Home › Resources ›

Report on the Workshop on Commissioning of New and Existing Buildings

Share this
Resource Type:
Report
Author(s): 
Rodney Sobin
Image
Download: 
application/pdf icon
workshop_summary_report.pdf

The General Services Administration (GSA) Office of Federal High-Performance Green Buildings and the Alliance to Save Energy, with co-sponsorship of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), held a one-day workshop on building commissioning on May 21, 2010 at the AIA Boardroom, Washington, DC.

The workshop, facilitated by Mr. Phil Welker of Portland Energy Conservation, Inc. (PECI), engaged Federal and private sector managers with responsibilities for building construction and operations as well as builders, engineers, academics, and other experts to discuss the state of commissioning (Cx) practices as well as opportunities, resources, impediments, and technical advances in Cx, recommissioning (reCx), retrocommissioning (retroCx), and ongoing commissioning. (See agenda in Appendix B and list of participants in Appendix C in the full report)

The workshop included presentations, facilitated discussions, and an exercise in which participants broke into groups to discuss specific topics followed by all workshop participants voting to indicate their prioritization of items (see Extended Summary for further discussion and Appendix A for complete list of items and vote tallies).

The group identified numerous pertinent issues that spanned technical and workforce topics as well as administrative, budgetary, and contractual issues.

Among major points were the following:

  • Cx professionals should be included early in the design stage for new building projects and integrated into the design and construction team throughout the construction project through hand-off to the buildings’ owners and operators.
  • The presence of energy efficient technologies and features does not assure energy efficient performance. Operator and occupant behavior are critical to building performance.
  • Cx, reCx, and retroCx should include strategies to ensure that energy and other benefits persist over a long period, such as providing training, manuals, and other materials to building operators. Building operators should have requirements and incentives for transferring knowledge and experience to new staff as operations and maintenance (O&M) staff turns over.
  • Cx often is seen as a one-time activity when it should really be redone (reCx) every few years depending on the rigor of persistence strategies and changes in building use. A process of ongoing commissioning utilizing trained O&M personnel, monitoring and measurement, and even simulation and modeling tools would be better. Ultimately it may be possible through a combination of advanced monitoring and control and well-trained O&M staff to make reCx obsolete.
  • There is a shortage of qualified Cx professionals.
  • There are varied, uncoordinated industry standards and credentials. This can impede the pursuit of consistent, high quality Cx. There should be definitive standards and credentials for Cx professionals. Federal building project managers should assure that Cx is performed and supervised by appropriately credentialed professionals.
  • Federal standards to define services, qualifications, and quality expectations for Cx of federal buildings are lacking. Building managers often do not know what to expect or demand as high quality Cx. Inconsistent results of Cx remain a challenge to Federal building managers.
  • Measurement and metering remains challenging, with some Federal facilities still lacking individual building meters. Projects (new buildings and renovations) should aim to submeter and monitor to as fine a level as budget allows. There are advantages to submetering by both building systems as well as by tenant. Submetering not only allows better discernment of building energy use for diagnostic purposes but can impose accountability by tenant and operation for their energy consumption.
  • Non-energy performance and benefits to Cx are important. Indoor air quality, noise, water, safety, and security are critical to occupant health, comfort, and productivity. They are particularly important for specialized buildings (for instance, health care facilities, laboratories, and defense and other security-sensitive facilities).
  • Occupant engagement is critical for enhancing building performance while providing a safe, healthy, comfortable, and productive work environment. Buildings that meet codes and standards do not necessarily meet occupant needs. For instance, ambient lighting levels are often too high for computer workstations . Summer temperature set-points are often too low. Smart design and new technologies can allow greater occupant control over individual work environments to enhance occupant satisfaction and energy efficiency.
  • O&M staff is often focused on responding individually to occupant complaints rather than proactively maintaining and enhancing building performance. Enhanced metering, measurement, and instrumentation can provide better feedback for building operators to identify and diagnose problem. Dashboard displays, diagnostic software, and emerging modeling and simulation tools offer great promise in moving toward ongoing commissioning and eventually to obsolescence of discrete Cx. However, these tools require well-trained O&M personnel to be effective.
  • The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) imposes challenging objectives for federal building energy auditing—25,000 per year. It could be useful if re- or retroCx could be combined with auditing or constitute an ―audit‖ under the EISA requirements. There was also discussion of the value of requiring re-/retroCx unless building managers provided specific justification for not performing Cx. However, auditing and related EISA requirements are ―unfunded mandates‖ that are not accompanied by corresponding appropriations.
  • There are budgetary and administrative impediments to Cx, reCx, and retroCx, including the ―color of money issue,‖ such as distinctions between capital from operating budgets. Also, incentives for performing re-/retroCx or other efficiency measures are diminished when there are no requirements for some or all monetary savings to go back to the facility or unit that saved the energy.
  • The uncertainty of savings from an individual re- or retroCx project has dissuaded the application of energy savings performance contacts (ESPCs) with energy service companies (ESCOs). Thus, ESCO capital is not for these types of projects. Perhaps a mechanism could be developed to allow multiple re- or retroCx projects to be aggregated so as to reduce ESCO risks from individual building projects.
  • O&M contractors may lack contractual and monetary incentives to collaborate and participate in re- and retroCx projects. Building owners and operators may generally lack strong incentives to perform such projects.

Reflecting on the workshop presentations and discussions, the attendees broke up into group to discuss five areas of commissioning that had been identified during the day and which encompassed opportunities for improvement:

  1. Knowledge Transfer
  2. Incentives
  3. Certifications and Standards
  4. Non-Energy Benefits
  5. Measurement, Metering, and Monitoring

In a break-out exercise, groups proposed specific actions that could be pursued to improve the commissioning process for federal agencies. Attendees then each cast five votes to select their preferred actions across all of the areas and proposed activities.

Top vote recipients: (See Appendix A for the full list of items and votes.)

  • All Cx projects should specify a staff training element (10 votes) (I. Knowledge Transfer)
  • Measurement granularity should be at the level of sub-meters or finer (equipment level) and/or include simulation based approaches (10 votes) (V. Measurement, Metering, and Monitoring)
  • New federal level certification (multiple levels) for operating staff to recognize training (9 votes) (I. Knowledge Transfer—also III. Certifications and Standards pertinent)
  • All Cx projects should specify an ongoing Cx plan (8 votes) (I. Knowledge Transfer)
  • Need federal standard definition of retroCx (8 votes) (III. Certifications and Standards)
  • Need federal standard defining qualifications for Cx providers (8 votes) (III. Certifications and Standards)
  • Contractual—financial incentives for performance (7 votes) (II. Incentives)
  • Non-energy benefit considerations (7 votes) (IV. Non-Energy Benefits)
    • occupant needs/comfort—light level, temperature, noise, odor, individual controls
    • water
    • indoor air quality and health
    • safety and security (fire, seismic, other)
  • Attention to audience/users of feedback (7 votes) (V. Measurement, Metering, and Monitoring)
    • Energy manager, O&M manager, real estate portfolio manager, occupants ―manager‖

Numerous times during the workshop participants spoke of the need to combine design, technologies, procedures, well-trained staff, and occupant engagement to move toward ongoing commissioning and to make commissioning as a discrete activity obsolete.

Mr. Kampschroer offered final remarks calling for a fundamental change in objective from merely incrementally improving performance and minimizing waste to eliminating waste altogether.

GSA may wish to consider engaging workshop participants in follow-up activities, such as delving more deeply into particular questions, impediments, and potential actions and solutions.