Regardless of what approach is deployed, the key is to work collaboratively with all parties to understand what in the first instance is required to bring the facilities up to the required standard (if any) identified by the handback surveys. Where investment is already planned within the Agreement for certain systems, and/or where additional Authority funding may benefit such plans in respect of reducing consumption and associated costs and reduction in carbon emissions.
Generally (this may vary from project to project) the Project Co is obligated to maintain all building plant, fittings and infrastructure to Good Industry Practice. The Project Co is also required to replace building fabric, plant and infrastructure when life expired (or to meet handback condition requirements), utilising an agreed Lifecycle plan and fund. Also, the Project Co has a responsibility to report on energy performance (i.e. energy consumed and costs incurred), however utilities invoices are generally either paid directly by or a 'pass through' cost to the Authority for payment while, as noted above, on some projects, there are provisions within the Agreement related to energy performance targets, and 'pain/gain' calculations for which the Project Co takes an element of risk based on the annual energy consumption of the buildings.
The FM SLS and payment mechanisms associated with the Project Agreement mean that careful consideration is required in respect of how contractually and commercially NZ changes could be implemented particularly relating to the apportioning of performance risk, and associated contractual mechanisms, with third party involvement in installing and/or operating building systems.
Development and delivery of NZ opportunities within the constraints of the Project Agreement itself, either through Project Co lifecycle works or Authority instructed Change, is the most pragmatic opportunity for implementation.