Establishing Industry Qualifications & Standards for Building Enclosure Commissioning Providers

John Runkle, PE, Intertek
Alec Jeffries, International Institute of Building Enclosure Consultants

The International Institute of Building Enclosure Consultants (IIBEC) has developed and launched a new ANSI ISO 17024 accredited certification for building enclosure commissioning (BECx) providers with clear qualifications and a rigorous application and examination process. This session will review the Certified Building Enclosure Commissioning Provider (CBECxP®) program, highlight available training modules, and review evolving building enclosure commission trends and standards throughout the industry.

Learning Objectives:

• Understand the history of BECx with respect to standards and training.
• Learn the comprehensive application, qualification, and criteria for obtaining the new CBECxP credential.
• Discuss future industry trends and professional growth opportunities relating to building enclosure commissioning.
• Understand what current training options are in the market and some differences between certification, accreditation and certificates.

Sponsored By:

Put the Owner Back into the OPR: How LEED has led the OPR astray

Tom Paladino, PE, LEED AP, Paladino and Company
Brad Greeff, LEED BD+C, CEM, CCP, Paladino and Company

As its name suggests, the Owner Project Requirements (OPR) is the designated channel for the voice of the owner. But if you look at most OPRs for sustainable buildings, the owner’s goals are rarely addressed – the OPR simply dictates to the owner what is required to achieve LEED certification. This reality is contrary to the spirit in which LEED commissioning was created.

The OPR forms the basis from which all design, construction, acceptance, and operational decisions are made – and for the document to deliver meaningful business value the Owner must be put back into the author’s seat when identifying project requirements.

This session will present an objective approach to aligning owner needs with a decision support structure and third-party validation whether it’s LEED, LBC, WELL or others. The approaches reviewed in this session will benefit owners and Cx teams, providing skills advancement and examples of good, better, and best OPRs.

Learning Objectives:

• (Re)define the purpose of an OPR
• Identify good, better, and best approaches to drafting OPRs
• Understand how the Cx agent can deliver greater value to the ownership
• Identify techniques to link owner values to Cx practices

Sponsored by:

Technology Engineering Cx (TECx): Why this is a necessity.

Randy Gruberman, PE, RCDD, CxA, Level-1 Global Solutions, LLC
Kagan Longval, BECxP, CxABE, Genesis AEC

Building Technology systems are not only networks and WiFi, they also include life safety and security. Your building owners are often getting involved with the design/delivery of Technology systems and construction processes for the first time, and general contractors often do not have qualified staff to handle complex systems oversight and commissioning. Technology Cx providers can help guide the systems to successful completion and desired maintainable outcomes. Operations of technology systems can include the security for all of a building’s occupants. Technology commissioning is essential to reduce schedule slips, change orders, and operating costs and to free up owner staff to concentrate on the mission along with the maintenance.

Learning Objectives:

• Discuss technology commissioning as a design and construction service.
• Show that properly designed and installed systems can save energy and operating budgets.
• Discuss resources (people and tools) and the lack thereof in our industry.
• Join in discussion with the audience about technology commissioning.

Sponsored By:

Considerations for Energy Efficiency – Retrofit vs New Construction in Institutional Settings

Caroline Segsworth, Morrison Hershfield
Stevan Vinci, CET, LFA, LEED Fellow, CxA+BE, BECxP, Morrison Hershfield
Chris Brown, AIA, LEED-AP, Mahlum Architects

As school boards endeavor to improve on existing infrastructure supported by unpredictable budgets, different strategies to increase energy and operational efficiency are considered, often weighing the trade-offs between retrofitting existing buildings versus building new. Existing infrastructure is sometimes considered to have intrinsic value, both for place creation and historic significance within the broader community.

Even without historic considerations, the re-use or adaptation of existing buildings can prove to be both a cost-wise and materially efficient means of improving both performance of the building and the experiences of its occupants. However, there are also cases where the existing structures are not sufficient for the Owner’s expected programming. In these cases we look to best practices for new construction that will provide building operators and owners with the best strategies for approaching cost, energy, and material efficiency, while maximizing the potential durability of the new structure. Strategies in either case will require a multi-faceted approach to design and construction, focused on performance of the building envelope, mechanical systems, and interior design. Integrated design approaches must be paired with comprehensive construction review and commissioning.

This session will provide insight into strategies related to decision making between retrofit or new construction and working with multiple school districts, jurisdictions, and design teams, to achieve the goals of each group. Caroline, Steve and Alyssa will also present two case studies comparing each approach with strict environmental, energy and occupant experience goals: one new construction project and one retrofit and extension of an historic campus.

Learning Objectives:

• Understand the differences in Owner expectations between retrofitting existing infrastructure vs needs for replacement.
• Learn to effectively implement integrated design and collaborative construction review in both retrofit and new construction scenarios.
• Outline techniques and tools used to develop performance criteria and occupant experience, including key technical considerations needed to meet building envelope performance goals and integration between systems.
• Identify strategies to verify and track efficiency and durability performance related to the building enclosure across all project phases and their impact on adjacent systems.

Fire & Life Safety Systems Commissioning Essentials

David LeBlanc, PE, FSFPE, Jensen Hughes

The 2021 Edition of NFPA3, Standard for Commissioning Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems, provides the process, methods, and documents for commissioning fire protection and life safety systems. The speaker focuses on the difference between, and implementation of NFPA3 and the new NFPA 4 Standard, Integrated Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems: who’s involved, how this new process interfaces with commissioning providers, and the steps in the commissioning process as it relates to fire protection and life safety systems.

Learn about the fire safety roles of the Fire Commissioning Agent (FCxA), and the new Integrated Testing Agent (ITa) who is responsible for review, documentation, and testing the needed integration/ interfacing between fire protection and life safety systems across various systems. What are their qualifications and responsibilities, and how do they fit in into an overall full building commissioning team? The speaker discusses common misconceptions, misunderstanding, and standardized terminology of commissioning fire protection and life safety systems, and reviews EBCx subsets – re-commissioning (ReCx) and retro-commissioning (RCx) – and how they may differ from new construction commissioning.

Learning Objectives:

• Describe the unique challenges with Commissioning Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems.
• Articulate the NFPA 3 commissioning process for Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems.
• Define the role of the Fire Commissioning provider and how they integrate with the full commissioning team.
• Differentiate between Cx NFPA 3 and Integrated Testing NFPA 4 of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems.

Sponsored By: