ASHRAE/IECC Compliance for AHU's, RTU's and Heat Pumps

Peter, I will try to give a little insight to your questions. First, you bring up something that we all have to deal with, and that is the EOR response. As we bring up questions or concerns in a design review, the burden of resolution falls on the EOR. They will be signing the project, and will be submitting to GBCI for certification as well, so many of the issues you state below will be resolved below. Once we get an EOR response that states they have considered this or their interpretation is such, then we tend to back off. We may agree to disagree, and have in several instances, but it is not our role to force our opinions on a project. Now, we may very well be proved right during functional testing too. By accepting the EOR response and closing an item does NOT mean we agree or approve something, only that they have spoken, and the owner has accepted that decision. I will let others comment on the energy aspects (which you might post questions 1 thru 4 under EAp2 or EAc1, as this goes to 90.1 compliance). Your item 5 has come up on another project, and you are correct. If the occupants cannot change the setpoint, then they do not have controllability. On a recent project we were commissioning, the guards were on the thermostats, but were not part of the contract. The owner was moving in while construction was finishing, and went and installed the guards themselves…the maintenance staff did without talking to the project management staff. We noted this on the Action Log as not conforming to the contract documents AND that the point was in jeopardy. The guards were removed. The decision was placed with the owner on if they wanted the guards or the point.