Last edited 21 Apr 2018

Common pitfalls relating to BREEAM assessments

Contents

[edit] Assigning responsibilities

  • Lack of commitment from site team as they have more important concerns
  • For any BREEAM project, there should be a Project Manager/Lead who will clearly explain the purpose and necessity in achieving the targeted BREEAM rating for the project. It is very difficult for BREEAM assessors to undertake the assessment without any support from the PM/Lead as the assessors do not usually have the authority to push the project team to work towards to meeting the BREEAM criteria. This should be agreed from the beginning between the assessor and the client/project team.

[edit] BRE QA

  • Not taking into account time taken to complete BRE QA
  • BRE QA feedback may require a resubmission thus delaying certification
  • Misunderstandings from the BRE QA team concerning some provided evidence. Solution: the newly created QA chat for assessors helps a lot to avoid these misunderstandings.

[edit] Changes

[edit] Communication

[edit] Criteria details

[edit] Planning

[edit] Scope

  • Pre Assessment tracker does not align with actual contract terms of agreement for scope - not picked up until later stages

[edit] Timing

[edit] Tracker tools

  • If using your own tracker always use BRE tools to double check scores and weightings etc to ensure no mistakes

[edit] Unrealistic commitments

[edit] Value engineering


BRE Global does not endorse any of the content posted and use of the content will not guarantee the meeting of certification criteria.

--Multiple Author Article 21:49, 21 Apr 2018 (BST)