Intent:
- Reduce ozone depletion.
Implementation:
- New Building: Zero use of CFC-based refrigerants in HVAC systems
- Existing Building: Consider replacement or “phase-out” program for HVAC units and fire systems with CFCs.
- CFC production stopped in 1995 and was phased out 5 years after that.
- Existing mechanical systems connected to existing chilled water systems have to be CFC-free.
- notes:
- ODP: ozone depletion potential
- GWP: global warming potential
- Specify new HVAC equipment that uses NO CFC REFRIGERANTS.
Code:
- EPA Montreal Protocol – 1987
Submittal Phase:
- design
Extra Credit:
- none
More Energy & Atmosphere Credits
- EA P1 – Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems (prerequisite)
- EA P2 – Minimum Energy Performance (prerequisite)
- EA P3 – Fundamental Refrigerant Management (prerequisite)
- EA 1 – Optimize Energy Performance
- EA 2 – On-Site Renewable Energy
- EA 3 – Enhanced Commissioning
- EA 4 – Enhanced Refrigerant Management
- EA 5 – Measurement & Verification
- EA 6 – Green Power
13 Comments On This Post
I’ve been following your website and I think it is excellent and very helpful!
One thing I’d like to add to EA p. 3: I think it’s important to note the alternative option, which is to provide proof that replacement of EB CFC-using HVAC systems is not “economically feasible” (will take more than 10 years for simple payback), thus excusing you from this prerequisite, but that you have to minimize leakage to less than 5%.
what does short environmental lifetime mean? in selecting refrigerants a should have a short environmental life and be small ODP and small GWP. The phrase is in Approach and Implementation.
In the summary page for EA p3, it says that “phase-out plans extending beyond the project completion date will be considered on their merits,” but in the Approach & Implementation section, it says there’s a timeline of 5 years. So do you get 5 years for phase-out, or not?
@ Melissa,
I believe the normal phase out period is 5 years, but depending on the situation, probably for really large scale projects with low budgets, they will extend the phase out beyond 5 years, since they are trying to do the right thing, and they’ll earn this credit. If you can, you should try and find a CIR about this as I’m sure others have had the same question, who are working on real life projects. Good luck!
The intent section exempts small equipment.
What happens when the total number of small refrigerators (less than 0.5 lbs of refrigerant) are a lot?
There are previous (non-LEED) projects I’ve worked on like medical testing labs that have a lot of these little refrigerators all over the place. Then there are a couple of big beverage companies that likewise have a lot of coolers and refrigerators. A dozen of these little units pushes your refrigerant past the 5 lbs mark. No such thing as “critical mass” for this prerequisite?
Any kind of explanation to clarify a case like this would really help. Thank you!
In reference to EAp3 CFC reduction in HVAC&R, My reference guide LEED CI,v 2.0 pg 142 states that an ID point is possible for projects that demonstrate that eliminate use of Ozone depleting materials with GWP from the project. I was under the impression that points were never awarded for Prerequisites. Does anyone have information regarding this? Thanks,
I don’t think you can earn a point for the prerequisite, but the possibility for exemplary performance ID point looks more than the statutory requirements and involves CIR submission.
The way I read it is that zero use in new tenant HVAC&R – installed or renovated. To comply, under NC 2.2 one would have to show that existing CFC-based refrigerants are to be phased out (NC 2.2, EAp3, page 172, col. 1).
I think you get the ID point in CI for an existing system that gets replaced as a consequence of your project to show zero CFC and GWP.
Franco, Thanks for your response. I think you are right about the ID point and perhaps could earn points for CI SSc1L Other Quantifiable Environmental Performance? Synergies- I could refer to NC EAc4 Enhanced Refrigerant Mgt.
Hi pat,
This question has been asked before (Mellissa Sept. 21 2008), but Im asking it again just incase anyone has found the answer.
Im not sure if there is a 5 year phase out for eleminating CFC in existing buildings. According to the practice test I just took, the cfc’s must be phased out prior to project completion. Any extentions (past project completion) will be considered on their merits.
5 years or project completion?
Hi Tyler,
This is directly from the LEED Reference guide:
“If the building is existed to an existing chilled water system, that system must be CFC-free; or a commitment to phasing out CFC-based refrigerants, with a firm timeline of five years from substantial completion of the project, must be in place”
So, I’m guessing 5 years from substantial completion based on this, if the new system cannot be CFC-free right away.
“Phase-out plans extending beyond the project completion date will be considered on their merits.”
Similar to others above, had a sample test question that asked something about these “merits” even though it sounds like a 5 year phase-out plan is perfectly acceptable. Something to be aware of in case it comes up on the real test.
“Prior to phase-out, reduce annual leakage of CFC-based refrigerants to 5% or less…”
Another sample test question I had wrong because I was relating the 5% or less to just the alternative option for existing buildings (project excused from this prerequisite if simple payback is greater than 10 years).
“If CFC-based refrigerants are maintained in the central system, reduce annual leakage to 5% or less…and reduce total leakage over the remaining life of the unit to less than 30% of its refrigerant charge.”
Another piece of info to be aware of. Was asked about the 30% aspect on another sample question.
How come you list the Montreal Protocol as a standard, but ref guide 2.2 does not?
Thanks again.
Rachel,
Please read para 3 and 4 under Environmental Issues section on page 171. There is reference to the Montreal Protocol but you are right – it’s not a standard referenced for this prerequisite. Can someone clarify this please?