Concrete forming and temporary material - recycled content

In calculations for MR Credits 3-6, include only materials permanently installed in the project. Exclude temporary materials specified in Division 03 such as formwork, shoring, reshoring, and curing membranes. Also exclude other temporary materials, such as bracing, scaffolding, protective covers, and guardrails.

I agree with Jon, formwork doesn't count towards MRc3-6, but my understanding is that any formwork that will be reused on another project counts toward MRc2, construction waste management, since it is being diverted from the landfill.

Yes. If temporary materials are purchased for a project and retained or sold for reuse, they can count toward MRc2; however, rented materials cannot. Also, MRc7 DOES allow wood products purchased for temporary use on a project to be included in Certified Wood calculations for that credit. If any such materials are included, all temporary wood must be included. (I have tried this option before, but documentation was a nightmare. It did not help credit achievement, so I gave up.) That should just about cover temporary materials for all MR credits.

Caroline - The total cost calculation (45% default) includes ALL costs in Divisions 03-10 and the Sections in 31 and 32. You cannot exclude the cost of temporary items.

The purpose of the “45% Default” calculation is to estimate total material cost when the contractor’s cost breakdown fails to itemize permanent material costs separately from labor and other cost. The Default assumes 45% for permanent materials, with the remaining 55% for temporary construction and installation labor & equipment. Therefore, you must multiply 45% times the “total hard costs” for the required CSI Divisions. If using the “Actual Cost” method, you must exclude formwork and other temporary construction.

I know the thrust of this conversation is surrounding form work which is specified in Division 3. Other costs for temporary materials may be more complicated. Specifically, I'm thinking about mock ups which I would specify in Division 1 but the materials themselves are specified in Divisions 3 - 10. I would not include mock up costs in the 45% Default costs. Do others do the same?

Wow...interesting! Typically, mockups constitute only a tiny percentage of overall material costs. Therefore, it may make little difference whether you include them or not—well within the margin of error assumed by the default calculation. However, if you project has extensive (and expensive) mockups, it might be wise to require the contractor to account for mockup costs separately. Even then, many Specs allow mockup materials to be incorporated into finished construction, allowing mockup costs to be recouped. It sounds like hairsplitting. If we require this level of detail in the contractors’ schedules of value, pay applications, and cost reports, we might as well require them to itemize “Actual Material Costs” separately from labor and other costs. As noted above, the “45% Default” is an estimate made as a stopgap when itemized material costs are not available. It is also intended as a conservative (high) approximation, so tweaking numbers downward could be seen as “gaming,” even if done so only to make the estimate more accurate. Forgive us, Caroline, for wandering so far off-topic. Your questions have struck a chord, and it is easy to get carried away.

Jon, you said the 45% gets multiplied by the “total hard costs”, which makes sense and is straight from the credit language. However, there's been discussion on this forum about contractor overhead being applied to the relevant divisions, such that the 45% is multiplied by the 'cost to the owner'. Do you consider contractor overhead and profit as part of the "total construction cost" that gets multiplied by 0.45?

Lyle—Hard costs typically include contractor overhead and profit. See Nadav’s response to Travis’s January 2010 questions at the bottom of the last page of this MRc4 forum: https://www.leeduser.com/comment/redirect/881.

Thank you, Jon. That makes it very clear.

Here's the problem I have with this: "Cost to the owner" AKA "Contract Value" can be way more than just hard hosts. Many of our subcontractors have a design-assist role (i.e. curtain wall subcontractor/installer), and I don't think it's fair to include all that money for hours and hours of engineering and drafting to take your 45% from. Temporary materials? Yes. Shop Drawings? No. Imagine a Venn diagram with material cost within installed cost, and installed cost within contract value. I think it's perfectly fair to take 45% from whatever you can prove (via a SOV or requisition) is an accurate "installed cost", even if that "installed cost" is only 70% of the contract value. I can't say there is consensus on this, this is my interpretation based on the intent of the credit. I can't say all other agree with me on this but you should...