Ancillary site buildings

If they are inside the LEED boundary and part of the new construction contract then they would be applicable to SSc7.2.

Per the original MPR Supplemental Guidance (2009), p19, these types of "small buildings" could be excluded if they met certain criteria. However, in subsequent revisions, this guidance went away yet the list of changes in the revisions does not mention why.

In the 2011 revision, on p 25-26 under "Project boundaries that include other buildings" it says:
NON-LEED-CERTIFIABLE BUILDING ON SITE
If there is a non-LEED-certifiable building within the LEED project boundary, the project team can include the non-certifying building within the project boundary in ALL
relevant submittals that are allowed and appropriate for each individual credit and prerequisite, essentially treating the non-certifying building as an extension of the certifying building.

It seems there is quite a bit of interpretation left up to the team in the more recent version. I have a similar situation on a current project and would appreciate some feedback. For instance, a little storage shed not big enough to be occupied? Or a single-person ticket booth that is occupied, but not conditioned?

I had a similar case where I had a security post at the entrance to the project site that fell into the non-LEED certifiable category since it was too small. During the review process I was asked to include this space in all my documentation considering it as an extension of the building pursuing LEED certification.
This complicated the justification process and required for example including entry-way systems for the security post. As this as turned out to be rather painful process for anther similar project we have decided to follow the campus certification path, thus giving us the possibility to exclude the security post at the entrance to the project. We are waiting to see if this is in fact the best path to take in such situations. Anyone else had the same experience?