Thank you LEEDuser for flagging this huge change to v4.1. In the latest addenda, there has been a change to the requirement for who the CxA can be on a project. They can now be an employee of the design or construction team if they are not part of the actual design!
There is also welcome clarification on documenting at submission what items are not completed but will be in the near future, along with how to confirm this.
While those that know me will understand why I support this concept. This is good for teams that include highly qualified multi-discipline team members that have deep commissioning qualifications. That being said, I wish GBCI would spend more time reviewing the qualifications submitted for the CxA. I know of no time that the CxA has been challenged or asked for further proof of competence. There have been many times that I have seen or been made aware of CxA individuals and firms that have done extremely poor work or such abbreviated service to have negated any positive effect on the project.
Rachael McGinley
Head of SustainablityCBRE
3 thumbs up
May 12, 2021 - 6:05 am
This is really great news. Has anyone tested this on a project yet?
Allison Zuchman
Senior Sustainability ConsultantThe Green Engineer
14 thumbs up
August 20, 2021 - 12:02 pm
Where can I find the "clarification on documenting at submission what items are not completed but will be in the near future?" I don't see that on a credit form or in addenda. Thanks.
Ok scractch that, I see it on the Fundamental Cx credit form. I assume this is also accepted for Enhanced Cx - would folks agree? And odd I do not see this update in any official USGBC addenda. Please direct me to that if it exists.
Mark Benson
72 thumbs up
September 27, 2022 - 9:25 am
So does this mean that employees of the installing mechanical (or electrical) subcontractor can serve as the CxA for a LEED project if they are not personally part of the construction team?