When commencing a new construction project, it seems very reasonable for the building owner to expect to occupy a building that has been functionally completed with all components and systems fully installed, started, controlled, balanced, and tested. However, as commissioning agents, EH&E’s experience is that most commercial buildings today are occupied prior to all systems being complete, and this overlap of systems completion and occupancy invariably has a significant negative impact on both the immediate and lasting performance of the building.
Problems manifest themselves in the form of high initial levels of occupant complaints and the resulting maintenance costs, as well as long-term performance deficiencies and higher energy costs on the building. All of these problems and their associated costs are subsequently inherited by the building owner.
Defining Project “Completion”
Why do we continue to see this occur on so many construction projects? Essentially, it’s because the construction industry has changed over time in response to the twin pressures of tight budgets and fixed completion/occupancy dates. One very basic indication of the change can be seen in the definition of “completion.” The definition has become somewhat nebulous, often with very different meanings to the construction team, the owner, and the Architectural/Engineering (A/E) team. It is important for the owner to be aware of how these changes can impact their projects and what oversight they should expect to provide to ensure they get what they paid for and realize the full value of their first cost investment.
From the contractor’s stand-point the building is “substantially complete” when the occupancy permit requirements have been met. Most owners have come to accept this view, with the understanding that the “punch-list” will be completed by the contractor and accept the building as ready to occupy. However, from a commissioning (and historical) perspective, substantial completion would additionally require that all components and subsystems of the HVAC system documentation have been completed, started, fully controlled, and balanced per the building’s design intent and contract documents. Without this process, systems may be operational yet not complete and achieving all performance goals specified in the contract documents.
Impact of “Substantial Completion” on Occupancy and Performance
Most building system performance shortfalls will quickly become evident upon or during occupancy. Performance deficiencies such as insufficient air distribution to certain end-use spaces or failed reheat coil operation could easily go undetected prior to occupancy, but will contribute to excessive maintenance calls upon occupancy. Additionally, while blatant failures will be immediately noticeable, many performance deficiencies such as inadequate air or water flow may not be as easily detectable under certain load conditions and may cause problems to stretch out for months. The system completion process in these cases will generally cause disruptions and complaints from the occupants due to potential system isolation and or shut-downs required during occupied hours. An occupant will be exposed to heating or cooling deficiencies, and any anomalies related to power, lighting, or thermal comfort (i.e., anything that they can physically sense). In these instances the building can quickly develop a reputation as a “bad” building.
In a recent project in which final completion occurred 12 months after occupancy, a conservative estimate of unexpected maintenance costs to the owner was more than $150,000. The energy and equipment life costs are more difficult to quantify but are significant as they can continue to add cost over the entire life of the building.
Maximizing Building Value Using Inchstones
To minimize the negative impacts on the building owner outlined above, a new process or approach is needed to minimize the overlap between occupancy and final completion as defined from the commissioning perspective (controls completion and balancing). From detailed reviews of our commissioning records on many large projects, we discovered a series of potential indicators that could be used at various stages of the project to predict potential scheduling delays. These indicators, which we’ve termed “inchstones” as they work within the existing construction milestones, are carefully chosen to enable the owner to identify potential delays at points early enough in the schedule to correct and maintain the scheduled dates. We define inchstones as contractual sub-tasks with associated tangible deliverables which if not completely implemented will directly or indirectly lead to schedule delays and performance shortfalls. Tracking these deliverables during the project provides a finer degree of scheduling oversight for the building owner and gives the project team notification of potential delays early in the project when corrections can be more easily and inexpensively implemented.
It is important to reiterate the point that the inchstones selected by EH&E are all required project deliverables and are not additional requirements to the project. The project deliverables associated with the inchstones are almost always standard components of the contract language in the large projects that we commission. However, we always suggest a review of the specification requirements during the design phase of the project to ensure that all critical inchstones (deliverables) for a project are in place.
Examples of project inchstones during the construction phase of a project can include:
· submittal requirement sheets and approval tracking.
· contactor plans (for installation, startup, balancing, training, etc.).
· point-to-point controls checklists.
· start-up notification requirements.
All of these documents contain information critical to the proper specification, installation, and performance of equipment, and should be precursors to the proper startup, completion, and acceptance of building systems. Consequently, the lack of these key deliverables at certain points in the project should be an early warning that problems will occur later in the construction cycle. For example, if the schedule indicates that equipment startup is to begin in 2 weeks yet no start-up plans (the “what, how, and by whom” of the startup) have been submitted, then it is highly unlikely that the startup will be performed to client expectations or needs. This sets the stage for later equipment problems, project delays, voided warranties, and higher energy and maintenance costs to the owner.
Implementing the Inchstone Management Process
Incorporating inchstones into a construction project is not a major effort. As the examples above have shown, it’s primarily a matter of tracking some key project deliverables. However, making the process work to its potential involves several important steps that the owner should follow:
· Ensure the contract contains the proper inchstones.
· Make your expectations clear to the construction team.
· Collect, organize, and disseminate deliverables.
· Hold the team accountable.
Experience on many projects has shown us that any time the owner must occupy a new building before all systems have been completed and checked per contracted specifications, the owner will add a substantial cost to the project in added maintenance, wasted energy, voided warranties and building reputation. By adding a tracking process for key project deliverables spread throughout the building process, the owner can take an active role in minimizing the likelihood of occupancy before systems are fully completed and tested, and therefore take full advantage of the new building.
To download the compete version of this white paper, go to http://www.eheinc.com/inchstonewhitepaper.htm
For more information on EH&E’s Instone Project Monitoring service, contact Michael Della Barba at firstname.lastname@example.org [ mailto:email@example.com ] or visit http://www.eheinc.com/inchstone.htm.