Beyond diverting waste generated, the project team has designed and implemented processes that will reduce the total amount of waste generated in the first place. These strategies included advanced framing processing, ordering, and construction techniques which eliminate waste generation on-site by delivering exact-sized framing members based on detailed framing documents from the architect. Specifically, all of the steel studs throughout the project are cut off-site and ordered in pre-determined lengths and quantities to suite the precise needs of the project. Framing members can be cut at the manufacturer or distributor from larger pieces due to the removed length restrictions from shipping. By reducing the total amount of waste generated instead of maximizing the total amount of waste diverted, the project is actually being penalized under MR Credit 2 for its laudable efforts. Obviously it is more valuable from an environmental and limited global resources perspective for a project to reduce waste in the first place rather than divert what waste is generated. The project would like a Credit Interpretation Ruling as to how it may achieve credit for its efforts. We would like a ruling on both of the following approaches. 1. In the LEED-Homes Rating System, MR Credit 3 has already dealt with this issue by allowing either waste diverted (measured in tons) or waste generated (normalized by building size by measuring pounds per square foot of building) as a metric. In LEED-Homes, this credit awards up to 3 points for decreasing levels of total waste generated during construction. So projects that generate less waste per square foot earn credit for their efficient use of materials during construction. In order to stay flexible, the credit allows for a project to earn credit by pure diversion, and has an equivalency chart that relates various diversion thresholds to waste generation thresholds. In the LEED-Homes standard, the conversion chart equates waste generation levels of 2.0 pounds/square foot and 1.0 pounds /square foot with waste diversion thresholds of 50% and 75%, respectively. We propose that these waste generation thresholds, as established in the LEED-Homes Rating System be allowed to be used as an alternative compliance path for LEED-Schools with the same submittal requirements as exist within LEED-Homes. This will allow projects that select materials that result in less construction waste to still achieve recognition for these efforts under MR Credit 2. 2. In the LEED-Homes Rating System, there already exists a credit that specifically awards up to 5 points under Material Resources Credit 1: Material Efficient Framing for the exact same strategies we are using. In fact, if this were a LEED-Homes project, we would achieve 3 out of the 5 points for this credit. The project has already generated Detailed Framing Documents (1 point), a Detailed Cut List and Lumber Order (1 point), and Pre-cut Framing Packages (1 point). This credit operates in chorus with LEED-Homes Material Resources Credit 3: Waste Management which is more analogous to LEED-Schools MR Credit 2. One credit awards points for reducing waste generated and the other awards points for diverting the waste that is generated. This combination works well to reduce overall material waste and there is no apparent reason why a similar attempt and method couldn\'t achieve a point via an ID credit in the LEED-Schools Rating System. We propose that this LEED-Homes credit be available as an ID credit if at least 3 of 5 LEED-H MR Credit 2 points are achievable, and with the same intent and submittal requirements.
The CIR has posed the following two inquiries regarding the application of LEED for Homes Materials and Resources credit 1, Material-Efficient Framing, within the LEED for Schools system. The first portion of the CIR asks if project teams could utilize the LEED for Homes MR credit 1 compliance path as an alternate compliance path for MR credit 2, Construction Waste Management. As formal credit substitution policies have not been established between LEED for Schools and other LEED Rating Systems, the Material Efficient Framing credit compliance path presented in the LEED for Homes Rating System cannot be substituted as an alternative compliance path for MR credit 2. The second portion of the CIR asks if the LEED for Homes MR credit 1 strategy could be used to garner an ID point for a project that has employed a minimum of 3 of the 5 strategies noted under the LEED for Homes MR credit 1. Project teams may select appropriate credits from different Rating Systems, which are not otherwise represented, for possible Innovation in Design credits. The project team will need to establish and document the credit intent, requirements, and supporting materials to demonstrate that the project has followed a comprehensive approach that has quantifiable/measurable environmental benefit.