ENERGY AND ATMOSPHERE
Fundamental Commissioning and Verification Pending
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
1. The commissioning documentation (Commissioning Report, Commissioning Plan) identifies Amr El Oufy as the
Commissioning Authority (CxA). However, the qualification document provided is a CV for Shawki Issa. Therefore,
the commissioning experience for the project's lead CxA has not been verified.
Clarify who served as the lead CxA for the project and provide documentation demonstrating their commissioning
experience for at least two similar projects of comparable size.
2. Functional performance test documentation has not been provided.
Provide at least one complete functional performance test for each of the applicable systems (e.g., mechanical,
electrical, and plumbing systems). If the plumbing tests within the scope are not complete, then the blank
functional test shall be provided for that system and photo evidence must be provided to show that the system
has been installed. Ensure that the FPT includes project-specific test scripts to demonstrate that the
performance test included each process in the sequence of operations and confirmed performance in all modes
of operation.
Minimum Energy Performance Pending
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 1: Whole-Building Energy Simulation, 33.2% energy cost savings, 33.2% greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions reduction per ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Appendix G.
1. Provide the following:
a. A narrative response to each Preliminary Review comment.
b. A narrative describing any additional changes made to the energy models, or any significant changes to energy
performance as a result of these changes (e.g., Baseline or Proposed energy consumption per end-use,
Baseline or Proposed cost, etc.)
c. LEED Minimum Energy Performance Calculator (MEPC) updated to address the comments below.
d. Simulation input/output summary reports for the Baseline and Proposed models updated to address the
comments below.
2. The MEPC indicates a Proposed window construction assembly of U- 0.55, SHGC- 0.40. However, the LV-D
simulation report indicates a modeled performance of U-0.25, and the provided glazing details show U-0.27
(summer) and SHGC-0.27.
Revise the modeled assembly to match the reported value or provide further justification for the modeled value.
3. It is not clear whether the window U-value of 0.27 used for the Proposed Case accounts for the impact of the
window frames on the whole assembly as required by the ASHRAE modeling protocol.
Provide information to confirm that the framed assembly U-value was used for the Proposed Case windows (such
as: showing that the whole window assembly has been tested by NFRC; verifying that LBNL Window 6
calculations have been provided for the whole assembly; or verifying that the frame effects are captured within
the energy modeling software). Alternatively, revise the model referencing ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Table A8.2.
4. It is unclear whether the lighting system for both cases has been modeled appropriately.
i. The Baseline Case LV-B report shows that Building-Area-Method has been used, and all space areas have been
modeled using an LPD of 0.9 W/sf, including the parking garage. However, parking garage are always considered
a separate building area type, and if present in the building, must be listed as a separate building area type from
the main building area type.
ii. The Space-by-Space method has been selected in the MEPC Lighting Tab, and the total reported area does
not reflect the modeled building area (139,641.6 sf as shown in the LV-B report).
iii. The Input & [Link] mentions that the Proposed Case LPD is modeled using an estimated LPD reduction
(0.54 W/sf) of 40%. However, since this building is pursuing LEED v4 ID+C rating system, it is expected that the
lighting system has been completed.
iv. Per the information provided within EQc Interior Lighting, it is unclear whether installed task lighting has been
accounted for in the interior lighting calculation.
Revise the MEPC using Building-Area-Method and update the LV-B report for both cases. Provide the lighting plan
and an LPD calculation to demonstrate that the project information has been reported accurately and
consistently throughout the submittal and reflects the as-built detail in the LEED project.
5. The floor plan provided in PI Project Information shows that the project contains perimeter spaces where
ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Section [Link] mandatory daylight controls might be applicable. However, the Minimum
Energy Performance Calculator does not indicate whether any spaces are modeled with daylight controls.
Provide additional documentation, such as a narrative and control drawings, to ensure that these mandatory
controls have been designed in the proposed building, and the mandatory lighting controls have been modeled
in the baseline case model as applicable. If these mandatory controls are not included in the actual design,
provide the documentation to show either the design is revised or the energy penalty has been accounted for in
the energy model.
6. Energy Optimization Report indicates that occupancy sensors are modeled in both the Baseline and Proposed
Case. The report indicates that the lighting schedules have been reduced by 10% for spaces with occupancy
sensors. However, Table G3.1#6 mentions that credit may be taken for automatically controlled systems by
reducing the connected lighting power by the applicable percentages listed in Table G3.2. Alternatively, credit
may be taken for these devices by modifying the lighting schedules used for the proposed design, provided that
credible technical documentation for the modifications are provided to the rating authority. Additionally, the
lighting plan showing the occupancy sensor locations has not been provided.
Provide the credible technical documentation for the reduced lighting schedule as required by Table G3.1#6, as
well as the control drawing showing the occupancy sensor. Ensure that credit is not taken where occupancy
sensors are required in accordance with Section [Link] and indicate where occupancy sensor controls are
modeled for credit (if any), verifying that this credit aligns with ASHRAE 90.1-2010 Table G3.2 and is only applied
to fixtures controlled by occupant sensors. For spaces that are required to have occupancy sensors by ASHRAE
90.1-2010 Section [Link], verify that they have been modeled appropriately in the Baseline Case. Revise the
Baseline and Proposed Case models, the form, and supporting documentation if necessary. If these mandatory
controls are not included in the actual design, provide the documentation to show either that the design is
revised or that the energy penalty has been accounted for in the energy model.
7. It is not clear whether the Proposed Case HVAC system was modeled as designed.
i. The MEPC shows that the outdoor airflow rate is modeled as 6,000 cfm, which is lower than the OA rate of
9,925 cfm indicated in EQp Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance.
ii. The SV-A report shows that all packaged single zone systems have been modeled as cooling EIR-0.25.
However, the mechanical schedule has not been provided to include the cooling efficiency of the outdoor units
and the fan power for indoor units.
iii. The supply airflow rates listed in Input & [Link] are inconsistent with the information in the HVAC drawing.
For example, the total FCU supply airflow rate (10,057 cfm) of the ground floor is lower than the total FCU airflow
rate of 17,322 cfm, as calculated using the airflow rates and quantities indicated in the HVAC drawing. This
document also does not include information for the existing FCUs.
iv. The modeled FCU tags, airflow rates, and quantities in the SV-A report are inconsistent with the FCU airflow
rate shown in the HVAC drawings.
Table G3.1.10 (b)(Proposed) requires that the model be consistent with the design documents.
Provide a complete mechanical schedule that includes a list of split air-conditioners’ outdoor and indoor units.
Ensure that the mechanical schedule includes all necessary information to verify the designed HVAC system,
such as heating and cooling capacity, indoor fan power, efficiency, and quantity. Update the model so that all
HVAC system parameters (e.g. fan volumes, fan powers, efficiencies, heating/cooling capacities, etc.) are
consistent with the design documents, update the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator to reflect all changes
made, and update the form to reflect any changes made.
8. The project is served by shared FAHUs, and it is unclear how the shared FAHUs have been allocated to this
project and if the allocation method is consistent with LEED modeling protocol.
Refer to Further Explanation, Contribution of base building HVAC and service water-heating systems section in
the LEED v4 ID+C Reference Guide for detailed guidance. Provide a description to confirm one of the two ways
listed there has been implemented to allocate the shared systems. Provide a narrative to describe the modeled
design supply airflow, design fan power, design heating capacity, design cooling capacity, and outdoor airflow.
Ensure that each FAHU is modeled as a separate air-side system and reflects the as-designed HVAC system.
9. The Baseline system type is unclear. The General HVAC Tab indicates Baseline system type is System 6-
Packaged VAV with PFP boxes, whereas System 5 is listed in the MEPC Air-side Tab. In addition, page 22 in the
Energy Optimization Report mentions the Baseline system type 8-VAV with PFP boxes, as well as water pumps
and chillers; the MEPC Water-side tab also includes water-side equipment; however, the model outputs do not
include any pump consumption. Since this building is a non-residential, five-floor, and 91,494 sf, it appears that
the Baseline system should be modeled as either System 6 or System 8.
Confirm that the Baseline system was modeled correctly or revise the system type to reflect ASHRAE modeling
protocol. Ensure that the project information in the report has been reported accurately and consistently
throughout the submittal and reflects the as-built detail in the LEED project.
10. The interior fan demand reported in the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator Performance Outputs tab of
38 kW for the Baseline Case exceeds the Baseline fan power allowance of 23.7 kW for the Baseline Case
reported in the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator Air-Side HVAC tab.
It is noted that the supply airflow rate in the MEPC Air-side Tab (22,176 cfm) is inconsistent with the rate listed in
the supplemental Input & [Link] (40,367 cfm). Confirm that the values reflected in the Air-Side HVAC tab
appropriately reflect the modeled fan power, revise the models, and verify that the fan demand reflected in the
model outputs (and reported in the Performance Outputs tab) does not exceed the fan power reported in the Air-
Side HVAC tab for the Baseline or Proposed Case. Provide the SV-A report for the Baseline Case.
11. It appears that the Minimum Energy Performance Calculator is incomplete and does not reflect the model
details.
i. Although descriptions have been provided in the simulation report regarding the proposed building roof and
exterior wall construction assembly, the MEPC Opaque Assemblies Tab is incomplete, and the LV-I reports have
not been provided to reflect the modeled values.
ii. The MEPC Shading and Fenestration Tabs show that 17.2% window area has been modeled for the Proposed
Case, which is inconsistent with the LV-D report provided in the simulation report (21.8%, identically between the
two cases).
iii. The annual cost for the Proposed Case is entered using the cost of the Baseline Case.
iv. The MEPC Air-side Tab is missing information for the Proposed Case fan powers, as well as the unitary cooling
efficiencies for both cases.
Complete the calculator and ensure that all required information has been provided and accurately reflects the
model specifications.
12. The simulation input summary reports required in the LEED form have not been provided.
Provide the following input summary reports generated directly by eQuest for both the Baseline Case (0-degree)
and the Proposed Case.
a. A sample of the wall, roof, floor, and window assembly inputs showing U-values and window SHGC, as well as
the infiltration for a few representative spaces, such as LV-D, LV-H, and LV-I report;
b. Sample lighting and plug load inputs for a few representative spaces, such as LV-B report;
c. Sample inputs at the thermal zone and system for each system type, including the cooling, heating, fans,
controls, and outside air, such as PV-A and SV-A reports.
Ensure that the model input and output reports are provided separately for the Baseline Case (0-degree) and the
Proposed Case. The documents can either be merged using software, or submitted separately in two distinct
folders based on the respective cases.
Optimize Energy Performance Pending : 19
Possible points: 25
Attempted: 19, Denied: 0, Pending: 19, Awarded: 0
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 1: Whole-Building Energy Simulation, 33.2% energy cost savings, 33.2% greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions reduction
1. EAp Minimum Energy Performance is pending clarifications.
Refer to the comments within the prerequisite and resubmit this credit.
Fundamental Refrigerant Management Awarded
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Awarded.
Enhanced Commissioning Pending : 5
Possible points: 5
Attempted: 5, Denied: 0, Pending: 5, Awarded: 0
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Path 2: Enhanced and Monitoring-Based Commissioning
1. EAp Fundamental Commissioning and Verification is pending clarifications.
Refer to the comments within the prerequisite and resubmit this credit.
2. The documentation does not indicate that monitoring-based commissioning has been fully incorporated into
the enhanced commissioning.
Provide evidence, such as submittal reviews of meters, energy analysis software, and drawings of controls for
compliance with the owner’s MBCx metering and monitoring requirements, the pre-functional and functional test
for MBCx related equipment to demonstrate compliance with the requirement. Refer to the Step-by-Step
Guidance (Steps 2, 3, and 4 for Option 1 Path 2) of the LEED v4 BD+C Reference Guide for additional information.
Advanced Energy Metering Pending : 2
Possible points: 2
Attempted: 2, Denied: 0, Pending: 2, Awarded: 0
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 2: Advanced metering
1. The submitted advanced meter cut sheets do not provide adequate information confirming that meters meet
all requirements of this credit.
Provide the data collection system description and storage capability.
Renewable Energy Production Not attempted
Possible points: 3
Enhanced Refrigerant Management Pending : 1
Possible points: 1
Attempted: 1, Denied: 0, Pending: 1, Awarded: 0
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 2: Calculation of Refrigerant Impact
1. The project is served by upstream equipment for the treated fresh air, and the calculations do not account for
the upstream refrigeration equipment.
Provide two separate LEED Form calculations; one for the district cooling plant and one for the project building to
demonstrate that each separately complies with the credit requirements. If either of the calculations are in non-
compliance, then the project team may demonstrate compliance using the weighted average refrigerant impact
for the project building as described in the Further Explanations, Calculations section of the LEED v4 ID+C
Reference Guide.
Items that do not require a response for this project, but should be considered for future projects:
1. It is noted that the refrigerant impact calculation does not appear to use the default equipment life from Table
2 of the LEED v4 ID+C Reference Guide. The alternate equipment life of ten years is shorter than the default life
years for split AC (15-year life). When recalculated, credit compliance is not affected.
Green Power and Carbon Offsets Not attempted
Possible points: 2
INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Pending
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 1: ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010
1. The total area of 55,436 square feet documented for this prerequisite varies substantially from the total gross
area of 91,494 square feet reported in LEED Online project registration details. It is not clear whether all occupied
space has been accounted for within the ventilation rate procedure calculations. Although some of the difference
can be attributed to non-occupied spaces (e.g., mechanical rooms, inactive stairwells, shafts, and gross versus
net area) and space types that are only required to meet the exhaust requirements of Table 6-4 without specific
Table 6-1 minimum ventilation rate requirements (e.g., restrooms, janitor closets), a justification for any difference
in excess of roughly 10% must be provided. All occupied spaces (which can include regularly occupied,
nonregularly occupied, and unconditioned areas) must be provided with ventilation that meets the minimum
requirements in accordance with ASHRAE 62.1-2010.
Update the Ventilation Rate Procedure calculations to include all occupied spaces and ensure that the area is
reported consistently among all credits. If the difference in area is greater than 10%, provide a detailed narrative
that describes the approximate area breakdown of the excluded spaces by space type to confirm that all
occupied spaces have been included in the calculations.
2. The project is served by shared FAHUs, whereas it is unclear whether the other areas served by the FAHUs
have been taken into account.
Refer to Further Explanation, Shared Ventilation System section in the LEED v4 ID+C Reference Guide for detailed
guidance. Provide a description to confirm one of the three ways listed in the Shared Ventilation System section
of the LEED v4 ID+C Reference Guide has been implemented to account for the other areas in the building
served by FAHUs. Ensure that each FAHU is calculated separately and reflects the as-designed HVAC system.
3. The provided HVAC plan does not include the outdoor air duct distribution, making it unclear whether the
correct ventilation system is calculated. Additionally, the VRP calculation combined multiple FCUs into one large
multi-zone recirculating system, which does not appear reasonable.
Provide the complete mechanical plan that clearly shows how the outdoor air will be introduced to the project
building. Ensure that all occupied spaces have been designed with OA that meet the minimum requirement of
ASHRAE 62.1-2010. Note that if the base building FAHU supplies OA directly into the rooms, the ventilation
systems are more appropriately classified as 100% outdoor air because the FAHU supply only outdoor air to one
or more ventilation zones. If the base building FAHU supplies OA to the return of the FCUs, and the FCUs supply a
mixture of OA and recirculation to one zone or multiple zones, then single-zone or multiple-zone recirculating
system should be calculated, depending on the served zone number.
Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control Pending
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
1. The documentation does not sufficiently demonstrate that permanent signage indicating the no-smoking
policy is posted within 10 feet (3 meters) of all building entrances, including balcony/terrace entrances. Note for
LEED v4 ID+C, this prerequisite applies to the whole base building in which the project is located. Additionally,
some photographs appear to depict temporary, construction-phase signage (e.g., taped-on sheets or paper)
rather than permanent signage communicating no-smoking policy to occupants after construction completion.
For v4 ID+C projects located in a base building with a LEED-compliant interior and exterior no-smoking policy, but
for which signage communicating the smoking policies is not posted within 10-feet (3 meters) of all building
entrances, LEED Interpretation 10435 may be applied. In such a case, provide evidence that the project has
signage posted at the entrance to the project (tenant) space, communicating the interior and exterior no-
smoking policy, and that a request to have exterior signage posted at all building entrances was made and the
landlord refused to accommodate the request.
For v4 ID+C projects located in a base building that does not have a LEED-compliant interior and/or exterior no-
smoking policy, the LEED v4.1 credit substitution, Option 2, must be used. Visit the v4.1 Credit Catalog to view
the updated version of this prerequisite. The LEED v4.1 Beta Guide is available here:
[Link] All v4 credits are available for substitution. If resubmitting following the v4.1
compliance path, complete the v4.1 LEED Form and provide the required documentation as described in the
LEED v4.1 Beta Guide for this prerequisite.
Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies Pending : 1
Possible points: 2
Attempted: 2, Denied: 0, Pending: 1, Awarded: 1
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 1: Enhanced IAQ Strategies
1. It does not appear that all regularly used exterior entrances have entryway systems installed, as required. The
site photos are provided for a single entryway system. However, based on the floor plan, the project has multiple
entryways that are within the CI scope of work, including but not limited to the entrances from the parking area on
the basement, the entrances for the bank, lobby, staircase, and corridors on the ground floor.
Provide revised uploads demonstrating that qualifying entryway systems are installed at all regularly used
entrances which are not exit-only locations. Include documentation, such as drawings highlighting the entryway
systems, change orders and/or photographs, to demonstrate any changes that have been implemented. If
applicable, include a narrative clarifying why any entry points do not meet the credit definition of regularly used
exterior entrance.
2. The documentation provided within PI Project Information indicates that this project includes hazardous gas or
chemical storage spaces. The spaces marked as “kitchen” besides the restrooms on the first and second floors
seem to be janitor’s sink spaces.
Clarify the space function of these spaces. Revise this documentation and provide documentation to confirm that
these spaces are negatively pressurized and include self-closing doors and deck-to-deck walls or a hard lid
ceiling.
----------
Option 2: Additional Enhanced IAQ Strategies
B. Increased Ventilation
1. EQp Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance is pending clarifications.
Refer to the comments within the prerequisite and resubmit this credit.
----------
C. Carbon Dioxide Monitoring
Awarded.
Low-Emitting Materials Awarded : 2
Possible points: 3
Attempted: 2, Denied: 0, Pending: 0, Awarded: 2
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
The project is pursuing the LEED v4.1 substitution path for this credit.
The following product categories have been attempted: Wall Panels (95.21%), Furniture (96.38%).
Product documentation has been reviewed to determine that at least the required threshold has been met for
two product categories (Wall Panels, Furniture).
Awarded.
Items that do not require a response for this project, but should be considered for future projects:
1. It is noted that the products Aspect Aluminium Partition, PLEXIGLAS solid sheets Glass, and STADIP Laminated
Glass were included in both the Wall Panels and Furniture categories, although they belong only in the Wall
Panels category. Compliance is not affected in this instance. For future projects, ensure that all products are
classified in the appropriate category.
Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan Awarded : 1
Possible points: 1
Attempted: 1, Denied: 0, Pending: 0, Awarded: 1
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Awarded.
Indoor Air Quality Assessment Pending : 2
Possible points: 2
Attempted: 2, Denied: 0, Pending: 2, Awarded: 0
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 2: Air Testing
1. The air testing report does not include the target volatile organic compounds as required. Refer to LEED Credit
Library for the required target VOCs and their maximum concentration levels.
Update the air testing report as required. Ensure that each contaminant does not exceed its concentration limit
listed in Table 1 on the LEED Credit Library for this credit.
2. The air testing report indicates that the concentration of PM2.5 and PM10 exceeded the concentration limits at
most of the test locations. The project must demonstrate that each contaminant does not exceed its
concentration limit listed in the table(s).
Investigate the causes of the high concentration of contaminants, correct any identified issues, and re-test
before the building is occupied. If the building has been occupied and re-testing has not been performed, the
project is not able to demonstrate compliance.
Thermal Comfort Awarded : 1
Possible points: 1
Attempted: 1, Denied: 0, Pending: 0, Awarded: 1
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Thermal Comfort Design
Option 1: ASHRAE Standard 55-2010
Awarded.
----------
Thermal Comfort Control
Required thermal comfort controls are provided for 96.95% of individual occupant spaces and in 100% of shared
multioccupant spaces.
Interior Lighting Pending : 2
Possible points: 2
Attempted: 2, Denied: 0, Pending: 2, Awarded: 0
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Option 1: Lighting Control
Required lighting controls are claimed for 97.97% of individual occupant spaces and in 100% of shared multi-
occupant spaces.
1. The floor plan indicates that the project is designed with conference rooms which are expected to have a
projector. However, it is unclear whether the lighting control in the conference rooms meets the credit
requirement.
Provide documentation, such as a lighting plan, to demonstrate that lighting for the presentation or projection
wall has been separately controlled.
----------
Option 2: Lighting Quality
1. The required documentation has not been provided.
Provide the Interior Lighting Calculator and supplemental documentation for at least four strategies.
2. The required documentation has not been provided.
Provide the following:
a. Cut sheets for all lighting fixtures that include cd/m2 luminance tables.
b. Cut sheets for all lamps indicating that they meet the requirements of a CRI of 80 or higher and the rated life.
c. A revised Interior Lighting Calculator, if changes have occurred.
d. A revised LEED Form, if changes have occurred.
Items that do not require a response for this project, but should be considered for future projects:
1. Ensure that the total connected lighting load reported here is inconsistent with the total connected lighting
load reported within EAp Minimum Energy Performance.
Daylight Not attempted
Possible points: 3
Quality Views Not attempted
Possible points: 1
Acoustic Performance Attempted
Possible points: 2
INNOVATION
Innovation Pending : 1
Possible points: 5
Attempted: 3, Denied: 0, Pending: 1, Awarded: 2
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Strategy 1: Innovation - Green Cleaning Policy, Option 1. In-house Green Cleaning Policy
The LEED Form indicates that the project team has developed and implemented a Green Cleaning Policy that
includes quantitative goals and performance metrics for cleaning products and cleaning equipment. Additionally,
goals and strategies have been developed for conserving water, energy, and toxic chemical usage, staffing and
staff training, cleaning products and equipment purchasing.
Awarded.
----------
Strategy 2: Pilot Credit - IPpc89 Social Equity within the Community
The LEED Form indicates that the project team has registered for Pilot Credit 89: Social Equity within the
Community, Option 2, Partner with Existing Community Service and Advocacy Organizations. The project team
has defined the community, partnered with a local organization to understand and engage the community, and
implemented strategies that improve social equity in the project. The completed Option 2 Documentation
Template found on the resources tab of this credit has been provided. Additionally, the survey information has
been provided.
Awarded.
----------
Strategy 3: Exemplary Performance - EQc Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies
1. The requirement for exemplary performance is to achieve both Option 1 and Option 2 and incorporate an
additional Option 2 strategy. However, the base credit has not been achieved.
Refer to the comments within EQc Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies. Ensure that any issues noted there are
addressed within the exemplary performance documentation when resubmitting this credit.
Alternatively, the project may pursue a different strategy for the Final Review.
One point pending.
LEED Accredited Professional Awarded : 1
Possible points: 1
Attempted: 1, Denied: 0, Pending: 0, Awarded: 1
Design and Construction Preliminary Review
Awarded.