-
Repeated cycle of retrocommissioning
Ongoing commissioning involves performing critical elements of the retrocommissioning process, repeatedly over a series of two-year cycles. The idea is to optimize system performance and continue to fine-tune it, actively preventing problems for the lifetime of the building.
Third of three commissioning credits
The tasks of ongoing commissioning are similar to those performed during retrocommissioning, as completed for EAc2.1, Option 1 and EAc2.2. This credit simply repeats those activities over continuous and ongoing two-year cycles. You would not attempt EAc2.3 unless you have committed to EAc2.1 Option 1, and EAc2.2. (The activities associated with EAc2.1 Option 2, the ASHRAE Level II Audit, will not satisfy the...
Step-by-step credit help
Got the gist of the LEED credit but not sure how to actually achieve it? LEEDuser gives step-by-step help. Members get:
- Checklists covering all the key action steps you'll need to earn the credit.
- Hot tips to give you shortcuts and avoid pitfalls.
- Cost tips to assess what a credit will actually cost, and how to make it affordable.
- Ideas for going beyond LEED with best practices.
- All checklists organized by project phase.
- On-the-fly suggestions on useful items from the Documentation Toolkit, Resources, and Credit Language.
-
Credit language straight from USGBC
Need to check up on the exact LEED credit language from the LEED Rating System on the fly? LEEDuser includes the verbatim language. Members get:
- Easy access to the official LEED credit language with just a couple of clicks.
- On the jobsite without your bulky LEED Reference Guide? Check up on the credit language details here.
- Credit language content is used by permission of the U.S. Green Building Council.
Your credit-by-credit reference library
Why waste time chasing down referenced standards and supporting resources when LEEDuser links you directly to the ones you need? LEEDuser has gathered all the best tools out there and organized them by credit for easy reference. Members get links to:
- Organizations that can give information or help on a credit.
- Standards or studies that are key reference points for credits and prerequisites.
- Articles that help explain important topics.
- Key documents or references for credit inputs.
- Software tools you can use to run calculations or simulations.
Documentation Toolkit
In the end, LEED is all about documentation. LEEDuser’s Documentation Toolkit saves you time and helps you avoid mistakes with:
- Calculators to help assess credit compliance.
- Tracking spreadsheets for materials purchases.
- Spreadsheets and forms to give to subs and other team members.
- Guidance documents on arcane LEED issues.
- Sample templates to help guide your narratives and LEED Online submissions.
- Examples of actual submissions from certified LEED projects.
18 Comments
ASHRAE Audits
Our project has taken the ASHRAE II Audit route for EA 2.1 and would like to pursue the ongoing commissioning credit. Even though we performed the audits, can we still pursue this credit if we create an ongoing commissioning plan that is compliant to the requirements and commission the systems instead of performing additional audits? Or are we disqualified from going after this point entirely?
It is confused.
Refer to first paragraph of Section 4 of EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. 2009 Reference Guide Page 186, only projects pursuing EA Credit 2.1: Option 1 will be eligible for this credit.
But the online credit form do have a question asking which path have been used in Credit 2.1, and the form shows credit still can be earned by selecting audit path.
Comments from a LEED review
We just received comments on a review of this credit I am trying to understand. For this project, we actually had an approved MV plan from LEED NC credit EAc5. The plan is very detailed and addresses how to trend and look for variations in performance of each component (chillers, boilers, air handlers, heat recovery wheels, motors, etc.). The comment said, “the ongoing commissioning program should include elements of planning, system testing, performance verification, corrective action response, ongoing measurement, and documentation to proactively address operating problems. This includes evidence that rigorous functional testing of equipment (e.g., by changing parameters, setpointsSetpoints are normal operating ranges for building systems and indoor environmental quality. When the building systems are outside of their normal operating range, action is taken by the building operator or automation system. or conditions and observing and documenting the system or equipment response through various modes and conditions over time) is being performed in the project building…. Note that system monitoring and preventive maintenance activities alone are not sufficient for achieving this credit, nor are repetition of the energy auditing activities associated with Option 2 of EAc2.1”
What I don’t understand is where is the value in additional functional testing. If something is going off, it would show up in the trends. Why push the setpoints around if maintaining them where they are is maintaining your energy consumption and efficiency targets? We could repeat some of the Functional Performance Tests from the initial building Cx1. Commissioning (Cx) is the process of verifying and documenting that a building and all of its systems and assemblies are planned, designed, installed, tested, operated, and maintained to meet the owner's project requirements. 2. The process of checking the performance of a building against the owner's goals during design, construction, and occupancy. At a minimum, mechanical and electrical equipment are tested, although much more extensive testing may also be included. process, but again, where is the value? (I can see that this would confirm some of the safety and fault procedures, but how is that related to the intent of this credit?) I know the ref guide says “monitoring” is not enough, but it also says that “portable data loggers are likely necessary,” and I have yet to see a variable that would contribute to ongoing Cx that can’t be put into a BMS if you want to.
Also, wouldn’t it make sense if following through on your plan approved for LEED-NC EAc5 actually earned you the related LEED-EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. credit? Why get an M&V plan in one LEED rating system if it won’t play in another?
Scope of comissioning
Hello-
We're working on a building that is not owner occupied and the tenant has 48 additional pieces of equipment that are not a part of the base building that are currently only being monitored for alarms. Is this equipment part of the project scope in terms of commissioning? The owner has no control over these items.
Thanks for your help
Does EA C2.1 qualify as 50% of EA C2.3
If EA C2.1 is being pursued and the ongoing commissioning plan is developed, would this qualify as 50% of the ongoing scope being completed? Or must the project presumably wait 1-2 years to perform the first 50% of the scope after the implementation of the retrocommissioning findings?
Clarification on Ongoing Cx Cycles
LEED User states - "Provide a clear budget for the commissioning cycle along with the credit submission that demonstrates that what has been completed as of the end of the performance period is greater than 50% of the total ongoing commissioning budget."
My questions:
1. Does the end date of the 1st Cx1. Commissioning (Cx) is the process of verifying and documenting that a building and all of its systems and assemblies are planned, designed, installed, tested, operated, and maintained to meet the owner's project requirements. 2. The process of checking the performance of a building against the owner's goals during design, construction, and occupancy. At a minimum, mechanical and electrical equipment are tested, although much more extensive testing may also be included. cycle have to correspond with the end date of the Performance Period, or can it extend past the end of the PP?
2. How long past the end of the PP can the 2nd Cx cycle extend?
tie-up w/ EAp1
My client has implemented on-going commissioing to be implemented over the long term. This was part of their Six-Sigma project, beginning 2006, and some are still being implemented - 3 projects from 2008 (our LEED application was 2010).
My queries:
1) Do we need to tie this up w/ the prerequisite or can these 3 credits (2.1, 2.2 and 2.3) stand alone without being included in EAp1?
2) If there is a tie up, can anyone recommend how?
You can meet EAp1 through commissioning, so I would do that.
I'm not sure if this answers your question—please feel free to clarify.
New Chiller Installation & Performance Period
Hello:
We are beginning an EBOMEBOM is an acronym for Existing Buildings: Operations & Maintenance, one of the LEED 2009 rating sytems. v2 project soon and we are unsure of how a new chiller installation will affect our certification. We are replacing two steam absorption chillers with two new electric drive chillers.
We have read in the ref. guide that if major changes to building equipment are made during the perf. pd, collect at least 3-months of data afterwards.
Besides this additional 3 months, is there anything else we should be aware of before we set our perf. pd?
Thank you very much.
A few things to consider, you might be able to qualify for MRc3 and MRc9, both involve facility alterations and additions made during the performance period. Another item to consider is that by updating such major equipment you may see a considerable increase in energy efficiency, which could help with EAp2 and EAc1.
Frequency of Inspections
In looking to achieve this credit, I am planning on writing a Cx1. Commissioning (Cx) is the process of verifying and documenting that a building and all of its systems and assemblies are planned, designed, installed, tested, operated, and maintained to meet the owner's project requirements. 2. The process of checking the performance of a building against the owner's goals during design, construction, and occupancy. At a minimum, mechanical and electrical equipment are tested, although much more extensive testing may also be included. plan that meets the requirements described in the Reference Guide, but I am planning on putting the frequency of each inspection right at 2 years and doing them all at the same time, rather than spread them all out. This would be both cost effective for the client and make it easier for the CxAThe commissioning authority (CxA) is the individual designated to organize, lead, and review the completion of commissioning process activities. The CxA facilitates communication among the owner, designer, and contractor to ensure that complex systems are installed and function in accordance with the owner's project requirements..
However, in reading the Reference Guide it seems that LEED is assuming all these inspections required will be done at different times. So the CxA would have to make multiple site visits throughout the year to perform each task, why not do it all at once? Would LEED frown upon this approach and would it still meet the intent of the credit?
Thanks!
Ben,
A lot of the ongoing commissioning items typically feed into a buildings normal operating plan. Checking calibration of thermostats, confirming supply temperatures, confirming functionality of lighting controls... Are the retro-commissioning items you are referring to similar to an outside air balance or another larger maintenance service?
Well I am certainly referring to all of those items you listed, as well as bigger picture items such inspection of HVAC equipment, pumps, fans, filters, motors etc. The items you listed are certainly included in my list but from what I understand the intent of the credit is for a 3rd party to complete the tasks, not the building maintenance staff. So why have a CxAThe commissioning authority (CxA) is the individual designated to organize, lead, and review the completion of commissioning process activities. The CxA facilitates communication among the owner, designer, and contractor to ensure that complex systems are installed and function in accordance with the owner's project requirements. come to the site to simply confirm supply temps, wait three months then come back and confirm functionality of lighting controls? The fact that LEED wants 50% completed during the performance period is confusing, wouldn't it be logical just to it all at one time?
I'm not sure a 3rd party is required for this credit. It does ask that the commissioning team take a systems wide approach that is beyond the normal operation and maintenance scope. If the operations staff contracts with a 3rd party to perform a detailed functional testing every 2 years it will certainly add great value by helping to calibrate the ongoing commissioning testing that is being performed as part of the operating plan. It should be noted that the ongoing functional testing piece of the commissioning process can be automated through a buildings BMS system. Check out this article for a case study: http://resources.cacx.org/library/holdings/050.pdf.
Ongoing Commissioning Overlap with New Building Commissioning
Has anyone purused this credit for a project previously receiving the Enhanced Commissioning Credit for LEED NC Certification? And if so, do you know if the performance period for the EB On-going Commissioning can ap back into the 10 Month post substantial commissioning period for the NC enhanced commissioning credit?
THANKS!
I'm concerned that documenting EA2.1 and EA2.2 are independent of documenting EA2.3 and require independent processes. In short, if your team is identifying cost saving measures during the first 10 months using EA2.1 it might not satisfy putting into practice 50% of an ongoing retro commissioning plan. (Required by this credit.)
What are your thoughts?
That's a good point...the issue might be more about whether work done can contribute to the credit if it was done before a 'Formal LEED compliant' retro-commissiong plan was developed (but within the 2 year window provided by initial EB certification).....Maybe as part of an alternative compliance path around 'out of LEED sequence' work that meets the credit intent?
Doug,
I have the same question. Did you ever pursue using a LEED NC Enhanced Commissioning as the 1st half of the Ongoing RCx process? Did it work?
Thanks,
Sonrisa
Please register to use the forum.