LEED - Page 9 - LEED, PTOE, PMP - Engineer Boards
Jump to content
Engineer Boards
Sign in to follow this  
Guest twada

LEED

Recommended Posts

I have my LEED AP under the old system (2.2) and my window of opportunity to take the test get my "BD +C" certification expires in October. I work for a company that does construction only, but figured I could possibly donate some time to an architect on a LEED project around here. Trouble is, there is only one within project within 2 hours of me and I don't know anyone in that area. I figure I might ask a local architect around here anyway, but I have to imagine other people have had to be in the same boat as me. There really arent that many CEU credit opportunities around here either, although I'm not entirely sure about this. Anyone have any advice for me or have the same dilemma?

Andrew, I think you are confused with the process... If you have LEED AP under the old systems then you are currently in your enrollment period. This means you simply log into your 'my credentials' account and click a few buttons, viola, you will then be a LEED AP BD+C... You DO NOT need to re-test or meet any eligibility requirements. You will also be required to complete the CMP requirements every two years... If you fail to complete the CMP requirements after opting in, you will revert to LEED AP original edition, it's yours forever with no maintenance. Here are some links for you. First is a video on how to enroll, second is a document on how to enroll, third is all the ways to earn your prescriptive maintenance credits.

http://www.gbci.org/main-nav/cmp/enrollmen...ment-webex.aspx

http://www.gbci.org/Files/enrollment_guide.pdf

http://www.gbci.org/Files/cmp_guide.pdf

If you let the enrollment period lapse, then yes, you will need to be eligible with recent LEED project exposure, and take both the GA & AP tests in order to gain a specialty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not want to let my enrollment period expire and thus take both tests, that's my whole reasoning for wanting to take the "specialty" test. But I can't take the test until I have verified experience on a LEED project. You following me now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not want to let my enrollment period expire and thus take both tests, that's my whole reasoning for wanting to take the "specialty" test. But I can't take the test until I have verified experience on a LEED project. You following me now?

There are two paths to enrollment, ONE you can take the AP specialty test and then do non-prescriptive maintenance. Or TWO, just enroll, then do prescriptive maintenance. The only difference is you have to hit certain subjects in your CMP if you take the prescriptive path. It isn't a much bigger burden, you just have to take more care when choosing and entering your hours.

No one in their right mind should test to enroll into a specialty. Studying for these tests is a painful process, and costs a small fortune. The only reason anyone would take a specialty test at enrollment is to enter the new specialties (Homes & ND), which you cannot do via the prescriptive maintenance option. Prescriptive can get you into O+M, BD+C or ID+C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I'm well aware of the two paths!!! This is the simpler path for me...I can take a test and be done with it instead of completing all these maintenance hours and I don't have a two year period to complete these hours anyway. The company I work for will pay for the test and since I passed the first one why would it be that hard to pass the second?? My question is regarding project experience (see above), not about the damn enrollment paths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, I'm well aware of the two paths!!! This is the simpler path for me...I can take a test and be done with it instead of completing all these maintenance hours and I don't have a two year period to complete these hours anyway. The company I work for will pay for the test and since I passed the first one why would it be that hard to pass the second?? My question is regarding project experience (see above), not about the damn enrollment paths.

You are still required to do 30 hours of CMP even if you test, all you dodge is the prescriptive categories requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have my LEED AP under the old system (2.2) and my window of opportunity to take the test get my "BD +C" certification expires in October. I work for a company that does construction only, but figured I could possibly donate some time to an architect on a LEED project around here. Trouble is, there is only one within project within 2 hours of me and I don't know anyone in that area. I figure I might ask a local architect around here anyway, but I have to imagine other people have had to be in the same boat as me. There really arent that many CEU credit opportunities around here either, although I'm not entirely sure about this. Anyone have any advice for me or have the same dilemma?

I may be wrong, but I don't think you have to meet the project experience requirements to re-test as a legacy LEED AP to gain a speciality.

I think you can just sign up for the exam.

I'm in the same boat, but I've decided on the CMP packet from Red Vector. I think so anyway. It's cheaper than buying the LEED 2009 booklet and the exam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just passed my LEED Green Associate exam today. Time to celebrate

Congrat!! Can I ask what study materials did you use for the exam? Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you want the extra credential? I took the test before 2009 to avoid the hassle of maintenance. I get emails enticing me to add a credential, when all it really adds up to is just more $$$ for USGBC. Unless something has changed, Legacy LEED-AP is all you need to work on a LEED project. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you want the extra credential? I took the test before 2009 to avoid the hassle of maintenance. I get emails enticing me to add a credential, when all it really adds up to is just more $$$ for USGBC. Unless something has changed, Legacy LEED-AP is all you need to work on a LEED project. Correct me if I'm wrong.

You don't need any credential to work on a LEED project. The only time it comes into play is if you are seeking the 'bonus' point in the ID category. LEED 2012 draft has a note that you will need a LEED AP with the specialty of the project as well as two other current LEED professionals, either GA or AP with specialty... Long story short, when LEED 2012 launches, 'legacy' AP's will no longer be able to earn that point. If that is worth something to you, enrollment may be a good idea. For most, hard to say if it holds enough value to outweigh the maintenance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a LEED AP and have been working toward being elligible to function as the CxA on a LEED project. I have commissioned two projects and feel that I have the experience to provide commissioning services, at least as far as LEED requires.

My problem is this: I have a client that has a LARGE (over 300,000ft) project that he needs mechanical design and a CxA to provide Enhanced Commissioning for LEED. I cannot provide both (per LEED requirements) and currently am the only PE liscensed in this particular state at my firm. Does ayone know a way around the LEED requirement to have an independant CxA so that my firm can provide the design documents and achieve the Enhanced Commissioning Credit? I know if they drop the enhanced and only go for the fundamental commissioning we would be elliglible because I could stamp the drawings and the other PE in the office operate as the CxA, but that is the only thing I can come up with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that requirement was there to prevent the same company from providing both the design as well as the commissioning to help "legitimize" the design/commissioning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could not be more right. I was still hoping for a "loophole".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about that, but the way I read LEED 2009 is that the CxA cannot be employed by the design firm (I think thats verbatim).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An architect friend of mine sent this to me. Ironically, He and I had a GSA LEED project that was canceled mid-construction last year. I am a LEED AP and have made a little bit of coin because of this LEED junk (coordination/commissioning/modeling). However, my stance, since we were introduced to LEED back in '02-'03, is that an owner doesn't need to pay USGBC the ungodly amount of money it takes to get the certification just to have an energy efficient building. If they would just put a little bit more into thier envelope and mechanical budget they can save 30-40% on energy costs. Alas, but my suggestions have not been heeded. Oh well, I guess I'll just keep charging them for these unnecessary services as long as it holds out. I'm curious if anyone has an argument for LEED?

From the Federal Times:

The General Services Administration should stop using the LEED rating system to grade how green its buildings are, 56 House lawmakers from both parties said in a May 18 letter to GSA's acting administrator Dan Tangherlini.

The lawmakers said the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program, run by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), is adopting standards that unfairly hurt certain manufacturers of building materials.

GSA primarily uses the LEED system, which scores how green a building is based on everything from construction materials to its proximity to mass transit, as a benchmark for all of its construction projects.

Buildings can be LEED certified or achieve even higher degrees of "greenness" at the LEED Silver, Gold or Platinum levels. GSA has made it a goal to make all of its new construction LEED Gold certified.

At issue are rules slated to take effect July 1 that offers building owners LEED credit for avoiding a list of "chemicals of concern." The lawmakers said in the letter that the restrictions are arbitrary and would require agencies to use more costly materials in construction projects.

"We are deeply concerned that the LEED rating system is becoming a tool to punish chemical companies and plastics makers and spread misinformation about materials that have been at the forefront of improving environmental performance — and even occupancy safety — and in buildings," the lawmakers wrote.

One of the identified chemicals is polyvinyl chloride, commonly known as PVC, which is used in pipes and roofing materials.

GSA and the Energy Department are expected to decide this year which ratings system to adopt for new building construction and renovation for the next five years. They will choose between LEED and two other standards; the Green Building Initiative's "Green Globes" system and the International Living Building Challenge.

"If USGBC does not reconsider these harmful provisions in LEED 2012, we respectfully request that GSA stop using the LEED rating system," the lawmakers wrote.

Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., said the new standards have little to do with making buildings more energy efficient and more to do with targeting specific companies.

"It makes no sense for GSA to support and adopt these standards, knowing the danger they pose to so many sectors of our economy," Pompeo said in a statement.

Roger Platt, the senior vice president of global policy and law at USGBC, said in a statement Monday that LEED is a voluntary, consensus-driven process that addressed the concerns of manufacturers.

He said "single-issue" stakeholders are pressuring Congress and agencies in order to influence the LEED development process.

"USGBC is working with all stakeholders, including companies from all sectors of the building industry, to ensure that LEED remains the most widely used high performance building rating system in the country," Platt said.

Edited by badal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LEED sucks

Most of the time we add pointless stuff to get LEED points to get LEED certification. Agreed with you just take that money and dump it into the M/E systems and get a return on your initial investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
USGBC is working with all stakeholders, including companies from all sectors of the building industry

This should clue us in as to what the real issue is. USGBC has connections, and they intend to remain the default choice when it comes to a green building standard. Personally I am not a fan of the LEED system, and I see through many of its claims of making buildings more efficient, healthy, etc. There have been others that felt the LEED system should not be used, and that their claims are not legitamate. As such a 100$ MIllion class action lawsuit was filed a while back, but I am not sure what the status is at this point.

That being said, I do not fault you for getting a LEED rating, and serving your clients according to thier wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a big LEED fan, either, but this smells fishy to me - a bunch of politicians ganging up on a non-governmental industry group like this. Sounds more to me like one or a few particular businesses sent some lobbyists to the halls of Congress with some cash....

I'd be interested to see the exact provision in the new LEED standards that outlaws PVC pipe... I doubt it exists. The issue has probably been overexaggerated to make the USGBC look as bad as possible - they probably referred to one particular use of PVC, and this group of politicians spun that to make it look as dramatic as possible - "One of the identified chemicals is polyvinyl chloride, commonly known as PVC, which is used in pipes and roofing materials." note, they did not say pipes or roofing materials were banned.

Engineers: stay strong. Don't let the politicians turn you into mindless reactionaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought LEED was generally against plastics because they were 'not sustainable' (which translates to 'uses that nasty oil in production,'), but that's just from observing local LEED certified projects. I've never really looked into it too deeply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LEED is a scam. Design around Ashrae standards and use common sense and save the USGBC fees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...