Per the LEED Reference Guide, standard refrigerators, small water coolers, and small HVAC units with less than 0.5 pounds of refrigerant are not considered base building equipment and are exempt from the prerequisite.However, if you have larger versions of these pieces of equipment, like a large refrigerator or larger window air-conditioning unit, that has more than 0.5 pounds of refrigerant, you do need to address those in your refrigerant management plans. The key factor is not so much the equipment type, but the amount of refrigerant.

Always use the actual value for the leakage rate of each piece of HVAC equipment in the project building that has more than 0.5 pounds of refrigerant. You can calculate the actual leakage rate values by tracking the amount of additional refrigerant that has been added during the maintenance activities throughout the performance period. Note that if the actual leakage rate of a piece of equipment is less than 0.5% (i.e. 0%), use the minimum default value of 0.5% in your leakage rate calculation instead of the actual leakage rate.

Yes, even though it is not explicitly requested by the LEED Online form, you are required to include documentation demonstrating that the project has reduced annual leakage to 5% or less, and the total leakage over the remaining life to less than 30%.

Yes, the economic analysis must include both the conversion AND replacement of the CFC-based building systems.

This scenario, which is common to museums, visitor centers, cafeterias, and fitness club, falls under the “special-use space” category. In special-use spaces where visitors are given limited access to lighting controls, you can meet the credit requirements by specifying that building staff will be available to adjust lighting conditions as necessary. Provide a clear narrative describing the details of the space and how building staff are available and instructed to adjust lighting.

Although this requirement not explicitly stated in the LEED Reference Guide, project teams are now being asked to demonstrate that at least two levels of control are provided in multi-occupant spaces (like conference rooms). A single on-off switch is not compliant, and an on-off switch with an occupancy sensor is no longer compliant either. Examples of the most common compliant scenarios for multi-occupants spaces include: two (or more) lighting zones with on-off switches; an on-off switch combined with window blinds; and an on-off switch with a dimmer.

It’s up to the project team to determine what target performance to set for the building. Target EUI can be based on a combination of audit results, project building goals for energy use and consumption, benchmarking against other similar buildings, etc. Ideally, the target should be set to a level that will require some real effort to achieve, but that is attainable and realistic.

The expectation is that the audit methodology outlined in the ASHRAE “Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits” be used to guide the audit procedure and the approach to understanding building performance, energy use and opportunity for improvement. However, teams are not required to use the ASHRAE forms for reporting results. Refer to the Reference Guide and the LEED Online EAc2.1 credit form for checklists and outlines of documentation that is required for LEED documentation.

Yes, the ASHRAE Level I audit can be performed in-house. The auditor must have the skills necessary to perform the audit, but otherwise does not need to hold specific credentials or be a third-party. Audits for LEED-EBOM projects or commonly conducted by a third-party auditor, commissioning agent, or building engineer. 

Demand describes the rate of electricity use and is measured as kW. Consumption is based on the actual electrical energy used, and is measured as kWh. Utilities generally levy separate charges for each, and some energy conservation measures will help to reduce both demand and consumption for electricity. Considering both paints a more accurate picture of potential cost savings and makes the results of the low-cost and no-cost improvement assessment more meaningful and useful.