National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

The Controls Integration Meeting

Karl Stum and Norm Nelson CH2M HILL

Synopsis The controls integration meeting(s) is a series of meetings that go over the control issues on the project to enhance understanding of the full sequences of control and interactions between various disciplines, trades and systems. The intent is to clarify control-related issues for the controls contractor; mechanical, fire alarm and electrical contractor; owner facility staff and commissioning authority (CA). Seasoned CAs consider this meeting or series of meetings one of the critical elements contributing to a successful commissioning project. When conducted during design, the meeting will reduce change orders and Requests for Information (RFIs). When conducted during design and again during submittal review in construction, the meetings will shorten the time required to program and reprogram the controls, perform testing and troubleshooting, and will enhance building operation and control for facility staff. About the Authors Karl Stum is a senior mechanical engineer and project manager focusing on building commissioning. He was the 2001 winner of the Benner Award for Commissioning Excellence. He was on the founding board of the Building Commissioning Association and on the ASHRAE committee that just completed Guideline 1The Commissioning Process. Norm Nelson is a senior project manager and forensic engineer whose current focus is total building commissioning, and forensic investigation of building failures. He has spent the last 20 years specializing in building commissioning and forensic investigations. He has been designing building mechanical systems since 1967, a member of ASHRAE since 1976, and employed by CH2M HILL for more than 20 years.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Importance of Controls
Building controls have become increasingly important over the last two decades. Buildings have become more complex with more systems and more integration between systems. The equipment and systems themselves have become more complex, as the cost of microprocessors plummeted and equipment designers harnessed their limitless power and capabilities. The controls and the sequences of operation that run the equipment have become more sophisticated, as the industry strives for high performance buildings. Design Issues. While technology advanced, elements of project delivery methods digressed to some degree. Design-build methods have become more popular, but are notoriously characterized by design documentation that lags construction, which is one of the primary causes for controls not working as well as they should. In design-bid-build, the designers fees have been chiseled down over the years. To survive, designers have had to cut scope and delegate or hand-off tasks to others. Controls design has been one of the casualties. Many designers have believed that they would be successful by providing performance type specifications, leave the details up to the controls contractor, and review the controls contractors submittals. What these designers neglected to do was to ask for detailed submittals, and the contractors simply submitted little if any more detail than what the designers gave them to work with in the beginning. As a result, many details of the control sequences were still a mysteryknown only to the control programmer. Too many thermodynamic, HVAC, energy, O&M and indoor environmental quality decisions have been left up to the control programmer. Final result controls dont work as intended. Construction Issues. As systems and controls became more complex, so did specialization among construction trades and disciplines. Unfortunately, the delivery methods have not yet embraced a commensurate increase in integration. Item after item falls through the cracks, and systems either dont work together as intended, dont work at all, or require costly change orders try to correct the deficiencies. Final resultcontrols dont work as intended because the engineer or the contractor had no clear understanding by of how the controls were supposed to work. It is the authors experience that control issues represent the majority of deficiencies identified during construction phase commissioning.

What Is a Controls Integration Meeting?

A controls integration meeting is an assembly of those with a vested interest in the controls of the building. They are ideally held at two different periodslate design and early construction. During design, attendees include the designers, users, operators, CA and the contractor (if already selected). During construction, attendees include those previously listed plus key subcontractors. The meetings are used to discuss issues surrounding the controls so that all parties clearly understand what the control systems actually are, and are not doing and how the controls will accomplish those tasks.

How a Controls Integration Meeting Can Help

Controls integration meetings are needed because the CA will review the design and the controls submittal to such a level of rigor and detail that numerous questions, issues, problems and clarifications will be raised that cannot be efficiently handled through written comments alone.
Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting 2

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Controls integration meetings help improve controls design and installation in three primary ways: Improve communication, particularly across disciplines and between designers and constructors. Provide new ideas to enhance the design (through peer reviews prior to the meetings). Provide a second set of eyes to catch problem areas (through peer reviews prior to the meetings).

Improve Communication Design drawings and specifications dont always communicate clearly what is intended. Miscommunication results in expectations not being met or potential change orders and delays. Controls integration meetings bring together parties for face-to-face discussions of issues after each party has reviewed the written documents. Parties of non-HVAC and controls disciplines (such as security, fire alarm, electrical and emergency power) are involved as needed so their systems are fully understood and their issues are heard. For example, it may be unclear how the emergency power interfaces with air handlers for smoke control. By having the fire, life and safety consultants in the meeting with the mechanical and electrical designer, these issues can be efficiently resolved. Another example is during construction, if the separation of responsibility for control and monitoring of the boiler packaged controls with the central building automation system is not clear, the controls integration meeting will help to clarify the issues. These meetings are much more effective than circles of emails because all stakeholders are together at one time, so decisions can be made more quickly. Owner representatives with budgetary authority should be in attendance to address matters that impact cost or schedule. New Ideas To Improve Design During design, prior to the meeting, operations staff and the CA review the systems being controlled, the control sequences and drawings. The review should be early enough in design to allow for improvements to sequences and some improvements to equipment and features, if not too extensive. The owner provides direction as to their willingness to entertain new ideas. The reviewers document ideas that surface as they study the design to understand what is being proposed. During construction, the designer is added to the above list of reviewers to evaluate the contractors submittals. Again the reviewers document ideas for improvements. The ideas can be freely discussed in the meetings and effectively moved forward or dropped. Identify Problem Areas During the review process, reviewers identify control, operations or maintenance areas that may present problems or are likely to result in change orders or requests for information. The problem areas are presented and resolved through the meetings. The CA is especially focused on identifying areas that are not clear between disciplines and trades.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Planning and Implementing Controls Integration Meetings

Design Phase The controls integration meeting during design is a follow-up to a formal design review. It resolves outstanding issues that require owner or input from other disciplines or further engineering discussion with the commissioning authority. As the CA, the first thing to do is to get the meeting included in your scope of work. Talk to the owner and make sure it is also in the designers scope. Carefully plan when the meeting should be held. Request the design and owner teams to develop the control sequences and schematics a little earlier than usualideally by mid-construction documents phase and schedule the meeting(s) at that time. Even if there isnt a formal printing package scheduled at the time, an interim review set could be printed. The controls review and coordination meeting should be held when the design is defined enough to be able to provide more specific comments, but not late enough to make changes more expensive. The more input into the design the CA may have (more design reviews), the later in the design the controls meeting can be held. Request during early design development the latest control schematics and sequences of operation that are desired for review. Some designers will not provide any control schematics, only equipment, piping and air distribution layouts. This is highly discouraged, except on very simple HVAC systems, which only require packaged equipment complete with packaged controls. Figure 1 illustrates a typical control schematic. Equally as important as the controls schematics are one-line simplified flow diagrams of systems. Request these from the designer early and as they change have them updated by the designer. The flow diagrams should clearly show the flow of air or water through the entire system with at least all fluid movers, control valves and main branches Figure 1: Typical Controls Schematic depicted without unnecessary line cross-overs and routing for clarity. The air-side flow diagrams for a given system should include outside air, supply, return and exhaust all on one diagram so reviewers can understand the system-wide design. Request that the sequences of operation be detailed, organized logically, and written in short statements, rather than run-on paragraphs. Request early development of a points list that defines control points, monitoring points only, and calculated points. Request that specific information be given as to what points, setpoints and control sequences will be controlled or provided by equipment-packaged controls and by the central building automation system.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

For projects where the designer has the capability, request that the control design engineer show all wiring and tubing terminations for control devices provided by the controls contractor and even more importantly, devices provided by other contractors. In addition, where the DDC system interfaces with packaged equipment, the controls interface needs to be decided by engineers, not field installers. Then during the meeting, equipment and control device interfaces can be discussed by all parties involved. The above requests of the designer may not be in their scope. The CA should advocate that the owner add these items to the designers scope, by indicating that these drawings will benefit the design, commissioning and the operations staff. Prior to the meeting, the CA and owner staff should review the latest design submission and document questions and concerns about controls related issues. This is analogous to a normal design review, except that it is focused on controls. Unlike some more simple equipment issues, controls issues often involve theory and an understanding of related systems and equipment. Many control issues are more easily resolved in meetings rather than via written communications alone. The importance of this review and follow-up meeting must be maintained. The CA and owner provide their written comments to the designers and obtain written feedback. Many issues are resolved through these written comments and responses. The controls integration meeting focuses on the issues that require further discussion and/or owner input or where other disciplines need to provide input or have interest. A list of topics to be covered in the reviews and meeting are given in the Appendix. Issue Management One of the most critical areas in managing design reviews and controls integration meetings is to put in place a good system for follow-up. Each issue that is raised should be entered on the issues log and given a status; Open, In Process, and Closed are typical choices. The issue moves from Open to In Process once the resolution is agreed upon. It does not move from In Process to Closed until the resolution is verified of being incorporated. For design phase issues, that is when it has been back-checked and verified to be in the design documents. Parties requiring action to resolve an issue should be noted on the issue log. Many issues will have agreed upon resolutions and responsible parties named in the issues log with the parties having every intention of following through with their action items. However, all too often the issues are not addressed in a timely manner. Eventually, many will have to be dropped because the window of opportunity is gone for making inexpensive changes, or the issues resurface later and expensive changes are made. In many cases, because of the delay the original optimal solution must be substituted with a less ideal one. It is critical that the CA verify that someone is in charge of following up on action items. Dont assume that the owner will follow through with items, just because its in their best interest. They often are expecting the CA or someone else to be pushing the issues to resolution. A responsible CA will scope for and execute pushing issues to resolution and not let them drop off the table or fall through the cracks. After the meeting, remaining issues are tracked to resolution by the CA. Additional smaller meetings or conversations may be required to resolve and manage various outstanding issues.
Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting 5

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

The CA should provide updates to the meeting issues log to document action taken and additional items resolved. The issues log is used to review future design submissions against. Figure 2 provides a sample design review and issues log format.

Figure 2: Design Review Issues Log Preparation for Construction Phase Two additional tasks must be accomplished during design. First, the designers must include in the specifications clear and concise requirements for controls drawings and the sequence of operation submittals during the construction phase. This is vitally important to ensure the contractor is responsible for providing the level of detail needed for the designer and CA to fully understand what the controls contractor intends and to allow the CA to write test procedures. The Appendix contains sample specification language. It is very useful to actually provide an exemplary sequence of operation as an attachment to the specifications. The designers (or the CA in the commissioning specifications) must include a requirement for the contractors to participate in the controls integration meetings. The Appendix contains sample language for these requirements. Construction Phase The controls integration meeting(s) during construction are follow-up to a formal review of the controls submittal. It resolves outstanding issues that require designer or owner input, input from other trades or further engineering discussion with the commissioning authority. The number of meetings required during construction will vary with the project size and complexity and the amount of design review that has already occurred. For example, a 600,000-sf courthouse required seven 3-hour meetings, while a 100,000-sf office building only required one meeting with some offline follow-up with various disciplines. During construction, the meeting attendees include the mechanical designer, the owners technical staff, the owners project manager with budget authority, the CA, and the general, mechanical, and controls contractors. Additional attendees to include at appropriate times are the electrical engineer, electrical contractor, and the fire alarm and security contractors. The
Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting 6

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

intent of the meetings is to make sure the contractor understands what the design intent is and that the designer, owner and commissioning team understand how the contractor intends to meet the design intent. The first step in the process during construction is to review (through a memorandum or a meeting) the purpose and scope of the controls integration meetings with the contractor, owner and designers. The contractor should be made fully aware of the controls submittal requirements and controls integration meetings in the specifications long before they prepare the controls submittal. Plan how the submittal for the controls will be formally handled. To avoid sticky protocol formalities, the submittal may have to be called preliminary or draft, but it should be as fully developed as possible with the information the controls contractor has on hand. Normally, this controls submittal package only includes the control drawings and sequences of operation and doesnt include the hardware submittal. The submittal package is provided to the owner, designer and CA for review. When the project is large, only a few systems may be reviewed at one time with a meeting held to address issues related only to those systems. The process is repeated until all systems are covered. For the reviews, the CA should at provide a list of comment fields needed for the reviewers to include, or provide the review form for them. Each comment should be uniquely identified for reference. A good method to use for performing a thorough review is to review the submittals as if you were in the process of writing detailed step-by-step testing procedures for each sequence. Let nothing remain unanswered. This is a prime opportunity to ask questions when the designers and controls contractor are present. The review comments are provided to the contractor who responds in writing to each comment. This process is much more manageable and accessible if a common form is used. The comments and responses are distributed to all parties and the controls meeting is scheduled. The controls integration meeting is then held to discuss the outstanding issues in the comments or issues log. Areas that need clarification are discussed and resolved. The parties discuss issues from the drawings and specifications relative to controls. Cross-discipline issues are discussed, such as fire and life safety and how they are integrated with the emergency power, HVAC and controls systems. Security and access systems integration with HVAC and lighting are also discussed. In the end, the clarity of the design documents is enhanced significantly. Designers come away with more clear direction from the owner groups and the owner groups better understand what they will actually be getting with the design. The Appendix contains a list of issues that may be covered in the meetings. Actions are assigned and follow-up meetings or calls are scheduled. If a significant number of issues remain open at the end of the meeting or other sections of the controls still need to be covered, additional meetings are scheduled and held. At select meetings, additional disciplines are invited, such as security, fire alarm, lighting controls or emergency power contractors. For larger projects, subjects may be discussed in these meetings or in special controls meetings for areas for which the controls submittals have not yet been developed. Issues from the specifications or drawings where the contractor, owner or CA has questions can be discussed to give direction to the contractor.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Issues The proper management of issues identified through the controls reviews and controls integration meetings is critical. The CA must take this responsibility seriously. The issue management recommendations given for the design phase effort above, also apply to the construction phase meetings. A form similar to that used for design phase control issues works well for tracking issues. A few additional guidelines for the construction phase are warranted. Follow-up carefully on issues that are resolved by the contractor stating Will be reflected in shop drawings. Too often the CA doesnt even see the shop drawings. Once the meetings have been conducted and issues resolved, require that the controls contractor formally update and submit the control drawings and sequences of operation to reflect the agreements on the comments and issues log. Do not accept statements like, Will be reflected in as-builts or record drawings. This is may be acceptable for issues that arise after the official control drawing submittal has been approved. However, if the CA accepts such a statement in lieu of requiring the changes to the pre-installation submittal, there is good likelihood that the programmers or installing technicians wont have the benefit of the resolution and will set it up wrong. Define a process for tracking issues that need closer examination in the field. This includes areas for which recommendations were made but not accepted and areas that may result in problems in performance, justifying closer follow-up. Define a process for identifying and tracking whether items brought up in the course of the reviews and meetings result in requests for information (RFI) or change orders. Insist that the contractor and design team keep the CA in the loop on applicable RFIs and change orders. Figure 3 provides a sample of a controls integration meeting issues log used during construction submittal review.
Priority--1-low; 3-high

STATUS: Blank = Open, IP = In Process of finalizing a resolution, and [A date] = Resolution Agreed Upon Mtg Issue ID Date Entered Entered By

STATUS

Issue What happens when Portico is in alarm and autoexhausting is ON and fire personnel goes to pressurization or purge on adjacent floors? Is the Portico smoke management independent of other SM operations? Clarify in the narrative. During Portico alarm, what is all other TU damper positions?

System

Next Action Needed By

Resolution / Action Taken (with dates)

7/1/02: Portico is not connected to the rest of the building. JCI will clarify. Also discussed that the Portico doors should open first, before the EF fans start, so it will for sure open. 7/1/02: Remain as is, since there is not connection.

Formal RFI?

Incorporation Verified In Docs?

7/1/02

6-8

Smoke

6/28/02

KS

JCI

Test

7/1/02

6-9

Smoke

6/28/02

KS

na

Figure 3: Controls Meeting Tracking Log

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Summary
During design, the controls integration meeting is a follow-up to a formal design review. During construction, the controls integration meeting(s) are follow-ups to a formal review of the controls submittal. These meetings resolve outstanding issues that require designer or owner input, input from other trades, or further engineering discussion with the CA. The controls integration meetings and associated controls reviews assist in making it clear to the owner and CA what is intended by the design. They also clarify for the designer what is desired and needed by the owner and CA. During construction, the meetings aid in bringing the understanding of the designer and contractor in alignment and provide the CA with sufficient information to write detailed test procedures, reducing deficiencies and providing more detailed documentation for operators.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Appendix
I. Topics for Controls Integration Meetings
General Are sequences clear and complete? Are there sequences for all equipment? Are sequences too performance oriented, leaving too much up to the controls contractor? Are equipment capacity modulation, staging and standby functions clear? Are reset requirements given from return from loss of power (manual or automatic)? Are adequate trending features listed? Is a points list provided and is clear and complete? Are unoccupied modes given (NLL; NHL), warm-up, night flush, etc.? Are actions during loss of power and during a fire alarm given? Are interlocks to other equipment shown? Also, might want to have contractor(s) indicate specific location of field mounted devices on shop drawings, i.e., low voltage relay to start fan will be nippled to VFD. Are sufficient points shown on controls schematics to perform sequences? Are equipment redundancy assumptions given? Are start-up and shutdown sequences listed? Are safeties given for freeze protection, high duct static (hardwired or software, bypass VFD or not), interlocks to fire/smoke dampers, etc.? Are off-site alarming requirements given? Have all reasonable energy efficiency strategies been incorporated? For controls architecture issues: Are requirements given to prevent network traffic issues? Are expandability requirements included? What about front end graphics requirements? How will one be able to maneuver between graphic screens? eview samples of graphic displays such as an air handler for general layout, style, enhanced features like movement or changing of variable color to represent an override or alarm condition. What points can be monitored from the graphic? What points can be overridden or what setpoints can be changed from the graphics? What will be the expected update time for graphic screens given the system architecture? Commissioning and O&M Facilitation Are sufficient monitoring points in the building automation system given, even beyond that necessary to control the systems, to facilitate performance verification and O&M? Required isolation valves, dampers, interlocks, piping, etc. to allow for manual overrides, simulating failures, seasons and other testing conditions? P/T plugs or other means near each sensor for making calibrations? P/T plug on each side of every coil and control valve? Pressure gages, thermometers and flow meters in strategic areas for verifying system performance and ongoing O&M? Pressure and temperature (P/T) plugs at less critical areas or on smaller equipment where gages and thermometers would be impractical? Requirements for graphics screens clearly given? Point naming convention or method for establishing it given?

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

10

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

Adequate balancing valves, flow metering and control stations and control system functions to facilitate and verify reliable test and balance? What about any activities that are to occur at the end of the warranty. Everyone buy into this? All parties aware of their responsibilities?

Other Specification of the location and criteria for the VAV duct static pressure sensor and chilled water differential pressure sensor given? Simultaneous heating and cooling prevention strategies listed? Clear differentiation between packaged and central controls as to who is enabling, monitoring or controlling each sequence or feature? For smaller stand-alone equipment, is it clear if there are any points being monitored? Sensor accuracy requirements given and adequate? Any special room pressurization control and performance criteria clear? Economizer control sequences clear? Outside air strategy clear, especially CO2 controlhow low can the minimum go and why or why not; how many and where are CO2 sensors? Resets of air and water temperatures and pressures included and appropriately bounded and not competing (2003 ASHRAE Applications Handbook, Chapter 41)? Building pressurization control sequences clear and complete with number and location of building static sensors given and common static pressure reference location specified? Interfaces and interlock issues between security and card access, HVAC, fire alarm, emergency power and lighting controls are covered? Is it clear the system will not just be capable of performing many features and schemes, but each of these features will actually be set up and operable?

II. Specification Language for the Controls Submittal Requirements

1. Sequences of Operation Submittals. The submittals of control drawings shall include complete detailed written text narrative sequences of operation for each piece of equipment, regardless of the completeness and clarity of the sequences in the specifications. Block and graphical programming schematics must be accompanied by full written narratives explaining the step-by-step operation of each block with a clear link between the written text and the graphical block. The sequences of operation will be provided in three places: 1) Individual equipment sequences shall be inset on the equipment schematic page or near it; 2) All sequences for all equipment together in successive pages; 3) All sequences together provided in electronic word processing format (for use in the Systems Manual). Sequence submittals shall include: a. An overview narrative of the system (1 or 2 paragraphs) generally describing its purpose, components and function. b. All interactions and interlocks with other systems. c. Detailed delineation of control between any packaged controls and the building automation system, listing what points the BAS monitors only and what BAS points are control points and are adjustable. d. Written text narrative sequences of control for packaged controlled equipment. (Equipment manufacturers stock sequences may be included, but will generally require additional narrative). e. Start-up sequences. f. Warm-up mode sequences. g. Normal operating mode sequences. h. Occupied and unoccupied mode sequences.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

11

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

i. j. k. l. m. n. o. p.

q. r.

s.

Shutdown sequences. Capacity control sequences and equipment staging. Temperature and pressure control: setbacks, setups, resets, etc. Detailed sequences for all control strategies, e.g., economizer control, optimum start/stop, staging, optimization, demand limiting, etc. Effects of power or equipment failure with all standby component functions. Sequences for all alarms and emergency shut downs. Seasonal operational differences and recommendations. Initial and recommended values for all adjustable settings, setpoints and parameters that are typically set or adjusted by operating staff; and any other control settings or fixed values, delays, etc. that will be useful during testing and operating the equipment. Time of day schedules. To facilitate referencing in testing procedures, all sequences shall be written in small statements, each with a number for reference. For a given system, numbers will not repeat for different sequence sections, unless the sections are numbered. Refer to the sample sequence of operation provided as a supplement to Section 01810.

2. Control Drawings Submittal a. The control drawings shall have a table of contents and a key to all abbreviations (including all abbreviations in schematics and points list column headings and cell contents). b. The control drawings shall contain graphic schematic depictions of all systems with each component, valves, dampers, actuators, coils, filters, fans, pumps, speed controllers, piping, ducting, etc., and each monitored or control point and sensor, all interlocks to other equipment, and include fan and pump cfm; gpm and horsepower by each element. List the location of remote points off the schematic, like static pressure sensors, outside air sensors, etc. c. The sequences of operation will be included as described above. d. The schematics will include the system and component layout of any equipment that the control system monitors, enables or controls, even if the equipment is primarily controlled by packaged or integral controls. e. Provide a full points list with at least the following included for each point: 1) Point abbreviation / name (names shall be pre-approved by Owner) 2) Point type (AI, AO, DI, DO). All setpoints and calculated virtual points will also be listed. 3) System the point is associated with. 4) Point description (include mention (monitoring only) if this point is only a monitoring point and doesnt control anything and/or if it is a setpoint and/or calculated point). 5) Display unit. 6) Panel address. 7) Panel ID. 8) Panel location. 9) Reference drawing number from blueprints. 10) Intermediate device information. 11) Field device (temperature sensor, starter, contact, static tip, etc.). 12) Comments column. 13) The Controls Contractor shall keep the CA informed of all changes to this list during programming and setup. f. Room Schedule. A listing of all rooms shall be provided with at least the following information for each room: floor, room number, room name, air hander ID, reference drawing number, air terminal tag, heating and cooling valve tag ID, cold and hot pipe size, K factor, minimum and maximum cfm for both heating and cooling, actuator signal range and type.

Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting

12

National Conference on Building Commissioning: May 18-20, 2004

g. Valve schedule, including at least: valve tag, system tag (air hander or terminal), service (heating or cooling), quantity, action (2-way, 3-way), fail position, body style, size, close-off pressure, gpm or lb/hr, design Cv, actual Cv, design differential pressure (DP), actual DP, actuator type, control signal range; comments. How about connection type flange, MNPT, MNPT with union h. Network architecture drawing showing all controllers, workstations, printers, and other devices in a riser format and including protocols and speeds for all trunks. i. Provide a set of building floor plans showing the location of all points and controllers. Use the Mechanical CAD drawings and turn the color of all layers to a background shade. Then, show all points with a symbol at the point location and the point name and descriptor next to the point.

III. Specification Language for Controls Integration Meetings

1. Controls Integration Meetings: The Commissioning Authority coordinates a series of meetings to review the control drawings, sequences of operation, points list, database and controls submittal requirements. These meetings are held prior to a formal control drawing submittal and any programming. The intent is to clarify control related issues for the controls contractor, mechanical, fire alarm and electrical contractor, owner facility staff and Commissioning Authority prior to final point database development, programming and the formal control drawing submittal.

a. The controls contractor shall attend all meetings. The mechanical, electrical and general
contractor shall attend when issues regarding equipment they are responsible for are discussed. The mechanical and electrical designers attend as needed according to their contracts. The control technicians attending the meetings must be the same technicians that are/will install and program the DDC system. b. Draft, complete control drawing submittals, and sequences by system are provided by the contractor to the designers, Commissioning Authority and owner. These drawings are not preliminary in content or accuracy. They are as complete as the contractor can make them without further input. c. Parties will review the drawings and sequences and provide formal written comments on forms provided by the Commissioning Authority. The Commissioning Authority will submit comments to the Contractor who shall respond in writing to each comment on forms provided. Comments and responses will be distributed by the Commissioning Authority prior to the meeting(s). d. Primary issues discussed and clarified are: 1) Unresolved issues from the controls reviews 2) New issues from meeting attendees 3) Issues and clarifications needed from the controls contractor 4) Control drawing content and format 5) Point database (points (monitored points, software points, naming conventions, alarms, report format) 6) Sequences of operation and setpoints (clarity, completeness, design intent, functionality, and enhancements for control, energy and O&M) 7) Interlocks to packaged controls and other systems, including filling in the fire alarm and emergency power response matrices 8) Operator workstation graphics 9) Field sensor and panel locations e. A site walk-through with the Controls Contractor, Commissioning Authority and Engineer shall be conducted where precise locations of panels, sensors, thermometers, flow meters and stations and valve taps will be identified. f. The Commissioning Authority takes minutes at these meetings, which may include marked up data base forms and sequences of operation.
Stum et al: The Controls Integration Meeting 13