Guest Post: Ten Ways to Minimize Legal Pitfalls of Sustainable Design and Construction

Angela R. Stephens

 Today's guest post is by Angela Stephens, a fellow construction attorney in the Construction Service Group and Green Law Group at Stites & Harbison PLLC. She is a LEED Accredited Professional and is the first attorney in the Commonwealth of Kentucky to achieve Green Advantage® certification.

 Sustainable Design and Construction raises unique legal issues for all parties who touch the project. It affects sureties, insurance companies, banks, owners, design professionals, contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers, vendors, and their respective employees.

Design professionals should work with the owner and contractor to develop sustainable goals that are attainable. Owners and banks want to be sure that they have adequate remedies in case costs exceed what was promised, tax incentives which were being sought by having a sustainable and energy efficient building are lost, or if the design or construction of a project does not result in LEED Certification.

Contractors and subcontractors need to make sure that they understand the unique requirements for “green” projects such as: (1) following the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan adopted for the project, (2) avoiding disturbance of more areas than necessary or allowed by LEED on previously undeveloped land, (3) properly installing the right materials (i.e. materials with low VOC limits, high SRI values, which are recycled, reused, regional, or renewable) and equipment, (4) protecting materials and equipment during construction from moisture or construction debris, (5) collecting and submitting the required documentation for those materials, and (6) following the waste management plan for recycling construction waste materials. If a contractor fails to comply with one of these requirements which was tied to a sustainable goal or point needed for certification, then it may be liable for any resulting damages suffered by the owner.

Owners, design professionals, and contractors want to make sure that they have adequate insurance coverage in place to cover any potential risks. However, insurance companies are still evaluating whether special coverage is needed on sustainable design and construction projects; only a few companies are currently offering specialized coverage for “green” projects. In addition to obtaining insurance coverage to help minimize the risks to your company, here are some ways to minimize the potential legal risks of sustainable design and construction.

  1. Don’t Promise More Than You Can Deliver.  In addition to environmental stewardship, there are many recognized benefits to sustainable design and construction such as energy and operational cost savings, healthier workspaces, increased worker productivity, increased tax incentives, and financing incentives. However, what happens when your marketing materials promise or guarantee these benefits and they are not realized or there is a dispute over whether these benefits are actually realized? The parties may end up in a dispute alleging breach of an express or implied warranty, fraud, false advertising, or other similar claims. The key is to monitor your marketing activities. Only promise what you can measurably deliver, and include clauses in your contracts which limit all warranties to those expressly provided in the contract.
  2. Don’t Guarantee the Level of Certification. Likewise, if you are a contractor, subcontractor or design professional, do not guarantee the level of certification on any project unless required by law. In many cases, the determination of whether a project achieves a certain level of certification is regulated by a third party over which you have no control. For example, under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building LEED Rating System, owners who want to design and construct a LEED certified building must first register the construction project with the Green Building Certification Institute (“GBCI”), a third party responsible for project registration and LEED certification. During the design and construction phase of the project, the project team submits documentation to the GBCI, through LEED Online, verifying that certain points have been achieved. Ultimately, the GBCI determines whether various points are achieved in order to reach the various levels of LEED certification. Therefore, instead of guaranteeing a certain level of certification, warrant that the work will be in accordance with the contract, the plans and specifications, and accepted industry standards.
  3. Identify the Participants, Their Roles, and Their Responsibilities.  Many disciplines are involved in achieving a project’s sustainable goals (whether obtaining LEED Certification or following the guidelines of the Green Globes rating system). On most sustainable construction projects, no one party is in control of obtaining all of the points or goals. The parties must collaborate and work together in order to obtain the project’s goals. Most importantly, the parties must understand who is responsible for all of the aspects of meeting the project’s goals. For example, if the owner's goal is LEED Silver Certification, the parties should create a version of the LEED 2009 score card which clearly identifies which parties will be responsible (i.e. architect versus the general contractor and subcontractors) for achieving the various points sought within LEED 2009, and make this document an addendum to each of the contracts on the project. Additionally, owners and contractors should select an experienced green building team and consider inserting clauses in their contracts affirming that the contractor and/or subcontractor have read, understands, and will comply with the LEED or green requirements for the project.

To continue reading Angela's post and learn about the seven other tips, please click here.

The Green Construction Performance Bond: The Friction, A Legislative Dilemma and the Current Environment

This guest post was written by Kevin Kaiser of SuretyBonds.com, specializing in teaching consumers about surety bonds through the Surety Bond Education Center.  I do not represent Kevin or his company, nor do I sponsor any of their products.  Kevin has some great things to say about the surety's perspective in green construction, which is particularly timely given the announcement of a recent challenge to a LEED certification in Wisconsin

The Green Performance Bond

Green Construction Performance BondGreen building continues to gain momentum across the country, as project developers and consumers look for ways to incorporate environmental consciousness into everyday life.

Last year, Energy Star homes accounted for almost 20 percent of all new single family construction, up from 12 percent the year before. There’s also greater interest this year in LEED-certified homes and other more involved green-certified standards from the U.S. Green Building Council.

But it isn’t all smooth sailing. In fact, green construction is proving extremely problematic for the surety industry, which ensures that construction projects are completed and in accordance with contracts by issuing bonds.

And until that’s rectified, a nationwide wave of green construction might be on hold.

The Friction

In short, the issue is a performance bond. These are a key part of the normal construction bonding process that guarantee a contractor completes all work up to contract and code.

Surety companies typically scrutinize a contractor’s financial health, expertise, work history and likely ability to perform the job before underwriting a bond. They also look at a given project’s specific contract. Performance bonds are tied to specific, quantifiable goals grounded in industry standards and accepted practices.

That’s why green building performance standards are becoming a significant and mounting problem for surety companies.

To obtain certain green building designations, third parties like the U.S. Green Building Council look for specific levels of energy efficiency and other quantifiable improvements. But most sureties will steer clear of bonding a company with a contract that calls for third-party certification or requires specific energy reductions.

The reasons revolve around risk mitigation and responsibility: Who’s on the hook financially if the building falls to meet those third-party requirements?

“It’s not always the party that has to post the bond that’s responsible for that element of LEED certification,” Bob Duke, director of underwriting and assistant counsel for the District-based Surety and Fidelity Association, told the Washington Business Journal. “Maybe the party posting the bond doesn’t have control of the total obligation.”

Because of those lingering questions, most surety companies will not issue a bond for a contract that calls for any type of green or energy efficiency benchmarks, which are not performance standards but prescriptive requirements.

“In the event that a building fails to perform to a specified level of resource efficiency, should the surety be required to compensate the owner to rebuild the structure?” Mark Rabkin, a risk manager for Althans Insurance Agency, noted in a recent blog post. “That is not what they are in business to do and will not bond contracts guaranteeing efficiency and performance specifications.”

The D.C. Green Building Dilemma

The green performance bond issue has garnered headlines in the last year because of new regulations in Washington, D.C.

The District in 2006 created a green building requirement for certain private and public projects. The regulation basically requires the use of a bond that doesn’t really exist yet — a green performance bond.

Surety companies and associations have lobbied against the new regulations, which take full effect in 2012.

Projects that fail to meet the new green standard would pay claims of up to 4 percent of building costs to a city green building fund. Compounding the situation is a clear conflict of interest: The District agency that maintains the green building fund is the same that can determine whether a project is in compliance with the new regulations.

Last fall, surety claims attorney Bryan M. Seifert addressed the D.C. green building regulation in a piece on Entrepreneur.com:

This type of legislation involves a fundamental misunderstanding of the marketplace, the type of products available in the insurance and surety industry and how those products respond to today's construction needs. Performance bonds typically guarantee the performance of a quantifiable objective. Rather than legislate a performance bond to guarantee a quantifiable goal based on an objective standard for which the bond is written, the District has chosen to legislate a particular prescriptive rating system with attendant unknown risks. The surety product will more likely end up contributing to the District's green building fund and not the sustainable performance objectives of the District's projects.

Owners, stakeholders, contractors, risk managers, insurers and sureties must be keenly aware of the flurry of legislative activity and its implications for their interests. Much of the recent green building legislation is a result of advocacy for intangible outcomes with little analysis given to the overall performance of the public asset and little consideration for the industries that support and sustain the construction process such as insurers and sureties. The D.C. Act is just one of many examples of legislative activity that may have profound and unknown affects on these industries.

Sureties continue to balk at the vague and risky language of this and other proposed green building bonding measures. If that persists, the burden will fall to contractors and developers to assume greater risk when taking on some green public and private projects.

Current Environment

After consistent outcry from the surety industry, officials in Washington, D.C., are trying to rework the language regarding performance bonds.

Industry officials and observers alike are unsure when or how the issue will likely get resolved. D.C. environmental officials have staked a claim that green performance bonds are feasible.

Now they have to find a practical way to prove it to the nation’s surety industry.

 
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]