|David J. Wyatt, CDT|
Post Number: 61
|Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2014 - 03:28 pm: |
I did a search to see if this has been covered, but the search results were too vast.
|anon (Unregistered Guest)|
|Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2014 - 04:25 pm: |
ARCOM MasterSpec places LEED submittals under Action Submittals Article.
Not sure ARCOM is correct on this. Nothing I can find in A201 requiring Architect to stamp a LEED submittal (unlike other Action submittals).
Post Number: 628
|Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2014 - 04:46 pm: |
I consider them as informational. They are more or less certification the contractor is complying with sustainable requirements. However, some of the sustainable attribute information will be included in action submittals such as for FSC wood and VOCs. I break them out as a new paragraph "Sustainable Design Submittals" under the credits to be achieved.
|Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC|
Post Number: 432
|Posted on Thursday, February 06, 2014 - 07:56 pm: |
We fudged the Mastespec standard by creating a unique article "Submittals for LEED Certification".
The insert language (for every Section template) was prepared by the office Sustainability Leader, the only time I let someone edit in my masters. They were eager and I felt like Tom Sawyer getting the fence painted.
|David J. Wyatt, CDT|
Post Number: 62
|Posted on Friday, February 07, 2014 - 08:42 am: |
Thank you Steve, Wayne, and anon. Your comments affirm my position here.
The people I work with want them specified as Action Submittals, but then they are reluctant to take action on them once they are submitted.
I think about how closely they are tied to the contractor's means and methods for achieving the certification, which makes me favor Informational status for them.
Post Number: 535
|Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2014 - 02:53 pm: |
It isn't what they are (they are product data) but rather what should be done with them that establishes whether they are Action Submittals (Architect commits to reviewing and responding no matter what) vs Informational Submittals (Architect still reviews but responds only if they do not meet requirements). It's the specifiers call.
That's why Masterspec is called a master - spec. The content exists for the specifier to modify to suit their practice, not to dictate what the practice should be.
As the failure to achieve LEED certification due to documentation shortfalls is often considered project failure by an owner, many specifiers treat LEED submittals as Action Submittals so that they are hopefully reviewed with more diligence as they are initially submitted, rather than creating a circumstance where the documentation is in need of perfecting one or two years later after the project team has dispersed (and there's no fee left to bill against).
Post Number: 703
|Posted on Tuesday, February 11, 2014 - 04:10 pm: |
I prefer to keep LEED submittals separate from 'real' submittals. My language makes it clear that Action Submittals are just that, submittals acted upon by the design team. Actions on LEED submittals are for LEED compliance only. Often LEED submittal review is by a separate LEED consultant who I usually do not trust to provide action responses to the Work. I advise the designers to review the LEED submittal responses to ensure that they do not impact the Work. We also include caveats stating that responses to LEED submittals (whether by our design staff or by a separate LEED consultant) do not diminish Contractor responsibility for means and methods. So far maintaining LEED submittals as separate from Action or traditional Informational submittals has worked. Sometimes I almost think the GC feels sorry for us.