Dear all,
In some credits, including in CxA credit, there are initial of CxA or other parties are required. I wonder whether this initial must be filled in by CxA through a separate login by CxA himself? or can the LEED AP put the CxA initial?
It is easier to manage if LEED AP control the submission instead of involving so many parties to log into the project and put in their initial and upload their document
Can the whole submission done by LEED AP?
thanks and cheers
Tristan Roberts
RepresentativeVermont House of Representatives
LEEDuser Expert
11474 thumbs up
February 22, 2011 - 12:26 pm
Eric, a "required signatory" means just that—a sign-off from that person is required, and can't be substituted for by the LEED coordinator. You might think twice about taking on the liability associated with those signatures, anyway. There is a good tip on team administration on our Required Signatory page.
Sara Heppe
ArchitectPF&A Design
19 thumbs up
October 23, 2013 - 9:41 am
Tristan, there are some "required signatory" text fields that do not designate the team member who needs to sign it. I am speaking specifically about the EAp1 Fundamental Commissioning template. Do you have any guidance on how to handle this situation? I checked on the EAp1 blog site and it seems as though people have asked the question but no one has gotten a response as to how to proceed.
Scott Bowman
LEED FellowIntegrated Design + Energy Advisors, LLC
LEEDuser Expert
519 thumbs up
October 23, 2013 - 7:38 pm
Interesting… I had not had that confusion before, so decided to look at the different version of the template from v3 to v5. There are differences.
Under EAp1 (Fundamental), the v3 form is pretty clear. The OPR signatory is to be the owner indicating approval. Then the contents of the OPR are confirmed by the CxA signatory. Now, while it does not say this in the block, the signatory is answering the question, so that is how I determine who should sign.
But v4 had a different method to show signatory. I still read that the owner should sign for the OPR approval (or now you can upload a separate document with the signatory statement on letterhead, dated and signed). Then the OPR contents would be the same, by the CxA, but now you have two options.
EAc3 (Enhanced) still only has a v3 form that uses the on line signatory, but clearly all of them are the CxA.
As to the original intent of the document, I am against anyone other than the CxA uploading the documents. I think that separates the person performing that service from the requirements they must fulfill, and completing the documentation is one of those requirements. My opinion only of course!