In many countries, commissioning is still an emerging activity and advances are needed for greater formalization, understanding of its process, and standardization of its procedures. This report summarizes the objectives, lessons-learned, and follow-up recommendations for the design phase commissioning work performed on defense base construction projects in Japan. The intent of this document is to contribute to the successful implementation and development of future commissioning projects in Japan.

Design phase commissioning is the process of comparing each element of the design to the owner’s performance requirements. The design phase commissioning process is not intended to be a peer review of the design architects and engineers work or responsibilities, as these remain the responsibility of the design A-E team. Design phase commissioning evaluates each system and element of the design as it relates to commission ability, operability, maintainability and industry accepted best practices. The main objectives of design phase commissioning are:

・To assist the owner and A-E design team in establishing
　clear design intent
・To assist the design team in developing construction
　documents that conform to the owner’s design intent
・To review all design documents for commissioning ability,
　operability, maintainability, and best industry standards
・To develop clear and measurable acceptance criteria that
　will guide the execution of construction acceptance phase
　work
・To develop specifications that outline the construction
　contractor’s obligations related to the construction
　phase commissioning for all applicable systems and
　equipment to be commissioned

If desired by the building owner, the commissioning authority can be requested to structure the commissioning project to achieve the following goals. Of course, each project is different and each building owner has different needs. It is important for the owner to meet with the commissioning agent before the start of design to discuss what benefits are desired for each project. These are some of the objectives that the Owner can request the commissioning authority to incorporate into the design phase commissioning project:

Achieve cost savings during the design phase: The CA can be asked to develop the owner's project goals for the design team to use to guide the design process. This might help clarify the design efforts and could reduce design changes that result in added cost and project deadline extensions. Due to miscommunications or misunderstandings designers sometimes must start their work without a clear understanding of how the building’s operation. The primary goal of commissioning during the design phase should be to verify that the designers have a clear vision of the Owner’s needs for the facility.

Achieve cost savings during the construction phase: There are many ways to reduce cost by commissioning during the construction phase. The most frequent method is to reduce construction change orders that result in construction rework and project deadline extensions. Missed deadlines and construction change orders are unforeseen conditions that largely impact the building owner. If the construction contractor does not have a clear understanding of the Owner's expectation for the building, construction rework and additional costs could result. The commissioning authority can assist by asking the right questions to guide the contractor before construction mistakes are made.

Reduce operations cost: Some building and facilities owners have a budget of what they expect to pay to maintain the facility when it is in use. The Owner’s operations budget is not frequently communicated to the design team, and usually not considered in the building’s design. The design of the systems should consider the capabilities and level of experience of the operations and maintenance staff. Does the owner intend to hire the quantity of staff that is needed to maintain the systems within building? These are important questions that can be coordinated in the commissioning process.

Reduce equipment maintenance and repair costs: Equipment and systems can fail unexpectedly and have lengthy building outages if preventative maintenance is not regularly performed. However, when the contractor hands the building to the Owner, does the owner have an understanding of what preventative maintenance steps are needed to keep equipment operating in good condition? The commissioning authority can be requested to facilitate the handover of proper operations and maintenance procedures.

Specify the energy efficiency goals for the building or facility: Many building owners are primarily concerned with the construction cost for the project. But the cost energy costs can exceed the amount that the owner’s budget to operate the facility over time. Evaluating the cost to benefit options can be facilitated by the commissioning authority.

Reduce the impact on the environment: Some governments have energy codes that require energy efficient building designs, and today many private building owners feel responsible for doing their part to reduce the impact on the environment. Buildings and facilities that are not designed and operated correctly will pollute the environment and waste energy which results in more production of greenhouse gasses. The commissioning authority can have an active role in assisting the owner to communicate the need for energy efficient designs.

Document lessons learned to use on future projects. Commissioning is a continuous improvement process. The commissioning process can be applied to document problems encountered on each project and the solutions that were used to correct them. The lessons learned from past construction and renovation projects are typically lost when the project manager or facilities manager resigns. The commissioning scope should also include a lessons learned report to record problems encountered, solutions used, and recommendations for how to approach similar problems in the future.

Based on observations made during our recent military defense base design phase commissioning project, the following recommendations are offered:

Owner s Project Requirements:
The Owner's Project Requirement (OPR) document is a compilation of the communications and documentation of the Owner's goals, objectives, and expectations for the project. This would include any specific requirements pertaining to the project. For military defense base projects, it is typical for the Users to write an OPR that outlines their own requirements for the facility. Under normal commissioning protocol, the A-E team and the commissioning authority should follow the OPR as the Owner’s intent. However, the owner who is responsible to provide funding for the project must have the authority to review and modify the OPR document to meet their requirements. The OPR is not effective unless it contains the Owner’s true intent for the project.

The OPR can also be used to specify allowable budget that the Owner is expecting to pay for the project. On most defense base projects, the A-E team is required to provide a cost estimate for each respective discipline (HVAC, electrical, plumbing, communications, etc.) that helps the owner understand the expected cost of construction. For each additional cost item that is added during the design and design review processes, the cost of that item should be added to the overall project cost estimate. This might be especially useful on Host Nation funded projects where the Users may ask for more items than the budget can afford. The Owner can keep track of the Users' added cost items so that the project costs do not exceed the budget. If the Owner hires the commissioning authority from the beginning of the design process, the task of keeping track of project costs can be assigned to the CA. This will require more work effort and cost by the CA, however, can be useful to the Owner to keep construction cost from escalating out of control.

Basis of Design Report:
The Basis of Design (BOD) document is the design A-E team’s written description of the proposed design solutions that satisfy the requirements of the OPR. The BOD is typically required on US projects, but is not typically a requirement on Host Nation funded projects. The government’s contracting officer should decide which projects could benefit by requiring the A-E design team to provide a BOD report. Preparing a BOD does require more time, effort, and costs by the designers. Also, the Owner is responsible for paying the expenses to write the BOD report. However, it is important to have a record of the design process, decisions made, and comments from the designers regarding items that either improved or reduced their efficiency and the project end results. This can be a very effective tool for planning and specifying future projects. Requiring a project BOD report also gives the A-E designers a mechanism to write constructive criticism and improve future projects.

Lessons-Learned Report:
Cost control during construction is highly dependent on having a complete design package for the contractors to bid on. Change orders during construction tend to cost the Owner more than when work is specified in the bid documents. The commissioning authority should be asked to keep an issue log of the problems that were resolved on each construction project. The items that added cost to the project can be summarized in a lessons learned report for improving future projects. The Owner and A-E designers can both use the lessons learned report for negotiating the design scope on future projects. Similarly, the commissioning authority can add lessons learned to coordination checklists to ensure that the omitted items are coordinated and provided on future designs.

1. Start commissioning early: For design phase commissioning projects, it is typical that the funding to do commissioning is not approved until the design is mostly complete. In our experience, it is quite common that the commissioning authority is hired at the time when the design development is already 90% complete. There is less opportunity for the commissioning design review recommendations to influence a design near completion. Starting commissioning early can enable more dialogue about the Owner and User’s needs before the start of the design.

2. Host a partnering meeting: A partnering meeting can be held at the start of the design phase to encourage dialogue and cooperation between all parties. On host nation projects, one obstacle is that there were many parties involved that all have different goals and understanding of what the design needs to achieve. It will never be possible to have all parties reach 100% agreement. However, it would be beneficial to have one or two partnering meetings to encourage teamwork and communication. It is understood that all parties have a common goal of wanting the project to be a success.

3. Establish a partnering agreement: The partnering agreement should focus on the end result for the project and what responsibilities each party must perform to achieve it. The end result of the partnering meeting is the partnering agreement that all designers and major stakeholders will sign. Once established, the partnering agreement shall be honored by all parties.

4. Establish the roles and responsibilities: It may be possible to have more than one owner, more than one user on a project, and multiple design and construction managers who represent them. It is important to establish who has the authority to make financial decisions and contractual decisions. The owner has ultimate authority to make financial and contractual decisions. If two parties share the Owner's role (financial and contractual decision making), then important decisions that affect the outcome of the project should be negotiated between those parties. No party or individual has the right to force the owner(s) to accept a decision.

5. Prioritize design objectives: The design objectives requested by Owner and User parties can be unrealistic for an international design team to accomplish. The request to “Comply with ALL requirements in UFC, NFPA, IBC, etc.” is just not possible. It would improve the focus of the design engineers if the Owner and User representatives would prioritize the design objectives. Objectives should be put on several lists of Highest, High, Medium, and Low importance. This will allow the reviewers to ensure that the greatest design priorities are satisfied, and simplify the objectives for the design team. "Comply with All requirements" is not a realistic expectation and leaves too many openings for priorities to be neglected.

6. Establish guidelines for joint meetings: The design onboard review (OBR) conferences should be held at various stages to review and discuss the A-E design document submittals. The reviewers might consist of contracting officer technical engineering staff for both Owner and User representatives, who have the authority to make decisions on behalf of their government agencies. Reviewers should not present their requirements in a demanding manner. It would be beneficial to the final outcome of the project if there is more cooperation, teamwork, and understanding between the teams. The reviewers that represent the interest of the building occupants should be reminded that they a working in partnership with the designers. Reviewers who conduct themselves in a rude or demanding manner should keep in mind that this is unprofessional behavior. All participants who attend the OBR (reviewers, designers, government representatives, and consultants) are professionals and should be treated with equal respect. This item should be discussed at the partnering meeting before the design kick-off, and reinforced at subsequent partnering meetings.

Design phase commissioning is a continuous improvement process. Mistakes, delays and cost overruns cannot be completely eliminated from all projects. However, as the commissioning process matures in Japan, the difficulties on past projects can be used to find solutions that improve future projects. It is important that the owner, contracting officers, A-E designers, construction contractors, users, and operation & maintenance staff understand that their participation in commissioning equally contributes to the project's success. This goal should be explained and reinforced on all projects at the start of the design and construction phases. Commissioning will continue to improve the design and construction processes by improving communication, coordination, and cooperation if all parties agree to work towards that common goal.