Green Building Challenge Policy Requires Fixes
Reader's note: This is my last post on the LEED certification challenge. Thanks for staying with me.
I thought I would end my discussion of the Northland Pines High School LEED certification challenge with some constructive suggestions. The LEED challenge issue is not going away anytime soon and clearly requires some fixes.
1. Appeals of LEED certification challenges most go to an independent body. It is not appropriate for the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) or the Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI) to review and decide LEED certification challenges when these two parties are responsible for deciding certification initially. There may also be constitutional authority issues if a party is forced to challenge a federal project's LEED certification to the USGBC/GBCI.
2. The LEED Policy Manual absolutely must be incorporated into the LEED reference manuals. This is a no-brainer.
3. Energy modeling is fuzzy math. LEED certification for new construction must be tied to actual energy usage as quickly as possible. I realize it takes years to change the LEED rating system, but the next version that comes out should include a re-certification requirement based on actual energy use.
4. Standing and timeliness requirements must be created for the LEED challenge process. Otherwise, the USGBC/GBCI will be overwhelmed with challenges.
5. Most importantly, if you are a contractor, architect or engineer, you absolutely must consider the implications and liabilities created by the LEED certification challenge process. If you guarantee some level of certification, you may be responsible if a subsequent LEED challenge proves successful. Will you be responsible to defend against the challenge?
2. The LEED Policy Manual absolutely must be incorporated into the LEED reference manuals. This is a no-brainer.
3. Energy modeling is fuzzy math. LEED certification for new construction must be tied to actual energy usage as quickly as possible. I realize it takes years to change the LEED rating system, but the next version that comes out should include a re-certification requirement based on actual energy use.
4. Standing and timeliness requirements must be created for the LEED challenge process. Otherwise, the USGBC/GBCI will be overwhelmed with challenges.
5. Most importantly, if you are a contractor, architect or engineer, you absolutely must consider the implications and liabilities created by the LEED certification challenge process. If you guarantee some level of certification, you may be responsible if a subsequent LEED challenge proves successful. Will you be responsible to defend against the challenge?
Do you have any more thoughts on the LEED challenge process? How do we fix it?
Interesting thoughts. I would suggest they also need a more fleshed out hearing process, rules, information exchange, et c. if they want to keep the mantle of transparency. There should also be a way to sort through and rapidly dismiss bogus challenges a la summary judgment.
The standing one is the biggest, plus people needing to factor in time and expense associated with the challenges.
I am an engineer/attorney and I have to agree that USGBC needs allow documents to be revised.
Once a building is constructed, LEED ratings should be based on as-built drawings and specifications rather than the design documents.
I agree John. The goal should ultimately be the end product design and performance meeting specified criteria.
That being said, it should not take a challenge to flush out significant problems. The counter argument is that the all or nothing approach would force applicants to take the submission process more seriously and not require a challenge safety net on the back end to force compliance.
Me, I lean towards the practical finish line approach still. There are way too many things that can go modestly wrong with design and construction to not permit some level of available clean up and tweaking, especially when the problems are not caught during initial reviews so that no one is aware.
Hi Chris --
Thanks for the covering this important topic.
I'm only for decertification if a building doesn't recertify after 5 years.
The energy consumption strategy for the LEED design standards (everything but EB) won't work in the market. It takes 2 yrs. for a building to shake out in terms of performance and getting your plaque won't interest the market.
Cheers,
R
Finally had a chance to reply here on the challenge deal ...
Challenges to LEED Certifications: Standing, Procedure, Wiggle Room and Money http://ht.ly/22J2r