• The CxA may be a qualified employee of the owner, an independent consultant, or an employee of the design or construction firm who is not part of the project’s design or construction team, or a disinterested subcontractor of the design or construction team.
  • Project teams that intend to pursue EA Credit Enhanced Commissioning should note a difference in the CxA qualifications: for the credit, the CxA may not be an employee of the design or construction firm nor a subcontractor to the construction firm.

From the above mentioned LEED BD+C: New Construction | v4 - LEED v4 Fundamental commissioning and verification section:

It sounds like the individual chosen to be the fundamental CxA can also be an employee of the mechanical design firm contracted to complete MEP CD's, but not part of the design team itself, which is true most of the time. I was just clarifying that this is a true statement? 

Also I understand that the same person mentioned above cannot be the Enhanced CxA on this project, and must be contracted separately of the design team. This leads my next statement of to exactly what level of involvement does the enhanced CxA have to be on the project? It seems like the designated ECxa (enhanced) simply needs to review the fundamental CxA work and submit this to the owner and to LEED online separately at the end of the project. Otherwise it would seem that there are two separate agents being paid to almost to the same things in essence and it is costing the owner twice as much. The review of the fundamental CxA work by the enhanced ECxA individual would seem like the most cost effective method. Could you shed some light onto this question as well, as some clients ask these exact questions?