Materials Cost - Materials and Resource Calculator

You are doing something wrong. What you submitted for review essentially said to the GBCI that every single item put into your project has some recycled content. While that is possible, what the GBCI is saying back to you is 'we doubt it'. You need to prove that case or modify your sustainable materials cost.

Let's say that your project added a bathroom and the rest was office space. Do the ceramic tiles installed in the bathroom have recycled content? Does the paint you put on the walls have recycled content? Further, let's assume that the answer is no to both questions. Both products fall into Divisions 3-10 and both products would contribute to total materials cost. Because the tile and the paint do not have recycled content, they would not contribute to the sustainable materials cost. Therefore, total materials cost is a higher number than total sustainable materials cost. It sounds to me like you are saying that your sustainable materials costs is your project cost and doing all your calculations that way which is incorrect. You need to account for all materials in those CSI divisions.

Are you relying on the total $ number that is at the bottom of the LO form (above the Sustainable Criteria percentage)? This does not calculate the total material cost - just the sustainable materials cost. The total cost figure is on page 1 of the form and isn't physically attached to the excel like table where you enter the materials. If you've entered all your materials into the excel like table, taken the total from that and put that number into page 1 where it asks for the 'actual materials cost' you have short circuited things.

I have the same exact review comment. I think I filled the form out in the same manner as Pedro, in that I listed all materials from divisions 2-10, 12, 31 & 32, whether they had any contributing value to recycled content or regional materials etc. or not. The "total actual materials and furniture cost" is in fact the same dollar value as the "total sustainable materials cost" because I listed ALL materials that were used for the required divisions. I am confused as to how this is incorrect. Should I remove the items with no contributing values from Table L-3 and just include their cost in the total actual material cost on page 1? Please advise.

I just found that there is an updated IDC Material and Resource Calculator (June 2012). I had used the July 2011 version when completing my documentation in May. I input my data into this calculator and it seems to be calculating properly. The only thing I did differently was not enter the materials that had no contributing values into Table L-3. The sustainable criteria value as percentage of total is now 97.91% as apposed to 100%.

I am extremely interested in the answer to this question, I am also including ALL materials in qualified divisions in my spreadsheet whether they have sustainable qualities or not as did Pedro and Marie. please advise.

Hi Pedro,
I have not resubmitted yet as we are waiting on a response from GBCI on an unrelated issue. I am with Norma on this. In regards to Table L-3, I would still like someone to provide an official answer on whether we are to list ALL materials (for Div 03-10,12,31-32), or list only the materials that contribute to one of the MR credits. I am not sure that Susan Walter's response above really addresses this.
Thanks ~ Marie

Have there been any updates on this issue? We have had several projects come back with comments stating the same thing. Overall, it is very confusing. One of our pending projects is about to lose its Platinum status over what seems to be a simple spreadsheet error. The project modeled its submission on a previously accepted Platinum project.
Please advise.

Emily - I hope others in this comment string will chime back in if they have any answers and when you find out more you'll share the info.

However, in the meantime, I would advise you to contact GBCI directly - especially in your situation. GBCI has stated they want to be more available for questions and concerns and this sounds like it is affects many folks. I would go to http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact/Contact-Us/Project-Certification-Que... and select Questions about Review Comments from the dropdown menu.

BTW - There is an August 2012 version of the BDC Materials and Resources Calculator but I see that they did not update the IDC one (latest is June 2012), which is the version I hope you are using.

Ok thanks. I believe the IDC version is the latest, and will verify, just in case. I have also suggested that we take each of the separate projects with the same problems to GBCI and get a direct response.
If no one else has an answer here by the time we get a response (if we get a response), I'll let everyone know what our outcome is.

Has anyone received a response from GBCI on this issue? I was about to e-mail GBCI, but thought I'd check here first...I'm beginning to add all of the interior finish materials to Table L-3 in the IDC Materials and Resource Calculator, but I am unsure whether to include all materials or just the materials that can contribute towards MR Credits 3-7 (as I have previously for LEED-NC projects). The GC will be tracking all of the actual material costs from the subcontractors regardless, but I'll also need to advise the GC LEED coordinator on whether he should include all materials (excluding MEP/equipment) ot just the MRc3-7 contributing materials as he is documenting Table L-3 during construction.

Christine - I apologize for my delayed response - I was at Greenbuild last week. I wish I had taken this request to the LEED Certification Work Zone because I do not have an answer for you. Emily, Pedro, Marie - Do you have any updates you can share?

If not, I would use the Contact Us form and ask GBCI directly - http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact/Contact-Us/Project-Certification-Que.... If you could post your response back here, it would help others and be appreciated.

Thanks Michelle, no worries...I just sent the question to GBCI and will post their response here as soon as I hear back.

I have not heard back about the pending project we had, but I have checked with some of our contractors on other projects, and they have started tracking all materials as a precaution.
I'm anxious to hear what Christine's results will be!

Hello all,

We had our preliminary report review and we got the same comment on MRc4 and MRc5:
"The Actual Materials Cost for Divisions 3-10, 31, and 32 is equivalent to the costs of the materials listed within the form. It is inconsistent with industry norms for the materials listed for credit compliance to be a complete list of all materials used within the LEED-CI project. Therefore, it is unclear that the Actual Materials Costs include the costs of all materials associated with this LEED-CI project as required. Note that Actual Materials Cost must include the cost of all materials that are part of any specifications within Divisions 3-10, 31, 32 and 12 (for example, including any adhesives, sealants, coatings, etc. which are contained within those specification sections)."

Our project is an office fit out. All the adhesives, glues, primers, sealants and everything is listed in the sheet, but there are not many materials (glass partitions, gypsum walls, technical floor and technical ceiling).

I have send the request to GBCI two times, called them (no way to be answer this question by phone) and we dont know what else to do, since we will have to submit the final review within 10 days and there is no answer.

Did any of you get any other answer from GBCI explaining a little more?

We do not understand the input from Total sustainable materials cost, per the excel file is the addition of all the F column, but for example, the paint has no recycled content, neither local, but since is in the Division 09 of Masterformat has to be in the L-3 data. But, why is it added its value to the Total sustainable materials cost if its not really sustainable???

Please anyone getting an update from GBCI will be more than welcome to share with all of us! If I get any response I will post it here :)

I think the confusion stems from the fact that there are two different ways that people can fill out the Materials and Resources Calculator which impacts whether the “Total Materials Cost” and the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” would be the same.

First, let’s recognize that there is a difference between “Total Materials Cost” and “Total Sustainable Materials Cost”. “Total Materials Cost” is populated via Tab A via based on whether you select either the Actual Materials Cost option (Cell F11) or the Total Construction Cost option (Cell F13). “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” is the sum of the cost of all materials that the project enters within Tab B.

Now, that you understand the basic difference in where these two numbers come from, you can better understand when you might get that review comment. As you’ll see below, there are instances where these two numbers may be the same but there are also instances where these two numbers may be different. It really depends on how you choose to complete the calculator.

Route A: Project focuses on including only the larger-cost items in Tab B. Once the project hits the point threshold that they are hoping to, they stop listing materials/providing material documentation. As such, the list of materials within Tab B is clearly incomplete. In this case, the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” would not match the “Total Materials Cost” (regardless of whether the Actual Cost or the Total Construction Cost option was selected in Tab A).

Route B: Project includes every material specified within the applicable divisions on Tab B. For each of these materials, Cells B-E must be completed even if the material is non-compliant/does not contribute to any of the attempted credits (i.e. none of the other cells are filled in). In this case, the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” would match the “Total Materials Cost” –if– the Actual Cost option is selected in Tab A. If the Total Construction Cost option was selected in Tab A, then the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” might be slightly lower than the “Total Materials Cost” (note that if it is higher, there is an issue).

My experience is that the review comment in question appears only in instances the “Total Materials Cost” and the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” are identical and reviewers have one of the following two questions:
1. The listing of products in Tab B does not appear to be a comprehensive list of every single applicable product in the project.
2. If project documentation indicates additional materials which are not included in Tab B (such as, floor tile which was not listed – perhaps because it does not contribute to the credit).

In both cases, the reason for the review comment is because it is unclear whether the “Total Materials Cost” has been properly calculated (i.e. it includes both sustainable and non-sustainable materials). It is very important that this number include the cost of all materials, both those that contribute towards the credit and those that do not. In instances where the “Total Materials Cost” matches that of the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” within Tab B, the issue generally is that not all materials are included.

This issue is fairly understandable when one looks at the amount of time and effort that is required to track the hard costs associated with every applicable material/division, including all of the adhesives, sealants, etc. associated with that product/division. That information can sometimes be difficult to obtain and it will make the product listing in Tab B quite long as each product must be listed individually. Finally, it can seem counter-intuitive to include materials that aren’t sustainable/do not contribute in the listing of materials in Tab B so sometimes those materials are omitted.

As such, it is generally more common that projects follow Route A (mainly tracking only the larger-cost items); it is generally atypical to get a listing of materials in Tab B which includes every single material in the project. If you haven’t tracked every material, you will need to make sure that your “Total Materials Cost” does not match the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” to account for the fact that Tab B doesn’t include all of your materials.

That said projects can definitely use Route B for documentation provided you recognize where the red flags are. In using this option, you’ll need to make sure that your calculator is extra thorough to include every single material found within the applicable divisions (including any sealants, adhesives, etc. specified in those divisions). My general recommendation is to try to list materials in Tab B in division order (i.e. 033000 then 051200 then 096800 for example) as it will allow you an easy way to check that all materials were included. Remember to include all materials, both those which contribute to the credit requirements and those that do not, along with their associated cost (Cells B-E must be completed). Finally, I would recommend including a narrative with your submission affirming that you have included all materials, including the related adhesives, coatings, etc. from the relevant specifications, in the calculations.

Kristina - Thanks for your detailed response.

First, I need to clarify that for LEED-CI the IDC Calculator does not offer Actual Material Cost or Total Construction Cost (cells F11 and F13, respectively, as you indicate). LEED-CI must use actual material cost so teams must provide (on Tab A) - Actual Material Cost, excluding labor and equipment (cell G10) and Actual Material Cost for Furniture, excluding labor and equipment (cell G12). (Note my information is based on the June 2012 version of the IDC Material and Resource Calculator.)

Hence, while you advice is sound for an NC project, your Route A does not apply to CI. CI projects must list every material specified for Divisions 03-10 plus furniture in Division 12 in Tab B (your Route B - first two sentences only for CI).

Maria - First I would contact GBCI via Contact Us > Certification Questions and request an extension to your clarification responses (Project Review Extension Request). In that response, say that you have questions about review comments and have not been able to get a response to your inquiry about this earlier (include any relevant case numbers - see below).

Then from that same link, I would try again to submit a “Questions about Review Comments” inquiry and explain your situation. While LEEDuser is not a definitive source, you could reference this forum and note that this is not just affecting you but is part of a larger issue related to the IDC Material and Resource Calculator - http://www.leeduser.com/credit/CI-2009/MRc4?page=0#comment-46882.

USGBC/GBCI has been having trouble with their Contact Us and you should immediately receive a reply e-mail acknowledging receipt of your Contact Us inquiry with a Case Number. If you do not get that, then they do not have your request. This happened to me on 1/6/14 and when I inquired on it on last Friday (1/24), I was told there was no record of my request. I had to resubmit it and still did not get an automated response with a Case Number. So I had to call Customer Service a second time and they gave me the steps to get my response logged with a case number.

Do you have case numbers for your original requests? If so, GBCI should be able to look up the Case Number(s) and tell you the status of it (them). If you do not have a case number, then you need to follow my advice above and ensure you get a case number. (Maybe the updates they did over this weekend helped with this issue? I am not sure.)

As discussed previously in this forum there appears to be a formula error in the IDC Calculator where anything put into the Material Cost column (Column F) is automatically going down to the Total Sustainable Materials Cost (cell F22) when the cost should be going to the Total Materials Cost (cell F23) instead.

I hope this helps you!

In the mean time, I am going to reach out to some contacts at USGBC/GBCI and see if a resolution can be started that way.

Thanks a lot Kristina and Michelle for your useful help!
I will update this post with whatever GBCI answer since it seems to be a common issue.
Kind regards!

Maria

My apologies - I missed the fact that we were in the LEED-CI forum. I wish that the rating system appeared more prominently as you scroll down. Michelle is definitely right that LEED-CI projects only have the option of using the Actual Materials Cost method.

That being said, I still don't believe this is an error in the calculator. I still think it might be confusion about how the calculator does the calculations. While you have to use the actual cost of all materials in the calculation for LEED-CI, the calculator doesn’t require you to list out every single material in Tab B. The most important part is making sure that you've included the cost of all division-applicable materials, both the sustainable and the non-sustainable materials, in the "Total Materials Cost" that you enter in Tab A so that the calculations work out properly. For example, the "MRc4 Sustainable Criteria Value" divided by the "Total Materials Cost" gives you your achievement within MRc4. Since the achievements are based on what percentage of your overall materials meets the requirements of that credit, you just want to be sure that the "Total Materials Cost" includes the actual cost of all your materials, both sustainable and non-sustainable. It would not be appropriate for that number to only include the cost of sustainable materials as then you wouldn't be looking at all of your materials in the project and would be artificially-inflating your achievements.

A very, very simplified example:
-You have a project that has $10,000 in Total Materials Cost. You input that in Tab A. In Tab B, you list out just two of your materials: Tile at $3,000 and Carpet at $500. For ease of calculations, let's assume that both products are comprised of 50% post-consumer + 0% pre-consumer recycled content. Your Total Sustainable Materials Cost in Tab B is $3,500 ($3,000 Tile + $500 Carpet). Your MRc4 Sustainable Criteria Value would be $1,750 ($3,000 Tile x 50% + $500 Carpet x 50%).

-Now your actual MRc4 achievement would be 17.5% ($1,750 MRc4 Sustainable Criteria Value / $10,000 Total Materials Cost). If you had incorrectly used the Total Sustainable Materials Cost ($3,500) rather than the Total Materials Cost ($10,000) in the calculations, you would’ve ended up with calculations showing that you achieved 50% in MRc4. However, this is not accurate as it is looking at only a portion of the materials rather than all materials as required. The denominator has to be the Total Materials Cost which includes both sustainable and non-sustainable materials (in this case, $10,000 Total).

I actually don't know why "Total Sustainable Materials Cost" is even in the calculator as it is not used for any credit calculations; all of the calculations go back to the “Total Materials Cost” fields from Tab A. My only guess is that it is included in the calculator just so that project teams that are listing every material in Tab B can cross-check that total with then their "Total Materials Cost" to make sure that they have actually entered everything... If you aren't going to list all of your materials in Tab B, it actually doesn't matter so long as it is not identical to the “Total Materials Cost" entered in Tab A; you would only need to make sure that the “Total Materials Cost” in Tab A includes the actual cost of all materials as required.

LEED-CI projects still have the options of either listing some or all of the materials in Tab B; again, the denominator of the calculation always pulls from the values you enter in Tab A. If you didn't want to list out all of the materials in the form but want the “Total Sustainable Materials” and the “Total Materials Cost” to match, I have seen projects include a line in Tab B of "Non-LEED Materials" with a value so that the "Total Sustainable Materials Cost" is then identical to the actual "Total Materials Cost" and include a narrative saying that they've included the actual cost of all non-sustainable materials there hence the reason that the "Total Materials Cost" and the "Total Sustainable Materials Cost" are identical.

In any case, a narrative confirming that your “Total Materials Cost” includes the actual costs of all materials within Divisions 3-10, 12, 31.60.00, 32.10.00, 32.30.00, 32.90.00, including both the sustainable materials and the non-sustainable materials, should be sufficient to verify that your numbers are correct. They really just need to make sure that the number used in the denominator of the calculations includes everything and not just the sustainable materials in those divisions.

----

Michelle is definitely right about the best ways to contact GBCI and the fact that, if you don't get an auto-email with a case number, your inquiry probably didn't go through. Don't worry too much about the "deadline" to resubmit for your Final Review. That is generally more of a suggestion than a firm deadline. The only time a response deadline is very firm is when a Mid-Review Clarification Request is sent when they give you 10-days to respond. If you're not in the middle of an actual review and are just working on your general clarifications in response to the results of the Preliminary Review, that 25-day deadline is really more a guideline than a firm deadline. Since you've already sent in requests for feedback and are awaiting a response, you don't have to also ask for an extension. But you definitely can if that makes you more comfortable (you'd do that through the same link Michelle provided above).

Hello Maria,
I'm the Materials and Resources specialist at USGBC and I wanted to chime in here. The information Kristina and Michelle have provided is spot on so I won't re-state the facts. I wanted to add that the reason the field “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” exists is to check against the “Total Material Cost” to ensure that the cost of materials being entered into the table does not exceed the "Total Materials Costs". In the 2009 form and earlier versions of the calculator when the “Total Sustainable Materials Cost” was higher than the “Total Material Cost” the form would produce an error. However during the streamlining effort for submittals USGBC decided to remove errors from the MR calculators because they were confusing, frustrating, and slowed down the system.

In regards to your review comment, Kristina is correct that when the two values are the same it raises a red flag for the reviewer. In this case GBCI is asking for an explanation of why ALL the materials used for the project are listed AND confirmation that the Actual Materials Cost includes all required materials cost. I suggest providing a brief explanation similar to that in your post in the Special Circumstances of the form when you re-submit.

Kristina and Sarah - Thank your prompt and detailed assistance on this issue!

Maria - Good luck and we look forward to you posting a great outcome to your situation!

It looks like this issue has already been cleared up, but I thought I'd share the response that I just received back from GBCI:

"The total materials costs must be identified in the calculations, however, only the actual materials that contribute towards MR Credits 3-7 need to be individually tracked and included in the ID+C Materials and Resource Calculator."

Christine - Thanks for the follow up and accountability!!

The LEED reviewers are concerned that the Materials and Resource Calculator form may not accurately reflect the total cost of all materials used in the project. They are suggesting that the form may only list the cost of materials that are specifically required for credit compliance and that the cost of other materials that are used in the project may not be included. This could result in an underestimation of the total materials cost, leading to the project not achieving LEED certification.

To address this issue, you should review the Materials and Resource Calculator form carefully and make sure that it includes the cost of all materials that are used in the project, regardless of whether they are required for credit compliance or not. It would be best if you also were prepared to provide documentation to support your calculations.

As for the difference between the Total Materials Cost and the Total Sustainable Materials Cost, the Total Materials Cost is the cost of all materials used in the project, while the Total Sustainable Materials Cost is the cost of materials that meet certain sustainability criteria. These criteria may include using recycled materials, locally sourced materials, or certified materials as being sustainably harvested or manufactured.

I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you have any other questions.