Pre-Functional Checklist Dispute on Air Handling Units
On a hospital project, the Cx agent issues pre-functional checklists for 22 air handling units. The mechanical contractor returns the checklists for 18 units with every line marked 'N/A' or checked without initials, and states that the manufacturer's start-up sheets cover the same ground so the Cx checklists are duplicative. The agent inspects two units and finds fan belts misaligned on one, a stuck outdoor-air damper on another, and no record that duct static pressure sensors were zeroed. The contractor's project manager says the schedule cannot absorb 'paperwork' and that the agent is 'testing the contractor, not the equipment.' The hospital's infection control team needs the surgical suite AHUs operational in three weeks.
1. How should the Cx agent respond to the contractor's position on the checklists?
Read the worked answer
The agent should hold the line but reframe the dispute as a risk and schedule issue rather than a paperwork issue. Manufacturer start-up sheets verify the equipment as shipped; they do not verify installation integration, such as damper linkage freedom, sensor zeroing, belt alignment, control valve stroke, or filter loading. The two units the agent inspected already show defects that a start-up sheet would not catch, which is concrete evidence that the checklists are not duplicative.
The agent should ask the contractor to initial and date each line, use 'N/A' only with a written reason, and attach the manufacturer's sheets as supporting documentation rather than a substitute. The agent can offer to walk the first two or three units with the contractor's foreman to demonstrate what a completed checklist looks like, which usually shortens the learning curve. The agent should also escalate through the owner's representative if the contractor continues to refuse, because the specification and contract define the contractor's commissioning responsibilities. On schedule, the agent can sequence the surgical suite AHUs first so infection control gets what it needs, while making clear that sequencing does not waive the checklist requirement. The agent should document the defects found and the contractor's refusal in the issues log with dates.
2. The contractor claims the agent is 'testing the contractor.' How should the agent describe its actual role?
Read the worked answer
The agent should explain that pre-functional verification is a quality-assurance activity performed by the installing contractor and witnessed or spot-checked by the Cx agent. The contractor's own technicians complete and sign the checklists; the agent verifies that the work was done and that the equipment is ready for functional testing. The agent is not the installer and does not perform the contractor's work.
The purpose is to avoid wasting functional test time on equipment that is not ready. If belts are misaligned or a damper is stuck, the functional test will fail for reasons unrelated to the control sequence, and the retest costs everyone schedule. Catching those items in pre-functional checks protects the contractor's schedule. The agent should make this explicit in a short meeting with the contractor and owner, restate the contractual basis for the checklists, and confirm that the agent's spot-checks are sampling, not a substitute for the contractor's own completion. The tone should be collaborative but the requirement should not move.