PARTIES EXCLUDED FROM APPLYING
The following are disqualified from applying:
1. Employee or subcontractor of general contractor with construction responsibilities
2. Employee or subcontractor, with construction responsibilities, of construction manager who holds constructor contracts
3. Employee or subcontractor, with project design responsibilities, of the architect or engineer of record
4. Disinterested employee or subcontractor of ceneral contractor or construction manager1
5. Disinterested employee of architect or engineer1
1 “Disinterested” means an employee or subcontractor who has no project responsibilities other than commissioning.
ELIGIBLE PARTIES
The following are eligible to apply:
1. Disinterested subcontractor to architect or engineer1
2. Construction manager not holding constructor contracts
3. Independent consultant contracted to Owner
4. Owner employee or staff
1 “Disinterested” means an employee or subcontractor who has no project responsibilities other than commissioning.
Fabio Frescia
Sustainable Engineer53 thumbs up
March 7, 2010 - 7:54 pm
Dear Jean,
thanks for that, I have read the table at page 221 of LEED BD+C.
I just want a more precise answer. Can we be CxA for either case 1) r 2)?
Plus, do the infrastructures services(around the building project) need to be part of the commissioning?
Thank you.
Jean Marais
b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert832 thumbs up
March 8, 2010 - 2:56 am
Case 1) Yes. Case 2) No.
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
March 8, 2010 - 12:27 pm
Fabio, infrastructure around the building does not have to be commissioned for EAp1. See the credit language for details on the Cx requirements.
Karen Stewart
President, LEED APEcoPotential
56 thumbs up
March 15, 2010 - 7:08 pm
Jean,
Wouldn't you say yes to both case 1 and case 2 for fundamental commissioning?
Chris Ladner
PartnerViridian
261 thumbs up
March 16, 2010 - 10:43 am
The technical answer to questions 1 and 2 is "yes" for fundamental commissioning. The real world situation is that the CxA should not be influenced by, or have a conflict with, the design or construction team members. Although it is alowed for Fundamental Commissioning, I would propose that any employee of the architecture, MEP, or constuction firm has a potential conflict as a commissioning agent.
The infrastucture question has a lot to do with what you call infrastucture. If there is a central utility that feeds the project and it is part of the "infrastucture", you will need to ensure it is commissioned as part of enhanced commissioning. Although it is slightly outdated, there is guidance in this document http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=4176.
Jean Marais
b.i.g. Bechtold DesignBuilder Expert832 thumbs up
March 16, 2010 - 11:28 am
Sorry, I meant Enhanced Cx...usually I go for this with the attitude that if you're going to do the leg work you may as well go the full mile. Chris has a good answere.
Karen Stewart
President, LEED APEcoPotential
56 thumbs up
March 16, 2010 - 11:53 am
Thanks Jean. I agree with both you and Chris. Enhanced commissioning has a triple bottom line return on investment and should be seriously considered on all LEED projects. "Organizations that have researched commissioning claim that owners can achieve savings in operations of $4 over the first five years of occupancy as a direct result of every $1 invested in commissioning—an excellent return on investment." http://www.wbdg.org/project/buildingcomm.php