NC and EBOM

Kitty, I'm not sure I follow your question, and what you are describing seems overly complicated. Can you try rephrasing it?

Hello Kitty, I believe I understand what you are asking. It sounds as though you are asking about using the same LEED Campus Boundary for a multiple building site that involves some new buildings that will be pursuing certification using LEED-NC and existing buildings that will be using LEED-EBOM. Since you use the term "LEED Campus Boundary", I assume that you are referring to projects using the Master Site Campus Credit approach from the AGMBC, not the Group Certification approach.

As indicated in the AGMBC FAQ (https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=9224), teams with LEED-NC and LEED-EBOM projects on the same campus would need to register separate Master Site projects for the purposes of campus credit review. However, it is acceptable to use the same "LEED Campus Boundary" for both a D+C and an O&M Master Site project, as long as each individual building has its own, non-overlapping "LEED Project Boundary" within that larger LEED Campus Boundary.

Eric,
I think the GBCI is missing a bigger point here on complicated campus projects. We work in healthcare; mainly Hospitals. These buildings are generally 'clumps' and not individual entities separated by some form of landscaping which is think is more typical in all the AGMBC writings. The new HC/NC project will be attached and part of an older structure which will be renovated to some degree. One project or two? The owner will usually tell you that they are multiple projects because he won't have funding or approval for any of the renovations. So where is the boundary really? Then what about the older mechanical units we can't touch? What about the spaces on the large main levels of the Hospital where the line has become so blurred between structures that the architectural space is classified in one building but half of it is actually fed mechanically by a second building which isn't being worked on at all?

From what I can tell, there is little advantage for my projects with these Block/Master Site groupings. The credits that I'm allowed to document once are frankly the easiest ones to document and I copy/paste really well.

Hi Susan, I couldn't agree with you more that the types of projects you have described pose serious challenges in terms of applying the LEED rating systems, mostly in terms of defining an 'entire building' or 'complete interior space' that is compliant with MPR 2 and a LEED project boundary that is compliant with MPR 3. We are working to find more universal guidance for such situations, but this is, by nature, not a one-size-fits-all kind of issue. It is also worth noting that many such projects have been able to successfully define an acceptable project scope and certify their projects under either the LEED Interior Design + Construction (ID+C) rating systems (e.g. CI) or the Building Design + Construction (BD+C) rating systems (e.g. LEED-NC, HC, etc). Usually, if the project scope & data for the 'Addition', per se, can be separated from the renovation work going on the rest of the building, the guidance for "attached buildings" on pages 14-17 of the MPR Supplemental Guidance (http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=10131) can be used to seek separate certification for the addition under the appropriate BD+C rating system. In some cases, the interior renovations may then also qualify, per the criteria on pages 19-20 of the same document, for their own separate LEED-CI certification, if desired. Teams can either contact GBCI (http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact.aspx) or submit a Formal Inquiry (https://www.leedonline.com/irj/go/km/docs/documents/usgbc/leed/config/co...) for guidance on particularly complex situations that are not addressed adequately by existing published guidance.