Wood costs - per vendor or end user (project contractors)?

I have a similar issue in that the contractor provided the original invoice, but had whited out all cost info. We submitted it as received, and the reviewer came back saying that we needed to provide the invoice showing all cost information. So, to answer your question Victoria, I would say no it isn't acceptable to provide invoices without cost (at least based on the review response we received).

Victoria - If you absolutely can't get the vendor invoice with costs, you might get by with what you suggested above ...but in my opinion, both the contractor and vendor invoices would need to be clearly 'mapped' together with the same line-items, descriptions, etc. You might even want to do a special tally sheet of your own to make this abundantly clear to the Reviewer. If it still comes back during the submittal review, then you can use the GBCI response as leverage to try and get the info from the contractor / vendor...let us know how thing progress!

Any update on this issue? I have a subcontractor who refuses to provide their COC-supplier's complete invoice with their costs, as it would reveal their mark-up. Has anyone been successful with submitting the matching subcontractor and COC-supplier line item invoices, where only the subcontractor's indicate values?

Cory, I don't know of a way around it. Any reviewer I have had makes the pricing on the invoice mandatory. You may not have any wiggle room in this. Can you exclude the material from your FSC applicable materials and just include it in your baseline materials cost? Or you could explain to the Owner that the credit is not going to be earned (and they are not going to get the full benefit of the FSC purchase) because of an uncooperative sub-contractor. See if a little pressure could help.

Andrew is right about using 'pressure points' to solve the problem...just make sure and use them with care because they can alienate the very people you asking for help from. Another ‘pressure point’ method that is SOMETIMES successful, meaning you should use this 'pressure point' at your discretion, is to do your very best at documenting the credit during the initial submittal; I.E. submit with the best information you have. You might even consider work arounds like the one I describe above on June 20, 2011 using the alternative compliance path method (you should assume that this will most likely NOT be successful!!) and then use the LEED reviewers comments (assuming they say No) as leverage and proof that you really do need the information you were requesting (like the $value on the invoice) to earn the credit. There's risk in this of course, because you've submitted without having the officially approved documentation in place, so make sure you do this with your eyes wide open and be prepared to follow-up during the clarification stage. Having said that, sometimes the only thing that will get the information you need is some project specific proof, from the GBCI, that the credit is at risk because you don't have the information needed – make sure you have clearly asked for the information and you have afforded adequate time for a response from the supplier before you take this step! Let us know how you work out your challenge and if it succeeds! Doug