This Credit Interpretation is being submitted as an appeal to the Project Manager\'s Ruling dated 6/4/2003. The first CIR did not adequately describe the HOV program and we would like to clarify issues raised in the Project Manager\'s Ruling. It is important to reiterate that no new parking was provided. The first issue was stipulation that this credit requirement only be applied to " FTE Workers". When considering a major airport terminal, addressing only the Full Time Equivalent workers does not account for a majority of the building occupants. The airport authority feels that to have any real beneficial affect on the environment, the HOV program would have to accommodate both passengers and workers. The LEED 2.1 NC Rating System was designed for Commercial Office Buildings because that sector had the largest market share of new construction and thus, that is where an environmental rating system could have the most beneficial impact on the environment and market transformation. The airport authority used the same logic in targeting the passengers with an HOV Program because that is where they could make the most beneficial impact on the environment. The other issue raised in the Project Manager\'s ruling suggested that providing priority curbside access for local transit authority buses, shuttle buses, and van shares is related to LEED Credit SS4.1 Public Transportation Access and therefore not applicable to Credit SS4.4. While they are related, the design team and airport authority could have NOT provided priority curbside access and still met the requirements for SS4.1. Credit SS4.1 requires the building to be sited in proximity to mass transit, period. It is awarded for decisions made during the early project planning phases. On the other hand, Credit SS4.4 is a point awarded for measures implemented during the design phases and employed throughout the life of the building. It actually involves the design of physical features to accommodate HOVs. For commercial office buildings, this means preferred HOV-only parking spaces. For residential projects, Credit Rulings stipulate this means a curbside drop-off/pick-up area and a carpool rider board. We are proposing that for airport terminal projects, the physical design feature be the priority curbside drop-off/pick-up areas. In addition, the airport authority\'s suburban express HOV shuttle service was developed to meet the specific LEED Parking Capacity Credit\'s stated intent to "Reduce pollution and land development impacts from single occupancy vehicle use". This shuttle service is operated by the airport authority and provides express service to five suburban locations without optimal access to public mass transit service. What separates this service from Credit SS4.1, is that it is operated and maintained by the airport authority, one of the chief stakeholders in the airport terminal. In addition, this service is not being included to demonstrate the project\'s compliance with SS Credit 4.1. Annual surveys indicate that 5% of the airport terminal staff and over 6% of the airline terminal passengers use this service. With a daily passenger load of 38,216 passengers and an FTE staff occupancy of 789, this program effectively removes 2,333 single occupancy vehicles a day from the amount of vehicles going to and from the terminal. If the stakeholders for this project were to abandon this program and adhere only to the letter of the LEED Project Manager\'s Ruling and the Credit Requirements, then only 40 single occupancy vehicles per day would be removed from the roads. In light of the clarifications made to this Credit Interpretation Request, the design team and the stakeholders for this project are submitting this appeal for consideration as both an equivalent compliance to the requirements for SS Credit 4.3 AND an Innovation Credit for Exemplary Performance to SS Credit 4.3 for surpassing the required LEED benchmark by over 2,000 vehicles.