To meet the requirements of LEED-NC Version 2.2, EA Credit 5, we would like to use IPMVP Option C. This option is considered a low rigor option by the IPMVP because the baseline comparison in this case is with a group of buildings that are located on various sites and are supposedly similar in usage and type. In our case two identical buildings on the same campus are next to each other and have the same square footage, number of stories, size, orientation, type of use (office), the same owner and the same maintenance staff. The first building is under renovation to achieve Gold certification and the second building will be renovated in three years. It appears to us, that metering the two identical buildings simultaneously and using the actual old non-renovated building metrics as a baseline for the retrofit of the second renovated building, follows the intent, philosophy and purpose of the LEED EA Credit 5. In addition, this will give an incentive to the owner to continue with the renovation of the second building when energy savings are evaluated during the first year of operation. Is the use of the IPMVP Option C acceptable in this particular case?
The applicant is requesting approval to develop a Measurement and Verification (M&V) plan based on IPMVP Option C. While it appears that the baseline building will more accurately represent the proposed building than most projects conducting M&V using IPMVP Option C, the proposed approach is not acceptable. Only whole-building level performance can be measured using IPMVP Option C. IPMVP Options B and D, in addition to being more accurate, allow for the measurement and verification of performance of each energy conservation measurement (ECM). Applicable Internationally.