Total Material Default Value

Ted - Your understanding is correct but there is a language discrepancy in what is written in the overview section and the Calculations sections of MRc3, MRc4, MRc5, and MRc6, which is puzzling. There is a subtle language difference on page 337 of the first edition of LEED Reference Guide: "However, LEED for New Construction, LEED for Core & Shell, and LEED for Schools allow project teams to apply a 45% factor to total construction costs (including labor and equipment) from Construction Specification Institute (CSI) MasterFormat™ Divisions 03–10, 31 (Section 31.60.00 Foundations) and 32 (Sections 32.10.00 Paving, 32.30.00 Site Improvements, and 32.90.00 Planting) to establish a default total materials cost for the project. I am trying to point out: “total construction costs (including labor and equipment)” vs. “total construction cost (hard costs only).” I see that the BDC Material and Resource Calculator (Aug 2012) states: “Includes hard costs for CSI MasterFormat 2004 Divisions 3-10, 31.60.00, 32.10.00, 32.30.00, and 32.90.00 only. Excludes mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components, and equipment.” That subtle but critical language issue aside, it is very clear that “Do not include mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components or appliances and equipment in the calculations for this credit.” per the Reference Guide and the Calculator. I think you have a reviewer who is misinformed. I would consider contacting GBCI via Contact Us (http://www.gbci.org/org-nav/contact/Contact-Us/Project-Certification-Questions.aspx) and select Questions about Review Comments from the dropdown menu. Or, if you are at Greenbuild next week, get an appointment in the LEED Certification Work Zone - http://www.greenbuildexpo.org/events/LEED-certification-work-zone.aspx. I’m going to ask about the hard vs. total costs language issue while I am there.

Ted - Just a note of caution… I recently quoted some information from another LEEDuser forum via the Contact Us form and the reply from the review team was: "Please note that while the LEED User website or LEED User forum information may provide useful guidance based on other project team experiences, information on that site should not be considered precedent setting."

Ted - You are right. The reviewer has misinterpreted the 45% default rule based on old Credit language dating back to LEED v2.0 & v2.1. Since v2.2 was issued, the default calculation required deducting out MEP, Elevators, Equipment, Furnishings, & Special Construction (Div13) BEFORE multiplying by 45%. LEED-2009 prescribed the same calculation. In your response to reviewers, cite the 2009 Reference Guide passages that you list above and cite LEED Interpretation #3009. The ruling, as corrected 10/25/2005, prescribes exactly the procedure that you used and remains in effect under LEED-2009. Good luck...Please let us know how this turns out.

Jonathan - Good of you to find this LI and point it out to us - http://www.usgbc.org/leed-interpretations?keys=3009. I’d be surprised if the reviewer would be citing this since it is a MRc3 CIR (now LI) but you never know. Ted - I hope you have gotten a resolution. I got some answers on the subtle language difference I noted on 11/14 but need to submit a correction to USGBC. More to come on that.

I finally got around to submitting a suggestion to USGBC earlier this week regarding the subtle language issue in the Reference Guide (and in the BDC Calculator) that I noted earlier in this post. I was told the issue would be brought up for consideration when they review proposed Addenda items. Stayed tuned for official word of a change.

Congratulations! I’m so glad it worked out for your team! Thanks for posting the response so everyone could both learn of the positive outcome and what they required as backup.