[Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans

[Pasha Korber-Gonzalez]

Hi Paul,

we are on the same page that the reveiwers of our LEED or Compliance models
are (majority) not as skilled as the simulators turning in the models.


I  would like to share with you and others if they are interested;   I
intereviewed with GBCI and Ms. Gail Hampsmire to become a LEED reviewer last
year.  I thought this move in my career would be supportive to my
professional growth and the services that I offer my clients---I thought it
would make me a better simulator & LEED compliance documentarian while being
able to offer some of my simulation experience & training back to GBCI and
the industry.  This was my goal.

During my interviews with Ms. Hampsmire who is the Team Manager for the EAc1
reviewers (as was my understanding); we conversed how I have felt that the
EAc1 reviewers on my past LEED projects appeared to know less about whole
building simulation than I did--therefore rendering them unqualified to
review my models or others who might have similar simulation experience to
mine.  Ms Hampsmire conceded to say that it was an orgainization issue that
thier LEED reviewers do not gain on-going, present simulation experience as
they are also working only as LEED reviewers.  It is her challenge as a
manager to hire the most qualified of simulation reviewers.

It was further conveyed to me that the LEED reviewers that are hired by GBCI
have a strict "conflict of interest" policy in that they cannot work on any
other LEED projects in any other capacity so long as they are employed by
GBCI.

Professionally & Organizationally I respect and agree with this policy.
However;  as it applies to the EAc1 reviewers it is my professional opionion
that this policy is restrictive in allowing or supporting the present &
ongoing training that it is EVIDENT these EAc1 reviewers are lacking from
the comments they are providing to us when we recieve our LEED reviews
back;.and as supported by the discussion I had on this topic with GBCI
during my interview process.

Furthermore (to feed other curiosity if interested.)  It was the conflict of
interest policy that would have forced me to close down my personal
consulting business, and have to immediately drop all of my clients that are
currently relying on me to provide them with simulation support and LEED
modeling services.  Although the benefits pkg was IMPRESSIVE due to the
amount of money that LEED programs bring into the Non-profit USGBC
organization; professionally I felt more of an obligation to keep my clients
for the services they are needing from me in today's industry and demands
for whole building energy simulations and compliance models for ALL of thier
projects.

Lastly--it makes more sense to me that as a NON-EAc1 reviewer I will be able
to educate more simulators on how to correctly model sustainable buildings
and systems and provide more education to support the need to develop more
skilled simulators within our industry...which could hopefully bring things
full circle in the future and maybe one of the future modelers I can help
train will have more than enough experience to be hired as an EAc1 reviewer
and then would be able to offer qualified, skilled reviews of my LEED models
and all the other ones that are coming in to GBCI now.   My logic was
supported on this when one of my clients actually "thanked" me for not
choosing another Professional path and closing down my business.  This
client is in need of on-going simulation training and support for thier
business and the LEED and other utility compliance models they are producing
for thier clients.

Ms Hampsmire agreed in our discussions that there is a significant gap in
skilled simulators (i.e 7+ yrs experience vs. -3 yrs experience with
simulations.)   The entire industry is feeling this pressure and gap with
the need to hire already skilled simulators (not just entry positions.)

I'd also LOVE to hire a skilled simulator that could support my work
load---there is just not many available simulators with more than 5years
exposure to simulations...this is the criteria I would have to require to
make it an effective position for me to invest into to help support my
business and the industry demands that my clients are asking me to fulfill
for them.

As always I am always happy to recieve anyone professional commentary and
opinion on my comments and experience with these issue.  I am only one
simulator in the industry so take it as that only.

Cheers,
Pasha Korber
308-763-1593

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>wrote:

>  Pasha:
>
> No problem, it is raping as far as I am concerned.  GBCI is using
> incompetent reviewers and they expect us to train them.  They take the
> application fees and offer nothing in return except ridiculous comments.
>
> I have a similar problem with Northeast Utilities serving CT and MA.  NU
> offers a modeling incentive of $6,000, an efficiency incentive up to $2.00
> ft2 and a LEED incentive up to $15,000.  They employ reviewers that have no
> modeling or eQuest experience.  One reviewer expected that I would explain
> how custom performance curves are built for an eQuest VRV system.
>
> I told them I wasn't in the business of training their employees at the
> client's expense.  I would provide the manufacturer's performance tables and
> my eQuest curve coefficients, but I was not going to spend time to explain
> how to verify that my curves are accurate.  They need to spend money to
> train their reviewers or hire experienced reviewers.
>
> I feel that the comments that you received from the GBCI were indicative of
> a person who has no clue and is not qualified to review building
> simulations.
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul Diglio
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com>
> *To:* Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>
>
> *Cc:* equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
> *Sent:* Fri, June 17, 2011 3:45:23 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans
>
> Hi Paul--  thanks for receiving my comment in the most professional sense
> of the term as it relates to the economics of the LEED simulation &
> Compliance markets.
>
> I didn't really feel it was unprofessional, but I didn't desire to offend
> anyone with the terms that i chose.   I was pretty sure that I wasn't
> completely alone with the 'feeling' or sense I was getting from others
> comments I've seen with the forum (past & present).
>
> I offer a sincere professional apology if my chosen adjectives offended
> anyone.  (were they adjectives?  I don't know I'm not an english major...)
> :)
>
> Cheers,
> Pasha
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Paul Diglio <paul.diglio at sbcglobal.net>wrote:
>
>>  Pasha:
>>
>> I agree with your 'raping' verb and do not think it is inappropriate for
>> the forum.  Dan is out of sync.
>>
>> Paul Diglio
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* Daniel Knapp <danielk at arborus.ca>
>> *To:* Pasha Korber-Gonzalez <pasha.pkconsulting at gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* equest-users at lists.onebuilding.org
>> *Sent:* Fri, June 17, 2011 3:32:24 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Equest-users] LEED Review Comment - Exhaust Fans
>>
>> Dear Pasha,
>>
>>   client has already paid them.   DEAR USGBC---please stop raping the
>> industry for the money monopoly that you have created.  The sense of GREED
>> is oozing from everything that comes out of USGBC/GBCI with a price tag on
>> it or a cost associated with it.
>>
>>
>> I hear that you are very frustrated with the review process, however, I
>> find this kind of language inappropriate for a public forum and would ask
>> that you take more care in the future.
>>
>> With all best wishes,
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> —
>> Daniel Knapp, PhD, LEED® AP O+M
>> danielk at arborus.ca
>>
>> Arborus Consulting
>> Energy Strategies for the Built Environment
>> www.arborus.ca
>> 76 Chamberlain Avenue
>> Ottawa, ON, K1S 1V9
>> Phone: (613) 234-7178 ext. 113
>> Fax: (613) 234-0740
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.onebuilding.org/pipermail/equest-users-onebuilding.org/attachments/20110617/f5518a5b/attachment-0001.htm>