our review just came back and the reviewers made the following comment: "The economic assessment policy is incomplete, as it does not require that maintenance cost savings be included in the economic assessment. Technical Advice: Please provide a revised policy that accounts for potential water supply and disposal cost savings, as well as maintenance cost savings as part of the required economic assessment of conversion to high-performance plumbing fixtures and fittings." 1. 'potential water supply and disposal cost savings' surely means 'water utility savings and sewage utility savings', which is included in the policy we submitted - or am i missing something? 2. we had submitted the policy document with an amendment which specifically amended the policy to include "potential maintenance cost savings". again: i don't understand what else we should include? before i send a clarification request to the review team, maybe one of you can help me shed some light on this? many thanks!
You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?
LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.
Jutta, if you used the copy of the policy that is currently available in the Documentation Toolkit, then I'm not sure why the reviewer would have marked it pending. Section 6 of the draft policy clearly indicates that the economic assessment will consider:
3. Water utility savings
4. Sewage utility savings
5. Potential Maintenance Costs
Beyond spelling it out that way, I don't think there's much else you can do. I'd go ahead and send the clarification request to see if you can get any other details.
Jason, thank you. since the "potential maintenance cost savings" were included in a policy addendum, it seems to me that they may have overlooked this part of our documentation and will raise this and the other query with them.
Add new comment
To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.