2012 LEED Rating System Development Highlights

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

2012 LEED Rating System Development

The United States Green Building Council (USGBC) has released their initial draft version of the LEED 2012 Rating System.  There have been two comment periods released for the public to offer their input towards the LEED 2012 draft version and for future LEED rating systems.  The two comment periods are from November 8, 2011 to January 14, 2011 and from July 1, 2011 to August 15, 2011.  Due to the open comment periods, the current draft version will be subject to modifications and is a work in progress.

According to the USGBC, “future LEED updates will focus on increasing the technical rigor of the rating system, and expanding the market sectors able to use LEED.”[1]  Overall, there are three main categories which differentiate LEED 2009 and LEED 2012 draft version: new credit categories, changes to technical content, and revised point distribution. 

Within the draft version, there are currently three new credit categories: Integrated Process (IP), Location and Transportation (LT), and Performance (PF).  These new categories strive to accomplish two goals: provide a better understanding as to which credits help best optimize important issues, and synchronize organization of the LEED commercial rating and LEED for Homes rating system.  Further explanation of each new category is as follows:

  • ·         Integrated Process (IP)[2]: highlights the importance of the use of iterative, inclusionary process in the   design, construction, operations and maintenance of green projects Location and
  • ·        Transportation (LT)[3]: reorganizes project location, planning and transportation issues into a new category to highlight the importance of and increase dialogue about these issues.  Most of the credits in the new LT category previously existed (in some form) in the Sustainable Sites category.
  • ·       Performance (PF)[4]: highlights the importance of on-going operational performance in LEED projects.  Credits that deal with performance measurement and verification will be reorganized into this category and are intended to be a natural link to USGBC’s Building Performance Partnership (BPP).  The scope of this category includes, but is not limited to: Metering, Commissioning, Utility consumption data reporting, and Occupant comfort/satisfaction surveys.

The point values of the credits will also change and will be weighted as they were for LEED 2009 by using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI) categories.  The point allocation was not included in the LEED 2012 draft version for the first comment period but will be completed before the second comment period commences. 

Additional comment periods may be opened as needed for LEED 2012.  The scheduled release of LEED 2012 is set for November 7, 2012.

USGBC, LEED Rating System FAQ, https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=8447

H&A Invited to Testify Before Minnesota Senate Tax Committee

Mark Beattie, a Principal at Hickey & Associates, LLC, will be testifying before the Minnesota Senate Tax Committee on Wednesday, January 26, 2011 as part of a three day series of hearings. The Chair of the Committee, Julianne Ortman, invited Hickey & Associates, LLC to provide testimony using the expertise they have gained through years of experience in corporate real estate, corporate job growth and retention, and economic development. The focus of the hearing on January 26 will be on global competitiveness.

The hearings consist of a three part series from January 25-27, 2011 from 8:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m. All hearings will be held in the State Capitol Building, Room G-15.

Please contact the Minnesota Senate Tax Committee for further details at (651) 296-4837.

Site Selection Magazine Online: State of the States

SoS_HeaderThe pages which can be accessed through the link below highlight recent corporate facility projects, new laws and incentives policies, wages, employment, demographics and infrastructure facts in one easy-to-digest compendium.   


The status of the U.S. as a nation owes much if not most of its character to the livelihoods of its individual members. And things can change fast: Witness how quickly high-speed rail plans were either derailed or boosted in a total of 14 states following the December decisions by new governors in Ohio and Wisconsin to rebuff federal funds.
That same week, Ohio and Wisconsin were named along with leader Illinois, North Carolina and Missouri as the top states in public disclosure of incentives in “”Show Us the Subsidies,”” a report on economic development transparency from Good Jobs First that studied 245 major incentive programs. A number of states, most recently Massachusetts, have enacted legislation or simply improved their transparency. A dozen others (plus D.C.) have no disclosure at all. Which is better for economic development remains a much-debated question in statehouses across the land.
As it happens, Massachusetts, followed by Washington, Maryland, New Jersey and Connecticut, topped the 2010 State New Economy Index, released in November 2010 by the Information Technology Innovation Foundation and the Kauffman Foundation. The report uses 26 indicators to assess states’ efforts to succeed in the innovation economy, and we present several of them here.

Adam Bruns

A note on the layout: Our business plan for this project offered exclusive sponsorship to advertisers allied with particular states, up to a full page. States supported by a half-page or less of advertising are represented here by half-pages of data.

WEB TOOLS YOU CAN USE: As you wind your way across a nation’s worth of data, take note of the extra navigation built into each state’s data page by clicking on the state economic development or commerce department’s Web address to visit that agency directly.

Data Sources: The editors wish to thank Jason Hickey, president of Minneapolis-based Hickey & Associates LLC, for granting access to his firm’s thorough State Incentives Database. Also: BLS; BEA; NBER; Nat’l. Ctr. for Education Statistics; Census Bureau; Conway Data; National Conference of State Legislatures; Nat’l. Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation; Entertainment Software Association; AAPA; Pew Charitable Trusts; Milken Institute; Beacon Hill Institute; Pollina Corporate Real Estate; Deloitte; U.S. Chamber; Tax Foundation; state chambers of commerce, economic development agencies and associations; press reports; governors offices; government relations law firms; and legislative documents.