft, what had been the Site Selection credit has morphed into a prerequisite and a credit. The prerequisite, Sensitive Land Protection, is structured very much like the current SSc1, but as a prerequisite, those requirements would have bumped a lot of projects out of LEED consideration in v2009. In Case 1, projects must develop only previously developed portions of a site. In Case 2, projects developing previously undeveloped sites have the opportunity to mitigate their impacts, depending on the type.

If you must build some or all of your project on prime soils, you can purchase or donate conservation easements for similar land elsewhere. Building an infill site on prime soils is also considered acceptable. If you don’t meet the requirement to stay 15 feet away from wetlands, you can earn the prerequisite by not building on the wetland and by performing stormwater mitigation.

The corresponding credit has become High Priority Site, changed from Enhanced Site Protection, but is not otherwise much altered. There remain three options: locate on an infill location within a historic district; locate on a brownfield (that, in a change from the last draft, you must actually remediate); or locate on a site listed for preferential development by one of seven federal programs, such as the EPA National Priorities List. This new approach appears to raise the bar on brownfield remediation (see the SS section), and a new credit for historic buildings that appeared in the first public comment period has been rolled in here.

The old Development Density credit (SSc2) gets another new title, now  Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses. The basic intent has not changed, but USGBC continues to look for workable documentation requirements. In this draft, projects may calculate density using either separate residential and non-residential densities or combined density values. There are only detail-level changes to the “diverse uses” option, but a section highlighting pedestrian-friendly measures as a third option has been scrapped in this draft.

The Quality Transit and Reduced VMT credit (with “VMT” meaning vehicle miles traveled) from the last draft is now simply Quality Transit. This credit remains consistent with the first LEED 2012 draft, with a focus not just on locating near mass transit options, as in LEED 2009, but also on mass transit options that have routes meeting certain designated requirements and a minimum number of trips. VMT has been struck from the credit name because a second option offering compliance by locating within a metropolitan planning organization location with low VMT has been removed.

There are numerous small changes to the Bicycle Network, Storage, and Shower Rooms credit (no, they’re not “changing” rooms anymore), with mixed results in terms of stringency.  Minimum requirements for a bike rack have been dropped since the previous draft, but there are new requirements for short-term bike storage (2.5% of users) added to requirements for long-term bike storage (5% of users for commercial and 30% for residential projects). Short-term bike storage basically amounts to “preferred parking”—it’s within 100 feet of a main entrance— while long-term storage is within 100 feet of any functional entrance. It’s easy to see that we’re going to need a new glossary in the LEED 2012 Reference Guide.

Walkable Streets in the first LEED 2012 draft became Walkable Project Site in the second draft, and now it’s gone. It had focused on designing the building frontage to be friendly to pedestrians, with features like continuous sidewalks that connect to public sidewalks.

The new Reduced Parking Footprint credit has minor revisions since the last draft. The key requirement remains from the first draft: reduce capacity over a “base ratio” given in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Parking Planning Handbook. The requirements are tougher for transit-served projects. Now new and existing spaces are explicitly counted (a change from LEED 2009, in which existing parking spaces are grandfathered in). The biggest change in this draft is the addition of requirements for pooled parking, such as in a mall. Projects may use their designated parking spaces for credit calculations, but if they do not have designated spaces, the entire parking area must meet the requirements.

As with the second draft, the Low-Emitting and Fuel-Efficient Vehicles credit is only offered to schools and warehouses, and the requirement is to provide a low-emitting vehicle fleet for the facility.

What do you think of the proposed changes? Post your public comment below.

Several key changes are proposed for a new structure for the LEED-EBOM Rating System in 2012. Most significantly, prerequisites and credits now have an Establishment component and a Performance component. In the Establishment portion of the credit, project teams are asked to establish a foundation that the credit will rely on, for example, to develop a policy. The Performance part will request that project teams show evidence of an activity (i.e. a survey, audit, or testing) or ongoing tracking. The intention behind this new structure is to simplify and clarify the recertification process. 

In addition to the usual upgrade with the latest standards and higher compliance thresholds, LEED-EBOM 2012 will include a handful of new prerequisites.

Additionally, there is now a suite of LEED-EBOM rating systems with requirements that are tailored to specific project types, including Schools, Retail, Data Centers, Hospitality, and Warehouse & Distribution Centers.

Some new credit categories have been proposed through the various versions of public comment. However, some have not made the cut in the third version. The proposed Integrative Process and Performance categories are no longer part of the rating system. The new credit category that did stick is Transportation and Location. The category includes only one credit, Alternative Transportation Commuting (a credit previously in the Sustainable Sites category). Also, in an attempt to streamline the credits, several related credits have been combined.

Location & Transportation (LT)

The new LT category for EBOM consists only of a lonesome relocation of Alternative Commuting Transportation (1-14 points) from SS to LT. The credit is mostly recognizable from its v2009 form, but there are some significant changes highlighted below.

Major Changes in LT

The biggest change with this credit is that the baseline is no longer 100% single-occupant vehicle (SOV) commuting trips. Instead, the baseline is based on the national average of SOV trips for the specific building type. For example, the baseline for office buildings is 85% SOV, whereas at the other end of the spectrum, the baseline for college classrooms and administration is 40% SOV.

So this credit just got more stringent for all buildings and particularly for buildings like hotels, schools and colleges. In addition to the modified baseline, the alternative commuting trip types are no longer weighted equally. The most highly weighted alternatives are human-powered trips and public transportation, and low-emitting, fuel-efficient vehicles are the lowest-weighted alternative trips.  

Minor Changes in LT

As for minor changes, the performance (point) thresholds have been modified slightly, and you can earn a point just for conducting the survey. But the net difficulty related to the point thresholds is still more or less the same as v2009. Also, note that there is an alternative compliance path specific to retail projects.

Currently, the credit language does not outline specific steps for the Establishment and Performance phases, so it’s a bit unclear how often the survey will need to be conducted after the initial certification.

Sustainable Sites (SS)

You’ll be familiar with most of the SS section, as it retains many of its familiar faces, including heat island, light pollution, and site management, although some areas have been combined into single credits. Also, we see the introduction of a sustainable sites prerequisite with the Site Management Policy outlined below.

Major Changes in SS

The most notable change with the SS section is the establishment of a new prerequisite and the departure of SSc4 Alternative Commuting Transportation (v2009) over to the LT section. The prerequisite involves establishing a Site Management Policy that more or less covers the same components of SSc2 and SSc3 from v2009. Project teams in the past struggled with the build-your-own metrics aspect of the v2009 credits, and this version attempts to put clear parameters on what performance is required and how it is evaluated. One addition to the mix of maintenance equipment, cleaning chemicals, fertilizer, etc. is maintenance practices to ensure optimal operations of irrigation equipment. The site management policy is adopted in the Establishment period, and there is no Performance activity or tracking associated with the prerequisite. Performance requirements for site maintenance activities are now in the associated credit for site maintenance.

Another big change with the sites credits is that Stormwater Management is re-branded as Rainwater Management (1–3 points) and comes fresh with new performance criteria for managing rainwater on the site. Specifically, the credit requires implementation of 2 of 5 available strategies ranging from low-impact development (LID) practices to rainwater capture and reuse to a rainwater filtering system. The new credit criteria appear to be more stringent than their v2009 precursors and may prove to be more meaningful measurements of environmental performance.

Lastly, Site Improvement Plan (1 point) has been added as a new credit that investigates and establishes a five-year plan to improve the hydrology, vegetation, and soils on the project site. All low-cost and no-cost measures must be implemented for the Performance component of the credit.

Minor Changes in SS

Protect or Restore Habitat (1–2 points) has been modified a bit and will be more stringent now that native and adaptive vegetation is required for 20% of the entire site area (including the building footprint). The off-site option has been re-framed to provide financial support to an off-site area equal to the total site area with some additional stipulations to require for the first time that off-site locations be within a certain geographic range of the project building (within the same EPA Level III Ecoregion or state as the project building).

Heat Island Reduction (2 points), including both roof and non-roof strategies, has been combined into a single credit but is pretty much the same as in v2009. A couple small changes: the non-roof hardscape surfaces are assessed by their solar reflectance (not SRI), and the SRI requirements for the roofing material now include criteria for the 3-year aged SRI value in addition to the initial SRI value.

The Light Pollution Reduction (1 point) credit remains mostly the same as v2009 with some slight modification to the shielding option for exterior lighting. But if you were watching the changes through the second round of public comments, there is no longer an option for “appropriate personnel” to turn off the interior lighting at night. The only option now is for automatic controls, like with v2009. In practice, this has usually meant that teams skip this credit and don’t add exterior shielding even if they can, unless they happen to already meet the interior criteria (it is easy for new buildings that were built to code that require automation, but expensive and impractical for a lot of older buildings).

The Site Improvement Plan (1 point) credit brings the concept of energy auditing to the building site, with components of documenting conditions, evaluating options for improvement, and prioritizing low-cost and no-cost measures. The idea here is to get project teams to take a longer view of site sustainability, given that the typical EBOM project might last a year or less and revitalizing site infrastructure is a long-term project.

Water Efficiency (WE)

The Water Efficiency category has upped the ante with a new prerequisite, Building-Level Water Metering. The previously proposed third water prerequisite requiring Outdoor Water Use Reduction has been dropped in the third draft for public comment. Other increased thresholds and additional requirements make the WE category credits slightly more difficult than they were to achieve before. A proposed prerequisite and credit for Appliance and Process Water Use Reduction have officially been done away with in the third round of public comment.

Major Changes in WE

The addition of the new prerequisite, Building-Level Water Metering, stresses the importance LEED-EBOM places on knowledge of a project building’s water consumption. Under this version of the rating system, project buildings are required to install permanent water meters to measure total potable water for the project building and grounds. This is most likely to present a challenge to buildings located on a campus. Points can still be achieved by metering of water subsystems via the Water Metering credit (2 points). Both the prerequisite and the credit require that the whole-building and subsystem meter data be shared with USGBC for at least five years.

The new, more difficult baseline criteria for the Indoor Water Use Reduction prerequisite and credit (4 points) will increase the required amount of cost and work associated with retrofitting and replacing new plumbing fixtures and fittings. This version of the rating system establishes the water use baseline by the date the building received a certificate of occupancy: for projects with a certificate of occupancy from 1995 or later (increased from 1993 in v2009), the baseline is 120%, whereas for buildings older than 1995, the baseline water use is 150%. These seemingly minor changes can add up to many thousands of additional dollars in required retrofits for older buildings to comply.

According to our analysis of one real project building (Class A urban high-rise built before 1995), changing the baseline from 160% of EPAct to 150% only increases the water savings by 10%, but increases the costs of complying with the prerequisite by 33%. Given that fixture water use is by no means the main source of consumption in most commercial buildings, LEEDuser wonders if this ratcheting up of the threshold makes as much sense as a cooling tower water use prerequisite would. Consider running your current projects through a scenario that uses a 150% baseline instead of 160% to see the impact on costs and savings, and comment to USGBC accordingly.

If you are going for Option 2, which calls for a baseline based on actual metered data, and then a reduction from that, it is now required that the baseline be reset every ten years for recertification purposes.

The Indoor Water Use Reduction prerequisite also now requires that all existing fittings and fixtures be inspected to confirm they are operating properly, and that a fixture and fitting replacement and retrofit policy is implemented that specifies WaterSense-labeled products are actually installed (versus the v2009 requirement for an economic assessment policy). Older piping can sometimes restrict the fixtures that may be installed. We expect that project teams will experience challenges in the implementation of this credit with the new baseline for older buildings.

Also notable are the new requirements for Cooling Tower Water Use (1–3 points) requiring a one-time potable water analysis measuring at least a specified list of five control parameters and then calculating the number of cooling tower cycles to determine the level of compliance.

Minor Changes in WE

The proposed requirements for Outdoor Water Use Reduction (2 points) have not changed significantly, except that fewer points are available (5 points were available under v2009).

Energy & Atmosphere (EA)

Changes to the v2012 EA section include a familiar but more stringent energy performance prerequisite, the inclusion of a new demand-response credit, and the departure of the building automation and emissions credits. Also, energy-related credits like commissioning that were located in the PF section for round 2 public comment have been moved back to the EA section.

Major Changes in EA

The changes to Minimum Energy Efficiency Performance solidify this prerequisite’s status as the gatekeeper for the LEED-EBOM program. The prerequisite requirements have been beefed up to a minimum Energy Star rating of 75 for ratable buildings or better than 75% of similar buildings for those not eligible for an Energy Star rating. The basic mechanics of documenting compliance appear to be the same as those in v2009, and maybe what’s most notable about the prerequisite is that an option included in the 2nd round of public comments that offered an alternative compliance path for buildings to demonstrate a 20% improved performance over their historic baseline has been removed. Removal of that option plus the heightened minimum Energy Star rating guarantees that the maximum total market share for LEED in the existing building arena is limited to just about a quarter of all buildings.

New to the EA section is Demand Response (1–3 points) This credit has been piloted with v2009 projects and appears to be very similar to the pilot credit.

Minor Changes in EA

The Existing Building Commissioning credits (investigation & analysis – 1 point, implementation – 2 points, and ongoing commissioning – 3 points) are similar to what we’ve seen with v2009, except that it appears that the energy audit path and the commissioning path have been merged so that you have to conduct both commissioning activities and an ASHRAE Level II audit in the investigation & analysis phase. The implementation is mostly the same as v2009 with the addition of seemingly firmer requirements around tracking and verification. The ongoing commissioning plan credit also provides more prescriptive documentation required for the Performance component.

The Advanced Energy Metering (1 point) credit has been simplified a bit and now requires that all end-uses that consume at least 20% of the annual energy use (minus plug loads) have to be metered and logged continuously. Also new are requirements related to tracking peak demand in the building over time.

The Green Energy Production and Utilization (1–5 points) credit (formerly on- and off-site renewable energy) remains mostly the same except that off-site renewable energy offers fewer point opportunities, and now carbon offsets can cover both electricity and fuels. Also, Refrigerant Management is nearly the same for both the prerequisite and the credit, with the exception that there is a new and potentially simplified path for the enhanced refrigerant management credit in addition to the old v2009 option.

Materials and Resources (MR)

Most of the changes in the new Materials and Resources credit category are due to restructuring and the new materials requirements that have evolved with LEED 2012 across all rating systems.

Major Changes in MR

An Ongoing Consumption Policy has taken the place of the v2009 Sustainable Purchasing Policy and the Solid Waste Management Policy. It requires that the policy address the purchases covered in both Purchasing – Ongoing Consumption and Purchasing – Facility Alterations and Additions, where new requirements and standards reside. Notably, in addition to addressing target goals for Solid Waste Management, it also requires that an audit be conducted of the building’s entire waste stream (this is no longer a choice!). Performance is confirmed by either pursuing Solid Waste Management – Ongoing Consumption, or by conducting a waste audit annually.

The first step to achieving the new Purchasing – Ongoing Consumption (1–4 points) credit is to identify the to five ongoing consumable products that are purchased consistently. Then at least 60% of the total ongoing consumables (defined as the top five products purchased consistently as well as paper, toner cartridges, binders, batteries, and desk accessories) must meet the established criteria.

However, the new established criteria make this credit a bit trickier to achieve. For one thing, food purchases are now included in this credit (but would only be relevant if a food item were a top-five consistent purchase). Additionally, many of the new materials criteria align with those in the new BD&C rating systems, which now address issues such as where and how raw materials are mined, quarried, grown, and harvested. These new materials requirements are a departure from the structure of the last few versions of LEED. The credit also requires that at least 40% of electric-powered equipment purchases meet EPEAT Silver (higher than previously required Energy Star), or if not covered by the EPEAT standard, Energy Star. The tracking of an already-difficult-to-track credit seems to be getting even harder.

The requirements for Purchasing – Facility Alterations and Additions (1–2 points) have been completely overhauled to align with the new BD&C materials purchasing criteria. A second point can now be earned for purchasing furniture that meets the prescribed standards, such as BIFMA.

Minor Changes in MR

Although a new prerequisite, the new requirement to develop a Facility Alterations and Additions Policy seems less difficult than others. The policy addresses construction waste management, indoor air quality guidelines during construction, and creating a plan to evaluate whether a flush-out or air quality testing is needed.

Solid Waste Management – Ongoing Consumption (2 points) now includes ongoing consumables as well as office equipment, appliances, and audiovisual equipment (electronics waste). It also requires that a waste audit is conducted at least every five years, or if occupancy changes are greater than 20% of the gross floor area.

Solid Waste Management – Facility Alterations and Additions (2 points) has not changed significantly, except that furniture now must be included in this credit.

Indoor Environmental Quality (EQ)

The EQ section includes most of the same basic content as with v2009, but there have been some notable mergers and acquisitions, including the long-awaited union between the green cleaning policy and the formerly separate high-performance green cleaning program. Also, the walk-off mat, CO2 outside air monitoring, and MERV 13 filtration credits have all been grouped into a single credit, Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies.

Major Changes in EQ

No major changes to the EQ prerequisites have been made, but some smaller modifications include the updated ASHRAE 62.1-2010 ventilation standard, a couple of minor additions to the green cleaning policy, an option to demonstrate ongoing performance by contracting with a third-party-certified cleaning contractor, and required signage for the smoking prerequisite. Also, some happy news for multifamily and hospitality projects: air leakage testing will not be required for non-smoking residential or hotel guest units.

Other important changes are that the Interior Lighting (1–2 points) credit has been expanded to include an additional point for projects meeting lighting quality requirements. LEEDuser’s take on the lighting quality criteria is that evaluating them in an existing building, especially with multiple tenants, will be beyond the ken of the typical project team, and that bringing in a lighting designer to retroactively evaluate lighting design won’t be an attractive proposition.

The Daylight and Quality Views (2–4 points) credit has been modified to include “quality of views” criteria. In the Green Cleaning credits, there are now additional standards, including Design for the Environment (DfE), and ionized water has been added to the old Green Seal and Environmental Choice standards. The cleaning product purchasing performance threshold has also been raised to 75%. Also, the green cleaning equipment and custodial effectiveness audit credits have been modified with higher performance thresholds.

Minor Changes in EQ

Many of the EQ credits remain substantially unchanged, including the Thermal Comfort, Indoor Air Quality Management Program (IBEAM), Integrated Pest Management, and Occupant Comfort Survey.

Innovation

The point allocation for the Innovation credit is confusing. It’s hard to tell exactly how many points can be earned for what. However, in addition to Innovation and Exemplary Performance strategies in the previous LEED-EBOM Rating System, LEED Pilot Credits from the LEED Pilot Credit Library can now officially be pursued.

For the LEED Accredited Professional credit, only one LEED AP is required; however, the LEED AP must have a specialty most appropriate for the project type.

Update: USGBC has opened a 4th public comment period, with a LEEDuser forum here. Also, check out our webcast that goes behind the scenes on LEED 2012 reference guide and credit form development.

USGBC has opened the third public comment period on LEED 2012, the next version of the LEED rating systems. This public comment period is scheduled to run from March 1st to March 27th (it has been extended from March 20).

As with the first public comment period, which opened in Nov. 2010, and the second public comment period from August 2011,  LEEDuser is here to provide guidance on key changes to LEED 2012 certification, and to provide an open forum for members of the LEED community to understand the changes and weigh in on them.

At USGBC's request, LEEDuser has set up a series of forums on the LEED 2012 draft. These forums are both a chance to register a public comment or comments on the draft, and a place to publicly discuss the draft. Questions and dialogue are welcome and encouraged! (If you prefer to send your comment to USGBC directly, see the link below.)

Please review the new draft of LEED 2012  and share your thoughts with the LEEDuser community and USGBC below!

LEEDuser's guide to key changes in LEED 2012, second comment

• Integrated Process (IP)  (see below)
• Location and Transportation (LT)
• Sustainable Sites (SS)
• Water Efficiency (WE)
• Energy & Atmosphere (EA)
• Materials & Resources (MR)
• Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)
• Innovation – (see below)

Also, see:

• LEEDuser's full guide to LEED-EBOM changes, prepared by our friends at YR&G Sustainability
• An hour-long video overview of proposed LEED-NC and LEED-EBOM changes

Key USGBC links

• Main USGBC Page on Public Comment Period• Download LEED 2012 Rating Systems Drafts

And now, our guide to key changes in the new LEED 2012 draft, starting with Integrated Process.

LEEDuser's Guide to the Integrated Process (IP) Section

The new Integrated Process (IP) section has been overhauled yet again, with noteworthy changes. The main credit here has been changed in name from “Integrated” to Integrative Process, something favored by advocates of the concept. While integrated process is viewed as a done deal—a finished product—an integrative process is viewed as evolving, open-ended, and welcoming of new viewpoints.

If Integrative Process is a bit of a mouthful, it’s a big improvement over the credit naming in the second comment period. In this draft, what had been two process credits have been consolidated into one with three sections: Energy-Related Systems, Water-Related Systems, and Cost Analysis. Each section has a Discovery and an Implementation phase (the second comment draft had Discovery and Implementation as two credits). Beyond this reorganization, the credit has not changed a lot from the previous draft. The credit is expected to provoke “analyses of key systems interrelationships before decisions are made on building form and throughout the design process.”

The LEED Accredited Professional credit has been moved back out of this section into the Innovation section.

Guide to Innovation (IN)

The Innovation credit isn’t significantly changed in the new LEED 2012 draft, although it is allotted 1–6 points rather than 1–5 as in LEED 2009. Even with that increase in emphasis, the Exemplary Performance path is allocated only 1–2 points (down from 1–3), while the Innovation path retains 1–4 points, and a Pilot Credit Library option is given 1–3 points

The LEED Accredited Professional credit (1 point) has been retained, with the specialty credential still required in this draft. In a minor deemphasis of the credit, it has been moved from the Integrated Process section back to the Innovation section, where it can stand outside the base 100-point scale.

What are your comments on LEED 2012 in general, and on the IP and IN sections? Please post them below!

USGBC has announced the opening of the third public comment period on LEED 2012, the latest update to the LEED rating systems, on March 1.

Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments posted here during USGBC's second public comment period  will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the second public comment

Performance (PF)

As with the first draft, the second draft of LEED 2012 retains a new Performance section, which is a mix of new and old credits.

Major Changes

There are numerous specific changes to the new Water Metering prerequisite (required), but the gist remains the same: all water conveyed to the project—regardless of source—must be metered. Water consumption must also be submetered in five specific cases, with the common thread being applications using over 100,000 gallons annually, or 1,000 gallons daily in the case of process uses. Any reclaimed water source would also have to be metered. Finally, reporting of metering data, including submeters, to USGBC would be required for five years.

Advanced Water Metering (1 point) builds on the prerequisite, not only requiring metering but also that meters and submeters be able to report data remotely, and be part of a management system that tracks performance and generates alerts for leaks or operational anomalies. In a change since the first draft, this credit includes submetering requirements that had been part of the prerequisite, notably submetering for any freestanding building using over 100,000 gallons annually, submetering of any tenant space, submetering of HVAC systems, and submetering of ornamental water bodies.

Fundamental Commissioning and Verification, a prerequisite, was moved here from the EA section in the first LEED 2012 draft. As with that first draft, the detailed requirements have numerous changes. The changes most notably make the credit language here more simple and straightforward, although the requirements remain lengthy. For example, the “Building Envelope” is a required system in this draft—a big change from LEED 2009—but this is a change from the first draft, in which “roofing assemblies and systems” and  “thermal, air, and vapor transmission properties of walls, roofs, windows and doors” were required. How much these wording changes are just wording changes, and how much they reflect a change in scope, may not become clear until LEED 2012 documentation requirements are developed. “Plumbing” also falls under the prerequisite’s scope, a change from LEED 2009, which only required commissioning of domestic hot water systems.

Enhanced Commissioning (3 points) would get increase emphasis, getting one more point than in LEED 2009. Similarly to the changes under Fundamental Commissioning, the language of this credit is much simplified since the first draft, but it may not be clear until later in the development of LEED 2012 whether the scope is also simplified.

This draft adds a third commissioning item not seen in the first LEED 2012 draft: Monitoring Based Commissioning (1 point). This credit would require both Fundamental and Enhanced Commissioning as prerequisites, and in addition, would require the development of monitoring-based procedures to be incorporated into the commissioning scope. Among other things, the plan would require a list of points to be trended with associated frequency and duration for trending, and limits of acceptable values for tracked points.

After the Occupant Experience Survey credit replaced and greatly expanded upon the LEED 2009 Thermal Comfort—Verification credit, in the first LEED 2012 draft, this new draft eliminates the credit entirely. The first draft would have required surveying of not only thermal comfort, but also air quality, lighting quality, acoustics, building cleanliness and maintenance, ergonomics, and opportunities for improvement. Results would have been reported to USGBC.

Minor Changes

The new prerequisite, Building-Level Energy Metering, is not significantly changed from the first draft of LEED 2012. Among other things, this prerequisite inserts directly into the rating system what has in LEED 2009 been a requirement found in the Minimum Program Requirements: that projects share energy data with USGBC for at least five years.

Advanced Energy Metering (1 point) partly replaces the seldom-pursued LEED 2009 measurement and verification (M&V) credit (see below for the other part). It includes prescriptive and performance-based paths revolving around installing permanent meters for whole-building energy sources. The meters would have to record data at least hourly, transmit data remotely, and be integrated with a data storage and management system. The credit has been reorganized in this second draft, particularly in terms of which project types must follow which requirements, but its overall requirements are not significantly different.

Reconcile Design and Actual Energy Performance (1 point) essentially builds on the “verification” part of the LEED 2009 measurement and verification credit. An M&V plan would be required—as it is in LEED 2009—but the M&V provider would also have to “prepare and submit a final report to the project design team and the building owner that describes the M&V program and its outcomes,” including actual energy use compared to the projected use defined by the Optimize Energy Performance credit (EAc1). There are only minor wording revisions to this draft of the credit.

What do you think of the changes proposed for LEED 2012? Questions? Post your thoughts below.

 Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments posted here during USGBC's second public comment period  will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the second public comment

Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ)

Major Changes

In a small but meaningful change for Schools projects, projects unable to meet the Minimum Acoustical Performance prerequisite due to limited scope of work can submit a narrative explaining their design decisions.

The Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring, Increased Ventilation, and Indoor Chemical and Pollutant Source Control credits have all been eliminated.

There is a new Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies credit (1–2 points), which is largely a repackaging of key requirements from those eliminated credits. Option 1 in this new credit (1 point) includes the key track-off, exhaust, and filtering requirements from LEED 2009’s IEQc5, and includes the key natural ventilation requirements that are part of IEQc2: Increased Ventilation in LEED 2009. Option 2 for this credit requires meeting Option 1, plus requirements that are similar to LEED 2009 requirements for increased ventilation over ASHRAE 62.1 and for outdoor air delivery monitoring. Those requirements are a bit more sophisticated, however, incorporating use of modeling to show that air contaminants will be below key exposure levels.

The second draft of LEED 2012 brings us a second major overhaul of Low-Emitting Interiors (1–3 points), although the overall systems approach introduced in the first draft remains. In that system, the building interior is organized into five systems: flooring, ceilings, walls, thermal and acoustic insulation, and furniture (which must be included if it is in the scope of the project). In this draft, rather than accumulating points by complying with the requirements of one or more systems, projects would try to improve their “total % compliant” score. This score would be an average of the “% compliant” score for each of the key systems. Projects don’t have to be perfect in any of the areas: 50%–70% compliance gets 1 point, 70%–90% gets 2 points, and 90% or more gets three points, and 90% or greater compliance in a single area is considered 100% compliance for the purpose of the average. Projects not making an effort in any major category will be penalized: less than 50% compliance in a single area is considere 0% for the average. Percent compliance is based on surface area for walls, floors, and ceilings, and on cost for furniture. Products will need to show compliance with the 35 VOC emission limits within the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Standard Method V1.1-2010, often referred to as California Section 01350, and they will also need to report their total TVOC levels.

Indoor Air Quality Assessment (1–2 points) is the new name for Construction IAQ Management Plan—Before Occupancy. The big change here is that the Option 1 flush-out path preferred by most LEED projects would be downgraded to one point, versus two points for Option 2: Air Testing. (Testing better ensures lower levels of contaminants, but introduces more uncertainty for project teams.) Changes to the testing requirements include specification that typical ventilation rates be used, and there are also changes to the chemicals. Testing of carbon monoxide and 4-PCH would no longer be required, but all target chemicals under CDPH Standard Method V1.1-2010 would be. In other changes, furniture would have to be installed, and samples from the entire building and “representative situations” would be explicitly required.

The new Interior Lighting credit (1–2 points) covers the scope of the LEED 2009 “Controllability of Lighting” credit, which falls under Option 1 (1 point), and Lighting Quality can optionally be pursued for a separate point under Option 2. Changes to the lighting control requirements put specific emphasis on providing three lighting levels (or “scenes”) for individual and multi-occupant spaces: on, off, and mid-level. For lighting quality, projects would have a choice of meeting four (changed from five under the first draft) out of eight (changed from 12) quality measures. These measures include color rendering index (CRI) requirements and use of reflective surfaces.

An Acoustic Performance credit (1 point) was previously only available to Schools projects remains available to NC projects in this draft. However, it has been overhauled: in place of a fairly vague, performance-based approach, projects would now have to achieve numerous, specific acoustical ratings defined in the credit language.

Minor Changes

Minimum IAQ Performance (required) still references minimum ASHRAE-62.1 requirements. Outdoor air delivery monitoring requirements are included for CS projects.

Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control sees a fine-tuning of requirements rather than any major change (such as absolute prevention of smoking). Non-smoking requirements extend to outdoor spaces used for business purposes, like patio seating. Language for residential projects that specifically prohibited smoking on balconies is eliminated.

Requirements for a Construction IAQ Management Plan during construction are remain largely unchanged (with some adjustments to wording), but have become a prerequisite instead of a credit.

The Thermal Comfort credit (1 point) is updated to newer standards such as ASHRAE 55-2010, but is otherwise mostly unchanged.

The Daylight credit (1–3 points), overhauled in the first draft of LEED 2012, doesn’t see many additional changes in this second draft. Two simulation options remain, Option 1: Simulation – Daylight Autonomy (2–3 points), and Option 2: Simulation – Illuminance Calculations (1–2 points). A third option, Measurement, remains for one point. With a new 90% threshold for Options 1–2, this credit has more value compared with LEED 2009.

The LEED 2009 credit on views became Quality Views (1 point) in the first LEED 2012 draft, and thus it remains. USGBC has tweaked some of the calculation details, noting, for example, that if fixed window treatments are used for the credit, occupants should be able to discern movement and faces through the treatment.

What do you think of the proposed changes for LEED 2012? Post your thoughts below.

 Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments posted here during USGBC's second public comment period  will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the second public comment

Materials and Resources (MR)

Major Changes

A Recycled Content prerequisite that was introduced in the first LEED 2012 draft is now gone. It would have required recycled content at 10% of the materials budget, with post-consumer and pre-consumer content valued equally.

Another prerequisite that is new to LEED 2012, Construction and Demolition Debris Management Planning, survived the first public comment period, but has some changes. It includes basic construction waste management requirements, including having a management plan in place, and targeting 20% diversion. Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) would not qualify as diverted debris.

A new credit, Environmentally Friendly Construction and Enclosure (1–3 points), would replace the former Building Reuse credit, as well as incorporate aspects of the former recycled content and regional materials credits. This lengthy credit includes four options summarized in Table 1, and would move LEED toward more holistic, life-cycle-based materials evaluations rather than single-attribute credits.

This move toward multi-attribute materials considerations is reinforced throughout the new draft of the MR section, with the new credits Non-Structural Materials Transparency (1–2 points), Environmentally Preferable Non-Structural Products & Materials—Prescriptive Attributes (1 point), Responsible Sourcing of Raw Materials (1 point), and Avoidance of Chemicals of Concern in Building Materials (1 point). These credits are summarized in Table 2.

These credits represent a complete overhaul of the MR section since the first public comment, with the old Certified Wood, Regional Materials, Recycled Content, and Materials Reuse credits, along with the new Biobased Materials credit all being jettisoned in this draft.

This MR overhaul is sure to spark debate. Proponents of an “FSC or better” (for the Forestry Stewardship Council) policy for LEED will be pleased that FSC is the only forestry or biobased certification recognized under the Responsible Sourcing credit, and that the Materials Transparency credit has shifted away from Pilot Credit 43’s approach to recognizing other forestry certifications. Opponents of FSC-only, on the other hand, will be pleased that this draft maintains recognition of biobased materials without certification, something introduced with the first draft. Forestry industry leaders who have argued that LEED singles out wood for such stringent attention, making it “anti-wood,” should take note of new requirements for responsible sourcing of mined and extracted materials applying to concrete, steel, and other materials. Major certifications for those materials aren’t as available yet, but USGBC hopes to help spur their development.

Another noteworthy MR change is a shift away from the simple 500-mile radius defining “regional materials,” to use of a more targeted metric, the Core Based Statistical Area, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. According to the Census, this concept refers to “a metropolitan or micropolitan statistical area containing a substantial population nucleus, together with adjacent communities having a high degree of economic and social integration with that core.”

What do you think of these proposed changes? Please post your comments and questions below.

Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments posted here during USGBC's second public comment period  will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the second public comment

Energy and Atmosphere (EA)

 

Major Changes

Eliminated in the first LEED 2012 draft, the Fundamental Refrigerant Management prerequisite is back. The actual credit language is basically unchanged from LEED 2009.

The Optimize Energy Performance credit (1–18 points, in a change from 1–19 points in LEED-NC 2009) is largely the same in this draft in terms of credit language, but the aggressiveness in the point scale that we observed in the first LEED 2012 draft is largely gone. In this second draft, points start at a 12% reduction for new construction (same as 2009, down from 13% in the first 2012 draft), and go up to 46%—down from 48% in LEED 2009 and from 70% for the first 2012 draft. Note that as explained below under the prerequisite, the calculation method has changed, so these percentages are not directly comparable. Details requiring project teams to use the energy modeling process to influence design—rather than using models only to check compliance after the fact—remain in this draft.

USGBC has completely overhauled the Demand Response credit (1–2 points) introduced with the first draft, in response to industry criticism. Key changes are the elimination of on-site generation as an option to earn the credit; more focus on automation technologies, including the addition of manual/semi-automated as well as fully automated demand response options; and additional guidance on process, including initial assessment, training, and financial analysis.

More aggressive point thresholds introduced in the first draft for On-Site Renewable Energy (1–3 points) have been scaled back from the first draft. A top threshold of 25% in the first LEED 2012 draft is now 10%—also down from 13% in LEED 2009. However,  point allocation is reduced from LEED 2009’s 1–7 points, and judged on that basis, the point thresholds are about twice as aggressive.

Green Power and Carbon Offsets (1–2 points) has a more aggressive point thresholds than LEED 2009: 50% for 1 point, 100% for two. As suggested by the new name (in LEED 2009 and previous drafts the credit is simply “Green Power”), the credit now applies to total energy use, not just electricity use.

Minor Changes

Arguably the most important LEED prerequisite, Minimum Energy Performance is remarkably unchanged from the first draft. As introduced in that draft, the new LEED 2012 draft calls for a combination of energy cost and source Energy Use Intensity (EUI) to serve as the key measurement.

The Refrigerant Management credit (1 point) has some apparently minor wording changes. Point allocation is down from 2 points in LEED 2009.

What do you think of the proposed changes to EA? Please post your comments and questions below.

Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments posted here during USGBC's second public comment period  will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the second public comment

Water Efficiency (WE)

Major Changes

The Landscape Water Use Reduction prerequisite introduced with the first draft now has a simpler compliance path, in which projects show that the landscaped area does not need irrigation. All other projects with over 1,000 ft² of exterior vegetated space would still need to reduce water use for the peak watering month 30% below a baseline established by the WaterSense Water Budget Tool.

The 20% water reduction baseline required by Minimum Fitting and Fixture Water Use Reduction is unchanged from the LEED 2009 water use reduction prerequisite. There are some minor changes to this draft, but the most interesting is a change in scope: only fixtures within the project scope would fall under the prerequisite here, not all fixtures in the building.

The Appliance and Process Water Use Reduction prerequisite, new in the first draft, sets minimum performance requirements for some appliances and processes. As with the fixture prerequisite, this one also contains a change limiting it to the project scope. Energy Star ice machines have been added to the requirements, and they must also use air-cooled or closed-loop cooling.

The wording of Additional Fixture and Fitting Water Use Reduction (2–4 points) is simplified, with the language now referring to the prerequisite. The big change is that the proposed point thresholds are more stringent: 35% reduction for 1 point, but 40% reduction for 2 points, and 50% for three.

Tweaks to Sustainable Wastewater Management (1–2 points; previously “Innovative Wastewater Technologies”) appear to make this credit more achievable, while also offering a higher bar. Reducing sewage conveyance by 50% through Option 1 would earn one point, but reducing it by 95% would earn two points. In Option 2, reuse of 95% of wastewater would earn two points, but implementation of wastewater reuse at any level (no lower limit is given) would earn one point. Under Option 3, one point could be earned for implementing (no threshold is given) resource recovery for key wastewater nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous), while two points would be earned for also addressing recovery of organic carbon.

Minor Changes

Additional Landscape Water Use Reduction (1–2 points) is similar to the prerequisite (see above) in its use of the WaterSense Water Budget Tool. Fairly minor changes have been made to requirements and calculations, and the credit thresholds (50% and 100%) remain unchanged from LEED 2009. Playgrounds and athletic fields may be excluded from the credit calculations, but other best management practices such as metering must be in place for those areas.

In Cooling Tower Makeup Water  (1–2 points) there have been some wording and reorganizing that does not appear to amount to significant changes to this credit, which would be new for LEED-NC projects.

Revisions to the new Additional Appliance and Process Water Use Reduction credit (1 point) since the first LEED 2012 draft create a menu of choices. Commercial washing machines, commercial kitchen equipment, commercial laboratory and medical equipment, commercial vehicle washing systems, and municipal steam systems all fall under this credit. Earning it means establishing eligibility for a given category (being connected to a municipal steam system, for example), and then meeting specified requirements for all of the given equipment within the project scope. In most cases, that entails meeting efficiency standards; in the case of municipal steam, projects would recover and reuse steam condensate.

What do you think of the proposed changes? Post your comments or questions below.

Do you have comments or questions on this draft? Discuss them below with your fellow LEED professionals. Substantive comments posted here during USGBC's second public comment period  will be submitted to USGBC and considered "official" public comments.

More information on LEED 2012 certification and the second public comment

Some Sustainable Sites (SS) credits have been moved to the new Location and Transportation (LT) category, but much still remains, and there are some big changes.

Major Changes

There is a brand-new credit in this second draft: Site Assessment (1 point). The credit requires a “site survey/assessment” taking into consideration topography, hydrology, climate, vegetation, soils, and human uses. The credit appears to be a nudge toward integrated design, requiring a narrative on how each topic influenced the project design. This same assessment is required for the IP “Discovery” credit (see above), so this type of assessment essentially gets extra weight in this draft.

Brownfield Redevelopment is now Brownfield Remediation (2 points—an increase from LEED 2009), and projects would still not only develop a contaminated site, they would also have to clean it up. Perhaps with the aim of making this credit more achievable, the requirements have been simplified: remediation has to happen to the satisfaction of a relevant authority, but specific ASTM and EPA standards are no longer referenced.

Heat Island Reduction (1–2 points) remains one credit, not two as in LEED 2009. In this draft, the requirements have broadened. The building façade is now considered part of the relevant surface area, and you would earn credit for these surfaces by using architectural devices or vegetation to shade east and west façades, or low-emissivity (low-e) glazing.

As with the first draft, the overall intent behind the Light Pollution Reduction credit (1 point) doesn’t appear to have been changed, but the requirements have again been overhauled. This draft remains similar in outline to the first draft, but many specific changes to glare and backlight ratings have been made. An option to exceed model lighting ordinance requirements has been eliminated.

Minor Changes

The Construction Activity Pollution Prevention prerequisite remains the same after seeing minor changes for the first draft. The only revision is that the 2008 EPA Construction General Permit is now referenced—not 2003.

For Schools projects, the Environmental Site Assessment prerequisite has a minor but noteworthy change: the blanket exclusion of sites on former landfills has been removed.

Site Development—Protect or Restore Habitat (1–2 points) keeps similar requirements from the first public comment, with a focus on protecting portions of the site from development. The wording of a new soil protection requirement has been clarified. Off-site conservation remains an option, and requirements for that have been made more specific, but not in a very restrictive way.

Since being simplified for the first public comment, Site Development—Open Space (1 point) had only minor wording changes. Projects must provide outdoor space equal to 30% of the total site area, including building footprint—stricter than LEED 2009’s comparable Case 3. A minimum of 25% of the outdoor space must have ground or overhead vegetation.

After rolling the two stormwater credits from LEED 2009 have been rolled into one credit, Rainwater Management (1–2 points) for the first draft, this draft continues by overhauling the wording of the credit. Although they don’t appear to change the requirements drastically, the wording now puts a premium on strategies that “replicate natural site hydrology.”

What do you think of these proposed revisions? Please discuss below. Your comments will considered official public comments by USGBC if received by the public comment deadline.