Applicable version of water use reduction additional guidance

During a recent review, a project's WEp1 was marked pending because I hadn't followed the most recent version of the guidance document (which was released AFTER I submitted for review) so I wrote in to the GBCI to see what version we were actually required to use. In the response I received, they stated "Please note that this document is not bound by project registration date and project teams should be following the guidance that is current at the time of documentation submittal."

So I guess teams should check for any updated versions immediately prior to submitting for review and update water use calculations as needed. Now if only they announced when the updates were released...

Hi Carly,
Well that's the first time I've seen a reviewer put it in writing that the document is not bound by the registration date, but I can't say I'm surprised. Despite the profusion of resources, guidance, addenda, rating systems, credit forms and LEED Interpretations, we have seen a continuing erosion of that boundary line of project registration date. How to keep up with the requirements is something even reviewers are apparently struggling with given the comments we're seeing.

There's always a natural bit of reviewer bias in that they all seem to look to each other for cues about what is required and to what degree, rather than to the documentation requirements in place at the time. It's obviously a difficult task.

GBCI is still maturing and I expect there will be challenges they struggle to meet. But this is a critical issue to future growth. We all need to be able to rely on knowing what the LEED requirements are for a project at any given time. And everyone needs to be able to trust that a LEED certification offers some apples to apples benefit in assessing green buildings, not just added cost, frustration and paperwork as a reward for doing the right thing.

Here's hoping they get a handle on this issue, perhaps in v4.0.

I'm curious, what is the specific issue you're grappling with, and how have changes to the guidance document affected how you document it, and comply with the prerequisite requirements?

I had the same situation with a 10 second metering faucet being specified for my project. We had to resubmit clarifications using the 12-second run time so our overall savings dropped with the revisions, and essentially we had to claim a higher volume of water than will actually be installed. I have been working on LEED projects/water calcs for years so I had never even opened the Guidance Document until the reviewer referenced it in the review comments.

It would be a useful if the document could at least be retitled to 'Water Use Reduction Additional Requirements' or be included as an addenda so it is clear that the document MUST be used. Calling it a guidance document is misleading.

Morning TIffany,
I can understand your frustration. GBCI has already had to acknowledge that you need to look at online credit forms to get a complete understanding of LEED requirements and that these forms change at any time. So I have to agree that they are making a specious distinction when they say the guidance only applies to how to use the form. I have had to resort to that Additional Guidance document numerous times to be able to make the calculations properly.

Construction projects take a while and decisions are literally set in stone at a certain point. Requirements that change in mid-stream are onerous and unfair, particularly when there are supposed to be understood safeguards like project registration date in place to keep everyone on the same page until certification is complete.

The reality is that LEED requirements can be a bit of a moving target, and reviewers sometimes make mistakes about how to interpret their application or their timing with respect to your specific project. Over the years, we've found that it's wise to have a point buffer to hedge against surprises.

However, if you have a good case and a well founded argument you can make, it's possible to successfully contest unfortunate review comments. Intent is still an important part of the picture, not just how you fill out the credit forms. And though I think it would be difficult to arm yourself with previous versions of the guidance, you are on the right track in that context is very important in any conversation with LEED reviewers.

If your isse is not prerequisite compliance, build in a margin of error against the goal you need if you can and hope for the best. If you do have a concern about prerequisite compliance, it might be wise to consider a CIR or LI to establish your situation.

The 12 second default was put in place as of an 11/2/2009 addendum.Was your project registered before or after that?

The default value has always been listed as 12 seconds in the reference guide, so the 12 second value stated in the 2009 addenda wasn't an update, it was just a breakout of residential vs. nonresidential. Page 171 of the reference guide states "Table 2 provides default fixture use values for different occupancy types. These values should be used in the calculations for this credit unless special circumstances warrant modifications." Additionally on page 173, it states "The design case must use the rated flow rates and flush volumes for installed plumbing fixtures and fittings." The addenda you referenced does not change requirements for using defaults.

The only document that states the 12 second default must be used in lieu of actual installed metering faucet run times is the Guidance Document.

Hi all,
I agree with Carly on this one. We ran afoul of this issue on several CI projects where we thought we had to get the subcontractors to change all the factory default settings of metered faucets onsite so that we could get down to 10 seconds when GPC became the calculation in V3.0. Then they finally clarified that 12 sec was the minimum allowed for good handwashing.

This has been a lively discussion! I wanted to address a couple of the comments and hopefully help to clarify things:1. Lavatory installation: Some commenters have expressed concern that USGBC is requiring autocontrol faucets to be set to exactly 12 second durations and to switch out the faucets if exactly 12 seconds cannot be achieved – this is not the case. Projects may select faucets with cycles of any duration, and may set those faucets as they see fit. The 12 second design case duration used in the form is meant to represent a typical hand washing duration. According to many sources, durations as long as 20-30 seconds are recommended to prevent the spread of germs (CDC says 20 seconds). Occupant behavior is the hardest variable to control for here. If faucet flow is set to a very short intervals, users will typically reactivate the faucet multiple times, thus negating any savings from the shorter setting. To address this, when documenting these fixtures, projects should use a 12 second design case duration in the form, which allows projects to earn some savings for autocontrol faucets, but not for the durations where users are likely to reactivate in order to fully wash their hands.2. Precedent for 12 second design case duration within the reference guide: The default 12 second design case duration for autocontrol lavatory faucets is outlined in Table 2 Default Fixture Uses, by Occupant Type on page 171 of the LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction, 2009 First Edition. Table 2 outlines the default usage assumptions (uses per day and duration) that are used to calculate the quantity of water use in the baseline and design case calculations. The default values in Table 2 should be used in the calculations unless special circumstances warrant modifications per page 171 of the Reference Guide. This was further clarified with addenda. The reference guide also says that manufacturer flush and flow rates should be used, but not duration of flow.3. Use of the Water Use Reduction Additional Guidance (WURAG)) – This guidance document was originally created to address questions project teams encountered when completing the WEp1/c3 form. The calculations in this form are fairly complex and are generally not addressed in the reference guide. The WURAG is intended to guide the user through the process of filling out the form, but is not intended to create any new requirements. Unlike LEED Interpretation and addenda, it does not have an “effective on” date because the guidance is intended for all projects to use, regardless of registration date. It is accessible in the link above, or under the resources tab of WEp1 & WEc3 in the credit library. Wherever possible going forward we will try to put guidance directly in the form for clarity, but this guidance can be helpful for specific project scenarios and it has historically been a faster way for use to deliver guidance to project teams.I don’t expect this to answer all questions, but I hope it helps to clarify a few things.