FAQs about EAp2 :

The project is built on a site with existing exterior lighting installed. How should this be accounted for?

Can mezzanines open to floors below be excluded from the energy model?

How do I provide a zip code for an international location?

For a project outside the U.S., how do I determine the climate zone?

For a project outside the U.S., how do I determine the Target Finder score?

Do hotel rooms need automatic light shut-off control?

How commonly are the 90.1 mandatory compliance forms submitted as part of EAp2/EAc1?

The Section 9 space-by-space method does not include residential space types. What should I use?

Can the Passive House Planning Package (PHPP) be used to energy model for LEED?

Is it acceptable to model a split-type AC with inverter technology compressor as a heat pump, like modeling VRF?

Can the Trace 700 'LEED Energy Performance Summary Report' by uploaded to LEED Online in lieu of the Section 1.4 tables spreadsheet?

A portion of our building envelope is historic. Can we exclude it from our model?

Which baseline HVAC system do I use if my building has no heating or air conditioning?

For an existing building, do I need to rotate the model?

Our project has a diesel backup generator. Should we include it in our energy model?

Our project has a large process load—75%. Despite our efforts to make an efficient HVAC design, the cost savings are minimal. What can we do to earn this prerequisite and be eligible for LEED certification? Is there any flexibility in how we model the p

Can SHGC be higher in the proposed than in the baseline model?

Our process load is higher than 25%. Do we have to justify that?

Do I need to justify the electrical and fuel rates I am using in my model?

Our local code references ASHRAE 90.1-2010. Should I use that for my documentation, or 90.1-2007?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-2009 EAp2:Minimum Energy Performance

LI ID #10421 allows 90.1-2010 for v2009 but how to document it?

One of my projects is considering using LI ID #10421 (http://www.usgbc.org/content/10421) that allows v2009 projects to use ASHRAE 90.1-2010 with an adjusted point scale. We have the v05 version of the EAp2 form in LEED Online. My conundrum is there are no Section 1.4 Tables for v4 (that I can find in the Credit Library), so are we forced into using the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator for v4? (Based on the issues with the v06 forms update, I don't really want to upgrade to the v06/v07 version of the EAp2 form if I can help it.)

2

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Mon, 05/23/2016 - 22:22

Under the credit resources tab the page with the v2009 calculator it says "Note: If using ASHRAE 90.1-2010 per LEED Interpretation 10421, please use the v4 Minimum Energy Performance spreadsheet in lieu of this spreadsheet."

Tue, 05/24/2016 - 15:10

Kathryn - Yes - I've seen that remark but as evidenced below (http://www.leeduser.com/comment/redirect/64492) there are problems with the Minimum Energy Performance Calculators. I was hoping there was another option besides using those.

Tue, 05/24/2016 - 15:20

I think you are stuck using the new form since it is the only one that documents the 90.1-2010 baseline. If you can find another easy to thoroughly document the modeling input and output values which includes all of the necessary information I am sure it would be accepted.

Tue, 05/24/2016 - 18:09

Struggling with this issue as well. We used 90-2010 for a v2009-Retail project and filled out the V4 spreadsheet and it says savings is 12%. Per LID 10421, that should be 7 points, if applicable, but to get 7 points, I would have to type in 24% savings in the online form. Is that the expectation? Seems odd, since uploaded spreadsheet would show 12% savings (albeit vs. 2010).

Wed, 06/01/2016 - 16:43

Matthew - That is my expectation. The v4 calculator is set up for LEED v4 projects. Hence the output will show the points only for LEED v4 projects. For now, I plan to use the Special Circumstances area of the EAp2 form to alert the review team that we are using this LI. In addition, this is where I will reference the points we are anticipating. Note: You can input the 12% savings into the v07 form. Since the linkages are removed from the v06+ forms, this shouldn't be a problem for EAp2 or EAc1. However, one of my contacts at USGBC wrote: "The energy team is currently writing up some additional guidance regarding each scenario for applying the calculators. They are planning to have this guidance completed by the end of next week." I am anticipating that completion date to be June 3.

Fri, 04/21/2017 - 01:19

I can't speak to the details here (mechanical speak is another language to me), but do the most recently issued updates to the calculators address these issues? http://www.usgbc.org/leedaddenda/5000076

Tue, 05/02/2017 - 16:42

Although LEED Coach originally told me that they were going to provide Additional Guidance for other calculator scenarios, I wanted to post that LEED Coach told me last summer that "The energy team discussed putting together special guidance on various documentation strategies for EAp2/EAc1. However, they decided that due to circumstances for each project being unique, any team with questions regarding the forms and/or calculators should reach out to us directly with their project details and we will provide guidance based on their specific project. They plan to issue future updates within the EA Minimum Energy Performance Calculator. We periodically issue updated versions of the calculator with bug repairs and revised notes." Emily's Addenda note includes some bug fixes for both v2009 and v4 versions of the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator. Note: There have been instructions in the Instructions worksheet of Minimum Energy Performance Calculator on v2009 projects using LI ID #10421 since the v02 version of the calculator (January 2016).

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.