AGC – Job Order Contracting Webinar – March 12, 2013

Webinar:   Job Order Contracting

Tuesday, March 12, 2013 – 2:00pm to 3:30pm

Job Order Contracting (JOC) is an innovative delivery method focused on the renovation and repair of large facility infrastructure under a long-term contract.   JOC has been around for a long time but is experiencing an upswing in an era of limited capital dollars and greater efficiency.   Like IPD, JOC focuses on relational contracting, an integrated team, and performance incentives, but JOC is unique in its unit-price structure and repetitive delivery order process.  This webinar will demystify unit pricing, coefficient development, job order scoping and estimating process, and skillsets needed to succeed in JOC. The current JOC market will be framed, with an emphasis on serving owners throughout the building life-cycle.

During this webinar, participants will learn about:

• Compare Job Order Contracting (JOC) to other well-known delivery methods.
• Describe the pricing structure of JOC, identify strategies for developing a coefficient, and understand the basics of line item estimating.
• Discuss the JOC delivery order process, including scoping, proposal preparation, and execution.
• Identify current JOC market opportunities and dynamics, including market segments, contract structure, unit price books, consultants, etc.
• Determine skillsets and culture to be a successful JOC contractor..

Speakers

Lisa Cooley
Consultant, LEED AP

Perfecto Solis
Vice-President of Airport Development and Engineering, DFW Airport

Leo Wright
Vice-President of Job Order Contracting Division, F.H. Paschen

 

 

---

Any questions or changes to your registration should be made via email to meetings@agc.org.

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier Cost Estimating and Efficient Project Delivery Technology for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, POCA, BOA.

Cloud Computing, Construction, Engineering, Architecture and Productivity

Cloud computing is a more than catalyst for change, it is a DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGY.  Cloud computing will drive significantly enhanced productivity within the Architecture, Engineering, Construction and Facility Management Sectors by enabling the consistent deployment of integrated project delivery methods.   Owners, Contractors, Architects, Engineers and stakeholders of the built environment will benefit if they focus upon CHANGE MANAGEMENT and how to best leverage cloud computing.

1. Collaboration – True cloud computing (vs. cloud-washing, or simply posting legacy application to the cloud) lets users  work concurrently on projects in real-time (milliseconds)… virtually anyone, anywhere, anytime.  Multi-language and mult-currency, etc. can easily be implemented.
2. Security – Information is NEVER deleted.  This is potentially the best form of security available.   “Who” does “What” and “When” is always tracked and changes can be “rolled back” at any time by authorized administrators.  Furthermore, only changes are transmitted vs. full data sets and even these are encrypted.
3. IP Protection – Despite all the “hype” to the contrary, it is YOU, the user who determines how, when, and where to publish data.   For example, you can maintain information in your private area, publish as read only to specified members within a private cloud…or publish to all members in a private cloud, or publish information to all members in public cloud and enable rights to use and modify data.
4. Visualization -  Despite the pervasive misunderstanding of BIM and unfortunate focus upon 3D visualization, DATA visualization and the associated development and implementation of the colloborative life-cycle management of built environment are the benefits provided by BIM.  Cloud computing will accelerate data visualization and transparency among all stakeholders of physical infrastructure and promote performance-based processes.
5. Agility – Our work and natural environments are changing at an accelerated pace.  Rapid deployment, monitoring,  and the associated modification of processes and policies is becoming increasingly important.  Cloud computing deploys process faster than any other method currently available.   There is no longer a need to rely upon internal “IT” for deployment or applications specific changes.
6. Mobility – It is neither cost effective, nor efficient to have everyone working in offices or specified work settings.  Resources need to be tapped from multiple locations enabling use of “the best of the best”, and resources with localized resources and/or capabilities.   Cloud computing allows direct, transparent access to local resources while also communicating centralized processes and procedures.
7. Centralization of Information – While information can be scattered among several data centers, it also can be instantly consolidated to provide global management in support of an organization’s mission as well as associated, efficient local action.
8. Business Continuity – True, Internet access is required, however, would you rather store your information at your location and risk catastrophic failure, or have your information at multiple locations designed with redundancy, power backup, etc.?

BIG DATA and EFFICIENT CONSTRUCTION METHODS (Integrated Project Delivery, Job Order Contracting), CLOUD COMPUTING, and BIM are here to stay, are you ready?

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier cost estimating and efficient project delivery software for JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, …

Roadmap

BIG DATA

BIM Evolution

In the long history of humankind, those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed.
– Charles Darwin

BIM, the life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology, requires a fundamental change in how the construction (Architects, Contractors, Engineers) and facility management (Owners, Service Providers, Building Product Manufactures, Oversight Groups, Building Users) sectors operate on a day-to-day basis.  

BIM, combined and  Cloud Computing are game changers.  They are disruptive technologies with integral business processes/practices that demand collaboration, transparency, and accurate/current information displayed via common terminology.

The traditional ad-hoc and adversarial business practices commonly associated with Construction and Facility Management are changing as we speak.    Design-bid-build and even Design-Build will rapidly go by the wayside in favor of the far more efficient processes of Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, and Job Order Contracting – JOC, and similar collaborative programs.  (JOC is a form of integrated project delivery specifically targeting facility renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction).

There is no escaping the change.   Standardized data architectures (Ominclass, COBie, Uniformat, Masterformat) and cost databases (i.e. RSMeans), accesses an localized via cloud computing are even now beginning to be available.   While historically, the construction and facility management sectors have lagged their counterparts (automotive, aerospace, medical, …)  relative to technology and LEAN business practices, environmental and economic market drivers and government mandates are closing the gap.

The construction and life-cycle management of the built environment requires the integration off several knowledge domains, business “best-practices”, and technologies as portrayed below.   The efficient use of this BIG DATA is enabled by the BIM, Cloud Computing, and Integrated Project Delivery methods.

The greatest challenges to these positive changes are  the CULTURE of the Construction and the Facility Management Sectors.  Also, an embedded first-cost vs. life-cycle or total cost of ownership perspective.  An the unfortunate marketing spotlight upon the technology of 3D visualization vs. BIM.   Emphasis MUST be place upon the methods of how we work on a daily basis…locally and globally  − strategic planning, capitial reinvestment planning, designing collaborating, procuring, constructing, managing and operating.  All of these business processes have different impacts upon the “facility” infrastructure and  construction supply chain, building Owners, Stakeholders, etc., yet communication terms, definitions, must be transparent and consistently applied in order to gain  greater efficiencies.

Some facility life-cycle management are already in place for the federal government facility portfolio and its only a matter of time before these are expanded and extended into all other sectors.

BIM, not 3D visualization, but true BIM or Big BIM,  and Cloud Computing will connect information from every discipline together.  It will not necessarily be a single combined model.  In fact the latter has significant drawbacks.    Each knowledge domain has independent areas of expertise and requisite process that would be diluted and marginalized if managed within one model.   That said, appropriate “roll-up” information will be available to a higher level model.   (The issue of capability and productivity marginalization can be proven by looking a ERP and IWMS systems.  Integration of best-in-class technology and business practices is always support to systems that attempt to do everything, yet do not single thing well.)

Fundamental Changes to Project Delivery for Repair, Renovation, Sustainability, and New Construction Projects MUST include:

• Qualifications Based or Best Value Selection
• Some form of pricing transparency and standardization
• Early and ongoing information-sharing among project stakeholders
• Appropriate distribution of risk
• Some form of financial incentive to drive performance / performance-based relationships

Metrics for BIM – Total Cost of Ownership and Facility Life-cycle Management

BIM Metrics

If you think the value of BIM is in pretty 3D pictures, don’t both to read the attached article…   there is too much for you to learn.    Remember…  “you can’t manage what you don’t measure.”

Metrics/Cost Models

􀀹 FCI (Facility Condition Index) = DM (Deferred Maintenance) + CR (Capital Renewal)/
CRV (Current Replacement Value)
􀀹 AI (Adaptive Index) or PI (Programmatic Index) = PR (Program Requirements)/
CRV (Current Replacement Value)
􀀹 FQI (Facility Quality Index) or Quality Index or Index = FCI (Facility Condition Index)+ AI (Adaptive Index)
􀀹 Annualized Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) per building per gross area = Rate per square foot
􀀹 Annualized TCO per building/Current replacement value = Percent of Current Replacement Value (CRV)
􀀹 Annualized TCO per building/Net assignable square feet = Cost rate per net assignable square
feet per building
􀀹 Annualized TCO per building/Non-assignable square feet = Cost rate per non-assignable square
feet per building
􀀹 Annualized TCO per building/Building Interior square feet = Cost rate per interior square foot per
building
􀀹 Total Cost (inclusive of construction, design, project management, etc.)/square foot vs. Regionalized
Applicable Standard Reference Cost, Percent Variance
􀀹 AI (Adaptation Index) or PI (Programmatic Index) = PR (Program Requirements)/
CRV (Current Replacement Value)
􀀹 Uptime or Downtime – Defined in percent, as amount of time asset is suitable for the program(s)
served.
􀀹 Facility Operating Gross Square Foot (GSF) Index (SAM Performance Indicator: APPA 2003)
􀀹 Custodial Costs per square foot
􀀹 Grounds Keeping Costs per square foot
􀀹 Energy Costs per square foot
􀀹 Energy Usage
􀀹 Utility Costs per square foot
􀀹 Waste Removal Costs per square foot
􀀹 Facility Operating Current Replacement Value (CRV) Index (SAM Performance Indicator: APPA 2003)
􀀹 Churn Rate
􀀹 Utilization Rate
􀀹 Planned/Preventive Maintenance Costs per square foot
􀀹 Emergency Maintenance Costs as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures.
􀀹 Unscheduled/Unplanned Maintenance Costs as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures.
􀀹 Repair costs (man hours and materials) as a percentage of Annual Operations Expenditures
􀀹 FCI (Facility Condition Index) = DM (Deferred Maintenance) + CR (Capital Renewal)/
CRV (Current Replacement Value)
􀀹 Recapitalization Rate, Reinvestment Rate
􀀹 Deferred Maintenance Backlog
􀀹 Facilities Deterioration Rate

STATEMENT OF KEVIN KAMPSCHROER DIRECTOR OFFICE OF FEDERAL HIGH-PERFORMANCE GREEN BUILDINGS OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTWIDE POLICY U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

What is the Green Building Certification System?    What is Federal government’s role in using sound science and peer-reviewed studies to evaluate and implement advanced building technologies?

Congress has set statutory goals for improvements in performance – from reducing energy and water intensity across the Federal government’s real property inventory  relative pursuing net-zero energy buildings…. but is any project truly being made?

Executive Orders in two successive Administrations also have been issued to accomplish sustainability targets, but is anything truly being done in a productive manner?

The GSA is chartered to lead high performance building efforts including Congressionally-mandated review of green building certification systems.

As the GSA’s success is measured in how well it aids other agencies in their effectiveness, it must address all core aspects of sustainability initiatives including: efficient project delivery methods (integrated project delivery – IPD and job order contracting – JOC), capital planning and management,  and the disposal of Federal assets.

Congress created the  Office of Federal High Performance Green Buildings – OFHPGB (Chartered in December 2007 under Section 436 of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) ) to enable and enhance Federal leadership in the field of large scale sustainable real property portfolio policy, management and operations.

Goals established in 2007 include:

Energy managers to complete annual comprehensive energy and water evaluations for approximately 25 percent of covered facilities, with each facility evaluated at least once every 4 years;

30 percent of hot water demand in new Federal buildings and major renovations be met with solar hot water equipment provided it is life-cycle cost effective;

Agencies use energy-efficient lighting fixtures and bulbs in Federal buildings;

Sustainable design principles to be applied to new Federal buildings and major renovations of Federal buildings;

Aggressive fossil fuel-generated energy reductions for new Federal buildings and major renovations of Federal buildings, phased-in through 2030, and

Agencies reduce total energy consumption per gross square foot in their new and existing Federal buildings by 30 percent from a FY2003 baseline by FY2015.

In 2009, the President signed Executive Order 13514 – Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance which added the following:

Reduce potable water intensity by 26 percent in FY2020 compared to FY2007;

Reduce industrial, landscaping, and agricultural water use 2 percent annually, leading to a 20 percent reduction by FY2020 compared to FY2010;

Ensure all new Federal buildings entering the design phase in 2020 or later be designed to achieve net zero energy by 2030, and

Have at least 15 percent of existing buildings and leases meet the Guiding Principles for Federal Leadership in High Performance and Sustainable Buildings by 2015 with continued progress towards 100 percent.

To this date one might argue that little has been done.  For example the GSA and most, if not all other Federal Government non-DOD Departement and Agencies don’t even have a standardized job order contracting (JOC) program to enable efficient implementation of sustainability projects.

The DOD however, especially the Air Force has full documented and working JOC programs (called SABER in the Air Force), and the Army has made some progress as well.

Thus in summary, the GSA is still in the mode of “Putting the tools together”, to allow the Federal government to make strides in achieving the aggressive performance goals set by Congress and pursued by the Administration.

The question however is, do we have the time to wait?

 

 

Reducing the Federal Government Real Property Footprint 2012 – Civilian Property Realignment Act – CPRA – H.R. 1734

The  “Civilian Property Realignment Act,” (CPRA) H.R. 1734, a bill  to reduce the size of the federal government’s footprint and save taxpayers billions of dollars through realignment and consolidation of the federal real estate portfolio was just passed (February 7, 2012) by the U.S. House of Representatives and is headed for the U.S. Senate.

The bill was introduced by Representative Jeff Denham, R-A, chair of the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, and had thirty-one (31) House member co-sponsors.

Federal Real Property Bill

The White House Office of Management and Budget estimates that the benefit to taxpayers from passage of the proposed legislation will be at least US$15 billion.  A one-time appropriation of US$88 million is called for, after which proceeds from the sale of excess federal properties would be used to repay the treasury and provide taxpayers a 60% windfall on any property sold.

“I believe the potential to save billions of dollars is real,” said Denham. “Given our trillion dollar deficit and skyrocketing debt, we must examine every area of government and look for ways to cut spending. My bill establishes a nine person Civilian Property Realignment Commission to take politics out of the process, increase transparency and save billions of taxpayer dollars.”

Life-cycle costs are also a component of the legislation via arequirement that  federal agencies conduct a full life cycle cost analysis of any building design, construction, or operations and maintenance projects.

The federal government is the largest single property owner in the United States and has the opportunity and resources to lead the way in  the development and implementation of integrated building operation, maintenance, and space utilization practices.

 

Why Focus on High-Performance Buildings?

From the materials produced to construct buildings and the energy used to operate them, buildings consume vast amounts of resources and are responsible for nearly half of all greenhouse gas emissions. High-performance buildings, which address human, environmental, economic and total societal impact, are the result of the application of the highest level design, construction, operation and maintenance principles—a paradigm change for the built environment.

• Our homes, offices, schools, and other buildings consume 40% of the primary energy and 70% of the electricity in the U.S. annually.
• Buildings consume about 12% of the potable water in this country.
• The construction of buildings and their related infrastructure consume approximately 60% of all raw materials used in the U.S. economy.
• Buildings account for 39% of U.S. CO2 emissions a year. This approximately equals the combined carbon emissions of Japan, France, and the United Kingdom.
• Americans spend about 90% of their time indoors.
• Poor indoor environmental quality is detrimental to the health of all Americans, especially our children and elderly.
• Residential and commercial building design and construction should effectively guard against natural and human caused events and disasters (fire, water, wind, noise, crime and terrorism).
• The U.S. should continue to improve the features of new buildings, and adapt and maintain existing buildings, to changing balances in our needs and responsibilities for health, safety, energy efficiency and usability by all segments of society.

The Benefits of BIM, Life-cycle Management, Sustainability and High Performance Buildings

In many ways BIM, Life-cycle facility management, sustainability, and high performance buildings are interchangeable terms… some of us just don’t know it yet.

BIM is the life-cycle management of facilities (vertical and horizontal built environment), support by digital technology.  Thus BIM is part process and part software.  Life-cycle management includes all physical and functional conditions of a structure (physical condition of major systems, sub-systems, components, functional conditions-suitability for current mission, life/safety/security, access/ADA, utilization, ….) and all associated strategic, capital, and tactical planning.  High performance building management and sustainability also includes these factors, with a focus upon environmental impacts-Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality.

The benefits of BIM, Life-cycle management, sustainability, and high performance building strategies go well beyond financial considerations, though productivity and improved performance is sorely lacking within the AEC communities.

The following are just a few of the benefits of Sustainability and High Performance Buildings:

- Improved building occupant productivity ( studies indicate that approximatley $260B Billion lost annually due to poor indoor air quality-Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory).  Productivity gains have also been linked to factors such as day lighting (7-8%), temperature, ventilation,

-  Goodwill, enhanced image.

-  Reduce environmental impact / carbon footprint:  energy, water, waste, pollution (CO2 emissions, pesticides, fertilizers, …)

To put facility costs into perspective, here’s an example from the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS).  Annual costs in the private office building sector average $200 per square foot for salaries, $20 per square foot for building costs, and $2 per square foot for energy use – a 100:10:1 ratio.   It is therefore relatively easy to calculate direct cost savings relative to productivity and energy improvements.

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software for efficient construction project delivery – visual cost estimating and project management – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, IDIQ, POCA, BOA, and exclusive enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database.

 

Fram,ework for High Performanc Building Managment, BIM, and Sustainability

 

 

References:

Source: Quantifying the Hidden Benefits of High-Performance Building, TAMU Mays Business School Cooperative Study, December 2011

Bryson York, Emily. (2010, August 28). Goodwill, better business grow from going green. ChicagoTribune.com.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2010). LEED for New Construction.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Gregory.(2006). Greening America’s Schools Costs and Benefits.
Beko, Gabriel, Geo Clausen, & Charles J. Weschler. (2008, October). Is the use of particle air filtration justified? Costs
and benefits of filtration with regard to health effects, building cleaning and occupant productivity. Building and
Environment, 43(10), 1647-1657.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
U.S. Green building Counsel. (2009). LEED® for Retail.
Gardner, Ken. (2010). Overcoming Barriers to Green Building.
Miller, Norm & Dave Pogue. (2009). Do Green Buildings Make Dollars and Sense?
WBDG Sustainable Committee. (2010). Sustainable.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Issa, M.H., J.H. Rankin, & A.J. Christian. (2010, January). Canadian practitioners’ perception of
research work investigating the cost premiums, long-term costs and health and productivity benefits
of green buildings. Building and Environment, 45(2010), 1698-1711.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 2(3), 193-208.
Hepner, Christina M. & Richard A. Boser. (2006, December). Architects’ Perceptions of LEED Indoor
Environmental Quality Checklist Items on Employee Productivity. International Journal of Construction Education and
Research, 2(3), 193-208.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
Hoffman, Andrew & Rebecca Henn. (2008). Overcoming the Social and Psychological Barriers to Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Romm, Joesph & William Browning. (1997). Green Building and the Bottom Line.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their
Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Daylighting.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. High Performance Lighting.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Gregerson, John. (2010). The Thermal Comfort Zone.
Fisk, William J. (2000). Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building
Energy Efficiency.
NSF/IUCRC Center for Building performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon University. Mixed Mode Conditioning Systems.
International Society of Sustainability Professionals
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Fisk, William J. (2002). How IEQ Affects Health, Productivity.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Kats, Greg. (2003). The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Building.
Lipow, Gar W. Cooling It: No Hair Shirt Solutions to Global Warming.
Cascio, Wayne and John Boudreau. (2008). Investing in People. (p. 195-215). Pearson Education, Inc.

Behind the High-Performance Federal Buildings Act

---

Reduction of  federal building energy footprint is an important initiative.

Focus must shift to the renovation, repair, and sustainability of existing buildings and associated efficient project delivery methods.   BIM and Cloud computing can integrate the currently disparate processes associated with facility capital planning, management, renovation, and maintenance…. and make enable the widespread use of efficient project delivery methods such as integrated project delivery (IPD) and job order contracting (JOC).

The focus on BIM as 3D visualization and design is a distraction we can no longer afford.

 

BIM is the life-cycle management of facilities supported by digital technology.  It is the use of robust business processes and standardized taxonomies and metrics.

The tools to significantly reduce the carbon footprint of the built environment are readily available.  Products and services  manufactured here in the United States, the use of which would also help our economy.

The  High-Performance Buildings Caucus was started in 2007 with a goal to make a real difference in our economy and environment. Last year,  the “Federal Buildings Personnel Training Act”  was introduce to piece of legislation ensure that people working on federal buildings are properly trained to do the work their job requires. This bill was signed into law at the end of 2010, however, the   General Administration Services (GSA) is lagging in its proper implementation.  Knowledge of life-cycle facility management is critical to reaching the goals of efficient facility life-cycle management.

The High Performance Federal Buildings Act is intended to require analysis of the full life-cycle costs for buildings.    It also requires regulations for the use of energy and water in federal buildings to reflect the most current codes and standards.   The Act will reduce energy footprint speed compliance with mandated standards.

It is very important to use of life-cycle cost analysis on any construction, alteration or acquisition of a building.  Facility condition assessments and commissioning are also key elements in this regard that must be addressed in a standardized manner.

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software for efficient project delivery, cost estimating, and project management – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, IDIQ, POCA, BOA.

Building Product Data – BIM Life-cycle Information / Data

” what we need is open, structured building information that we can share “

SPie Overview

Product Templates

An Example

 

Example (con't)

 

 

Process

 

Source of above -  Bill East, CSI BIM Committee Presentation – July 2011

 

BIMF - A BIM Framework

 

via www.4Clicks.com  – Premier Cost Estimating and Project Management Software for Efficient Project Delivery – JOC, IPD, SABER, SATOC, IDIQ, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA.

 

Bill East, Ph.D., P.E., F. ASCE

US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research & Development Center

 

Beyond LEED – Standards for the Operations and Maintenance of High Performance / Green Buildings – ASHRAE

Proposed Operation and Maintenance Guideline from ASHRAE

Many buildings with great designs fade from green to grey when operation and maintenance isn’t carried out as intended, especially in regard to energy conserving systems.

A proposed guideline from ASHRAE, currently open for public comment, will help improve the performance of all buildings by providing guidance on optimizing operation and maintenance of buildings to achieve the lowest economic and environmental life cycle cost without sacrificing safety or functionality.

ASHRAE Guideline 32P, Sustainable, High Performance Operation and Maintenance, is open for public comment until July 4, 2011.

ASHRAE – 32

“This guideline outlines steps that can be applied to any building to move its operation and maintenance function toward high performance,” Michael Bobker, chair of the guideline 32P committee, said. “Buildings can be designed to be high performance, but if they are not operated well that performance will not be delivered. This guideline is part of ASHRAE’s effort to strengthen its guidance for existing buildings.”

The guideline will apply to the ongoing operational practices for buildings and systems with respect to energy efficiency, occupant comfort, indoor air quality, health and safety. These systems include the building envelope, HVAC&R, plumbing, complementary energy systems, and utilities and electrical systems.

GDL_32_PR_Final_ChairApproved

“Modern air conditioning systems protect the health, comfort and productivity of building occupants,” ASHRAE Presidential Member Bill Harrison, whose presidential theme focused on the need for operation and maintenance, said. “Unfortunately, even very well designed systems waste a great deal of energy when they are not operated and maintained properly. ASHRAE’s Guideline 32 attacks wasted energy by helping people from the executive suite to the powerhouse understand how to efficiently manage the sophisticated systems that produce healthy comfort in today’s buildings. This is a giant step forward as we strive to use only the energy that produces value in our buildings.”

Studies and documented experience have shown that improved operational strategies alone could save 10 to 40 percent in energy.

These savings came about through application of expert knowledge to operation and maintenance practices, not large capital investment, Bobker noted. “We must first upgrade and then maintain the capabilities of the operations staff, which is where Guideline 32 will help play a role,” he said.

The guideline contains recommendations for three levels of building oversight: senior managers, facility managers and technicians. Checklists for tracking that appropriate steps are being taken to move toward high-performance operation and maintenance are included for each.

Among the items on the checklist for facility managers are:
o Develop and implement protocols for good facility/system documentation.
o Investigate, identify and implement appropriate levels of building intelligence.
o Identify and implement appropriate performance metrics.
o Benchmark against other similar facilities.
o Establish performance baselines and targets. Institute a system for regular reporting and evaluation.

Bobker said the guideline will provide the next steps beyond compliance with ANSI/ASHRAE/ACCA Standard 180, Standard Practice for Inspection and Maintenance of Commercial Building HVAC Systems, and provide concepts, methods and details that meet the intent of the “minimum standards of care” under ANSI/ASHRAE/USGBC/IES Standard 189.1, Standard for the Design of High Performance Green Buildings.