Views
3 months ago

EnvisionV3-LOA-table-option

LD2.4 PLAN FOR END OF

LD2.4 PLAN FOR END OF LIFE INTENT: Ensure that the project is informed by an understanding of the full impacts and costs of the project end-of-life. METRIC: The degree to which the project team analyses, and communicates with stakeholders, end-of-life impacts, cost, and value. LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT IMPROVED ENHANCED SUPERIOR CONSERVING RESTORATIVE IMPROVED ENHANCED SUPERIOR CONSERVING RESTORATIVE (1) End-of-life Plan Plan (3) (3) Enhancements. (6) (6) Pushing the the Boundaries. (10) (10) Extending the the Boundaries. LOA not available (A) The project team develops an end-of-life plan including the necessary replacement/ refurbishment of major components over the project life (A) and The its ultimate project team decommissioning, develops an deconstruction, (A) The project or team replacement. develops an The plan (A) is The included project in team operations develops and an maintenance (A) The project documents. team develops an end-of-life plan including the end-of-life plan including the end-of-life plan including the end-of-life plan including the necessary (B) Relevant replacement/ future demands, loads, necessary or other requirements replacement/ on the infrastructure necessary system replacement/ are estimated over the necessary anticipated replacement/ project life. The project refurbishment extends useful of life major through components reconfiguration, refurbishment future expansion, of major components or flexibility, refurbishment OR options to of beneficially major components repurpose refurbishment the project after of major end-of-life. components over the project life and its ultimate over (C) End-of-life the project impacts life and are its ultimate assessed over including the project the environmental, life and its ultimate social, and over economic the project conditions life and its of ultimate the decommissioning, deconstruction, decommissioning, site and surrounding deconstruction, community. decommissioning, deconstruction, decommissioning, deconstruction, or replacement. or replacement. or replacement. or replacement. (D) The project includes a feasibility analysis including end-oflife costs The plan is included in operations The plan is included in operations The and plan salvage is included value associated in operations with deconstruction, The plan is included decommissioning, in operations and maintenance documents. and maintenance documents. and or replacement. maintenance The documents. findings are presented and maintenance to stakeholders. documents. (B) Relevant future demands, loads, or other requirements on the infrastructure system are estimated over the anticipated project life. (B) Relevant future demands, loads, or other requirements on the infrastructure system are estimated over the anticipated project life. (B) Relevant future demands, loads, or other requirements on the infrastructure system are estimated over the anticipated project life. (B) (E) Relevant The project future team demands, loads, demonstrates or other requirements proactive on the infrastructure stakeholder engagement system are estimated in over end-of-life the anticipated planning project and can life. demonstrate the community The project extends useful life The project extends useful life The project extends useful life The understands project extends the full useful life cycle life through reconfiguration, future through reconfiguration, future through reconfiguration, future through costs and reconfiguration, benefits of the future project. expansion, or flexibility, OR options expansion, or flexibility, OR options expansion, or flexibility, OR options expansion, or flexibility, OR options to beneficially repurpose the project after end-of-life. to beneficially repurpose the project after end-of-life. to beneficially repurpose the project after end-of-life. to beneficially repurpose the project after end-of-life. DESCRIPTION (C) End-of-life impacts are assessed including the environmental, social, and economic conditions of the site and surrounding community. This credit addresses the need to anticipate costs and impacts of project refurbishment or replacement and completes the series of planning credits that includes sustainable project identification and efficient low-impact operations and maintenance. Given the long life of infrastructure careful consideration is not always given to the projects end of useful life. For many projects the default assumption is that the project will continue indefinitely with periodic refurbishment. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT (C) End-of-life impacts are (C) End-of-life impacts are assessed including the assessed including the environmental, social, and environmental, social, and economic conditions of the site and economic conditions of the site and surrounding community. surrounding community. (D) The project includes a (D) The project includes a feasibility analysis including end-of- feasibility analysis including end-oflife costs and salvage value life costs and salvage value associated with deconstruction, associated with deconstruction, decommissioning, or replacement. decommissioning, or replacement. The findings are presented to stakeholders. This credit encourages project teams to consider the costs and impacts associated with a project’s end-of-life. In doing so, consideration should be given to extending the useful life of the project by enabling reconfiguration, future expansion, or flexibility, or by finding a beneficial use for the project. The EVALUATION longer the useful CRITERIA life of the AND project, DOCUMENTATION the less it will need GUIDANCE to be replaced, substantially reducing the energy, water, and materials required for a rebuild. A. Has the project team developed and end of life plan? The credit assessment begins with developing an end-of-life plan that 1. Base case for project useful life (in years). includes the replacement or refurbishment for major project components and the ultimate decommissioning, deconstruction, or replacement of the project. There are many instances where infrastructure is currently operating under conditions that exceed its original design parameters. This causes accelerated degradation of the asset and speeds its end-of-life. Project teams should anticipate future loads and incorporate them into the project in order to prolong the project life. This can be achieved through incorporating capacity for reconfiguration, future expansion, or flexibility. Project teams The should findings also are consider presented to the ultimate end-of-life impacts of the project. For example, stakeholders. whether decades of operation will render the site contaminated or otherwise environmentally damaged. These impacts are ultimately borne by the community and therefore they should be actively engaged in understanding the associated trade-offs and end-of-life costs and impacts. (E) The project team demonstrates proactive stakeholder engagement in end-of-life planning and can demonstrate the community understands the full life cycle costs and benefits of the project. © 2017 ISI, Inc. 57

2. EVALUATION Documentation CRITERIA of operations AND DOCUMENTATION and maintenance documents GUIDANCE including the end-of-life plan. The plan includes at minimum the timeline and frequency for replacement or refurbishment of all major components as well as considerations for the ultimate decommissioning, deconstruction, A. Has or replacement the project of team the project. developed and end of life plan? 1. Base case for project useful life (in years). B. Has the project team evaluated opportunities to extend the project’s useful life or beneficially repurpose the project at end-of-life? 2. Documentation of operations and maintenance documents including the end-of-life plan. The plan includes at minimum the timeline and 1. Estimates frequency of for the replacement relevant future or refurbishment demands, loads, of all major other components requirements as on well the as infrastructure considerations system. for the ultimate decommissioning, deconstruction, 2. Documentation or replacement of how the project. the overall design will allow for expansion, reconfiguration, and/or multiple uses, OR how the project can feasibly and beneficially be repurposed at the end of its useful life. B. Has the project team evaluated opportunities to extend the project’s useful life or beneficially repurpose the project at end-of-life? C. 1. Has Estimates the project of the relevant team assessed future demands, potential loads, social, or environmental, other requirements and on economic the infrastructure end-of-life system. impacts? 1. 2. Documentation estimating of how the potential overall design impacts will associated allow for expansion, with the project. reconfiguration, Assessment and/or should multiple cover uses, social, OR environmental, how the project and can economic feasibly impacts. and beneficially be repurposed at the end of its useful life. D. Has the project team evaluated the costs and salvage value of the project’s deconstruction, decommissioning, or replacement? C. Has the project team assessed potential social, environmental, and economic end-of-life impacts? 1. Results of the feasibility study identifying end-of-life costs and ultimate salvage value. 2. 1. Documentation Documentation estimating that the relevant potential agency, impacts department, associated or with other the public project. entity Assessment is aware should of the end-of-life cover social, feasibility environmental, analysis. and economic impacts. E. D. Has Has the the project project team team evaluated proactively the engaged costs and stakeholders salvage value in end-of-life of the project’s planning? deconstruction, decommissioning, or replacement? 1. 1. Documentation Results of the feasibility demonstrating study identifying that end-of-life end-of-life costs costs and impacts and ultimate were salvage incorporated value. into the stakeholder engagement process and the community 2. was Documentation engaged in that considering the relevant end-of-life agency, options department, for the or project. other public entity is aware of the end-of-life feasibility analysis. E. Has the project team proactively engaged stakeholders in end-of-life planning? DESCRIPTION 1. Documentation demonstrating that end-of-life costs and impacts were incorporated into the stakeholder engagement process and the community was engaged in considering end-of-life options for the project. This credit addresses the need to anticipate costs and impacts of project refurbishment or replacement and completes the series of planning credits that includes sustainable project identification and efficient low-impact operations and maintenance. Given the long life of infrastructure careful consideration is not always given to the projects end of useful life. For many projects the default assumption is that the project will continue indefinitely with periodic refurbishment. PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT This credit encourages project teams to consider the costs and impacts associated with a project’s end-of-life. In doing so, consideration should be given to extending the useful life of the project by enabling reconfiguration, future expansion, or flexibility, or by finding a beneficial use for the project. The longer the useful life of the project, the less it will need to be replaced, substantially reducing the energy, water, and materials required for a rebuild. The credit assessment begins with developing an end-of-life plan that includes the replacement or refurbishment for major project components and the ultimate decommissioning, deconstruction, or replacement of the project. There are many instances where infrastructure is currently operating under conditions that exceed its original design parameters. This causes accelerated degradation of the asset and speeds its end-of-life. Project teams should anticipate future loads and incorporate them into the project in order to prolong the project life. This can be achieved through incorporating capacity for reconfiguration, future expansion, or flexibility. Project teams should also consider the ultimate end-of-life impacts of the project. For example, whether decades of operation will render the site contaminated or otherwise environmentally damaged. These impacts are ultimately borne by the community and therefore they should be actively engaged in understanding the associated trade-offs and end-of-life costs and impacts. © 2017 ISI, Inc. 58

Lulu Loa - Iolani School
Michael Green​- Lao LoA signing.pdf - GMS-EOC
an Option
TABLE
tables
At the table?
*-optional
Options
OPTIONS
Sponsorship Options Supplementary Options