Commissioning

RSS

Continuing last month’s topic of commissioning action lists (a.k.a. master issues logs, a.k.a. corrective action lists), I would like to focus on the items in those documents that deal with construction phase or acceptance testing “deficiencies.” 

Whether one calls it a commissioning action list, a master issues log, a deficiency list, a corrective action list, etc., every commissioning project includes a matrix of items needing attention by someone on the project team. This table is the responsibility of the commissioning professional to create, maintain, and share with the team.

Last month’s column walked through the scenario of what might happen if the commissioning professional is not engaged until very late in the construction phase.

Late last year (November and December, 2015) this column addressed the situation where a third-party commissioning professional is not by with the building owner until the last few weeks of construction. 

This month, I want to address an issue which is as old as building systems commissioning itself. It was one of the first challenges commissioning professionals endeavored to resolve in order to more effectively and efficiently facilitate the commissioning process … and yet it still lingers. 

Fallout from “value engineering” spurs an idea about security and performance.

With a move-in date looming, which systems can wait and which can’t?

When it comes to end-of-project commissioning, perfection may not be a practical goal. 

A familiar financial concept could serve as an effective new tool to encourage proper project completion.

Your definition might well depend on your continent.