V600 Capstone Report on Green Building for SPEA

Beautiful, Affordable, Sustainable

A Report on the Challenges and Opportunities of Creating a LEED-Certified Green Building on the Indiana University Bloomington Campus

by

SPEA V600 Capstone ClassIndiana University Bloomington

Fall 2005

SPEASCHOOL OF PUBLIC ANDENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS

�Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

ContentsExecutive Summary iIntroduction iiiSustainable Sites 1

1.0. SS Prerequisite, Erosion & Sedimentation Control 11.0 SS Credit 1, Site Selection (1 point) 21.0 SS Credit 2, Development Density (1 point) 31.0 SS Credit 3, Brownfield Redevelopment (1 point) 41.0 SS Credit 4.1, Alternative Transportation: Public Transportation Access (1 point) 51.0 SS Credit 4.2, Alternative Transportation: Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms (1 point) 61.0 SS Credit 4.3, Alternative Transportation: Alternative Fuel Vehicles (1 point) 81.0 SS Credit 4.4, Alternative Transportation: Parking Capacity (1 point) 101.0 SS Credit 5.1, Reduced Site Disturbance : Protect or Restore Open Space (1 point) 111.0 SS Credit 5.2, Reduced Site Disturbance: Development Footprint (1 point) 131.0 SS Credit 6.1, Storm water Management: Rate and Quantity (1 point) 151.0 SS Credit 6.2, Storm Water Management: Treatment (1 point) 181.0 SS Credit 7.1, Heat Island Effect: Non-Roof (1 point) 201.0 SS Credit 7.2, Heat Island Effect: Roof (1 point) 221.0 SS Credit 8, Light Pollution Reduction (1 point) 24

Water Efficiency 251.0.1 WE Credit 1.1, Water Efficient Landscaping: Reduce by 50% (1 point) 251.0.2 WE Credit 1.2, Water Efficient Landscaping: No Potable Use or No Irrigation (1 point) 251.0 WE Credit 2, Innovative Wastewater Treatment Technologies (1 point) 291.0 WE Credits 3.1 and 3.2, Water Use Reduction: 20% and 30% Reduction (1 point each) 31

Energy & Atmosphere 341.0 EA Prerequisite 1, Fundamental Building Systems Commissioning 341.0 EA Prerequisite 2, Minimum Energy Performance 361.0 EA Prerequisite 3, CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment 371.0 EA Credit 1, Optimize Energy Performance (1-10 points) 381.0 EA Credits 2.1 -2.3, Renewable Energy, 5-20% (1-3 points) 431.0 EA Credit 3, Additional Commissioning (1 point) 491.0 EA Credit 4, Ozone Protection (1 point) 511.0 EA Credit 5, Measurement and Verification (1 point) 531.0 EA Credit 6, Green Power (1 point) 55


Materials & Resources 571.0 MR Prerequisite, Storage & Collection of Recyclables 571.0 MR Credit 1.1, Building Reuse: Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors and Roof 591.0 MR Credit 1.2, Building Reuse: Maintain 100% of Existing Walls, Floors and Roof 601.0 MR Credit 1.3, Building Reuse: Maintain 100% of Shell/Structure and 50% of Non-Shell/Non-Structure 611.0 MR Credit 2.1, Construction Waste Management: Divert 50% 621.0 MR Credit 2.2, Construction Waste Management: Divert 75% 641.0 MR Credit 3.1, Resource Reuse: 5% 661.0 MR Credit 3.2, Resource Reuse: 10% 681.0 MR Credit 4.1, Recycled Content: 5% (post-consumer + ½ post-industrial) 701.0 MR Credit 4.2, Recycled Content: 10% (post-consumer + ½ post-industrial) 721.0 MR Credit 5.1, Regional Materials: 20% Manufactured Regionally 741.0 MR Credit 5.2, Regional Materials: 50% Extracted Regionally 761.0 MR Credit 6, Rapidly Renewable Materials 781.0 MR Credit 7, Certified Wood 79

Indoor Environmental Quality 811.0 IEQ Prerequisite 1, Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance 811.0 IEQ Prerequisite 2, Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control 821.0 IEQ Credit 1, Carbon Dioxide Monitoring 831.0 IEQ Credit 2, Ventilation Effectiveness 851.0 IEQ Credit 3.1, Construction Management Plan: During Construction 881.0 Credit 3.2, Construction Management Plan: Before Occupancy 901.0 IEQ Credit 4.1, Low-Emitting Materials: Adhesives and Sealants 921.0 IEQ Credit 4.2, Low-Emitting Materials: Paints and Coatings 941.0 IEQ Credit 4.3, Low-Emitting Materials: Carpet 961.0 IEQ Credit 4.4, Low-Emitting Materials: Composite Wood 981.0 IEQ Credit 5, Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control 1001.0 IEQ Credit 6.1, Controllability of Systems: Perimeter Spaces 1011.0 IEQ Credit 6.2, Controllability of Systems: Non-Perimeter Spaces 1031.0 IEQ Credit 7.1, Thermal Comfort 1051.0 IEQ Credit 7.2, Permanent Monitoring System 1061.0 IEQ Credit 8.1, Daylight 75% of Spaces. 1081.0 IEQ Credit 8.2, Views for 90% of Spaces 111

Innovation & Design Case Studies 113Alberici Corporate Headquarters 113Chicago Center for Green Technology 115Genzyme Center 117Herman Miller Marketplace 119

� Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

National Resources Defense Council (Robert Redford Building) 121Pharmacia Building Q 123Rinker Hall, University of Florida 125Roberts Residence Hall, Lewis & Clark College 127Sarah Lawrence College: Heimbold Visual Arts Center 129Seattle Justice Center 131 University of Denver: College of Law 133University of Michigan: Samuel T. Dana Building, School of Natural Resources and Environment 135U.S. EPA Science and Technology Center 137

Conclusion 139Glossary 141Bibliography 143Index 153Supplementary Material: CD on inside back cover

1. Beautiful, Affordable, Sustainable (pdf)2. Appendices3. Archived Material4. Presentation - 2 December 2005 (powerpoint)

i Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

Executive SummaryIn this report we investigate the opportunities and challenges in constructing a certified “green” building for the School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) at Indiana University-Bloomington. We focus on technical questions of green building in order to identify methods of achieving “credits,” as defined by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program, a leading industry standard. We also provide information that explores costs and aesthetics associated with green buildings. We conclude that Indiana University and SPEA can successfully build a LEED Platinum-rated building on the IU Bloomington campus.

“Green building” can be defined as simply any structure designed to have a smaller environmental impact than would traditional construction. The LEED standard that guides this report quantifies efficiencies gained during green building in order to certify buildings at different levels of environmental efficiency. LEED defines six categories of credits: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Materials & Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, and Innovation & Design processes. We divide our report into those six classes and report on ways IU and SPEA can achieve prerequisites and credits. Some key ways that SPEA might achieve certification include:

• Sustainable Sites: limit overall footprint size; restore open space with native or adopted vegetation; build constructed wetlands and vegetative roofs; include shade, high reflectance materials, and open-grid paving systems; and consider underground parking.

• Water Efficiency: plan landscape using principles of xeriscaping and native plants; raise awareness about water consumption through the showcase of efficient fixtures (for example, touchless sinks and water-free toilets); and employ natural systems to assimilate and treat wastewater.

• Energy & Atmosphere: commission the building according to LEED standards; control and integrate HVAC, lighting, fire alarm and security systems, laboratory controls, elevators, power management, and other systems into one unified system; use on-demand hot water, energy efficient lighting, task lighting, dimmable ballasts, LED exit signs, solar-powered exterior luminaries and automated lighting controls; and purchase at least two years’ worth of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) to encourage use of off-site, grid-source renewable energy.

• Materials & Resources: assemble a Recycling and Waste Reduction Team; engage an independent contractor for construction demolition waste salvaging and recovery; identify opportunities to incorporate salvaged materials into building design; use rapidly renewable resources in cabinetry, flooring and furniture; and build using certified sustainable wood.

• Indoor Environmental Quality: install underfloor ventilation systems; employ a written work plan for construction contractors; use low-emitting and non-toxic carpeting and paints;

iiIndiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

choose an advanced HVAC (ventilation) system that monitors room use and is integrated with operable windows; and design building layout to maximize advantages of natural daylight.

• Innovation & Design Process: engage the IU and SPEA communities to achieve energy savings not found in other buildings; investigate a wide variety of successful LEED certified buildings to stimulate original thinking at SPEA; and include buildings with a variety of uses, sizes, geographic locations and institutional occupants.

Finally, we note the advantages of a certified green building. One advantage to SPEA is to put into practice our environmental message. Another advantage to SPEA and to the University is to lead the nation in environmental practice. Green buildings also provide their owners with financial benefits (they generally pay for themselves and achieve substantial cost savings over time); social benefits (safer, healthier, more productive workplaces); and of course the environmental benefits of reduced resource use.

We believe that by thinking green early in the design process, IU and SPEA can create a LEED Platinum-rated building that is beautiful, affordable and sustainable.

iii Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

IntroductionIn this report we investigate the opportunities and challenges in constructing a “green” building for the School of Public and Environmental Affairs (SPEA) at Indiana University. Researched and compiled by SPEA’s own graduate students, it represents our initial attempt to identify problems, obstacles and advantages specific to building green on the Indiana University Bloomington campus and at SPEA.

Our central task—developed in conjunction with SPEA professors and members of the building committee—is to identify ways to achieve “credits” as defined by a leading industry standard. In order to fulfill this task, we focus on the technical questions of green building. We ask how our building can conserve water and energy, build with sustainable materials, reduce disturbance during construction, promote a healthy environment for occupants, and much more. We also touch on cost and aesthetics, as these are often seen as obstacles to building green.

We intend this project to be of interest to a wide readership. Students, faculty and staff who may someday work in a green SPEA building can learn what it means to be certified green and some of the challenges to achieving that status. Those SPEA community members charged with getting the project off the ground can find details about specific problems addressed in a methodical way. The technically-minded (engineers, architects, etc.) can use this document as a starting point for more detailed research. In short, we hope we have provided the foundation to begin a much broader conversation about SPEA’s role in the green building and design movement.

What is Green Building?

A broad definition of “green building” might be simply any building designed to have a smaller environmental impact than would traditional construction, absent consideration for principles of environmental sustainability. This broad definition can help builders to remember that one main goal of green building is to reduce environmental impact and promote responsible, sustainable use of resources.

Such a broad definition, however, does not provide a standard against which builders can measure their “green-ness.” To provide such a standard, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) created the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System. The USGBC is a coalition of leaders from across the building industry that works to promote environmentally responsible, profitable and healthy buildings. Its leaders and members include representatives of private industry, all levels of government, university researchers and more. The USGBC coalition created the LEED standard as a voluntary, consensus-based national standard for developing high-performance, sustainable buildings.

LEED aims to establish common measurement standards to define green buildings; promote integrated, whole building design processes; recognize environmental leadership; stimulate green competition; raise consumer awareness of green building benefits; and transform the building market. Several LEED categories exist, but our focus is on “LEED for New Commercial Construction and Major Renovation Projects,” or simply “LEED for New Buildings.”

The LEED New Building standard provides a rating system to determine exactly how “green” a building is. Points are awarded for fulfilling a variety of objectives, such as site selection, water efficient landscaping, renewable energy, construction waste management, and many more. Out of a potential sixty-nine points, a building with

ivIndiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

26-32 points is defined as “certified,” 33-38 points as “silver,” 39-51 points as “gold,” and 52-69 points is defined as “platinum.”

Our objective in this project has been to identify ways that SPEA can earn as many points as possible, with an ultimate goal of earning a LEED platinum rating. Therefore, we have focused on narrow questions of how to gain credits, rather than broad issues of overall environmental sustainability. Highly rated LEED buildings will result in buildings with ecologically “friendly” profiles. Both readers and builders should bear in mind, however, that a highly rated LEED building is not automatically the same as an efficient, sustainable building.

Why Build Green?

SPEA needs a new building. The current building was occupied in 1981, and it has begun to show its age. Leaky roofs, moldy ducting and pest infestations are just a few of the obvious signs of wear. But why build a green building instead of a traditional building? What advantage does green offer to SPEA and to the University?

One advantage to SPEA is the opportunity to practice what we preach. As an institution dedicated to environmental education, a sustainable building would serve as a tangible symbol of our commitment to sound environmental practices.

A second advantage to SPEA and to the University is the chance to lead the nation in environmental practice. Green building is exploding across the country, with business, government and educational institutions moving toward sustainable standards. As of this writing, however, very few universities have platinum rated buildings. In fact, only one building—the Donald Bren Hall at the School of Environmental Science and Management at the University of California, Santa Barbara—is a platinum rated building for an environmental affairs program, and that building was rated according to a now obsolete LEED standard. Thus, SPEA has the chance to be the first LEED 2.0 platinum rated environmental affairs school, not just in the Big Ten conference or in the Midwest, but in the entire nation. Such a distinction could help the School to attract students, faculty and funding, as well as national acclaim.

Other advantages to building green include financial benefits, social benefits and environmental benefits. Green buildings are sometimes thought of as expensive, since they can have higher initial costs than traditional construction. However, by providing substantial savings in energy and maintenance over the life of the building, green buildings can pay for themselves and prove cheaper than traditional construction. (A rule of thumb in industry is that initial construction is 30% of building costs, while operation and maintenance is 70%. Thus, for example, a five percent savings in operation costs would more than offset a five percent premium in construction costs.) Additionally, non-pecuniary benefits accrue to people living in the building, since green buildings are generally healthier, safer places to work. Green buildings result in fewer cases of “sick building syndrome” and fewer health problems associated with the work place, as well as fewer workers’ compensation claims for breathing disorders, exposure to toxins, etc. Also, naturally lighted buildings with occupant control over climate can lead to significant gains in employee motivation and productivity, as well as student achievement. Finally, green buildings reduce environmental impacts and thereby benefit society over the long term.

v Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

Opportunities and Challenges

We structure our discussion of opportunities and challenges around the LEED credit system. In order to achieve a platinum rating, SPEA must achieve at least fifty-two out of sixty-nine credits. These credits are subdivided into six categories: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation and design process. In this introduction, we highlight key issues and recommendations to achieve credits in each category. Below we provide a point-by-point analysis of the intent, requirement and documentation for each credit; the challenges to meet the credit; implementation options; and our recommendations. Further details are available in the appendices found on the CD included with this document.

1) Sustainable Sites (14 possible points)

This group of credits aims to limit the building’s overall impact on its surroundings. Specifically, the credits dictate erosion and sedimentation control measures, and they encourage thoughtful site selection and redevelopment, alternative transportation, reduced site disturbance, storm water management, heat island effects and light pollution reduction. Achievement of the site selection and redevelopment credits is beyond the control of Indiana University: two of these credits will be met regardless of site chosen, while another cannot be met on the IU campus. The alternative transportation credits include locating the building near public transport, including a shower/changing room in the building design and encouraging the use of carpooling and fuel-efficient vehicles. The reduced site disturbance credits can be achieved by limiting overall footprint size and by restoring open space with native or adopted vegetation, though these credits may be subject to political, economic, and logistical considerations. Storm water management credits could be achieved through various strategies such as constructed wetlands or vegetative roofs and will involve considerable expense. Similarly, credits for Heat Island Effects can be achieved using shade, high reflectance materials, open-grid paving systems, vegetated roofs and even underground parking; some of these strategies would require additional capital investment. Light pollution can be reduced using indirect lighting and compact fluorescent lamps. These choices can also require an additional initial investment, though they pay for themselves very quickly. Finally, many site selection credits are obvious to casual observers, so they visually represent the entire green building project to the public.

2) Water Efficiency (5 possible points)

This group of credits aims to reduce the amount of water that the building and its occupants consume. Several options exist for achieving the LEED credits in the Water Efficiency category. On the exterior of the building, thoughtful planning of the landscape, xeriscaping, constructed wetland and/or vegetated roof (see Sustainable Sites section) can create outdoor classrooms or laboratories that complement the environmental science and policy curriculum at SPEA through living examples on site. The selection of native plants provides opportunities for both water efficiency and educational purposes for visitors and students alike. On the interior of the building, the emphasis should again be on educational opportunities presented by different systems. One option would be to raise awareness about water consumption through the showcase of efficient fixtures (for example, touchless sinks and water-free toilets), while another could demonstrate the ability of natural systems to assimilate and treat wastewater. Some of these options complement one another, whereas other systems and designs will compete for the same space and water. Regardless of the ultimate decision reached on which technologies to employ, any combination of those described here will bring prestige and recognition to the School of Public and Environmental Affairs and Indiana University.

viIndiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

3) Energy & Atmosphere (17 possible points)

This group of credits aims to reduce the building’s consumption of energy and limit its pollution output. The building must be commissioned, which presents a relatively minor challenge since Indiana University has extensive experience commissioning buildings. Furthermore, compliance with ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1999 is already standard industry practice and will not be difficult. Similarly, much new building construction is already free of CFC based refrigerants. In order to optimize energy performance, SPEA could control and integrate HVAC, lighting, fire alarm and security systems, laboratory controls, elevators, power management, tanks and generators, gas detection and particle measurement into one unified system. Additionally, on-demand hot water, energy efficient lighting, task lighting, dimmable ballasts, LED exit signs, solar-powered exterior luminaries and automated lighting controls could all contribute to decreased energy consumption. SPEA should also meter its energy, water and other resource use in order to measure and ultimately decrease its use of those resources. Finally, SPEA can purchase at least two years’ worth of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)—equivalent to at least 50% of the building’s energy consumption—in order to encourage the use of off-site, grid-source renewable energy.

4) Materials & Resources (13 possible points)

This group of credits aims to decrease waste of material resources during construction and encourage recycling. We recommend that a Recycling and Waste Reduction Team take the lead in waste management for the new building to ensure compliance with recycling efforts. Additionally, an independent contractor should be engaged for construction demolition waste salvaging and recovery to reduce cost, increase efficiency and increase visibility. Building designers should identify opportunities to incorporate salvaged materials into the building design (such as blast furnace slag concrete, recycled wood products, metals and glass) and then establish a record keeping system for reused materials in order to reduce demand for virgin materials and reduce waste. Regionally purchased materials (within 500 mile radius) should be obtained from the region roughly bounded by Kansas City (MO), Atlanta (GA), State College (PA) and Green Bay (WI). In particular, since limestone and concrete will represent a large portion of the building materials to be used in new construction, all concrete and limestone should come from local suppliers such as Irving Materials, Inc. (IMI) of Indianapolis. Popular ideas for rapidly renewable resources include cabinetry and flooring, and suggested materials include bamboo flooring, wool carpets, straw board, cotton batt insulation, linoleum flooring, sunflower seed board and wheatgrass cabinetry. Certified wood providers are scarce in Indiana, but many are found within a 500 mile radius of Bloomington; a record-keeping system established early for all wood purchases can help to insure that 50% of wood products are certified. Finally, several credits in this category cannot be achieved, since they require that we incorporate parts of the old building into the new building; obviously this is not possible if the old building will remain standing.

5) Indoor Environmental Quality (15 possible points)

This group of credits aims to provide a well-ventilated, toxin-free building environment along with individualized control over lighting, temperature and airflow in the building. To achieve these credits, several problems must be solved simultaneously. Building designers must provide adequate fresh, clean air to all spaces; prevent the buildup of toxins in materials such as furniture and carpets; provide individual control over room temperature and conditions to occupants; and provide access to adequate natural and artificial light. Several key recommendations will help SPEA to achieve the credits in this category. Underfloor ventilation systems can solve the problem of air quality and controllability of air flow. Employing a written work plan for construction contractors will reduce unnecessary contaminants during construction. The use of low-emitting materials such as carpeting and

vii Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

paints will limit the buildup of toxins in the environment. Installing an advanced HVAC (ventilation) system that monitors room use and is integrated with operable windows can balance energy efficiency with occupant comfort and control. Finally, careful building layout and design will maximize advantages of natural daylight.

6) Innovation & Design Process (5 possible points)

This group of credits rewards building designers with bonus points for innovative designs that are original and unique. We provide case studies that demonstrate how successful LEED certified buildings have achieved these and other credits. No single building replica should be pursued to reproduce a highly-rated building; however, much can be learned from observing the ways in which stakeholders created environmentally-friendly structures that are attractive, cost-effective, and efficient. This section reports on credits achieved for buildings ranging in use from research and education to commercial to government and others. Sample buildings include the platinum rated Alberici Corporate Headquarters in St. Louis, MO; the platinum rated Chicago Center for Green Technology in Chicago, IL; the platinum rated Genzyme Center in Cambridge, MA; the gold rated Pharmacia Building Q Laboratories in Skokie, IL; and a host of other LEED silver, gold and platinum rated buildings across the country. The innovative design features in these buildings span the full range of LEED credits, including sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, and indoor environmental quality. The case studies demonstrate that the best design considers the building’s intended use, the character of the area and its users, and seamlessly blends LEED credit features into the functionality of the structure.

viiiIndiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs


Sustainable Sites

1.0. SS Prerequisite, Erosion & Sedimentation Control

1.1 IntentThis Prerequisite is intended to control erosion in order to reduce negative impacts on water and air quality.

1.2 RequirementsDesign a sediment and erosion control plan that conforms to United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Document No. EPA 832/R-92-005 (September 1992), Storm Water Management for Construction Activities, Chapter 3, or local erosion and sedimentation control standards and codes, whichever is more stringent. The plan shall meet the following objectives: 1) Prevent loss of soil by storm water runoff and/or wind erosion during construction, including protecting topsoil by stockpiling for reuse; 2) Prevent sedimentation of storm sewer or receiving streams; 3) Prevent polluting the air with dust and particulate matter.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should indicate whether the project follows local erosion and sedimentation control standards or the referenced EPA standard. Provide a brief list of the measures implemented. If local standards and codes are followed, describe how they meet or exceed the referenced EPA standard.

2.0 ChallengesThis prerequisite does not pose any unique challenges as the Indiana Department of Environmental Management mandates the stated requirements, and Indiana University is in compliance with these regulations.1

3.0 Implementation OptionsNot applicable.

4.0 RecommendationsNot applicable.

� Ind. Admin. Code title 327, r. 15-13-1 Water Pollution Control Board, Article 15 NPDES General Permit Rule Program, Rule 13 Storm Water Run-Off Associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Conveyance.


1.0 SS Credit 1, Site Selection (1 point)

1.1 IntentAvoid development of inappropriate sites and reduce the environmental impact from the location of a building on a site.

1.2 RequirementsDo not develop buildings, roads or parking areas on portions of sites that meet any one of the following criteria: 1) Prime farmland as defined by the United States Department of Agriculture in the United States Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Volume 6, Parts 400 to 699, Section 657.5 (citation 7CFR657.5); 2) Land whose elevation is lower than 5 feet above the elevation of the 100-year flood as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); 3) Land which is specifically identified as habitat for any species on Federal or State threatened or endangered lists; 4) Within 100 feet of any water including wetlands as defined by United States Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR, Parts 230-233 and Part 22, and isolated wetlands or areas of special concern identified by state or local rule, OR greater than distances given in state or local regulations as defined by local or state rule or law, whichever is more stringent; 5) Land which prior to acquisition for the project was public parkland, unless land of equal or greater value as parkland is accepted in trade by the public landowner (Park Authority projects are exempt). 1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the civil engineer or responsible party, declaring that the project site meets the credit requirements.

2.0 ChallengesThe potential site situated near the education building is characterized by a temporary storm water collection pond and a small stream on the southern extent of the property. The building would need to be set 100 feet from the stream or temporary storm water collection pond in order to comply with this credit.

3.0 Implementation OptionsEnsure that all building structures are located at least 100 feet from the stream and temporary storm water collection pond at the Education building site.

4.0 RecommendationsEnsure that all building structures are located at least 100 feet from the stream and temporary storm water collection pond if the selected site is in close proximity to water features.

Sustainable Sites


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 2, Development Density (1 point)2

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to channel development to urban areas with existing infrastructure, to protect greenfields, and preserve habitat and natural resources.

1.2 RequirementsIncrease localized density to conform to existing or desired density goals by utilizing sites that are located within an existing minimum development density of 60,000 square feet per acre (two story downtown development).

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should indicate that the project has achieved the required development densities. Provide densities for the project and for the surrounding area. Provide an area plan with the project location highlighted.

2.0 ChallengesThe sites under consideration would satisfy the development density goal; therefore, this credit does not pose any particular challenges.



� See Indiana University Bloomington: Campus Map for an overview of development density on the IU campus. http://www.indiana.edu/~iubmap/mapredirect.pl?select=BL000


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 3, Brownfield Redevelopment (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to reduce the pressure on undeveloped land by promoting the rehabilitation of damaged sites where development is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination.

1.2 RequirementsDevelop on a site documented as contaminated (by means of an ASTM E1903-97 Phase II Environmental Site Assessment), OR on a site classified as a brownfield by a local, state or federal government agency and effectively remediate site contamination.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should describe the type of damage that existed on the site and the remediation performed. Provide a copy of the pertinent sections of the ASTM E1903-97 Phase II Environmental Site Assessment documenting the site contamination, OR provide a letter from a local, state or federal regulatory agency confirming that the site is classified as a brownfield by that agency, whichever condition may apply.

2.0 ChallengesWe are unaware of any brownfields on the IU campus. Therefore, this credit would be unattainable.




Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 4.1, Alternative Transportation: Public Transportation Access (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to reduce pollution and land development impacts associated with automobile use.

1.2 RequirementsLocate project within 1/2 mile of a commuter rail, light rail or subway station, or 1/4 mile of two or more public or campus bus lines usable by building occupants. 1.3 Documentation The LEED letter template should indicate that the project building(s) are located within the required proximity to mass transit. The template should be accompanied by an area drawing or transit map, which highlights the building location and bus lines, and indicates the distances between them. Include a scale bar for distance measurement.

2.0 ChallengesIt is likely that this credit will be achieved regardless of the site chosen, as the Indiana University campus is well connected by Bloomington Transit and IU Campus Bus routes.

3.0 Implementation OptionsEnsure that the chosen site meets the stated requirement. If necessary, negotiate with Bloomington Transit and/or IU Campus Bus to implement service at the new building, thereby meeting the requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that this credit be pursued, as doing so would involve virtually no costs and would improve the alternative transportation options at the new building.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 4.2, Alternative Transportation: Bicycle Storage & Changing Rooms (1 point)


1.2 RequirementsProvide secure bicycle storage with convenient changing/shower facilities (within 200 yards of the building) for 5% or more of regular building occupants.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED letter template should indicate the distance to bicycle storage and showers from the building entrance, and demonstrate that these facilities can accommodate at least 5% of building occupants. 2.0 Challenges

2.1 Changing/Shower FacilitiesFew buildings on the IU campus have shower facilities. Furthermore, we are unaware of any buildings having showers for the express purpose of accommodating bicyclists. Showers would increase the square footage of the building and would need to be located near the main entrance. Finally, it is unclear to what extent these facilities would be utilized by building faculty, staff, and students. 3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Secure Bicycle StorageIt is likely that a new SPEA building would have ample bicycle storage to meet this portion of the credit. However, it is possible that bicycle storage could be incorporated into the building design in such a way as to further promote bicycling beyond the requirements of the credit. Covered bicycle racks would encourage bicycle commuting by ensuring that bicycles would not be subject to rain and snow while in storage. To achieve this, the building would need to be designed to include an overhang or other protected area allowing for a bicycle rack (for example, see IU Law School’s North, Ground Floor Entrance or IU Music School’s West Entrance between Music Annex and Merrill Hall).

3.2 Changing/Shower FacilitiesIn order to meet the credit, the new building should provide two showers each for men and women.3 Including changing and locker space, this would require two rooms of approximately 60-75 square feet each.4

� It is anticipated that there will be 220 regular building occupants in the new building (faculty and staff). To accommodate 5% of this population, four showers would be sufficient, as it would not be necessary that these individuals use the showers at precisely the same time.� Patrick Murray, IU Bureau of Facilities Programming and Utilization. Personal Communication via email, 7 November 2005.


Sustainable Sites

3.3 CostProvision of secure bicycle storage is unlikely to impose an additional cost, as it would be provided regardless of the LEED credit. Shower/changing facilities, on the other hand, would require an additional cost. However, the additional expense would be small compared with overall building costs. It is estimated that a single shower unit would cost roughly $1,500-$4,000 installed, depending on the material (fiberglass or ceramic).5 Thus, this portion of the LEED standard could likely be met at an additional cost of $16,000 or less.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that this credit be pursued. In order to improve usability, overlapping uses of shower/changing facilities should be identified. For example, the facilities should be available to class members who might need a place to change and/or shower upon returning from fieldwork. Additionally, faculty and staff could use the facilities upon returning from a jog or other exercise routine during lunch break. We also recommend that bicycle storage facilities be incorporated into the building design if possible, so as to allow sufficient protection from the elements. However, it is not strictly necessary that covered bike parking be provided, as doing so would be extraneous to achieving the LEED credit.

� Jeffrey Kaden, University Engineer. Personal Communication via email. 1 November 2005.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 4.3, Alternative Transportation: Alternative Fuel Vehicles (1 point)


1.2 RequirementsProvide alternative fuel vehicles for 3% of building occupants and provide preferred parking for these vehicles, OR install alternative fuel vehicle refueling stations sufficient to accommodate 3% of total vehicle parking.

1.3 Documentation The LEED letter template should indicate one of the following, depending on which of the above conditions are met: Ownership of, or 2 year lease agreement for, alternative fuel vehicles with calculations indicating that these vehicles will serve 3% of building occupants, and a site plan or drawings highlighting preferred parking for alternative fuel vehicles, OR specifications and site drawings highlighting alternative fuel refueling stations, and calculations demonstrating that these facilities accommodate 3% or more of the total vehicle parking capacity.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Alternative-Fuel VehiclesSPEA is typically not involved in the purchase or leasing of vehicles, and it is not clear that there is a valid reason for this type of activity beyond achieving the LEED standard. To maintain the LEED rating, these vehicles would need to remain under ownership of regular building occupants.

2.2 Preferred ParkingIndiana University Parking Operations has indicated an interest in supporting the use of preferred parking spaces in order to encourage environmentally-friendly transport options.6 However, it would be necessary to ensure that any preferred parking spaces be fully utilized as, under-utilized spaces might provoke complaints.

2.3 Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Stations Alternative fuel passenger vehicles are not in widespread use in Indiana. There are a total of 67 alternative fuel refueling stations in the state, 7 but these are primarily for bus and other service fleets. Furthermore, the notion of a vehicle refueling station on the Bloomington campus is at odds with the aesthetic, health, and safety goals of the University.

3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Faculty/Staff CommitmentIt seems unlikely that SPEA would purchase or lease alternative fuel vehicles to meet the LEED requirement. A more effective means of achieving the requirement might involve a commitment by SPEA faculty and staff to ensure that 3% of their collective fleet is comprised of alternative fuel vehicles (including gas/electric hybrids). In that case, the university would simply be required to designate 3% of parking spaces for these vehicles.

� Doug Porter, Parking Operations. Personal Communication, 19 October 2005.� U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/infrastructure/station_counts.html Accessed on 19 October 2005.


Sustainable Sites

3.2 Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling StationAs discussed above, it is unlikely that an alternative fuel vehicle refueling station would satisfy the concerns of the campus stewards. However, as alternative fuel vehicle technologies develop, it is possible that this option would seem more realistic in the future. Plug-in hybrid vehicles, in particular, would be worth monitoring. These vehicles would allow users to recharge using a standard 110 or 220 V outlet. Providing a “refueling station,” then, would simply involve the provision of a standard electrical outlet.8 As gas prices rise over the next several years, the technology and infrastructure for these vehicles is likely to make significant advancements, such that providing an alternative fuel vehicle refueling station might look like a more reasonable pursuit at the time that building options are being considered in more depth.

3.3 CostOf the aforementioned choices under current conditions, Option 3.1 would be the least expensive. In this case, it would be required that SPEA faculty or staff demonstrate ownership of roughly seven alternative-fuel vehicles. Currently, 2006-model gas-electric hybrid vehicles can be purchased for as little as $1,150 more than their conventional counterparts.9 In this case, the collective “cost” of meeting the standard would roughly $8,000, disregarding the benefits associated with increased fuel efficiency. Perhaps the organization and implementation of such a program would present a more fundamental obstacle. 4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that this credit be pursued. Under ideal circumstances, 3% or more of faculty and staff would purchase hybrid vehicles in the absence of any program. In order to encourage this, consider implementing a preferred-parking program for hybrid vehicles at the current building. By doing so, faculty and staff may adjust their vehicle purchases to reflect the preferred parking benefits that will be a part of the new building. On the other hand, if a program such as that suggested in Option 3.1 could be arranged, this would also be a viable option. This option seems to be more feasible than Option 3.2 currently, and would allow faculty and staff to make a direct contribution towards attaining the LEED rating. Shifting the burden of responsibility to the occupants of the LEED certified building would be a powerful statement of personal commitment to the project, and could open the door for greater flexibility with university officials in regards to other LEED standards. Finally, technological advancements and market trends should be closely monitored so that the feasibility of implementing an alternative fuel refueling station may be evaluated closer to the realization of the project.

� EV World. http://www.evworld.com/electrichybrid.cfm. Accessed on 15 November 2005. � Welch, David. “Green Machines: What Makes a Hybrid Hot.” Business Week. 14 November 2005: 41.

�0Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 4.4, Alternative Transportation: Parking Capacity (1 point)


1.2 RequirementsSize parking capacity must meet, but not exceed, minimum local zoning requirements,AND provide preferred parking for carpools or vanpools capable of serving 5% of the building occupants. 1.3 Documentation The LEED letter template should indicate the relevant minimum zoning requirements and declare that parking capacity is sized to meet, but not exceed those standards. State the number of preferred parking spaces for carpools.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Zoning RequirementsAs Indiana University does not have specific parking requirements related to new buildings, this portion of the LEED standard does not apply.10

2.2 Preferred Parking for Carpools or VanpoolsThough Parking Operations would be unlikely to oppose the designation of preferred parking spaces, carpooling is generally not perceived as a convenient method of traveling to and from work. Thus, significant effort would need to be made in order to ensure that designated spaces are not wasted. 3.0 Implementation OptionsIn order to meet the standard, it would be necessary to provide preferred parking for carpools delivering roughly 11 persons to and from the new SPEA building. This would require three to five parking spaces, depending on the type of vehicles employed. As mentioned above, it would be imperative to ensure that these spaces are fully utilized. To accomplish this, a carpool program would need to be developed.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that this credit be pursued. The costs of organizing a carpool program would be negligible if done appropriately (this may be a good project for a graduate student). The program would likely need to target SPEA staff, as they would be more likely than faculty to hold regular hours. Faculty should not be excluded from participation, however. In order to minimize the time and effort involved in organizing such a program (and to increase the likely success), GIS should be used to determine probable carpool candidates, based on residential location and times of arrival and departure. We further recommend that a trial program be implemented at the current SPEA building in order to gain an understanding of the number of spaces that will need to be designated as preferred carpool spaces at the new building, and to work out the details of how a program could be implemented at the new building.

�0 Dara Zycherman, LEED Program Coordinator, U.S. Green Building Council. Personal Communication via email. 31 October 2005.

�� Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 5.1, Reduced Site Disturbance : Protect or Restore Open Space (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to conserve existing natural areas and restore damaged areas to provide habitat and promote biodiversity.

1.2 RequirementsFor previously developed sites, restore a minimum of 50% of the site area (excluding building footprint) by replacing impervious surfaces with natural or adopted vegetation. For greenfield sites, limit site disturbance including earthwork and clearing of vegetation to 40 feet beyond the building perimeter, 5 feet beyond primary roadway curbs, walkways and main utility branch trenches, and 25 feet beyond constructed areas with permeable surfaces that require additional staging areas in order to limit compaction in the constructed area.

1.3 Documentation For previously developed sites, the LEED Letter Template should declare and describe restoration of degraded habitat areas, including highlighted site drawings with area calculations, demonstrating that 50% of the site area that does not fall within the building footprint has been restored. For greenfield sites, the LEED Letter Template should demonstrate and declare that site disturbance (including earthwork and clearing vegetation) has been limited to 40 feet beyond the building perimeter, 5 feet beyond primary roadway curbs, walkways, and main utility branch trenches, and 25 feet beyond constructed areas with permeable surface. Provide site drawings and specifications highlighting limits of construction disturbance.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 University Landscaping Regulations Indiana University has a strict landscaping code that could interfere with satisfying this LEED credit requirement. Mia Williams in the University Engineer’s Office is a valuable resource on this matter, and has expressed a willingness and ability to work with the Building Committee in order to help it accomplish its goals within the existing regulatory confines.

2.2 Natural or Adopted Vegetation Natural or adopted vegetation is prevalent in the State of Indiana and widely available in LEED-mandated 500-mile radius. (See SS Appendix 1 for a list of native plants and certified, local vendors.)


3.1 Site Neutrality At the writing of this report, there are four sites under consideration. These are as follows: 1) 10th and Woodlawn (‘Informatics’); 2) 7th and Jordan (‘Jordan’); 3) Adjacent to the current Education School Building (‘Education’); 4) On the location of the current Wright Quad dormitory (‘Wright’). Each of these sites would be evaluated as a “Previously Developed” site, rather than a “Greenfield site.” Therefore, this LEED credit will not be contingent on site selection. The requirements are based entirely on a restoration of 50% of available space, regardless of how much actual open space the location affords.

��Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

Sustainable Sites

3.2 CostThe cost of meeting the standard would be minimal. There is a sufficiently varied selection of native or adopted vegetation and numerous vendors so as to ensure a competitive purchase price. Maintenance of native or adopted vegetation should not require additional labor or resources, as compared with non-native vegetation. Additionally, the labor and resources necessary to complete the initial restoration and ongoing maintenance would not require special training or skills. 4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend pursuing LEED credit 5.1, as it requires a minimum level of effort. Regardless of the future site, restoring 50% of the available open space available to native or adopted vegetation should present minimal challenges and is consistent with SPEA’s programmatic vision.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 5.2, Reduced Site Disturbance: Development Footprint (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to conserve existing natural areas and restore damaged areas to provide habitat and promote biodiversity.

1.2 RequirementsFor areas with no local zoning requirements (i.e., Indiana University), designate open space area adjacent to the building that is equal to the development footprint.

1.3 Documentation Provide a letter from the property owner stating that the open space will be conserved for the life of the building.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Site Selection Site selection for the new SPEA building will be based on myriad factors, most of which lie beyond the scope of this report and, perhaps, the consideration of LEED credits. With the understanding that political, financial, engineering, and architectural considerations will ultimately dictate which site is chosen, this analysis holds those factors constant. The discussion and recommendations are based solely on the practicality and feasibility of meeting the specific LEED credit requirements. Until the building site is selected, however, the projection and recommendation will be largely hypothetical.

2.2 Footprint Size and Space Availability The projected SPEA building footprint is 50,000 square feet.11 This number is based on calculations derived from a recommendation that approximately 200,000 square feet of building space will be needed to house the projected number of required classrooms, faculty, offices, labs, auditorium, meeting rooms, etc., and that a four story building will likely match the desired aesthetic.

In order to achieve the LEED standard, a 50,000 square foot building footprint will require at minimum 50,000 square feet of open space, with a total lot size of 100,000 square feet. Preliminary evaluations of the proposed sites suggest that the acquisition of a 100,000 square foot site could be problematic, particularly if either the Informatics or the Jordan site were selected. 3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Reduce Building Footprint While the 50,000 square foot building footprint was the initial suggestion, it is only a rough estimate, and could certainly be increased or decreased, for structural, practical, or aesthetic reasons. Reducing the building footprint could improve the prospects of achieving the stated requirements. For example, if the building were constructed with five stories rather than four, the building footprint and open space requirements would each be reduced by

�� Susan Fernandes, IU Bureau of Facilities Programming & Utilization. Personal Communication.


Sustainable Sites

10,000 square feet. An 80,000 square foot lot would likely be easier to justify. Building footprint is a function of architectural design, and thus is site neutral, except where other factors are limiting.

3.2 Increase Lot Size Another option would be to increase the lot size. This would be most easily accomplished at the Education site, as it is currently undeveloped and unoccupied. The Informatics and Jordan sites are in dense areas of campus, where open space would be at a premium. The Wright site is clearly a wildcard; should the buildings be razed, competition for occupation would be intense, as would any negotiations surrounding lot size. These factors seem to suggest that it would be easiest to expand the lot size at the Education site. None of the other three sites produce a clear choice, as all occupy equally congested and logistically complicated areas of campus. 4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that this credit be pursued, circumstances permitting. Based on the ability to decrease footprint size and/or expand available lot size, the Education site is recommended, keeping in mind that there are other considerations that will ultimately influence the site selection process.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 6.1, Storm water Management: Rate and Quantity (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to limit disruption and pollution of natural water flows by managing storm water runoff.

1.2 RequirementsIf existing imperviousness is less than or equal to 50%, prevent post-development 1.5-yr, 24-hr peak discharge rate from exceeding pre-development 1.5-yr, 24-hr peak discharge rate. If existing imperviousness is greater than 50%, implement a plan that results in a 25% decrease in rate and quantity of storm water runoff.

1.3 Documentation The LEED letter template should declare that post-development 1.5-yr, 24-hr peak discharge rate does not exceed pre-development 1.5-yr, 24-hr peak discharge rate (include calculations demonstrating that existing site imperviousness is less than or equal to 50%); OR Declare and demonstrate that the storm water management plan results in a 25% decrease in rate and quantity of storm water runoff (include calculations demonstrating that existing site imperviousness exceeds 50%).

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Quantity CapturedIt would be feasible to capture (or reduce the rate of) every drop of storm water that falls on the site before it enters natural water flows. A portion of captured storm water may be reused or naturally evaporated back into the atmosphere such that it never leaves the site as runoff. The remainder of the storm water would naturally filter through a permeable surface and underlying soil layers before it leaves the site.

2.2 Point of CapturePotential points of storm water runoff capture include the building roof and natural or built features above ground, on the surface, or below it. Each option or combination of options presents challenges with regard to cost, space, effectiveness, engineering, construction, treatment, geology, and aesthetics.

2.3 Re-use or Discharge Captured runoff may be reused naturally at the site or can be designated for irrigation, greywater in toilets and urinals, or custodial use (see Water Efficiency Section). Alternatively, it can be discharged at a significantly reduced rate back into natural water flows around the site. Whichever storm water uses are targeted, planners should recognize competing demands for the water and should implement a set of uses whose total demand does not exceed expected storm water quantities such that it becomes necessary to supplement with potable water. 3.0 Implementation OptionsThe options below include the following additional features in their overall storm water management plans: pervious pavement (see Sustainable Sites Credit 7.1) and landscaping with native, drought-resistant plants (see Water Efficiency Credits 1.1 and 1.2), both of which would aid in rate and quantity reduction of storm water runoff. Furthermore, all of the options presented offer the potential for re-use, as discussed in Section 2.3 above.


Sustainable Sites

3.1 Vegetated RoofA well-constructed and well-maintained vegetated roof may be the most effective way to reduce both the quantity and rate of storm water runoff from the building site. In addition to satisfying storm water management credits, a vegetated roof would meet the requirement for the Roof Heat Island Effect credit (Sustainable Sites Credit 7.2). Such a roof could also be used for research, public education, and recreation. (For a number of other significant benefits associated with having a vegetated roof, as well as some funding and grant possibilities, see SS Appendix 2.)

3.2 Built SystemsA number of above-ground, partially below-ground, and completely sub-surface systems are available for storm water management. Most of these require additional space beyond the immediate footprint of the building, and above-ground systems may necessitate a built structure around them for aesthetic reasons. Some sub-surface systems can be constructed beneath the building, in which case site hydrogeology and maintenance access become more critical considerations.

3.3 Constructed WetlandsConstructed wetlands provide an excellent way to capture storm water and control the rate at which it is discharged. They also offer potential wastewater treatment (see Water Efficiency Credit 2), educational value, and a number of ecological and aesthetic benefits. However, the recommended minimum drainage basin for constructed wetlands is 10 acres, and they require dry-weather base flow. Other possible limiting factors include issues with soil type, depth to groundwater, and depth to bedrock.

3.4 CostsIf ample land is available at reasonable cost, and hydrogeologic factors are favorable, Option 3.3 would be the least expensive and most effective storm water management option. Relative to the other options, constructed wetlands are inexpensive to build, and they require minimal maintenance. Option 3.2 would be more expensive than Option 3.1 . Design, materials, and installation range widely from $25,000 to $250,000, depending on the desired system. Most of these systems would also require semi-annual inspections and other significant periodic maintenance costs. Of the three options discussed above, Option 3.1 – a vegetated roof – has the greatest initial costs.12 At an estimated 50,000 square feet, such a roof would cost at least $500,000 to build. As the market toward building vegetated roofs will undoubtedly continue to expand and materials technology will improve, this expense should decrease. Normal maintenance costs associated with vegetated roofs are minimal, and their life spans on average exceed those of conventional roofs. If the roof were open to the public for recreational and educational purposes, other maintenance costs would exist.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend a storm water management plan that includes a vegetated roof and constructed wetlands. We believe the concept and utility of both are perfectly aligned with the leadership and educational values that SPEA upholds. This plan affords the best opportunity to achieve Sustainable Site Credits 6.1, 6.2, 7.1, and 7.2, and all Water Efficiency credits. To defray the high cost of an all-vegetated roof, we propose a roof that is at least 50% vegetated with native and drought-resistant plants. The remainder of the roof should be covered by a high albedo surface such as an Energy Star compliant, high reflective, high emissivity roofing membrane system. Runoff from

�� Initial costs associated with a vegetated roof currently range from $13 to $20 per square foot compared to $6 to $7 for a high-albe-do roof. While a high-albedo roof would satisfy the requirements for credit 7.2, it would provide no stormwater management benefits.


Sustainable Sites

the roof should be transported to the constructed wetlands. Non-roof storm water runoff quantity and rate should be reduced by pervious pavement and appropriate landscaping around the building, and as much as possible should be directed to the constructed wetlands before leaving the site and entering natural water flows. Water from the constructed wetlands should be re-used for irrigation if not for other greywater uses.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 6.2, Storm Water Management: Treatment (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to limit disruption of natural water flows by eliminating storm water runoff, increasing on-site infiltration, and eliminating contaminants.

1.2 RequirementsConstruct site storm water treatment systems designed to remove 80% of average annual post-development total suspended solids (TSS) and 40% of average annual post-development total phosphorus (TP) based on average annual loadings from all storms less than or equal to 2-yr, 24-hr storm (use Best Management Practices outlined in Chapter 4, Part 2 of EPA-840-B-92-002 or local government’s BMP document, whichever is more stringent).

1.3 Documentation The LEED letter template should declare that the design complies with or exceeds EPA or local government BMPs, whichever is more stringent, for TSS and TP.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Quantity TreatedIt would be feasible to treat every drop of storm water falling on the site before it enters natural water flows. Storm water that is not reused or evaporated back into the atmosphere should filter through a permeable surface and underlying soil layers before leaving the site.

2.2 Point of TreatmentPotential points of storm water runoff treatment include the building roof and natural or built features above or below ground, or on the surface. Each option or combination of options presents challenges with regard to cost, space, effectiveness, engineering, construction, geology, and aesthetics.

3.0 Implementation OptionsAll of the options below include the following additional features in their overall storm water management plans: pervious pavement (see Sustainable Site Credit 7.1) and landscaping with native, drought-resistant plants (see Water Efficiency Credits 1.1 and 1.2), both of which would aid in the treatment of storm water runoff. Furthermore, all of the options below offer the potential re-use of storm water for irrigation, greywater in toilets and urinals, or custodial use (see Water Efficiency Section).

3.1 Vegetated RoofA well-constructed and well-maintained green roof promotes immediate treatment of the precipitation as it infiltrates through the constructed soil layers. A vegetated roof would also meet the requirement for the Roof Heat Island Effect credit (Sustainable Sites Credit 7.2). Such a roof could also be used for research, public education, and recreation. (See SS Appendix 2 for further discussion of vegetated roofs including examples and funding/grant opportunities.)


Sustainable Sites

3.2 Built SystemsA number of above-ground, partially below-ground, and completely sub-surface systems are available for storm water management. Many of these systems facilitate filtering, storing, and/or re-using captured storm water. Most require additional space beyond the immediate footprint of the building, and above-ground systems may necessitate a built structure around them for aesthetic reasons. Some sub-surface systems can be constructed beneath the building, in which case site hydrogeology and maintenance access become more critical considerations.

3.3 Constructed WetlandsConstructed wetlands provide an excellent way to detain storm water so that suspended solids and contaminants settle out, and they control the rate at which it is discharged. They also offer potential wastewater treatment, educational value, and a number of ecological and aesthetic benefits. However, the recommended minimum drainage basin for constructed wetlands is ten acres, and they require dry-weather base flow. Other possible limiting factors include issues with soil type, depth to groundwater, and depth to bedrock.

3.4 CostsIf ample land is available at reasonable cost and hydrogeologic factors are favorable, Option 3.3 would be the least expensive and most effective storm water management option. Relative to the other options, constructed wetlands are inexpensive to build, and they require minimal maintenance. Option 3.2 would be more expensive than Option 3.1 . Design, materials, and installation range widely from $25,000 to $250,000, depending on the desired system. Most of these systems would also require semi-annual inspections and other significant periodic maintenance costs. Of the three options discussed above, Option 3.1 – a vegetated roof – has the greatest initial costs.13 At an estimated 50,000 square feet, such a roof would cost at least $500,000 to build. As the market toward building vegetated roofs will undoubtedly continue to expand and materials technology will improve, this expense should decrease. Normal maintenance costs associated with vegetated roofs are minimal, and their life spans on average exceed those of conventional roofs. If the roof were open to the public for recreational and educational purposes, other maintenance costs would exist.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend a storm water management plan that includes a vegetated roof and constructed wetlands. We believe the concept and utility of both are perfectly aligned with the leadership and educational values that SPEA upholds. This plan affords the best opportunity to achieve Sustainable Site Credits 6.1, 6.2, 7.1, and 7.2, and all Water Efficiency credits. To defray the high cost of an all-vegetated roof, we propose a roof that is at least 50% vegetated with native and drought-resistant plants. The remainder of the roof should be covered by a high-albedo surface such as an Energy Star compliant, high reflection, high emissivity roofing membrane system (see SS 7.2). Runoff from the roof should be transported to the constructed wetlands. Non-roof storm water runoff quantity and rate should be reduced by pervious pavement and appropriate landscaping around the building, both of which would also encourage infiltration and subsequent elimination of contaminants before discharging off-site and into natural water flows. To the extent possible, storm water runoff should be directed to the constructed wetlands, where a high percentage of remaining contaminants would settle or be filtered out before leaving the site and entering natural water flows. Water from the constructed wetlands should be re-used for irrigation if not for other greywater uses.

�� Initial costs associated with a vegetated roof currently range from $13 to $20 per square foot compared to $6 to $7 for a high-albedo roof. While a high-albedo roof would satisfy the requirements for credit 7.2, it would provide no storm water management benefits.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 7.1, Heat Island Effect: Non-Roof (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to reduce heat islands (thermal gradient differences between developed and undeveloped areas) in order to minimize impacts on microclimate and human and wildlife habitat.

1.2 Requirements Provide shade (within 5 years) and/or use light-colored/high albedo materials (reflectance at least 0.3) and/or open grid pavement for at least 30% of the site’s non-roof impervious surfaces, such as walkways, plazas, parking lots, etc.; OR place a minimum of 50% of all site parking spaces underground or covered by permanent structured parking; OR use an open grid pavement system (less than 50% impervious) for a minimum of 50% of the parking lot area.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should indicate that a minimum of 30% of non-roof impervious surfaces areas are constructed with high-albedo materials and/or open grid pavement systems and/or will be shaded within 5 years; OR a minimum of 50% of parking spaces have been placed underground or are covered by structured parking; OR an open-grid pavement system (less than 50% impervious) has been used for a minimum of 50% of the parking lot area. The LEED Letter Template should reference the information noted above.

2.0 Challenges 2.1 ShadeReliance on adequate growth of shade inducing foliage in the allotted five-year window could result in failure to achieve sufficient shade cover for 30% of constructed surfaces by final commissioning. Therefore, it may be necessary to combine Heat Island strategies to ensure that performance is achieved in regard to credit 7.1.

2.2 High Reflectance MaterialsHigh reflectance materials will be subject to weathering effects that may result in darkening of constructed surfaces over time and possible failure to maintain adequate reflectance values. Again, it might be necessary to combine Heat Island strategies to ensure that performance is achieved in regard to credit 7.1.

2.3 Open-Grid Paving SystemsOpen-grid paving systems employ pervious paving technologies or open cells which may/or may not be seeded with vegetation. Vegetated systems may not be suitable for highly trafficked areas. Snow clearing procedures or application of road salt/sand may negatively affect porosity or vegetation growth, thereby affecting the performance or aesthetics of these systems over time.

2.4 Underground ParkingConstruction of an underground parking lot would require extensive excavation of limestone bedrock, the predominant bedrock found on the Indiana University campus. Underground parking is unlikely to be a feasible option.


Sustainable Sites


3.1 Provide Shade Within Five YearsThis strategy would be simple, cost effective and easy to implement. However, open spaces must be designed with potential foliage heights in context to prevent development of spaces that cannot be adequately shaded by foliage within the five-year window.

3.2 High Reflectance (Albedo) MaterialsStandard black asphalt pavement will not pass the LEED reflectance minimum standard. White Portland cement concrete is characterized by high reflectance values, even under weathering. Similarly, standard Portland cement concrete demonstrates reflectance values that meet the LEED reflectance minimum standard.14 The addition of light colored aggregates or ground granulated blast furnace slag would improve reflectance values and would also contribute to Materials & Resources credits 3.1 and 3.2.

3.3 Pervious Paving SystemsPervious paving systems allow rainwater to percolate through constructed surfaces and into the sub-base, where it may be collected and discharged to a storm sewer system or allowed to drain into bedrock. Recently, Indiana University installed a pervious pavement system in the parking lot at Assembly Hall. Pervious paving areas may also accept runoff from roofs and adjacent parking areas, thereby reducing storm water discharges.

3.4 CostProviding shade cover via vegetation would be a cost-effective option to meet LEED Credit 7.1. Further, landscape design techniques would be employed on Indiana University building sites irrespective of the LEED rating credit. Standard Portland cement concrete, with or without slag incorporation, would represent the most cost effective of the paving system options. See Table 1 in SS Appendix 3 for paving cost comparisons. Construction of an underground parking lot would require significant capital expenditure.

4.0 RecommendationsStandard Portland cement concrete has been identified as a cost-effective strategy which would satisfy LEED credit 7.1 regarding Heat Island effects for non-roof surfaces. Greater than 80% of all platinum and 60% of all LEED-certified projects employed high-albedo cement and provided shade cover for building surfaces, such as walkways, plazas and parking lots. We recommend that this approach be followed at Indiana University along with the vegetated shade cover option explained above.

�� American Concrete Pavement Association. http://www.pavement.com Accessed on 15 November 2005.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 7.2, Heat Island Effect: Roof (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to reduce heat islands (thermal gradient differences between developed and undeveloped areas) in order to minimize the impact on microclimate and human and wildlife habitat.

1.2 Requirements Use Energy Star compliant (high reflective) and high emissivity roofing (emissivity of at least 0.9 when tested in accordance with ASTM 408) for a minimum of 75% of the roof surface; OR install a green (vegetated) roof for at least 50% of roof area. Combinations of high albedo and vegetated roofs can be used providing they collectively cover 75% of the roof area.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should indicate that roofing materials comply with Energy Star Label requirements and have a minimum emissivity of 0.9. Additionally, it should be demonstrated that high-albedo and vegetated roof areas combined constitute at minimum 75% of roof area; OR, that vegetated roof areas constitute at minimum 50% of the roof area.

2.0 Challenges 2.1 Energy Star Compliant Roofing SystemEnergy Star compliant roofing systems would not provide significant energy efficiency gains for a building similar to the proposed design based on climate considerations. Therefore, a strict benefit/cost analysis would reject the proposal for such a roof system based on energy savings alone.

2.2 Vegetated Roof The additional expense incurred for installation and maintenance of a vegetated roofing system would be significant in comparison to any benefits obtained from storm water diversion or increased energy efficiency. Therefore, installation of a vegetated roof would not be justified without full consideration of the non-monetary benefits such a system would provide.


3.1 Energy Star Compliant Roofing SystemEnergy Star compliant roofing systems are available through a variety of manufacturers and distributors in the Midwest. These systems demonstrate excellent long-term durability, require minimal maintenance, and may be easily combined with other roofing systems, such as solar arrays or vegetated roofing systems. Indiana University has installed several roofing systems of this nature on the IUB campus. The life span of these roofing systems is typically 20 to 30 years, and would be enhanced where combined with a vegetated roof.


Sustainable Sites

3.2 Vegetated Roof Vegetated roof systems can collect, store, and slowly discharge storm water while providing insulation against incident solar energy. The expected energy benefit and storm water reduction from such an installation would not justify this strategy based on standard cost/benefit analyses. However, the educational benefit of such a system would be of great significance. Overall, these systems demonstrate exemplary commitment to the principles of green building design. Vegetated roofs complement public access areas, creating a park like setting on the building’s roof and will have a life span similar to a membrane style roof.15 Roofing systems of this type have been installed on buildings in Indiana, such as Oaklyn Branch Library, located in Evansville, Indiana.

3.3 CostOf the available options, installation of an Energy Star R compliant roofing system will be the most cost effective manner to achieve LEED credit 7.2. Installation of an Energy Star compliant roofing system would cost $6-$7 /sq. ft. for a total of $260,000 (covering 75% of a 50,000 sq. ft. roof). This would be similar to the expense of a non-Energy Star compliant roofing system.16 Thus, there would be no additional cost to achieve this credit. The energy benefit received from installing an Energy Star compliant roofing system is roughly $1,350 annually from reduced air-conditioning requirements.17 (See SS Appendix 3 for parameters used to calculate energy savings.)

Vegetated roofing systems are significantly more expensive to install and maintain long term when compared to standard membrane roofing systems. Installation costs range $15-$20 per square foot, or $500,000 (covering 50% of a 50,000 sq. ft. roof). The non-economic benefits of vegetated roofs, although substantial, are difficult to accurately quantify.18

4.0 RecommendationsA vegetated roofing system covering 50% of the total roof area would represent an effective option to achieve LEED credit 7.2. Although few LEED-rated buildings invest in vegetated roof systems, the non-economic benefits associated with these roofs are significant and should be taken into account. Installation of such a system would demonstrate Indiana University’s commitment to the principles of green building design, aiding in the recruitment of both students and faculty to SPEA. Alternatively, use an Energy Star compliant, high reflectivity/high emissivity roofing membrane system to cover 75% of the total roof area. Greater than 80% of LEED-certified buildings employ Energy Star compliant roofing systems to obtain LEED credit 7.2 regarding Heat Island effects for roofs.19

�� Lisa Fae Matthiessen and Peter Morris.http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Resources/Cost_of_Green_Full.pdf#search=’Costing%20Green:%20Davis%20Langdon Accessed on 15 November 2005.�� Peter Baker, Seward Sales Corporation. Personal communication. 5 October 2005. �� US Department of Energy Cool Roof Calculator. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/roofs+walls/facts/CoolCalcEnergy.htm Accessed on 15 November 2005. �� John Bruns, Enviroscapes, Inc. Personal Communication. 8 October 2005.�� Matthiessen and Morris.


Sustainable Sites

1.0 SS Credit 8, Light Pollution Reduction (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to eliminate light trespass from the building and site, improve night sky access, and reduce development impacts on nocturnal environments.

1.2 RequirementsMeet or provide lower light levels and uniformity ratios than those recommended by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) Recommended Practice Manual: Lighting for Exterior Environments (RP-33-99). Design exterior lighting such that all exterior luminaires with more than 1,000 initial lamp lumens are shielded and all luminaires with more than 3,500 initial lamp lumens meet the Full Cutoff IESNA Classification. The maximum candela value of all interior lighting shall fall within the building (not out through windows) and the maximum candela value of all exterior lighting shall fall within the property. Any luminaire within a distance of 2.5 times its mounting height from the property boundary shall have shielding such that no light from that luminaire crosses the property boundary.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should declare that the credit requirements have been met.

2.0 ChallengesThis credit should not be difficult to achieve at any of the proposed sites.


3.1 Indirect LightingThe benefits of indirect lighting are: 1) it distributes light more evenly than direct lighting systems, 2) it eliminates glare and shadows, 3) it reduces electricity use and cooling loads, and 4) it reduces required light levels. The costs associated with indirect lighting are: 1) it may be more costly to implement in some cases compared to direct lighting, and 2) it may require greater floor to ceiling heights.

3.2 Compact Fluorescent LampsThe benefits associated with dimmable compact fluorescent lamps are: 1) they lower energy consumption, 2) they promote longer lamp life, and 3) they adapt lighting supply to meet relative demand. However, compared to indirect or conventional lighting systems, the costs are higher and larger aperture fixtures are required.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that this credit be pursued. Both indirect lighting and compact fluorescent lamp systems are satisfactory methods of achieving the standard.


Water Efficiency

1.0.1 WE Credit 1.1, Water Efficient Landscaping: Reduce by 50% (1 point)

1.0.2 WE Credit 1.2, Water Efficient Landscaping: No Potable Use or No Irrigation (1 point)

1.1 Intent

1.1.1 WE Credit 1.1 This credit is intended to limit or eliminate the use of potable water for landscape irrigation.

1.1.2 WE Credit 1.2This credit extends WE 1.1 to further limit or eliminate the use of potable water for landscape irrigation.

1.2 Requirements

1.2.1 WE Credit 1.1Use high-efficiency irrigation technology OR use captured rain or recycled site water to reduce potable water consumption for irrigation by 50% over conventional means.

1.2.2 WE Credit 1.2 Use only captured rain or recycled site water to eliminate all potable water use for site irrigation (except for initial watering to establish plants), OR do not install permanent landscape irrigation systems

1.3 Documentation

1.3.1 WE Credit 1.1 Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, engineer or responsible party, declaring that potable water consumption for site irrigation has been reduced by 50%. Include a brief narrative of the equipment used and/or the use of drought-tolerant or native plants.

1.3.2 WE Credit 1.2 Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the responsible architect and/or engineer, declaring that the project site will not use potable water for irrigation. Include a narrative describing the captured rain system, the recycled site water system, and their holding capacity. List all the plant species used. Include calculations demonstrating that irrigation requirements can be met from captured rain or recycled site water. OR Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the landscape architect or responsible party, declaring that the project site does not have a permanent landscape irrigation system. Include a narrative describing how the landscape design allows for this.

2.0 Challenges


Water Efficiency

2.1 Non-potable IrrigationWhen considering permanent irrigation that uses non-potable water, two options pose challenges—capturing storm water and recycling non-sewage wastewater. Both of these options require the installation of storage tanks for captured storm water or greywater as well as the water recycling system required for most greywater systems. The presence of these storage tanks and/or recycling systems may pose constraints on site and building design as well as aesthetics.

Harnessing storm water, in many designs, relies on the roof as a catchment surface. However, this design could conflict with other roof designs being considered that could limit or eliminate storm water runoff of the building, such as a vegetated roof. Although some storm water runoff will continue even with a vegetated roof, the amount of storm water captured is unknown at this time. Another option to capture storm water is to utilize the parking lot as a catchment surface via impervious pavement.

Recycling non-sewage wastewater into greywater for non-potable uses can quickly become complicated and expensive. In order to use water from a source other than a public water supply, a non-potable distribution system must be completely separate from the potable system and written approval from the state board.20 Costs associated with using greywater are high, including separate plumbing and ensuring the appropriate level of sanitation/filtration required by the state.

2.2 Challenges in Using All Native Plants When designing and implementing a landscape of all native plants, a few challenges can be expected and may be prevented. A common undertaking at the time of acquisition and planting is to substitute specified plants for cheaper or more readily available species. Native plants can be more expensive than non-natives, so if a consultant is used, expect a hassle to stick to an all-native plant landscape and higher costs. One solution is to be up-front about the resolve to use all native plants. Another challenge can come from the available stock at nurseries. As the benefits of native plants continue to be realized and demanded, nurseries will supply more native plants. A current list of nurseries that typically stock native plants can be found in (WE Appendix 1). Early consulting during the design phase with nurseries may help to overcome any complications due to unavailable plants.


3.1 Permanent IrrigationBloomington’s climate does not mandate permanent irrigation if native plants for medium or dry soils are selected. If permanent irrigation is needed either due to selection of non-native plant species or as part of wastewater treatment, technologies to reduce or eliminate the use of potable water are an option. Some technologies that can complement irrigation systems to create more efficiency are timer controls, soil moisture sensors, and rain switches. Underground drip irrigation delivery systems target irrigation water directly to the root systems of plants while reducing runoff. Any irrigation system should be used in conjunction with xeriscape landscape principles (See WE Appendix 2) that have the potential to reduce water demands by 50 percent or more.21 When considering irrigation systems, it is important to remember the continued costs for regular maintenance even though the cost of the system is not particularly high.

�0 410 IAC 6-5.1-8(c)�� North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. http://www.p2pays.org/ref/01/0069201.pdf Accessed on 19 October 2005.


Water Efficiency

Additional technologies can reduce or eliminate the need for potable water, such as using greywater or harnessing storm water. These options require design coordination concerning both the site and building. Harnessing storm water or rainwater harvesting requires simple materials found at local hardware stores (See WE Appendix 3) as well as larger or more expensive components of storage tanks, pressure tanks and pumps that connect to the irrigation system. The amount of collected rainfall can be calculated based on collection efficiency, precipitation over the last 50 years, and the catchment surface, typically the roof (See WE Appendix 4). Some storm water catchment systems utilize collection through impervious pavement of a parking lot into underground bins. Harnessing stormwater can be utilized on a relatively smaller scale just for irrigation or as part of a larger system for other water efficiency targets; however, the challenges will pose obstacles (see 2.1 ). The costs of harnessing storm water vary greatly according to system and building design as well as system capacity. If a retention pond or constructed wetland exists on-site, installing a relatively minimal system of filter and pump to deliver water to the irrigation system can provide a simpler solution for using non-potable water, but common maintenance issues should be fully considered that can raise costs.

Other systems that draw upon non-potable water sources include greywater or recycled water, such as wastewater from sinks. Using greywater will require advance planning of plumbing to keep non-potable water completely separate from potable water. The requirements associated with using greywater can quickly complicate building design and raise costs. Depending on system size and design, some estimates have started at $100,000 for capturing greywater.

3.2 No IrrigationGiven the climate in Bloomington, a selection of native plants in the landscape design can eliminate the need for any permanent irrigation system. The design of the landscape specific to the site should be thoughtfully carried out and include applicable xeriscape landscaping principles (See WE Appendix 2). Careful consideration of the features of the site, such as areas where storm water runs off from the building and natural drainage areas, can help with plant selection due to species specifications.

This option is significantly less costly than any of the systems proposed in Option 3.1 considering both upfront costs and ongoing maintenance costs. The selection of native plants, depending on species, does not pose significantly higher or lower costs than choosing non-native plants. When comparing costs of native plants and turf grass, installation of most native species is approximately half the cost of turf. The maintenance costs in the first five years are about the same as turf, but after five years, the costs of native plants fall to at least one-quarter to that of turf grass areas. For example, by choosing a meadow landscape over turf grass, mowing is only required twice a year versus once a week for conventional grasses. The overall long-term lower maintenance costs outweigh any relatively minor higher upfront costs of choosing native plant species.

4.0 Recommendations Planning and development of a functional landscape should incorporate not only natural and native landscaping techniques but also xeriscaping principles applicable to the southern Indiana climate—such as planning and design, soil improvement, and drought-tolerant, native plant selections (See WE Appendix 1). Site conditions such as drainage, soil type, sun exposure/shade, aesthetic preferences, existing plantings, slope/grade, and water availability are all crucial elements of an efficient plan. Intended use of the site must be carefully considered, including recreation, traffic, and habitat. Trees, shrubs, and grasses all require different amounts of water. Plants should be placed in groups according to their respective water needs, called hydrozones. Incorporate high water demanding plants at the bottom of slopes. Consider grading and directing surface runoff and rainfall gutters to


Water Efficiency

landscaped areas as opposed to drainage ways that exit the property. As for plant selection, native species are adapted to work together in similar soils and benefit each other’s growth by forming symbiotic relationships.22 Native plants are capable of surviving in soil conditions, climate, pests, and diseases of this locality. To satisfy any open-area, grass requirements of Indiana University, the Director of Landscape Architecture at Indiana University, Mia Williams, is familiar with several grass species that require little or no irrigation.

We recommend selecting native plants and carefully planning the landscape layout so that no permanent irrigation system is needed resulting in two LEED credit points. Plants suited for medium or dry soil moisture and native to the region will work best for Bloomington. If wetlands or surface water exists on site, plants adapted to wetter soil moisture should be considered, but plants that survive periods of drought will be more successful and less expensive over time. A soil analysis is not needed if six inches of top soil is added to all vegetated landscape areas. If using seed mixes instead of mature plants, ensure the landscaper is contracted for the initial maintenance, typically 2 years, due to the labor-intensity of growing from seed—includes regular weeding to prevent unwanted plants from succeeding over desirable plants.

Landscape design opens up possibilities of sponsoring gardens, forested areas, a wetland, a roof top garden (i.e., vegetated roof), and/or outdoor laboratories or classrooms. Through thoughtful planning of the landscape, in addition to the options of a constructed wetland and vegetated roof, the creation of outdoor classrooms or laboratories can complement the environmental science and policy curriculum at SPEA through living examples on-site.

�� North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. http://www.p2pays.org/ref/01/0069201.pdf


Water Efficiency

1.0 WE Credit 2, Innovative Wastewater Treatment Technologies (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to reduce the generation of wastewater and potable water demand.

1.2 RequirementsReduce the use of municipally provided potable water for building sewage conveyance by a minimum of 50%, OR treat 100% of wastewater on-site to tertiary standards.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED letter template should be signed by the architect, MEP engineer, or responsible party, and affirm that water used in the building for sewage conveyance will be reduced by 50%. This document must be accompanied by a spreadsheet calculation and a narrative that demonstrates the measures used to reduce wastewater by at least 50% from baseline conditions,23 OR the LEED letter template should be signed by the civil engineer or responsible party affirming that 100% of the wastewater will be treated to tertiary standards on-site. This document must be accompanied by a narrative that describes the on-site wastewater treatment system.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Space LimitationsDue to the urban setting at Indiana University, there are limitations on the type of wastewater treatment systems that can be used. Specifically, on-site wastewater treatment wetlands and ecologically engineered natural systems (see WE Appendix 5) require subsurface (i.e. anaerobic tank), surface (i.e. undeveloped/open space), and/or indoor space that must be incorporated into the initial building design. A wastewater treatment wetland could be implemented if an undeveloped site was chosen that had adequate space and minimal change in elevation. A Living Machine wastewater treatment system is not limited in terms of exterior space, but in terms of interior design limitations. A greenhouse or atrium is critical for adequate sunlight and, subsequently, to the aerobic water treatment function of these systems (see WE Appendix 6).

2.2 Cost RealizationTypically, new buildings at Indiana University are required to connect to the Bloomington city utilities sewer system and the concept of bypassing the conventional sewage system is relatively foreign. Because of this uncertainty, the actual realization of direct costs by treating wastewater on-site may not be justified (see WE Appendix 7). However, benefits of an alternative treatment system are vast when considering the educational and research opportunities. Students and staff could maintain both a wastewater treatment wetland and Living Machine with proper training24.

Another aspect that may offset costs associated with an alternative wastewater treatment system is methane capture. Depending on the evolution of methane capture technology, this anaerobic decomposition by-product could be used to make hydrogen for fuel cells or for an alternative source of heat (see WE Appendix 8).

�� All inquiries on this option of meeting the LEED criteria should be directed to Credits �.� and �.�, as they are critical in the �0% reduction of wastewater conveyance.�� Oberlin College, Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies. http://www.oberlin.edu/ajlc/systems_lm_4.html Accessed on 2 November 2005.


Water Efficiency

2.3 Regulatory HurdlesRegulations regarding on-site sewage treatment and disposal are geared towards maintaining standard practices. Any deviation from a typical system will require approval and permitting by several agencies for both the system to be installed and the installer. Some rules state that public sewage systems must be utilized exclusively, where available, and that interior toilet fixtures must be of the water-flushed type resulting in wastewater diversion to municipal sewage system25. These regulations will present barriers to on-site wastewater treatment. However, provisions exist that allow the use of experimental treatment methods, and there are several non-conventional systems operating in the state of Indiana which indicate that the regulations have some degree of flexibility.


3.1 Living MachineThe first option of a Living Machine presents the most challenges, but is much better suited for education and demonstration purposes. In other locations where this technology is utilized, the aesthetically pleasing Living Machine often becomes a highly visible showcase of the building’s innovative technologies and would attract high quality students and faculty. A Living Machine will also provide opportunities for student employment and for the development of practical skills. A variety of research projects from both students and faculty members could be carried out using a Living Machine, which could serve as a source of funding for its maintenance costs. Where implemented, Living Machines have consistently demonstrated a high level of performance, treating water to tertiary standards26. In order to comply with regulations and to provide for a failsafe in case of overflow or system failure, the Living Machine would be connected to the existing sewage system, as are other buildings on campus.

3.2. Wastewater Treatment WetlandIf these restrictions listed above are overcome (2.1 and 2.3), the ecological and aesthetic benefits will be recognized by SPEA and the rest of the campus at Indiana University. SPEA’s long tradition of wetland education and research will be complemented by opportunities that this type of system will present. Also, an in-state consulting firm with SPEA ties, J.F. New, is an excellent resource for guidance on this option (see WE Appendix 9).

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that a Living Machine be implemented in the design of the new SPEA building. We also recommend a wastewater treatment wetland if the chosen site will accommodate this type of system. Either of these systems would provide a concrete example of sustainability that is aligned with the environmental, leadership, and educational values which SPEA represents. If the aforementioned options are not feasible, we believe that emphasis should be placed on the reduction of water use (Water Efficiency Credits 3.1 and 3.2).

�� IAC 410 6-5.1(c)�� United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet: The Living Machine.


Water Efficiency

1.0 WE Credits 3.1 and 3.2, Water Use Reduction: 20% and 30% Reduction (1 point each)

1.1 IntentCredits 3.1 and 3.2 are intended to maximize water efficiency within buildings to reduce the burden on municipal water supply and wastewater systems.

1.2 RequirementsUse strategies that in aggregate use 20% and 30% less water than the water use baseline calculated for the building after meeting the Energy Policy Act of 1992 on fixture performance requirements.

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED letter template should be signed by the MEP engineer or responsible party, declaring that the project uses 20% and 30% less water than the baseline fixture performance requirements of the Energy Act of 1992. Further, a spreadsheet calculation demonstrating the water-consuming fixtures specified for the stated occupancy and use of the building reduce occupancy-based potable water consumption by 20% and 30% compared to baseline conditions.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Challenges for Reducing Water Use at the 20 and 30 Percent LevelsCurrent statistics show that approximately 340 billion gallons of fresh water are withdrawn every day from rivers, streams, and reservoirs to support residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural and recreational activities. Using large volumes of water increases maintenance and lifecycle costs for building operations. Further it increases consumer costs for municipal supply and treatment facilities.

The biggest challenge that Indiana University will face when considering reducing water use at the 20 percent, or 30 percent level, will be the cost of the technology. Most of the options are very inexpensive; however, the maintenance of some of the technologies such as the waterless toilets can be somewhat costly.


3.1 Water-Free ToiletsThere is a need to reduce the use of water, especially in commercial buildings. According to some estimates, water efficiency measures in commercial buildings can reduce water usage by approximately 40 percent.27 In a typical 100,000 square-foot office building, lox-fixtures with sensors and automatic controls can save a minimum of one million gallons of water per year.28 This estimate is based on 650 building occupants each using an average of 20 gallons of water per day.29 In commercial buildings, toilet flushing uses the most water, accounting for 4.8 billion gallons per day30. An option that can help SPEA reduce its water usage is to install waterless toilets. Some estimates show that waterless urinals can save approximately 45,000 gallons of water per year31.

�� The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.state.oh.us/opp/greenbuilding_web.pdf Accessed on 21 November 2005. �� Ibid.�� Ibid.�0 U.S. Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/b2c/b2c/init.do�� California Integrated Wastewater Management. http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/GreenBuilding/ Accessed on 16 November 2005.


Water Efficiency

Waterless toilets are systems that do not use water to treat or transport human excreta. These systems consist of a single container in which excrement is deposited and decomposes as it moves slowly through the container. It is then removed as compost from the end product chamber.32 Waterless toilets rely on aerobic bacteria that work ten 10 to 20 times faster than the anaerobic bacteria at work in septic tanks.33 The challenge of waterless toilets is getting air to the composting process while minimizing human exposure to the contents. However, careful engineering of airflow can minimize this problem. If the air is taken in and then exhausted through an exhaust vent instead of through the bathroom, human exposure to the composting contents will be extremely limited.

An advantage to installing waterless toilets is that these single container units fit directly under a bathroom and can easily replicate a flush toilet with little physical or social adjustment. The container is permanently fitted under the toilet seat, and never has to be fully emptied as the compost can be gradually removed when it reaches the end-product chamber. The disadvantage is that if a problem occurs with the toilet, the system can be out of order until the problem is fixed because there is only one container.

There are many advantages to using waterless toilets. First, the cost for a waterless toilet is priced ranged from $2,000 to $5,000 per toilet (depending on design).34 Statistics show that if these systems are properly designed, waterless toilets can reduce the flush volume from eight gallons to a maximum of 1.6 gallons.35 Further, research shows that waterless toilets can reduce the site restrictions and pollution nutrients problems that are usually encountered with the use of systems such as the septic tank.

3.2 Automatic ControlsAnother option that could help SPEA reduce its water use by 30 percent is by placing automatic controls in restrooms. The use of automatic or touchless controls for restroom fixtures (toilets and faucets) can save water and promotes hygiene in restrooms. For urinals and toilets, the automatic controls use an infrared sensor that activates the flushing mechanism only when it is needed and for only one flush. This eliminates over-flushing and sharply curtails damage and vandalism to the flush valve.

For faucets, automatic controls limit the flow of water to only those times when it senses a hand under the faucet. On average, this feature reduces water use by 75 percent.36 Further, much research suggests that it also reduces vandalism and damage because users cannot leave the water running. The costs of automatic controls range from $200 to $350 per sensor/control.37

3.3. Point of Use Water HeatersTraditionally, buildings have been designed with central, domestic water heating systems. Centrally located heaters generate the hot water, which then is piped to all areas within the building that need hot water. In larger facilities, circulation pumps are added to help reduce the wait time for hot water, particularly at locations far from the water heater.

�� The Center for Ecological Pollution Prevention. http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/yourhome/technical/pdf/fs27.pdf�� Ibid.�� Ibid.�� Ibid.�� Plumbing and Mechanical. http://www.pmmag.com/CDA/BNP__Features__Item/0,2379,154223,00.html Accessed on 16 Novem-ber 2005. �� Ibid.


Water Efficiency

Equally important, these systems can waste large amounts of water. Users must run the water for several seconds before hot water is available. In many cases, more water is wasted while waiting for it to become hot than is actually needed once it is hot. Not only does this waste water, but also it wastes the energy required to heat the water.

An alternative to the central-system approach is the point-of-use water heater, which uses multiple small water heaters located where water is used throughout the facility. Each individual heater is sized to meet the requirements of that location and is placed as close as possible to minimize both water and energy losses between the heater and the use point. By minimizing the water loss waiting for hot water to reach the user, these systems offer greatly reduced water use rates, as well as improved energy efficiency.

The most significant drawback of point-of-use systems is their increased maintenance requirements. While the units are low maintenance, there are more components that maintenance personnel must check and maintain regularly. While more maintenance might be required, the use of point-of-use water heaters eliminates a major maintenance problem found with all central systems, in that the loss of a single component will not eliminate hot water to the entire facility.

4.0 RecommendationsThere are several options available to Indiana University to reduce the use of water at the 20 percent or 30 percent levels. Actually, all of the options specified above are feasible. Most green buildings of competing institutions have managed to include waterless toilettes and automatic controls to reduce the amount of water used. It is recommended that Indiana University do the same. According to our research, waterless toilets cost $2,000 to $5,000 per unit. However, on average they save 45,000 gallons of water per year on a typical 100,000 square foot office building. It is also recommended that the University use automatic controls to reduce water use. Not only is this technology used by competing institutions but by a vast majority of “green building.” The costs of these units are small (see Options section on Automatic Controls). Further, these units are low maintenance.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Prerequisite 1, Fundamental Building Systems Commissioning

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to verify and ensure that fundamental building elements and systems are designed, installed and calibrated to operate as intended. 38

1.2 RequirementsImplement or have a contract in place to implement the following fundamental best practice commissioning procedures:

Engage a commissioning team that does not include individuals directly responsible for project design or construction management.Review the design intent and the basis of design documentation.Incorporate commissioning requirements into the construction documents.Develop and utilize a commissioning plan.Verify installation, functional performance, training and operation and maintenance documentation.Complete a commissioning report.

1.3 Documentation The LEED Letter Template should be signed by the owner or commissioning agent(s), confirming the fundamental commissioning requirements have been successfully executed or will be provided under existing contract(s).

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Previous Experience Overall this requirement should not pose any challenges to acquiring LEED status. Several Indiana University- Bloomington buildings have used a commissioning team starting with the IU Auditorium. Previously used commissioning teams may not have an extensive level of experience with green design, but numerous firms in Indiana and the surrounding states are qualified to commission this type of building. 3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Commissioning Teams Affiliated with IUBeginning with the IU Auditorium, several buildings on campus have used a building commissioner to assure buildings are running properly when opened. This is increasingly important for buildings with complex systems, especially “green buildings.” University Engineer, Jeffrey Kaden, cites that IU previously used a commissioning team from Kentucky with success. However, this commissioning team and others with whom IU has worked is not familiar with some of the individualized systems used in green building.

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005.

•

•••••


Energy & Atmosphere

3.2 Indiana “Green” Commissioning TeamsCurrently there are no LEED accredited commissioning agents in the state of Indiana. Some engineering and architecture firms have individuals certified in LEED building. This suggests commissioning teams within the state will soon be trained in working with LEED buildings.

3.3 Other “Green” Commissioning TeamsThere are numerous LEED accredited commissioning agents throughout the United States. The LEED website lists all accredited agents.39 Currently there are four registered commissioning agents in the surrounding states, but this number will certainly increase over time. The commissioning agents work for the following firms. Qei Engineers, Inc from Dayton, OH, Four Seasons Environmental, Inc in West Chester and Cincinnati, OH and Paladin, Inc in Lexington, KY.

Little information is available about Qei Engineers, Inc. However, they focus on meeting standards such as ASHRAE.40 Four Seasons Environmental, Inc is based in Ohio, but is expanding services southward. In 2004, Four Seasons was nominated for Small Business of the Year by the Internal Revenue Service. While the organization is known to be a stellar business, it is best known for its mechanical maintenance services.41 Paladin, Inc focuses on Facility Evaluation / Diagnostics, Project Management, Control System Design / Commissioning, and Facility Commissioning. They claim their strengths include: engineering mechanical, electrical, and process control systems, understanding capital demands a return, and appreciating the needs of operations and maintenance staff.42 The emphasis on operations and maintenance staff is essential as a LEED certified building would require some alternative care and maintenance. Furthermore, this is a central element of additional commissioning.

3.4 CostThe cost of a commissioning team will be based on a competitive bidding process. Since this is becoming standard practice at IU, it would not require funding beyond a standard building. No current cost estimate can be made as IU has never certified a green building and the specifics of the building cannot be provided to a commissioning agent at the current time.

4.0 RecommendationsIt is recommended the building systems commissioning team be hired through a competitive bidding process with requirements set for previous experience. LEED accreditation and membership are essential, as well as previous commissioning on a LEED certified building requiring a wide variety of systems. An emphasis on experience with high technology buildings including labs and “smart” classrooms may also be a requirement. There is no recommendation regarding which firm may be most appropriate for commissioning at the current time. While, Paladin, Inc is currently the most appropriate commissioning agent, Indiana firms will most likely be gaining experience in future years.

�� US Green Building Council.http://www.usgbc.org/LEED/AP/ViewAll.aspx?CMSPageID=50&CategoryID=19& Accessed on 28 October 2005.�0 Hayden Safety Engineers.http://www.haydensafety.com/docs/engineering.html Accessed on 7 Nov 2005.�� Internal Revenue Service.http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-procure/04_four_seasons.pdf Accessed on 7 Nov 2005.�� Paladin. http://www.paladinky.com/index.php?b=About_Us Accessed on 8 Nov 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Prerequisite 2, Minimum Energy Performance

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to establish the minimum level of energy efficiency for the base building and systems. 43

1.2 RequirementsDesign the building to comply with ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1999 (without amendments) or the local energy code, whichever is more stringent.

1.3 Documentation The LEED letter template should include a signed statement by a licensed professional engineer or architect confirming the building complies with ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 or local energy codes. ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 is more stringent than Indiana and local codes and therefore would be required for this prerequisite.

2.0 ChallengesThere are no challenges predicted for this particular requirement. ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 is often viewed as an industry standard in any building construction. Currently, Bloomington and Indiana energy code are less stringent than ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 and therefore cannot be considered the standard.


3.1 Engineer or Architect FirmThe engineer or architect firm must clearly understand regulations set forth by ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999. Since this is becoming standard practice, any engineer or architect qualified to construct a LEED certified building should be qualified to fulfill these standards.

3.2 CostNo additional costs as compared to other buildings would be incurred in meeting this requirement. Furthermore, meeting this standard should be done regardless of LEED certification and is built into other architecture, engineering and construction costs.

4.0 RecommendationsIt is recommended ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 is considered throughout the building process as it affects various parts of the building. As for hiring an architect or engineer, qualifications regarding other elements of green design should be prioritized.

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Prerequisite 3, CFC Reduction in HVAC&R Equipment

1.1 IntentReduce ozone depletion as a result of CFC-based refrigerants.44

1.2 RequirementsZero use of CFC-based refrigerants in new building HVAC & R base building systems.45

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED letter template should be signed by the owner or commissioning agent(s), confirming the fundamental commissioning requirements have been successfully executed or will be provided under existing contract(s).

2.0 ChallengesAs the construction of the new building will require no conversion of outdated base HVAC systems, there are no challenges predicted for this particular requirement.

3.0 Implementation Options 3.1 Engineer or Architect FirmThe engineer or architect firm must clearly understand regulations set forth by ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999. Since this is becoming standard practice, any engineer or architect qualified to construct a LEED certified building should be qualified to fulfill these standards.

4.0 RecommendationsIt is recommended ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 is considered throughout the building process as it affects various parts of the building. As for hiring an architect or engineer, qualifications regarding other elements of green design should be prioritized.

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005.�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Credit 1, Optimize Energy Performance (1-10 points)

1.1 IntentAchieve increasing levels of energy performance above the prerequisite standard to reduce environmental impacts associated with excessive energy use.46

1.2 RequirementsReduce design energy cost compared to the energy cost budget for regulated energy components described in the requirements of ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1999, as demonstrated by a whole building simulation using the Energy Cost Budget Method described in Section 11: New Buildings Existing Buildings Points 20% 10% 2 30% 20% 4 40% 30% 6 50% 40% 8 60% 50% 10

Regulated energy components include HVAC systems, building envelope, service hot water systems, lighting and other regulated systems as defined by ASHRAE.47

1.3 Technologies and Strategies Design the building envelope and building systems to maximize energy performance. Use a computer simulation model to assess the energy performance and identify the most cost effective energy efficient measures. Quantify energy performance as compared to a baseline building.48

2.0 ChallengesThe achievement of a 20 percent improvement in energy cost will not be a difficult task. The new building will be tighter, which means it will be well-insulated and not settled. Further, new mechanical devices use less power, thus having less resistance. Unfortunately, two out of ten possible points is a very large loss in trying to achieve a platinum LEED rating by the U.S. Green Building Council. To achieve a 60% reduction in energy costs on a continuing basis will require a very sophisticated approach. Most likely, stand-alone devices that are monitored monthly will not have the level of control needed to achieve this objective.


3.1 Siemens APOGEE Building Automation System49

APOGEE GO is the new web server application for Insight, and the latest software edition of their powerful APOGEE building management and control system. It incorporates industry leading encryption technology to assure secure transmission. What is seen is only what is permitted.50

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005. �� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005.�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220& Accessed on 10 November 2005.�� Siemens. http://www.sbt.siemens.com/BAU/products/software/Insight_APOGEE_GO.asp Accessed on 3 November 2005.�0 Siemens. http://www.sbt.siemens.com/BAU/products/software/Insight_APOGEE_GO.asp Accessed on 3 November 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

There are various options for Insight. One interesting one is the Compliance Support Option, which tracks which property of an option was changed, when it was changed, how much, by whom, and its values before and after the changes. It also tracks who authorized the change and from where the change was made. The Light Safety Option for Insight turns into a workstation that acts as an operator control interface for fire alarm, automation, and security systems. It is sanctioned by Underwriters Laboratory. A Remote Notification Option will send information to pagers, email, or telephones, via voice or short message format. There are other options that will convert any computer into an Insight client, without the necessity of having to install the Insight Software on the machine. An option which is significant to this LEED credit is called the Utility Cost Manager for InfoCenter Suite. InfoCenter Suite provides a solid foundation for data storage and retrieval to tracking, analysis and documentation of facility energy usage. Standard Windows NT Server security protocols combined with the features of the InfoCenter Server ensure the integrity of the InfoCenter database.51

Adding to this tracking capability of Insight are APOGEE System Controllers. There are modular building controllers and modular equipment controllers. They will control the HVAC or complex designs of energy savings, as dictated by SPEA. These include elements such as sensors, terminal equipment controllers, digital energy monitors, valves and actuators, damper actuators, combustion controls, variable frequency drives and lab and fume hood controls.

To sum the capability of this option, SPEA could control and integrate HVAC, lighting, fire alarm and security systems, laboratory controls, elevators, power management, tanks and generators, gas detection and particle measurement and be ISO 14001 compliant, meeting all of OSHA standards, all the time, without any doubt.

3.2 The Current System of Control by Decentralized ApproachThe Siemens APOGEE Building Automation System option would involve some individual monitoring devices in places throughout the building and on incoming power and steam lines, as well as insulating the new building and ensuring that people do not unnecessarily waste energy. Having variable controls on lighting and thermostat assists in this mission.. This encompasses both status quo and benefits of a new building and increased awareness of the need to conserve energy. Individual rooms may be too hot in the summer and too cold in the winter. Lights may be mistakenly left on, and other non-controllable losses of energy could result.

3.3 Hot Water ServiceCreating a hot water service system throughout the whole building through a use of innovative and up-to-date technologies can significantly improve the building performance and optimize energy use. One example is the use of an on-demand hot water heater or tankless water heaters. Each unit, depending on manufacturer, can provide up to 8.5 gallons per minute. When the faucet is opened, the burner in each unit turns on and heats metal coils in the heat exchanger. Hot water is continuous and a constant temperature. When faucet is turned off, the unit shuts off. No energy is wasted. Multiple units can be manifold together. The units turn on sequentially to meet demand. Multiple units provide redundancy. Units are wall-mounted either internally or externally, saving valuable space. Typical life expectancy is 15 to 20 years. These units reduce gas usage by nearly 50 percent and have no maintenance associated with them and overall energy efficiency increases by 85 percent.52

�� Siemens. http://www.sbt.siemens.com/BAU/products/software/Insight_APOGEE_GO.asp. Accessed on 3 November 2005. �� Rinanni Corporation. www.rinanni.us. Accessed on 6 November 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

Mini-tank hot water systems can be installed directly underneath sink basins. These are individual units that store anywhere from 1 gallon to 3.5 gallons of water. They are heated by a continuous pilot light that heats the unit and supplies the hot water. There is no waiting for hot water; it is available as soon as the faucet is turned on.

3.4 HVAC SystemsThe inclusion of an energy efficient HVAC system within the new building will help contribute to better overall energy performance. There are so many types of systems out that most are regulated by ASHRAE and meet Energy Star Compliance. One type of HVAC system can include Demand Controlled Ventilation (also called Digital Demand Control or DDC). DDC monitors different zones in the building for CO2 concentration as a proxy for how many people are using a room/zone. It sends less air to unoccupied zones and more air to higher occupancy areas. As a result, less “wasted” air is blown as compared to a typical CAV or VAV system (since un-used rooms are not ventilated), resulting in significant energy savings.

HVAC systems can also be designed as an overhead air circulation unit or an under-floor ventilation unit. Depending on the room design and whether they are offices or classrooms, set-up will vary.Please refer to the Indoor Environmental Quality section within this document to view a more in-depth analysis of multiple HVAC systems, set-ups and recommendations.

3.5 Energy-Efficient Lighting and Automated Lighting Controls

3.5.1 Energy-Efficient Lighting

3.5.1.1 T5 vs. T8 Fluorescent LampsIf energy efficiency is a prime criterion in choosing fluorescent lamps, T5 lamps are most appropriate. Invented in the year 2000,53 T5 lamps are smaller in diameter and more energy efficient than predecessors T8 and T12.54 General Electric claims that its “T5 lamps with Starcoat [are] the most efficient fluorescent lamp available.”55 See pp. 386-387 of the GreenSpec Directory for a listing of manufacturers.

3.5.1.2 Compact Fluorescent Lights “CFLs use much less energy than incandescent bulbs and need replacing far less often, making them a cost-effective choice. CFLs have also been used effectively to replace halogen lights in torchieres. Although early CFLs had a stark light, the color rendering of newer CFLs is equal to or superior to incandescent light bulbs, producing full-spectrum lighting.”56 See pp. 387-388 of the GreenSpec Directory for a listing of manufacturers.

�� GE Consumer and Industrial Lighting. http://www.gelighting.com/na/business_lighting/education_resources/learn_about_light/history_of_light/last_years.htm Accessed 23 October 2005.�� AdvancedBuildings.org. http://www.advancedbuildings.org/_frames/fr_t_lighting_t5_fluor.htm Accessed on 13 October 2005. �� GE. “GE T5 Lamps with Starcoat” sell sheet. August 2000. Saved as an electronic archive pdf..�� U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (USDOE EERE).” http://www.eere.energy.gov/EE/buildings_lighting.html Accessed on 17 October 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

3.5.1.3 Task Lighting“Lighting is more efficient when it is applied directly to a task (for instance, a bright light over a desk) rather than illuminating the entire room at the same lighting level.”57 Using task lights in SPEA offices could reduce energy consumption. See pp. 382-383 of the GreenSpec Directory for a listing of manufacturers of compact fluorescent luminaires / torchieres and task lighting.

3.5.1.4 Electronic Dimmable Ballasts“Operating lamps with electronic ballasts reduce electricity use by 10% to 15% over magnetic ballasts for the same light output. Electronic ballasts also offer reduced flicker, lower weight, less noise and longer life than do magnetic ballasts. Dimmable electronic ballasts can be controlled by photosensors, occupancy sensors and/or a time clock.”58 Although electronic ballasts cost only slightly more than magnetic ballasts, however, electronic dimmable ballasts can cost more than three times as much.59 See pp. 386 of the Greenspec Directory for a listing of manufacturers.

3.5.1.5 LED Exit signs“Older exit signs are still illuminated with two 15- or 20-watt incandescent lamps…LED Exit signs use…as low as 1.8 watts per illuminated face…Though LED fixtures cost somewhat more than incandescent, they often pay for themselves in less than a year through reduced energy costs and labor savings.”60 See pp. 384-385 of the GreenSpec Directory for a listing of manufacturers.

3.5.1.6 Exterior LuminairesThere now exist commercially available solar-powered exterior luminaries; they charge up during the day and put out light at night. See pp. 383-384 of the GreenSpec Directory for a listing of manufacturers.

3.5.2 Automated Lighting ControlsOccupational sensors will provided an added energy savings by reducing the operating time on several lighting fixtures. There are three different types of occupational sensors that could be utilized throughout the building. These are:

Timer Based: This control system uses a timer to regulate when the lights turn on and off, and is the most basic type of control. Occupancy Based: This type of sensor is controlled by movement. These types of sensors will recognize movement within a room and turn the lights on.61 Lighting Level Based: This sensor registers the ambient light in the room and adjusts the artificial light-ing in a given room to supplement the existing light.

How does SPEA choose the best lighting control option? The state of Wisconsin offers some advice: “Consider occupancy sensors and timers if the space use is unpredictable. Typical examples might be warehouse aisles and hotels or any space that is unoccupied, in an unpredictable fashion, for more than 30 percent of the time. Consider

�� Ibid.�� AdvancedBuildings.org. http://www.advancedbuildings.org/_frames/fr_t_lighting_e_dimmable_ballasts.htm Accessed 13 October 2005.�� AdvancedBuildings.org. http://www.advancedbuildings.org/_frames/fr_t_lighting_e_dimmable_ballasts.htm�0 Wilson, Alex, Nadav Malin and Mark Piepkorn, eds. Greenspec Directory: Product Guideline Specifications 5th Edition. Brattle-boro, VT: BuildingGreen, Inc. 2005.�� WisconsinPublicService.com. http://www.wisconsinpublicservice.com/business/eba_10.asp Accessed on 16 November 2005.See the following Web site for a manufacturer listing: http://www.wisconsinpublicservice.com/business/PA_manufacturers.html#PA10

•

•

•


Energy & Atmosphere

timed switches if space use is predictable and not part of a 24-hour operation. Photoswitches and timed switches work well for exterior lighting used on facades, signs, and in parking areas. If daylight is available, consider dimming ballasts with photosensors or multilevel switches. In spaces where there is a need to vary light levels, either during the day or after hours, manual dimmers or multilevel switching will work well.”62

3.6 Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005This law “provides a tax deduction of up to $1.80 per square foot for new commercial buildings that reduce regulated energy use by 50 percent relative to the requirements in the 2001 new construction standard developed by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE 90.1).”63 “The law also allows owners of new and existing buildings (those placed in service prior to the date of enactment) to earn a partial deduction of $0.60 per square foot per system for upgrading one or two major building systems (envelope, lighting, or HVAC) to 50 percent more efficient than ASHRAE 90.1 standards, instead of all three (e.g., a $1.20 per square foot deduction for upgrading lighting and HVAC).”64

4.0 Recommendation

4.1 AutomationThe Siemens APOGEE option is strongly recommended, which might cost a significant amount, but which would virtually guarantee a platinum LEED rating by the US Building Council, and most likely have a payback value of less than ten years in cost saving alone. The cost of their system will most likely be lower in the next five years also. If Siemens is involved from the beginning, in a turnkey type approach, the organization will also be in a position to be even more valuable, having the skills that would be necessary to install the system.

4.2 Service hot waterIn reference to the service hot water heaters, the ideal situation for the new building is the selection of the tankless on-demand water heaters. The selection of these provides for more space and less maintenance for building operators while providing the most efficient use of energy and performance. Tankless has no standing water, and does not require the water to be continually lit like its counterpart, the mini-tank direct contact water heater. This can result in less gas wasted by a pilot light and prevents the buildup of lime and calcium deposits within the tank due to the water continually being heated. Another downside to the mini-tank units are its lack of available hot water. If more than one sink is connected to the unit, then the chances of running out of hot water are more likely, and adding an additional unit would prove too costly. The tankless units would be ideal for the new building.

4.3 Energy-Efficient Lighting and Automated Lighting ControlsWe recommend implementing energy-efficient lighting, as specified in 3.5.1.1 - 3.5.1.6, and implementing automated lighting controls where appropriate, as specified in 3.5.2.

4.4 Tax DeductionWe recommend taking advantage of the tax deduction specified in 3.6, or whatever tax incentives are available when the new building is constructed.

�� WisconsinPublicService.com “Lighting: lighting controls.” http://www.wisconsinpublicservice.com/business/eba_40.asp Accessed 16 November 2005.�� Nadel, Steven. “The Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 and its Implications for Energy Efficiency Program Efforts.” American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy Report Number E053. September 2005. p. 3.�� Nadel, Steven. p. 4.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Credits 2.1 -2.3, Renewable Energy, 5-20% (1-3 points)

1.1 IntentEncourage and recognize increasing levels of self-supply through renewable technologies to reduce environmental impacts associated with fossil fuel energy usage.65

1.2 RequirementsSupply a net fraction of the building’s total energy use (as expressed as a fraction of annual energy cost) through the use of onsite renewable energy systems. A reduction of 20% is worth three points in LEED credits toward a platinum rating from the U.S. Green Building Council. 66

1.3 Technologies and StrategiesAssess the project for renewable energy potential, including solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydro, and bio-gas strategies. When applying these strategies, take advantage of net metering with the local utility.67

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Fuel CellsThe challenges to meeting this requirement will not be cost, as expected. For example, for biomass, work will be done to set up existing technologies that convert biomass, corn, peanuts, and other wastes into methane and hydrogen to use for either of the options selected. Other energy sources, such as solar energy, will be challenged more by changes in technology. Innovation will drive these points, not in buying existing electricity and heat generation technologies.

2.2 Wind PowerOn-site wind power is not a viable option for SPEA. Added to the challenge of building a wind turbine on IU property is the fact that southern Indiana is rated a Class 1 out of 7 in terms of annual average wind power density (with Class 1 being “least windy”).68

2.3 Solar PowerThe challenge of solar power is the initial cost of installing a large system.


3.1 Purchase Two 3000 kW Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Turbine GeneratorsSolid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) is a partnership between Siemens and the Department Of Energy, which began in 2002 and started with an $80 million dollar budget. It will develop fuel cells within 10 years that will cost approximately $400/kW to manufacture and market. For a 120,000 square foot facility, based on figures from the Indiana University engineer, the daily usage of kilowatt hours would be 1 million hours. 20 percent of that is 200 kW hours per day. Peak volume this year was April and 280 kW were used per day in the current

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220. Accessed on 2 November 2005.�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220. Accessed on 2 November 2005.�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220. Accessed on 2 November 2005.�� Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps/chap2/2-01m.html Accessed 4 November, 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

SPEA for electricity.69 Therefore, a 300kW hybrid turbine SOFC fuel cell should cost about $12,000 in five years. Two of those would amount to a $24,000 expenditure.70 Siemen’s Pittsburg manufacturing facility is where the SOFC hybrid turbines are produced and there is a branch office on the north side of Indianapolis. Two cells are recommended so one could function as a backup. This product runs from methane.

3.2 Nexa Airgen Fuel Cell GeneratorsNexa Airgen currently makes a fuel cell that generates 1kW and 120 volts at 60 Hz. It costs $12,900 and operates from hydrogen. In five years, the price will be lower on this product. Using the specifications for the new lecture building, these fuel cells could power the lecture halls and two 60 seat classrooms. A rough estimate would be one each for the five lecture halls and one for the two classrooms. The operating equipment in the rooms would drive energy usage. Fuel cell generators would not be used for lighting or heat. Therefore, the cost would be an initial $78,000 dollars. The residual costs would be the generation of hydrogen from whatever source was adopted. Other sizes and prices for hydrogen different sizes of fuel cells--including those that generate only 12V, to be used for desktop computers--are also available.

3.3 GeothermalGeothermal energy technologies use the heat of the earth for direct-use applications, geothermal heat pumps, and electrical power production. Research in all areas of geothermal development is helping to lower costs and expand its use. In the United States, most geothermal resources are concentrated in the West, but geothermal heat pumps can be used nearly anywhere.71

Almost everywhere, the shallow ground or upper 10 feet of the Earth’s surface maintains a nearly constant temperature between 50° and 60°F (10° and 16°C). Geothermal heat pumps can tap into this resource to heat and cool buildings. A geothermal heat pump system consists of a heat pump, an air delivery system (ductwork), and a heat exchanger—a system of pipes buried in the shallow ground near the building. In the winter, the heat pump removes heat from the heat exchanger and pumps it into the indoor air delivery system. In the summer, the process is reversed, and the heat pump moves heat from the indoor air into the heat exchanger. The heat removed from the indoor air during the summer can also be used to provide a free source of hot water.72

Energy savings are a significant advantage of GHP systems. Instead of creating heat by burning a fuel, GHPs move heat from one place to where it is needed. Therefore, consumption of electricity is reduced 25 percent to 50 percent compared to traditional heating and cooling systems, allowing a payback of system installation in 2 to 8 years and a life expectancy of 20 to 30 years. GHPs are proven to be safe for schools. Polyethylene ground heat exchangers—essentially the same as used for natural gas distribution—are often guaranteed for 25 to 40 years.

�� Kaden, Jeffrey R. Indiana University Engineer. SPEA UTILITY USAGE-30 September 2005.�0 Siemens. http://www.powergeneration.siemens.com/en/fuelcells/seca/index.cfm. Accessed on 27 November 2005. �� U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/geothermal.html. Ac-cessed 4 November 2005.�� U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/geothermal.html. Ac-cessed 4 November 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

3.4 Solar PowerThere are two general ways that SPEA could directly use the power of the sun. One way is through “passive” solar heating and daylighting.73 The other way is through “active” solar hot water or solar heating74, and/or photovoltaic (solar electric, or PV) panels to produce electricity. The “Renewable Energy” LEED credit covers active applications.

In a residential application, a solar hot water system can provide a household with 4 times the energy savings of a similarly-priced photovoltaic system. For residences, therefore, solar hot water systems typically provide more so-called “bang for the buck” than photovoltaic systems. But SPEA’s energy needs differ from that of a residence, in that our demand for hot water as a percentage of total energy consumption is probably quite a bit lower than the demand for hot water as a percentage of total energy consumption in a household.75 SPEA’s roof space—in addition to the part of it that is vegetative (“green”)—would thus be more wisely devoted to photovoltaics (see footnote 14 for an expert opinion).

3.4.1 Geographical location for solar power: suitableWe have heard people state the assumption that Indiana may not be a great place to install solar panels due to its latitude and clouds. However, the amount of sunlight that reaches rooftops at IU Bloomington is no less than the amount of sunlight that reaches rooftops at some other universities that have elected to install PV systems. A PV system that produces an average of 4.7 kWh of electricity per square meter per day at IU Bloomington would produce only 4.6 kWh/sq-m/day at Yale University and at Farmingdale State University of New York, and only 4.4 kWh/sq-m/day at University of Michigan Ann Arbor.76 Yet each of these three other schools has chosen to install PV systems at its campus. And the sunlight reaching warmer areas such as Orange County, CA77 and Miami, FL78 is less than 25% more than the sunlight reaching Bloomington. Therefore, geographic location should not be a reason to rule out SPEA as a candidate for photovoltaics. See below at “Innovation Case Studies” for more details about specific cases.

�� USDOE EERE http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/solar_passive.html Accessed 12 November, 2005.“Passive” solar heating and daylighting refers to non-mechanical “design features such as large south-facing windows and building materials that absorb and slowly release the sun’s heat.”�� USDOE EERE http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/integratedbuilding/activesolar/ Accessed 28 November 2005.The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy advises that “Active solar energy systems should be integrated with a building’s design and systems only after passive solar and energy-conserving strategies are considered.”�� Gordon. Solar Service, Inc. Phone Interview. 16 November 2005. (Phone #847-677-0950). According to FindSolar.com, Solar Service, Inc. has installed 1500 water heating systems and only 2 grid-tied PV systems. Joe confirmed that the company for which he works specializes in solar hot water installations. Nevertheless, he recommended that for our situation—both the old and the new SPEA building—PV would be a better choice than solar hot water.�� FindSolar.com. http://www.ebike.net/solar/index.php?page=rightforme (tells the solar rating of the county in which each of these universities resides.) Accessed on 16 November 2005.�� In this scenario, 5.7 kWh/sq-m/day�� In this scenario, 5.3 kWh/sq-m/day


Energy & Atmosphere

3.4.2 Cost, Power, and Space A 1 kW PV array installed today at IUB would cost $9,000 (including parts and labor), use 100 square feet of roof space, and produce an average of 100 kWh of electricity per month.79 In future years, more watts per square meter will be attainable as PV cell efficiency continues to improve.80

SPEA’s electricity consumption determines the cost and required space to produce various percentages of electricity production with photovoltaics.81 For example, a middle school in northern Kentucky recently installed a 24 kW PV array, with the objective that this array would provide 5% of its power. This school is one story tall, with a footprint of 112,070 square feet.82 If the new SPEA building is twice that size, and requires twice as much energy, it will require a 48 kW PV array to provide 5% of our power.83 In 2005 such an array would cost us $9000 x 48= $432,000. Providing 10% of our power with PV (a 96 kW array) would cost $864,000, and providing 20% of our power with PV (a 192 kW array) would cost $1,728,000 and consume 19,200 square feet of roof space. However, the cost of such a large installation would probably be less due to economies of scale—the more kW of panels we install, the less the installer will charge per kW.84

SPEA can likely find lower cost options than the case previously described. For example, a recent 20 kW installation in Illinois cost the customer $150,000.85 With economies of scale, we could therefore receive a 200 kW system for less than $1,500,000.

A quote from another company yielded an estimate of about $1,500,000 for a 20 kW installation ($ 7 – 8 per watt installed)86. Please see EA Appendix 1 and EA Appendix 2 for information about solar power system installers in this region.

3.5 Financial incentives for renewable energy applications

�� Michelle Greenfield. Third Sun Solar and Wind Power. Phone Interview. 16 November 2005. (Phone #740-597-3111). According to FindSolar.com, Third Sun has installed 52 grid-tied PV systems and 29 grid-independent PV systems, which makes them the most experienced PV installers that we were able to locate in this region.�0 Aur Beck. Chief technician of Advanced Energy Solutions. Phone Interview. 16 November 2005. (Phone #618-893-1717)In a laboratory setting engineers have developed solar cells that are twice as efficient as the ones presently commercially available. Beck also said that a typical commercially available PV panel is about 15% efficient. “15% efficient” means that the panel converts 15% of the wattage that it receives from the sun into wattage that we can use as electricity.�� Michelle Greenfield. Third Sun Solar and Wind Power. Phone Interview. When the new SPEA building is designed, an engineer/architect will estimate the electrical load of the building. According to Michelle Greenfield of Third Sun Solar and Wind Power, this person should be LEED-certified, so that their estimate properly takes into ac-count the building’s energy savings that result from its many other “green” features.�� Michelle Greenfield. Third Sun Solar and Wind Power. Phone Interview.�� This figure could be an overestimate, as our new LEED-certified SPEA building probably will be more energy-efficient than the middle school in the example. Or it could be an underestimate if certain SPEA facilities, such as its laboratories, have uniquely large energy demands.�� Michelle Greenfield. Third Sun Solar and Wind Power. Phone Interview.�� Aur Beck. Chief technician of Advanced Energy Solutions. Phone Interview�� Jenny Strauss. Inside Sales Representative. PowerLight Corporation. Email.(PowerLight Corporation, 2954 San Pablo Avenue, Berkeley CA 94702 USA [email protected] http://www.powerlight.com


Energy & Atmosphere

3.5.1 GrantsSPEA should apply for one or more of three grants that the state of Indiana offers for renewable energy projects. The guidelines for two of these grants—the Indiana Alternative Power and Energy Grant Program (worth up to $50,000 and applicable not only to renewable energy but also to HVAC), and the Indiana Distributed Generation Grant Program (worth up to $100,000) are posted in the Appendix (EA Appendix 3 and EA Appendix 4). Information about the Indiana Energy Education and Demonstration Grant Program (or answers to questions about the other two grants) is available from Ryan J. Brown, Office of the Lieutenant Governor-Energy Group Program Manager, Phone# 317.232.8961 Email [email protected]

3.5.2 DonationsJim Lefeld at Cinergy/PSI said that it would be possible for Cinergy/PSI to donate a PV system to SPEA.87 To apply, send a 1-2 page proposal to his email address, [email protected], or call him at 513-287-2435.

3.5.2 Net meteringGrid-tied facilities with photovoltaic systems can sell excess electricity back to the grid. For example, if SPEA is connected to the regional utility grid, and if SPEA has a PV installation on the roof that produces electricity in excess of the building’s demand (for example, on holidays when the building is largely vacant88), then the electricity that SPEA produces would flow into the grid for other customers’ use, and SPEA would get a credit from the utility company for our contribution.89

4.0 Recommendations

4.1 Fuel CellsWe recommend the SOFC option, given the fact of the SECA joint project with the Department of Energy. From a price standpoint, it is much more viable than the hydrogen fuel cell generators, even though they have the advantage of being portable. Biodegradation to produce natural gas would be a cost-effective way to produce some of the fuel for the larger SOFC hybrid turbines and Siemens would be available to service them if a problem arose. This is an advantage, because the SOFC’s would be set up outside, instead of the portable hydrogen fuel cells. Also in five years, and as a result of the joint collaboration project, the state-of-the-art could be raised to a much higher level. Our advice is to contact Siemens early and get them to begin designing one or two custom SOFC hybrid turbine generators for the new Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs building.

�� Jim Lefeld.Jim said that they would donate a PV system if the system were “highly visible”; therefore, we would need to provide tours for people to see the system (and/or, for example, have an electronic display in the lobby that shows how much electricity the panels are creat-ing—and write “Thanks to Cinergy/PSI” on the display (“Many IU parents are Cinergy/PSI customers…”)). Cinergy/PSI donated to the Cincinnati Zoo a system that is highly visible to zoo visitors. Also, Cinergy/PSI keeps the credits for the environmental attributes of the electricity created by any PV equipment it donates.�� …and the lights in vacant rooms are turned off thanks to our future automation system!�� Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy (DSIRE). “Indiana Incentives for Renewable Energy: Net Metering” Accessed on 14 September 2005. http://dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfm?Incentive_Code=IN05R&state=IN&CurrentPageID=1


Energy & Atmosphere

4.2 GeothermalDue to the building’s dependency on the Physical Plant steam operations and to maintain a part of the system for University-wide benefits, we feel it is important to incorporate multiple uses of renewable energy in order to not only diversify our savings, but to act as a model to demonstrate the different types of energy and its effect on the bottom line. Geothermal is just one of many types that should be included in the building. It is using the earth’s wasted energy to produce energy for our new building in the form of hot water, heating and cooling of rooms, and heat exchange to different parts of the building. Due to how the unit is built and set-up, there is no need for large bulky units that are usually placed on the ground or on the roof, thus, freeing up space on the roof for other innovative designs or uses of other renewable energy sources such as solar energy. The payback period is rather short, considering the life expectancy of the unit, and has zero emissions. Some units can even be powered by their own fuel cell or solar panel, therefore causing it to be eco-friendly on all levels.

There are many manufacturers of geothermal heat pumps, but one comes directly from Fort Wayne, Indiana. WaterFurnace Inc. produces many types of geothermal pumps and loop systems for schools, homes, and large commercial buildings around the world.

4.3 PhotovoltaicsPhotovoltaics should be one of the renewable energy options explored for the new SPEA building. Photovoltaics may or may not be our favored renewable energy option, depending on the state of technology when this building is constructed.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Credit 3, Additional Commissioning (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to verify and ensure that the entire building is designed, constructed and calibrated to operate as intended. 90

1.2 RequirementsIn addition to the Fundamental Building Commissioning prerequisite, implement or have a contract in place to implement the following additional commissioning tasks:

A commissioning authority independent of the design team shall conduct a review of the design prior to the construction documents phase.An independent commissioning authority shall conduct a review of the construction documents and completion of the construction document development and prior to issuing the contract documents for construction.An independent commissioning authority shall review the contractor submittals relative to systems being commissioned.Provide the owner with a single manual that contains the information required for re-commissioning building systems.Have a contract in place to review building operation with O&M staff, including a plan for resolution of outstanding commissioning-related issues within one year after construction completion date.

1.3 Documentation The LEED Letter Template should confirm that the required additional commissioning tasks have been successfully executed or will be provided under existing contract(s).

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Previous ExperienceOverall, this requirement should not pose any challenges to acquiring LEED status. Several Indiana University- Bloomington buildings have used a commissioning team starting with the IU Auditorium. Previously used commissioning teams may not have an extensive level of experience with green design, but numerous firms with Indiana and the surrounding states are qualified to commission this type of building.

2.2 Additional requirements from Fundamental Building CommissioningMost of the additional requirements necessary for this point have been included in previous IU commissioning contracts. The only foreseeable problem is the necessity to hire a commissioning team early, with a sound contract and professional relationship with architects and construction firms.


�0 US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220. Accessed on 2 November 2005.

•

•

•

•

•


Energy & Atmosphere

3.1 Commissioning Teams affiliated with IUBeginning with the IU Auditorium, several buildings on campus have used a building commissioner to assure buildings are running properly when opened. This is increasingly important for buildings with complex systems, especially “green buildings.” University Engineer, Jeffrey Kaden, cites that IU previously used a commissioning team from Kentucky with success. However, this commissioning team and others with whom IU has worked is not familiar with some of the individualized systems used in green building.

3.2 Indiana “Green” Commissioning TeamsCurrently there are no LEED accredited commissioning agents in the state of Indiana.

3.3 Other “Green” Commissioning TeamsThere are numerous LEED accreted commissioning agents throughout the United States. The LEED website lists all accredited agents. Currently there are four registered commissioning agents in the surrounding states, but this number will certainly increase over time. The commissioning agents work for the following firms. Qei Engineers, Inc from Dayton, OH, Four Seasons Environmental, Inc in West Chester and Cincinnati, OH and Paladin, Inc in Lexington, KY. These firms were described in the previous section on building system commissioning.

3.4 CostThe cost of a commissioning team will be based on a competitive bidding process. Since this is becoming standard practice at IU, it should not require funding beyond a standard building.

4.0 RecommendationWe recommend that the building systems commissioning team be hired through a competitive bidding process with requirements set for previous experience. LEED accreditation and membership are essential, as well as previous commissioning on a LEED certified building requiring a wide variety of systems. An emphasis on experience with high technology buildings including labs and “smart” classrooms may also be a requirement. There is no recommendation as to which firm may be most appropriate for the commissioning at the current time. While, Paladin, Inc is currently the most appropriate commissioning agent, Indiana firms will most likely be gaining experience in the upcoming years. The firm selected for the original commissioning should be responsible for all commissioning in the building.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Credit 4, Ozone Protection (1 point)

1.1 IntentReduce ozone depletion and support early compliance with the Montreal Protocol.

1.2 RequirementsInstall base building level HVAC and refrigeration equipment and fire suppression systems that do not contain HCFC’s, or Halon. For new buildings, specify refrigeration and fire suppression systems that do not use HCFC’s or Halons.91

1.3 DocumentationThe LEED Letter Template should include a signed statement by a licensed professional engineer or architect confirming the building complies with ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1-1999 or local energy codes.

2.0 ChallengesImplementation of HCFC and Halon-free refrigeration and fire suppression equipment should not present a challenge, as engineers will not have to modify outdated base building systems. No conversion will be necessary. Thus, this credit can be met through investigation of vendors of HCFC and Halon alternatives within Indiana and its surrounding states.92

2.1 Previous ExperienceOverall, this requirement should not pose any challenges to acquiring LEED status. Numerous firms with Indiana and the surrounding states are qualified vendors of HCFC and Halon-free refrigeration and fire suppression equipment. Construction engineers and architects should be familiarized with these systems, as alternatives to HCFC and Halon are well known.93

3.0 Implementation OptionsImplementation of HCFC and Halon alternatives does not represent a significant challenge. There are numerous vendors within Indiana and the surround states that offer HCFC and Halon-free refrigeration and fire suppression equipment. Almost 100% of residential and commercial air conditioning equipment (excluding large air conditioning systems called chillers) has traditionally operated on HCFC-22 (R-22). However, these systems are in the process of being phased out under the supervision of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and alternatives are currently available.94 The current refrigerant alternatives for residential and commercial air conditioning equipment are HFC blends, and have become readily available. The current refrigerant alternatives for commercial and industrial refrigeration systems are HFCs, HFC blends and ammonia. An excellent example of vendors of HCFC and Halon alternatives within Indiana and its surrounding states include United Refrigeration Inc, which operates a branch office located in Evansville, Indiana.95

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220&. Accessed 28 November 2005.�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220&. Accessed 28 November 2005.�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220&. Accessed 28 November 2005.�� United States Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/ozone/science/indicat/ Accessed 27 November 2005.�� United Refrigeration Inc. http://www.uri.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/PrcTransaction/-/-/-/Default-Start Accessed 28 November 2005.


Energy & Atmosphere

3.1 CostThe implementation of HCFC and Halon alternatives in refrigeration and fire suppression systems will be slightly more expensive to implement because almost 100% of residential and commercial air conditioning equipment (excluding large air conditioning systems called chillers) has traditionally operated on HCFC-22 (R-22).96 Therefore, alternatives may be more expensive. As production of HCFC and Halon is phased out under the supervision of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, alternatives (though more expensive) must be pursued, not only to remain abreast of current trends, but also to easily achieve the applicable LEED credit.

4.0 RecommendationThere is no recommendation regarding which firm may be most appropriate for the implementation of HCFC and Halon alternatives at the current time. While United Refrigeration Inc. offers an excellent example of an appropriate commissioning agent, other Indiana firms will undoubtedly offer similar alternatives to HCFC’s and Halon. A competitive bidding process will identify which firms can supply the necessary deliverables at the lowest cost.

�� United Refrigeration Inc.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Credit 5, Measurement and Verification (1 point)

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to provide for the ongoing accountability and optimization of building energy and water consumption performance over time. 97

1.2 RequirementsInstall continuous metering equipment for the following end-uses:

Lighting systems and controlsConstant and variable motor loadsVariable frequency drive (VFD) operationChiller efficiency at variable loads (kW/ton)Cooling loadAir and water economizer and heat recovery cyclesAir distribution static pressures and ventilation air volumesBoiler efficienciesBuilding-related process energy systems and equipmentIndoor water risers and outdoor irrigation systems

In addition, develop a Measurement and Verification plan that incorporates the monitoring information from the above end-uses and is consistent with Option B, C or D of the 2001 International Performance Measurement & Verification Protocol (IPMVP) Volume I: Concepts and Options for Determining Energy and Water Savings.

1.3 Documentation The LEED Letter Template should indicate that metering equipment has been installed for each end-use and declaring the option to be followed under IPMVP version 2001. A copy of the Measurement & Verification plan following IPMVP, 2001 version, including an executive summary should be provided.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 IU constraintsCurrently, Indiana University has little to no metering of buildings. There is no record of boiler efficiencies and other heating and cooling systems because of the centralized nature of the IU heating system. With steam heat produced at the central plant and brought to each building, it is difficult to measure individual building use. Furthermore, to better gauge heating use separate systems would provide better measurements. The new building would have to be designed to either separate itself from the central steam plant, or to develop metering to measure intake.

�� US Green Building Council. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220 Accessed 28 November 2005.

••••••••••


Energy & Atmosphere

2.2 Dependence on other systemsDesign of systems such as indoor water risers and outdoor irrigation systems play a major role in how metering of these systems is conducted. The water efficiency points, such as water- efficient landscaping must be referenced when measuring use. The SPEA building can only measure outdoor irrigation systems if the water efficiency points are earned.

2.3 Necessary PlanningRecommendations from LEED suggest the building design must include equipment to measure energy and water performance. Comparisons to the current building would need to be made, but the current building does not have this information available. 3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Contract with Experienced TeamMost contractors are familiar with measurement and verification systems in industrial and educational buildings. Finding an experienced resource early in the planning process is necessary to assure measurement is feasible and accurate. Firms, such as Siemens in Indianapolis, have installed metering systems in buildings that currently have little to no metering at the present time. Furthermore, they are experienced with installing metering in systems similar to IU. For example, Siemens installed metering equipment on buildings at Ball State University, a university with similar energy systems.

3.2 CostThe cost of metering equipment is minimal for a building of this type. This type of metering will provide solid information about the cost savings in the building. For example, metering will provide dependable figures about boiler efficiencies. Not only does this show cost efficiencies to students, taxpayers, and the community, but it also displays IUB as a good investment.

4.0 RecommendationsThe points available for measurement and verification are easily achievable if a qualified engineer and contractor are available. Firms familiar with green building and metering individual buildings in a centralized energy system are preferred. Furthermore, the current SPEA building should have metering equipment installed so that comparisons between the buildings can be made.


Energy & Atmosphere

1.0 EA Credit 6, Green Power (1 point)

1.1 IntentEncourage the development and use of grid-source, renewable energy technologies on a net zero pollution basis.

1.2 RequirementsProvide at least 50% of the building’s electricity from renewable energy sources by engaging in at least a two-year renewable energy contract. Renewable sources are as defined by the Center for Resource Solutions (CRS) Green-e products certification requirements.

1.3 Documentation The LEED Letter Template should document that the supplied renewable power is equal to at least 50% of the project’s energy consumption and the sources meet the Green-e98 definition of renewable energy. We also must provide a copy of the two-year electric utility purchase contract for power generated from renewable sources.

1.4 Explanation of the “Green Power” LEED creditWhile Credits 2.1-2.3 (“Renewable Energy”) encourage the use of on-site renewable energy, the “Green Power” credit encourages the use of off-site, grid-source renewable energy. Green power sources include solar, wind, low-impact hydro, geothermal, and biomass. Green power may be procured from a Green-e certified power marketer, a Green-e accredited utility program, or Green-e certified “Renewable Energy Certificates” (RECs) (also called “Tradable Renewable Certificates (TRCs)”).

2.0 ChallengesIt is not possible at this point in time for SPEA to purchase green power from either a “Green-e certified power marketer” or a “Green-e accredited utility program.”

A Green-e certified power marketer is an independent company, in states with electric utility deregulation, that sells electricity derived directly from a renewable energy source; the services of such a company are not available to SPEA.99 Furthermore, Bloomington’s utility company, Cinergy/PSI, does not have a Green-e accredited utility program.100 Cinergy/PSI does allow customers to make a monthly donation toward developing local renewable energy systems101, but such a donation does not count for LEED credit.102

Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), on the other hand, are a viable option.

The main challenge in purchasing Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) is estimating the building’s annual energy consumption, so that the appropriate amount (at least 50%) of green power can be purchased. That said, if we aim to obtain this credit by purchasing RECs but underestimate our building’s energy consumption, it would be easy to purchase additional RECs as needed. A list of REC purveyors, with price and contact information, is found in EA Appendix 5.

�� Green-e. http://www.green-e.org/ Accessed 17 November 2005.�� Keri Bolding, Green-e. Phone Interview. 16 November 2005. (Phone # 415-561-2100). If we have further questions for Green-e, we are supposed to ask for “Kathy.”�00 Keri Bolding. Green-e.�0� Jim Lefeld. Cinergy/PSI. Phone Interview. 9 November 2005. (Phone # 513-287-2435, email [email protected]). Bird, Lori and Blair Swezey. “Green Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report (Eighth Edition).”. www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/resources/pdfs/38994.pdf Accessed on 7 November 2005 p. 37.�0� Keri Bolding. Green-e.


Energy & Atmosphere


3.1 Examples of Renewable Energy Certificate purchases by other universitiesThe University of Michigan signed a two-year contract to use wind power for 50% of the energy needs of its Samuel Dana School of Natural Resources & Environment (SNRE) Building. This contract is with Renewable Choice Energy, which is one of the companies listed in EA Appendix 5. The contract provides 536,600 kWh of wind power for the Dana Building,103 and if U of M is paying $2 per 100 kWh—the price quoted on the Renewable Choice Energy website—then the cost to U of M for 2 years’ worth of wind power is $10,732. See the below at “Innovation Case Studies” for more details about the SNRE Dana Building.Oregon State University contracted with Bonneville Environmental Foundation, one of the companies listed in EA Appendix 5, to support the production of 5 million kWh of wind energy.104

3.2 Implementation at SPEASPEA’s method of implementation for the Green Power credit is limited to purchasing Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). There are many different companies from which SPEA can choose. Cost and contact information about 12 of these companies is provided in EA Appendix 5. Additional information is available at the EPA’s Green Power Partnership website.105 4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend obtaining the Green Power credit by purchasing at least two years’ worth of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) equivalent to at least 50% of the building’s energy consumption. Criteria for selecting an REC purveyor could include cost (for example, per 100 kWh) and/or renewable energy type.

�0� LaPorte, Elizabeth. http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/0405/Jan10_05/21.shtml Accessed on 5 November 2005. Note: The first sentence of that article erroneously states that wind power will provide “all of the energy” used by the Dana Building, while the final sentence of the article correctly states that wind power will be equivalent to “half of all the energy” used by the building (for more information, contact Yoshiko Hill, Manager, Electrical Engineering and Energy Management, Utilities and Plant Engineer-ing Department, University of Michigan Plant Operations at [email protected]) �0� Stauth, David. http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/2003/Aug03/energy.htm Accessed on 9 November 2005.�0� USEPA Green Power Locator: Indiana. http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/locator/in.htm Accessed on 13 November, 2005. If we choose to obtain this green power credit, we will want to join EPA’s Green Power Partnership, a program that “provides assis-tance and recognition to organizations that demonstrate environmental leadership by choosing green power” (http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/index.htm)


Materials & Resources

1.0 MR Prerequisite, Storage & Collection of Recyclables

1.1 IntentFacilitate the reduction of waste generated by building occupants that is hauled to and disposed of in landfills.

1.2 RequirementsProvide an easily accessible area that serves the entire building and is dedicated to the separation, collection, and storage of materials for recycling including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics and metals.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or owner, declaring that the area dedicated to recycling is easily accessible and accommodates the building’s recycling needs. Provide a plan showing the area(s) dedicated to recycled material collection and storage.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 SPEA and Indiana University Bloomington (IUB) Community InvolvementAdequate participation of faculty, staff, students, and visitors is essential for a successful recycling program. A collaboration of industrious student groups, employees, and management have made the IUB Campus recycling program one of the best in the nation. The Physical Plant recycles tires, automotive batteries, all metals, refrigerant CFCs, anti-freeze, motor oil, wooden pallets, and most organic materials. This highly cooperative effort currently recycles over 150 tons per month (25 - 30% of total campus waste). Even so, there is significant room for improvement.106

2.2 Education, Training, and SignageIt is important that all users of the new building and the University community appreciate the benefits of education regarding waste reduction and recycling. Recycling and sustainable waste management are current priorities for SPEA and IUB. Hence, through standardized education on waste reduction and recycling, commingling recyclables with the trash can be prevented.

The recycling area must be both accessible and user-friendly. Maintaining separation in the waste stream for instance, will promote uncomplicated transport of materials from the building to the material recovery facility, where the recyclables are sorted and prepared into marketable commodities for manufacturing. Proper signage on how recycling is done and explanation of material-specific containers will further streamline the operation.


�0� 1 Indiana University Bloomington Physical Plant. http://www.indiana.edu/~phyplant/recycling.html#wastereduction Accessed on 18 October 2005.



3.1 Development of a Recycling and Waste Reduction Team107 A Recycling and Waste Reduction Team is a proposed group of students, faculty, and staff who are responsible for many of the tasks involved in recycling and waste reduction. These tasks include planning, designing, implementing, and maintaining the recycling and waste reduction plans. A team approach allows these tasks to be distributed among several individuals and enables the SPEA community to directly contribute to reducing waste.

3.2 Special Training in Recycling and Waste Reduction for Building Maintenance StaffImproper disposal of recyclables with trash at SPEA is likely related to systemic failures in waste management education for building maintenance staff. A special training, specifically for building maintenance employees, can alleviate preventable landfill diversion of recyclables. Instruction such as this can be task-oriented and tailored to the specific activities that maintenance staff perform on a regular basis, thereby ensuring that correct handling of recyclables at the point of disposal is simple and practical.

3.3 Cost Of the two implementation options, development of a Waste Reduction and Recycling team is likely to be the least expensive and most effective. Ambitious recycling programs such as this require immense cooperation, promotion, support, and monitoring to ensure success. Members of the Recycling and Waste Reduction Team can be encouraged to volunteer their services. A waste reduction program also necessitates the more expensive purchase of recycling equipment, such as recycling stations, a compactor, and a baler for example. The total cost of the materials can range from: $10,000 - $30,000. This total cost depends on equipment specifications and quality. See MR Appendix 1 for more information on recycling equipment vendors.

4.0 RecommendationsFirst, we recommend that a Recycling and Waste Reduction Team take the lead in waste management for the new building. Next, we recommend appropriate containers and continuous separation of recyclables in the waste stream: paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, and metals. Thirdly, proper signage and educational material on waste reduction must also be posted in plain view near every trash and recycling receptacle. We also propose that SPEA join the WasteWise Program, a free, voluntary EPA program through which organizations eliminate costly municipal solid waste and select industrial wastes, benefiting their bottom line and the environment.108 Separation of recyclables in the waste stream will allow for efficient storage and handling. Proper signage will reinforce educational initiatives. Organization of a SPEA Recycling and Waste Reduction Team is likely to streamline the waste management process and provide a forum for active learning. Benefits of WasteWise membership include national recognition and the support of an interdisciplinary network of professionals committed to recycling and waste reduction.

�0� Winter, John et al., “Business Guide for Reducing Solid Waste,” United States Environmental Protection Agency (1993).

�0� US EPA. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/recyle.htm Accessed on 28 October 2005.



1.0 MR Credit 1.1, Building Reuse: Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors and Roof

1.1 IntentExtend the life cycle of existing building stock, conserve resources, retain cultural resources, reduce waste and reduce environmental impacts of new buildings as they relate to materials manufacturing and transport.

1.2 RequirementsMaintain at least 75% of existing building structure and shell (exterior skin and framing, excluding window assemblies and non-structural roofing material).

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, listing the retained elements and declaring that the credit requirements have been met.

2.0 ChallengesNot applicable. 3.0 Implementation OptionsNot applicable

4.0 RecommendationsThis credit cannot be achieved. The existing building will remain fully in tact despite construction of a new SPEA building.



1.0 MR Credit 1.2, Building Reuse: Maintain 100% of Existing Walls, Floors and Roof


1.2 RequirementsMaintain an additional 25% (100% total) of existing building structure and shell (exterior skin and framing, excluding window assemblies and nonstructural roofing material).



4.0 RecommendationsThis credit cannot be achieved. The existing building will remain fully intact despite construction of a new SPEA building.



1.0 MR Credit 1.3, Building Reuse: Maintain 100% of Shell/Structure and 50% of Non-Shell/Non-Struc-ture


1.2 RequirementsMaintain 100% of existing building structure and shell (exterior skin and framing, excluding window assemblies and non-structural roofing material) AND at least 50% of non-shell areas (interior walls, doors, floor coverings and ceiling systems).



4.0 RecommendationsThis credit cannot be achieved. The existing building will remain fully intact despite construction of a new SPEA building.



1.0 MR Credit 2.1, Construction Waste Management: Divert 50%

1.1 IntentReuse building materials and products in order to reduce demand for virgin materials and to reduce waste, thereby reducing impacts associated with the extraction and processing of virgin resources.

1.2 RequirementsDevelop and implement a waste management plan, quantifying material diversion goals. Recycle and/or salvage at least 50% of construction, demolition and land clearing waste. Calculations can be done by weight or volume, but must be consistent.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, tabulating the total waste material, quantities diverted and the means by which diverted, and declaring that the credit requirements have been met.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Builder Involvement in Waste Recycling – Maximizing Recycling and/or Recycling RateThere are four options for waste recycling in construction waste management with varying degrees of builder involvement. The lead contractor for the new building should decide which of the following implementation options results in at least a 50% recycling and/or salvage rate for construction, demolition, and land clearing waste.

2.2 Documentation and Weight RequirementIn order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 2.1 , it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record keeping system for the weight of recycled products to be used in new construction and the total weight of all products used in construction.


3.1 Jobsite Clean-Up ServiceIn the case of jobsite clean-up service subcontractors place all waste in a designated area or relatively small on-site container. Subsequently, haulers handle the waste. Advantages to a system like this include less builder involvement, which can lead to the positive impacts associated with specialization. This system also has the added benefit of established up-front costs. The primary disadvantage associated with this system is that it is invisible, which can be counterproductive for a waste reduction and recycling plan. 3.2 Commingled RecoveryCommingled recovery is separation of commingled waste and recovery of recyclables off-site. Materials are contained on-site in a traditional manner. Subsequently, haulers handle the waste. Advantages to a system like this include less builder involvement, which leads to the positive impacts associated with specialization. The key disadvantage associated with this system, as in implementation of a jobsite clean-up service, is that it is invisible, which can be counterproductive for a waste reduction and recycling plan.



3.3 Jobsite SeparationIn jobsite separation, subcontractors place waste and recyclable material in separate containers. An advantage to this system is that it is highly visible, which may encourage waste reduction and recycling. Disadvantages include more containers on site and challenges for subcontractors with controlling contamination in the various waste streams.

3.4 Self-Haul In self-haul waste recycling, the builder handles and transports all materials. The benefits of this scheme include the elimination of large roll-off containers on-site. This also creates an opportunity for reuse on site. The disadvantages of this system are substantial vehicle wear and tear, as well as the required time and knowledge of the recycling market. This can cause contractor costs to increase substantially. The return on the dollar amount spent may not be as desirable due to the difficulty of maintaining experts in recycling among the ranks of lead contractor personnel.

3.5 CostThe most cost-effective and beneficial option for implementation is jobsite separation by an independent contractor. In this arrangement the construction and demolition recycling and waste reduction program can benefit from specialization, visibility, and accessibility of materials for reuse. Self-haul is also an attractive option if the ultimate goal is to salvage by donating materials to the local Habitat for Humanity for example. We did not find cost data regarding disposal at the existing building. Hence, a summary of the cost savings may help to illustrate the importance of recycling and waste reduction. See Table 1 in MR Appendix 2 for a summary of the savings rate based on tipping fees, from diverting construction, demolition waste from the landfill. Reuse of materials in new construction will result in a reduced overall building materials cost. 4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that construction demolition waste salvaging and recovery, diverting 50% from the landfill, be handled by an independent contractor due to reduced cost, increased efficiency, and increased visibility. We should aim to recycle land clearing debris, cardboard, metal, brick, concrete, plastic, clean wood, glass, gypsum wallboard, carpet and insulation.

Calculations of construction, demolition waste should be done by weight, rather than volume, to avoid loss caused by non-compacted waste. We recommend establishing goals for landfill diversion and adopting a construction waste management plan to achieve these goals. Construction haulers and recyclers that are equipped to handle this project are identified in MR Appendix 3. Salvage should include donation of materials to charitable organizations such as Habitat for Humanity. See MR Appendix 4 for more information about Habitat for Humanity and Rehab Resource, Inc.



1.0 MR Credit 2.2, Construction Waste Management: Divert 75%


1.2 RequirementsDevelop and implement a waste management plan, quantifying material diversion goals. Recycle and/or salvage an additional 25% (75% total) of construction, demolition and land clearing waste. Calculations can be done by weight or volume, but must be consistent throughout.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, tabulating the total waste material, quantities diverted and the means by which diverted, and declaring that the credit requirements have been met.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Builder Involvement in Waste Recycling – Maximizing Recycling and/or Recycling RateThere are four options for waste recycling in construction waste management with varying degrees of builder involvement. The lead contractor for the new building will have to decide which of the following implementation options results in at least a 75% recycling and or salvage rate for construction, demolition, and land clearing waste.

2.2 Documentation and Weight RequirementIn order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 2.1 , it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for the weight and/or volume of recycled products to be used in new construction and the total weight and/or volume of all products used in construction.


3.1 Jobsite Clean-Up ServiceIn the case of jobsite clean-up service, subcontractors place all waste in a designated area or relatively small on-site container. Subsequently, haulers handle the waste. Advantages to a system like this include less builder involvement, which can lead to the positive impacts associated with specialization. This system also has the added benefit of established, up front costs. The primary disadvantage associated with this system is that it is invisible, which can be counterproductive for a waste reduction and recycling plan. 3.2 Commingled RecoveryCommingled recovery is separation of commingled waste and recovery of recyclables off-site. Materials are contained on-site in a traditional manner. Subsequently, haulers handle the waste. Advantages to a system like this include less builder involvement, which leads to the positive impacts associated with specialization. The key disadvantage associated with this system, as in implementation of a jobsite clean-up service, is that it is invisible, which can be counterproductive for a waste reduction and recycling plan.



3.3 Jobsite SeparationIn jobsite separation, subcontractors place waste and recyclable material in separate containers. An advantage to this system is that it is highly visible, which may encourage waste reduction and recycling. Disadvantages include more containers on site and challenges for subcontractors with controlling contamination in the various waste streams.

3.4 Self-Haul In self-haul waste recycling, the builder handles and transports all materials. The benefits of this scheme include the elimination of large roll-off containers on-site. This also creates an opportunity for reuse on site. The disadvantages of this system are substantial vehicle wear and tear, and the required time and extensive knowledge of the recycling market. This can cause contractor costs to increase substantially. The return on the dollar amount spent may not be as desirable due to the difficulty of maintaining experts in recycling among the ranks of lead contractor personnel.

3.5 CostThe most cost-effective and beneficial option for implementation is jobsite separation by an independent contractor. In this arrangement the construction and demolition recycling and waste reduction program can benefit from specialization, visibility, and accessibility of materials for reuse. Self-haul is also an attractive option if the ultimate goal is to salvage by donating materials to the local Habitat for Humanity for example. We did not locate cost data regarding disposal at the existing building. Hence, a summary of the cost savings may help to illustrate the importance of recycling and waste reduction. See Table 1 in MR Appendix 2 for a summary of the savings rate based on tipping fees, from diverting construction, demolition waste from the landfill. Reuse of materials in new construction will result in a reduced overall building materials cost. 4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend construction demolition waste salvaging and recovery, diverting 75% from the landfill, be handled by an independent contractor because of its reduced cost, increased efficiency, and increased visibility. We should aim to recycle land clearing debris, cardboard, metal, brick, concrete, plastic, clean wood, glass, gypsum wallboard, carpet, and insulation.

Calculations of construction, demolition waste should be done by weight, rather than volume, to avoid loss caused by non-compacted waste. We recommend establishing goals for landfill diversion and adopting a construction waste management plan to achieve these goals. Construction haulers and recyclers that are equipped to handle this project are identified in MR Appendix 3. Salvage should include donation of materials to charitable organizations such as Habitat for Humanity or private non-profit corporations like Rehab Resource, Inc. See MR Appendix 4 for more information about Habitat for Humanity and Rehab Resource, Inc.



1.0 MR Credit 3.1, Resource Reuse: 5%


1.2 RequirementsUse salvaged, refurbished or reused materials, products and furnishings for at least 5% of building materials.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met and listing each material or product used to meet the credit. Include details demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of reused materials and products and showing their costs and the total cost of materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Sources of MaterialsAs no buildings on the Indiana University campus are currently scheduled for demolition, reusable building materials would need to be obtained from sources outside of Indiana University. Further, contractors may not be familiar with use of recycled building materials or their suppliers.

2.2 Documentation RequirementIn order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 3.1 for Resource Reuse: 5%, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for purchases of recycled products to be used in new construction.


3.1 Sources of MaterialsIdentify opportunities to incorporate recycled materials into building design and research potential material suppliers. Building materials that contain a high percentage of recycled material include reinforcing and framing steel, concrete masonry units, gypsum wallboard and facing paper, acoustic ceiling panels and their suspension system. Blast furnace slag can be incorporated into concrete for use in exterior constructed surfaces. Consider salvaged materials such as beams and posts, flooring, paneling, doors and frames, cabinetry and furniture, brick and decorative items.

Examples of recycled building materials in use include rubber flooring made from recycled rubber, ceiling panels made from bio-composites, bathroom tiles made from recycled glass, and toilet partitions made from recycled plastic bottles. Consult MR Appendix 5 for a list of recycled materials providers.

3.2 CostThere should be no additional expenditure required for purchase of reusable materials to be used in new construction, other than any additional transportation expense. Further, it is anticipated that reuse of materials in new construction will result in a reduced overall building materials cost.



In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 3.1 for Resource Reuse: 5%, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record keeping system for purchases of reuse products used in new construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to fulfill this requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsIdentify opportunities to incorporate salvaged materials into building design and research potential material suppliers for products such as blast furnace slag concrete, recycled wood products, metals or glass. Establish and maintain a record keeping system for total purchases of reuse materials used in new construction.



1.0 MR Credit 3.2, Resource Reuse: 10%


1.2 RequirementsUse salvaged, refurbished or reused materials, products and furnishings for at least 10% of building materials.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met and listing each material or product used to meet the credit. Include details demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of reused materials and products and showing their costs and the total cost of materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Sources of MaterialsAs no demolition is currently slated for buildings on the Indiana University campus, reusable building materials must be obtained from sources outside of Indiana University. Transportation of reusable building materials from possible demolitions sites outside of the IUB campus may result in additional expenditures for transportation.

2.2 Documentation In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 3.2 for Resource Reuse: 10%, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of reuse products used in construction.


3.1 Sources of MaterialsIdentify opportunities to incorporate recycled materials into building design and research potential material suppliers. Building materials that contain a high percentage of recycled material include reinforcing and framing steel, concrete masonry units, gypsum wallboard and facing paper, acoustic ceiling panels and their suspension system. Blast furnace slag can be incorporated into concrete for use in exterior constructed surfaces. Consider salvaged materials such as beams and posts, flooring, paneling, doors and frames, cabinetry and furniture, brick and decorative items.

Examples of recycled building materials in use include rubber flooring made from recycled rubber, ceiling panels made from bio-composites, bathroom tiles made from recycled glass, and toilet partitions made from recycled plastic bottles. Consult MR Appendix 5 for a list of recycled materials providers.

3.2 CostThere should be no additional expenditure required for purchase of reusable materials for purposes of new construction, other than any additional transportation expenses. In fact, it is anticipated that reuse of materials in new construction will result in a reduced overall materials cost.



In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 3.2 for Resource Reuse: 10%, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of reuse products used in construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to fulfill this requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsIdentify opportunities to incorporate salvaged materials into building design and research potential material suppliers for products such as blast furnace slag concrete, recycled wood products, metals or glass.

Establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of reuse materials used in new construction. (See MR Appendix 5 for a list of suppliers and products)



1.0 MR Credit 4.1, Recycled Content: 5% (post-consumer + ½ post-industrial)

1.1 IntentIncrease demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials, therefore reducing the impacts resulting from extraction and processing of new virgin materials.

1.2 RequirementsUse materials with recycled content, such that the sum of post-consumer recycled content plus one-half of the post-industrial content constitutes at least 5% of the total value of the materials in the project. See MR Appendix 6 for the formula.

The value of the recycled content portion of a material or furnishing shall be determined by dividing the weight of all material in the item by the total weight of all material in the item, then multiplying the resulting percentage by the total value of the item.

Mechanical and electrical components shall not be included in this calculation. Recycled content materials shall be defined in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission document. 109

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met and listing the recycled content products used. Include details demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of recycled content materials and products and showing their cost and percentage(s) of post-consumer and /or post-industrial content, and the total cost of all materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Sources of Materials and Value of Recycled ContentAcquiring the appropriate recycled content will require brokering purchasing deals with the University Purchasing Division. Based on the formula used to calculate the value of recycled content, achievement of this credit is more likely given a higher recycled content weight and a high total value of the item. Practical application of the materials, and the synergistic effects that result, should also be considered. See MR Appendix 6 for the formula.

2.2 Documentation RequirementIn order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 4.1 for Recycled Content, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system as well as personnel and/or students who will periodically perform the weighing and post-industrial use calculations. As other LEED credits call for the use of recycled materials, there will arise a need to disaggregate the appropriate recycled content based on the federal guidelines.


�0� Federal Trade Commission. www.ftc.gov/bcp/grnrule/guides980427.htm Accessed on 1 November, 2005



3.1 Sources of MaterialsIdentify recycled content vendors as well as provide an appropriate system for the collection and management of the recycled content for the building. As other LEED credits call for the use of recycled materials, there will be a need to disaggregate the appropriate recycled content based on the federal guidelines.

3.2 CostSome of the cost of purchasing recycled content products will be absorbed by the university. However it is anticipated that SPEA may incur additional cost for recycled content products that it currently does not have to purchase now.

In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 4.1 for Recycled Content: 5%, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record keeping system for total purchases of reuse products used in construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to train personnel and students, as well as acquiring the proper weighing system.

4.0 RecommendationsIdentify opportunities where SPEA and IU can take advantage of bulking purchasing in the even that it has to purchase its own recycled content products as a means of affecting per unit costs. If the wider university is not amenable then consider regional SPEA programs and their product needs.

Establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of recycled content materials. This can become an intensive project for the personnel/student who manages the system. We recommend mitigating costs by considering a work-study appointment instead of hiring additional staff. Alternatively, IU could offer student appointments.

If relationships are established with recycle content collection vendors, it is possible that the company may perform the calculation of the weight ratio for SPEA. See MR Appendix 5 for a list of suppliers and products.



1.0 MR Credit 4.2, Recycled Content: 10% (post-consumer + ½ post-industrial)

1.1 IntentIncrease demand for building products that incorporate recycled content materials, therefore reducing the impacts resulting from extraction and processing of new virgin materials.

1.2 RequirementsUse materials with recycled content such that the sum of post-consumer recycled content plus one-half of the post-industrial content constitutes at least 10% of the total value of the materials in the project.

The value of the recycled content portion of a material or furnishing shall be determined by dividing the weight of all material in the item by the total weight of all material in the item, then multiplying the resulting percentage by the total value of the item.

Mechanical and electrical components shall not be included in this calculation. Recycled content materials shall be defined in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission document. 110

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or other responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met and listing the recycled content products used. Include details demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of recycled content materials and products and showing their cost and percentage(s) of post-consumer and /or post-industrial content, and the total cost of all materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Sources of MaterialsAcquiring the appropriate recycled content will require brokering purchasing deals with the University purchasing division.

2.2 Documentation RequirementIn order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 4.2 for Recycled Content, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record keeping system as well as personnel/ students who will periodically perform the actual weighing and post-industrial use calculations. As other LEED credits call for the use of recycled materials there will be the need to disaggregate the appropriate recycled content based on the federal guidelines.


3.1 Sources of MaterialsIdentify recycled content vendors as well as provide an appropriate system for the collection and management of the recycled content for the building. As other LEED credits call for the use of recycled materials there will be the need to disaggregate the appropriate recycled content based on the federal guidelines.

��0 Federal Trade Commission. www.ftc.gov/bcp/grnrule/guides980427.htm Accessed on 1 November, 2005



3.2 CostSome of the cost of purchasing recycled content products will be absorbed by the University. However, it is anticipated that SPEA may incur additional cost for recycled content products that it currently does not have to purchase now.

In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 4.2 for Recycled Content: 10%, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of reuse products used in construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to train personnel/students as well as acquiring the proper weighing system.

4.0 RecommendationsIdentify opportunities where SPEA and IU can take advantage of bulking purchasing in the even that it has to purchase its own recycled content products as a means of affecting per unit costs. If the greater University is not amenable, then consider regional SPEA programs and their product needs.

Establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of recycled content materials. This can become an intensive project for the personnel/student who manages the system. To mitigate costs, consider work-study appointments instead of hiring additional staff. If relationships are established with recycle content collection vendors, it is possible that the company may perform the calculation of the weight ratio for SPEA. See MR Appendix 5 for a list of suppliers and products.



1.0 MR Credit 5.1, Regional Materials: 20% Manufactured Regionally

1.1 IntentIncrease demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured within the region, thereby supporting the regional economy and reducing the environmental impacts resulting from transportation.

1.2 RequirementsUse a minimum of 20% of building materials and products that are manufactured regionally, within a radius of 500 miles. Manufacturing refers to the final assembly of components into the building product that is furnished and installed by the tradesmen. For example, if the hardware comes from Dallas, Texas, the lumber from Vancouver, British Columbia, and the joist is assembled in Kent, Washington, then the location of the final assembly is Kent, Washington.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met. Include calculations demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of regional materials/products and showing their cost, percentage of regional components, distance from project to manufacturer, and the total cost of all materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 AvailabilityMany standard building materials will be available locally, or regionally. However, in order to comply with Materials and Resources Credits 3.2, 3.3 and 7, regarding FSC-certified wood products and renewable or recycled building materials, many new products, manufacturers and distributors must be sourced.

2.2 Documentation In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 5.1 for Regional Materials: 20% Manufactured Regionally, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record keeping system for purchases of regionally manufactured products used in construction.

3.0 Implementation OptionsEstablish a project goal for locally-sourced materials and identify materials and material suppliers that can achieve this goal. During construction, ensure that the specified local materials are installed and quantify the total percentage of local materials installed.Many major cities are located within a 500-mile radius of Indiana University-Bloomington. Therefore, it would be likely that any building materials required for exterior or interior construction would be readily available.

3.1 CostsThere should be no additional expenditure required for purchase of local materials for the purpose of new construction. In fact, it is anticipated that use of locally-produced materials in new construction will result in a reduced overall materials cost as they require less transport to the building site.



In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 5.1 for Regional Materials: 20% Manufactured Regionally, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of local products used in construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to fulfill this requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsSource all manufactured building materials from within a 500-mile radius of Indiana University. A 500-mile radius around Bloomington, Indiana would extend west to Kansas City, south to Atlanta, east to State College and north to Green Bay. Given that limestone and concrete will represent a large portion of the building materials to be used in new construction, source all concrete and limestone from local suppliers such as Irving Materials, Inc. (IMI), of Indianapolis. Coordinate Regional Materials Credit 5.1 with credits 3.2, 3.3 and 7, in order to assure that products satisfy as many credits as possible.



1.0 MR Credit 5.2, Regional Materials: 50% Extracted Regionally

1.1 IntentIncrease demand for building materials and products that are extracted and manufactured within the region, thereby supporting the regional economy and reducing the environmental impacts resulting from transportation.

1.2 RequirementsOf the regionally manufactured materials documented for MR Credit 5.1, use a minimum of 50% of building materials and products that are extracted, harvested or recovered (as well as manufactured) within a radius of 500 miles of the project site.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met. Include calculations demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of regional materials/products and showing their cost, percentage of regional components, distance from project to manufacturer, and the total cost of all materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 AvailabilityMany standard building materials will be available locally, or regionally. However, in order to comply with Materials and Resources credits 3.2, 3.3 and 7, regarding FSC-certified wood products and renewable or recycled building materials, many new products, manufacturers and distributors must be sourced.

2.2 Documentation RequirementIn order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 5.2 for Regional Materials: 50% Extracted Regionally, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record keeping system for total purchases of regionally extracted products used in construction. There may be additional expense associated with the need to fulfill this requirement.


3.1 AvailabilityEstablish a project goal for locally extracted materials and identify materials and material suppliers that can achieve this goal. During construction, ensure that the specified local materials are installed and quantify the total percentage of local materials installed.

Many major cities are located within a 500-mile radius of Indiana University, therefore it would seem likely that any and all building materials for exterior and interior construction should be easily available. From this group select a minimum of 50% of building materials that are extracted, harvested or recovered regionally.

3.2 CostsThere should be no additional expenditure required for purchase of locally-extracted materials for purposes of new construction. In fact, it is anticipated that use of locally-extracted materials in new construction will result in a reduced overall materials cost.



In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 5.2, Regional Materials: 50% Extracted Regionally, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of locally-extracted products used in new construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to fulfill this requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsSource all manufactured building materials from within a 500 mile radius of Indiana University. A 500-mile radius around Bloomington, Indiana would extend west to Kansas City, south to Atlanta, east to State College and north to Green Bay. Given that limestone and concrete will represent a large portion of the building materials to be used in new construction, source all concrete and limestone from local suppliers such as Irving Materials, Inc. (IMI), of Indianapolis. Coordinate Regional Materials Credit 5.1 with credits 3.1 , 3.2 and 7, in order to assure that products satisfy as many credits as possible.



1.0 MR Credit 6, Rapidly Renewable Materials

1.1 IntentReduce the use and depletion of finite raw materials and long-cycle renewable materials by replacing them with rapidly renewable materials.

1.2 RequirementsUse rapidly renewable building materials and products (made from plants that are typically harvested within a ten-year cycle or shorter) for 5% of the total value of all building materials and products used in the project.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met. Include calculations demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of rapidly renewable materials products. Show their cost and percentage of rapidly renewable components, and the total cost of all materials for the project.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Acquiring rapidly renewable resource vendors Locating vendors who might be able to provide expertise on rapidly renewable products will be the initial challenge.

2.2 Develop and appropriate use for them in the building.Developing a way to incorporate the appropriate amount of rapidly renewable products relative to the scale of the cost of the building will require ingenuity in the placement of rapidly renewable products.

3.0 Implementation OptionsRapidly renewable materials will provide long term cost savings and may well provide an aesthetic benefit to the building. It is not anticipated that rapidly renewable materials will cost more, however projected savings should balance out unanticipated costs over time.

4.0 RecommendationsManaging the purchase and installation of rapidly renewable materials will require oversight. Establish project goals and hold one person accountable for the management of rapidly renewable resources. The requisite quantity of products must be purchased and installed in order to achieve this credit. Popular ideas include cabinetry and flooring. Suggested materials include: bamboo flooring, wool carpets, straw board, cotton batt insulation, linoleum flooring, popular OSB, sunflower seed board, and wheatgrass cabinetry.



1.0 MR Credit 7, Certified Wood

1.1 IntentThis credit is intended to encourage environmentally-responsible forest management.

1.2 RequirementsUse a minimum of 50% of wood-based materials and products, certified in accordance with the Forest Stewardship Council’s (FSC) Principles and Criteria, for wood building components including, but not limited to, structural framing and general dimensional framing, flooring, finishes, furnishings, and non-rented temporary construction applications such as bracing, concrete form work and pedestrian barriers.

1.3 DocumentationProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, owner or responsible party, declaring that the credit requirements have been met and listing the FSC-certified materials and products used. Include calculations demonstrating that the project incorporates the required percentage of FSC-certified materials/products and their cost together with the total cost of all materials for the project. For each material/product used to meet these requirements, provide the vendor’s or manufacturer’s Forest Stewardship Council chain-of-custody certificate number.

2.0 Challenges 2.1 AvailabilityThere are few Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified wood producers, vendors, or distributors in Indiana. However, there are many producers, manufacturers and vendors within a 500-mile radius of Bloomington, Indiana. Therefore, FSC-certified wood products will need to be transported from the manufacturer to the site. Further, architects and contractors may not be familiar with FSC-certified products, their vendors or distributors. Therefore, it will be necessary to build and maintain working relationships with FSC-certified wood producers, vendors and distributors.

2.2 Documentation In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under Credit 7 for Certified Wood, it will be neces-sary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of wood products used in construc-tion.


3.1 AvailabilityTo facilitate access to FSC-certified products, several FSC-accredited wood product certifiers, such as the Rainforest Alliance or Metafore, have established databases listing certified manufactures and distributors. These services list FSC-certified suppliers, with contact and product information arranged according to product type. The SmartGuide database lists products such as cabinets and casework, decking, doors and windows, engineered wood, exterior applications, flooring, frame lumber, millwork, office furniture, and plywood.



In Indiana, Mohawk Flush Doors, Inc. produces FSC-certified veneers, and doors for architectural and commercial interiors111. See MR Appendix 7 for a partial list of vendors, manufactures and distributors of FSC-certified wood products. Visit the Rainforest Alliance or MetaFore websites for complete lists of products, manufacturers and vendors.112

3.2 CostThere would be no additional expense associated with purchase of an FSC-certified wood product. At this time, few FSC-certified wood product manufacturers or vendors exist in Indiana. Therefore, it would be necessary to transport FSC-certified wood products to the building site from other locations throughout the United States.

In order to fulfill the documentation requirement established under MR Credit 7 for Certified Wood, it will be necessary to establish and maintain a record-keeping system for total purchases of wood products used in construction. There may be additional expenses associated with the need to fulfill this requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsEstablish a project goal for FSC-certified wood products and identify suppliers that can achieve this goal. During construction, ensure that the FSC-certified wood products are installed and quantify the total percentage of FSC-certified wood products installed. Establish a record-keeping system for all wood purchases, in order to fulfill all documentation requirements.

111 Mohawk Flush Doors, Inc., 402 N. Sheridan Street, P.O. Box 3098, South Bend, IN 46619-1416, Telephone: 574.288.4464, Fax: 574.232.4621, www.mohawkdoors.com Accessed on 12 October 2005.

112 Rainforest Alliance, Smart Guide, http://www.brandsystems.net/smartwood/ Accessed on 12 October 2005.; MetaFore, Inc. http://www.metafore.org/index.php?p=Wood+for+Building+Green&s=34 Accessed on 12 October 2005.


Indoor Environmental Quality

1.0 IEQ Prerequisite 1, Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance

1.1 IntentEstablish minimum indoor air quality (IAQ) performance to prevent the development of indoor air quality problems in buildings, thus contributing to the comfort and well-being of the occupants.

1.2 RequirementsMeet the minimum requirements of voluntary consensus standard ASHRAE 62-1999, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality, and approved Addenda (see ASHRAE 62-2001, Appendix H, for a complete compilation of Addenda) using the Ventilation Rate Procedure.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the mechanical engineer or responsible party, declaring that the project is fully compliant with ASHRAE 62-1999 and all published Addenda and describing the procedure employed in the IAQ analysis (Ventilation Rate Procedure).

2.0 ChallengesAcceptable indoor air quality (IAQ) is typically not achieved by addressing any one specific building product, system, or procedure. Rather, it is the result of careful attention to at least four fundamental elements, including: 1) contaminant source control; 2) proper ventilation; 3) humidity management; and 4) adequate filtration. In order to meet ASHRAE 62-1999, SPEA will have to design a building with an HVAC system configured to meet all these elements. As a practical matter, the ASHRAE 62-1999 standard is not as stringent as subsequent standards (e.g. ASHRAE 62-2001), and a new building that is well-designed and engineered will rarely have difficulty meeting this standard.113

3.0 Implementation OptionsWe describe multiple options to meet this standard in the following sub-sections on Indoor Air Quality. In order to succeed, building designers and engineers ultimately will have to integrate multiple options and balance tradeoffs in competing parameters. Final implementation of this prerequisite will depend on design choices made later in the building process.

4.0 RecommendationsSee individual credits below for our complete recommendations on how to best achieve maximum IAQ in the new SPEA building. Our summary recommendation is the totality of recommendations for individual credits.

�� Trane Corporation. http://trane.com/commercial/issues/iaq/ISS-APG001-EN.pdf Accessed on 12 October 2005.



1.0 IEQ Prerequisite 2, Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) Control

1.1 IntentPrevent exposure of building occupants and systems to Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS).

1.2 RequirementsTwo possible approaches exist: 1) prohibit smoking in the building, and locate any exterior designated smoking areas away from entries and operable windows; OR 2) isolate and capture tobacco smoke generated within the building and exhaust it to the outdoors. 1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the building owner or responsible party, declaring that the building will be operated under a policy prohibiting smoking; OR provide the LEED Letter Template declaring that ETS will be isolated, captured and exhausted to the outdoors.

2.0 ChallengesThis prerequisite does not present a challenge because Indiana University policy already exceeds the standard. 3.0 Implementation OptionsThe only implementation necessary is to continue to enforce Indiana University’s current non-smoking policy. IU currently prohibits smoking in campus buildings and within 30 feet of building entrances. This standard exceeds the LEED requirement.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend the continued enforcement of Indiana University’s current non-smoking policy.



1.0 IEQ Credit 1, Carbon Dioxide Monitoring

1.1 IntentProvide capacity for indoor air quality (IAQ) monitoring to help sustain long term occupant comfort and well-being.

1.2 RequirementsInstall a permanent carbon dioxide (CO

2) monitoring system that provides feedback on space ventilation

performance in a form that affords operational adjustments. Refer to the CO2 differential for all types of occupancy

in accordance with ASHRAE 62-2001, Appendix D.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the mechanical engineer or responsible party, declaring and summarizing the installation, operational design and controls/zones for the carbon dioxide monitoring system. For mixed-use buildings, calculate CO

2 levels for each separate activity level and use.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Monitor CO2 buildup

The central challenge under this credit is to monitor the buildup of CO2 and provide enough outdoor air (OA)

to limit CO2 buildup inside the building. Carbon dioxide itself is not toxic, but it has been used for more than a

century as a proxy for the suite of bioeffluents whose buildup makes rooms uninhabitable.

2.2 Free Energy and WindowsBecause SPEA is in a temperate zone, a major challenge in designing the HVAC system will be to take advantage of free energy during mild weather. Operable windows (i.e. windows that open) offer both control over the environment to building occupants and also enhance energy efficiency when the weather is mild. The problem with windows is that they can disrupt designed airflow patterns and render HVAC systems inefficient. Systems that monitor CO

2 need to resolve this constraint to ensure that standardCO

2 levels are not exceeded, while also

providing an effective, efficient movement of air. 3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Monitor Individual RoomsSPEA can place individual carbon dioxide monitors in each high-occupancy room. These monitors emit a signal when CO

2 levels exceed pre-set norms. Occupants then open windows or vents to allow more fresh air to enter the

room. This system is implemented in the new, LEED Platinum-rated building of the Natural Resources Defense Council in Santa Monica, CA.114 Cost of CO

2 monitors has fallen more than ten times since they became widely

available in the early 1990’s. The problem under this option is that open windows do can interrupt the balance and operation of the building’s HVAC system.

�� Natural Resources Defense Council. http://www.nrdc.org/cities/building/smoffice/guides/indoorenv.pdf Accessed on 15 No-vember 2005.



3.2 Build Monitors into Ventilation SystemAn alternative to individual monitors is to integrate the monitors into the building’s HVAC system. This integration allows the CO

2levels to be continuously and automatically monitored. Rather than rely on individuals to respond

to sensor signals, the building’s HVAC system senses a rise in CO2 levels in the system (for example, as occupants

enter the building in the morning) and increases the amount of outside air (OA) pumped into the building. There are two drawbacks to this system: 1) open windows in one area can unbalance the system in the rest of the building; and 2) the system is inefficient because it blows excess air into unoccupied areas in order to ensure minimum levels of OA to high-occupancy zones.

3.3 Demand Controlled Ventilation (DCV)Demand Controlled Ventilation (DCV—also called Digital Demand Control, or DDC) combines the advantages of the options above. A DCV system monitors each zone of use independently and directs air away from unoccupied areas and toward areas with high CO

2 levels. This technology has been field-tested during the past five years

and is now entering into widespread use.115 Its additional advantage is that it adjusts automatically to changes in individual environments (e.g. open windows) and supplies only the necessary amount of air to meet occupancy needs.

3.4 CostNone of these options is cost-prohibitive. The least expensive is probably to have people open windows, while DCV probably requires the greatest up-front investments in technology. However, DCV also offers the greatest potential for cost savings during building operation, since air output is matched precisely to CO2 needs. The system never blows more air than necessary, unlike typical systems that provide excess OA to unused areas to ensure appropriate levels in high-occupancy zones. The payback period for DCV systems is fastest for buildings with highly variable occupancies, such as buildings with classrooms, auditoriums, labs, and other variable spaces.

4.0 RecommendationsDemand Controlled Ventilation provides the best mechanism to meet this LEED credit. Individual sensors—while technically fulfilling the requirement—leave too much discretion to users and would not solve the problem in practice. Placing monitors in the HVAC system could solve the problem of automation, but the system would still blow far more air than necessary to meet occupant needs. This solution wastes energy and costs money. DCV typically costs more up front, but costs are recovered quickly since the system blows only the air necessary to meet needs. DCV also lets users open windows at their discretion without sacrificing efficiency and effectiveness of the HVAC system.

�� Carrier, one of the largest heating and cooling companies in the world, now manufactures every piece of its equipment to be compatible with DCV. It also provides a good overview of the benefits of DCV in its publication, “Demand Controlled Ventilation System Design Guide: Providing the Right Amount of Air, In the Right Place, At the Right Time.” Carrier. http://www.commercial.carrier.com/commercial/hvac/general/0,2047,CLI1_DIV12_ETI4470_MID4438,00.html?SMSESSION=NO Accessed on 15 Novem-ber 2005.



1.0 IEQ Credit 2, Ventilation Effectiveness

1.1 IntentProvide for the effective delivery and mixing of fresh air to support the safety, comfort and well-being of building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsFor mechanically ventilated buildings, design ventilation systems that result in an air change effectiveness (ACE) greater than or equal to 0.9 as determined by ASHRAE 129-1997. (Note: Because entirely natural ventilation is not possible due to climate limitations in southern Indiana, we omit references to requirements for naturally ventilated spaces.)

1.3 Documentation For mechanically ventilated spaces: provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the mechanical engineer or responsible party, declaring that the design achieves an air change effectiveness (ACE) of 0.9 or greater in each ventilated zone. Complete the table summarizing the air change effectiveness achieved for each zone.

2.0 ChallengesAir change effectiveness (ACE) measures the amount of “old” air in a space replaced by “new” air introduced by ventilation. Thus, an ACE of 0.9 indicates that the ventilation system replaces 90% of air in a space during a given cycle.

The challenge for typical overhead ventilation systems is to force enough air down to the occupancy level to mix into and replace “old” air with newly introduced (“supply”) air. Failure to replace air at lower levels in the room may lead to strong circulation near the ceiling but leave occupants breathing stale air at temperatures too high or too low for comfort.


3.1 Operable windows Operable windows increase the possibility to introduce more outdoor air (OA) into a room. This added OA im-mediately and dramatically increases ACE (any time a person opens a window to “get some fresh air,” he or she improves ACE. Operable windows are required in other LEED credits (see below), and their use in improving ACE should be incorporated. Operable windows alone cannot entirely resolve the problem of ACE, since 1) weather conditions prevent occupants from opening windows during much of the year; and 2) windows do not guarantee appropriate patterns of airflow to all spaces in a room.



3.2 Displacement VentilationDisplacement ventilation (often used nearly synonymously with “low velocity ventilation” and “under floor air delivery” [UFAD]) introduces supply air at low velocities from near or beneath the floor. Supply air is spread across the floor and then rises by convection as it picks up the energy load in the room (see IEQ Appendix 1). This design means that displacement ventilation does not rely on “mixing” supply air with room air. Instead, supply air literally displaces stale, polluted air and forces it upward and out exhaust grilles. As a result, air change effectiveness in displacement ventilation can actually exceed 100% (i.e. ACE > 1.0).116 Displacement ventilation reduces energy consumption through reduced fan use and higher supply air temperature.

One concern often expressed about displacement ventilation is the possibility that cool air introduced near the floor will stratify the room, leading to literally cold feet. A study by the Department of Energy found that temperatures increased on average 1 to 2 degrees Celsius (2-4 degrees Fahrenheit) from floor to ceiling. The study also found that occupants were highly satisfied with the temperatures provided by the displacement ventilation system.117 Displacement ventilation is common practice in Europe, while its acceptance in North America has only begun to develop more recently, apparently as a result of conventional placement of ductwork in ceilings and more extreme climates.118 The design has been used in settings as varied as the 80,000 ft2 California State Automobile Association Inter-Insurance Bureau, the 200,000 ft2 First National Bank of Omaha Technology Center, and the 290,000 ft2 corporate offices of British Columbia Electric Utilities.119

One additional advantage of underfloor air delivery is the possibility to reconfigure air delivery in a room. If underfloor grilles are built in modular segments, then they can be moved on demand. For example, if a grille blows too much air on a workspace, the occupant can actually lift out the grille and move it away from his desk. This maintains the volume of air delivered and delivers greater comfort. Additionally, if the purpose of a room changes—say, from a conference room to office space—the grilles can be rearranged to deliver air to individual workstations, giving occupants personal control over the work environment.

3.3 CostsWe consider the costs of operable windows elsewhere in this report. Displacement ventilation may incur greater initial costs (though not necessarily), and it saves money in the building’s operation phase. The authors of the ASHRAE GreenGuide120 conclude that first costs for controls, equipment and design fees are equivalent to standard ceiling designs; distribution ductwork costs for displacement ventilation can exceed costs for ceiling designs. Recurring costs are the same for maintenance, commissioning, and training of operators. Greater efficiency of displacement ventilation leads to lower energy costs over time.

�� Grummen, David (ed). “ASHRAE GreenGuide,” Atlanta: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (2003): 60. �� Federal Interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/ciaq/10_20_04meeting_minutes.pdf Accessed on 15 November 2005. �� Grumman, 60. �� Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley. http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/underfloorair/casestudies.htm. Accessed on 15 November 2005. See also the case study on displacement ventilation from CBE at: http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/re-search/pdf_files/SR_Teledesic.pdf Accessed on 15 November 2005.��0 Grumman, 60.



A research review by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy compared displacement ventilation with conventional designs and found that projected energy savings range from 10% to 57% depending on climate, building type and system design.121 A secondary school in Kansas achieved an annual 20% savings in electricity costs by incorporating displacement ventilation as part of its green strategy.122

3.4 An Additional Concern: LaboratoriesSPEA’s new building will also contain laboratories, which present a particular challenge for HVAC systems. In general, labs should be ventilated on separate ducting system from the rest of the building in order to prevent the possibility of cross contamination of the air from the labs to the rest of the building. However, a host of case studies is demonstrating that well-designed labs can also contribute to a decrease in energy use and the overall “greening” of a building.123

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend a displacement ventilation system along with operable windows to achieve this credit. A standard, ceiling-based ventilation system may be able to reach 0.9 ACE, but the additional advantages achieved by displacement ventilation—including decreased energy use, adjustable grilles for different air delivery patterns, and natural decrease in pollutant levels—make it the best choice.

�� American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. http://www.aceee.org/pubs/a042_h19.pdf. Accessed on 15 November 2005.Accessed on 15 November 2005. �� Energy Design Resources (California public utilities research group). http://www.energydesignresources.com/docs/db-05-dis-placementventilation.pdf. Accessed on 16 November 2005. �� “Labs for the 21st Century Project.” http://www.labs21century.gov/. Accessed on 27 November 2005.



1.0 IEQ Credit 3.1, Construction Management Plan: During Construction

1.1 IntentPrevent indoor air quality problems resulting from the construction/renovation process in order to help sustain the comfort and well-being of construction workers and building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsDevelop and implement an Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Management Plan for the construction and pre-occupancy phases of the building. During construction meet or exceed the recommended Design Approaches of the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning National Contractors Association (SMACNA) IAQ Guideline for Occupied Buildings under Construction, 1995, Chapter 3. Protect stored on-site or installed absorptive materials from moisture damage. If air handlers must be used during construction, filtration media with a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 8 must be used at each return air grill, as determined by ASHRAE 52.2-1999. Replace all filtration media immediately prior to occupancy. Filtration media shall have a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 13, as determined by ASHRAE 52.2-1999 for media installed at the end of construction.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the general contractor or responsible party, declaring that a Construction IAQ Management Plan has been developed and implemented, and listing each air filter used during construction and at the end of construction. Include the MERV value, manufacturer name and model number, AND EITHER Provide 18 photographs—six photographs taken on three different occasions during construction—along with identification of the SMACNA approach featured by each photograph, in order to show consistent adherence to the credit requirements OR Declare the five Design Approaches of SMACNA IAQ Guideline for Occupied Buildings under Construction, 1995, Chapter 3, which were used during building construction. Include a brief description of some of the important design approaches employed.

2.0 ChallengesThe challenges with this credit are increased time and money for the additional planning and precautions. However, by taking these extra steps, the new building will be a healthier building from the beginning.

3.0 Implementation Options A written plan should be created, for the contractor to use in managing air quality on the construction site. Ventilation systems should be utilized throughout the construction process. Humidity and temperature should be monitored throughout the construction process, and plans should be created to establish protocol for the building process. Construction should be staged to minimize the amount of contaminates produced throughout the building process.124 Staging construction can minimize other materials absorption of VOCs that would otherwise act like a “sink.” 125An example of staging/sequencing would be to apply, and fully dry, sealants, paints and any other volatile materials before carpet and ceiling tiles are installed. Steps should also be taken to ensure that ductwork and absorptive materials do not become damaged during transport or installation.

If air handlers need to be used during the construction process, filtration media must have a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 8 and be used at all return air grills to meet the ASHRAE 52.2-1999 standard. All

�� Pratt School of Engineering @ Duke “aboutpratt.ciemas –leed building certified.” http://www.pratt.duke.edu/about/fciemas_leed.php Accessed on 24 Oct 2005�� Resource Venture. www.resourceventure.org. Accessed on 25 October 2005: 4



filtration media must be replaced before occupancy with media that has a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 13 to meet ASHRAE 52.2-1999, according to the LEED standard.

3.1 CostThere will be additional monetary and time costs to meet this LEED credit, however, this building will be a healthier environment during the construction process and once completed.

4.0 RecommendationA written plan should be created for the contractor for use on the construction site to manage air quality. The site should be ventilated during the installation process with temporary exhaust systems until the building’s HVAC system is installed and operating.126 Air quality should be monitored during the whole building process, not just during times of high emissions and airborne pollutants.

Since Bloomington, Indiana is located in a relatively humid climate, moisture control and mold prevention should be aspects of the construction plans. Identifying sources where moisture could penetrate the building during both design and construction is a necessary component to minimize mold infiltration. Temperature and humidity controls should be utilized during the construction process to identify potential areas of infiltration before the permanent enclosure of the building. Inspection protocol should be established for areas prone to high levels of moisture, and procedures for the remediation of mold should be components to the construction management plan.

Ductwork should be wrapped during delivery, installation and construction to ensure that particulate contamination of the ductwork does not occur.127 Absorptive materials (both on-site and installed) should be protected from moisture damage.

When possible construction should be “staged and isolated” in order to minimize the amount of airborne contaminates. If the building is occupied before completed; sequence construction activities towards the end of the work day, so overnight ventilation can flush out contaminates.128

If air handlers need to be used during the construction process, filtration media must have a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 8 and be used at all return air grills to meet the ASHRAE 52.2-1999 standard. All filtration media must be replaced before occupancy with media that has a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) of 13 to meet ASHRAE 52.2-1999, according to the standard.

�� U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/construction.html#iaq Accessed on 20 October 2005.�� Pratt School of Engineering @ Duke. http://www.pratt.duke.edu/about/fciemas_leed.php Accessed on 20 October 2005.�� U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/construction.html#iaq Accessed on 20 October 2005.



1.0 Credit 3.2, Construction Management Plan: Before Occupancy

1.1 IntentPrevent indoor air quality problems resulting from the construction/renovation process in order to help sustain the comfort and well-being of construction workers and building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsDevelop and implement an Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Management Plan for the pre-occupancy phase as follows: after construction ends and prior to occupancy conduct a minimum two-week building flush-out with new Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 filtration media at 100% outside air. After the flushout, replace the filtration media with new MERV 13 filtration media, except the filters solely processing outside air; OR Conduct a baseline indoor air quality testing procedure consistent with the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s current Protocol for Environmental Requirements, Baseline IAQ and Materials, for the Research Triangle Park Campus, Section 01445.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect, general contractor or responsible party, describing the building flush-out procedures and dates, OR Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, declaring that the referenced standard’s IAQ testing protocol has been followed. Include a copy of the testing results.

2.0 ChallengesThe challenges with this credit are increased time and money for the additional planning and precautions. However, by taking these extra steps, the new building will be a healthier building from the beginning. 3.0 Implementation OptionsThis credit can be attained by either a complete building flush-out, or by meeting the EPA requirements for Baseline IAQ and Materials, for Research Triangle Park Campus, Section 01445.

3.1 Building Flush-Out.A building flush out refers to using increased ventilation to “flush-out” or remove contaminants from the building by bringing in 100% of outside air directly into the building and without recirculating any of the indoor air.129 This option is not feasible because Indiana University does not conduct building flush-outs.

3.2 Baseline Indoor Air Quality TestingBaseline Indoor Air Quality Testing should be conducted as specified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s current Protocol for Environmental Requirements, Baseline IAQ and Materials, for the Research Triangle Park Campus, Section 01445. The requirements include baseline testing for the maximum concentration levels of pollutants that are acceptable in the new building, along with independent materials testing of materials thought to have a large impact on the indoor air quality, including construction materials.

�� Environmental Protection Association. www.epa.gov/rtp/new-bldg/environmental/thegreeningcurve-new.pdf. Accessed on 28 October 2005: 75.



The EPA’s North Carolina Campus utilized ventilation during construction along with the baseline indoor air testing to determine if the indoor air met the specifications for maximum allowable limits. They utilized this time line to ensure that their building met all the requirements by the time the building was occupied.130

3.3 CostThere will be additional monetary and time costs to meet this LEED credit, however, this building will be a healthier environment during the construction process and once completed.

4.0 RecommendationsBefore the building is occupied, an indoor air quality testing program should be carried out, including monitoring the levels of carbon dioxide, and measuring the temperature and humidity controls to ensure that the levels meet the required targets.

The filtration should be replaced before occupancy, except the filtration media solely processing outside air. The MERV or Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value for the filtration should be a level 13 as required by ASHRAE 5.2.2.-1999. Once the new filtration media is installed, a two week, building flush-out should be conducted, with 100% outside air after construction commences. If the 100% flush-out cannot occur, a baseline IAQ testing procedure that meets the EPA requirements for Baseline IAQ and Materials, for Research Triangle Park Campus, Section 01445.131

If a flush-out process is used, non lab spaces, like conference rooms, offices, classrooms, would require a two week flush-out. Some lab spaces may require additional consideration during the flush-out. Most wet labs need a flush-out with 100% outside air.132

��0 Environmental Protection Association. www.epa.gov/rtp/new-bldg/environmental/thegreeningcurve-new.pdf. Accessed on 20 October 2005: 76.�� U.S. Department of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/construction.html#iaq Accessed on 20 October 2005.�� Whole Building Design Guide. http://www.wbdg.org/design/lableed.php?print=. Accessed on 24 October 2005



1.0 IEQ Credit 4.1, Low-Emitting Materials: Adhesives and Sealants

1.1 IntentReduce the quantity of indoor air contaminants that are odorous, potentially irritating and/or harmful to the comfort and well-being of installers and occupants.

1.2 RequirementsThe VOC content of adhesives and sealants used must be less than the current VOC content limits of South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule #1168, AND all sealants used as fillers must meet or exceed the requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Regulation 8, Rule 51.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, listing the adhesives and sealants used in the building and declaring that they meet the noted requirements.

2.0 ChallengesIt appears that there are relatively few challenges with using sealants to meet this credit. There may be some parts of the new building that need a more specialized than a multipurpose sealant


3.1 Green Label PlusThe W.W. Henry Company, from Aliquippa Pennsylvania, 430 miles from Bloomington, Indiana, manufactures GreenLine Sealant which is an Green Label Plus sealant for multipurpose use, carpet, linoleum, and vinyl composition tile.133 Adhesives that have this certification are flooring adhesives that have lower emissions than the Carpet and Rug Institute’s (CRI) Indoor Air Quality standards. Green Label Plus carpet sealants emit up to 97% less than current standards.134 (See IEQ Appendix 2 for Green Label Plus) The W.W. Henry Company was the focus of a CRI Special Edition news letter.135 (See IEQ Appendix 3) Sealants from this company would be above and beyond what is necessary for the LEED credit. As guidelines change and more companies follow suit with the W.W. Henry Company by manufacturing adhesives, competition will bring any additional cost of the Green Label Plus sealants down. The price for the GreenLine Sealant is $5.55 a gallon, while similar products from this company range from $4.99 a gallon to $12.86 a gallon.136 This product can be found at Lowes, and other local hardware stores. There is also a 10 year warranty for their Green Label Plus. The Henry Company also manufacturers GreenLine VCT Adhesive and GreenLine Linoleum Adhesive that are in the same price range as their uncertified counterparts.137

3.2 Green LabelThese three manufactures are not only in Bloomington’s region, but their products are manufactured to have VOC levels within the South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule #1168 which is required for this LEED credit.

�� The W.W. Henry Company. http://www.henrygreenline.com/ Accessed on 18 October 2005. �� The Carpet and Rug Institute. http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=15 Accessed on 16 October 2005. �� The Carpet and Rug Institute. www.carpet-rug.com/News/Newsline/020208_Newsline_V3I2.pdf Accessed on 18 October 2005.�� LOWES Bloomington. Accessed on 23 October 2005.�� The W.W. Henry Company. http://www.henrygreenline.com/ Accessed 24 October 2005.



Brands of Green Seal Adhesives include, CHAPCO Safe Set Adhesives which is manufactured from Chicago Adhesive Products Corporation in Chicago, IL which is 230 miles away from Bloomington, IN. Sheetrock Brand Acoustical sealant is manufactured by the United States Gypsum Company in Chicago, IL which is 230 miles away from Bloomington, IN. Liquid Nails Adhesive from MACCO Adhesive Division is manufactured in Cleveland, OH, about 370 miles away from Bloomington, IN. 138 (See IEQ Appendix 4 for more Green Label Products.)

If the Ultra Green Certified Seal sealants cannot be used, then Green Certified sealants should be used in order to attain this credit.

3.2 Other Option: GreenFloors Click Floating FloorsThis flooring system generally does not need any glue or sealant for installation. There are three current types of Click Floating Floors, Linoleum, Plank and Tile Click Floors, Cork Floating Click Floors, and Bamboo Click Floors. Therefore if sealants are needed that have higher VOCs than the requirements, the GreenFloors Click Floating Floors could be used to offset the emissions produced from higher VOC sealants.139 The price of these flooring systems ranges from $4.99-$5.59 per sq. foot.140

3.3 CostThe prices for these sealants fall within the average range of sealants. Multipurpose Henry GreenLine sealants which are Ultra Green Certified are $5.55 a gallon, compared to similar products from this company range from $4.99 a gallon to $12.86 a gallon.141

4.0 RecommendationsSPEA, as a leader in the environment, should take extra steps to go above and beyond standards if when cost effective to show the commitment the school has to forward thinking. W.W. Henry Company’s adhesives should be the ultimate choice. However, if it is more cost effective for the school to use the Green Certified Seal products, the LEED credit will still be attained. If the school needs to use some adhesives that exceed the levels of VOCs, they could offset the levels by using GreenFloors Click Floating Floor systems, or other systems that do not need any glue or sealants for installation.

�� The Carpet and Rug Institute. http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=15 Accessed 24 October 2005.�� GreenFloors, http://www.greenfloors.com/HP_Click_Floors_Index.htm. Accessed 24 October 2005.��0 GreenFloors, http://www.greenfloors.com/HP_Click_Floors_Index.htm. Accessed 24 October 2005.�� LOWES Bloomington. 23 October 2005.



1.0 IEQ Credit 4.2, Low-Emitting Materials: Paints and Coatings


1.2 RequirementsVOC emissions from paints and coatings must not exceed the VOC and chemical component limits of Green Seal’s Standard GS-11 requirements.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, listing all the interior paints and coatings used in the building that are addressed by Green Seal Standard GS-11 and stating that they comply with the current VOC and chemical component limits of the standard.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Laboratory PaintsSome laboratories in SPEA might need to have specific paints (which might have higher than required VOC levels) to control reflectance of light. The Pratt School at Duke remedied this challenge by using low VOC paints, and zero VOC paints in other parts of the school to average the level necessary to meet the Green Seal’s Standard GS 11 requirements142

2.2 Deepness of ColorsThere are a wide variety of colors offered by the manufacturers in the Green Seal Certified Paints; however, the colors may not appear as deep as paints with higher VOCs since a large portion of the pigmentation contains high numbers of VOCs.143 This is not to say that the quality is diminished or durability of the paints is diminished.144 Since the market appears to be expanding, the colors should become more comparable in future years.


3.1 CostThere are many paints currently in the market who are Green Seal Certified (See IEQ Appendix 5).145 For example, Olympic Paints which can be found primarily at Lowe’s, have a Zero-VOC Premium Interior Line costs the same as other Olympic Paints that do not achieve the certification, ranging from $15.92/gallon to $19.98/gallon.146 Pittsburgh Paints Pure Performance line from Pittsburgh Architectural Finishes Inc. costs the same as their other

�� Pratt School of Engineering @ Duke. http://www.pratt.duke.edu/about/fciemas_leed.php Accessed 20 October 2005.�� Correspondence with RBS Building Material Distributor (Bloomington) about Zero and Low VOC Paint, 27 October 2005.�� Correspondence with RBS Building Material Distributor (Bloomington) about Zero and Low VOC Paint�� Green Seal Standards and Certifications. http://www.greenseal.org/certproducts.htm#paints Accessed on 12 October 2005.�� LOWES Bloomington. Accessed on 23 October 2005.



interior paints that do not achieve the certification, ranging from $21.63/gallon to $26.52/gallon depending on finish of paint.147 Benjamin Moore produces three types of Green Seal Certified latex paint. The cost for their EcoSpec interior paints ranges from $27.39/gallon to $34.49/gallon, which are also roughly fifty cents less expensive than Benjamin Moore latex paints that do not achieve the certification.148

In the Aberdeen Painting Project, the U.S. Department of Army’s Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) found that paints that fit their standards (which are equal to the Green Seal Standards) were on average “$1.76 less expensive per gallon based on a review of prices for compliant and noncompliant paints from… frequent suppliers.”149

3.2 BenefitsThe restrictions set by Green Seal for both inorganic and organic compounds are on compounds known or suspected to have adverse affects on health, and the environment.150 By using Green Seal paints, the indoor air quality will be healthier for building occupants. To assist in the credits for regional sustainability, PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. based out of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania should be considered. Pittsburgh is 410 miles away from Bloomington, IN.151

4.0 RecommendationsGreen Seal paints “VOC limits are based on the lowest VOC levels achieved by at least 15 percent of the paint market.”152 This credit can be achieved with paints and coatings that are superior in quality and also minimize the health impacts of standard paints and coatings, for roughly the same cost as other paints. It appears that there are sufficient number of companies and product options to make Green Seal paints easily accessible. It also appears that new paint manufacturers will enter into the market as the demand increases, which is very likely in the next 8 to 10 years. As more manufacturers enter into the market, prices will also decrease for the Green Seal products. When choosing brands of paints, regional sustainability should also be considered. This can be achieved by using PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. Pure Performance Line paints. If regional sustainability in the paint industry is not a higher priority than cost, then Olympic Paints should be used since they are the least expensive paints that meet this criterion that can be purchased locally through Lowe’s.

�� Correspondence with RBS Building Material Distributor (Bloomington) about Zero and Low VOC Paint.�� Correspondence with Bloomington Paint and Wallpaper about Zero and Low VOC Paint (27 October 2005)�� Clean Air Counts: EPA Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program. http://www.cleanaircounts.org/Resource%20Package/A%20Book/paints/paints.pdf. Accessed on 6 October 2005: 11. ��0 Clean Air Counts: EPA Environmentally Preferable purchasing Program. http://www.cleanaircounts.org/Resource%20Package/A%20Book/paints/paints.pdf: Accessed on 6 October 2005: 6.�� Mapquest. http://www.mapquest.com Accessed on 20 October 2005.�� Clean Air Counts: EPA Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program. http://www.cleanaircounts.org/Resource%20Package/A%20Book/paints/paints.pdf: Accessed on 6 October 2005: 8.



1.0 IEQ Credit 4.3, Low-Emitting Materials: Carpet


1.2 RequirementsCarpet systems must meet or exceed the requirements of the Carpet and Rug Institute’s Green Label Indoor Air Quality Test Program.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, listing all the carpet systems used in the building and stating that they comply with the current VOC limits of the Carpet and Rug Institute’s Green Label Indoor Air Quality Test Program.

2.0 ChallengesOne aspect of the chemical makeup of carpet includes Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) that can be released into the air for 48 to 72 hours following installation.153 Adhesives, other sealants and carpet padding also account for the VOCs associated with carpet and other flooring. As mentioned in the previous section, sealants with low VOC contents can reduce the Indoor Environmental problems that occur with using carpeting and other flooring products.154

SPEA should only use carpets that meet the Carpet and Rug Institute’s (CRI) “green label” or “green label plus” CRI Indoor Air Quality Carpet Testing Program. The “green label” program allows consumers to choose carpets that have been proven to meet the CRI’s low emissions criteria.155

There are currently twenty manufacturers that produce Green Label Plus certified carpets. Green Label Plus carpets meet the most stringent requirements from the Carpet and Rug Institute.156There are currently 43 manufacturers of Green Label Certified Carpets which should provide adequate selection and competitive prices.157 (See IEQ Appendix 6 for a list of certified carpets)


3.1 Green Label Plus CertifiedCollins and Aikman (C&A) Floorcovering’s Powerbond ER3 modular tiles are made with 100% recycled backing materials and use the C&A low VOC “peel and stick” adhesive system.158 (Indiana University currently purchases carpeting from this manufacturer) There are currently four types of carpet manufactured by Collins and Aikman that receive the Green Label Plus certification, two of which are modular carpet. C&A’s carpet consist of 31-

�� Green Seal. http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations.htm#certification Accessed on 21 Oct 2005.�� Green Seal. http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations.htm#certification Accessed on 21 Oct 2005: 4-5.�� Green Seal. http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations.htm#certification Accessed on 21 Oct 2005: 4-5.�� The Carpet and Rug Institute, (n.d.). Indoor air quality. http://www.carpet-rug.org/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=17&requesttimeout=350. Accessed on 24 October 2005.�� Carpet and Rug Institute. http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=11&listid=2. Accessed on 24 October 2005.�� Green Seal. http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations.htm#certification Accessed on 21 Oct 2005: 7.



50% recycled content (the difference depends on style). Twenty three percent of the recycled material is from recycled carpet, and seven percent is from post-consumer products. Also available through C&A is a “carpet collection/recovery system and a currently operational, commercial-scale recycling process to recycle vinyl-backed carpet.”159 When a customer purchases C&A carpets, the customer receives a written guarantee that the carpet will not be land-filled, or disposed. The returned carpet will be recycled, even if the carpet is not C&A brand. The price range for C&A carpets is from $15 to $25 a square yard. The square foot price would be from $1.66 to $2.77.160 Collins and Aikman materials can be purchased through a distributor in Chicago, IL.

3.2 Green Label CertifiedThere are currently 44 manufacturers of Green Label certified carpets. GreenFloors, based out of Fairfax, VA, has modular carpet tiles ranging from $1.00 a square foot to $6.00 a square foot. Their commercial carpeting in rolls ranges from $1.50 to $4.00 a square foot. GreenFloors also manufactures limestone composite tile, linoleum, cork floors, along with many other options. The prices for Green Label Certified carpets are comparable with non-Green Label carpets, and there are enough manufacturers of Green Label certified carpets to provide a wide selection. Also it appears that many more manufacturers are introducing Green Label products; by the time the new SPEA is built, there should be a larger selection of products. 3.3 CostIt appears that both Green Label Plus certified carpets and Green Label carpets are in the same range of prices of non-certified products.

4.0 RecommendationsWhen possible, carpet tiles should be used instead of wall to wall carpet. By using carpet tiles, only damaged tiles would need to be replaced, versus the whole carpet. If under-floor air distribution systems are utilized, modular carpeting is most practical, since the floor can be moved to meet the occupants needs (See Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 6.2)

Carpeting should at least meet the CRI Indoor Air Quality Standards for the Green Label program. Indiana University currently uses Collins & Aikman for some of their carpets and should work with this company to find the Green Label Plus carpets that meet the university’s needs.

�� Green Seal’s Choose Green Report: Carpet. (2001). http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations.htm#certification Accessed on 21 Oct 2005: 7.��0 Correspondence with Collins & Aikman Distributor (Chicago) (Phone Interview on 3 November 2005)



1.0 IEQ Credit 4.4, Low-Emitting Materials: Composite Wood


1.2 RequirementsComposite wood and agrifiber products must contain no added urea-formaldehyde resins. 1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, listing all the composite wood products used in the building and stating that they contain no added urea-formaldehyde resins.

2.0 ChallengesParticleboard is made from wood shavings and sawdust that are bonded together by urea formaldehyde or other types of resin.161 The materials are pressed into sheets that are used for use in furniture, cabinets and doors. Usually particleboard is covered on at least one side with a surface finish, like a veneer. Particleboard is also used below carpets and other floor covering choices. Medium-density fiberboard (MDF) is a “composite board made of wood fibers bonded with urea formaldehyde or other synthetic resin.”162 MDF is recognized for good mechanic ability and smooth surface. MDF’s primary use is to replace wood boards in cabinets, furniture, picture frames and moldings.163

At first glance it appears that there are only a few distributors who make particleboard and MDF which could be a challenge. After further searching, there are many subsidiaries, and manufacturers of the different brands, for example Huttig Building Products is a distributor of Timbersil out of St. Louis Missouri. Local companies, such as RBS Building Materials carry these products. 3.0 Implementation Options

3.1 Use Only Solid WoodOne way to achieve this credit would be by using only solid wood products, and not using particleboard or medium-density fiberboard. However, this is not a practical solution due to the cost of solid wood.

3.2 Green Seal CertifiedThere are currently three types of greener PB and MDF on the market: Agricultural Waste Fiber that is Formaldehyde-free (made from agricultural residues that are bonded without the use of formaldehyde, Post-Consumer Waste Fiber, Formaldehyde-Free (“post-consumer paper waste, bonded with a formaldehyde-free resin”), and Recovered Wood Fiber, Formaldehyde-Free (“pre-consumer wood residues, bonded with a formaldehyde-free resin.”)164

(See IEQ Appendix 7 for Product Recommendations)

�� Green Seal. www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_particleboard.pdf Accessed on 25 October 2005:2. �� Green Seal. www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_particleboard.pdf. Accessed on 25 October 2005: 2.�� Green Seal. www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_particleboard.pdf Accessed on 25 October 2005: 2.�� Green Seal, (2001). www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_particleboard.pdf Accessed on 25 October 2005: 6.



Each recommendation from Green Seal’s Choose Green Report is especially environmentally friendly since the formaldehyde-free recommendations also are made from either waste fiber, or recovered wood fiber.

3.3 CostIn a phone interview, Aetna Plywood Incorporated’s Purchasing Department (with whom Indiana University has an account) provided cost estimates for plywood that contains and does not contain urea-formaldehyde. The cost per square foot for ¾ inch particleboard that contains formaldehyde is around $0.55 and the cost per square foot for ¾ inch particleboard that doe not contain formaldehyde is around $0.88.165 Depending on the amount used in the building process, there could be very little difference in cost or a more substantial difference in cost if more of the product is used. However, reducing the risks of cancer and other negative health impacts should outweigh the difference in costs, especially in a new building for SPEA, which is in the forefront of environmental policy and thought.

4.0 RecommendationsSince each recommendation from Green Seal’s Choose Green Report for formaldehyde-free recommendations are made from either waste fiber, or recovered wood fiber, SPEA should choose the option that is most appropriate for the construction needs at the time. This industry should expand before the new building is constructed which will provide more options to choose from. By using formaldehyde free products, the construction workers and building occupants’ health risks will be reduced, since even small amounts of formaldehyde could cause cancer.166

�� Correspondence with AETNA Plywood Incorporated’s Purchasing Department. (Phone interview on 16 November 2005.) �� Green Seal, (2001).www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_particleboard.pdf Accessed on 25 October 2005: 3.



1.0 IEQ Credit 5, Indoor Chemical & Pollutant Source Control

1.1 IntentAvoid exposure of building occupants to potentially hazardous chemicals that adversely impact air quality.

1.2 RequirementsDesign to minimize pollutant cross-contamination of regularly occupied areas: Employ permanent entryway systems (grills, grates, etc.) to capture dirt, particulates, etc. from entering the building at all high volume entryways. Where chemical use occurs (including housekeeping areas and copying/printing rooms), provide segregated areas with deck to deck partitions with separate outside exhaust at a rate of at least 0.50 cubic feet per minute per square foot, no air re-circulation and maintaining a negative pressure of at least 7 PA (0.03 inches of water gauge). Provide drains plumbed for appropriate disposal of liquid waste in spaces where water and chemical concentrate mixing occurs.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, declaring that: Permanent entryway systems (grilles, grates, etc.) to capture dirt, particulates, etc. are provided at all high volume entryways. Chemical use areas and copy rooms have been physically separated with deck-to-deck partitions; independent exhaust ventilation has been installed at 0.50 cfm/square foot and that a negative pressure differential of 7 PA has been achieved. In spaces where water and chemical concentrate mixing occurs, drains are plumbed for environmentally appropriate disposal of liquid waste.

2.0 ChallengesSource control is considered to be the “most effective strategy for achieving good indoor air quality” and should begin during construction.167 Source control is then followed by elimination, reduction and isolation of pollutant sources.168 Using walk off mats should not be a challenge since the existing building and other buildings at Indiana University have mats at each high traffic entrance. Isolation of the ventilation for the duplicating room and ventilation and plumbing of the janitor’s closets will reduce biological, chemical and particle contaminates in the new building, thus improving the health of SPEA’s occupants, improved preservation of finishes and systems in the building. SPEA’s current building does not have these areas isolated, but the planning for the new building should include these provisions.

3.0 Implementation OptionsWalk off mats at high traffic entrances should already be a part of the building construction at Indiana University since they are used in all current buildings. Isolation of ventilation and plumbing should not be cost prohibitive because ventilation ducts and plumbing will need to be installed in the new building, and it should not be much more expensive, if at all, to install these systems to meet the standard in the new building.

4.0 RecommendationsThe new SPEA building should use source control to protect the health of building occupants by installing mats and other entryway systems. Since the plans for the building have not been created, the design should include deck-to-deck partitions along with independent exhaust ventilation and plumbing that meets this credit. This credit should be relatively easily achieved as long as these recommendations are a part of the initial design process.

�� Levin, Hal. BuildingGreen.com. http://www.buildinggreen.com/elists/halpaper.cfm Accessed 30 October 2005. �� Levin, Hal. BuildingGreen.com. http://www.buildinggreen.com/elists/halpaper.cfm Accessed 30 October 2005.

�0� Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs


1.0 IEQ Credit 6.1, Controllability of Systems: Perimeter Spaces

1.1 IntentProvide a high level of thermal, ventilation and lighting system control by individual occupants or specific groups in multi-occupant spaces (i.e. classrooms or conference areas) to promote the productivity, comfort and wellbeing of building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsProvide at least an average of one operable window and one lighting control zone per 200 square feet for all regularly occupied areas within 15 feet of the perimeter wall.

1.3 DocumentsProvide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, demonstrating and declaring that for regularly occupied perimeter areas of the building a minimum of one operable window and one lighting control zone are provided per 200 square feet on average.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 Operable Windows vs. HVAC & Energy Efficiency Increasing personal control of lighting can lead to higher levels of personal satisfaction and productivity. Moreover, building occupants tolerate a wider range of temperature conditions in naturally ventilated buildings than do those in mechanically conditioned buildings. Additionally, buildings with operable windows exhibit fewer symptoms of sick-building syndrome. However, the problem of operable windows is that—obviously—open windows allow conditioned air to escape, increasing building energy use169.

Control on overhead lighting is easily achieved through the installation of additional switch boxes. Additionally, installation of extra task lighting (individual lamps at work stations) can provide even finer control.


3.1 Mixed-Mode Approach This integrated approach, called “mixed-mode,” makes it possible to avoid conflicts between operable windows and HVAC systems. The mixed-mode offers a combination of improved energy performance and comfortable temperature conditions. For example, when occupancy sensors are interlocked with HVAC operation (see Demand Controlled Ventilation in Credit (1)), energy savings can result little or no loss of temperature performance during occupied hours. One drawback of the integrated, mixed-mode options is that it requires a single HVAC zone per office.

3.2 Energy-Saving WindowsSelecting windows for energy efficiency is essential to choosing appropriate windows and skylights. For For ventilation and air-tightness, casement or awningcasement or awning windows maximize effective ventilation area and better exclude precipitation while ventilating. Additionally double- (or triple-) pane windows with low-E coating fills in cold climates reduce heat losses and condensation170.

�� Daly, Allen PE. http://www.hpac.com/member/feature/feature_pdf/0212daly.pdf Accessed 24 October 2005. ��0 US Department of Energy. http://windows.lbl.gov/pub/selectingwindows/window.pdf Accessed on 15 November 2005.

�0�Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs


3.3 Automatic LightingAppropriate lighting controls can yield substantial cost-effective lighting energy savings, reducing the power consumption for lighting in offices by 30% to 50%. Lighting controls are devices that regulate the operation of the lighting system in response to an external signal. Energy-efficient control systems include: 1) Localized manual switches; 2) Occupancy linking controls; 3) Time scheduling controls; and 4) Day lighting responsiveness controls. In order to maximize efficiency, it is important that the permanent occupants of a space are aware of the existence of the lighting control system, how it works, and how they can interact with it171.

4.0 Recommendations We recommend interlock controls with the HVAC system to turn off heating and cooling when windows are open. Automatic sensors linking HVAC with windows make this possible. The sensors should also be connected with the lighting system for additional energy savings. As for the windows, double-pane & awning windows are recommended to reduce heat losses and improve efficiency.

�� GreenBuilding. http://energyefficiency.jrc.cec.eu.int/greenbuilding/pdf%20greenbuilding/GreenBuilding_Lighting_Module_V3.pdf Accessed on 10 November 2005.



1.0 IEQ Credit 6.2, Controllability of Systems: Non-Perimeter Spaces

1.1 IntentProvide a high level of thermal, ventilation and lighting system control by individual occupants or specific groups in multi-occupant spaces (i.e. classrooms or conference areas) to promote the productivity, comfort and wellbeing of building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsProvide controls for each individual for airflow, temperature and lighting for at least 50% of the occupants in non-perimeter, regularly occupied areas.

1.3 Documents Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the architect or responsible party, demonstrating and declaring that controls for individual airflow, temperature and lighting are provided for at least 50% of the occupants in non-perimeter, regularly occupied areas.

2.0 Challenges

2.1 HVAC vs. Local ControlWhen a building is designed with local controls, the comfort level of occupants can be noticeably enhanced. For example, allowing occupants to open and close some windows, even small ones, can enhance their connection to the local environment, especially on mild days. This degree of control allows people to comfortably tolerate a wider range of temperatures than they will in a mechanically ventilated space. Moreover, local controls are fundamental to energy-conservation. The problem is to balance occupant comfort and control with system efficiency and both initial and operating costs.


3.1 Ventilation Control Local control on ventilation depends on the type(s) of ventilation employed. There are several options for localThere are several options for local air delivery control. If the new SPEA build used UFAD (Underfloor Air Distribution), then RFTDA (Round Floor(Underfloor Air Distribution), then RFTDA (Round FloorRFTDA (Round Floor Turbulent Face Adjustable Diffuser) would be recommended, which is typically installed at each workstation, allowing employees to individually control the speed and volume of air supplied to their space. Alternatively, if OAD (Overhead Air Distribution) is selected in the new SPEA building, personal VAV diffusers allow individual control of a zone through thermostats or infrared remote control. These diffusers are an ideal solution to providing personal control in an office environment.172

3.2 Lighting Controls Lighting controls are simply devices for turning lights on and off or for dimming them. The various types include a standard snap switch, photocells, timers, occupancy sensors, and dimmers. 1) Photocells respond to natural light levels. For example, photocells switch outdoor lights on at dusk and off at dawn. Some advanced designs gradually raise and lower fluorescent light levels with changing daylight levels. 2) Mechanical or electronic

�� USGBC. http://mail.price-hvac.com/repnet-www/pdfs/Brochure_USGBCLeedProgram.pdf Accessed on 10 November 2005.



timers automatically turn on and off indoor or outdoor lights. 3) Occupancy sensors activate lights when a person is in the area and then turn off the lights after the person has left. 4) Dimmers reduce the wattage and output of incandescent and fluorescent lamps but will save energy only when used consistently. Dimming fluorescent requires a special dimming ballast and lamp holder but does not reduce their efficiency.173

3.3 Thermal Controls We can reduce energy consumption by the installation of automatic set-back thermostats. Programmable thermostats are a great way to squeeze maximum efficiency out of the HVAC system. They automatically change the temperature of buildings to meet the needs of occupants’ preference. This system can reduce the energy consumption of building systems by about two percent.174

4.0 Recommendation To achieve this credit, we recommend a strategy interconnecting operable windows, the HVAC system and electric lighting controls in all spaces. If the new SPEA building adopts underfloor air distribution ventilation, it would be easy for individual to maintain local ventilation and thermal control. Occupant sensors are recommended for overall automatic system to save energy consumption.

�� US Department of Energy. http://msucares.com/pubs/publications/p2269.pdf Accessed on 8 November 2005/ �� Green Buildings. http://www.dgs.state.pa.us/dgs/lib/dgs/green_bldg/greenbuildingbook.pdf Accessed on 8 November 2005/



1.0 IEQ Credit 7.1, Thermal Comfort

1.1 IntentProvide a thermally comfortable environment that supports the productivity and well-being of building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsComply with ASHRAE Standard 55-1992, Addenda 1995, for thermal comfort standards including humidity control within established ranges per climate zone.

1.3 Documentation For mechanically ventilated spaces: provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the engineer or responsible party, declaring that the project complies with ASHRAE Standard 55-1992, Addenda 1995. Include a table that identifies each thermally controlled zone, and that summarizes for each zone the temperature and humidity control ranges and the method of control used.

2.0 ChallengesThis credit requires that occupied spaces remain comfortable under a variety of different air conditions. For example, a lower temperature and higher humidity can feel just as comfortable as a higher temperature and lower humidity, at least within a certain range. The prescribed range is given in the ASHRAE standard below.175

3.0 Implementation OptionsImplementation requires only that any HVAC system selected for SPEA’s new building be capable of regulating conditions within the ranges in the standard. This requirement should not challenge architects or engineers, since essentially all new HVAC systems are built to achieve—and in most cases systems substantially exceed—the standard.176 Thus, all implementation options discussed elsewhere in this document remain available to building designers (e.g. overhead forced air, underfloor air delivery, radiant heating and cooling, natural ventilation, etc.).

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that when choosing an HVAC system on other grounds (cost, efficiency, etc.), SPEA’s building designers double check to ensure that the system does meet the standards of ASHRAE 55-1992, Addenda 1995.

�� US Department of Energy. http://www.energycodes.gov/comcheck/pdfs/300text.pdf Accessed on 12 November 2005. �� Conversations with multiple HVAC systems engineers at the US Green Building Council 2005 GreenBuild Expo in Atlanta, GA. Engineers responded to questions about meeting the standard as “irrelevant….Any system you buy will meet the standard. The real questions are about efficiency, reliability and cost.”



1.0 IEQ Credit 7.2, Permanent Monitoring System

1.1 IntentProvide a thermally comfortable environment that supports the productivity and well-being of building occupants.

1.2 RequirementsInstall a permanent temperature and humidity monitoring system configured to provide operators control over thermal comfort performance and the effectiveness of humidification and/or dehumidification systems in the building.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template, signed by the engineer or responsible party, declaring that a permanent temperature and humidity monitoring system will operate throughout all seasons to permit control of the building zones within the seasonal thermal comfort ranges defined in ASHRAE 55-1992, Addenda 1995. Confirm that the temperature and humidity controls were (or will be) tested as part of the scope of work for Energy and Atmosphere Prerequisite 1, Fundamental Building Systems commissioning. Include the document name and section number where the commissioning work is listed.

2.0 ChallengesThis credit asks that we solve two problems already dealt with above. First, to design the HVAC system to meet the requirements of ASHRAE 55-1992, Addenda 1995; and second, to install a monitoring system to ensure that the standard continues to be met. We address these challenges under IEQ credits 2 and 7.1, and below.

Note that any modern HVAC system requires some degree of centralized control—in most cases, almost total control. On the IU Bloomington campus, the Campus Control Center monitors and operates HVAC systems from its central location. Unless IU chooses to remove SPEA’s new green building entirely from the campus heating and cooling systems, similar centralized controls would have to be integrated into the new building’s HVAC system so that the Control Center could monitor and adjust the environment.



Thus, one challenge will probably be to integrate the building’s monitoring system (hardware and software) into the current IU monitoring protocol. On the other hand, a permanent monitoring system becomes an automatic addition to the ventilation system, and the credit is achieved.


3.1 Meeting Comfort RangesTo meet the first part of this credit, we will have to meet the temperature and humidity requirements of ASHRAE 55-1992. As discussed in 7.1 above, that requirement is not onerous. The building’s HVAC system will have to be integrated with the building envelope and layout to ensure that the building operates within the designed comfort ranges.

3.2 Monitoring Temperature and Humidity Monitoring equipment—both hardware and software—is available from a variety of companies. Johnson Controls177 provides a wide selection of ventilation tools from complete HVAC systems to independent monitors. Johnson is also one of the first HVAC companies to focus on “green” ventilation systems; they offer a complete LEED certification system from design through implementation, and they apparently enjoy a strong reputation in the green building community. Siemens178 also provides a flexible, easily integrated monitoring system. Other manufacturers include Invensys,179 ASI Controls,180 and industry standards such as Honeywell181 and Carrier.182

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that building designers ensure that the HVAC system they choose includes an appropriate monitoring system that can be easily integrated into the existing IU-Bloomington monitoring and control system.

�� Johnson Controls. http://www.johnsoncontrols.com/cg/html/what_we_offer.htm Accessed 16 November 2005.�� Siemens. http://www.sbt.siemens.com/HVP/Staefa/products/talon/default.asp Accessed 16 November 2005.�� Invensys. http://www.invensysibs.com/ Accessed 16 November 2005.��0 ASI Controls. http://www.asicontrols.com/ Accessed 16 November 2005.�� Honeywell. http://buildingsolutions.honeywell.com/Cultures/en-US/ServicesSolutions/BuildingAutomationControls/ Accessed 16 November 2005.�� Carrier. http://www.commercial.carrier.com/commercial/hvac/general/0,3055,CLI1_DIV12_ETI9040,00.html Accessed 16 November 2005.



1.0 IEQ Credit 8.1, Daylight 75% of Spaces.

1.1 IntentProvide for the building occupants a connection between indoor spaces and the outdoors through the introduction of daylight and views into the regularly occupied areas of the building.

1.2 RequirementsAchieve a minimum Daylight Factor of 2% (excluding all direct sunlight penetration) in 75% of all space occupied for critical visual tasks. Spaces excluded from this requirement include copy rooms, storage areas, mechanical plant rooms, laundry and other low occupancy support areas. Other exceptions for spaces where tasks would be hindered by the use of daylight will be considered on their merits.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template signed by the architect or responsible party. Provide area calculations that define the daylight zone and provide prediction calculations or daylight simulation.

2.0 ChallengesDaylighting saves energy, enhances productivity, and reduces costs associated with electric lighting. 183 However, designers must make careful choices to achieve maximum benefits. Designers must locate and size windows and other elements to ensure a relatively even amount of brightness in the building’s interior, avoid excess heat and glare, and minimize the amount of bright sunlight that falls directly on work areas.

Additionally, natural lighting offers opportunities for multiple energy and financial savings, such as decreased need for artificial lighting and consequently lowered heating and cooling costs. However, these savings are quickly lost if a unified building design does not account for the benefits and consequences of natural lighting. For example, natural lighting decreases the need for artificial lighting, which lowers heat gain and overall energy load on the building and permits the installation of significantly smaller (and less expensive) HVAC equipment. Thus, to achieve full cost and energy savings from daylighting, architects must integrate design of the exterior (windows, skylights, etc.), interior lighting, and HVAC system together.

Finally, appearance is sometimes considered a challenge for daylit buildings—“won’t all those windows be ugly?” In fact, daylit buildings are attractive both inside and out, and they would both fit in and enhance the beauty of the IU campus. In fact, the large windows and broad access to daylight used in the design of the new Kelley School of Business building are already consistent with this credit.

3.0 Implementation Options184

�� Pacific Gas & Electric. http://www.pge.com/003_save_energy/003c_edu_train/pec/daylight/di_pubs/SchoolsCondensed820.PDF Accessed 16 November 2005. �� US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Department of Energy. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/33938.pdf Accessed 16 November 2005. http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/daylighting/pdf/DaylightBenefits.pdf Accessed 16 November 2005.



3.1 Building Shape and OrientationNot all buildings or sites are optimal for daylighting. A square building, or one with a long axis running north and south, is not optimal. In both cases, there is more east- and west-facing glass than is best for a daylit building because low sun angles on the east and west make shading difficult. Ideally, the building should have a long, narrow footprint along an east-west axis. Additionally, west-facing windows should be minimized.

3.2 Atria and Top LightingAdding an atrium increases the amount of space that receives natural light in a building. An atrium is often a central, enclosed area one or more stories high (depending on the building’s height) with side lighting and top lighting. A central courtyard provides a similar effect.

For top lighting, daylight enters a space through vertical windows located above the ceiling line. Daylight apertures can face north or south. Cloth or plastic baffles under roof monitors (skylights) or deep window wells diffuse and reflect light in the space, preventing glare. Top lighting can also be provided with stepped clerestory windows (see IEQ Appendix 8), roof monitors, or horizontal window wells. IEQ Appendix 9 show designs currently employed across the country.

3.3 Windows: Shading and GlazingBecause a well-designed daylighting system captures indirect light from the sun or sky, windows on the south, east, and west facades must be shaded from direct sunlight. Shading options include “self-shading” windows in deep exterior wall sections, horizontal overhangs, louvers, vertical fins, and light shelves (see IEQ Appendix 10) that can be integrated into the building’s structure. Examples of such strategies can be seen on the first floor of IU’s Wells Library.

Additionally, different window glazings have different properties. For example, glazings differ in the amount of visible light they permit, the amount of solar heat gained, and their rate of conductive heat transfer. See IEQ Appendix 11 for a list of common glazing issues.

3.4 Integration with electric lightingDesigners must coordinate daylighting with the electric lighting design so they work together as one system. For example, electric lighting should dim automatically when daylight increases during daylight hours. Otherwise electric lights can stay on, and potential energy gains are wasted. Similarly, designers can decrease the size of the HVAC system installed, since efficiency gains mean lower peak and overall demands on the ventilation system.

3.5 CostDaylighting strategies can cost more initially, but they quickly pay for themselves. A 128,000 ft2 secondary school employed daylight strategies to reduce electricity use by 26%, and they save $0.29/ft2 in heating and cooling costs over traditional lighting strategies. In that case, the additional up-front cost of $1.23/gross ft2 will be paid back in just over four years.185 The 184,000 ft2 Sacramento Utility Customer Service Center used daylighting

�� Peter Morante, Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/daylightdividends/pdf/SmithCaseStudyFinal.pdf Accessed 16 November 2005.

��0Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs


strategies to save $56,328 annually in energy costs ($43,073 from reduced lighting loads and $13,255 in reduced HVAC costs). Initial costs were about 50% greater than traditional lighting and the payback period is about nine years. Sacramento Utility expects the payback period to shorten as costs decline for advanced technologies they employed.186

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that the building design integrate all or most of the features above to achieve the required 2% Daylighting Factor for 75% of occupied spaces.

�� DELTA Portfolio Lighting Case Studies. http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/DELTA/pdf/SMUD.pdf Accessed 16 November 2005.



1.0 IEQ Credit 8.2, Views for 90% of Spaces

1.1 IntentProvide for the building occupants a connection between indoor spaces and the outdoors through the introduction of daylight and views into the regularly occupied areas of the building.

1.2 RequirementsAchieve direct line of sight to vision glazing for building occupants in 90% of all regularly occupied spaces. Examples of exceptions include copy rooms, storage areas, mechanical, laundry and other low occupancy support areas. Other exceptions will be considered on their merits.

1.3 Documentation Provide the LEED Letter Template and calculations describing, demonstrating and declaring that the building occupants in 90% of regularly occupied spaces will have direct lines of site to perimeter glazing. Provide drawings highlighting the direct line of sight zones.

2.0 ChallengesMaximizing views requires many of the same strategies as maximizing daylight (see 8.2 above). The central challenge is to integrate and balance the design demands for maximum views with the demands of other credits.


3.1 Building Shape and LayoutAs with lighting in credit (8.1), not all building shapes are optimal for views. A square building maximizes interior space where occupants cannot see out. Longer, narrower buildings provide more perimeter space and thus more views. (For example, think of Ballantine Hall’s upper floors, where virtually 100% of occupants have external views.) Similarly, square buildings built around a courtyard maximize perimeter spaces.

3.2 Exterior Windows (“Glazing”)Designers should include exterior windows (often referred to as “glazing” in the professional literature) wherever possible. As in (8.1), this strategy takes advantage of natural light, improves productivity and can enhance energy efficiency. Planners must use caution to prevent glare, solar heat gain and other potentially negative consequences.

3.3 Open Floor plansOpen floor plans are natural for classrooms, auditoriums, and gathering spaces. In work spaces (such as office and administrative spaces) they can contribute to improved efficiency, communication and work flow. They also afford nearly identical views to glazing for those who work near windows and those closer to the building interior. Disadvantages to open floor plans can include loss of privacy and increased noise transmission.

3.4 Interior Windows, Transparent Interior DividersDivided spaces in the building interior should be transparent. Clear partitions permit views to the exterior while still decreasing noise and providing privacy. An excellent example of this at IU is the STEPS Classroom in the Wells Library, where three walls divide computer users from exterior views. Because all three walls are transparent partitions, people can work in the center of the building’s interior and still see the outdoors.



We should also minimize the number of enclosed spaces along the building perimeter. Where this is not possible, interior windows can provide exterior views while maintaining privacy. For example, the interior walls of a Dean’s office might include ribbon windows from 7’ up to the ceiling, which would secure privacy and still provide exterior views and admit light. See IEQ Appendix 12 for a current building that employs the strategies above to provide daylighting and views to all of its occupants.

4.0 RecommendationsWe recommend that the new SPEA building include all or most of the options above. These options can all be implemented together with credit (8.1) to achieve both natural daylighting and exterior views for all or nearly all of the building’s occupants.


Innovation & Design Case Studies

Alberici Corporate Headquarters

1.0 General Information

1.1. LEED Rating: Platinum 1.2. Location: St. Louis, MO, USA1.3. Building Type: Corporate Headquarters; Office Space1.4. Project Type: Redevelopment1.5. Size/Contract: 110,000 sq. ft. / $20.85 million (Alberici Redevelopment Corp)1.6. Construction: 15 months (Sept. 2003 – Dec. 2004)

2. Project Overview

Conversion of 60,000 sq. ft., three-floor building with 97 percent material diverted from landfill resulting in 110,000 sq. ft. office building and 300 car indoor parking facilities. Retention ponds, native landscaping and parking garage catchments system recycle 60 percent of storm water runoff.

3. Innovations in LEED Categories

3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Eliminated “surface” parking with enclosed facilities3.1.2. Reduced hard-paved areas by 60 percent3.1.3. Reduced potable water consumption by 78 percent with cistern capture system3.1.4. Passive solar panel system provides 95 percent of energy for hot water needs3.1.5. Partnered with Missouri Botanical Garden’s Shaw Nature Reserve for native landscaping3.1.6. Design-Build strategy to eliminate redundant services at reduced expenditures

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – Alberici implemented a storm-water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) including EPA “best practices” and photo-documentation of construction processes.3.2.2. Alternative transportation – The renovation includes bike racks for employees and surpassed zoning requirements for parking facilities (by 100 parking spots) through collaboration with local officials. 3.2.3. Reduced site disturbance – The development team partnered with the Missouri Botanical Garden Shaw Nature Reserve to create a native landscape (all native trees and grasses) with retention points and constructed wetlands.3.2.4. Storm water management – Collaboration with Shaw Nature Reserve and Missouri Department of Conservation; site developed as a quasi-watershed, capturing almost all storm water under a process known as “micro-detention”, where infiltration procedures cure the water of total suspended solids.3.2.5. Landscape/Exterior Design – The project used “slag-Crete” (alternative to cement), propitious tree placement, and bright-white roofing material to maximize reflected sunlight.

3.3. Water Efficiency


Innovation & Design

3.3.1. Landscaping – Native landscaping eliminates the need for irrigation systems.3.3.2. Wastewater Technologies – The building relies on a cistern system that funnels rainwater into a 31,000-gallon tank that strains, filters, and chlorinates water for the building toilet system.3.3.3. Restroom fixtures – Chemically maintained (water free) toilets and dual-flush toilets minimize water expenditures; metered water flow technologies control faucets.3.3.4. Heating – solar panels heat approximately 90 percent of the water used for internal purposes by directing energy through a glycol loop through a transfer plate to the hot water container.

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – Roof and wall insulation as well as window glazing and the building orientation created 60 percent gains in energy efficiency.3.4.2. Additional Commissioning – The development team included ongoing commissioning (required for fundamental building operation) to double-check all phases of the project.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – The development collaborated with local recycling companies and local government agencies for recycling lumber and traditional metals and glasses.3.5.2. Rapidly renewable materials – The project used Plyboo (plywood made from bamboo), Woodstalk (particleboard made from wheat) and soybean-based membrane for the garage roof.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Carbon dioxide monitoring – an adaptive monitoring system introduces additional levels of oxygen when CO2 levels pass a threshold limit.3.6.2. Ventilation effectiveness – The redeveloped building uses under-floor air distribution via raised-floor architecture, partial displacement ventilation that delivers air at a constant and low velocity, and a “building management system” (BMS) that alerts employees when conditions permit for natural (open windows) ventilation.3.6.3. In-door air quality (IAQ) management – During the construction phase, the development team surpassed LEED requirements by reinforcing water intrusion controls, sequencing delivery schedules, and protecting materials from water damage.


Innovation & Design

Chicago Center for Green Technology


1.1. LEED Rating: Platinum1.2. Location: Chicago, IL, USA1.3. Industry: Commercial office, Industrial, Assembly1.4. Type: Renovation1.5. Size/Contract: 40,000 sq. ft. / $14,400,000 (Department of Environment)1.6. Construction: Completed January 2003

2. Project Overview

Utilizing geothermal, solar panels, rainwater collection, smart lighting, and a green roof have provided the city of Chicago a platinum level LEED building. The 17 acre location of the Center is the former Sacramento Crushing Corporation and was financed through the $100 million settlement with Commonwealth Edison Company.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Atrium Skylights and daylighting reduces the reliance of standard lighting by 24 percent3.1.2. LEED Accredited Professional3.1.3. Bio-swales, natural environment, storm water filtration and run off control for parking lots3.1.4. High-reflective hardscape is used to reduce “urban heat island” effect3.1.5. Geothermal exchange system is in place to utilize the constant ground temperature3.1.6. Solar panels within five years will produce 20 percent of electricity

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – Erosion and sediment controls were necessary to prevent topsoil runoff. 3.2.2. Alternative transportation – The Metro Rail is a half of a mile from the building. The building is located 1/4 mile from two bus lines. Bike racks are provided and the building has showers and changing facilities. Electric vehicle recharging stations are providing in the parking lot, and preferred parking is available for carpools. 3.2.3. Reduced site disturbance –The former dumping site was cleaned and much of the material was recycled or reused. The site was selected for development and infill development. 3.2.4. Storm water management – Cisterns connected to the building catch rainwater used for irrigation and reduces water flowing to sewers. A wetland and bioswales reduce pollutants entering the ground and sewers by allowing settling. 3.2.5. Landscape/Exterior Design – Light covered paving, green roofs, white painted roofs, and extensive tree coverage reduce the heat island effect.

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Landscaping – Native plants were chosen to reduce maintenance and irrigation needs.3.3.2. Wastewater Technologies – Bio-swales are present on curbs and gutters, a designed wetlands removes pollutants, and the collection of the water for irrigation all control the wastewater. 3.3.3. Restroom fixtures -- ll plumbing fixtures are low-flow fixtures according to the 1992 policy act.


Innovation & Design

3.3.4. Heating – Geothermal wells drilled 200 feet into the earth provide consistent building air temperature utilizing the ground temperature from 28 wells. Heat is located in close proximity to occupants.

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – Solar power is expected to produce 20 percent of the building’s electricity within five years. Daylighting reduces the need for artificial lighting by 24 percent. The building management system processes energy needs throughout the day and deliberately manipulates the energy consumption of the building to eliminate energy spikes.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – 84 percent of all construction waste was diverted from landfills and 100 percent of the original building’s structural shell was retained in the reconstruction. 3.5.2. Rapidly renewable materials – Cork flooring, canola oil instead of petrochemical-based oil is used for the elevator, and natural linoleum flooring are all utilized in the building.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Ventilation effectiveness – Prior to occupancy a construction indoor air quality management plan was developed including protecting ducts from contamination and cleaning air ducts before occupancy. Temporary air filters were installed during construction on permanent devices. 3.6.2. In-door air quality (IAQ) management – Low-VOC materials were exclusively used, a non-smoking policy is recommended, a comprehensive commissioning process is used, asbestos was checked for in the old vinyl flooring and pipe insulation. Asbestos was removed from the building.


Innovation & Design

Genzyme Center


1.1. LEED Rating: Platinum1.2. Location: Cambridge, MA, USA1.3. Industry: Biotechnology1.4. Type: New Construction1.5. Size/Contract: 344,000 sq. ft. / N/A (Behnisch, Behnisch and Partner)1.6. Construction: Completed November 2003

2. Project Overview

The Genzyme Center is the home of biotechnology firm Genzyme. The center offers office space, employee cafeteria, a library, training rooms, gardens, a conference center, cafes, and public retail space. The center was designed to represent the progress of Genzyme and its employees.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Innovation in Design: Exemplary Performance in Green Power3.1.2. Innovation in Design: Provision of Green Building Education3.1.3. Innovation in Design: Exemplary Performance in Recycling During Construction3.1.4. Innovation in Design: Exemplary Performance in Provision of Public Transportation3.1.5. LEED Accredited Professional

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – During construction, in order to alleviate the environmental pains caused by massive runoff and sedimentation, construction workers employed a system of piping that contained filters that reduced pollution and stopped soil erosion. During periods of prolonged rain, the sediment runoff from the roof is trapped in the gutters and filtered before the water is discharged from the site. The planners also implemented landscape plantings on the property as well as the roof to trap the soil and prevent runoff during rainy periods.3.2.2. Site Selection –avoiding building the site on any of the pre-described areas such as farmland, land with elevation of lower than five feet above the elevation for the one-hundred year flood, land occupied by endangered or threatened species, within one-hundred feet from any water sites, land that was previously public parkland.3.2.3. Urban Redevelopment – The project was designed and constructed on an existing urban site with existing infrastructure. There was very little damage to habitat or natural resources.3.2.4. Brownfield Redevelopment – By selecting a brownfield site for the development, planners were able to reduce the impacts that a building of such grandeur might have on the local environment, habitats, etc.3.2.5. Alternative transportation – The project was designed with an emphasis on pedestrianism and provides safe access for pedestrians and cyclists, bike racks and shower/changing rooms for employees and surpassed zoning requirements for parking facilities, added alternative fuel refueling stations for electric vehicles, provided access to support car, vanpooling, and public transportation. 3.2.6. Storm water Management – The planners created the “green” roof, along with a skylight rainwater collection system, in order to reduce storm water runoff by 25-percent.


Innovation & Design

3.2.7. Landscape and Exterior Design to Reduce Heat Islands and Light Pollution Reduction – The planners developed a below ground parking garage which eliminates the albedo factor caused by asphalt parking surfaces. The creation of the underground parking facility removes the threat that heat islands have on the natural environment. Also, with the addition of a “green” roof, the threat of heat differentials is mitigated even further.

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Landscaping/Potable Water Use – The planners have installed various methods for trapping rainwater and later using the reserves for both interior and exterior irrigation, eliminating the need for potable water on site. The irrigation system utilizes an automatic controller with a sensor to measure soil-moisture density, thus providing the greatest efficiency. 3.3.2. Water Use Reduction – By adding automated and low flow faucets, waterless urinals, and dual flush toilets to the interior, the planners reduced indoor potable water use by 32-percent.

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – The design and planning of the building, along with the site orientation created 40-percent gains in energy efficiency.3.4.2. Green Power – Planners employed the use of roof-mounted solar panels to provide power for the facility. Also, by partnering with a local steam power plant, the planners were able to procure waste water from the plant which is used to cool the building.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – The developers were able to recycle, save, or reuse at least 75-percent of waste attributed to construction, demolition, and land clearing waste.3.5.2. Recycled Content – It is estimated that 23-percent of the materials used for construction are from recycled material.3.5.3. Local/Regional Materials – 20-percent of materials used in construction were manufactured within a 500-mile radius. Also, 50-percent of the materials used in production were harvested within a 500-mile radius.3.5.4. Certified Wood ¬– Almost ninety percent of the wood products used in production were FSC certified.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Carbon dioxide monitoring – The project included an adaptive monitoring system introduces additional levels of oxygen when CO2 levels pass a threshold limit.3.6.2. Construction IAQ Management Plan (Before Occupancy) – The developers implemented an Indoor Air Quality Management Plan for the pre-occupancy phase compliant with LEED regulations.3.6.3. Construction IAQ Management Plan (During Construction) –The developers implemented an Indoor Air Quality Management Plan for the construction phase compliant with LEED regulations.3.6.4. Low-Emitting Materials – The designers used materials that had low emission levels in the paints, carpets, composite wood, adhesives, and sealants.3.6.5. Thermal Comfort – A monitoring system was installed to keep the relative humidity levels between 30 and 60 percent. Also, upon occupation each occupant was given access to temperature and climate controls in their own area.3.6.6. Daylight and Views – Architects designed building the building so that 75-percent of the buildings space would have daylight and 90-percent of the occupied space would have views.


Innovation & Design

Herman Miller Marketplace


1.1. LEED Rating: Gold1.2. Location: Zeeland, MI, USA1.3. Industry: Commercial Office1.4. Type: New Construction1.5. Size/Contract: 95,000 sq. ft. / $8.455 million (The Granger Group)1.6. Construction: Completed January 2002

2. Project Overview

This 2-story, 95,000 square prototype office environment was created by the Integrated Architecture firm from Grand Rapids Michigan in attempts to promote “progressive business-place thinking within a sustainable framework.” The lot for the building was originally a landfill and covers approximately 9.70 acres.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Tenant/Owner Lease Agreement3.1.2. Sustainability Education3.1.3. Exemplary Performance Recycled Content3.1.4. Exemplary Performance Local Materials3.1.5. LEED Accredited Professional

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – The planners developed a site sediment and erosion control program that conforms to the EPA standard. A storm water management plan was designed to exceed the county requirements, resulting in no net increase in the rate or quantity of runoff from the site. The project was also designed to detain a 100-year storm event, which is far above the county requirement.3.2.2. Alternative transportation – The project includes bike racks and shower/changing rooms for employees and surpassed zoning requirements for parking facilities, added alternative fuel refueling stations for electric vehicles, and provided access to support car and vanpooling. 3.2.3. Landscape and Exterior Design to Reduce Heat Islands and Light Pollution Reduction – The parking lots heat-island potential was reduced by orienting parking lot islands on an east-west axis and planting trees to maximize the shading of southern sun. Minimum Number of trees required 93, and 115 were planted

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Landscaping – The native landscaping of Michigan, eliminates the need for irrigation systems. With the reliable climate and weather patterns, plants will be watered by hand for first growing season only.3.3.2. Low-water-Use Fixtures – The lavatory facilities use low flow toilets and automatic faucet controls to reduce water consumption by over 20 percent.


Innovation & Design

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – The design and planning of the building, along with the site orientation created 50 percent gains in energy efficiency.3.4.2. Lighting – The Design of an open floor plan allows daylight to enter building. The addition of large exterior windows and very high ceilings increase the amount of daylight entering the building. The building is designed to utilize no more than 1.0 watts of non-natural light per square foot. Non-natural lighting utilizes high-efficiency T8 fluorescent lamps.3.4.3. Non-Solar Cooling Loads – The architects used operable windows for temperature regulation.3.4.4. HVAC Controls and Zoning – The HVAC system was designed with sufficient sensors and control logic to efficiently regulate the environment of the building. Also, the thermostats were located in a central area in order to protect from sun and gain accuracy in the readings. The HVAC systems uses variable-volume air distribution systems.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – The developers were able to recycle, save, or reuse at least 50 percent of waste attributed to construction, demolition, and land clearing waste.3.5.2. Recycled Content – The sitework included 100 percent post-consumer recycled concrete, 100 percent recycled concrete rebar, 90 percent post-consumer recycled structural steel, and 95 percent post-consumer recycled metal joists, floor deck, and roof deck.3.5.3. Local/Regional Materials – 20 percent of materials used in construction were manufactured within a 500 mile radius. 3.5.4. Certified Wood – At least 50 percent of the wood-based materials used in construction were certified in accordance with the Forest Stewardship Council guidelines for wood building components.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Carbon dioxide monitoring – The project included an adaptive monitoring system introduces additional levels of oxygen when CO2 levels pass a threshold limit.3.6.2. Construction IAQ Management Plan (Before Occupancy) – The developers implemented an Indoor Air Quality Management Plan for the pre-occupancy phase compliant with LEED regulations.3.6.3. Low-Emitting Materials – The designers used materials that had low emission levels in the paints, carpets, composite wood, and adhesives/sealants.3.6.4. Thermal Comfort – A monitoring system was installed to keep the relative humidity levels between 30 and 60 percent. Also, upon occupation each occupant was given access to temperature and climate controls in their own area.3.6.5. Daylight and Views – Architects designed building so that 90 percent of the space in the building had natural light and a view.


Innovation & Design

National Resources Defense Council (Robert Redford Building)


1.1. LEED Rating: Platinum 1.2. Location: Santa Monica, CA, USA1.3. Building Type: Commercial Office, Retail1.4. Project Type: Redevelopment1.5. Size/Contract: 15,000 sq. ft. / $5.1 million1.6. Construction: Completed November 2003

2. Project Overview

Renovation of an 89-year old building, leveraging public transportation routes, providing bicycle racks, changing rooms, and showers to promote alternative forms of transportation. Onsite photovoltaic system provides 20 percent of energy needs while treated rain- and gray-water supply restroom and plant-watering needs.


3.1. Innovation Highlights 3.1.1. One hundred percent renewable energy3.1.2. Rainwater & graywater treatment on-site for internal reuse3.1.3. Net-zero CO2 production

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Alternative transportation – The renovation includes bike racks, shower and changing facilities to encourage non-motor transport.

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Restroom fixtures – Chemically maintained (water free) toilets and dual-flush toilets minimize water expenditures by 40,000 gallons per year per urinal. 3.3.2. Storm-water management – Porous pavement filters water directly into the ground rather than towards storm drains.3.3.3. Water requirements – These technologies reduce water requirements by 60 percent.

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Natural lighting – Rooftop monitors diffuse sunlight and fresh air via an atrium system for the building.3.4.2. Roofing – Light-colored roofing maximizes deflected sunlight, reducing contribution to heat-island effects.3.4.3. Air conditioning – Low-velocity displacement ventilation via non-ozone-depleting HFC refrigerants minimize energy requirements and ozone depletion3.4.4. Renewable use – NRDC purchases renewable energy credits to supplement solar panel generation, providing 100 percent renewable energy.

3.5. Materials & Resources


Innovation & Design

3.5.1. Sustainable wood use – All wood used for the building came from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified forests.3.5.2. Low emissions & recycled materials – The building contained countertops made from recycled glass, flooring made from bamboo, and fiber-cement siding3.5.3. Green products – The Robert Redford Building used zero-VOC (volatile organic compound) acrylic interior paint, low-mercury fluorescent lamps, and low energy exit signs, as well as reusing or recycling 98 percent of construction waste.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Monitoring – Efficient computers, dimmable electronic ballasts, sensor monitors provide only necessary energy for giving usage needs.3.6.2. Carbon Dioxide Monitoring – constant monitoring coordinates with the partial displacement ventilation system and operable windows to maximize air quality and minimize energy requirements.3.6.3. Space use – The Robert Redford Building placed high-use rooms such as the library, shared administrative space, and conference rooms at places with the most exterior lighting (“prime” space).

3.7. Advice for Development 3.7.1. Municipal involvement – Create incentives for developers through a streamlined process, especially in interacting with local officials.Redevelopment issues – Ensure structural and material integrity for redevelopment to minimize extra material costs.


Innovation & Design

Pharmacia Building Q


1.1. LEED Rating: Gold 1.2. Location: Skokie, IL, USA1.3. Industry: Laboratory1.4. Type: New Construction1.5. Size/Contract: 176,000 sq. ft. / $78,000,000 (Pharmacia Corporation)1.6. Construction: 15 months (Sept 2004)

2. Project Overview

The construction of this four-floor building included diverting 78 percent of the material from the landfill. This project is a 176,000 sq. ft. chemistry laboratory building with sixteen modular laboratory suites focused on research. The building utilizes daylight with a central atria skylight which has assisted in the energy saving of more than the 38 percent that was predicted. In addition, Building Q includes an 80-seat auditorium, researcher offices, conference and break areas.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Atrium Skylights incorporates a passive-solar optical system 3.1.2. Developed two underground water reservoirs to correct storm water runoff issues left from former building on site3.1.3. LEED Accredited Professional3.1.4. Reduced energy use by over 38 percent through monitoring, use of occupancy sensors, heat recover systems, etc. 3.1.5. All laboratories are modular3.1.6. A corridor was designed around the spine of the building for circulation, adjacent to corridor is a vertical supply and exhaust air system3.1.7. Air supply system consists of 100 percent once-through outside air including offices to conserve energy

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – Due to the limited site size and the fact the site was a warehouse, the deconstruction of the site and the minimal non-building space limited the erosion and sediment issue.3.2.2. Alternative transportation – The campus this project is on is adjacent to light commuter rail and city bus routes. To travel between the two campuses a private shuttle offered. Bicycle storages, showers and changing rooms are also available.3.2.3. Reduced site disturbance –Due to the urban setting and limited space of the site, native plantings were used where possible, otherwise plants native to the climate of the site were used. Due to these plant selections no irrigation system was needed.3.2.4. Storm water management – Extensive water management control was implemented on the 2.4 acre site. 500 lineal feet of eight foot diameter drainage piping was laid to alleviate water control problem left from the deconstruction of the warehouse building that was historically on this site.


Innovation & Design

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Landscaping – Native plants and plants native to site climate eliminates the need for irrigation systems.3.3.2. Wastewater Technologies – Subsurface infiltration basins allow the waste water to flow from the site. 3.3.3. Restroom fixtures – Infrared sensors on all toilets and low-flow showers and urinals, flow restrictors installed in all lavatory and cup sinks have in aggregate the buildings water use was reduced by 52 percent3.3.4. Heating – The heat-recovery system saves six percent of the heating energy in addition to the VAV fumehoods’ sensors that monitor the sash position, the open area, and instantly alters the airflow.

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – Light-colored external walls and roof, refractive and reflective 3M radial lenses and reflective paneling provides up to eight times as much daylight as traditional glazing. HVAC sensors and variable-volume air distribution systems assist in enabling this building to consume forty percent less energy than in other similar laboratories. 3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – Recycled and reused debris from the deconstruction of the warehouse equaled 78 percent of all debris. New construction waste divergence was close to 60 percent. The U.S. Green Building definition of “local” was agreed upon when considering materials for the new building. 3.5.2. Rapidly renewable materials –The design team adopted a simplified lifecycle assessment technique for materials n the new building.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Carbon dioxide monitoring – Equipment integrated in the buildings management system monitors carbon dioxide, but the 100 percent once-through outside air removes virtually all pollutants. 3.6.2. Ventilation effectiveness –The Smart Lab Control system constantly monitors temperature and humidity and keeps building at the prescribed building settings. 3.6.3. In-door air quality (IAQ) management – IAQ management plan was implemented and rigorous testing was commissioned. The routine housekeeping program implemented a green program using non-toxic, phosphate free, and biodegradable cleaning products.


Innovation & Design

Rinker Hall, University of Florida


1.1. LEED Rating: Gold 1.2. Location: Gainesville, FL, USA1.3. Building Type: College, Instructional 1.4. Project Type: New construction1.5. Size/Contract: 47,300 sq. ft. (footprint: 22,200 sq. ft) / $6.5 million1.6. Construction: Completed March 2003

2.0 Project Overview

The new School of Building Construction at the University of Florida sits on an energy efficient north/south orientation with an open, linear interior design to allow for easy retrofits in the future. Design workshops incorporated faculty and student input from the department to identify goals and challenges. Graduate students led the construction management team. The building team secured major funding provided by the M.E. Rinker family and other outside resources. Benefit-cost analyses project $22,000 in annual savings and an 8.3-year payback period.

3.0 Innovations in LEED Categories

3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Dept. of Energy (DOE) and Superlite® modeling software allowed for optimization of energy and daylight reliance.3.1.2. Fifty-five percent energy reductions through enthalpy wheel, day-lighting, occupancy sensors, among other technology innovations.3.1.3. “Access Mapping/Flexibility” plan consolidated and simplified the routing of basic support systems (mechanical, data, and telephone) for easy upgrades to keep pace with technological changes at a minimum cost.3.1.4. Waste management plan required contractor to record all materials reused and recycled resulting in over 50 percent of materials recycled.

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Architecture – Three-story building designed to maximize natural landscape.3.2.2. Outdoor surfacing – “Compacted” gravel allows groundwater systems to recharge while impervious surfaces funnel water to campus storm-water collection system.3.2.3. Wastewater – Site chosen close to wastewater treatment system for maximized productive efficiency. 3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Wastewater – 8,000-gallon cistern system collects water for reuse for restroom requirements.

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere


Innovation & Design

3.4.1. Building Orientation – North/south orientation captures low-angle sunlight and optimizes net solar effects.3.4.2. Daylight control – Spectrally selective window glazing, shaped ceiling geometry, photo-sensor controlled interior lighting, and a skylight over the atrium provide maximized natural lighting.3.4.3. Energy modeling – DOE 2.1e® and Superlite® modeling software confirmed the efficacy of an enthalpy wheel, providing 40 percent of overall energy reductions.3.4.4. Structural accommodations – Metal and glass coupled with university-mandated brick masonry complement each other in releasing unneeded energy while coalescing with the university aesthetic.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Local sourcing – materials rated and chosen based on dimensions of proximity (“optimal pathways”), recycled content (aluminum paneling, fly ash concrete, and vitreous tile), renewable content (wheat board and linoleum), and chemical composition (to reduce adverse effects on occupants and the environment).3.5.2. Waste management plan – Required contractor to record all materials reused and recycled resulting in over 50 percent of materials recycled.3.5.3. Access mapping/flexibility – Consolidated and simplified the routing of basic support systems (mechanical, data, and telephone) for easy upgrades to keep pace with technological changes at a minimum cost. Major cabling runs along north/south axis (avoiding “shear” walls), designed for flexibility in growth and change.

3.6. Advice for Development 3.6.1. Materials minimization – Approach that minimized materials requirements while ensuring structural integrity and environmental quality (e.g. sealed concreted floors in classrooms).3.6.2. Environmental positives – Consider benefits of materials removed when designing for accessibility and flexibility for technological change.


Innovation & Design

Roberts Residence Hall, Lewis & Clark College


1.1. LEED Rating: Silver1.2. Location: Portland, OR, USA1.3. Building Type: College, Residential 1.4. Project Type: New construction1.5. Size/Contract: 24,700 sq. ft. / (n/a)1.6. Construction: Completed Sept. 2002


Lewis & Clark College leveraged the Portland Green Building Fund as well as municipal grants contingent on LEED certification to build a junior/senior residence hall as the product of a series of management, planning, and programming workshops. The building sits on a steep slope to reduce grade and storm water impacts while leveraging natural lighting. At full capacity, the building will house approximately 1,000 students while operating in excess of 23 percent of Oregon energy efficiency mandates.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Exterior design to reduce heat-island effects via microclimate exposure3.1.2. Waste management efficiencies in obtaining ninety-nine percent rate of landfill diversion of materials (just short of the goal of 100 percent)3.1.3. Proximal materials use by procuring seventy-four percent of materials from contractors within a 500-mile radius3.1.4. Passive energy design via “hydronic” systems provides space heating while heat recovery equipment recycles “exhaust” heat from kitchens and restrooms.

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Pedestrian emphasis – The building area provides a multitude of pedestrian walkways and meeting places that coalesce with the mandate to reduce automobile congestion started by the College. The site balances socialization and privacy with full handicap accessibility.3.2.2. Microclimate exposure – Developers carefully positioned the new building to take advantage of existing tree coverage and southern exposure.3.2.3. Native landscaping – Planners chose indigenous plants and trees resistant to drought while requiring no irrigation systems after they have taken hold.3.2.4. Water filtration & retention – Roof runoff collects into a water filtration and retention system while pervious paving allows for direct infiltration.

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Fixtures – Efficient plumbing materials, showerheads, and laundry facilities provide the majority of potable water. Total water use falls 38 percent below baseline levels.


Innovation & Design

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Passive design – A baseboard “hydronic” systems provides space heating while heat recovery equipment recycles “exhaust” heat from kitchens and restrooms.3.4.2. Natural ventilation & daylighting – The developers eliminated enclosed corridors that would require excessive lighting and ventilation with open-space designs.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Recycled materials – Ninety percent of materials used 20 percent post-consumer recycled materials and 40 percent post-industrial recycled content.3.5.2. Local materials – Seventy-four percent of materials came from contractors within a 500-mile radius.3.5.3. Materials reuse – Developers reused a significant portion of the building materials from structures demolished on the project site.3.5.4. Landfill diversion – The project obtained ninety-nine percent rate of diversion of materials (just short of the goal of 100 percent).

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Ventilation – A “natural ventilation” strategy creates indoor air comfort rather than mechanical conditioning.3.6.2. Windows – Operable windows provide each occupant with control over their indoor environment.3.6.3. CO2 monitoring – Carbon dioxide and volatile organic compounds (VOC) sensors ensure high quality, breathable air.

3.7. Advice for Development 3.7.1. Energy analysis – Simulations and models (such as DOE 2.1e and Superlite 2.0) should provide additional savings when used during project design, rather than just during construction.3.7.2. Certified materials – Contractor education in using certified materials streamlines the process of procuring green materials at an economically efficient cost.


Innovation & Design

Sarah Lawrence College: Heimbold Visual Arts Center

1. General Information

1.1 LEED Rating: Certified1.2 Location: Bronxville, New York, USA1.3 Industry: University Building1.4 Type: New Construction1.5 Size/Contract: 60,000 sq. ft. / $25,000,0001.6 Construction: Completed September 2004

2. Project OverviewThe Monika A. and Charles A. Heimbold Visual Arts Center at Sarah Lawrence College in New York embodies the liberal-arts culture and embraces sustainable design as a campus leader in environmentalism. It is designed to be nestled within the area’s dense foliage and hilltop topography. The building is home to 45 people regularly, with around 600 weekly visitors at 15 hours per week.


3.1 Innovation Highlights3.1.1 One-third of the building is underground with an accessible, terraced, green roof to control storm water runoff. 3.1.2 Fully automated digital building-management system (BMS) to control heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and lighting. 3.1.3 Building design that allows for flexibility in teaching and producing visual art in all forms (e.g. movable walls, flexible studio space, open areas).3.1.4 LEED Accredited Professional 3.2 Sustainable Site3.2.1 Selection—Property assessment integrated the local community with regional transportation corridors. The planning process avoided sprawl contribution while also searching for infill development opportunities. 3.2.2. Storm water management—A green roof helps absorb runoff. A detention system is designed to eliminate a net increase in storm water runoff.3.2.3 Alternative transportation—Specified carpool parking spaces were designated in an existing lot. No additional parking was constructed. Over 30 bus lines are less than a half mile in proximity, and a trolley stop is 1/8 mile from the main entrance. 3.2.4 Landscape & exterior design to reduce heat island—outside pavement utilized a concrete mix that reflects heat with sample average reflectance of 42%.

3.3 Water Efficiency3.3.1 Water use reduction— Water use in the building was reduced by at least 50% by using low-flow fixtures. No water is used to irrigate exterior landscaping, as drought-tolerant plants make up much of the landscaping. A ground-source heat pump system saves water by not requiring the cooling-tower make-up water, which can account for 90% of water usage in a typical building.


Innovation & Design

3.4 Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1 Optimize energy performance— A 29% reduction in energy has been experienced due to efficient design. All studios create ideal light conditions by such innovations as north wall channel glass, daylight monitors to provide additional natural light from above, southern space levers and cedar slats to control midday sun, and a central 2-story skylit gallery. Energy was also optimized by higher quality roof insulation, high-performance glazing, variable-speed drives with a turndown ratio of 30% for circulating pumps, central building management control, demand-controlled ventilation, and occupancy sensor controls for lighting. 60% of the interior space is daylit.

3.5 Materials & Resources3.5.1 Construction waste management— 1% of construction waste was sent to a landfill. 900 tons of bedrock was reused onsite, and 15,199 tons of waste was recycled off site.3.5.2 Recycled content—13% of all construction materials included recycled products such as fabric, cork, burlap panels, straw particleboard, and green roof materials. 3.5.3 Local/regional materials—The building was designed to blend with the campus landscape, which utilized green products including fieldstone, cedar, channel glass, and zinc. 55% of materials were purchased in the regional area. 3.5.4 Certified wood—Wood products were obtained from well-managed, independent forest carpentry suppliers. Over 60% of wood products met Forest Stewardship Council standards.

3.6 Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1 Carbon dioxide monitoring—Indoor controls monitor levels of carbon dioxide gas. These trigger demand-controlled ventilation systems as part of the building-management system. 3.6.2 Increase ventilation effectiveness—Natural ventilation is a key component by including at least one operable window per 200 sq. ft. Several studios have glass and aluminum garage doors that open as desired. 75% of the building can be ventilated via operable windows. 3.6.4 Low-emitting materials—Low-emitting adhesives, paints, and carpet were selected based on low volatile organic compound (VOC) compositions.3.6.5 Indoor chemical & pollutant source control—Indoor pollutant source-control includes walk-off mats at all entrances, deck-to-deck partitioning, and dedicated exhaust.


Innovation & Design

Seattle Justice Center


1.1. LEED Rating: Silver1.2. Location: Seattle, WA, USA1.3. Industry: Public Order and Safety1.4. Type: New Construction1.5. Size/Contract: 288,000 sq. ft. / $91,350,000 (NBJJ)1.6. Construction: Completed October 2002


The Seattle Justice Center is a 14-story building within a three-block Civic Center area of Downtown Seattle. The center is the main house for the city’s courts and police headquarters. The building was designed with the idea in mind to create two distinct identities, one for police and one for the courts, within the same building. As a result the Center has a two primarily different parts: a glass portion that is occupied by the courts and a stone portion utilized by the police force.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Innovation in Design: Glazed Thermal Buffer Wall3.1.2. Innovation in Design: Garden Roof3.1.3. LEED Accredited Professional

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – The planners created a water harvesting system that collects on average 44,458 cubic feet of water per year. This water is then used for irrigation and indoor use. This design also features a tank for storm water retention that greatly reduces runoff, erosion, and sedimentation during periods of heavier rain.3.2.2. Site Selection –avoiding building the site on any of the pre-described areas such as farmland, land with elevation of lower than five feet above the elevation for the one-hundred year flood, land occupied by endangered or threatened species, within one-hundred feet from any water sites, land that was previously public parkland.3.2.3. Urban Redevelopment – The project was designed and constructed on an existing urban site with existing infrastructure. There was very little damage to habitat or natural resources.3.2.4. Alternative transportation – The project was designed with an emphasis on pedestrianism and provides safe access for pedestrians and cyclists, bike racks and shower/changing rooms for employees and surpassed zoning requirements for parking facilities, added alternative fuel refueling stations for electric vehicles, provided access to support car, vanpooling, and public transportation. 3.2.5. Storm water Management – The planners created a storm water treatment and collection system by selecting plants that are very water efficient and hold water extremely well, and by the selection and utilization of a fertilizer containing no phosphates, the planners were able to reduce the average annual post-development total phosphorus emitted from the property by 60-percent.


Innovation & Design

3.2.6 Landscape and Exterior Design to Reduce Heat Islands and Light Pollution Reduction – By the creation of the “garden roof” the planners were able to cover at least 50-percent of the roof surface and ultimately reduce the difference between temperatures in developed and undeveloped areas. Also, by utilizing the city-owned parking garage on the adjacent property, the planners were able to reduce the heat islands caused by a massive, uncovered parking lot.

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Landscaping – The native climate around Seattle is conducive to natural irrigation. In conjunction with the abundance of natural rain received, the planners developed a water capturing system with a drip-irrigation system. The irrigation system utilizes an automatic controller with a sensor to measure soil-moisture density, thus providing the greatest efficiency. Also, by utilizing plants that are either water efficient or water retentive, the planners were able to drastically reduce the amount of water used for irrigation.3.3.2. No Potable Water Use – Also, by utilizing plants that are either water efficient or water retentive, the planners were able to drastically reduce the amount of water used for irrigation

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – The design and planning of the building, along with the site orientation created 35 percent gains in energy efficiency.3.4.2. Thermal Buffer Curtainwall –Designed by the architects to regulate solar heat gain. The double layer wall of glass has openings at the top and bottom. When sunlight comes in the windows, heat is trapped, and pushed out through the opening at the top of the window, regulating the temperature in the building.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – The developers were able to recycle, save, or reuse at least 75-percent of waste attributed to construction, demolition, and land clearing waste.3.5.2. Recycled Content – The site work included 90-percent post-consumer recycled structural steel, 100-percent recycled glass tile, 100-percent post-consumer recycled glass terrazzo, and 66-percent post-consumer recycled acoustical ceiling tiles.3.5.3. Local/Regional Materials – 20-percent of materials used in construction were manufactured within a 500-mile radius.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Carbon dioxide monitoring – The project included an adaptive monitoring system introduces additional levels of oxygen when CO2 levels pass a threshold limit.3.6.2. Construction IAQ Management Plan (Before Occupancy) – The developers implemented an Indoor Air Quality Management Plan for the pre-occupancy phase compliant with LEED regulations.3.6.3. Construction IAQ Management Plan (During Construction) –The developers implemented an Indoor Air Quality Management Plan for the construction phase compliant with LEED regulations.3.6.4. Low-Emitting Materials – The designers used materials that had low emission levels in the paints, carpets, adhesives, and sealants.3.6.5. Thermal Comfort – A monitoring system was installed to keep the relative humidity levels between 30 and 60 percent. Also, upon occupation each occupant was given access to temperature and climate controls in their own area.3.6.6. Daylight and Views – Architects designed building with large windows and high ceilings in order to increase the amount of natural light entering the building.


Innovation & Design

University of Denver: College of Law


1.1 LEED Rating: Gold1.2 Location: Denver, Colorado, USA1.3 Industry: University Building1.4 Type: New Construction1.5 Size/Contract: 190,000 sq. ft. / $63,500,0001.6 Construction: Completed in 32 months, certified June 12, 2005

2.0 Project OverviewThe University of Denver, College of Law is one of the nation’s largest law schools, with 1,200 students and over 100 faculty and staff. The College identified its “signature style” with oak features, natural light, emphasis on collegiate beauty, and a distinctive copper roof. As a top environmental law program in the United States, the College of Law sought to “practice what it preaches” for the environment.


3.1 Innovation Highlights3.1.1 Smart classrooms and seminar rooms; direct access to network connections at each seat 3.1.2 Fifteen classrooms with one 120-seat lecture hall and five seminar rooms; thirty-one meeting rooms3.1.3 LEED Accredited Consultant 3.1.4 Underground parking for 850 vehicles; electric automobile recharging3.1.5 The Law School Forum- a central commons with enhanced lighting3.1.6 The Law Library and Technology Center for Legal Research with 38,325 sq. ft. and electronic library access locations throughout the building3.1.7 Groundwater recycling3.1.8 Furniture selection based on 6-page questionnaire for vendors regarding policies, environmental practices, and 3.1.9 1% higher up-front cost of building to build “green”, but daily energy savings of 40%. 3.2 Sustainable Site3.2.1 Alternative transportation—Transportation alternatives were explored and supported, and a site was selected near public transit. Bicycle storage and showers were installed. Recharging stations for electric automobiles were included in the design.

3.2.2. Storm water management—Credit was received for environmentally-friendly treatment of storm water designed to reduce runoff by sand-filtering.3.2.3 Light pollution reduction—exterior lighting was specially designed to reduce vertical lighting and horizontal light trespass.

3.3 Water Efficiency


Innovation & Design

3.3.1 Water use reduction— Water use in the building was reduced by 39% by using infrared faucets, low-flow toilets, waterless urinals, water efficient landscaping, and groundwater recycling via landscape irrigation. Special irrigation technology and native plants resulted in a 50% reduction in landscaping water usage.

3.4 Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1 Optimize energy performance— A 40% reduction in energy has been experienced due to “smart” lighting with high-technology rooms with motion/occupancy sensor light controls. Natural light in a large atrium and oversized windows contribute to higher thermal performance. Light harvesting in the library and efficient classrooms, moot court, study rooms, and offices decrease energy usage. A thermal building shell and Low-E window glass cause walls, windows, and the copper roof to retain heat.3.4.2 Green power—50% of all building energy needs are purchased from wind- a renewable energy source on contract.

3.5 Materials & Resources3.5.1 Construction waste management— 75% construction waste was recycled (6,000,000 pounds).3.5.2 Recycled content—Materials such as structural steel, copper roof (85% recycled copper), carpet, ceiling acoustic tiles included post-consumer recycled goods. Furniture was purchased solely from manufacturers with demonstrated health, environmental, and safety policies for recycled/certified raw materials. In the finished building, each floor has designations for recycling glass, paper, and plastics. 3.5.3 Local/regional materials—20% of all building materials were manufactured locally, such as bricks and concrete.

3.6 Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1 Carbon dioxide monitoring—Indoor controls monitor levels of carbon dioxide gas.3.6.2 Increase ventilation effectiveness—Superior ventilation systems improve air flow and thermal comfort.3.6.3 Construction IAQ management plan—An IAQ construction plan was utilized.3.6.4 Low-emitting materials—Low-emitting paints, carpets, composite wood products, adhesives, and sealants were used. 3.6.5 Indoor chemical & pollutant source control—Enacting a smoking ban, along with other monitoring and controls decreased chemical/pollutant sources


Innovation & Design

University of Michigan: Samuel T. Dana Building, School of Natural Resources and Environment


1.1 LEED Rating: Gold1.2 Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA1.3 Industry: University Building1.4 Type: Renovation1.5 Size/Contract: 11,800 sq. ft. added / $25,000,0001.6 Construction: Certified May 6, 2005

2. Project OverviewThe Samuel T. Dana Building is home to the School of Natural Resources and Environment (SNRE) at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. This 102 year-old building underwent major renovation in two phases between 1999 and 2003 to add classroom space, office space, and make major maintenance upgrades to plumbing, electrical, and mechanical systems. In the process, project planners included students, faculty, staff, the community, and the University’s Center for Sustainable Systems in a collaborative planning process.


3.1 Innovation Highlights3.1.1 Radiant cooling system3.1.2 Solar panels3.1.3 LEED Accredited Professional3.1.4 Direct Digital Controls (DDCs) for controllability of all systems 3.2 Sustainable Site3.2.1 Alternative transportation—Bicycle storage and showers were installed. Existing access to public transportation add credits.

3.3 Water Efficiency3.3.1 Water use reduction— Water use in the building was reduced by at least 30% by using low-flow/sensor-activated fixtures, waterless urinals, and composting toilets. No potable water is used to irrigate exterior landscaping, and landscape water use was reduced by more than 50%. 5 of a possible 5 credits in water efficiency were achieved.

3.4 Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1 Optimize energy performance— A 30% reduction in energy was achieved by high-efficiency fluorescent sensor lighting that is also 100% controllable. An innovative radiant cooling system saves energy by running cold water through copper pipes near the ceiling. A complete renovation of the thermal building envelope improved insulation to save energy.

3.5 Materials & Resources


Innovation & Design

3.5.1 Construction waste management— Much of the demolition waste was reused in the renovation, including concrete and brick. Wood from the demolished attic was re-milled and made into trim, and doors were almost completely reused. Due to the nature of the renovation project, 100% of the building shell was maintained and reused. The local recycling center, Recycle Ann Arbor, partnered on the project to use or sell construction waste.3.5.2 Recycled content—Construction materials included recycled products such as fabric, glass tile, HDPE (high density polyethylene) partitions and countertops, and rubber flooring. 3.5.3 Rapidly renewable materials—Renewable materials were integrated, such as wool carpeting, cork flooring, bamboo flooring, pressed Aspen acoustical ceiling tiles, and bicomposite casework and countertops.3.5.4 Local/regional materials—The building was designed to blend with the campus landscape, which utilized green products including fieldstone, cedar, channel glass, and zinc. 55% of materials were purchased in the regional area.

3.6 Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1 Carbon dioxide monitoring—Indoor controls monitor levels of carbon dioxide gas. 3.6.2 Increase ventilation effectiveness—All ventilation ducts were sealed during construction to prevent air contamination.3.6.4 Low-emitting materials—Low-emitting adhesives, paints, and carpet were selected based on low volatile organic compound (VOC) compositions.


Innovation & Design

U.S. EPA Science and Technology Center


1.1. LEED Rating: Gold1.2. Location: Kansas City, KS, USA1.3. Industry: Commercial Office, Laboratory1.4. Type: New Development1.5. Size/Contract: 72,000 sq. ft. / $20 million (CB Richard Ellis, Corporation)1.6. Construction: Completed April 2003

2. Project Overview

Built on a brownfield site the Science and Technology Center services Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, and nine tribal nations. The two story building’s footprint is in an urban setting and provides laboratory and office space for the community.


3.1. Innovation Highlights3.1.1. Developed a drip irrigation system reducing potable water use3.1.2. Created rooftop rainwater recovery system and filtering system to us water in cooling and toilets which reduces domestic water use by 50 percent and run off by 40 percent3.1.3. Trained construction and demolition workers about recycling plan and implemented cost incentives for recycling – 72 percent of the waste was recycled3.1.4. Held competition to create the optimal lab design provided innovated design and energy conservation ideas

3.2. Sustainable Site3.2.1. Erosion & sediment control – This project was built on the former Freightliner repair and sales yard and designated brownfield site. 3.2.2. Alternative transportation – The facility includes bike storage, showers and changing areas for bikers. The site is located near public transportation, electric-vehicle charging capability is provided, and employees and visitors are encouraged to carpool. 3.2.3. Reduced site disturbance – The site avoided prime agricultural land and flood-prone property and revitalizes the former Freightliner repair and sales yard.3.2.4. Storm water management – The buildings’ rooftop rainwater-collection system provides graywater for toilets, cooling, and irrigation, reducing domestic water use by 50 percent. 3.2.5. Landscape/Exterior Design – The project includes landscaping with indigenous vegetation and a drip-irrigation system to provide moisture to soil and the vegetation is watered when it is necessary. Mulch is used to retain water.

3.3. Water Efficiency3.3.1. Landscaping – Indigenous and a gray water drip-irrigation system is in place.


Innovation & Design

3.3.2. Wastewater Technologies – The HVAC system is the buildings major water user. To reduce the use of potable water, water is collected from the rooftop system and is utilized for graywater purposes, supplying approximately 773,000 gallons of water a year, cutting domestic water use by 50 percent. 3.3.3. Restroom fixtures – The building includes low-flow plumbing fixtures and the use of graywater for toilets. 3.3.4. Heating – The project includes variable-air-volume fume hoods and plate-frame heat exchangers along with automated control systems with seven-day programmable thermostats and direct digital control (DDC) systems and heat-recovery ventilation

3.4. Energy & Atmosphere3.4.1. Optimized Energy Performance – Variable-frequency drives for fans and motors, high efficient lamps and fixtures, glazing, external shading devices, daylight redirection, and control glare optimize this buildings energy performance.

3.5. Materials & Resources3.5.1. Construction waste management – The general contactor trained demolition and construction workers and initiated an incentive program for recycling. 72 percent of all material was recycled. 3.5.2. Rapidly renewable materials – The project received approximately 76 percent of all the construction materials within the 500 mile radius of the site. Wallboard, carpet, and floor tiles specifically included recycled materials in product.

3.6. Indoor Environmental Quality3.6.1. Carbon dioxide monitoring – A zoned carbon dioxide sensors are integrated throughout the building. 3.6.2. Ventilation effectiveness – Humidity levels remain between 30 percent and 60 percent. Individual occupants control temperature in their areas.3.6.3. In-door air quality (IAQ) management – All systems were flushed after construction. During construction temporary filters were placed on all permanent air-handling devices. Protocols were established to control spread of pollutants into building.


ConclusionIndiana University and SPEA can build a LEED Platinum rated building on the Bloomington campus. The requirements are challenging, but the technical obstacles can be overcome. We have demonstrated that with careful planning, thorough research and smart design, SPEA can achieve at least the required fifty-two credits for a Platinum rating, and possibly more.

Three key issues should guide SPEA’s next steps. First, SPEA should convene a design charret to involve as many stakeholders as possible early in the design process. (A design charret is a collaborative design session.) A charret would encourage communication, raise stakeholder concerns early in the process, and ensure that key decision-makers and participants share a similar vision for a green building.

Second, the design team should investigate ways to integrate the credits described above. We have identified some key problems and technological solutions to those problems. However, even the best design will require tradeoffs among technologies and credits. In order to reach a Platinum rating, designers and engineers must consider both the individual credits and also integrative, whole-building systems.

Third, SPEA should gather more information about costs. We have already identified several issues related to the cost of achieving particular credits. Additionally, we have demonstrated that certified green buildings can be designed and built affordably. However, each building is unique, and more detailed cost information about SPEA’s proposal will be necessary to persuade University officials to build green.

SPEA not only can build green, we should build green. A green building will be a tangible symbol of the commitment to responsible environmental practice at SPEA and at IU. It would draw national attention, save money over the long term, and provide a healthier and safer environment for building occupants. Perhaps most importantly, a green building would preserve natural resources for the future.

Emory University President James W. Wagner lectured on Emory’s green building experience at the 2005 US Green Building Council national conference. He captured the essence of the choice to build for a sustainable future when he said: “Yes, we save money by building green. And yes, we get better buildings by building green. But let’s not lose sight of why we really did this. Ultimately, we decided to build green because it’s the right thing to do.”



Glossary

ACE: Air Change Effectiveness. ACE measures the amount of “old” air in a space replaced by “new” air introduced by ventilation. For example, an ACE of 0.9 indicates that the ventilation system replaces 90% of air in a space during a given cycle.

ASHRAE: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. ASHRAE writes standards for regulation of temperature and conditioning in buildings recognized across the United States.

ASTM: American Society of Testing and Materials.

Albedo: A measure of surface reflectivity, expressed as the ratio of electromagnetic radiation (EM radiation) reflected to the amount incident upon it. This ratio is usually expressed as a percentage from 0% to 100% or in units from 0 to 1.

Alternative Fuel Vehicle: A vehicle that uses low-polluting, non-gasoline fuels such as electricity, hydrogen, propane or compressed natural gas, liquid natural gas, methanol or ethanol. Efficient gas-electric hybrid vehicles are included in this group for LEED purposes.

Brownfield: A property that is abandoned, inactive, or underutilized, on which expansion or redevelopment is complicated due to actual or potential environmental contamination.

Daylight Factor: Defined as the ratio of daylight illuminating an indoor surface compared with how much light a horizontal surface would be receiving outdoors. More formally: DF = (E

i / E

o) x 100%, where E

i =

illuminance due to daylight at a point on the indoors working plane; and Eo = simultaneous outdoor illuminance

on a horizontal plane from an unobstructed hemisphere of overcast sky.

DCV: Demand Control Ventilation. A DCV system monitors carbon dioxide levels in each zone of use in a building and automatically directs air away from unoccupied areas and toward areas with high CO2 levels. A DCV system adjusts to changes in individual environments (e.g. open windows) and supplies only the necessary amount of air to meet occupancy needs. Also called Digital Demand Control (DDC).

Dry Soil Moisture: Well-drained soils; typically upland.

Emissivity: A measure of the energy emitted when a surface is directly viewed. Surface emissivity is generally measured indirectly by assuming that e = 1 - reflectivity. A single energy bounce is measured and the reflected energy measured.

Greenfield Sites: Land on which no urban development has previously taken place; usually understood to be on the periphery of an existing built-up area.

Heat Island: A thermal gradient difference between developed and undeveloped areas. A “dome” of elevated temperatures over an area caused by structural and pavement heat fluxes.


HVAC: Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning. A collective term for building ventilation systems.

Hydrozones: Plant groupings based on watering needs.

IAQ: Indoor Air Quality. A measure of air quality including components of filtration, contaminant control, amount of outdoor (fresh) air introduced into a space, temperature and humidity.

Living Machine: an on-site wastewater treatment system that treats primarily black-water to tertiary wastewater treatment standards by the use of ecological engineered design

Medium Soil Moisture: Generally moist soil, but maybe saturated or dry at times.

OA: Outdoor air. Fresh air delivered from outside a building through mechanical (or natural) means to replace stale air.

Regular Building Occupants: Occupants who spend seven or more hours in the building daily.

Reflectance: The ratio of incident solar flux to reflected solar flux on a surface.

Rain Switch: A device that cuts off an automatic irrigation cycle when a small cup or catchment area fills with rainwater.

UFAD: Underfloor Air Delivery. Introduces supply air at low velocities from near or beneath the floor. Supply air is spread across the floor and then rises by convection as it picks up the energy load in the room.

VOC: Volatile Organic Compound—any volatile compound that contains carbon. Usually toxic and dangerous to human health.

Wet Soil Moisture: Moist or saturated soil throughout the growing season.

Xeriscape: Creative landscaping designed to conserve water.


Bibliography

Sustainable Sites

American Concrete Pavement Association, “R&T Update, Concrete Pavement Research & Technology, Albedo: A Measure of Pavement Surface Reflectance.” http://www.pavement.com (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

Baker, Peter. Seward Sales Corporation. Personal communication. 5 October 2005. EV World. “The World of Electric, Plug-In Hybrids, Fuel Cell and Alternative Fuel Vehicles.” http://www.evworld.com/electrichybrid.cfm. (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

Bruns, John. Enviroscapes, Inc. Personal Communication. 8 October 2005.

Fernandes, Susan. IU Bureau of Facilities Programming & Utilization. Personal Communication.

Indiana Administrative Code. “NPDES General Permit Rule Program.” Rule 13 Storm Water Run-Off Associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Conveyance. (Year):title 327, r. 15-13-1 Water Pollution Control Board, Article 15.

Indiana University Bloomington: Campus Map for an overview of development density on the IU campus. http://www.indiana.edu/~iubmap/mapredirect.pl?select=BL000 (Accessed on 29 November 2005.)

Kaden, Jeffrey. University Engineer. Personal Communication via email. 1 November 2005.

Kaden, Jeffrey. University Engineer. Presentation to V600 class. 30 September 2005.

Mattehiessen, Lisa Fae and Peter Morris. “Costing Green: A Comprehensive Cost Database and Budget Methodology.” http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Resources/Cost_of_Green_Full.pdf#search=’Costing%20Green:%20Davis%20Langdon (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

Murray, Patrick. IU Bureau of Facilities Programming and Utilization. Personal Communication via email, 7 November 2005.

Porter, Doug. Parking Operations. Personal Communication, 19 October 2005.

U.S. Department of Energy. “Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Station Counts by State and Type.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/infrastructure/station_counts.html (Accessed on 19 October 2005.)

US Department of Energy Cool Roof Calculator. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/roofs+walls/facts/CoolCalcEnergy.htm (Accessed on 15 November 2005.) http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Resources/Cost_of_Green_Full.pdf - search=’Costing%20Green:%20Davis%20Langdon

Welch, David. “Green Machines: What Makes a Hybrid Hot.” Business Week. (14 November 2005.)


Zycherman, Dara. LEED Program Coordinator, U.S. Green Building Council. Personal Communication via email. 31 October 2005.

Water Efficiency

Australian Government: Department of Environment and Heritage: Australian Greenhouse Office. “Article?.” http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/challenge/methane/mwbpartc.html. (Accessed of2 November 2005.)

City of Bloomington Utilities. Title 10 of the Bloomington Municipal Code. (2003): Ordinance 03-24. (Rate Adjustment for Wastewater and Storm Water Services).

Ecological Engineering Group. “Is there a title of the article?.” http://www.ecological-engineering.com/solaraquatics.html (Accessed on 2 November 2005.)

Indiana Native Plant and Wildflower Society. “Landscaping with Plants Native to Indiana: Recommended Plants and their Sources.” http://www.inpaws.org/2005LandscapeBrochureWEB.pdf (Accessed on 23 September 2005.)

Indiana State Department of Health. “Rule 410 IAC Sanitary Schoolhouse Rule 6-5.1.”http://www.in.gov/isdh/regsvcs/saneng/laws_rules/410_iac6-5_1.html. (Accessed on 2 November 2005.)

J.F. New. Natural Wastewater Treatment Systems. http://www.jfnew.com/ (Accessed on 2 November 2005).

Living Designs Group, LLC. “Project Case Studies.” http://www.livingmachines.com/project-case-studies/.(Accessed on 2 November 2005.)

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. “Water Efficiency Manual for Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Facilities.” http://www.p2pays.org/ref/01/0069201.pdf (Accessed on 19 October 2005.)

Oberlin College, Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies. “Living Machine and Water Use Tour.” http://www.oberlin.edu/ajlc/systems_lm_4.html. (Accessed on 2 November 2005.)

Texas Water Development Board. “The Texas Manual on Rainwater Harvesting, 3rd Edition.” http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/publications/reports/RainwaterHarvestingManual_3rdedition.pdf (Accessed on 19 September 2005.)

Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. “How much rainfall can possibly be collected?” http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/exec/sbea/rainwater/collect.html. (Accessed on 23 September 2005.)

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet: The Living Machine.” (2002)

Wolovitz, Jeff. 2000. The Living Machine. Penn State On-line Research and Policy: 21 (3). http://www.rps.psu.edu/0009/machine.html (Accessed on 2 November 2005.)


Wolfe, Cheryl. E-mail correspondence. 28 October 2005.

Energy and Atmosphere

AdvancedBuildings.org. “Electronic Dimmable Ballasts.” http://www.advancedbuildings.org/_frames/fr_t_lighting_e_dimmable_ballasts.htm (Accessed 13 October 2005.)

AdvancedBuildings.org. “Lighting & Daylighting: T5 Fluorescent Lamps.” http://www.advancedbuildings.org/_frames/fr_t_lighting_t5_fluor.htm (Accessed 13 October 2005.)

Bird, Lori and Blair Swezey. “Green Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report (Eighth Edition). National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-620-38994.” www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/resources/pdfs/38994.pdf (Accessed on October 2005.)

Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy (DSIRE). “Indiana Incentives for Renewable Energy: Net Metering.” http://dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfm?Incentive_Code=IN05R&state=IN&CurrentPageID=1 (Accessed on 14 September 2005.)

FindSolar.com. “Solar Estimator.” http://www.ebike.net/solar/index.php?page=rightforme (Accessed 10 November 2005.)

GE Consumer and Industrial Lighting. “Lighting: the Last 125 Years.” http://www.gelighting.com/na/business_lighting/education_resources/learn_about_light/history_of_light/last_years.htm (Accessed 23 October 2005.)

Hayden Safety Engineers. “Engineering.” http://www.haydensafety.com/docs/engineering.html. (Accessed on 7 November 2005.)

Internal Revenue Service. “Award Nomination: Small Business of the Year.” http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-procure/04_four_seasons.pdf. (Accessed on 7 November 2005.)

Kaden, Jeffrey R. Indiana University Engineer. Presentation. SPEA UTILITY USAGE-(30 September 2005.)

LaPorte, Elizabeth. “Winds of change at Dana Building.” The University of Michigan Record Online. January 10, 2005. http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/0405/Jan10_05/21.shtml (Accessed 5 November 2005).

Nadel, Steven. “The Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 and its Implications for Energy Efficiency Program Efforts.” American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy Report Number E053. (2005.)

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States. “Map 2-1 United States annual average wind power.” http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps/chap2/2-01m.html (Accessed on 4


November 2005.)

Paladin. “About Us.” http://www.paladinky.com/index.php?b=About_Us. (Accessed on 8 November 2005.)

Siemens. “Fuel Cells.” http://www.powergeneration.siemens.com/en/fuelcells/seca/index.cfm (Accessed on 12 November 2005)

Siemens. “Products.” http://www.sbt.siemens.com/BAU/products/software/Insight_APOGEE_GO.asp . (Accessed on 3 November 2005.)

Stauth, David. Oregon State University News & Communication Services. August 27, 2003. “OSU to direct funds into renewable energy program.” http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/2003/Aug03/energy.htm (Accessed on 9 November 2005).

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (USDOE EERE). “Active Solar Systems.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/integratedbuilding/activesolar/ (Accessed 12 November 2005.)

USDOE EERE. “Buildings: Lighting: Technologies.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/EE/buildings_lighting.html (Accessed 17 October 2005.)

USDOE EERE. “Geothermal.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/geothermal.html. (Accessed on 4 November 2005.)

USDOE EERE. “Passive Solar Heating, Cooling and Daylighting.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/RE/solar_passive.html (Accessed on 12 November, 2005.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Environmental Indicators: Ozone Depletion.”http://www.epa.gov/ozone/science/indicat/. (Accessed on 7 November 2005.)

U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). “Green Power Locator: Indiana.” http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/locator/in.htm (Accessed on 13 November 2005.)

US Green Building Council. “LEED for New Buildings.” http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220&. (Accessed on 10 November 2005.)

United Refrigeration Incorporated. “About Us.” www.uri.com (Accessed on 7 November 2005.)

Wilson, Alex, Nadav Malin and Mark Piepkorn, eds. Greenspec Directory: Product Guideline Specifications 5th Edition: Brattleboro, VT, BuildingGreen, Inc., 2005.


WisconsinPublicService.com. “Lighting: lighting controls.” http://www.wisconsinpublicservice.com/business/eba_40.asp (Accessed on16 November 2005.)

WisconsinPublicService.com. “Lighting: Occupancy Sensors.” http://www.wisconsinpublicservice.com/business/eba_10.asp(Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Material and Resources

Federal Trade Commission.www.ftc.gov/bcp/grnrule/guides980427.htm. Accessed on 1 November, 2005

Indiana University Bloomington Physical Plant. http://www.indiana.edu/~phyplant/recycling.html#wastereductionAccessed on 18 October 2005.

MetaFore, Inc. http://www.metafore.org/index.php?p=Wood+for+Building+Green&s=34 Accessed on 12 October 2005.

Mohawk Flush Doors, Inc., 402 N. Sheridan Street, P.O. Box 3098, South Bend, IN 46619-1416, Telephone: 574.288.4464, Fax: 574.232.4621, www.mohawkdoors.com Accessed on 12 October 2005.

Rainforest Alliance, Smart Guide, http://www.brandsystems.net/smartwood/ Accessed on 12 October 2005.

US EPA. “WasteWise.” http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/recyle.htm Accessed on 28 October 2005.

Winter, John et al., Business Guide for Reducing Solid Waste. (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1993).


American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. “Emerging Technologies and Practices: 2004.” http://www.aceee.org/pubs/a042_h19.pdf. (Accessed 15 November 2005.)

ASI Controls. http://www.asicontrols.com/ (Accessed 16 November 2005.)

Capturing the Daylight Dividend Program (a consortium of state and federal energy agencies). “The Benefits of Daylight Through Windows.” http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/daylighting/pdf/DaylightBenefits.pdf (Accessed 16 November 2005.)

The Carpet and Rug Institute. “’Green Label Plus’ - Adhesive Testing Program.” http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=15 (Accessed on 16 October 2005)

The Carpet and Rug Institute, (2005). Indoor air quality. From “Green Label” Testing Program - Approved


Product Categories for Carpet Web site: http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=11&listid=2 (Accessed on 24 October 2005.)

The Carpet and Rug Institute. Indoor air quality. From “Green Label Plus” Carpet Testing Program - Approved Products Web site: http://www.carpet-rug.org/drill_down_2.cfm?page=8&sub=17&requesttimeout=350. (Accessed on 24 October 2005.)

The Carpet and Rug Institute. “SPECIAL EDITION CRI Salutes Adhesive Manufacturer Members.” www.carpet-rug.com/News/Newsline/020208_Newsline_V3I2.pdf (Accessed on 18 October 2005.)

Carrier Corporation. “Demand Controlled Ventilation System Design Guide: Providing the Right Amount of Air, In the Right Place, At the Right Time.” http://www.commercial.carrier.com/commercial/hvac/general/0,2047,CLI1_DIV12_ETI4470_MID4438,00.html?SMSESSION=NO (Accessed 15 November 2005.)

Carrier Corporation. “3V Packaged Control System.” http://www.commercial.carrier.com/commercial/hvac/general/0,3055,CLI1_DIV12_ETI9040,00.html (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley. “Underfloor Air Technologies: Case Studies.” http://www.cbe.berkeley.edu/underfloorair/casestudies.htm. (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

Clean Air Counts: EPA Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program. “Painting the Town Green: Aberdeen Proving Ground’s Paint Pilot Project.” http://www.cleanaircounts.org/Resource%20Package/A%20Book/paints/paints.pdf (Accessed on 6 October 2005.)

Correspondence with AETNA Plywood Incorporated’s Purchasing Department. (Phone interview on 16 November 2005.)

Correspondence with Collins & Aikman Distributor (Chicago) (Phone Interview on 3 November 2005.)

Correspondence with RBS Building Material Distributor (Bloomington) about Zero and Low VOC Paint

Daly, Allen PE. “Operable Windows and HVAC Systems.” http://www.hpac.com/member/feature/feature_pdf/0212daly.pdf (Accessed on 24 October 2005.)

DELTA Portfolio Lighting Case Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, Nov. 1997. “Sacramento Municipal Utility District Customer Service Center.” http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/DELTA/pdf/SMUD.pdf (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Energy Design Resources (California public utilities research group). “Design Brief: Displacement Ventilation.” http://www.energydesignresources.com/docs/db-05-displacementventilation.pdf. (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Environmental Protection Association, (2001). “The Greening Curve: Lessons Learned in the Design of the New EPA campus in North Carolina.” www.epa.gov/rtp/new-bldg/environmental/thegreeningcurve-new.pdf. (Accessed on 20 October 2005.):76.

Federal Interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality. “Minutes of the CIAQ Quarterly Meeting Wednesday,


October 20th, 2004.” http://www.epa.gov/iaq/ciaq/10_20_04meeting_minutes.pdf (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

GreenBuilding. “Lighting Module” http://energyefficiency.jrc.cec.eu.int/greenbuilding/pdf%20greenbuilding/GreenBuilding_Lighting_Module_V3.pdf (Accessed on 10 November 2005.)

Green Buildings. “The Pennsylvania Green Building Operations and Maintenance Manual” http://www.dgs.state.pa.us/dgs/lib/dgs/green_bldg/greenbuildingbook.pdf (Accessed on 8 November 2005.)

GreenFloors. “Click floating floor.” http://www.greenfloors.com/HP_Click_Floors_Index.htm. (Accessed on 24 October 2005.)

Green Seal’s Choose Green Report: Carpet. (2001). http://www.greenseal.org/recommendations.htm#certification (Accessed on 21 Oct 2005.)

Green Seal, (2001). “Choose Green Report: Particleboard and Medium-Density Fiberboard” www.greenseal.org/recommendations/CGR_particleboard.pdf. (Accessed on 25 October 2005.)

Green Seal Standards and Certifications. “Green Seal Certified Products.” http://www.greenseal.org/certproducts.htm#paints (Accessed on 12 October 2005)

Grumman, David (ed). ASHRAE GreenGuide (Atlanta: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 2003).

Honeywell. http://buildingsolutions.honeywell.com/Cultures/en-US/ServicesSolutions/BuildingAutomationControls/ (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Invensys. “Invensys Building Systems.” http://www.invensysibs.com/ (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Johnson Controls. “Products and Services.” http://www.johnsoncontrols.com/cg/html/what_we_offer.htm (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Levin, Hal. BuildingGreen.com “Ten Basic Concepts for Architects and Other Building Designer: Best Suitable Indoor Air Quality Practices in Commercial Buildings.” http://www.buildinggreen.com/elists/halpaper.cfm (Accessed on 30 October 2005.)

LOWES Bloomington (23 October 2005)Mapquest http://www.mapquest.com (Accessed on 20 October 2005.)

Morante, Peter. Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. “Daylight Dividends Case Study.” http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/daylightdividends/pdf/SmithCaseStudyFinal.pdf (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Natural Resources Defense Council. “Indoor Environmental Quality.” http://www.nrdc.org/cities/building/smoffice/guides/indoorenv.pdf (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

Pacific Gas & Electric. “Daylighting in Schools: An Investigation into the Relationship Between Daylighting


and Human Performance.” http://www.pge.com/003_save_energy/003c_edu_train/pec/daylight/di_pubs/SchoolsCondensed820.PDF (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Pratt School of Engineering @ Duke “aboutpratt.ciemas –leed building certified.” http://www.pratt.duke.edu/about/fciemas_leed.php (Accessed on 24 Oct 2005.)

Resource Venture, (n.d.). Construction IAQ Management for Leed 2.1 in Seattle. www.resourceventure.org (Accessed on 25 October 2005.): 4.

Siemens. “Staefa Control System.” http://www.sbt.siemens.com/HVP/Staefa/products/talon/default.asp (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

Trane Corporation. “Indoor Air Quality: A Guide to Understanding ASHRAE Standard 62-2001.” http://trane.com/commercial/issues/iaq/ISS-APG001-EN.pdf (Accessed on 8 November 2005.)

US Department of Energy. http://www.energycodes.gov/comcheck/pdfs/300text.pdf (Accessed on 12 November 2005.)

U.S. Department of Energy. “Energy and Environmental Guidelines for Construction.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/construction.html#iaq (Accessed on 20 October 2005.)

U.S. Department of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, (2004). “Building technologies program.” http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/info/design/construction.html#iaq (Accessed on 14 October 2005.)

US Department of Energy. “Lighting with Energy Efficiency in Mind” http://msucares.com/pubs/publications/p2269.pdf (Accessed on 8 November 2005.)

US Department of Energy. “Selecting Windows for Energy Efficiency.” http://windows.lbl.gov/pub/selectingwindows/window.pdf (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

US Environmental Protection Agency & US Department of Energy. “Labs for the 21st Century.” http://www.labs21century.gov/ (Accessed on 15 November 2005.)

US Environmental Protection Agency & the US Department of Energy. “Laboratories for the 21st Century, Best Practices: Daylighting in Laboratories.” http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/33938.pdf (Accessed on 16 November 2005.)

USGBC. “LEED Program & Sustainable Building Design” http://mail.price-hvac.com/repnet-www/pdfs/Brochure_USGBCLeedProgram.pdf (Accessed on 10 November 2005.)

Whole Building Design Guide, (2004). “Using LEED on laboratory projects.” http://www.wbdg.org/design/lableed.php?print= (Accessed on 24 October 2005.)

W.W. Henry Company. “Henry Greenline Environmental Technology.” http://www.henrygreenline.com/ (Accessed on 18 October 2005.)


Innovation and Design Case Studies

Alberici Corporation, Headquarters Building. Alberici Corporate Website.. http://www.alberici.com/index.cfm/Projects/Alberici%20Corporate%20Headquarters. (Accessed on October 21, 2005.)

Farr Associates. “Chicago Center for Green Technology.”http://www.farrside.com/architecture/ccgt_aerial1.pdf (Accessed on November 8, 2005.)

“Getting to Green: How to Get LEED Certified”. Powerpoint Presentation. http://web.dcp.ufl.edu/ckibert/BCN6585/PPLectures/Lecture5cLEED/Rinker%20Hall%20COAA%20Leed%20Presentation%20Jan%2003.ppt. (Accessed on November 2, 2005.)

“Green Products Inc.” www.greenproducts.net/products/products.html. (Accessed on October 13, 2005.)

Griscom, Amanda. “Who’s the Greenest of Them All? NRDC’s new Santa Monica building may be the most eco-friendly in the U.S.” Grist Magazine, Nov. 25, 2003. http://www.grist.org/news/powers/2003/11/25/of/. (Accessed on October 29, 2005.)

Herman Miller, Inc. “Marketplace.” http://www.intarch.com/digital_archive/brochures/green_is_gold/green_is_gold.pdf (Accessed on October 21, 2005.)

Morris, Jeff. University Business Magazine. “Going Green.” http://www.universitybusiness.com/page.cfm?id=288. (Accessed on 1 November 2005.)

Pring, George Rock. University of Denver College of Law. “The ‘Greening’ of Legal Education.” http://www.law.du.edu/secondcenturycampaign/pdf/The%20Greening%20Presentation.pdf. (Accessed on 4 November 2005.)

University of Denver College of Law news. http://www.law.du.edu/news/green.pdf. (Accessed on 6 November 2005.)

University of Michigan: Samuel T. Dana Building, School of Natural Resources & Environment. “The Greening of Dana.” http://www.snre.umich.edu/greendana/; http://www.snre.umich.edu/greendana/conservation/radiant_cooling.php; http://www.snre.umich.edu/greendana/conservation/insulation.php. (Accessed on 27 September 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. “US EPA Building.”http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=323 (Accessed on November 3, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. LEED Case Study: Rinker Hall. http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=286. (Accessed on October 21, 2005.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “Greening EPA.”http://www.epa.gov/greeningepa/facilities/kansascity-lab.htm (Accessed on November 8, 2005.)


U.S. Green Building Council. “Pharmacia Building Q.”http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/orverview.cfm?ProjectID=186 (Accessed on November 3, 2005.)

EPA & Department of Energy. “Laboratories for the 21st Century: Case Studies.”http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/32719.pdf (Accessed on November 8, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. “Chicago Center.”http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=97 (Accessed on November 3, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council.. “Herman Miller Marketplace.”http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=189 (Accessed on October 21, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. “Genzyme Building.”http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=274 (Accessed on October 21, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. City of Seattle Justice Center:http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=225 (Accessed on October 21, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. Used for each case:http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=220&

U.S. Green Building Council. LEED Case Study. “Roberts Hall.” http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=148. (Accessed on November 2, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. LEED Case Study. “National Resources Defense Council.” http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=236. (Accessed October 29, 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. “LEED Case Studies Overview: Sarah Lawrence College Humbold Visual Arts Center.” http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/overview.cfm?ProjectID=480. (Accessed on 8 November 2005.)

U.S. Green Building Council. “LEED Case Studies Energy: Sarah Lawrence College Humbold Visual Arts Center.” http://leedcasestudies.usgbc.org/energy.cfm?ProjectID=480. (Accessed on 8 November 2005.)


IndexAadhesives 92, 93, 118, 120, 130, 132, 134, 136air change effectiveness 85, 86albedo 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 118alternative transportation

alternative-fuel vehicles 8, 9bicycle storage 6carpool 10, 115changing/shower facilities 6, 7hybrid vehicles 9, 141preferred parking 8, 9, 10, 115public transportation 5

atrium 29, 109, 121, 126, 134automation 38, 39, 40, 41, 42

Bbicycle storage 6brownfield 4, 117, 137building

commissioning 20, 34, 35, 37, 49, 50, 52, 86, 106, 114, 116layout 111orientation 109shape 109, 111

Ccarbon dioxide 40, 83, 84, 91, 114, 118, 120, 121, 124, 128, 130, 132, 134, 136, 138carpet 92, 93, 96, 97certified wood 74, 76, 79, 80CFC-based refrigerants 37changing/shower facilities 6click floors 93coatings 94commingled recovery 62, 64compact fluorescent lamps 40composite wood 98compost 32, 135construction management plan 88, 90construction waste 62, 63, 64, 65, 116, 122, 124, 130, 134, 136

Ddaylight 42, 103, 108, 109, 111, 118, 120, 123, 124, 125, 130, 138demand controlled ventilation 84displacement ventilation 86

Eelectronic dimmable ballasts 41, 42, 122energy


automation 38, 39, 42energy-efficient lighting 24, 40, 42, 104, 120, 122energy-saving windows 101energy performance 22, 33, 36, 38, 39, 40, 83, 101, 111, 114, 118, 120, 127, 130, 132, 134, 135, 138fuel cell generator 43, 44fuel cells 29, 43, 44, 47green power 55, 56, 117, 118HVAC systems 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 47, 51, 81, 83, 84, 87, 89, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 120, 124, 138net metering 47photovoltaics 45, 47, 121point of use water heaters 33, 39, 42renewable energy 40, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 55, 56, 91, 121, 134Renewable Energy Certificates 55, 56solar power 43, 45, 46wind power 43, 46

erosion 1, 117, 119, 123, 131

FFederal Energy Policy Act of 2005 42fluorescent lamps 24, 40, 104, 120, 122Forest Stewardship Council 74, 76, 79, 80, 118, 120, 122, 130fuel cell generator 43, 44fuel cells 29, 43, 44, 47

Ggeothermal 44, 48, 115, 116greenfields 3, 11Green Label 92, 93, 96, 97green power 55, 56, 117, 118greywater 15, 17, 18, 19, 26, 27

Hheat island 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 118, 132, 141HVAC systems 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 47, 51, 81, 83, 84, 87, 89, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 120, 124, 138hybrid vehicles 9, 141

Iimpervious surfaces 26, 27indoor environmental quality

adhesives 92, 93, 118, 120, 130, 132, 134, 136air change effectiveness 85, 86carbon dioxide 40, 83, 84, 114, 118, 120, 121, 128, 132carpet 92, 93, 96, 97click floors 93composite wood 98demand controlled ventilation 84displacement ventilation 86Green Label 92, 93, 96, 97Indoor Air Quality 81, 83, 88, 90, 91, 114, 116, 118, 120, 124, 132, 134, 138Indoor Air Quality Management Plan 88, 90medium-density fiberboard 98particleboard 98sealants 88, 92, 93, 96, 118, 120, 132, 134thermal comfort 105, 118, 120, 132


thermal controls 104tobacco smoke 82ventilation 40, 53, 81, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 114, 121, 122, 128, 129, 130, 134, 136, 138VOCs 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 116, 122, 128, 130, 136windows 24, 45, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 101, 102, 103, 104, 108, 109, 111, 112, 114, 120, 122, 128, 130, 132, 134

interior windows 111irrigation 15, 17, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 28, 53, 54, 114, 115, 118, 119, 123, 124, 127, 131, 132, 134, 137, 142

Jjobsite clean-up 62, 64jobsite separation 63, 65

Llaboratories 87laboratory paints 94landscaping 11, 15, 17, 18, 19, 27, 54, 113, 114, 119, 127, 129, 134, 135, 137, 142lighting

atrium 29, 109, 121, 126, 134automation 40, 41, 42, 102compact fluorescent lamps 24, 40controls 24, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 101, 102, 103, 104, 108, 109, 110, 111, 115, 116, 120, 121, 122, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130,

133, 134, 135daylight 42, 103, 108, 109, 111, 118, 120, 123, 124, 125, 130, 138electronic dimmable ballasts 41, 42, 122energy-efficient lighting 42fluorescent lamps 24, 40, 104, 120, 122LED exit signs 41task lighting 41top lighting 109

light pollution 24, 118, 119, 132Living Machine 29, 30, 142

Mmaterials

adhesives 92, 93, 96carpet 92, 93, 96, 97certified wood 74, 76, 79, 80coatings 94commingled recovery 62, 64composite wood 98construction waste 62, 63, 64, 65, 116, 122, 124, 130, 134, 136jobsite clean-up 62, 64jobsite separation 63, 65low-emitting materials 92, 96, 98, 118, 120, 132medium-density fiberboard 98paints 94, 95particleboard 98recycled content materials 70, 71, 72, 73, 97, 126, 128recycling 26, 57, 58, 62, 63, 64, 65, 97, 114, 122, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138regionally-extracted materials 76, 77regionally-manufactured materials 74resource reuse 66, 67, 68, 69sealants 92self-haul 63, 65


waste reduction 57, 58, 62, 63, 64, 65methane 29, 43, 44

Nnative plants 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 28, 113, 119, 123, 124, 132, 134net metering 47

Oopen space 11, 12, 13, 14, 29ozone 37, 51, 121

Ppaints 94, 95particleboard 98pervious pavement 15, 17, 18, 19, 21photovoltaics 45, 47, 121point of use water heaters 32, 33, 39, 42potable water 15, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31, 113, 118, 127, 135, 137, 138preferred parking 8, 9, 10, 115public transportation 5

Rrain water catchment 25, 26, 27, 142rapidly-renewable materials 78recycled content materials 70, 71, 72, 73, 97, 126, 128recycling 26, 57, 58, 62, 63, 64, 65, 97, 114, 122, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138regionally-extracted materials 76, 77regionally-manufactured materials 74Renewable Energy Certificates 55, 56resource reuse 66, 67, 68, 69restroom fixtures 32

Ssealants 88, 92, 93, 96, 118, 120, 132, 134self-haul 63, 65sewage 26, 29, 30shade 20, 21, 27site disturbance 11, 13site selection

brownfield 4, 117, 137building footprint 11, 13greenfield 3open space 11, 12, 13, 14, 29site disturbance 11, 13wetlands 2, 16, 17, 19, 28, 29, 113, 115

solar power 43, 45, 46storm water 1, 2, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 113, 115, 117, 119, 123, 127, 129, 131, 133

impervious surfaces 15, 26, 27open-grid pavement 20pervious pavement 15, 17, 18, 19, 21rainwater catchment system 26, 27, 142wetlands 2, 16, 17, 19, 28, 29, 113, 115

T


task lighting 41thermal comfort 105, 118, 120, 132thermal controls 104tobacco smoke 82top lighting 109

Vvegetated roof 16, 18, 19, 22, 23, 26, 28, 115, 129, 130ventilation 40, 53, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 107, 109, 114, 121, 122, 128, 129, 130, 134, 136, 138VOCs 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 116, 122, 128, 130, 136

Wwaste reduction 57, 58, 62, 63, 64, 65wastewater treatment 16, 19, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 115, 125, 142water efficiency

composting 32, 135greywater 15, 17, 18, 19, 26, 27hot water 32, 33, 38, 39, 40, 42, 44, 45, 48, 113, 114living machine 29, 30, 142point of use water heaters 32, 33, 39, 42potable water 15, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31, 113, 118, 127, 135, 137, 138rainwater catchment system 26, 27, 142restroom fixtures 32waterless toilets 31, 32, 33

wetlands 2, 16, 17, 19, 28, 29, 113, 115window glazing 109, 111windows 24, 45, 79, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 101, 102, 103, 104, 108, 109, 111, 112, 114, 120, 122, 128, 130, 132, 134wind power 43, 46

