# Presentation: 412020

## COMPLETION AND COMMISSIONING REQUIREMENTS IN THE SEATTLE ENERGY CODE

- John Hogan, A.I.A., P.E.
- Senior Code Development Analyst
- Seattle Department of Design, Construction and Land Use
- 710 Second Avenue, Suite 700
- Seattle, Washington  98104
- National Workshop on State Building Energy Codes
- New Orleans, 12 July 2000

## OVERVIEW

- _C & C requirements took effect in summer 1998 __	_*(along with other Energy Code revisions as **	**	**part of the regular 3-year code update cycle)*
- _Code language on completion & commissioning:_  	*code adoption process, HVAC, lighting, **	**format, Building Official’s role, limitations*
- _Implementation:_ * publications, training on**	**	**	**Energy Code update, plan review, inspection*
- _Lessons learned:_*  there’s always more to do*
- _Resources for further information:_  *website, staff*

## CODE LANGUAGE: Parties in Code Adoption Process

- _ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1999:_*public review draft basis for code language*
- _Building Commissioning Association - Pacific Northwest (BCA-NW):_*member of Energy Code Advisory Committee, proposed minor modifications to 90.1 draft*
- _Mechanical/electrical contractors:_*supported the proposal, stated that they were doing this already, wanted a level playing field*

## CODE LANGUAGE: HVAC completion, lighting controls

- _1416.1 Drawings:_  record drawings in 90 days
- _1416.2 Manuals:_ operating & maintenance manual
- _1416.3 System Balancing: _a written balance report
- _1416.4 HVAC Systems Commissioning:_Simple systems: report of test procedures & resultsOther systems: preliminary commissioning report    to be completed prior to certificate of occupancy
- _1513.7 Automatic lighting controls:_ provide report

## CODE LANGUAGE: Format & Building Official’s role

- _General format:_  “Construction documents shall require _______ be provided to the building owner”.
- _Building official’s role_:  “The building official should check only to be sure that the construction documents require this information be transmitted to the owner.  Copies of these materials transmitted to the owner are not required to be sent to the building official.”

## CODE LANGUAGE: Limitations

- Does _not_ address full commissioning: 	this is a only a narrow slice of the process 	*(does not included concept development, **	**pre-design,...post-occupancy, etc.)*
- Does _not_ specify who does the work:	owner decides whether to go 3rd party
- Does _not_ require that the Building department  	witness the tests or verify that tests were 	done correctly

## CODE IMPLEMENTATION:     Public Information

- _Public info documents:_  CAM #419 - summarizes benefits 	of commissioning- list resources, and- provides sample text 	for plans in App.G *(available on the web)*

## CODE IMPLEMENTATION: Energy Code Training

- _Timing for training on Energy Code revisions:_- sessions 1-2 months _prior_ to effective date  *(for those working on upcoming projects)*- AND 3-6 months _after_ effective date  *(after people realize that revisions are in effect)*
- _Training personnel:_- involve plan review and inspection staff  *(ensures that staff understand the code, AND **  draws audience who want to ask questions on **  what is expected for plan review/inspections)*

## CODE IMPLEMENTATION: Plan Review

- _Must do plan review for Energy Code compliance:_- Seattle does _not_ accept architect or engineer’s    stamp in lieu of plan review - 5 staff do Energy Code & Mechanical Code plan    review for all nonresidential and R-1 occupancy  *(+ 16 plans reviewers check structural & R-3)*
- _Check that completion notes are on the drawings:_- notes in specifications alone _not_ acceptable- plans examiners put stickyback note on drawings 	(if completion requirements are not noted)

## CODE IMPLEMENTATION: Inspection

- _Must do inspection for Energy Code compliance:_- 3 mechanical inspectors check HVAC systems to   Energy Code & Mechanical Code requirements  *(+ building (9), electrical (9), boiler, plumbing)*
- _Inspection for completion & commissioning:_- not checking for record drawings- manuals already required by Mechanical Code- checking for copy of balancing report- checking for preliminary commissioning report

## LESSONS LEARNED

- _Contractor response to code requirements:_- commissioning is a higher priority- 80% know they need the reports *(all the locals)**	*but majority still need reminding- must don’t mind as long as they know in advance
- _Issues raised by mechanical inspectors:_- some people still don’t understand why we do it, 	the benefits and where commissioning fits in - need to provide format/min.req’ments for reports- challenge with floor-by-floor completion- should commissioning be done by 3rd party?

## RESOURCES

- _Code language:_ Seattle Energy Code website*(www.ci.seattle.wa.us/dclu/energy,**Chap. 14 - Sec. 1416;  Chap. 15 - Sec. 1513.7)*
- _DCLU public information documents:_Client Assistance Memo #419*(www.ci.seattle.wa.us/dclu/energy/cam)*
- _DCLU staff:_ John Hogan (adoption & intent): 206-386-9145Energy/Mechanical plan review: 206-684-7846