Drawing Review

Steve, building envelope commissioning is only required if you are pursuing the Enhanced Cx credit, Option 2.
 

Paula, I disagree. Per the reference guide as it pertains to the Fundamental Commissioning and Verification pre-requisite in v4  "Requirements for exterior enclosures are limited to inclusion in the owner’s project requirements (OPR) andbasis of design (BOD), as well as the review of the OPR, BOD and project design....The review of the exterior enclosure design may be performed by a qualified member of the design or construction team (or an employee of that firm) who is not directly responsible for design of the building envelope."

Thanks, Dan! I read that as well, but does it suggest to you that drawing reviews are required for Fundamental Commissioning?

The industry seems to question this requirement constantly. To me, yes, "review of the OPR, BOD, and PROJECT DESIGN" does mean that drawings pertaining to the design of the building envelope should be reviewed as part of the Fundamental Cx scope.

Agreed, the drawing review is required for mid design documents (50% DD for example), for the Fundamental Commissioning.  This is a deviation from a LEED v3 project, which we have also seen cause some confusion as previous versions did not include Envelope Commissioning (pilot credit) and did not require a design review in the Fundamental Commissioning requirements.  

Our interpretation of "review of the OPR, BOD and Project Design" includes a drawing review required for v4 Fundamental.  Looking through Credit Interpretation Requests and Addenda nothing is coming up addressing this issue.  

I agree with Dan on this one. Frankly, this is something I commented in every review of v4 that I made. Under fundamental, the CxA is to make sure the envelope is addressed in OPR and BOD and there is a design review of the envelope by someone not part of the design team (perhaps a principal in the firm not assigned to the project for example). I had many conversations with people key to the changes in the Cx credits (and we are still friends even though I disagree with the final wording) and discussed this very point. The intent was to start pushing for a future where envelope Cx is a prerequisite and this was the first step.

Thanks for cogitating and clarifying, everyone! Steve, do you feel like you got the answer you needed?

I have a very related question. What about envelope drawing review for a LEED V.4 IDC - TI project, where the envelope was not touched or included in the TI Scope?  In this case, I assumed it was not necessary to include anything related to the envelope for V4. Fundamental or Enhanced, if it is not included in the project scope? In a project I'm working on the envelope isn't be touched and is part of the landlord's building, but the MEP systems are included.  Is that consistent with what others have experienced?

Erin - that would be correct, Envelope for an IDC-TI project would be excluded from your project.  

There is no precise language anywhere in the LEED v4 Reference Guide for Building Design and Construction documentation under Fundamental Commissioning Prerequisite EAp1 that specifically says a "Design Review" of the envelope is "REQUIRED".

It appears that there are experts who can argue either way for this and since the language is not precise and there is not an exact Credit Interpretation Request and Addenda that states "UNEQUIVOCALLY" that a "Design Review" of the envelope must or is required than the answer that should be accepted is that only the Review of the OPR and the BOD is to be performed. 

Please see the references below: 

V4.1-

https://www.usgbc.org/node/11963667?return=/credits/new-construction/v4.1/energy-%26amp%3B-atmosphere

“Requirements for exterior enclosures are limited to inclusion in the owner’s project requirements (OPR) and basis of design (BOD), as well as the review of the OPR, BOD and project design. ASTM E2947-16: Standard Guide for Building Enclosure Commissioning provides additional guidance.”

V4.0-

https://leeduser.buildinggreen.com/credit/NC-v4/EAp1#tab-credit-language

“Requirements for exterior enclosures are limited to inclusion in the owner’s project requirements (OPR) and basis of design (BOD), as well as the review of the OPR, BOD and project design. NIBS Guideline 3-2012 for Exterior Enclosures provides additional guidance.”

Just following up on this, since it still seems to be confusing in my opinion (and I can't really tell that a consensus was ever reached. The LEED Step-By-Step Guidance says the following, which I think is still confusing:

"The OPR must include all systems to be commissioned plus the building envelope, even if full envelope commissioning is not pursued." 

and

"The BOD must include all systems to be commissioned plus the building envelope, even if full envelope commissioning is not pursued. The project engineer, architect, structural engineer, and other team members must work together to document building envelope thermal performance, load-bearing capabilities, and construction."

So, it sounds like we have to at least talk about it, but it's not required to actually be commissioned?

Garrett, I agree that even if the envelope is existing and not being changed in the scope of the project, at least describing the envelope and condition would be appropriate. You would only need to do commissioning if you pursue the envelope commissioning.