Forum discussion

CI-v4 EAc1:Enhanced commissioning

Is it safe to infer 'No formal Systems Manual' in v4?

I've read a few opinions and haven't found any official Interpretation (yet?) to better define the discrepancies in language regarding required Cx documentation.  The newer CFR/OMP content language in Prerequisite is - OK... - but then there are the 2 references to "Systems Manual" in Enhanced.  Taken together, it is still a bit of a word salad exercise, and I would like to be able to side with Scott Bowman's take that there is no separate 'Systems Manual' document requirement in v4.EA that has to be constructed or assembled from all these separate documents.  A lot of the stated content requirements for the CFR/OMP were items for the Systems Manual (as is the newly-defined Ongoing Cx Plan).

My question is whether anyone has seen any further definitions or clarifications of the v4 requirements?  Since the contents of the CFR/OMP are kind of mixed up under that single header, could this be submitted as a single document (which is basically then a Systems Manual with a different name...)  Has anyone had good/bad experience submitting these to date?

Thanks!   - Larry

0

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Sun, 08/11/2019 - 22:32

Crickets...I have not heard anyone disagree with my view yet.

Add new comment

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