See all forum discussions about NC-v4 EAc1

Subscribe to new posts about NC-v4 EAc1 Post a new question aboutNC-v4 EAc1

FAQs about EAc1 :

Can the same commissioning authority complete both Option 1 (enhanced commissioning) and Option 2 (envelope commissioning)?

Can non-design consultants on the project provide enhanced commissioning services?

View answers »

Forum discussion

NC-v4 EAc1:Enhanced commissioning

Independent 3rd Party CxA and Technology Design

Ryan Hoffman

Heapy Engineering

LEEDuser Basic Member

0 thumbs up

August 6, 2020

Our firm is a MEP/T firm that also has a large Building Optimization practice (LEED Consulting, Energy Modeling, Commissioning, etc.). For a project in which we are hired for the Technology Design only (systems not reviewed/commissioned), would we also be able to serve as the Independent 3rd party CxA for Enhanced? (a separate firm holds the MEP contract)

Post a reply

Marcus Sheffer

LEED Fellow

7group / Energy Opportunities

LEEDuser Expert

4454 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 15:50

Yes you can since you are not one of the designers of the systems being Cx. We do LEED consulting and energy modleing on many project where we also provided the Cx.

Emily Purcell

Sustainable Design Lead

CannonDesign

LEEDuser Expert

379 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 16:12

I recently received the opposite answer from USGBC - asked if it was acceptable for a different division of the Civil engineering firm to provide Cx and was told that was still a conflict of interest.

A.J. Speicher

Commissioning Project Manager

Borton-Lawson

LEEDuser Basic Member

0 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 16:57

Marcus, I have been given the same answer as Emily. Can you point us in the direction of some sort of guidance from USGBC so we can educate our clients that it is acceptable? Thx!

Marcus Sheffer

LEED Fellow

7group / Energy Opportunities

LEEDuser Expert

4454 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 17:31

Maybe in our case since we were not technically one of the designers, even though we often have a big influence over the design, we don't have such a conflict. Let me do some digging.

Ryan Hoffman

Heapy Engineering

LEEDuser Basic Member

0 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 17:49

Marcus - Thank you. We do LEED/EM and CxA quite often on projects and know that if we are the MEP as well, we can only go after the Fundamental Cx. It would be great to have a clear answer on being part of the 'design team' - but a part that is not under the Cx scope - and still be able to meet the requirements for Enhanced Cx.

Dave Hubka

Practice Leader - Sustainability

EUA

LEEDuser Expert

510 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 18:09

this thread has intigued me...I agree with Marcus' initial post, and it is odd that GBCI would be in conflict. My understanding is that non-MEP engineering roles would not preclude an entity from performing MEP CxA duties. I'll do some digging as well.

A.J. Speicher

Commissioning Project Manager

Borton-Lawson

LEEDuser Basic Member

0 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 18:14

Thanks so much for doing some digging. I have found that clients excluded us from performing the MEP Cx duties since we were also the civil engineer on the project, which does not make any sense to me aside from the same company name on both scopes of work. Let us know what you can find. Thx!!

Emily Purcell

Sustainable Design Lead

CannonDesign

LEEDuser Expert

379 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 18:56

just for reference, this was the LEED Interpretation i was quoted in the response I got: https://www.usgbc.org/leedaddenda/5197 It's a longstanding one but I don't remember it being applied as stringently in v2 and 2009. I do have another project (v2009) where the CxA is also providing energy modeling and that was accepted, so can corroborate Marcus's suggestion that that might not be considered a "design" service and therefore not a conflict.

David Eldridge

Energy Efficiency Ninja

Grumman/Butkus Associates

LEEDuser Premium Member

64 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 19:17

Emily, I think it is consistent that a different division of the same company would be excluded. Even though the two may not overlap in service there is still some common management, shared reputation, and potentially common ownership of the two. We do also provide Cx, energy modeling, and LEED consulting as a package of services succesfully. Or LEED consulting, modeling, and MEP/FP design and haven't had any issue with approval in those combinations.

David Eldridge

Energy Efficiency Ninja

Grumman/Butkus Associates

LEEDuser Premium Member

64 thumbs up

Thu, 08/06/2020 - 19:19

David, I don't think it's a question of service but rather the ownership, management, and shared reputation that provides an appearance of conflict of interest.

Dave Hubka

Practice Leader - Sustainability

EUA

LEEDuser Expert

510 thumbs up

Fri, 08/07/2020 - 02:05

my digging within GBCI also pointed me back to LI 5197....the same one that Emily posted. I'll chat with GBCI further next week and offer solutions that may provide other avenues in such situations. I'll post the results of my correspondence on this forum discussion.

Marcus Sheffer

LEED Fellow

7group / Energy Opportunities

LEEDuser Expert

4454 thumbs up

Fri, 08/07/2020 - 15:09

Technically the reviewer appears to be correct. Not all reviewers would review it this strict however. We would tend to let this go for the reason I noted above. Makes no sense to me that this is a conflict and having the Cx hired by the GC is not.

Dave Hubka

Practice Leader - Sustainability

EUA

LEEDuser Expert

510 thumbs up

Fri, 08/07/2020 - 15:17

On past projects we have been hired by the GC to provide CxA services and wrote our Cx scope to comply with LI 10244. My suspicion is that after I chat with GBCI / USGBC there may be a similar update (reversal) to LI 5197. One that aligns with the language and requirements of LI 10244.

Marcus Sheffer

LEED Fellow

7group / Energy Opportunities

LEEDuser Expert

4454 thumbs up

Fri, 08/07/2020 - 15:26

That makes perfect sense David!

Dave Hubka

Practice Leader - Sustainability

EUA

LEEDuser Expert

510 thumbs up

Thu, 08/13/2020 - 16:03

I spoke with GBCI this week. Their guidance was to submit a CIR and request that it be elevated to a LI. They hinted that they would not be surprised if LI 5197 was revised to better address MEP design team members versus non-MEP design team members. If a the revision occurs, companies that provide non-MEP design services could provide MEP Cx services. I understand that this is not the 'silver bullet' answer that some my have been hoping for, but at least it provides some direction. Good Luck!

A.J. Speicher

Commissioning Project Manager

Borton-Lawson

LEEDuser Basic Member

0 thumbs up

Tue, 08/18/2020 - 11:28

Thanks David! I gues the next question is, who is familiar with this process and can help submit a CIR to an LI, etc?

Dave Hubka

Practice Leader - Sustainability

EUA

LEEDuser Expert

510 thumbs up

Tue, 08/18/2020 - 14:45

here is a link that outlines how to submit a CIR: https://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/How%20to%20Submit%20a%20Credit%20Interpretation%20Request%20in%20LEED%20Online_workaround_1.pdf

Emily Purcell

Sustainable Design Lead

CannonDesign

LEEDuser Expert

379 thumbs up

Wed, 04/14/2021 - 16:45

Hi all, it looks like this recent addenda addressed this issue, in the v4.1 version of the credit: https://www.usgbc.org/leedaddenda/5000127 1. Under "Commissioning Authority" section, delete the following note: "If pursuing EAc Enhanced Commissioning, the CxA may not be an employee of the design or construction firm nor a subcontractor to the construction firm." add the following sentence: "If the CxA is an employee of the design or construction firm, upload documentation confirming: that the CxA has no responsibilities related to project design or construction; the CxA is reporting all findings to and communicating directly with the building owner; and the owner has signed off on this arrangement."

Scott Bowman

LEED Fellow

Integrated Design + Energy Advisors, LLC

LEEDuser Expert

377 thumbs up

Mon, 04/26/2021 - 15:47

Note that this addenda may be specific to v4.1. Review carefully before assuming it applies to v4. You could also look to see if you can use the v4.1 credit on v4. Sorry to be vague, but I have not had time to research this myself right now, so this is simply cautionary, not fully informed.

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.

You are currently logged in under an enterprise account

FAQs about EAc1 :

Independent 3rd Party CxA and Technology Design

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

Add new comment