Reform the LEED process

The U.S. Green Building Council recently released proposed versions of its LEED rating systems, collectively called LEED 2009. Use of the LEED system has grown tremendously, and is expected to accelerate as local and state government agencies pass resolutions requiring LEED certification for both public and private projects.


The U.S. Green Building Council recently released proposed versions of its LEED rating systems, collectively called LEED 2009. Use of the LEED system has grown tremendously, and is expected to accelerate as local and state government agencies pass resolutions requiring LEED certification for both public and private projects.

However, LEED 2009 is not a new version of LEED. It is intended to be a much needed and long overdue reorganization of LEED. LEED 2009 aims to provide consistency by aligning requirements and documentation across the various LEED rating systems, such as New Construction and Major Renovations, and Commercial Interiors.

The advantage to users, designers, engineers, owners, and contractors is obvious: Learn the rules once, and apply them to any LEED project regardless of what LEED system is used. But a much bigger fix is required: Reform the LEED certification review process.

Have you ever wondered why many of the LEED submittals requirements and calculations seem more complicated than they need to be? Why the LEED reference guides are sometimes unclear, leaving it up to the project team to figure out what to do, or to seek out a special LEED consultant to help?

The consultants who develop LEED reference guides are the same consultants who certify LEED projects. And these same consultants also are hired on projects seeking certification—an obvious conflict of interest. It's human nature, and good business practice, to give yourself an edge. For example, you can make your competitors charge more to complete a project, by making them jump through unnecessary hoops to cover the cost of the extra work they are forced to do. The harder the requirements are to understand, then the higher the fee that can be charged when selling consulting services.

In an effort to address this problem, USGBC is spinning off the LEED certification work to a subsidiary called the Green Building Certification Institute (GBCI). However, GBCI and USGBC share the same physical address, and the upper management remains the same for the two entities. USGBC is still responsible for LEED, its requirements, and the certification process.

True reform could be assisted greatly by the following recommendations: First, the consulting companies that sell LEED certification services should not be allowed to develop LEED documentation requirements. Second, companies that are contracted to adjudicate LEED submittals should not be allowed to review the submittals of their competitors. And finally, USGBC-hired consultants should not be allowed to sell their services as LEED project consultants, while they also are paid as reviewers of those projects completed by their competitors.

The certification review consultants need to work directly as employees for the new GBCI entity. This would reduce the conflict-of-interest problem, and the many troubles the USGBC knows it has with the certification review process that is now in place.

LEED has grown up enough for truly independent consultants to perform the certification reviews. It's time for the USGBC to take this step and get it done.

Author Information

Miranda has managed sustainability for more than 100 LEED projects, including four certified Platinum and eight Gold. He has served as vice chair of the LEED Indoor Environmental Quality Group, on the LEED Commercial Interiors Core Committee, and as a member of the AIA Top 10 Green Buildings Committee.

No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Engineering Leaders Under 40 program identifies and gives recognition to young engineers who...
A cool solution: Collaboration, chemistry leads to foundry coat product development; See the 2015 Product of the Year Finalists
Raising the standard: What's new with NFPA 70E; A global view of manufacturing; Maintenance data; Fit bearings properly
Sister act: Building on their father's legacy, a new generation moves Bales Metal Surface Solutions forward; Meet the 2015 Engineering Leaders Under 40
Cyber security cost-efficient for industrial control systems; Extracting full value from operational data; Managing cyber security risks
Drilling for Big Data: Managing the flow of information; Big data drilldown series: Challenge and opportunity; OT to IT: Creating a circle of improvement; Industry loses best workers, again
Pipeline vulnerabilities? Securing hydrocarbon transit; Predictive analytics hit the mainstream; Dirty pipelines decrease flow, production—pig your line; Ensuring pipeline physical and cyber security
Upgrading secondary control systems; Keeping enclosures conditioned; Diagnostics increase equipment uptime; Mechatronics simplifies machine design
Designing positive-energy buildings; Ensuring power quality; Complying with NFPA 110; Minimizing arc flash hazards
Building high availability into industrial computers; Of key metrics and myth busting; The truth about five common VFD myths

Annual Salary Survey

After almost a decade of uncertainty, the confidence of plant floor managers is soaring. Even with a number of challenges and while implementing new technologies, there is a renewed sense of optimism among plant managers about their business and their future.

The respondents to the 2014 Plant Engineering Salary Survey come from throughout the U.S. and serve a variety of industries, but they are uniform in their optimism about manufacturing. This year’s survey found 79% consider manufacturing a secure career. That’s up from 75% in 2013 and significantly higher than the 63% figure when Plant Engineering first started asking that question a decade ago.

Read more: 2014 Salary Survey: Confidence rises amid the challenges

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.