Proof of 3rd party Cx was requested by a Reviewer in a 2009 project. I'm no longer seeing this mentioned in v4... or is it implicit?
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Go premium for $12.95 »
Candice Rogers
PresidentPaladin, Inc
19 thumbs up
November 5, 2020 - 2:17 pm
For v4 under Fundamental Commissioning and Verification, renewables are required system (if included in the project). Consequently, they should be included in the process. The uploads which confirm their inclusion are listed in the Reference Manual. (i.e. systems lists, cx plan, documentation of testing and verification, etc.) Very best with your project!
Joyce Kelly
Architect - Cx Provider - Green Building SpecialistGLHN Architects & Engineers
16 thumbs up
November 5, 2020 - 5:18 pm
That makes perfect sense, Candice. Leaping to 4.1 and off-site renewables with RECs owned by organization seeking credit for several currently registered buildings - do you think we still need to prove these were 3rd party commissioned for any individual building to receive credit?
Candice Rogers
PresidentPaladin, Inc
19 thumbs up
November 5, 2020 - 5:55 pm
Good question. I am not seeing that the off-site renewable is specifically identified. The way I would approach this is via intent: 1) are the renewables owned? In that case, I would apply the same logic of District Energy Systems where new equipment to serve the project is included in cx scope and existing equipment has been functionally tested in last (I think) 5 years. 2) Are the renewables contracted? Then, the project has no control over the construction or maintenance of these and therefore could not require them to be commissioned.
In either case, the presence of commissioning would serve the project in ensuring the anticipated performance is realized from the installation.