Hi LEED community, paints in Australia have a certification scheme called Australian Paint Accreditation Scheme (APAS) which tests and certifies paints, coatings and non-paint products to ensure they meet stringent performance specifications. APAS also set limits for VOCs and VOC contents are determined through one of more of the following methodologies:

1. Method 1 - supplier's calculation of raw material data
2. Method 2 - experimentally in accordance with ASTM D3960
3. Method 3 - experimentally in accordance with ASTM D6886
4. Method 4 - TVOC measurement using gas chromatography

Are paints and coatings certified by APAS recognised as LEED compliant paints and coatings under the low emitting materials credit?

Hi,

We have had EQc5 rejected for one of our projects because one of the common area kitchen spaces is failing during winter due to being too warm, and kitchen spaces require a MET of at least 1.6. However, the space temperature and humidity are slightly lower than the summer condition, which just passes. The only difference being the Clo level which is 0.95 in the winter condition.  Practically, this makes little difference in comfort, as occupants who are slightly more active, would just remove their winter jumper if they get too warm. However, being a LEED credit following the ASHRAE standard, the space doesn't technically comply.

Has anyone encountered a similar issue, and convinced their LEED assessor to accept the ASHRAE calculations, with the same Clo level for both summer and winter (the space passes when the Clo level is brought down to the 0.65 summer level)? We are confident that there will be no thermal comfort issues in the space, but uncertain if LEED assessors are flexible enough to award the credit on appeal, given the slight variation in methodology (using the same clo level for both summer and winter for this space only).

Hi all, 

I'm wondering if anyone has documented this credit for an existing campus CEP. The current cycles need to increased to achieve the minimum cycles of concentration. It is expected that the client will be happy to increase the cooling tower cycles, as they have previously noted that the cooling towers are using more water than they would like.

However, does anyone know what sort of documentation will be needed to demostrate this? Would a letter signed by the client that they will increase the cooling tower cycles be sufficient, or would another cooling tower water test be required to demostrate that they are achieving the maximum number of cycles (7.2 cycles; current cooling tower water test calculates the cycles to be 5.7).

Hi,

We are working on a project outside of the US, and our Civil Engineer has developed their plan in accordance with IECA (International Erosion Control Association) standards. I am trying to understand the differences between the US EPA CGP and IECA, and figure I would reach out, in case anyone has looked at both standards recently, and can provide a little insight, or direction on where to focus my narrative.

Hi all,

Has anyone used manual blinds as their thermal comfort control (radiant temperature) for multi-occupant spaces? I don't expect it to be an issue, as putting down blinds would definitely change the radiant temperature to the space. But I would like to know if anyone has done it previously successfully, or had it rejected by the USGBC for some reason?

Good morning,

We are working on a LEED project in Australia, and Commercial Washing Machines are part of the project. It seems the CEE rating that is outlined in the v4 requirements is not longer existant, and we were looking to achieve the v4.1 Energy Star eqivalent performance.

Does anyone have experience with both American Energy Star certification, and an Australian Energy Star/WELS rating, and understand how they compare in performance? We have reached out to Energy Star in the USA to understand how the MEF and WF are calulated, but if someone is already aware of what Australian Energy Star rating is equivalent to Energy Star certification in the US, that would be excellent! 

As an interior fitout in a multi-tenant building, I've always assumed it's reasonable under LEED to pro-rata the number of whole building long-term bicycle parks and showers based on fitout floor area versus total building floor area. Please let me know if that's not acceptable, but that's not my main question!

My main question is: does short-term bicycle storage need to be pro-rated in the same way?

To ask the question in our particular context - our fitout is 1,766m² in a 43,000m² building. Under this credit, our project needs two short-term bicycle parks. There are two hoops outside the building, i.e. four bicycle parks. Would this be adequate, or do we need to ensure there's enough short-term parking to serve the whole building - therefore (theoretically) ensuring there's parks available when visitors to our project need them? And if so, how could we go about determining the number of peak visitors for the overall building?

Hi, my project is in Australia and as ENERGY STAR is not used here to rate electrical appliances there are some appliances that have been chosen that are high performing according to our star rating system but do not have the ENERGY STAR rating. Can I show equivalence by their performance?

I have a v4 project which is looking at substituting in the v4.1 version of EAc4 Renwable Energy Production.

EAc4 v4.1 has 6 points available, more than the 5 points available for EAc4 and EAc6 v4 which it replaces.

v4.1 deals with this by reducing the number of points available for EAc2 Optimize Energy Performance from 25 to 24.

If we want to stick with the v4 version of EAc2 though, how do we ensure the category's total number of points available is still 38? Should EAc2 drop down to 24 points available even though it's not being substituted; or should EAc4 be reduced to 4 points available?

Thanks in advance!

Is LEED O+M applicable to commercial interiors?