<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Franklin Gothic Medium";
panose-1:2 11 6 3 2 1 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Trebuchet MS";
panose-1:2 11 6 3 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Stylus BT";}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS Mincho";
panose-1:2 2 6 9 4 2 5 8 3 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.maintext
{mso-style-name:maintext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1489244031;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:54683208 1313381442 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:-;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:"MS Mincho";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
font-family:"Courier New";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">All;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Alright - I’ll weigh in on this one… There’s big difference between licensing and certification.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">What I mean by that is that there is a big difference (IMHO) between a PE placing his/her stamp on a document and a BEMP, etc. reviewing and approving the same
document. The difference is a level of risk that the PE is assuming when he/she stakes their name and reputation behind something. The engineering profession has, over time, instituted a series of ‘checks and balances’ for ensuring quality work, for example,
there exists a NSPE “Code of Ethics for Engineers” (<a href="http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html">http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html</a>). There is also licensing board (differs state by state) who both gives and takes away licenses
based on professional misconduct, etc. There are also Boards of Ethics who again, review complaints and can recommend to the state board that a PE lose his/her license based on the situation – far,far more than the “continuing education” requirements that
currently exist for the BEMP or AEE modeling certifications. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The Engineering Code of Ethics clearly states:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="maintext">“Engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their competence.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So, if you feel a PE is practicing outside his/her area of competence, then you have grounds to file a complaint with your state’s licensing board. It’s been
done before. As a practicing PE, I also had better have “Professional Liability” insurance to manage the known and unknown risks associated with practicing in my field of expertise, because people can and will sue me. When I sign, stamp or seal a document,
I am held to a much, much higher standard of performance than a BEMP, or BESA, CMVP, or many of the other certifications that are rapidly forming in the energy services space are currently being held to.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In a nutshell, I think the PE designation is (currently) the only engineering professional designation that has the kind of institutional Q/A that is necessary
to prevent rampant abuse. I would love to see BEMP, BESA or other energy modeler certifications grow to this level, but we must acknowledge the inherent balance of (risk/reward) that comes with professional liability. I see why Northeast utilities wants to
engage a PE, because if they choose to engage in this service, that PE is accepting a level of professional liability if/when things ‘go south’.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I felt similar about Commissioning Certifications that were the rage a few years ago. The way things were set up, it was the PE, or “design engineer of record”
who assumed professional liability for a design, and the commission professional often had very little professional risk yet the potential for great reward (significant commissioning fees as compared to A/E design fees). I don’t know if that has changed, but
I see the potential for a similar ‘set-up’ with the energy modeling community. <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Thoughts?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">All the best,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">_Chris<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Trebuchet MS","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Chris Balbach, PE, CEM, BEMP, CMVP, BESA</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Vice President of Research and Development<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Cell: (607)-327-1647<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Franklin Gothic Medium","sans-serif";color:#639F42"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Franklin Gothic Medium","sans-serif";color:#639F42">Performance Systems Development</span></b><span style="color:black">
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="245" style="width:183.75pt">
<tbody>
<tr style="height:3.75pt">
<td width="85" style="width:63.75pt;background:#639F42;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in;height:3.75pt">
</td>
<td width="65" style="width:48.75pt;background:#84D458;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in;height:3.75pt">
</td>
<td width="95" style="width:71.25pt;background:#B5E59B;padding:0in 0in 0in 0in;height:3.75pt">
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Franklin Gothic Medium","sans-serif";color:black">124 Brindley Street, Ithaca, NY 14850<br>
<a href="http://www.psdconsulting.com/">www.psdconsulting.com</a></span><span style="color:black">
</span><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Nick Caton<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 09, 2011 1:49 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Pasha Korber-Gonzalez; Paul Diglio; eQUEST Users List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Incentives for NU Modelers and LEED APs<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">As neither a PE (yet) nor a BEMP, I can offer some thoughts/suggestions from the sidelines =).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">A BEMP certification is certainly a more applicable qualification than having a PE seal from a model-reviewing standpoint. That said, there is a
much smaller pool of BEMP reviewers out there, and the desire for a certain quality standard in model reviews needs to be weighed against the availability of the “BEMP reviewership” out there.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">179D’s tax deduction precedent, which permits locally licensed contractors in addition to PE’s involved in the work to produce/certify the calculations,
better encompasses the range of commercial work out there on a national level (retrofit upgrades and the like) which may not locally require an Engineer’s seal.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The suggestion that no certification (BEMP or PE) ought to be required of those compiling the incentive documentation is not a bad idea, provided
the utility can manage or sub-contract out the spreadsheet/model/calculation review to those with the desired qualifications… see my next bullet. Any such requirement will likely have some impact on how widely the incentive program is considered and pursued
by building owners.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">One of our local utilities has a similar incentive program, but they are much less open about who can certify the model/calculations submitted. They
privately hire out and take on the costs of such review as part of the incentive program’s costs, so while it’s no cost to submit, it’s not up to the contractor/engineers seeking to achieve the incentives to decide who’s doing the reviewing. Consider that
food for thought.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Also concurring this discussion would be better-situated in [bldg-sim], but perhaps this is a wide enough audience based on the quick responses =).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I can address the AE PE as I’m studying right now for April: Those considering or studying for the Architectural Engineering (AE) PE exam will find experience
in building energy modeling, and particularly the inter-discipline communication and design experience/understanding that stems from energy modeling, is pretty helpful. Energy modeling experience isolated from building system design experience probably won’t
cut it, however.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The AE exam is unique to the other PE exams in that:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Every single question is directly related to the building industry – no questions about the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The exam is very much cross-discipline: questions cover mechanical, electrical, plumbing structural design; envelop analysis, and project management
/ construction administration<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">There are also some inter-disciplinary questions (i.e. how lighting loads can affect cooling capacities and how fenestration layout/shading affects
lighting/HVAC) which require knowledge in more than one area. These questions are a piece of cake for those practiced in energy modeling.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><![if !supportLists]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><span style="mso-list:Ignore">-<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"">
</span></span></span><![endif]><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">If you practice energy modeling and seek to really understand what you’re doing, you’ll be forced to understand some fundamentals that the average
MEP consultant won’t need to be rock-solid on to do his/her job well, and that may put you at an advantage for the AE PE.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I would not conclude an AE PE would be any better/worse-qualified than an EE or ME PE for model reviewing however. Having a PE of any sort is no guarantee
of the modeling experience necessary for a quality review.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">~Nick<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><img border="0" width="119" height="37" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.jpg@01CBC86E.AEB42370" alt="cid:489575314@22072009-0ABB"></span><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT";color:#2D4D5E"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT";color:#2D4D5E"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Stylus BT";color:#2D4D5E">NICK CATON, E.I.T.</span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Stylus BT";color:#2D4D5E"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#CC9900">PROJECT ENGINEER<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E">Smith & Boucher Engineers</span><span style="font-size:7.5pt;color:#CC9900"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E">25501 west valley parkway<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E">olathe ks 66061<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E">direct 913 344.0036<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#2D4D5E">fax 913 345.0617<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="www.smithboucher.com" title="blocked::www.smithboucher.com"><span style="font-size:10.0pt">www.smithboucher.com</span></a></span><u><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:blue">
</span></u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org [mailto:equest-users-bounces@lists.onebuilding.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Pasha Korber-Gonzalez<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 09, 2011 10:59 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Paul Diglio; eQUEST Users List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Equest-users] Incentives for NU Modelers and LEED APs<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I too think you are right to do this, and should post on the other bldg-sim, and maybe all the other lists too. This is a HUGE mistake and detriment to all simulators, and it is an insult to us experienced simulators to dictate that a
PE has to review the sims...majority of the PE's I know and work with are not simulators and know very little about simulation, let alone enough to review one properly--which is why I'm getting hired by them because I know simulation(s). I would sooner trust
a non-PE with direct simulation experience over a PE with little sim experience to review my own models...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Also I agree with David, and I will recommend to the contact you provided, that the BEMP certification is a much better measure of true simulation understanding, experience, and knowledge for review of simulations. I think of the BEMP
as the 'PE' for simulators--if someone can achieve the BEMP certification, at this point in time it is a better qualifier for simulation experience and knowledge than a PE would anyday---are there even any question on building energy simulation on the MECH
PE exam? Maybe there are sim questions on the new ARCH ENG PE exam for building designers? Does anyone know?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">There is likely to be much BIGGER issues with the quality of simulations that woud be submitted if they are being reviewed by inexperienced PE's who are dictating changes to the model that wouldn't be appropriate based on the software limitations
that are so inherent in all of the whole building simulation programs that are on the market currently. It is less likely for a random PE to be aware of these software limitations than a BEMP.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Pasha<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Paul Diglio <<a href="mailto:paul.diglio@sbcglobal.net">paul.diglio@sbcglobal.net</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;color:black">I realize that this message might not be appropriate to the forum, but it is the only way I know to contact the other simulators that will be affected by Northeast Utilities modeling requirements.
NU covers CT and Western Massachusetts.<br>
<br>
Some of you might know that NU is offering sizable incentives for modeling, improvements over ASHRAE 90.1 and LEED certification.<br>
<br>
The program is new for 2011 and NU just made the decision that the model has to be review and approved by a PE, any PE. Even if LEED approves your application, it still needs to be vetted by a PE to qualify for an incentive.<br>
<br>
If you are unhappy with this decision and find it is discriminatory, please e-mail James Motta
<a href="mailto:mottaj@NU.com">mottaj@NU.com</a>.<br>
<br>
Thank you,<br>
<br>
Paul Diglio<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Equest-users mailing list<br>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org" target="_blank">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/equest-users-onebuilding.org</a><br>
To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a blank message to <a href="mailto:EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG">
EQUEST-USERS-UNSUBSCRIBE@ONEBUILDING.ORG</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
<br /><b><font color='00509A'>Performance Systems Development </font><font color='FC9A2D'>Anti-X</font></b> Message Security: <a href='http://www.exchangedefender.com/verify.asp?id=p19Kw5xf006255&from=cbalbach@psdconsulting.com'>Check Authenticity </a>
<html>
<h1>
<strong><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: medium; ">CONFIDENTIAL</span></strong></h1>
<p>
This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Performance Systems Development.</p>
<b><p>
Please contact the sender if you believe that you have received this email in error and immediately delete this message. </p></b>
</body>
</html>
<br /><br />
</html>