This project, Number 0114, is in the midst of the certification Appeal process, having been advised during certification review that the requirements of EA Prerequisite 1, Fundamental Systems Commissioning, have not been met. Specifically, the review noted that the project had not engaged an independent Commissioning Authority, that there was no comprehensive plan to guide the commissioning process, and that there were no assurances that the tenant HVAC systems will be commissioned - a critical measure as the tenant systems will constitute almost all of the building\'s HVAC equipment in this Core and Shell building. The project team has reformed to include an independent Commissioning Authority (CA) to guide this project through a full Commissioning (Cx) process. The CA acknowledges that the process for commissioning this project will be unorthodox given that the building systems are already partially installed in the Shell tenant areas and fully installed in the Core lobby area. Accordingly, the CA has developed a commissioning plan specific to the circumstances of this project that meets all of the credit intents (fundamental procedures) outlined in LEED Prerequisite 1, as well as the intents of ASHRAE Guideline 1 where appropriate. The project team would like the credit interpretation review group to review the outline Cx strategy, below, and advise on whether this will be sufficient to meet fully the requirements of the LEED Commissioning Prerequisite. 1. Engage Cx Authority: The project has already engaged an independent Cx Authority to oversee all Commissioning work. 2. Develop Cx Plan: First the building Core areas and Shell will be commissioned, and then as tenant spaces are developed, they will be separately commissioned. All tenant spaces will be required to be fully commissioned as part of the overall project Cx process. 3. Documentation Review: The CA will review all available documentation on the commissioning work completed to date, including as-built drawings, to determine what is valid. For any invalid or missing documentation, the CA will provide documentation either via site verification and/or site testing. 4. Design Intent and Basis of Design Document: The CA will prepare a Design Intent (DI) and Basis of Design (BD)Document with input from the Owner, the Architect and the Owner\'s operating personnel. BoD documents will be developed for tenant spaces as they are developed. 5. Finalize Cx Plan: The CA will complete a detailed Commissioning Plan to incorporate comments/additions from all parties and findings from ongoing site assessments. The Cx plan methodology will be consistent with the process for commissioning Existing Buildings in accordance with ASHRAE Guideline 1, The HVAC Commissioning Process. Since it is not possible at this stage of the project to include the commissioning requirements in the construction documents, these requirements will be defined in the commissioning plan as part of the verification procedures and functional performance testing. 6. Verification/Testing: The CA will prepare verification and functional performance test procedures for the building envelope and the Core area systems. All building system testing and operation will be witnessed by the CA. The tenant spaces and respective HVAC systems will be tested once the tenant spaces are developed. 7. Documentation: The CA will prepare a detailed Commissioning Report, which will include all test results, updated O&M manuals and as-built documents. The CA will coordinate training by the vendors for the Owner\'s personnel if records of such training are not available, and the CA will determine if additional training for operation of the HVAC system is needed. Once the tenant spaces are developed, individual commissioning reports will be provided for each space.
The project team has chosen to pursue LEED certification well past the stage where it is possible to comply fully with the design requirements of EAp1. Accordingly, the project team has undertaken a comprehensive strategy to implement as many of the remaining commissioning activities as possible. Although the project team may be able to document building commissioning in a manner acceptable for EAp1 award, several issues must be comprehensively addressed. During the documentation of EAp1 the project team must ensure that the already built systems have had a thorough and unbiased review not just of how they were built, but of how they were designed. It is important for the project team to focus on the design intent - determining if what was built is what should have been built in order to meet the design intent. It is unclear from the information provided whether or not the CA is playing a significant role in the remaining work on MEP systems to be done during tenant fit out. During LEED certification appeal, it will be necessary to document that all portions of the EAp1 requirements have been satisfied for all activities on-going after the reformation of the commissioning team. For the purposes of this ruling, USGBC assumes that the commissioning process will play a significant role in the MEP fit-out of tenant spaces. Based on the information provided (about the process undertaken to commission the core and shell elements already installed, and the existence of a comprehensive strategy to implement commissioning activities on the fit out of the tenant systems as they are installed), the project team appears to comply with the portions of EAp1 that remain within the control of the Commissioning Authority.