Entry Type ID Date Applicable Rating System Primary Credit Inquiry (LIs) Ruling (LIs) Related Addenda/LIs Related Resources Campus Applicable Internationally Applicable Country Applicability Reference Guide (Addenda) Page (Addenda) Location (Addenda) Description of Change (Addenda) "LEED Interpretation" "10246" "2012-10-01" "New Construction, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction, Retail - New Construction, Healthcare, Data centers - New Construction, Hospitality - New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Retail - Commercial Interiors, Existing Buildings, Schools - Existing Buildings, Retail - Existing Buildings, Neighborhood Development" "We are performing a comparative analysis for fiberglass insulation regarding MR Credit 4: Recycled Content. Depending on the manufacturer, recycled content is reported either a plant- and product-specific average, or a country-wide average (various plants and products). We have contacted a manufacturer using North American average recycled content claims, and they state that the recycled content across their facilities and product lines can range from 0-70%. Are country-wide recycled content averages acceptable as documentation for MR Credit 4: Recycled Content? If country-wide averages are not acceptable, what level of specificity is acceptable?" "***Update 1/1/13: The original ruling is no longer valid and has been superseded by the language below. \n\nThe project team is requesting clarification regarding the documentation of recycled content for Materials and Resources Credit 4: Recycled Content. Recycled content claims must be specific to the installed product. The installed product refers to a unique product distinguished by color, type, and/or location of manufacture as identified to the consumer by SKU or other means. It is acceptable to use an average recycled content value stated by a single manufacturer for a single product. Recycled content claims for custom products are required to be product specific; industry wide or national averages are not acceptable for the purposes of LEED documentation. Note, for the purposes of LEED, steel has a previously established industry average of 25% post-consumer recycled content which does not require documentation on a per product basis. In all cases, if recycled content is given as a range then the lowest recycled-content percentage will be used for LEED documentation. Applicable Internationally.\n\nOriginal Ruling: The project team is inquiring about the acceptability of using a country wide average value for recycled content of a product. An average recycled-content claim, especially one that incorporates multiple product lines or places of manufacture, does not meet the credit intent and is not acceptable for LEED documentation. The product that is known to have zero recycled-content may be unduly benefiting from the recycled-content of other products/manufacturing facilities. Recycled-content claims must be specific to the installed product (and therefore place of manufacture), regional or national claims do not meet credit requirements. If product-specific recycled content is given as a range, then the lowest possible actual recycled-content number must be declared for LEED documentation. GBCI recognizes that this presents a challenge to design and construction teams as it is often not possible to specify or even identify-- the location of manufacture for a number of materials. It is hoped that manufacturers will respond to market demand for useful, credible product information. Note that this ruling does not apply to steel products, which have an established average recycled content of 25% and do not require documentation on a per product basis when that value is used in the LEED calculator. Applicable Internationally." "5645, 5519, 2497" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "1555" "2006-08-09" "New Construction, Schools - New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell" "Our project is a 185,000 SF lab. The lab is served by a Satellite Energy Plant (SEP) of 6,265 SF, being constructed concurrently, but on a separate site. We intend to apply for certification for only the lab building and not the SEP. Both buildings are currently under construction and the contractor is tracking the materials and providing us submittals for the MR Credits. However the contractor is not able to separate the materials\' submittals (e.g. steel) for the two buildings, without considering it a change-order or requiring a re-bid from the sub-contractors. We foresee the SEP materials to be a very small portion of the materials used. We have detailed cost estimates based on construction documents that give us a split between the two buildings. We would like to use these cost estimates to calculate and thus split the relevant material quantities in the contractor\'s submittals so that we can count the materials appropriately for the lab building in our certification documentation. Is this approach acceptable to you? If not, can you suggest another approach, that would be acceptable given our circumstances, that would avoid a re-bid or change order?" "It is acceptable to use estimates when breaking down the materials costs for the MR credits, thus your proposed approach is a good one. As a reminder, it is important to use a consistent project definition across all LEED credits, so be sure to make the same divisions in the SS, WE, EA, and IEQ credits. Applicable Internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "1601" "2006-11-03" "New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction" "As stated in CIR ruling dated 8/29/2003, ""Mechanical (mainly HVAC ductwork and equipment) and electrical system components (smaller infrastructure-type items such as wires, cables, junction boxes) are to be excluded from the LEED calculations. If a project team chooses to include additional items as part of the base material cost, such as elevators, appliances, hot tubs, or other semi-mechanical/electrical components, it should do so for all relevant material credits, which include MR Credits 3, 4, 5 and 6."" Does this exclusion include thermal insulation for mechanical and plumbing systems, or is mechanical and plumbing insulation considered a ""semi-mechanical component""? Furthermore, does this exclusion apply to self-insulated HVAC ducts, including fiber glass duct board ducts and flexible insulated ducts? Recycled content is currently available for these materials and excluding them would not provide incentive to manufacturers for increasing their use of recycled content, or motivate projects to incorporate recycled-content insulations. These products are lightweight and of low relative cost, and would not unduly affect other recycled content decisions." "Note that the referenced CIR is from NCv2.1, and your CIR was submitted for v2.2. Version 2.2 credit requirements state that mechanical, electrical and plumbing components shall not be included. The Reference Guide provides additional detail, although it does not clearly address your question. The phrase ""Mechanical, electrical and plumbing components"" refers to all items specified within CSI MasterFormat 1995 Divisions 15 and 16. Aside from the rationale stated in the Reference Guide (re: high-priced assemblies/equipment that would skew calculations), it is hoped that in general this approach provides a fairly level playing field between LEED projects and avoids a project\'s inquiries about recycled content in products for which data is difficult or impossible to gather, and where recycled content is not generally going to be influenced by LEED. Admittedly, this is a broad-brush solution that may miss some incentive opportunities, but the scope of materials for this and similar MR credits requires consideration of both technical and administrative issues for LEED. These credits were originally designed around Divisions 2 through 10: products considered the most practical to influence, the most practical upon which to create credit calculations, and which represent the bulk of a building\'s mass. Applicable Internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "2257" "2008-08-02" "New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction" "Our project features a custom Glazed Aluminum Curtain Wall skin. The curtain wall contractor will obtain custom-made glass, aluminum, and steel components from its suppliers. In order to facilitate material transport and installation, the contractor has elected to construct unitized curtain wall sections of various sizes and shapes in the shop before transporting the sections to the site and mounting them on the building. Because the curtain wall sections are composed of multiple materials, the sections could be considered individual ""assemblies"" according to the Reference Guide. If an assembly calculation is used, the relative weights of the components in each section would have to be used to determine the recycled value of each individual section. We submit that it is appropriate to calculate the recycled value of the curtain wall using the original components, rather than performing an assembly calculation for the individual unitized sections. The custom-made glass, aluminum, and steel components used in the construction of the sections can be accounted for pre-assembly. The contractor is able to identify the cost and recycled content information for each type of material. Since the recycled content value of the curtain wall\'s component materials can be accurately tracked using our proposed approach, the intent of the credit is maintained, as preference can be given to materials containing recycled content. Please confirm if this approach is acceptable." "The project is inquiring if it is acceptable to calculate recycled content based on actual components of an assembly rather than the weight of the assembly. This approach is acceptable as long as the project has access to individual cost and recycled content information for each of the assembled product\'s components. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "2289" "2008-09-05" "New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction" "The project team is seeking clarification for our intended use of on-site excavated rock. During excavation and site work at the project, a large amount of limestone rock was encountered. Instead of disposing of the rock off-site, we are using it on-site. We are breaking up the on-site rock into 12 - 18"" pieces for use as rip-rap. This eliminates the need to use virgin quarry rock and reduces the amount of the volume of waste sent to the landfill. We would like to apply the market value of the rip-rap to MR credit 4.1, Recycled Content (pre-consumer). We will use the following formula for our calculations: # of Tons of excavated rock used on site * the local quarry price per ton * 1/2 = $ applied to MRc4.1 Since this approach will use what is typically a waste stream and use it to reduce the demand for off-site materials, it seems to meet the overall intent of the LEED process. If the rock cannot be applied to MRc4.1, is there any other credit that it could be applied to?" "The project team is requesting clarification regarding on how to correctly account for rock extracted and used on site. It is good building practice to reuse materials on site and it is standard construction practice to reuse bedrock on the site (crushed or not). The reuse of these materials on site cannot be applied to MRc4 (Recycled Content), however, the value of the rip-rap may be applied to the calculations for MRc5 (Regional Materials), as calculated by the following equation: # of Tons of excavated rock used on site * the local quarry price per ton undelivered = $ applied to MRc5. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "2497" "2009-03-20" "New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell, Schools - New Construction" "Per CIR ruling dated 1/28/08, we feel there may be some flexibility in CSI classification of materials and how that qualifies a material for inclusion in Recycled Content (and other Materials & Resources credits) calculations. The particular material of concern here is ""RF Shielding"" panels to be installed in the MRI facility of our hospital expansion project. These panels are typically classified under CSI Division 13 for accounting purposes, because they are a specialty item. However, the panels are being custom fabricated in a shop, for this project, of a few simple materials, mainly: urea-formaldehyde-free recycled MDF and copper sheeting Because of the high recycled content of these two materials, we would like to include them in our recycled content calculations. We feel that because of the simplicity of this component, and our subcontractor\'s ability to break out the cost of each material and recycled content data, that we should be able to claim credit. Please verify." "The project team has requested a clarification regarding the inclusion of a material from MasterSpec Division 13 in the calculations determining credit compliance for MRc4. Yes, the material may be included in calculations for MRc4 provided that the values are applied consistently across MRc3-7. The material may be calculated for assembly recycled content as sub-components of a panel system. See page 272 of the LEED-NC 2.2 Reference Guide for further clarification on how to calculate the recycled content final percentages for this material. Applicable Internationally. " "10246" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "3006" "2003-08-29" "New Construction, Schools - New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell" "One of the most significant materials we have specified for this project is a wall system that is comprised of recycled polystyrene embedded in a Portland cement matrix cast into panels to provide both structural support, and a high insulation value. This system (Perform Wall) has an average weight per panel (10""x15""x10\') of 156 lbs. Because polystyrene is so much lighter than cement, the polystyrene within the panel only weighs 37lbs, but comprises 85% of the panel by volume. We have this information documented from the manufacturer. To calculate the percentage of recycled material based on the criteria of weight only, the polystyrene would only be 24 % of the total weight, while the manufacturer states that the polystyrene is 85% of the product volume. We believe we have followed the design intent by specifying a product with a high percentage of recycled content, and would like to be granted an exception to the calculation method and be permitted to utilize the 85% for submittal purposes. We will include the manufacturer\'s information in the submittal." "The LEED Version 2.0 Reference Guide (page 194) provides guidelines for calculating the recycle content of materials. The method described above uses Equation 3 (Assembly Recycled Content) methodology for the concrete-based wall system. Given this is based on weight, and since the polystyrene is a lighter material than the concrete, the equation does unfortunately reduce the assembly\'s overall recycled content value.\nAn alternative calculation methodology is to apply Equation 1 (Recycled Content Value). This would require itemizing the materials/components that make up the wall system and determining both their individual costs as well as the percentage of post-consumer and post-industrial recycle content. Calculations done this way may result in a higher recycle content value in comparison to using the other method. The manufacturer of this system should be able to provide individual costs and the respective recycled content for all the materials. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5024" "2007-01-16" "Core and Shell" "Due to late incorporation of construction waste recycling during the construction process, meeting the minimum recycled waste threshold of 50% would not be feasible even if all waste was recycled from now until project completion. This situation accounts solely for the core and shell portion of the structure as this is the portion of the project included in the scope of LEED-CS certification. The project team is interested in providing recycling containers for what remains of core and shell construction, as well as for the tenants during their fit out construction, which has not yet begun. Is there an opportunity for the project to obtain the MRc2.1 point if they can demonstrate that 50% of the remaining core and shell construction waste as well as tenant fit out construction waste is recycled? If this proposed compliance path diverges too far from the original credit structure, would it be possible to merit an ID point for this effort?" "If 50% waste diversion cannot be documented for the whole core and shell construction, this credit cannot be earned. In addition, as tenant fit-out is not part of the scope of core and shell, this waste diversion cannot count under LEED-CS. Innovation and design points are awarded for exemplary performance of MRc2, for which the threshold is 95% diversion. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5286" "2008-01-28" "New Construction, Schools - New Construction, Commercial Interiors, Core and Shell" "We are a Detention Center with materials, specifically detention furnishings, in division 11 in addition to 2-10. We are requesting permission to include these items in division 11 in addition to 2-10 and use these consistently throughout all pertinent credit calculations. This division includes a significant amount of applicable materials such as detention doors and frames, detention cells, detention furnishings, and other related items. These materials are known to have recycled and regional content. By including division 11 we would have more accurate recycled and regional content values for the project." "The project team has requested clarification regarding the inclusion of MasterSpec Division 11 materials in the calculations determining credit compliance for MRc4. Any detention materials specified under division 11 which could otherwise be specified under MasterFormat 2004 Version, Security and Detention Library divisions 2-10, can be claimed for the purpose of credit compliance. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X"