a question about DES option 1

As a CxA, my scope is the scope of the project as registered in LEED. So any equipment outside the project boundaries is outside my scope. However, the system description is incomplete unless some of the upstream equipment is discussed. So I include an informative annex describing the upstream equipment and its relationship with the project equipment (connections, meters, etc.). I don't test it, but I acknowledge it. If I can get my hands on the commissioning report from whomever commissioned the upstream equipment I attach it (with their permission).

Sometimes it is good to go back to the source material. Looking at the DES Guidance v2, they have decoupled the energy modeling from the commissioning. One does not inform the other. So those modeling the energy will read their section on how to address equipment upstream and downstream, and the CxA will review their section.

To your specific question, starting on Page 7 of the document, it is clear that upstream equipment is excluded from EAp1. So if you are doing fundamental only, then you only deal with downstream...ie the building systems.

Enhanced under EAc3 has a more complex selection criteria. Take a look at Page 8 of the Guidance. It would appear to me that the majority of projects will require commissioning of upstream equipment, because most will be getting much more than 20% of their energy from the DES.

I can support this requirement for enhanced, since LEED is looking to market transformation and the DES will be a large part of the energy efficiency of our buildings.

Of course I would want to get as much information as I can about the upstream equipment for my Cx Report. However, that upstream equipment doesn't belong to me (or my client). Of course if the upstream equipment does "belong" to the client, say a university, then that is another matter.

Here we have a municipal district chiller, the buildings all around it use chilled water from that system so they do not have to install their own chillers. The DCS is not going to let me commission their system, they won't even let me in the door, so all I can do is copy the details from their press releases. I have done this on several projects for enhanced commissioning and LEED accepted it.

Sounds like you have it well in hand. Again, there are lots of ways to interpret the guidelines, and as long as you are doing Option 1, I agree with your view. However, once Option 2 is used, then you are asking the reviewers to accept that the upstream equipment is operating at higher than typical efficiency. But again, that is only my opinion. Also, I would hope that DES systems are being commissioned on a regular basis no matter the owner, which would be in their best interests, as if they are more efficient, they can realize more profit.