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" "1640" "2006-12-06" "New Construction" "The ASHRAE 62.1-2004 User\'s Guide includes an Excel calculation tool (ASHRAE Tool) which calculates system ventilation efficiency (Ev) and zone ventilation efficiency (Evz). Please advise whether use of the ASHRAE 62.1 User Manual Calculation Tool can be used to document compliance with this LEED credit. The ASHRAE Tool includes inputs for zone air distribution effectiveness (Ez) which is considered equivalent to air change effectiveness (ACE) as noted in EQc2 CIR ruling dated 07/20/2004. The ASHRAE Tool also includes inputs for Space Type, Floor Area of Zone, Design Population of Zone, and Design Discharge Airflow to Zone. The ASHRAE Tool seems to be an alternative method which can be used to determine compliance with this LEED credit. The ASHRAE Tool calculations also seems to be more current and accurate than the allowed LEED option as described in EQc2 CIR ruling dated 07/19/2004 which determines ADPI using an ASHRAE Handbook, and selects Ez from a table in Standard 62.1-2001, Addendum N. We propose the following calculation alternative which is based on the CIR ruling dated 07/19/2004 but has been adjusted if the ASHRAE Tool is used to document compliance with this LEED credit. LEED-NC v2.2 basis credit compliance on system ventilation efficiency (Ev). This method is similar but it identifies Evz values for each zone in both heating and cooling modes which are both required by the CIR ruling dated 07/19/2004. Zone__ADPI__Ez Heat__Ez Cool__Evz Heat__Evz Cool__Evz Min 1 2 n TABLE NOTES: (a) ADPI: Not required if using the ASHRAE 62.1-2004 User\'s Guide Excel Calculation Tool. (b) Ez Heat / Ez Cool: Based on ASHRAE 62-2004, Table 6.2, Zone Air Distribution Effectiveness. Ez Heat equals Ez in Heating Mode. Ez Cool equals Ez in Cooling Mode. (c) Evz Heat / Evz Cool: Based on results calculated by the ASHRAE 62.1-2004 User\'s Guide Excel Calculation Tool using Ez values. Evz Heat equals Evz in Heating Mode. Evz Cool equals Evz in Cooling Mode. (d) Evz Min: Minimum Evz value for heating and cooling modes. Must be greater than 0.90 to meet the requirements of this credit for each zone. We realize that the LEED-NC v2.2 rules can be used document this credit, but the restrictions imposed by the USGBC in using v2.2 rules to document this credit force it to also comply with v2.2 requirements for EQ Credit 1. The v2.2 rules are also based on increasing the minimum amount of fresh air by 30%, and not on achieving a minimum Evz 0.90." "CIR ruling dated 6/8/05 allows for the use of ASHRAE 62-2004 in lieu of ASHRAE 62-1999. If ASHRAE 62-2004 is applied, it must be applied consistently throughout a project in all associated prerequisites and credits referencing ASHRAE 62. Note that ADPI calculations are still required regardless of which version of ASHRAE Standard 62 is used, so Note (a) in the table above is incorrect. Applicable Internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "502" "2003-03-11" "New Construction" "Our project is an Environmental Studies Building on a community college campus in California. The building is two stories and roughly 22,000 square feet. It is divided into two wings - one of which is mechanically ventilated with an underfloor system and one of which is naturally ventilated. The naturally ventilated wing is roughly 9,000 square feet and includes some classroom space, tech support areas for the classrooms, and open study and lounge space. We do not have any questions about how this credit applies to the ""mechanically ventilated"" wing. For the Naturally Ventilated spaces, we would like to know what methods we can use to show compliance with the requirements for this credit. We have heard some reference that a simulation run is not the only acceptable path to validation/documentation, one alternative being a detailed airflow diagram and accompanying narrative and related cutsheets based on established principals of natural ventilation. However all of the official language in LEED Version 2.0 and 2.1 appears to point to a ""simulation"" requirement. We believe that the credit\'\'s intent to ""provide for the effective delivery and mixing of fresh air to support the health, safety, and comfort of building occupants"" can be met without a ""simulation"" run being undertaken but would like confirmation as to whether or not this is the case. If a simulation is required, it will add significant cost to the project. The question is: What of the following (alone or in combination) will the USGBC accept as validation that the project meets the credit intent (the following has been listed in increasing order of effort/cost). 1) Conformance with Title-24 requirements for a naturally ventilated space - Section 121(b)1 The code reads: ""Natural outdoor ventilation may be provided for spaces where all areas of the space are within 20 feet of an operable wall or roof opening through which outdoor air can flow. The sum of the areas of the openings must total at least 5 percent of the floor area of each space that is naturally ventilated. The openings must also be readily accessible to the occupants of the space at all times. Air flow through the openings must come directly from the outdoors; air may not flow through any intermediate spaces such as other occupied spaces, unconditioned spaces, corridors, or atriums. High windows or operable skylights should be accessible from the floor."" 2) Airflow diagram(s) based on established principals of natural ventilation 3) Narrative based on established principals of natural ventilation 4) A single-node based simulation using our own internal software that would then provide air change rates for the space (but not air diffusion effectiveness). 5) A multi-nodal cfd based simulation 6) Some other method not listed above We appreciate your clarification on this topic." "The California Title 24 requirements for naturally ventilated spaces (very similar to ASHRAE 62 requirements for naturally ventilated spaces) are appropriate for documenting compliance of a naturally ventilated building with EQ prerequisite 1, but not for documenting achievement of EQ credit 2. The best way to demonstrate ventilation effectiveness in a naturally ventilated building is to develop a multinodal model of airflow. However, a convincing narrative using demonstrated natural ventilation principles, and including diagrams accurately representing the spaces in question, and supporting calculations based on space characteristics could be used to demonstrate achievement of this credit. Such a narrative would need to be well crafted, clear, and convincing. A single node model could be used to support this evaluation, but by itself would not be adequate to demonstrate achievement. Applicable Internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5518" "2005-05-13" "New Construction" "Credit intent is to provide for effective delivery and mixing of fresh air to support safety, comfort and well-being of building occupants. This project is a small (9000+ SF) school for the deaf with a small student body and a low student to teacher ratio. The school is located on an island and a considerable distance from traffic, manufacturing facilities and other sources of outdoor air pollution. Ventilation effectivenes has been accomplished with the use of Halton dispersion diffusers (displacement ventilation) mounted low to the floor. Ventilation air is introduced at the breathing level rather than discharging at the ceiling. Return air is taken at the ceiling on the opposite side of the room from the diffuser in order to promote effective cross ventilation. According to the mechanical engineer: ""Airflow calculations for ventilation effectiveness with displacement diffusers are difficult as design coefficients vary with each diffuser and space conditions. However Mr. Andrew Livchak of Halton Industries states, ""Interpretation IC 62-2001-31 to the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62-2001 recognizes that ventilation effectiveness of DV systems can be greater than i (maximum value for mixing ventilation systems)"". This is also stated in ASHRAE 129-1997, Appendix B."" During occupied non-cooling periods ventilation is 100% outside air at a rate of not less than 20 cfm per occupant. Although this approach results in fewer air changes per hour it assures the introduction of pure clean air at the breathing level while eliminating the mixing of return air and fresh air and reduces fan power. During occupied cooling periods the central air handling units increases speed to provide the amount of air required for air conditioning while maintaining an outdoor ventilation rate of not less than 20 cfm per occupant. Does this strategy in this project meet the intent of this credit?" "Your strategy meets the intent of the credit. In your documentation, demonstrate that the system was designed consistent with the guidelines in ASHRAE 62-2001 to support the declaration that your project achieves the higher ventilation effectiveness possible with displacement systems. Note that displacement systems in the heating mode will have an air change effectiveness of approximately 0.7 per ASHRAE 62.1. As a result, a separate heating system such as radiant heat or baseboard heat is likely required to meet the requirements of the credit. Applicable Internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5738" "2004-07-19" "New Construction" "Our project is a science and classroom building of approximately 115,000 sq. ft. on a state university campus. For mechanically ventilated spaces, we understand that there are two possible compliance methods. We have questions about both methods. Using the first compliance method outlined in the May 2003, Version 2.1 Reference Guide, page 253, we understand that we can meet the requirements of this credit by demonstrating that the ventilation systems in the building will provide an air change effectiveness greater than or equal to 0.9 as determined by ASHRAE 129-1997. However, ASHRAE 129-1997 is primarily a laboratory test standard, and it ""places strict limitations on the characteristics of spaces that can be tested with this method"" in field tests (see the last paragraph in the Forward on page 1 of ASHRAE 129-1997). In fact, the limitations outlined in Article 4.3 on page 2 of ASHRAE 129-1997 are virtually impossible to achieve in field test conditions. Therefore, we do not understand how this standard is to be applied in meeting the intent of this credit. Using the second compliance method outlined in the May 2003, Version 2.1 Reference Guide, page 253, we understand that we can meet the requirements of this credit by complying with the recommended design approaches in ASHRAE 2001 Fundamentals Handbook Chapter 32. According to the Reference Guide, required documentation includes our certification that the design complies with these ASHRAE recommendations, as well as providing a ""table summarizing the air change effectiveness achieved for each zone (must be 0.9 or greater)."" Upon examination of the Letter Template, the declaration for this compliance approach does not appear to require a table summarizing air change effectiveness, but it does appear to require that ""ADPI calculations be completed for each major space."" We are not clear on the level of performance required to meet the intent of this credit. In the context of the compliance method where ASHRAE 2001 Fundamentals Handbook recommendations are to be followed, there is no method in Chapter 32 for quantifying ""air change effectiveness."" With respect to ADPI calculations, ASHRAE recommends that ADPI be maximized for each zone, but there is no reference to a minimum ADPI performance threshold (ADPI is a number between 0 and 100) in either the ASHRAE Handbook or the LEED Reference Guide. Also, ADPI values for perforated and louvered ceiling diffusers (the most commonly applied products) are not documented above room loads of 51 BTU/hr/ft2. As our building is a teaching lab, some spaces have loads that exceed this value. Please clarify how ASHRAE 129-1997 or ADPI are to be used to meet the intent of this credit, whether there is a minimum ADPI that must be achieved in each zone including rooms with loads in excess of 51 BTU/hr/ ft2, and what documentation of ADPI and/or air change effectiveness must be provided with the Letter Template declaration. Thank you. " "The submittal requirements and v2.1 Letter Template are in need of clarification. A table intended for the EQc2 Letter Template was in fact erroneously omitted, thus causing this confusion. Note that the credit requirements specify ""ventilation systems that result in an air change effectiveness greater than or equal to 0.9"" The first compliance path for this credit is a performance path. The system is designed and then tested using ASHRAE Standard 129-1997 to demonstrate that the air change effectiveness (ACE) is greater than or equal to 0.9. The test may be a field test of the actual diffuser installation or may utilize laboratory tests of diffusers tested under similar operating conditions. The second compliance path for this credit, and the subject of this CIR, is a design solution. ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals Chapter 32 may be used to document proper positioning and design of diffusers as described in the LEED v2.0 and v2.1 Reference Guides to achieve good air distribution. Diffusers must be located and selected to achieve an estimated Air Diffusion Performance Index (ADPI) of 80% or greater as described in Chapter 32, Table 4, ADPI Selection Guide, under all expected occupied operating conditions. The v2.1 submittal requirements and Letter Template are, as you point out, in need of clarification. A table intended for the EQc2 Letter Template was in fact erroneously omitted, thus causing this confusion. The estimated ADPI from Chapter 32, or ADPI measured according to ASHRAE Standard 113, can not be used in lieu of Air Change Effectiveness (ACE) for determining compliance with this credit. However, provided the HVAC design has been developed according to Chapter 32, Table 4, ADPI Selection Guide, for an estimated ADPI of at least 80%, one may use the Zone Air Distribution Effectiveness, Ez, in ASHRAE Standard 62-2001, Addendum n, Table 6.2, to identify the ACE for each zone. This table prescribes the Zone Air Distribution Effectiveness values for various HVAC air distribution designs. To apply the values in the table correctly, requires consideration of both heating and cooling occupied modes for each zone. Separately analyze each unique space design. Projects must document designed performance in a table showing, for each zone, estimated ADPI of 80% or greater as well as an average ACE of 0.9 or greater for the occupied hours under worst case ACE conditions (e.g. the design day where the greatest number of occupied hours are projected for the ventilation mode with the lowest ACE, e.g. typically the design day with the greatest number of occupied hours with heating). For example, the documentation table will show: Zone___ADPI*___ACE, Heating**___ACE, Cooling**___ACE, Average *** 1 2 n * Based on ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals Chapter 32, Table 4, ôADPI Selection Guideö ** Based on ASHRAE 62-2001, Addendum n, Table 6.2. ôZone Air Distribution Effectivenessö. *** Time averaged ACE based on above ACE heating and cooling values, and ASHRAE 62-2001, Addendum n, Equation 6-9, for calculating the average ACE during the occupied hours. Calculation to be made using the worst case conditions representing the design day where the greatest number of occupied hours are projected for the ventilation mode with the lowest ACE. Software created by diffuser manufacturers or other credible sources may be used to calculate estimated ADPI as long as the LEED application narrative for this credit identifies the program by name and company. Any space with heating capability, such as a heating coil, serving a space with exterior walls or roof will typically operate in a heating mode at some point when the space is occupied. These spaces must document ACE under heating mode. Spaces without this type of heating condition can document ACE under cooling mode only. For designs with heating capability, where heating is designed to only occur during unoccupied hours (e.g. morning warm up), ACE may be documented under cooling mode only, provided submittal documentation demonstrates that heating does not occur during occupied hours,. For designs with heating capability, where both heating and cooling are expected to occur during occupied hours, one may use ASHRAE 62-2001, Appendix n Section 6.2.5.2, ôShort Term Conditionsö, Equation 6-9, to determine the average conditions over a defined time period, T, where T equals 3 times the room volume (ft3) divided by the breathing zone outdoor air flowrate (cfm) calculated in Equation 6-1. FOR EXAMPLE: In a 1000 ft2 office space with 5 occupants and 13 ft ceilings, including return air space above the suspended ceiling, Equation 6-1 requires 85 cfm per 1000 ft2. From Equation 6-9, T equals 3 times 13,000 ft3 divided by 85 cfm, or 459 minutes or 7.64 hours. This is the maximum time allowed for averaging. If the morning warm up continues for the first two hours of a 10 hour occupied period (e.g. 8AM to 6PM), followed by 8 hours of cooling, then the average ACE is calculated as follows for ceiling diffusers with a Zone Air Distribution Effectiveness of 1.0 in cooling mode and 0.8 in heating mode (i.e. supply air greater than 15 oF warmer than space and ceiling return air temperature) : For the first 7.64 hours (i.e. the maximum averaging period, T, as determined by Equation 6-9 above) the average ACE is calculated as (2 hours times 0.8 + 5.64 hours times 1.0) divided by 7.64 hours, for an average ACE of 0.95. This average is then averaged with the remaining 2.36 hours of cooling only, which has an ACE of 1.0 as follows: (7.64 hours times 0.95 + 2.36 hours times 1.0) divide by 10 hours, for an average ACE for the 10 hour occupied period of 0.96. The submitted table would provide this information, for example: Zone: 1 ADPI: 0.80 ACE, Heating: 0.80 ** ACE, Cooling: 1.0 ** ACE, Average: 0.96 *** Regarding how to proceed with a design using perforated and louvered ceiling diffusers in a laboratory with room loads in excess of 50 BTU/hr-ft2, we acknowledge that there are no data for these higher room loads in Chapter 32 Table 4, or to our knowledge in any diffuser manufacturer calculation programs. There are other diffuser types that provide estimated ADPI values for room loads as high as 80 BTU/hr-ft2. Also, since as room cooling loads increase, the mixing of the indoor air increases (e.g. results in ACE values closer to unity). For applications with room cooling loads greater than those listed in ASHRAE Chapter 32, Table 4, we recommend use of the estimated ADPI and the T50/L range for the highest room load listed for that diffuser type. For designs utilizing different types of diffusers, air distribution configurations, or T50/Ls not described in ASHRAE Chapter 32 or Standard 62 tables, the only options for this credit are to conduct measurements of ACE (ASHRAE 129) or ADPI (ASHRAE Standard 113) either in the field or in a laboratory simulation. Also, for application of ASHRAE 129 in the field for this credit, we note that the requirements in Section 4, ""Criteria for Acceptable Test Space"", are not required, provided the space is operated under normal design conditions. Applicable internationally. " "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "5872" "2004-07-20" "New Construction" "The LEED 2.0 Reference Guide states, ""Underfloor HVAC systems are assumed to have an air change effectiveness greater than 0.9 and do not require testing."" This statement is not in the 2.1 Reference Guide. Can we assume that because underfloor systems do have an air change effectiveness greater than 0.9 that we do not have to provide any testing when submitting under LEED 2.1? Please clarify." "No testing is required for this credit if the design path is chosen. Please refer to the EQc2 ruling dated 7/19/04 for a thorough description of the design path and submittals for achieving this point, including how to deal with heating conditions and high cooling loads. Underfloor air distribution (UFAD) systems are somewhat simpler to document for EQc2 than other systems. Since ASHRAE Chapter 32, Table 4 does not include recommendations for underfloor systems, use the manufacturers\' recommendations for proper selection and spacing of the diffusers and then use ASHRAE 62-2001, Appendix N, Table 6.2, to select a zone air distribution effectiveness. Note that zone air distribution effectiveness is equivalent to ASHRAE 129 air change effectiveness (ACE). Per Table 6.2, underfloor systems in the cooling mode have an ACE greater than 0.9. However, not all underfloor system designs will achieve a sufficiently high ACE in the heating mode. For instance, UFADs that heat from the floor (e.g. through grilles along the building perimeter) have an ACE of 0.8 per the ASHRAE table. These systems may not qualify for this credit. Per EQc2 ruling dated 7/19/04, the ACE in each space in both heating and cooling mode must be documented and the average ACE must be shown to exceed 0.9. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "6146" "1999-05-14" "New Construction" "How is natural ventilation defined in the Credit for Natural Ventilation? When building in a cold climate, could it include a geo-thermal pump?" "The intent of the credit is to reward approaches that do not require mechanical energy to provide comfort. In a cold climate the credit could captured with a combination of passive solar heating and ventilation cooling. A diagram showing the solar savings fraction would part of the documentation indicating compliance. Geothermal heating, using heat from natural steam vents or hot water springs, would be best applied for under Energy Credit 4, Renewable energy. Ground coupled heat pumps would contribute to energy efficiency and would help capture Energy Efficiency Credit 1. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "6171" "1999-04-12" "New Construction" "It is difficult (if not impossible) to meet the comfort levels required by ASHRAE 55-1992 with natural ventilation. In our climate, having natural ventilation provide comfort four months a year is equivelant to other locations doing it eight or more months a year. We are using a dessicant system to dehumidify. Can we get credit equivelance?" "The intent of this credit is to reward and recognize passive comfort control design. In other words, provide comfort through site and building design, not mechanical/electrical systems. Energy savings from the desiccant system can be captured under the Energy Efficiency Credit. This credit title is under discussion, and will probably be re-worded to match the intent during the next revision of LEEDTM. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "6183" "1999-09-29" "New Construction" " Question: Regarding the passive energy CREDIT, what is considered passive energy - no mechanical equipment at all, OR can you included low power fans and pumps as part of a passive design? The reason I ask is that if pumps are not considered passive, then a solar hot water collection system with a small circulating pump is not passive. Also, in order to make the 8 months of passive energy goal on the heating side in a climate like the Pacific Northwest, how do you keep your space temperatures up to an acceptable comfort level in October, March, April and May when you are required to bring in 20 cfm of fresh air per person? If fans were to be considered passive, I could use a heat recover ventilator to temper this air and I\'d be home free. " "The credit was envisioned for a commercial project where internal loads would be high enough to allow some shoulder season ""free heating"" from equipment. This credit has proved difficult for even the most advanced designs, and is being re-written to allow more participation. Stay tuned for version 2.0." "None" "None" "LEED Interpretation" "6184" "1999-09-29" "New Construction" "I propose that the ""Credit for Natural Ventilation, Heating and Cooling"" be separated into 1. Natural Ventilation (1 CREDIT) , 2. Passive energy design to accomplish all heating and cooling requirements for 8 months of the year (2 CREDITS) Rationale: A) If a design uses natural ventilation for the majority of the year but because of the climate, cannot make the 8 months of passive energy goal, the design should still be entitled to one credit for using less energy than a conventional system would use. B)The passive energy target for 8 months of the year is an extremely difficult target to achieve, particularly on the heating side in cool, and even mild climates. Therefore, I believe that this measure should be worth at least 2 CREDITS. " "This credit is being rewritten to address the difficulty you describe, and will become part of verison 2.0. For the duration of the pilot however, the credit stands as written so all projects are scoring against the same set of rules." "None" "None" "LEED Interpretation" "6185" "1999-10-08" "New Construction" "Does your 4 months of the year goal assume 24 hours of continual heating for 4 months? We do not plan to have the heating turned on during the day in one building that consistently has no use during the day. Can we use the equivalent amount of time of this goal and have no heat during the days for 12 months, and heat during the night for 6 months and still achieve this credit?" "If you can show that the building is in active mode for 1/3 of the total operation hours per year, and in passive mode for 2/3 of the operation hours per year, the project could qualify for this project. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "6186" "1999-08-25" "New Construction" "We are giving our best shot to utilize natural ventilation, heating and cooling for the 8 month target identified in the program, but finding it quite difficult in the shoulder seasons. For the four months with the switch on: Is this an equivelent amount of time during the year when no energy is being consumed? For example, the switch on for no more then about 2800 hours during the year, which is about 4 months of time, but the switch is turned on and off over the year, Does it need to be consecutive?" "The intent of this credit is to limit the use of mechanical conditioning to a fraction a conventional building\'s use. The limited 2/3 of a year for passive operation was envisioned to be contigous months correlating to the seasons. Should you wish to claim credit equivalence for limited non-contiguous hours of operation, the committee feels these would need to be supply the following inforamtion: 1) Proof that the project is naturally ventilated for the maximum amount of time possible for its region and function. 2) Provide more information on the type of building and the hours of operation. It is recommended that you turn in a credit equivalence application with these two issues addressed. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "6187" "1999-08-25" "New Construction" "We are looking into the possibility of using total natural ventilation and cooling on our project for 12 months of the year. There appears to be no available additional points if we were to achieve this goal, could we get a bonus point? Also, if we needed to use a PV powered ventilation fan, would we still qualify as naturally ventillated?" "The intent of this credit is to reward and recognize passive comfort control design. As several other credits have additional points for exemplery performance, the committee would recognize a demonstrated level of 12 months natural HVAC with an innovation credit. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "6229" "1999-07-27" "New Construction" "We are heating and cooling about 50% of the building via natural ventilation 100% of the time - the other half of the building is 100% HVAC. This won\'t equal 100% of the building for 67% time - but in future might there be a way to balance this out?" "The intent of this credit is to reward and recognize passive comfort control design. In other words, provide comfort through site and building design, not mechanical/electrical systems. Your calculation does not equate to the desired passive conditioning for two thirds of the year, so the project does not earn the credit. As written this is a difficult criterion to capture and the Committee will be reviewing it closely during the Pilot Program. Applicable internationally." "None" "None" "X" "LEED Interpretation" "948" "2005-02-07" "New Construction" "The credit intent is to, Provide for the effective delivery and mixing of fresh air to support the safety, comfort and well-being of the occupants. We will demonstrate our compliance through the second compliance by submitting a detailed narrative illustrating the design approaches that were used per the ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook 2001, Chapter 32: Space Air Diffusion, as described in the edition of the Reference Guide (May 2003 edition). We understand from the Reference Guide that in the case of an audit we must provide scale airflow pattern diagrams, among other data, on all major room types. We would like verification of our interpretation of the major room types of our project and our approach to meeting the credit intent. Our major room types are defined on the basis of room size, shape, extent of mechanical recirculation, the location of heat generating objects, and air motion. We have determined that 5 room types can represent the majority of the regularly occupied rooms at the health center. 1) 100 ft2, 4 ACH 2) 100 ft2, 12 ACH 3) 170 ft2, 4 ACH 4) 170 ft2, 9 ACH 5) 400 ft2, 4 ACH All room types above have 1 diffuser in the center of the room, except for room type 5, which has 2 diffusers Assumptions: - tests will be completed in cooling mode because we do not have air-based in-room heating - radiant panels located at the perimeter walls and will negate exterior wall effects - furnishings are neglected because they are minimal in offices and patient rooms and based on literature, will not contribute significantly to our ADPI calculations Hospital rooms, such as operating rooms, requiring specialized ventilation systems are excluded from our testing. These systems are characterized by high air change rates and laminar flow outlets. We feel that the high air change rate is sufficient to achieve the required ventilation effectiveness. Further, this system type cannot be evaluated using ASHRAE\'s Standard 113. We have also excluded non-regularly-occupied spaces such as corridors, storage rooms etc. as defined in credits EQc8 We have also excluded non-typical rooms from the testing process because they are not major spaces. However, ADPI calculations will still be performed on these rooms as per ASHRAE Fundamentals Handbook 2001, Chapter 32: Space Air Diffusion. For each of the 5 major room types, we will provide the following, as per the May 2003 version of the Reference Guide and the : 1. the predicted ADPI as determined by mock ups in accordance with ASHRAE Standard 113; 2. scale diagrams graphically illustrating the air throw patterns and air directions in the test planes. 3. ACE _cooling calculations per the USGBC ruling dated July 19, 2004 Because of the large variety of rooms we are representing, we cannot provide section and plan drawings showing inlets, outlets, furniture and occupants, as requested. Based on preliminary tests we expect that the test results will support our predicted ADPI. We feel that we will sufficiently demonstrate that the intent of this credit has been met by: 1) following the design recommendations in ASHRAE Fundamentals, Chapter 32; 2) evaluating the ADPI and ACE for all regularly occupied spaces as per the calculation guidelines provided in that document and ASHRAE 62 2001; and, 3) supporting the ADPI calculations with measured ADPI values and scale graphic airflow illustrations at two sections each for the 5 major room types described, We propose to base the design on test results acquired during the design phase. The test results will be submitted, as described above, to demonstrate that the design meets the credit intent to provide for the effective delivery and mixing of fresh air to support the safety, comfort and well-being of building occupants. Please advise us whether this approach is acceptable." "The course of action proposed by the applicant is above and beyond what is required. Per the EQc2 ruling dated 7/19/2004, provided the HVAC design has been developed according to Chapter 32, Table 4, ADPI Selection Guide, for an estimated ADPI of at least 80%, one may use the Zone Air Distribution Effectiveness, Ez, , in ASHRAE Standard 62-2001, Addendum n, Table 6.2, to identify the ACE for each zone."" This does not require testing to establish the estimated ADPI. Measured values and graphic airflow illustrations are not needed. Since the heating is not air-based, the heating mode need not be considered if heating occurs in the zone during occupied hours. The EQc2 ruling dated 7/19/2004 provides guidance and useful examples of how to use the ACE calculation procedure once the minimum ADPI of 80% has been established; it also illustrates how to average the ACE for heating and cooling. The establishment of major room types is a reasonable way to approach the calculations. In addition to the major room types given, other regularly occupied rooms such as waiting rooms and operating rooms should be addressed. Contrary to your statement, ASHRAE Standard 113 may be used to measure ADPI of operating rooms as the scope of this test method says that the method is applicable to all types of supply outlets. Furthermore as stated in the EQc2 ruling dated 7/19/2004, the ADPI need not be measured but may be estimated from Table 4 in Chapter 32 of the ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals. Please note that higher ventilation rates do not correlate with better mixing of the ventilation air. Higher ventilation rates (ach) will reduce the air change effectiveness, because at these higher ventilation rates the residence time (age) of the air is lower, so there is less time to mix the air. " "None" "None"