EAc3 - Enhanced Commissioning, LEED v2009

There is nothing specific about this, and often there will be two firms who share the fundamental and enhanced (with the enhanced firm being the lead), but not different firms from design to construction. In my opinion, this would be a bad idea, and would negate many of the benefits of enhanced commissioning. By having one firm do the design review and follow the project into construction, into submittals, and then into testing, you reap the investment you made in that firm to become familiar and knowledgeable about the project. If you split, then the construction firm will need to come up to speed on the overall project. If you share why you are considering this, maybe I can give more guidance in how you develop the scopes of work to bring you best value.

I have been on both sides of that issue for sure! My recommendation is to ask a commissioning firm for a two part proposal, and then specific a duration between the design work and the construction. I did that a few times when with KJWW, and normally I would include a little bit to cover increasing salaries and costs, but not a lot. You are only contracting for the design, but then when you come back to the firm for the construction within the 2 year period (for example), then they should not ask for anything more. Now if the scope changed (that never happens, right?), then you should negotiate, but you are working from scope instead of price.

Can anybody explain briefly for me the benefit of designating the CxA for performing early commissioning in the project in general ?

can anyone explain for me the importance of CxA or the idea of enhnced commissioning in general ?

Mohamed, I see you're not (yet) a LEEDuser member, but I would recommend joining. We provide lots of essential guidance on these questions and more in our member content here on LEEDuser.

Mohamed, you are asking two very foundational questions that are part of a long narrative related to the construction process, and are difficult to answer in this kind of format. So, I can give you very short answers and encourage you to seek a local commissioning professional to talk with to get the broader picture. Commissioning is a quality assurance process that is integrated into the construction process to monitor and test that systems are installed and operate per the original contract documents and the intent of the design. This is a highly structured process where the installation, programming, AND ultimate function are observed, investigated, and physically tested. By this process, the full potential performance of the building is unlocked providing the performance expected by the owner, and giving a solid footing for ongoing operations and maintenance. The benefits and financial returns are significant and have been well documented. Enhanced commissioning, in very simple terms, increases the scope of the CxA in the early part of the project to provide a peer review of the design. Experienced commissioning firms have a wide background in building systems and can help avoid problems or coordination breaks. They can also facilitate good owner/designer/contractor dialogue to make sure all parties understand the ramifications of decisions and scope changes. Again, this additional scope increases the benefits and return on the commissioning investment. The earlier the CxA is engaged the better. It is always easier and less expensive to resolve scope and design issues during the schematic and design development phase, when there is not as much of a penalty or cost to resolve issues or problems. If problems are ultimately discovered late in construction, the cost is always high, as well as the angst of the owner.