Hi,

i got the follwoing comment from the review team on SSc3, and this is the first time i got this comment. Maybe, anyone can help me, what exactly they want me to do.
"Documentation has not been provided regarding erosion and sedimentation control practices implemented during the performance
period. Provide a log or other documentation, such as a narrative, confirming that environmentally preferred erosion and sedimentation
control practices were implemented 100% of the time during the performance period. This should include any construction erosion and
sedimentation control and ongoing erosion and sedimentation control that occurred at the project site, including erosion and
sedimentation control activities for buildings with little or no landscaping (e.g., cleaning out storm drains, maintaining sidewalks,
removing debris, etc.) as well as activities for potential construction projects."

We didn't have any actions regarding erosion and sedimentation during the performance period.

Thanky you very much and kind regards

Hi, an occupant in our project building (office) insists on indoor smoking.
He agreed to installing a cabin in his kitchenette (they already smoke there). The cabin is able to comply with LEED requirements (deck-to-deck-partition, 5Pa negative pressure). Additionaly the cabin filters the air through 3 filters:
1. F7
2.HEPA-filter H14 which filters particles down to 0.01µm
3. adsorption filter (activated carbon) removing smells and hazardous gases.
It has been shown that the exhaust air contains less VOCs and hazardous substances from tabaco smoke than required by WHO for indoor air.

Are we allowed to exhaust this thoroughly cleaned air to the outside within the 25ft?
Thank you.

Hello,
our project is located directly along a public sidewalk. There are several retail tenants in the project. The building owner doesn’t want to force the tenants to prohibit smoking beyond the property line while prohibiting smoking inside the building is required by law and must also be designated at the entrances. The building owner fears that prohibiting smoking even on the public sidewalk would be a reason for interested tenants to decide against renting the space in the project.
So the question is which verifications the building owner has to provide exactly to show that the LEED requirements for IEQp2 C&S are fulfilled?
Thank’s for your answer.
Ulrike

We have a MR V3.0 project that uses district cooling.
First I thought this was great, as no refrigerants are used in the building.
Now the district energy guidelines say, that we have to provide all the data, even for the upstream equipment, and show that it meets the credits requirements.
Problem is, that the district cooling provider is in no way obliged to lay open his books and give the client somewhat sensitive data about his cooling production. So it is very hard, if not impossible, to get the necessary data for this credit.
I really had to laugh when I read that for Enhanced Commissioning, the upstream equipment has to be commissioned...really? We have absolutely no claim to get access to the production plant.
The district cooling contract just says you buy cold water and give back slightly warmer water in return.
Or am I misinterpreting things?

Dear LEED community,
we are working on a project in Berlin, Germany. The existing building is a logistics center consisting of a logistics and warehousing facility made up of 3 units (48,355 sf high-storage racks and packaging stations + 5,853 sf refrigerated) and an additional building with social rooms and administration offices (5,842,5 sf). Our client uses the warehouse for storing medical products and compiling these products for clinical trials.

The office building is mostly naturally ventilated (except for the WCs, showers and server room, which are not regularly occupied), and naturally conditioned (no cooling). All regularly occupied spaces within the office building comply with ASHRAE 62,1, section 5.1.
The warehouse is naturally ventilated and mechanically conditioned. As typical for warehouses, it doesn’t have windows or openings except for the smoke outlets in the roof and therefore doesn’t meet the ventilation rates required by ASHRAE 62.1.

Our question: Are warehouses excempt from the ventilation requirements?

Any suggestions how we should deal with this? Should we provide detailed analysis documenting the constraints and explaining that due to the function, the base building systems cannot be upgraded?

Thanks a lot in advance

Do you know if there is alternative path to achieve EQ Credit 9 outside the US? I'm working with a Project in Germany and we have a probem with Sound Transmission. German Standards does not use STC Rating, all Values of Sound Isolation are in dB. Is there any way to convert those dB Values into STC? I know that most of the German Standards are more strict than US Standards, that's why I believe we would be able to achieve this Credit, just I don't know hot to prove it to USGBC. I will be very grateful for any helpful answer!

Hello,
We are working on a LEED NC 2009 project with DES which the thermal plants consist except boilers and electric chillers also a cogenerator and an absorption chiller.
We are thinking to follow Option 2 of DES v2 guidance and have 2 questions as follows:
1. For the average efficiency calculation, should we deal with the CHP and absorption chiller separately and to model a virtual CHP and an absorption chiller in proposed case or to involve the CHP in the total heating system and the absorption chiller in the cooling system and apply the efficiencies separately to the air-cooled chiller and forced draft boiler in virtual DES model in proposed case?
2. In the DES v2 guidance Appendix E: Heating converted to cooling as part of the LEED project there was written:
‘‘Generally, district or campus systems that produce heating energy (steam or hot water, whether directly or as waste heat) serve heating end use applications in the connected buildings. Sometimes the heating energy supply is converted to chilled water using absorption chillers or other similar technologies in order to serve cooling loads instead. In this circumstance the equipment that converts heating to cooling may reside either within the DES itself (i.e., DES provides cooling to building) or within the connected buildings (i.e., DES provides heating to building; building converts heating to cooling).
When the equipment converting DES-supplied heat into cooling is part of the LEED project’s scope of work, then the DES guidance in this document must be modified for the EAp2/c1 energy modeling path. The modifications for this situation are as follows; guidance for all other LEED credits remains unchanged:’’
The question refers to the first sentence in the second paragraph: We treat the absorption chiller as upstream equipment outside the project’s boundary. Does that mean ‘‘part of the LEED project’s scope of work’’?

Thank you very much!

certified projects are still displayed and accessible at the new LEED Online?

I am working on a school project and actualy calculating WEp1. I am wondering that the default fixture use for a school indicate no daly uses for a shower for students. Also the LEEDonline form do not consider the showers for students. My question is, is that correct?

We are not attempting Credit SSc4.2. The showers are installd in the sports hall and will be used only by students.

Thanks
Markus

The project is a restaurant within a high rise office building. My question is: What is the correct gross square feet per FTE OR EMPLOYEE. CS appendix provides Table 1: default occupancy numbers and here the employees for restaurant are calculated with 435 gross square feet. But the sample calculation Table2 shows less gross square feet: restaurant FTE count per 225 sf.