Course Overview: Commissioning (Cx) and Re- or retro-commissioning (RCx), or the process of ensuring that a new or existing building’s performance continues to meet or exceed its design over time, is increasingly the target of government policy and the beneficiary of market forces. New Federal, State and Local mandates, in conjunction with voluntary, market-based standards, are poised to transform the Cx/RCx marketplace. What began as a tool to ensure that commercial building owners get their money’s worth from design and construction professionals, commissioning is now known to be the most cost-effective measure available for reducing energy use, lowering operating costs and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions in buildings. A recent meta-analysis by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that Re/Retro-commissioning yields a median 16% energy savings with a payback time of 1.1 years for a cash-on-cash return of 91%. The public sector, in an effort to both promote and secure the environmental, social and economic benefits of energy efficiency, are incorporating Cx/RCx into new policies. Increasingly, Cx/RCx is the direct focus of government policy aimed at boosting energy efficiency in the built environment. Over the past decade, a series of Federal laws, executive orders and other regulations have resulted in requirements for commissioning and retro-commissioning in all Federal buildings. The results of these policies have been to improve Federal energy management, while providing an instance of leadership-by-example that has increased the profile of Cx/RCx elsewhere. As a result, Cx/RCx is now the beneficiary of government or utility financial incentives or even the force of law. Ultimately, Cx/RCx has the potential to save building owners and operators more than $30 billion a year in energy costs by 2030.Continuing to underutilize this cost-effective quality assurance tool could not only be unlawful, but bad business. This course shall describe the Total Building Commissioning Process. Case studies that followed LEED Fundamental and Enhanced Commissioning guidelines for newly built and renovated facilities for the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security shall be presented and analyzed. Perceptions and expectations of the Cx process from the perspective of all stake-holders; owners, designers, contractors, and commissioning specialists shall be presented and discussed. The purpose is to illustrate that there are varying levels of agreement on “What Commissioning Is and Is Not.” Through the use of audience interaction, the instructor will illustrate that LEED Commissioning does not establish the final boundaries and benefits for the overall Total Building Commissioning process. The overall potential energy conservation and utility cost-saving benefits that could be captured go beyond LEED and enhance our country’s ability to achieve the goal of energy independence. Through lecture, written material, class discussion and interactive activities, students will learn the following material: Definitions of Commissioning (Cx) and Retro-Commissioning (RCx) The Cx & RCx Process – Similarities and Differences Objectives & Benefits Requirements & Attributes of a Certified Cx Provider Cx Standards, Regulations & References LEED and Cx Myths, Reality & Managing Expectations (Case Studies) Learning Objectives: Learning Objective 1: At the end of this course, participants will be familiar with the Commissioning and Retro-Commissioning process, applicable codes and standards, and be able to differentiate between the two in terms of similarity and differences. Learning Objective 2: At the end of this course, participants will understand the overall objectives, benefits, and potential results of the Commissioning process and how this relates to improved building operational efficiencies. Learning Objective 3: At the end of this course, participants will be able to distinguish through case study examination the myths from the reality of this process to include examining stakeholder expectations, contract language and issue resolution techniques. Learning Objective 4: At the end of this course, participants will become familiar with sustainability and energy conservation requirements as it relates to commissioning by examination of applicable legislative directives, Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC), Standards and Guidelines, and Building Rating Systems (Such as LEED, Green Globes).
Originally Presented: October 30, 2014 Course Length: 1.5 Hours Course Credit Hours: 1.5 PDH, 1.5 AIA LUs/HSW **For AIA credit, please email Belle Febbraro at Bfebbraro@same.org with your name, email address, and AIA #. Moderator: Rad Delaney, AIA, F.SAME, CDM Smith Speakers: Mitch Cornelius, Mortenson Construction Inc. Rachel Riopel Wiley, HDR Architecture Inc. Jason Fairchild, USACE Dean McCarns, NAVFAC Course Overview: What better way to understand the application of building information modeling in practice than to hear about it from the agencies and practitioners themselves? Join us to review project case studies outlining, not only the successes but revealing the most valuable lessons learned by all stakeholders. This session will include a panel of practitioners and agency representatives to dissect and discuss the requirements developed by the NAVFAC and USACE agencies.
ORIGINALLY PRESENTED JANUARY 15, 2014 Course Presenters: Col. Keith Welch, Chief, Environmental Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and the Environment Lisa Stanley, VP Product Management, U.S. Green Building Council Erin Shaffer, Green Building Initiative, Vice President for Federal Outreach Paula Shaw, PE, LEED BD&C, Program Manager, Built Infrastructure, Air Force Civil Engineer Center Eric Mucklow, AIA, CPHC, LEED BD&C, Building Technology Program Manager, HQ USACE Julie Kephart-Jones, RA, LEED BD&C, Sustainable Development Criteria Manager, NAVFAC ATL Col. Keith Welch, Chief, Environmental Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Installations and the Environment Lisa Stanley, VP Product Management, U.S. Green Building Council Erin Shaffer, Green Building Initiative, Vice President for Federal Outreach Paula Shaw, PE, LEED BD&C, Program Manager, Built Infrastructure, Air Force Civil Engineer Center Eric Mucklow, AIA, CPHC, LEED BD&C, Building Technology Program Manager, HQ USACE Julie Kephart-Jones, RA, LEED BD&C, Sustainable Development Criteria Manager, NAVFAC ATL - See more at: http://www.same.org/index.php/component/content/article/201-uncategorised/942-course-documents-sustainability-assessment-tools-for-new-and-existing-facilities#sthash.tGWS1EZh.dpuf Karen Erger, Vice President, Director of Practice Management, Lockton - See more at: http://www.same.org/index.php/component/content/article/201-uncategorised/895#sthash.jkKOkNhF.dpuf Karen Erger, Vice President, Director of Practice Management, Lockton - See more at: http://www.same.org/index.php/component/content/article/201-uncategorised/895#sthash.jkKOkNhF.dpuf Course Length: 2 Hours Course Credit Hours: 2 PDHs, 2 AIA LUs/HSW 1.5 PDHs, 1.5 AIA LUs/HSW Course Overview: Join us for an overview of federal mandates, High Performance Sustainable Building Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) and sustainability assessment tools. The Department of Defense (DOD) published the High Performance Sustainable Building Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) on sustainability on March 1, 2013. The UFC pulls together all known federal criteria including the High Performance Sustainable Building Guiding Principles (GP), EISA 2005, EPACT 2005 and Executive Orders 13423 and 13514. This webinar will discuss the link between federal mandates, UFC 1-200-02, and sustainability assessment tools. It will also include descriptions and how to use five assessment tools: the U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) GP assessment tool, the Green Building Institute’s (GBI) GP assessment tool, and Sustainability and Energy Record Cards for the Army, Navy and Air Force (AF). Presenters will describe how the record cards will be used throughout the life of the buildings and how that data collected will support the Annual Energy Management Report required by the Office of Management and Budget. The Department of Defense (DOD) published the High Performance Sustainable Building Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) on sustainability on March 1, 2013. The UFC pulls together all known federal criteria including the High Performance Sustainable Building Guiding Principles (GP), EISA 2005, EPACT 2005 and Executive Orders 13423 and 13514. This webinar will discuss the link between federal mandates, UFC 1-200-02, and sustainability assessment tools. It will also include descriptions and how to use five assessment tools: the U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) GP assessment tool, the Green Building Institute’s (GBI) GP assessment tool, and Sustainability and Energy Record Cards for the Army, Navy and Air Force (AF). Presenters will describe how the record cards will be used throughout the life of the buildings and how that data collected will support the Annual Energy Management Report required by the Office of Management and Budget. - See more at: http://www.same.org/index.php/component/content/article/201-uncategorised/914#sthash.7aSYX7f5.dpuf
ORIGINALLY PRESENTED SEPTEMBER 24 - 26, 2013 Course Title: Competing Successfully for DoD A-E Contracts (SF330) Course Presenters: Camille Krolikowski Course Length: 10 Modules / 4 Hours Course Credit Hours: 4 PDHs / 4 AIA LUs Course Overview: This course gives an overview of the Department of Defense Architect-Engineer Evaluation and Selection Processes with a special focus on key aspects of planning, preparing and submitting winning SF330 proposals according to Federal Acquisition Regulations and Federal AE Contracting Guidance. An understanding of the evaluation and selection processes driving the SF330 format is invaluable in producing quality and highly competitive proposals for Federal contracts. Preparing and submitting proposals in competing for Architect-Engineer Contracts is time-consuming, resource intensive and often financially risky, especially in highly competitive economic times. There is more to winning a contract for AE services than the submission of a single SF330. An understanding of the evaluation and selection processes driving the SF330 format is invaluable in producing quality and highly competitive SF330s. The course will cover: Background of FAR and guidance for DoD AE Evaluation and Selection Processes Typical solicitation requirements Expected content for highly competitive SF 330s Hands on exercises for improving SF330 material Evaluations, selection processes, and award notifications for AE contract competitions Debrief protocol Protests and when they are appropriate Learning Objectives: Knowledge of Federal Acquisition Requirements (FARs) Familiarization with typical FEDBIZOPS solicitations Learning about DoD AE Evaluation and Selection Processes Educating proposal writers on competitive content of SF330s Attachments: Modules 1-2 Handouts Modules 3-4 Handouts Q&A Responses to DOD Contracts - Modules 1-4 Modules 6-7 Handouts Modules 8-9 Handouts Q&A Responses to DOD Contracts - Modules 6-9 Presenter Bio: Camille Krolikowski Useful Resources - Websites
NREL - Integrating Measurable Energy Efficiency Performance Specifications Into Design-Build Acquisition and Delivery
Course Title: Integrating Measurable Energy Efficiency Performance Specifications Into Design-Build Acquisition and Delivery Course Presenters: Paul Torcellini & Shanti Pless Course Length: 3 Modules / 2.5 hours Course Credit Hours: 2.5 Hours Course Overview: Through a series of new construction projects at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and ongoing collaborations between NREL and industry, it has been shown that highly energy-efficient buildings can be procured within typical construction budgets. Success stories include NREL’s Research Support Facility (RSF), Energy Systems Integration Facility (ESIF), and Parking Structure. An energy efficiency goal was the foundation for each project. A goal, though, is not sufficient for success. An acquisition strategy that incentivizes an innovative design and construction team to meet the energy goal in design and operations is also critical. Using a well-planned process, owners can be confident that their projects will have system-integrated, cost-effective efficiency strategies and renewable technologies that perform as predicted. Specifically, this course investigates why aggressive energy efficiency is a necessary and achievable goal for commercial buildings. It considers goal setting and how the form of an energy goal can influence the result. The course looks at the NREL new construction examples, which used maximum energy use targets and subsystem energy criteria; lessons learned and best practices from these case studies are shared. Lastly, general steps are given to assist owners in designing and facilitating an energy-focused process for their construction projects. Learning Objectives: Define the most important attributes of an acquisition process that will ensure aggressive energy performance Understand how to define whole building and subsystem energy goals Write draft contract language that will help balance cost and energy performance Integrate measurable energy use requirements into the design-build delivery process Attachments: Module 1 Handouts Module 2 Handouts Module 3 Handouts Presenter Bio: Paul Torcellini Presenter Bio: Shanti Pless
ORIGINALLY PRESENTED JUNE 27, 2013 Written by: Nadja Turek, P.E., LEED AP BD+C Paula J. Loomis, FAIA, LEED AP BD+C, PMP Course Credit Hours: 1.5 PDHs, 1.5 AIA LUs/ HSW Course Overview: In March of 2013 the new UFC 1-200-02 titled “High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements” was released. The UFC was developed by the Tri-service Sustainability Discipline Working Group (DWG) and will become the common standard for HPSB requirements across the services. The UFC provides minimum requirements and coordinating guidance for planning, designing, constructing, renovating and managing DoD facilities to meet sustainable design requirements, federal mandates, and reduce total cost of ownership for the military. Attendees will hear from a member of the DWG about the future use of the new UFC among the services in their facility O&M programs and design and construction programs. And you will also hear from an A/E practitioner about how the UFC will affect providing services and winning work for military clients. Attendees will gain an understanding of the technical content and requirements of the new UFC and how it differs from previous management and procurement practices. It also addresses sustainability practices that can and should be implemented across an installation. Come learn how the new UFC helps to unify and clarify the Services sustainable building requirements and programs. Learning Objectives: At the end of this course, participants will be able to identify appropriate application for and use of the new UFC 1-200-02 titled “High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements” when executing work for/with the military services At the end of this course, participants will be able to understand the technical requirements outlined in the new UFC At the end of this course, participants will be able to learn how the UFC applies to their own work with/for the military At the end of this course, participants will be able to understand commonalities and differences between the intended use of the UFC by the military services, and the services unique HPSB policies
3 Courses: Project Delivery Methods for Water & Wastewater Infrastructure, Design-Build and Construction Management at Risk - Presented by Charles "Chuck" Williams Conducting the Procurement Process for Design-Build and CMAR Water/Wastewater Infrastructure Projects - Presented by Bryan Bedell Managing Risk & Liability for Alternative Delivery Water / Wastewater Infrastructure - Presented by Peter Hughes
Conducting the Procurement Process for Design-Build and CMAR Water/Wastewater Infrastructure Projects
Conducting the Design-Build and CMAR Procurement Process for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects outlines the major steps in which a successful procurement process for Design-build and CMAR projects for the water and wastewater infrastructure should occur. The contents of this video and materials are intended to provide knowledge and information about: A decision-making process on a Project Delivery Method for Water or Wastewater Infrastructure Projects Addressing the steps Owner’s take in Planning for a Design-Build and CMAR project, including critical factors for success. Conduct a successful procurement process for a design-build (DB) or construction management-at-risk (CMAR) project Developing an RFQ and RFP for a DB/CMAR project Employing effective, commonly-used evaluation criteria for your project, and Conducting and participating in the scoring and selection process for a design-build firm
Managing Risk and Liability discusses the risk allocation and liability in design-build and CMAR water infrastructure projects and offers practical suggestions for applying, where appropriate, key principles of allocating risks to the party best able to control or finance them. It defines: Risk issues for Owners and Design-Builders or those involved in CMAR water infrastructure projects, What undesirable events may occur, How likely is it that they will occur, If they do occur, how severe will the adverse impact be, How should the risks be managed and/or mitigated, and What party is best able to mitigate or absorb each risk
Understanding Design-Build and CMAR Project Delivery Methods provides the fundamental framework associated with alternative project delivery methods for the water and wastewater infrastructure. It is intended to provide knowledge and information about: The potential benefits and advantages, as well as the challenges and disadvantages of each delivery method, Owner planning issues and criteria for use in selecting and implementing alternative project delivery methods, and Critical factors for success in using Design-Build and Construction Management-at-Risk
Design Build and Sustainability Written by: Suzanne Sowinski, President and Director of Sustainable Design Sowinski Sullivan Architects, PC (SSA) Course Length: 3 Modules / 2 Hours Course Credit Hours: 2 Hours Course Overview: This course assumes that the student has a basic knowledge of the various project delivery methods and preferably has taken the Fundamentals of Project Delivery course offered by DBIA. At the end of this course the attendee will: Know the history of sustainability and affects on the environment See the relationship between sustainable design and design build Review current standards, codes, mandates and incentives for green design See how important BIM is as a tool to integrate design Have reviewed a few design techniques to help reduce carbon emission Beable to see how a whole building mindset is important when using life cycle costing analysis and value engineering early in the design process Know how to put the right team together to avoid contractual risk See how a completed design build project was successful in collaboration and achieving sustainable goals to receive a LEED certification Attachments: Sustainability Module 1 Notes Handout (Slides) Sustainability Module 2 Notes Handout (Slides) Sustainability Module 3 Notes Handout (Slides) Suzanne Sowinksi - Presenter Bio DBIA Position Statements: Use of Stipends Organization of DB Entity Role of Qualification in Selection of a Design-Builder Integrated Project Delivery Best Value Selection Contract Incentives and Design-Build Rethinking Acquisition Strategies Design Excellence
Course Title: BRIDGING DOCUMENTS: Benefits, Risks and Effects on Liability Course Presenters: Tom Porter, JD, DBIA Course Length: 5 Modules / 1 Hour Course Credit Hours: 1 Hours Course Overview: Bridging refers to a variant of design-build in which the owner furnishes extensive preliminary design, including substantial prescriptive specifications. This course describes the best practices that the owner and the design-builder can use to promote successful outcomes for those projects in which bridging is incorporated. At the end of this course participants will be able to: Know how bridging differs from design-build relying on performance criteria Identify potential benefits and disadvantages from use of bridging documents Appreciate how bridging affects the liability of project participants Understand best practices associated with use of bridging Attachments: Bridging-Module 1 (handouts) Bridging-Module 2 (handouts) Bridging-Module 3 (handouts) Bridging-Module 4 (handouts) Bridging-Module 5 (handouts) Use of Stipends Tom Porter - Presenter Bio
Course Title: High Performance Incentive Contracting Course Presenters: Diana R. Hoag & Matthew B. Ellis Course Length: 5 Modules / 3.25 Hours Course Credit Hours: 4 Hours Course Overview: Design-build project delivery proves more than any other method that “ordinary people can do extraordinary things.” Writing contracts that are successful at effectively motivating people, however, is central to making this happen. Successful motivation requires a well-written contract that provides appropriate awards and incentives. In traditional design-bid-build, contracts often contemplate only failure, with provisions and clauses that address what the adverse consequences will be once failure occurs. This presumption of failure results in contracts that do not contemplate how the contracting parties might appropriately reward one another for success and excellent performance. The most powerful design-build contracts, on the other hand, are written to include things such as award fees and incentives to promote cooperation, teamwork and collaboration. Combined with the effective use of performance requirements, these “aspirational contracts” help the contracting parties to achieve extraordinary success. At the end of this course attendees will be able to: Describe the basic structure of a design-build contract Define and delineate between award fees and incentives Describe the mechanics of incentive and award fee arrangements Identify various clauses and checklists used in incentive contracting Attachments: HP Contracting-Module 1 (handouts) HP Contracting-Module 2 (handouts) HP Contracting-Module 3 (handouts) HP Contracting-Module 4 (handouts) HP Contracting-Module 5 (handouts) Diana R. Hoag - Presenter Bio Matthew B. Ellis - Presenter Bio Use of Stipends Best Value Selection Contract Incentives and Design-Build, Rethinking Acquisition Strategies Integrated Project Delivery Organization of DB Entity Role of Qualification in Selection of a Design-Builder Wedges 2-5 Preamble_4 Mar 06 Sample Linked Incentives Contract Clause_4 Mar 06 Sample Award Fee Contract Clause_4 Mar 06 Exerpts from DBIA Guide 530_4 Mar 06
Course Title: Super Charged Source Selection Course Presenter: Diana R. Hoag Course Length: 4 Modules / 3.5 Hours Course Credit Hours: 4 Hours Course Overview: An effective source selection is one of the key elements of successful design-build projects delivery. In a competitive process where cost is not the sole criterion – such as best-value source selection – the selection process varies dramatically from traditional design-bid-build practices. Unfortunately there is little training which teaches techniques and skills essential to making that process achieve its potential for success. This course will serve as a primer, providing an overview of the two-phase design-build source selection process – the initial down select to identify the most highly qualified firms, as well as the final down select to choose the ultimate winner. At the end of the session attendees will be able to: Describe the key elements involved in qualifying a firm during phase one source selection; describe the steps involved in a two-phase selection and the key actions necessary to ensure success; identify the typical components of a “request for qualifications” documents; select key members needed for an effective evaluation team; determine appropriate evaluation factors and processes for the project; assess the appropriate number of evaluation factors for a particular project; describe various methods for scoring proposals including numerical, color scoring or adjectival rating. By the end of this course you will be able to: Describe the design-build model and process, and the role source selection plays in them Describe the steps involved in a design-build two-phase competitive process, i.e., source selection, and the key actions necessary to ensure success Identify the typical components of a “request for qualifications” document Describe the key elements involved in qualifying a firm during Phase I source selection Select key members needed for an effective evaluation team Determine appropriate Phase II evaluation factors and processes for the project Describe various methods for scoring proposals including numerical, color scoring or adjectival rating Attachments: SC Source Selection-Module 1 (handouts) SC Source Selection-Module 2 (handouts) SC Source Selection-Module 3 (handouts) SC Source Selection-Module 4 (handouts) Use of Stipends Best Value Selection Contract Incentives and Design-Build Rethinking Acquisition Strategies Integrated Project Delivery Organization of DB Entity Role of Qualification in Selection of a Design-Builder Diana R. Hoag - Presenter Bio Memorial RFQ Past Performance Telephone Interview Questions
Course Title: FUNDAMENTALS OF PROJECT DELIVERY Course Presenters: Bill Godwin, Rex Huffman and Craig Unger Course Length: 8 Modules / 2.5 Hours Course Credit Hours: 3 Hours Course Overview: This course provides a general overview of the attributes of all the major project delivery systems, procurement methodologies and contracting approaches. It sets the stage for DBIA’s other three core courses. At the end of this course, you will be able to: Explain the history and evolution of the project delivery system & define project delivery system terms Define procurement, describe various procurement methods, & understand how to choose the procurement method best suited for a given project Describe the framework for project delivery, including major Owner decisions & business goals Communicate the process for selecting an appropriate project delivery system Describe the four common types of contract structures & explain how to select an appropriate payment method List of Documents for Download: Bio of presenters: Bill Godwin, Rex Huffman and Craig Unger Presentation slides for each module in PDF Notes Page format Fundamentals - Case Study 1 Fundamentals – Case Study 3 Fundamentals – Case Studies 4 and 5 Position Statements on: Best Value Selection Integrated Project Delivery Organization of the Design-Build Entity Role of Qualifications in Selection of a Design-Builder Use of Stipends Contract Incentives and Design-Build - Rethinking Acquisition Strategies
Designated Design-Build Professional Online Exam Prep, facilitated by Craig Unger. Total Course Length: 8 Modules / 4 Hours Download List: * Bio of facilitator & presenter: Craig Unger * Presentation slides for each module in PDF Notes Page format * Position Statements on: * Best Value Selection * Integrated Project Delivery * Organization of the Design-Build Entity * Role of Qualifications in Selection of a Design-Builder * Use of Stipends
Course Name: Planning for Success: Acquisition Strategy Development for Design-Build Course Length: 1 hour Course Creator: Diana R. Hoag, DBIA Xcelsi Group, LLC Creation Date: February 1, 2011 Course Objectives: By the end of this on-line course you will: Understand the importance of acquisition planning for each design-build project Be familiar with acquisition strategy choices available to owners Know the elements of DBIA’s best value selection (BVS) acquisition model Understand the synergy resulting from a well-formed BVS acquisition strategy
This introduction class will explain how code relate to one another and to the reference standards
The International Building codes and it's related codes are confusing to understand as a team and how one relate to one another. This short class will help you understand the relationships between the codes and standards.