We would like you to reconsider your Credit Inquiry Ruling Inquiry ID 0329-SSc72-041902, and review the justification below to exclude area of the EXISTING Mall Terrace roof parking structure from SS Credit 6.1 and 7.2 calculations. (Appeal dated 7/5/02) We are in a process of designing a 250,000 s.f. largely subterranean facility for the Pentagon (PFRF), of which approximately 200,000s.f. will be renovated existing structure projecting from the north face of the Pentagon, under a raised terrace that supports existing large parking deck. Although this design-build program is made of multiple projects these projects have been brought together under one contractor to execute due to site adjacency and to expedite an economy of coordination. The Pentagon Renovation Program (PenRen) is responsible for management of these projects under separate contracts as follows: Pentagon Physical Fitness & Readiness Facility (PFRF), a stand-alone MILCON funded Army project and Auditorium, TV Studio, Tech Center, Executive Motorpool & Office Swing Space part of the overall renovation of the Pentagon funded from the Pentagon Reservation Monetary Revolving Fund (PRMRF) allocations. Because of site restraints, the design of these facilities has been integrated. Mall Terrace Waterproofing. This was a Washington Headquarters Services Real Estate & Facilities (RE&F) maintenance & repair project which receives separate funds from the PRMRF. (RE&F is set up to generally execute smaller maintenance and repair projects). It was required that the Mall Terrace Waterproofing be completed prior to any renovation work in the spaces below. Subsequently, the space below and the unbuilt area between the Mall Terrace and the Remote Deliver Facility (RDF) was identified as the location for the PFRF including the other identified Pentagon renovation needs listed under first bullet. The contract with TurnerHNTB for this project and associated funds were identified as a Contract Option with a separate Contract Line Item Number CLIN. This option was executed to expedite the coordination of this maintenance & repair work with the adjacent work of the PFRF and the Pentagon renovation.
UPDATED APPEAL RULING 7/31/02 BY STEERING COMMITTEE: The Steering Committee reviewed this appeal. The applicant made the case that the project in question consisted of separate contracts funded by separate divisions within the client organization, the Pentagon, and that therefore certain aspects of the building should be excluded from consideration under certain LEED credits. The Steering Committee emphasized that LEED is a BUILDING rating system, not a CONTRACT SCOPE rating system. Apparently, in this case the project is a single building, with a single client, regardless of the nuances of federal contract management. The SC is willing to allow the project to determine what part of the building is in the scope of the LEED project, but this scope must be defined consistently through all LEED credits. The project cannot pick and choose aspects of the building to certify, while ignoring other aspects of the building, depending on which credit is being addressed. In this case, if you choose to limit the definition of your LEED building to the connecting structure to capture a green roof credit, then the connecting structure should represent the full scope of your LEED project. As with any project, not all LEED credits can be addressed simultaneously. In this case, the client seems to have decided that the main roof of the building will not attempt SS Credit 7.2. Because the brief description above does not fully explain the relationship of the different building components, the Steering Committee is willing to allow the project to make the case more clearly with drawings and supporting documentation at the time of project submittal. However, the resolution will still hinge upon a consistent project scope in addressing the LEED credits. ORIGINAL RULING: The existing parking area is clearly serving as a roof for your project, and you state that you are in fact tasked with waterproofing the existing parking surface, presumably to convert it to a functional roof surface. This means that you have the opportunity to address the heat island credit in the scope of your project. You state that this area is NOT open for modification or design improvements, which we take to mean that the client has declared this area off-limits for potential improvement to meet LEED requirements. However, you cannot ignore part of the project with respect to LEED simply because the client is not interested in pursuing LEED goals in this area. Therefore, you cannot exclude this area from the roof area calculations. With respect to the term \'green roof\', the term "garden roof" is also used in the LEED Reference Guide on Page 45, and "vegetated" on Page 52 in the description of the credit requirements. From the description provided, your project\'s roof qualifies as a green vegetated roof.