230201-Guide To Envision Verification Applicants

Guide to Envision
Verification for Applicants
This guidance document contains

important information for applicants
(users) of the Envision® sustainable
infrastructure framework, including
current policies, procedures, submission
tips, and pricing.
Released: September 12, 2018

Updated: February 1, 2023
Canadian pricing added to Appendix E
GUIDE TO ENVISION VERIFICATION FOR APPLICANTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1
1.1 THE ENVISION FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................. 1
1.2 USING ENVISION ................................................................................................................ 3
1.3 BENEFITS OF ENVISION AND VERIFICATION .................................................................... 4
1.4 DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR VERIFICATION ............................................................... 5
2.0 ENVISION VERIFICATION.......................................................................................... 6

2.1 OVERVIEW........................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 VERIFICATION PROCESS STEPS ......................................................................................... 9
3.0 PREPARING YOUR PROJECT FOR VERIFICATION.................................................... 16

3.1 MINIMUM PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FOR VERIFICATION ......................................... 16
3.2 ASSESSING CREDIT ACHIEVEMENT ................................................................................. 16
3.3 PREPARING CREDIT SUBMITTALS ................................................................................... 19
4.0 WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE VERIFICATION PROCESS ......................................... 25

4.1 VERIFIER SELECTION & COMMUNICATION .................................................................... 25
4.2 VERIFIER REVIEWS ............................................................................................................ 25
4.3 TIMELINES ........................................................................................................................ 27
4.4 THE APPEALS PROCESS ................................................................................................... 29
5.0 POLICIES ................................................................................................................. 31
LIST OF APPENDICES
PROJECT INFORMATION ........................................................................ 32

A.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................ 32
A.2 Information to be provided when an online Scoresheet for a project is
created.............................................................................................................................. 32
A.3 Information to be provided before Registration .......................................................... 32
A.4 Information to be provided before Submitting for verification................................... 32
MINIMUM PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS ................................................. 33
PROJECT PREREQUISITES ....................................................................... 34

C.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................ 34
C.2 Environmental, Social and Governance Safeguards ..................................................... 34
ENVISION CREDIT COVERSHEET TEMPLATE .......................................... 35
VERIFICATION PRICING SCHEDULE ....................................................... 37

RELEVANCE TO ENVISION V2 PROJECTS ................................................ 38
VERIFICATION SUBMITTAL QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECKLIST ............. 40
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS .......................................................... 43
LIST OF ENVISION VERIFICATION POLICIES .......................................... 48

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Congratulations on your decision to pursue Envision verification for your infrastructure project!
You are on your way to increasing the value and sustainability of your project. This guide is intended
to lead you through the process of submitting your project for review and formal recognition from
the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI).
This guide identifies the program requirements and guidelines put in place by ISI for the purpose of
administering the Envision verification program. Applicants must adhere to the requirements and
guidance contained within this guide and attached appendices.
Also, throughout this document, applicants are referred to various policies. All referenced policies
can be found in the ISI Policies document. The guidance and policies set forth by ISI are applicable to
all applicants seeking to verify infrastructure projects under the Envision framework, regardless of
type and size of infrastructure project.
This document is intended for project teams pursuing Envision verification and should be used in
conjunction with the official Envision Guidance Manual and ISI Policies, as updated from time-to-
time, available on the ISI website: www.sustainableinfrastructure.org.
While this document is primarily intended for projects pursuing verification under Envision v3, this
document contains relevant guidance and information for projects pursuing Envision verification
under Envision v2. Particularly relevant sections and any notable differences for projects pursuing
verification under verification under Envision v2 can be found in a table in Appendix F.
1.1 THE ENVISION FRAMEWORK

There are six components that comprise the Envision framework. Throughout this document,
references will be made to each of the following:
1. Envision Guidance Manual: The written framework.
The Envision Guidance Manual is the foundational component of the Envision framework. It contains
64 sustainability indicators, called credits, that cover the full dimensions of infrastructure
sustainability. Each credit in the Envision framework includes an intent statement and metric, levels
of achievement ranging from Improved to Restorative, a description of the credit, ways to improve
performance, evaluation criteria and documentation guidance, and related Envision credits. Credits
are organized into five categories and 14 subcategories by subject matter:
• Quality of Life: Wellbeing, Mobility, Community

• Leadership: Collaboration, Planning, Economy
1
• Resource Allocation: Materials, Energy, Water

• Natural World: Siting, Conservation, Ecology
• Climate and Resilience: Emissions, Resilience
2. Envision Pre-Assessment Checklist: An early-phase high-level pre-assessment.
The Envision Pre-Assessment Checklist is an Excel-based tool structured as a series of yes/no

questions based on the criteria found in the Envision Guidance Manual. It can be helpful early in the
project planning phase when specific performance data necessary for an in-depth assessment is still
unknown. It is also an educational tool designed to help Envision users become familiar with the
sustainability aspects of infrastructure planning, design, and construction. The Pre-Assessment
Checklist can be used to quickly compare project alternatives before key project decisions have been
finalized.
3. Envision Online Scoresheet: The detailed online assessment tool and calculator.
The Envision Online Scoresheet is a digital version of the Envision Guidance Manual that Envision
account holders may access on the ISI website. The Envision Online Scoresheet is used to conduct
more in-depth sustainability project assessments and is used to register and submit a project for
verification.
4. Envision Sustainability Professional Credential (ENV SP): Professional training in Envision

use.
An ENV SP is an individual who has completed ISI’s training program on the use of Envision. The
training program is offered online through the ISI website or in-person by an ISI-approved trainer. In
order for a project to submit for Envision verification, at least one ENV SP must be on the project
team (refer to Policy 3.5.1).
5. Envision Verification: Independent third-party project review process.
While many project teams use Envision as a self-assessment tool, ISI also offers a project verification
program. Verification is an independent third-party peer-review process to confirm a project meets
Envision evaluation criteria. Pursuing verification helps project teams calibrate their self-
assessments.
6. Envision Awards: Recognition for qualifying verified projects.
Projects that complete the verification process and achieve sufficient points earn an Envision award.
Award levels are based on the percentage of applicable points achieved.
2
1.2 USING ENVISION

Envision can and should be used throughout the entire life cycle of a project. The earlier Envision is
applied, the greater the value it can deliver. Using Envision early in the planning and design phase
can help project teams:
• Determine the right project to pursue;

• Establish sustainability goals, targets and objectives for the project; and
• Determine how best to design the project to meet the sustainability goals and the needs of the
host and affected communities.
Using Envision early in the planning and design phase can also save time for applicants during
verification. The following sections provide a high-level overview of how to use Envision at each
stage of the project life cycle.
Planning: In the planning phase of the project, Envision can be used to assess community values,
engage stakeholders, and build consensus around the best project solution. It guides decisions
when defining a project scope, prioritizing a list of projects, and comparing project alternatives.
Envision tools to support project planning: Envision Guidance Manual, Envision Pre-Assessment Checklist.
Design: In the design phase of a project, Envision guides a thorough evaluation of the design and
aids identification of additional improvements toward more sustainable development. The credit
levels of achievement benchmark the relative impact and encourage expanding the project goals
toward higher levels of sustainability. Integrating the Envision assessment into the design process
allows for sustainable-minded decision making throughout the project.
Envision tools to support project planning: Envision Guidance Manual, Envision Pre-Assessment Checklist,
Envision Online Scoresheet, Envision Sustainability Professional Credential, Envision Verification.
Construction: The construction phase of a project allows for creativity and innovation in how the
design is achieved. Envision can be used to guide decisions in this phase for continuity between the
sustainable intent in design and actual project delivery. During this phase, sustainable achievement
is measured and documented. The impact of the credits on the construction process can also be
measured.
Envision tools to support project construction: Envision Guidance Manual, Envision Online Scoresheet,
Envision Sustainability Professional Credential, Envision Verification.
Operations and Maintenance: During operations and maintenance, it is important to measure

sustainable performance. The Envision framework provides key sustainable performance indicators
that can be monitored over the project life. In this way, Envision supports evaluation of sustainable
impacts across project life-cycles.
3
Envision tools to support project operations and maintenance: Envision Guidance Manual, Envision
Sustainability Professional Credential, Envision Verification.
Communication and Education: The Envision framework provides an organized system for
educating stakeholders and garnering support. The transparent nature of the framework
demonstrates the relationship to the triple bottom line. Advertising sustainable project
achievements and awards is further supported by this transparency.
Envision tools to support sustainable infrastructure communication and education: Envision Sustainability
Professional Credential, Envision Verification, Envision Awards.
1.3 BENEFITS OF ENVISION AND VERIFICATION

Using Envision can benefit projects in many ways, including:
• Long-term viability through increased resiliency and preparedness;

• Lower costs through management and stakeholder collaboration;
• Reduced negative impacts on the community and environment;
• Potential to save owners money over time through efficiency;
• Credibility of a third-party rating system; and
• Increased public confidence and involvement in decision-making.
Envision users, including owners, planners, designers, engineers, architects, contractors, and others
have found value in attaining third-party verification. They indicate that pursuing Envision
verification provides many benefits, including:
• Instils community confidence that the project addresses their needs and concerns;
• Instils rate-payer or tax-payer confidence that their money is being spent in their best interest;
• Demonstrates that the sustainable achievements of the project are recognized and considered
noteworthy by an independent internationally recognized system;
• Motivates the project team to collaborate to achieve better outcomes;
• Provides an objective measure of sustainable performance;
• Draws attention to the good work being undertaken;
• Emphasizes the importance of tracking performance, collecting documentation, and following a
sound methodology from project inception through construction and operations; and
• Provides a quality control/quality assurance measure to confirm project assessments are
accurately completed by the appropriate agency, department, or municipality.
4
1.4 DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR VERIFICATION

Envision is a holistic sustainability framework for all types and sizes of physical infrastructure. This
includes, but is not limited to: airports, bridges, dams, landfills, levees, parks, power generating
stations, pipelines, railways, streetcars, stormwater management systems, water treatment plants,
and other components that make up civil works. While initially developed for use in the United
States and Canada, the Envision framework is being successfully adapted and applied around the
world.
Envision is not designed to evaluate human-occupied, interior conditioned buildings as stand-alone

projects, but can be used in conjunction with building rating systems. Envision is also not designed
to evaluate non-physical infrastructure such as policies, programs, or master plans, though some of
the documentation requirements for Envision credits include policies, descriptions of programs, and
information contained in master plans.
Please use the following guidelines to determine your project’s eligibility to submit for Envision
verification:
• The submission is for physical infrastructure (see above).

• There is at least one Envision Sustainability Professional (ENV SP) on the submitting project team
(Policy 3.5.1).
• The project is at or after 95% design completion, meaning all major design decisions have been
made. Projects can and should use Envision from the earliest planning stages. However, projects
will not have sufficient documentation to complete an Envision verification submission until 95%
design completion.1
• The project has been fully operational for less than three years. 2
Refer to Policy 3.2.1and Policy 3.2.2 for ISI’s policies on project eligibility. If you wish to apply for
Envision verification but are uncertain about the eligibility of your project, please contact ISI before
registering.
1 Project teams may indicate their intention to pursue verification by registering their project at any point in the
project timeline. Projects may choose to submit for verification after 95% design completion or after 95%
construction completion according to the verification pathways described in Section 2.1.
2 Projects that have been operational for more than three (3) years are not eligible for verification unless special
permission has been granted by ISI. This is because the documentation required for verification is typically
more difficult to retrieve once the project has been operational for a longer period of time.
5
2.0 ENVISION VERIFICATION
The following sections provide more detail on the Envision v3 verification process, including an
overview of the steps involved, and then a closer look at each one in more detail.
2.1 OVERVIEW
The purpose of Envision is to foster the dramatic and necessary improvement in the sustainable
performance and resiliency of physical infrastructure by helping owners, planners, engineers,
communities, contractors, and other infrastructure stakeholders to implement more cost-effective,
resource-efficient and adaptable long-term infrastructure investments. Recognition is an important
component of increasing awareness and initiating this systemic change. To this end, ISI offers an
Envision verification and awards program for recognizing sustainable project achievements.
Under Envision v3, projects may choose to pursue one of two verification pathways (see Figure 1):
• Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction

• Pathway B: Post-Construction
In Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction the project team conducts the primary verification and
earns the Envision award after the design phase (at or after 95% design completion). Projects are
then required to complete an additional post-construction review to maintain their Envision award.
The purpose of the post-construction review is to validate that commitments made during the
design review were carried through during construction.
In Pathway B: Post-Construction the project conducts the verification after the construction phase
(at or after 95% construction completion). No further steps are required.
Figure 1: Envision v3 Verification Pathways
6
Verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction
Step Description Section

Reference
1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet and Conduct Self-Assessment:

In your Envision account, create an Envision Online Scoresheet by providing a few basic Sections 2.2.1
details about your project. You can then conduct a self-assessment of your project using the and 2.2.2
Envision framework.
2 Register Project:
Register your infrastructure project through the ISI website by providing additional details
Section 2.2.3
about your project, requesting an invoice for the project registration fee, and submitting
payment.
3 Start Verification:
Once the self-assessment phase is complete, submit the project for independent, third-party Section 2.2.4
verification.
4 Design Review:
Your assessment and submission are reviewed and validated. The review process is iterative
Section 2.2.5
in nature; projects teams have an opportunity to respond to verifier comments and provide
additional documentation.
5 Envision Award:
Section 2.2.7
Projects that earn sufficient points in the Envision framework receive an Envision award.
6 Post-Construction Review:
Your assessment and submission are confirmed by the verifier after construction is complete.
The purpose is to validate that commitments made during the design review were carried Section 2.2.6
through during construction. A post-construction review is required maintain the Envision
award.
7 Project Complete:
N/A
The project verification process concludes once the final score is returned to the project team.
Table 1: Steps in Verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction
7
Verification Pathway B: Post-Construction
Step Description Section

Reference
1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet and Conduct Self-Assessment:

In your Envision account, create an Envision Online Scoresheet by providing a few basic Sections 2.2.1
details about your project. You can then conduct a self-assessment of your project using the and 2.2.2
Envision framework.
2 Register Project:
Register your infrastructure project through the ISI website by providing additional details
Section 2.2.3
about your project, requesting an invoice for the project registration fee, and submitting
payment.
3 Start Verification:
Once the self-assessment phase is complete, submit the project for independent, third-party Section 2.2.4
verification.
4 Post-Construction Review:
Your assessment and submission are reviewed and validated. The review process is iterative
Section 2.2.6
in nature; projects teams have an opportunity to respond to verifier comments and provide
additional documentation.
5 Envision Award:
Section 2.2.7
Projects that earn sufficient points in the Envision framework receive an Envision award.
6 Project Complete:
N/A
The project verification process concludes once the final score is returned to the project team.
Table 2: Steps in Verification Pathway B: Post-Construction
8
2.2 VERIFICATION PROCESS STEPS

This section provides greater detail on the steps to prepare a project for Envision verification.
Important tools, including the Envision Guidance Manual, Envision Online Scoresheet, and Envision
Pre-Assessment Checklist can be accessed or downloaded from your account. If you do not already
have an Envision account with ISI, you can create one by visiting ISI’s website
(www.sustainableinfrastructrue.org).
2.2.1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet
Create an Envision Online Scoresheet project file by logging into your Envision account, clicking
“Create Project”, and providing basic information about your project.
When initially creating a new Envision Online Scoresheet you are required to provide some basic
information about your project, such as its name and location. Refer to Appendix A for the
information that you will be required to input online when you create your Envision Online
Scoresheet.
The ISI website will automatically assign the individual creating the scoresheet as the project leader.
Throughout the verification process only the project leader will have access to controls such as
managing individuals associated with the scoresheet (i.e. the project team), registering the project,
or submitting for verification. At any time, the project leader can assign another member of the
project team as the project leader. There can only be one project leader for a project. Refer to
Policies 3.5.2 and 3.7.7.
2.2.2 Conduct Self-Assessment
Conduct a self-assessment of your project by selecting levels of achievement for the credits you
wish to pursue.
Once your Envision Online Scoresheet is created, you can begin to assess your project against the
Envision evaluation criteria. Begin by determining the credits you wish to pursue and at what level of
achievement. Be sure to consider the types of documents that will be needed to support the level of
achievement selected. As you select levels of achievement for credits, the scoresheet will
automatically calculate your Envision score. Often, project teams will create more than one
scoresheet for a project to compare alternatives and test different scoring scenarios.
Project leaders have the ability to add individuals to a scoresheet as part of the project team to
assist in conducting the assessment. Project leaders also have the ability to limit editing controls to
certain members of the project team.
9
2.2.3 Register Project
Register your infrastructure project by providing additional details about your project, requesting
an invoice, and submitting payment.
Only the project leader can register a project. Registration is an important step in the Envision
verification process as it signals your intent to pursue Envision verification. Before you register your
project, it is important to ensure your project is eligible for Envision verification (refer to Policies 3.2.1
and 3.2.2).
You may register your project at any time in the process from early planning to shortly before
submitting for verification (refer to Policy 3.3.3)
There are many benefits to registering your project:
• Welcome Letter. After registering your project, the project leader and lead ENV SP will receive a
welcome letter from ISI including important directions and next steps for preparing the
verification submission.
• Dedicated ISI Project Manager. Registered projects are assigned an ISI project manager who
acts as the main point of contact for the project team. The project manager can address
questions related to the verification process, use of the online tools, and/or specific credit-
related questions.
• Pre-Verification Credit Review. Registered projects may submit up to two credits to ISI for a
pre-verification review. This optional service, at no additional charge, is especially useful to
project teams who are submitting for verification for the first time. In their review ISI staff
provide guidance on the structure and content of the submission but do not make decisions on
levels of achievement.
• Early Recognition on the ISI website. As an optional form of early recognition, registered
projects may be listed on the ISI website. In order for your project to be listed as “registered”, a
complete street address or Google Map coordinates for the project is required. Only a location
marker and the name of the project as it was registered will appear on the ISI website project
awards map. The award level being sought is not listed on the website.
• Continuity of Envision Versions. Registered projects are not subject to future changes of
Envision. They are allowed to complete verification using the version of Envision at the time of
registration. However, the sunset date for all Envision v2 projects to complete their verification is
December 31, 2020. To ensure projects complete verification by this sunset date, ISI
recommends submitting Envision v2 projects by no later than July 2020 (refer to Policy 3.4.1 to
3.4.3).
10
2.2.4 Start Verification
Using the Envision Guidance Manual, in conjunction with the Envision Online Scoresheet, conduct
an in-depth assessment of the sustainability aspects of your project. Your project is ready to
submit for verification after levels of achievement are selected for each credit and credit
submittals are uploaded.
Your project is registered, and you are ready to begin conducting an in-depth assessment of the
sustainability aspects of your project. This is the most detailed phase within the Envision verification
process. During this phase, you will assess the sustainability aspects of your project, prepare your
project for submission for third-party verification, and do a final quality assurance sign-off (refer to
Policy 3.8.2).
During this stage of the verification process, you will:
• Provide additional details about your project (refer to Appendix A).

• Determine the credits your project will pursue and the appropriate level of achievement for
each.
• Determine whether any credits are not applicable to your project (refer to Section 3.2.2).
• If pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post Construction, determine whether any credits
should be marked as ‘pending’ (refer to Section 1.1.1.6).
• For each credit you are pursuing:
− Complete a credit coversheet. Project teams must use ISI’s coversheet templates (refer to
Policy 3.7.2).
− Collect documentation to demonstrate the level of achievement (refer to Section 3.3.).
− Upload your coversheet and supporting documentation as a credit submittal. (A credit
submittal consists of a credit coversheet and supporting documentation – refer to Section
3.3.)
• Conduct a final quality assurance sign-off of the submission and complete the Verification
Submittal Quality Assurance Checklist (refer to Appendix G).
2.2.5 Design Review
This step only applies to projects that are pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post-
Construction. At this stage in the verification process, you will be locked from making additional
changes and your submission will be reviewed by an ISI appointed third-party verifier trained to
evaluate projects according to the Envision framework.
The ISI appointed third-party verifier will thoroughly review your project submission using the
evaluation criteria in the Envision framework. Your project will also be reviewed by an ISI Reviewer
to ensure decisions made by the third-party verifier are consistent from project to project, and to
further validate the submission. The verifier’s primary responsibilities are to review the credit
submittals and then:
11
• Determine the appropriate levels of achievement, and

• Explain their level of achievement selection.
The verifier will return the project to you with their levels of achievement determinations, and
feedback for each credit. The design review phase of the verification process is iterative; you will
have an opportunity to address the verifier’s feedback and requests for additional documentation
by resubmitting your project for a second review. It should be emphasized that if you agree with the
verifier’s determination you are not required to address the verifier feedback or documentation
requests. It is perfectly acceptable to agree with the verifier and accept the levels of achievement
they have determined.
Refer to Section 4.0 for more information about what to expect from the verifier and the verification
process.
2.2.6 Post-Construction Review
This step applies to projects that are pursuing either Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction, or
Pathway B: Post-Construction. At this stage in the verification process, you will be locked from
making additional changes and your submission will be reviewed by an ISI appointed third-party
verifier trained to evaluate projects according to the Envision framework.
1.1.1.1 Projects pursuing Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction
The post-construction review is a necessary step to maintain the Envision award that was granted
after the design review phase was completed. ISI recognizes there could be a significant amount of
time—potentially years—between the end of the design phase and the end of the construction
phase. The project team is required to estimate the date of construction completion and keep ISI
informed of any significant changes to that schedule.
The verifier will not review credits already awarded during the design phase. The verifier will only
review credits marked as “pending” to confirm you have submitted the documents you committed
to provide post-construction to demonstrate the selected level of achievement (e.g., final
calculations of the recycled materials used for RA1.2 Use Recycled Materials, or final calculations of
construction waste diverted from landfills for RA1.4 Reduce Construction Waste).
This post-construction review is not an iterative process for projects pursuing verification Pathway
A. Rather, this step is meant to be a confirmation that commitments made during the project
planning and design phases were carried out successfully through construction. No new credits may
be pursued during this post-construction review for projects pursuing Pathway A.
During the post-construction review, if the required documentation for a pending credit is not
provided or fails to demonstrate the level of achievement requirements were met, the credit level of
achievement and final project score will be revised. It is also possible for the documentation to
demonstrate that a higher level of achievement was attained. Therefore, it is possible that the
12
Envision award level granted after the iterative design review could change as a result of the final
post-construction review.
1.1.1.2 Projects pursuing Pathway B: Post-Construction
The ISI appointed third-party verifier will thoroughly review your project submission against the
evaluation criteria in the Envision framework. Your project will also be reviewed by ISI staff to ensure
decisions made by the third-party verifier are consistent from project to project, and to further
validate the submission. The verifier’s primary responsibilities are to review the credit submittals
and then:
• Determine the appropriate levels of achievement, and

• Explain their level of achievement selection.
The verifier will return the project to you with their levels of achievement determinations, and
feedback for each credit. Much like the design review process for Pathway A projects, this post-
construction review for Pathway B projects is iterative; you will have an opportunity to address the
verifier’s feedback and requests for additional documentation by resubmitting your project for a
second review. It should be emphasized that if you agree with the verifier’s determination you are
not required to address the verifier feedback or documentation requests. It is perfectly acceptable
to agree with the verifier and accept the levels of achievement they have determined.
Refer to Section 4.0 for more information about what to expect from the verifier and the verification
process.
2.2.7 Envision Award
An Envision award is earned after the ISI appointed third-party verifier has completed a thorough
review of your project and provided a final score. Envision awards are based on the percentage of
applicable points your project earned in the Envision framework.
Award Level Percentage of Total Applicable Points Earned

Verified 20 – 29
Silver 30 - 39
Gold 40 - 49
Platinum 50 or more
Table 3: Envision Award Levels
Once your project has completed the review process and a final score has been awarded, your
project earns an Envision award provided at least 20% of applicable points in the Envision
framework were earned. There are four (4) possible Envision award levels that can be earned:
Verified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Once returned, your final score will be automatically accepted
13
and finalized after 30 days. During this time, you have the option to appeal credit decisions for an
additional per-credit fee (refer to Policy 3.8.6, and Policies 3.10.1 to 3.10.4).
Refer to Section 0 for more information on the appeals process.
1.1.1.3 Formal Recognition for Envision Verified Projects
ISI believes in formally and publicly recognizing projects for their sustainable achievements. For
projects that have earned an Envision award, the sections below outline the ways in which formal
recognition of Envision verified projects is granted.
1.1.1.3.1 Award Letter
ISI issues an award letter via email to the project leader and lead ENV SP. ISI endeavors to issue
award letters within one (1) week of the final Envision score being returned to the project team. This
award letter indicates the Envision award level earned (e.g., Verified, Silver, Gold, Platinum) and may
be used as evidence of Envision verification for other purposes (e.g., for sustainability awards
offered by other organizations/associations).
1.1.1.3.2 Certificate
ISI provides a certificate of Envision verification for the project which can be accessed from the
project file on the ISI website. This certificate indicates the project name, Envision award level, year
of award, and is signed and dated by the ISI President and Chief Executive Officer.
You are free to reproduce these certificates and display them however you choose (e.g., framed in
an office, online, in a sustainability report, etc.).
1.1.1.3.3 Award Announcement/Press Release
ISI prepares a press release, or project announcement, for your Envision verified project. The
announcement contains information about the Envision framework, the award level earned, a quote
from ISI, and highlights noteworthy sustainability aspects of your project. To prepare the award
announcement, ISI will draw from information provided in the project registration form and credit
submittals. ISI forwards this draft project announcement to the project contacts for thorough review
and vetting.
The body of the project announcement is posted on the ISI website, social media channels (e.g.,
Twitter and LinkedIn) and in the monthly ISI newsletter. As the project team, you are encouraged to
distribute the full announcement widely through your networks. ISI asks that the announcement not
be released until the agreed-upon date between you and ISI.
If ISI does not hear from you within three (3) months after earning an Envision award, ISI will
proceed with listing the project (name, location, brief description) and award level earned online.
14
Beyond this, ISI will not post detailed information on the project or issue other forms of public
announcements about the project without express consent from the project team (refer to Policy
3.11.2).
1.1.1.3.4 Plaques/Trophies
ISI has an exclusive partnership with an awards manufacturer, Eclipse Awards. Eclipse Awards is the
world’s first carbon-neutral awards company. Projects that earn Envision awards may purchase
physical awards (e.g., glass or metal wall plaques, desktop trophies) to commemorate their
achievement. Visit http://envisionawards.org for more information and to see the suite of products
available for purchase. Eclipse awards can provide specific information on the degree of
customization allowed for Envision Awards and can assist with the award ordering process. To order
an award, you must provide basic information about your project including the name of the project
and the unique ISI assigned project ID.
For more information about Envision awards, refer to Policy 3.11.1.
1.1.1.3.5 Award Presentations/Ceremonies
On occasion, ISI is asked to present the Envision award at a ribbon cutting, open house, or other
type of award ceremony. When availability permits, we are able to accommodate these requests if
travel and other associated expenses are covered in full. Due to the significant volume of projects
that pursue Envision verification, ISI is unable to guarantee attendance even if travel and related
expenses are covered.
15
3.0 PREPARING YOUR PROJECT FOR VERIFICATION
The following sections provide specific guidance for applicants preparing their project for
verification.
3.1 MINIMUM PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FOR VERIFICATION

Projects submitted for Envision verification must meet the minimum program requirements as
outlined in Appendix B.
ISI reviews each project submission prior to sending it to the verifier to ensure it meets the
minimum program requirements for verification. Projects that do not comply with the above
requirements will be notified by ISI and required to address any gaps before the project is verified.
Refer to Policy 3.1.1.
3.2 ASSESSING CREDIT ACHIEVEMENT
3.2.1 Scoring Methodology
Each of the credits and their associated levels of achievement are assigned points weighted in
accordance with their estimated contribution to sustainability. Points achieved for each applicable
credit are added together (numerator) and divided by the total possible points (denominator), to
give the Envision score expressed as a percentage. The baseline total possible points that can be
earned is 1,000. Credits that are deemed not applicable are removed from the total possible points
that can be earned. Points earned for “Innovation or Exceed Credit Requirements” credits act as
bonus points and do not impact the total possible points.
3.2.2 Credit Applicability
As a highly flexible and adaptable resource for all types and sizes of civil infrastructure, Envision
recognizes that not all credits will be applicable to all projects or project types. Therefore, credits can
be omitted from consideration by designating them as “not applicable”. This is reserved for cases
where the sustainability indicator addressed by a given credit does not exist for the project. For
example, on a project that is entirely underground external light fixtures would not exist and the
project team would not be able to assess credit QL1.5 Minimize Light Pollution.
Credits deemed not applicable impact project scoring. The maximum point value associated with
not applicable credits is removed from the total number of possible points in the Envision
framework. Therefore, if a project team determines that QL1.5 is not applicable for their
underground pipeline project with no external lighting, a total of 12 points will be removed from the
denominator, lowering the total number of applicable points from 1,000 to 988.
16
If you believe one or more credits are “not applicable” to your project, you must provide a credit
submittal for review. You must explain in the credit coversheet why the credit is not applicable to
your project and provide supporting documentation as evidence.
Only whole credits may be deemed “not applicable”. ISI does not allow individual evaluation criteria
to be deemed “not applicable”.
Determining whether a credit is “not applicable” can be difficult. The following are not acceptable
reasons for determining a credit’s lack of applicability:
• The scope of a contract does not address the issue;

• Achieving the credit requirements is deemed to be too expensive, difficult, or time-consuming;
• Local laws or regulations prohibit meeting the requirements;
• Those conducting the Envision assessment do not have decision-making authority; or
• Stakeholders have indicated that the issue is not a priority.
In cases where local laws or regulations prohibit actions that would meet the credit requirements
(e.g., local laws requiring the use of bright external lighting) the sustainability indicator does not
become non-existent (e.g., QL1.5 Minimize Light Pollution). Rather, this means the project team will
not be able to achieve the credit requirements and will need to look elsewhere in the Envision
framework to earn points.
3.2.3 Evaluation Criteria and Documentation Guidance
When preparing your project for verification, it is important to pay close attention to the specific
evaluation criteria and documentation guidance for your chosen level of achievement. You must
fulfill all required evaluation criteria in order to achieve the level of achievement. You may not omit
or deem individual evaluation criteria as “not applicable”.
There are several types of evaluation criteria in the Envision framework, including:
• Yes/No: An action taken, or an outcome achieved (e.g., the project is not located on sensitive
sites)
• Target: a specified outcome with discrete quantifiable levels (e.g., the project reduces energy
consumption by 15%)
• Execution: a process conducted, or a commitment made to accomplish a stated objective (e.g.,
the project team has a comprehensive sustainability management plan in place)
• Accomplishment: a process conducted with a general or unspecified result (e.g., the project
team has ‘minimized’ the use of fertilizers and pesticides on the project)
Evaluation criteria are denoted with letters (e.g., A, B, C, D) and are accompanied by documentation
guidance denoted with numbers (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4). Refer also to Policy 3.7.3 for additional information
pertaining to evaluation criteria and supporting documentation.
17
3.2.4 Establishing Baselines
Several credits in the Envision framework—such as RA3.2 Reduce Operational Water Consumption—
require project teams to demonstrate performance by percentage reductions compared to an
acceptable base case or baseline. In the event a widely recognized industry standard does not
already exist, project teams must establish a baseline. Acceptable methodologies for establishing
baseline performance data for Envision include (in order of preference):
• Existing conditions: comparing your project against existing conditions or the existing system(s)
the project will replace;
• Project alternative: comparing your project against a seriously considered project alternative;
• Industry “standard practice”: comparing your project against industry “standard practice” or
existing codes, standards or regulatory requirements; and
• Similar project: comparing your project against a project of similar scope and size operating
within the same geographical area or within a geographical area with similar operating
conditions.
Regardless of the methodology chosen, you must provide:
• An explanation of why you selected the baseline and its relevance to your project,
• Documentation to support the establishment of the baseline, and
• The required percentage reduction calculations for your project compared to the baseline.
3.2.5 Innovation
Each credit category in the Envision framework includes one “Innovation or Exceed Credit
Requirements” credit denoted with a 0.0 after the credit category abbreviation (e.g., QL0.0).
Innovation credits include three options to earn bonus points:
• Innovation: sustainability solutions that overcome significant problems, barriers, and/or

limitations or create scalable and/or transferable solutions for the industry.
• Exceptional performance: Performance in one or more credits that exceeds the highest
available level of achievement.
• Additional Aspects of Sustainability: A sustainability indicator not already included in the
Envision framework.
Points awarded for innovation credits are discretionary and are awarded in 2-point increments (i.e.,
0, 2, 4, etc.). Innovation points cannot be earned in multiple categories for the same thing, for
example, an innovation submitted for points in LD0.0 cannot also be awarded under QL0.0 or RA0.0.
Project teams must clearly explain why they believe their project deserves the number of innovation
points selected and provide documentation to further justify their explanations. Specific guidance
for these credits and examples for each type of innovation option is included in the Envision
Guidance Manual.
18
Any points earned for innovation credits act as bonus points that are added to the project’s total
score (the numerator) but do not affect the total number of applicable points in the framework (the
denominator).
3.3 PREPARING CREDIT SUBMITTALS

A credit submittal must be prepared for each Envision credit being pursued for your project
including “Not Applicable” credits – refer to Policy 3.7.4. A credit submittal consists of the following
components:
• A credit narrative or coversheet (refer to Policy 3.7.2)

• Supporting documentation
A credit submittal does not need to be prepared for credits that you are not pursuing (i.e., no level of
achievement).
Section 3.3.1 provides more detail on Envision credit coversheets and Section 3.3.2 provides more
information about supporting documentation.
3.3.1 Preparing a Credit Coversheet
ISI has developed coversheet templates for each credit in the Envision framework. The full set of
coversheets can be accessed on the ISI website after logging into your account. To facilitate a
smoother verification process and to promote consistency from project to project, applicants are
required to use ISI’s coversheets.
Credit coversheets are meant to fulfill three main objectives:
• To specify the level of achievement being sought or the credit’s applicability.

• To provide an explanation as to how the project meets the evaluation criteria and credit intent
for the level of achievement sought.
• To direct the verifier to the supporting document(s) for each evaluation criteria.
Without a credit coversheet, the verifier will have insufficient context to review the supporting
documentation and will not be able to verify the level of achievement being sought. Refer to
Appendix D to see what an Envision credit coversheet template looks like.
Credit coversheets include the following sections:
1.1.1.4 Level of Achievement / Credit Applicability
Applicants must specify on the credit coversheet the level of achievement being sought. The
selection on the coversheet should match the level selected online. Six (6) options are available on
the coversheet: Not Applicable, Improved, Enhanced, Superior, Conserving, and Restorative.
19
1.1.1.5 Summary Statements
Summary statements are brief explanations as to why the project achieves the selected level of
achievement. They are especially important for credits deemed “N/A”.
If you are pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction, and one or more documents
required to demonstrate achievement will not be available until the post-construction review, you
must clearly mark the credit as “Pending” online and on the coversheet.
1.1.1.6 Pending Credits
Under Envision v3, project teams pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction,
conduct the primary review after 95% design completion. However, all the documentation necessary
to demonstrate achievement for certain credit criteria may not be available at this point in the
project timeline. Credits are marked as “pending” if documentation necessary to demonstrate
achievement will only be available at the post-construction follow-up review. If a credit is not marked
as pending the verifier will assume all the necessary documentation to demonstrate achievement
has been provided.
The following credits will likely always be considered “pending” during the design phase reviews in
Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction (not intended to be an exhaustive list):
• QL1.3 Improve Construction Safety

• QL1.6 Minimize Construction Impacts
• RA1.1 Support Sustainable Procurement Practices
• RA1.2 Use Recycled Materials
• RA1.4 Reduce Construction Waste
• RA2.2 Reduce Construction Energy Consumption
• RA3.3 Reduce Construction Water Consumption
For example, it will not be possible to provide all the documentation necessary to demonstrate
achievement in construction credits, such as QL1.3 Improve Construction Safety or RA3.3 Reduce
Construction Water Consumption, until after construction completion. In these cases, during the
design review the project team must:
• Mark the credit as “pending”;

• Select a level of achievement;
• Provide documentation that credit requirements will be met during construction (e.g.
construction specifications, targets, policies); and
• Identify and explain any additional documentation that will be available and provided in the
post-construction review in order to demonstrate achievement.
Refer to Section 3.2 for assessing credit achievement.
20
1.1.1.7 Explanations for Evaluation Criteria
Explanations must be provided as to how the project meets each of the credit’s evaluation criteria
for the selected level of achievement. Applicants are to assess each criterion separately; answers for
multiple evaluation criteria should not be combined. Explanations must answer the specific
questions posed by the evaluation criteria and must be supported by clearly referenced
documentation. Bolded or highlighted references are preferable as this enables the verifier to
efficiently locate supporting documentation. Supporting documentation is provided to back up
explanations provided in the narrative, therefore, it is important to summarize key findings from the
documentation in the explanations provided. For example, for QL1.1, criterion A “Has the project
team identified and taken into account community needs, goals, and issues?”, not acceptable
responses would be: “Yes” or “Yes, see document XYZ, pages 4-6.” These responses do not provide
nearly enough context for the verifier to accurately determine a level of achievement. A far superior
response to criterion A would be: “Yes, the project team has identified and taken into account the
following community needs goals and issues: XX, XXX, XXX which are documented in Document A,
pages 4-6 (sections also highlighted for ease of reference).”
Please note that this section is not required if a credit has been designated not applicable. In these
cases, the summary statements should explain to the verifier why not applicable was selected and
references to supporting documentation should also be provided in this section.
1.1.1.8 References to Supporting Documentation
When providing explanations for each evaluation criteria, you must also specifically direct the
verifier to the supporting documents or sections of supporting documents (e.g., specific page
numbers, headings) that support your statements. This enables the verifier to confirm explanations
provided in the credit coversheet.
If you are pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction, and one or more documents
required to demonstrate achievement will not be available until the post-construction review, you
must clearly mark the credit as “pending” and explain to the verifier what documentation you will
provide for the post-construction review and what it will demonstrate.
When referencing a supporting document in the body of the credit coversheet, please be sure to make the
reference stand out. ISI recommends bolding or highlighting references to supporting documentation for the
verifier’s ease of reference.
1.1.1.9 Table of Contents
Each credit coversheet template includes a table of contents section. This is where you are required
to list the documents that you have provided for the verifier to review. It is very important that you
use intuitive file names and that the file names match the names of the documents listed in the
table of contents.
21
1.1.1.10 Pending Documentation
Each credit coversheet template also includes a pending documentation table of contents. This
section is only relevant for projects pursuing verification Pathway A. This is where you are required
to list the documents that you will provide for the verifier to review during the post-construction
review step. You will also be required to provide a brief description of each pending document.
3.3.2 Preparing Supporting Documentation
Supporting documentation validates statements made by applicants in the credit coversheet. In

addition to referencing supporting documents in the credit coversheet, applicants are strongly
encouraged to highlight and/or annotate supporting documentation to draw the verifier’s attention
to the specific sentences, pages, or sections that correspond to statements made in the credit
coversheet. Supporting documentation must be provided for all credits and for all evaluation criteria
to demonstrate a level of achievement, regardless of the verification pathway.
Highlighting and/or annotating the supporting documentation facilitates a smoother verification process and
reduces the potential for verifiers to misinterpret the documentation or not be able to locate the required
evidence.
For example, if you are pursuing RA1.4 Reduce Construction Waste, evaluation criterion A calls for
evidence that a comprehensive waste management plan is in place. Projects pursuing verification
Pathway B: Post-Construction should provide the actual construction waste management plan that
was utilized during construction and demonstrate that it was implemented. If verification Pathway A:
Design + Post-Construction is being pursued, projects may not be able to demonstrate
implementation of a construction waste management plan during the design review, but should still
provide policies, specifications, or contract documents indicating that such a plan will be developed
and implemented. Criterion B requires the project team to demonstrate the extent to which
construction waste was diverted from landfills. Again, projects pursuing verification Pathway B
should provide calculations of the percentage of materials diverted to recycle or reuse. Projects
pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post Construction will not be able to provide calculations
during the design review, but should provide policies, specifications, contract documents, signed
commitments or other related documents to achieve a target construction waste diversion rate. The
verifier will assess the reasonableness of the assumptions used to set the target diversion rate.
Pathway B projects will earn a level of achievement based on sufficient documentation being
provided for each evaluation criteria. Pathway A projects will also earn a level of achievement based
on the documentation provided but the credit will be marked as pending until a post-construction
review has been completed by the verifier.
22
3.3.3 Credit Submittals “Dos and Don’ts”
The following tips are intended to help you successfully compile credit submittals for verification.
1. Do: Clearly define your project boundary and keep it consistent across all credit
submittals
It is important to fully explain what is being included in a project submission versus what is not. For
example, many infrastructure projects contain multiple elements such as a road and a bridge, and
perhaps even a park. Using this road/bridge/park example, if you only wish to have the road and
bridge components verified and not the park, the park component of the project cannot be counted
towards credits when it may be especially beneficial to do so (e.g., for QL3.4 Enhance Public Space &
Amenities).
2. Do: Prepare credit submittals as stand-alone submissions
ISI’s third-party verifiers have been trained to reference only the documents submitted for a given
credit. Applicants should not assume the verifier will remember or rely upon documents or
explanations provided in other credits. Each credit submission should include all the explanation
and documentation necessary to be assessed on its own, even if this means duplicating documents.
3. Do: Prepare high-quality and comprehensive credit coversheets
The quality and comprehensiveness of the explanations provided in the credit coversheets are
critically important and can either help the verifier to view the supporting documentation in the
applicant’s favor or cause the verifier to view the supporting documentation incorrectly.
4. Do: Review any/all available Credit Interpretations prior to submitting a project for
verification
From time to time, ISI makes the determination that a Credit Interpretation is required. Credit
Interpretations are developed when ISI determines that one or more elements in the Envision
Guidance Manual for a given credit or group of credits require clarification or further explanation. All
Credit Interpretations can be accessed on the ISI website.
5. Do: Use intuitive file names
Please save your files using intuitive file names before uploading them to the ISI website. Where
possible, save your files using the same names that you refer to them in the credit coversheet. For
example, if you’re uploading a lighting schematic for your project as documentation for QL1.5
Minimize Light Pollution, save the file using an intuitive name such as “Lighting Schematic” rather
than “Drawing C00167”.
6. Do: Distinguish between initial credit submittals and revised credit submittals
When preparing your project for resubmission (e.g., after the verifier has already reviewed the
project and provided feedback), be sure to identify any “new” or “revised” documentation submitted
23
for review. For example, any revised coversheets should be saved with “revised” at the end (e.g.
QL1.5_Coversheet_revised).
7. Do: Put yourself in the shoes of someone who is learning about your project for the first
time
When preparing credit submittals, applicants are encouraged to put themselves in the shoes of
someone who does not know anything about their project and has a limited amount of time to
review your project. As an applicant, your role is to convey the details of your project in a clear,
transparent, and accurate manner. You are very familiar with your project, but the verifier assigned
to review your project will be learning about it for the first time. It is always better to err on the side
of providing more detail than less (though the goal is never to overwhelm the verifier with too
much information or documentation). This will reduce questions from the verifier and in turn reduce
the amount of work to prepare a resubmission.
8. Don’t: Include links to webpages or videos as documentation
The verifier will not rely on information provided on external websites unless the information from a
website has been printed and uploaded as project documentation. Applicants wishing to provide
videos as evidence must provide written transcripts as links to videos are not accepted.
9. Don’t: Type your responses to the evaluation criteria in the credit comments section
online
As previously mentioned, ISI credit coversheets must be used. The online credit “comments” section
is a tool to enable teamwork and collaboration amongst members of the project team. This function
is especially useful when members of the project team span different offices and cannot, therefore,
work together in person on the project. Any information contained in the credit comments section
will not be reviewed by the verifier and will have no impact on how the credit is verified.
10. Don’t: Assemble all supporting documentation for the entire project into one master file
and provide it for reference
Only supporting documentation relevant to a particular credit should be provided for reference.
Providing extraneous documentation complicates the review process and will likely lead to the
applicant receiving a lower level of achievement than originally sought as the verifier will have a
more difficult time locating relevant documentation to back up statements made in the credit
coversheet.
Adherence to these guidelines and tips will result in the verifier being able to complete the review of your
project in a timely fashion and will increase the likelihood of a favorable review.
24
4.0 WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE VERIFICATION PROCESS
4.1 VERIFIER SELECTION & COMMUNICATION

ISI hires verifiers from a range of backgrounds to conduct third-party peer reviews of infrastructure
projects seeking formal recognition for their sustainable attributes. Once you notify ISI that you’re
ready to submit for verification, ISI will provide you with a list of three to five potential verification
companies. Submitting teams may not select their verifier from this list; rather, they are to inform ISI
of any potential conflicts of interest (e.g., a proposed firm worked on the project in any capacity) that
exist with any of the proposed verification companies.
Typically, verifiers are not assigned to projects more than 2 weeks in advance of a project being
submitted for verification. Project teams are expected to keep ISI apprised of any changes to the
submission timeline and are expected to provide at least 2 weeks’ notice prior to submitting for
verification (refer to Policy 3.8.4).
ISI is the main point of contact for applicants. Any communication with the verifier and applicant is
facilitated through the Envision Online Scoresheet. At no point in the verification process may the
applicant communicate directly with the verifier or vice versa by any means (e.g., email, phone, or in-
person), unless facilitated by ISI. Refer to Policy 3.8.7.
4.2 VERIFIER REVIEWS
4.2.1 First Review Scores
It is common for a project to drop at least one award level after the first review. For example, if you
submit your project at a Gold award level, you may find that your project is returned by the verifier
at a Silver. This is especially true for first-time applicants that may not be as familiar with the
Envision framework or the submission requirements. ISI allows for more than one review to provide
applicants with the opportunity to address comments and/or questions posed by the verifier after
they have completed their first review of the project. Often, the information the verifier needs to
confirm a level of achievement is available but was not uploaded with the submittal, or the verifier
was unable to locate the information in the credit submittal.
One of the reasons ISI offers a third-party verification program is to help Envision users calibrate
their self-assessments by going through a rigorous review process. Therefore, ISI encourages
applicants to view verification as an excellent learning opportunity for the current and future project
submissions. ISI and its verifiers aim to provide helpful, informative comments to applicants by
explaining why a level of achievement was verified different from the applicant’s original selection.
Note, however, that verifiers will not provide commentary beyond a simple message of agreement if
they concur with your initial level of achievement selection.
25
4.2.2 Verifier Feedback
The verifier will either agree or disagree with the applicant’s selected Level of Achievement for each
credit. If the verifier agrees with the applicant, a simple “agree” or “verifier agrees” note will be
included in the verifier comment box online. If the verifier disagrees with the applicant, and instead
believes a different level of achievement is more appropriate for one or more credits, he or she will
provide comments explaining why they have verified a different level of achievement and what
would be required to advance to the applicant’s desired level of achievement.
In cases where the verifier disagrees with the level of achievement chosen by the applicant, the
verifier comments will:
• Focus on what is missing from the documentation and/or explanations provided in the credit
coversheet;
• Align comments with the Envision Guidance Manual to the extent possible;
• Be as clear and as concise as possible;
• Be as direct as possible to avoid potential misinterpretation;
• Avoid the use of value judgments (e.g., the documentation is “bad”, or the explanation is “poor”).
Note that the verifier will not review or assign a level of achievement to any credits not being
pursued by the project team (i.e., credits for which no documentation was submitted) even if the
verifier feels the team could have or should have pursued the credit(s), and the verifier will not
suggest that the project team pursue higher levels of achievement for credit(s). Refer to Policies
3.8.10 and 3.9.7 for more information.
4.2.3 Preparing your Project for Resubmission
After receiving the first review feedback from the third-party verifier, applicants may decide to either
accept the verified award level or re-submit select credits to address verifier comments and
requested documentation. Applicants must keep ISI informed of the re-submission timeline to
ensure the verifier’s continued availability to review the project in a timely manner.
If you are planning to re-submit one or more credits to address verifier comments and
documentation gaps, a revised credit submittal should be prepared in accordance with details
provided in Section 3.3. The revised credit coversheet should be labelled as such, and any new or
revised documentation should also be labelled as such.
Prior to re-submitting your project for another review as part of the iterative verification process, if
you have questions or require clarification pertaining to any of the verifier comments, you must
submit your questions to ISI in writing. ISI will coordinate with the third-party verifier to respond to
your questions in writing. If further clarifications are still required after you receive written
responses from the verifier, contact your ISI project manager to discuss the potential for further
follow up questions in writing and/or setting up a short conference call with the verifier. When the
verifier responds to question in writing and/or via conference call, the verifier will only clarify
26
feedback provided. The verifier will not discuss re-submission strategies, guarantee levels of
achievement, or provide any other form of consultation. The onus is on you as the applicant to
determine the best way to respond to the verifier comments and demonstrate a level of
achievement based on the requirements set forth in the Envision Guidance Manual. Please allow at
least one to two weeks to receive responses to your questions.
For projects pursuing verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction, “new” credits 3 may be
submitted for review between the first and second design reviews, though ISI generally discourages
this practice as many credits benefit from the iterative design review process. The number of new
credits submitted are limited to two (2) unless the project team pays for an additional credit review –
refer to Section 4.4.2). New credits may not be submitted in the post-construction review stage.
During post-construction review, the verifier will only review credits that were marked as “pending”
during the design review stage as the purpose of the post-construction review is to confirm that
commitments made during design were carried out successfully through construction (refer to
Section 1.1.1.1).
For projects pursuing verification Pathway B: Post-Construction, since the post-construction review
step is iterative in nature (unlike in Pathway A when the post construction review step is not), “new”
credits may be submitted for review between the first and second post-construction reviews, though
ISI generally discourages this practice as many credits benefit from the iterative post-construction
review process. The number of new credits submitted are limited to two (2) unless the project team
pays for an additional credit review – refer to Section 4.4.2).
Refer to Policies 3.8.10 and 3.8.11 for more information.
4.3 TIMELINES
Typical verification timelines vary depending on which verification pathway the project is pursuing.
The figures below illustrate the typical verification timeline for verification Pathways A and B.
3 “New” credits refer to credits that were not previously pursued by the project team.
27
Weeks
Verification Step
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Start verification
Design review (1st)
Initial score returned to project team
Project team prepares project for second design review if required. Timeline up to the team.
Project re-submitted for verification
Design review (2nd)
Final score returned to project team – Envision award if applicable
Project team prepares project for post-construction review. Timeline up to the team and depends upon the construction
schedule.
Start verification
Post-construction review
Final score returned to project team – Envision award maintained
Figure 2: Typical timeline for verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction
Weeks
Verification Step
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Start verification
Post-construction review (1st)
Initial score returned to project team
Project team prepares project for second post-construction review if required. Timeline up to
the team.
Project re-submitted for verification
Post-construction review (2nd)
Final score returned to the team – Envision award if applicable
Figure 3: Typical timeline for verification Pathway B: Post-Construction
28
4.4 THE APPEALS PROCESS
4.4.1 Credit Appeals
Once the verifier returns the final score the project team, the team has the option to appeal one or
more credit decisions. You must appeal credit decisions within 30 days of the final score being
returned to you by the verifier.
For verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction, there are two opportunities to appeal credit
decisions:
• Once the final Envision score is returned at the end of the Design Review phase; and
• Once the final Envision score is returned at the end of the Post-Construction review phase.
For projects pursuing verification Pathway B: Post-Construction, there is one opportunity to appeal
credit decisions:
You must notify ISI which credits you wish to appeal and pay the per-credit appeals fee (refer to the
fee schedule in Appendix E) in advance of final credit decisions being rendered. ISI will convene a
panel of three verifiers to conduct independent reviews of the credit. They must arrive at a
unanimous decision. Their decision is final and cannot be appealed again.
Applicants may not alter their credit submittals for the appeals process. The most current credit
coversheet(s) and supporting documentation will be reviewed by the panel of verifiers.
The appeals process can take up to one month.
Should the Envision award for the project change as a result of the appeals process ISI will issue a
new award letter and certificate.
Refer to Policies 3.10.3 and 3.10.4 for more information.
4.4.2 Additional Credit Reviews
The Envision verification fee includes three (3) reviews under Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction
(2 design reviews and 1 post-construction review) and two (2) reviews under Pathway B: Post-
Construction (2 post-construction reviews). From time to time project teams may find it necessary to
submit one or more credits for an additional review over and above the number of reviews included
in the verification fees. For example, sometimes additional documentation is made available for
credits previously submitted to support a higher level of achievement after a credit review has
already been completed by the verifier. This option is available to project teams for the same per-
29
credit fee as the appeals process (refer to Appendix E). The differences between this option and the
appeals process are:
• The credit may be modified before re-submission;

• The same verifier assigned to the project will review the credit.
How this process works: the project team has the option to submit one or more credits for another
review once the verifier has returned the final score to the project team. You must let ISI know of
your intention to resubmit credits for another review within 30 days of the final score being
returned to you by the verifier.
For verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction, there are two opportunities to re-submit
credits for an additional review:
• Once the final Envision score is returned at the end of the Design Review phase; and
For projects pursuing verification Pathway B: Post-Construction, there is one opportunity to re-
submit credits for an additional review:
You must notify ISI which credits you wish to re-submit for another review and pay the per-credit
appeals fee in advance of final credit decisions being rendered.
Note that new credits (e.g., credits that were not previously submitted by the project team for
review) will not be allowed to be submitted once a verification review phase has been concluded
(e.g., the end of the design review phase or the end of the post-construction review phase).
Refer to Policies 3.8.10, 3.8.11, 3.10.1, and 3.10.2 for more information.
30
5.0 POLICIES
Throughout this document, references to a number of policies and guidelines have been made. All
verification policies are listed in Appendix I for ease of reference. These policies should be reviewed
in conjunction with the master ISI Policies document and should be reviewed prior to submitting a
project for verification. Policies are applicable to all applicants seeking to verify a project under the
Envision framework, regardless of type and size of infrastructure project. The latest ISI Policies
document is available for download from the ISI website. If you previously downloaded a copy of
this document or the ISI Policies document, be sure to check the website often for updates as the
latest versions of both of these documents will always be online.
31
PROJECT INFORMATION
A.1 PURPOSE
Project teams are required to provided ISI with important information about their projects prior to
submitting them for verification. This information is necessary in order to facilitate a smoother
verification process for both the project team (applicant) and verifier (third-party reviewer).
As a project progresses from the initial creation of the Online Scoresheet to registration and
verification, additional fields become mandatory to complete.
A.2 INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED WHEN AN ONLINE

SCORESHEET FOR A PROJECT IS CREATED
• Project Name and Location (City, State/Province, Country, Postal Code)
A.3 INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE REGISTRATION

• Project address / coordinates
• Project owner(s)
• Lead ENV SP
• Infrastructure Sector
• Primary and Secondary Project Types
• Key Dates (Estimated Submission Date, Estimated Design Completion Date, Estimated
Construction Completion Date)
• Verification Pathway (Pathway A, or Pathway B)
• Total Constructed Costs
A.4 INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE SUBMITTING FOR

VERIFICATION
• Project Description
• Main Issues / Problems / or Needs this Project is Addressing
• Project Team Description – companies involved and their role(s) on the project
• Project Delivery Method
• Site Map (upload)
• Reasons for Pursuing Verification
• Name of Project as it should appear on Final Award
32
MINIMUM PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
The following minimum program requirements (Policy 3.1.1) must be met by all projects prior to
submitting for Envision verification:
1. The project team must acknowledge they have read this document and all associated
verification policies.
2. Levels of achievement for all 64 credits must be selected online. If you decide not to pursue one
or more credits, “No Level” must be selected as the level of achievement.
3. All required fields about your project must be completed online (refer to Appendix A).
4. A credit submittal (coversheet 4 + supporting documentation) must be provided for each credit
being pursued, including “Not Applicable” credits. 5
5. Confirmation that the project meets the Envision prerequisites which are a series of
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) safeguards (refer to Appendix C and Policy 3.1.3).
6. Project registration fees must be paid, and verification fees are due in full prior to the initial
project score being returned to the team by the verifier (typically this is between 45 and 60 days
after the project is submitted for verification).
7. Conduct a final quality assurance review of the submission and complete and sign the
Verification Submittal Quality Assurance Checklist (refer to Appendix G and Policy 3.8.2).
4 ISI coversheet templates must be used.

5 A credit submittal is not required if “No Level” of achievement is being pursued.
33
PROJECT PREREQUISITES
C.1 PURPOSE
Applicants submitting their project for Envision verification must attest that, to the best of their
knowledge, a set of environmental, social, and environmental standards were adhered to on the
project.
C.2 ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE SAFEGUARDS

• All documentation provided to ISI for review is accurate and true
• All applicable national, state/provincial/territorial, and local health and safety laws and
regulations were strictly adhered to
• All applicable national, state/provincial/territorial, and local environmental laws and regulations
were strictly adhered to
• All applicable human rights, labor laws, and regulations were strictly adhered to
• All development is legally permitted
• No illegal resettlement took place
• There were no violations involving rights of indigenous peoples
• No forms of bribery, corruption, or anti-competitive behavior has taken place by any of the
owners and firms involved with this project
• No endangered or critically endangered plant or animal species on the IUCN Red List were
negatively impacted by this project without all reasonable efforts to mitigate
• No child labor was used
• No forced or compulsory labor was used
34
ENVISION CREDIT COVERSHEET TEMPLATE
35
36
VERIFICATION PRICING SCHEDULE
Fees listed in US dollars.
Project Size Registration Verification Pathway A: Verification Pathway B: Appeals

(US$M) Fees Design + Post-Construction Post-Construction (per credit)
Member Non- Member Non-
member member
<5 $2,000 $12,000 $14,000 $9,000 $11,000 $500
5 – 25 $2,000 $17,000 $20,000 $14,000 $17,000 $500
25 – 100 $2,000 $26,000 $30,000 $21,000 $25,000 $500
100 – 250 $2,000 $33,000 $39,000 $28,000 $34,000 $500
250 – 500 $2,000 $41,000 $48,000 $35,000 $42,000 $500
500 – 1000 $2,000 $48,000 $56,000 $42,000 $50,000 $500
> 1000 $2,000 Contact ISI for a quote. (Quotes are valid for 6 months.) $500
Fees listed in Canadian dollars.
Project Size Registration Verification Pathway A: Verification Pathway B: Appeals

(CAD$M) Fees Design + Post-Construction Post-Construction (per credit)
Member Non- Member Non-
member member
< 6.25 $2,500 $15,000 $17,500 $11,250 $13,750 $625

6.25-31.25 $2,500 $21,250 $25,000 $17,500 $21,250 $625
31.25-125 $2,500 $32,500 $37,500 $26,250 $31,250 $625
125-312.5 $2,500 $41,250 $48,750 $35,000 $42,500 $625
312.5-625 $2,500 $51,250 $60,000 $43,750 $52,500 $625
625-1250 $2,500 $60,000 $70,000 $52,500 $62,500 $625
> 1250 $2,500 Contact ISI for a quote. (Quotes are valid for 6 months.) $625
Note: When registering, the project size needs to be entered in US Dollars. However, the invoice will be converted to
Canadian dollars.
37
RELEVANCE TO ENVISION V2 PROJECTS
While this document was initially written for projects pursuing verification under Envision v3, this
document is also relevant for projects pursuing verification under Envision v2. Particularly relevant
sections and any notable differences for projects pursuing verification under Envision v2 are
outlined in the table below.
Section in Notable differences for v2 project

Title/description of section
Document verifications
Section 1.1 Description of the components that The v2 Envision Guidance Manual contains fewer
make up the Envision framework credits and some of the credit subcategories are
different. Refer to the answers provided for question 3,
above.
Section 1.2 Using Envision No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 1.3 Benefits of using Envision and pursuing No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
third-party verification
Section 1.4 Determining the eligibility of projects for No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
verification
Table 1 Steps in verification Pathway A: Design + This option is not available for v2 project verifications.
Post-Construction
Table 2 Steps in verification Pathway B: Post- The steps articulated for verification Pathway B are
Construction similar to the verification steps under Envision v2,
though projects proceeding with verification under
Envision v2 may submit for verification any time at or
after 95% design completion. There is no “post-
construction review” review step, only a “review” step.
Section 2.2.1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 2.2.2 Conduct Self-Assessment All Envision v2 projects must complete a self-
assessment of the project prior to submitting it for
verification, though the self-assessment is conducted
against the Envision v2 framework, instead of the v3
framework.
Section 2.2.3 Register project All Envision v2 projects must register prior to
submitting for verification, though information required
at the time of registration differs slightly from the
information that is required of Envision v3 projects.
Section 2.2.4 Start Verification This step is also relevant for Envision v2 projects
through there are no “pending credits” in Envision v2,
and v2 projects are not required to provide the same
project information prior to submitting for verification
as outlined in Appendix A.
38
Section in Notable differences for v2 project

Title/description of section
Document verifications
Sections 2.2.5 and Design Review and Post-Construction Both of these sections are generally applicable for
2.2.6 Review Envision v2 projects though v2 projects may submit for
verification anytime at or after 95% design completion,
up to three years post-construction. Under Envision v2,
the project reviews conducted are not referred to as
“design reviews” or “post-construction reviews” as there
is only one verification pathway for Envision v2
projects; there is no differentiation for v2 projects that
submit for verification during design, construction, or
post-construction.
Section 2.2.7 Envision Award The v3 “Verified” award level is called “Bronze” in v2.
Sections 1.1.1.3 to Formal recognition for Envision verified No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
1.1.1.3.5 projects
Section 3.2.1 Scoring Methodology The scoring methodology in Envision v2 is the same as
v3 though there are fewer total points in the Envision
v2 system (refer to the Envision v2 manual for details).
Section 3.2.2 Credit Applicability No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 3.2.3 Evaluation Criteria and Documentation No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Guidance
Section 3.2.4 Establishing Baselines No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 3.2.5 Innovation Envision v2 does not explicitly offer the same three
options to earn innovation or “bonus points” – refer to
the Envision v2 Guidance Manual for details on the
Innovation credits which are indicated with 0.0 after the
category ID, e.g., QL0.0, LD0.0. Also, under v2,
innovation points are earned in 1-point increments, not
2-point increments.
Section 3.3 Preparing Credit Submittals No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 3.3.1 Preparing a Credit Coversheet Envision v2 credit coversheet templates are available
on the ISI website for projects pursuing verification
under this version of the system. The v2 coversheet
templates function the same as v3 coversheet
templates and contain similar components. The only
significant difference between the v2 and v3 coversheet
templates are the “pending credit” and “pending
documentation” sections in the v3 coversheets (there
are no “pending credits” or “pending documentation”
provisions in Envision v2).
Section 3.3.2 Preparing Supporting Documentation Project documentation should be prepared for v2
projects in accordance with the information contained
in this section. Credit references made in this section
are v2 credits, and in v2, the concepts of “pending
credits” and “pending documentation” is not applicable.
Section 3.3.3 Credit submittals Do’s and Don’ts No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 4.1 Verifier Selection No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Sections 4.2 to 4.2.3 Verifier Reviews No notable differences for v2 project verifications.
Section 4.3 Timelines The timeline for verification under Envision v2 is the
same as the timeline for verification under Envision v3
Pathway B.
Section 0 Appeals Process Projects pursuing verification under Envision v2 have
the opportunity to appeal credits or request additional
credit reviews after the second and final project review.
39
VERIFICATION SUBMITTAL QUALITY

ASSURANCE CHECKLIST
40
41
42
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
1. Does this guidance document apply to me if I am pursuing verification under Envision

v2?
Yes. Refer to Appendix F.
2. What are the benefits of Envision and Envision verification?
There are many benefits associated with using Envision and pursuing third-party verification. Please
refer to Section 1.3 for more information.
3. What are the main differences between Envision v2 and Envision v3?
The table below summarizes the changes at a glance:
Section in
Envision v2 Envision v3
Document
Number of credits 60 64
Minimum total
points in the 809 1000
framework
Five (5): Quality of Life, Leadership, Five (5): Quality of Life, Leadership,
Credit categories Resource Allocation, Natural Resource Allocation, Natural World,
World, Climate and Risk Climate and Resilience
The envision sustainability framework
The Envision sustainability
Cost of Envision will continue to be free for all ISI
framework is available for free.
members.
20% - Bronze 20% - Verified
Award Levels (based
30% - Silver 30% - Silver
on % of applicable
40% - Gold 40% - Gold
points earned)
50% - Platinum 50% - Platinum
Two verification pathways:
Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction

Single verification pathway (projects may submit at or after 95%
Verification Process (projects may submit at or after design completion).
95% design completion)
Pathway B: Post-Construction
(projects may submit at or after 95%
construction completion).
43
Many of the Envision credits that were in Envision v2 have been revised or improved to enhance
clarity and address the lessons learned by applying Envision on projects over the past several years.
In addition, Envision v3 contains a number of new credits, addressing aspects of sustainability that
were not previously addressed in prior versions of Envision. Changes to credits are summarized on
page 18 of the Envision Guidance Manual.
One of the biggest changes is the Envision v3 verification program. Under Envision v3, projects may
choose to pursue one of two verification pathways: Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction or
Pathway B: Post-Construction. The two pathways are discussed in greater throughout this
document, starting with an overview provided in Section 2.1.
Fees associated with Envision v3 verifications have also changed slightly. Registration fees have
increased from $1,000 for Envision v2 projects, to $2,000 for v3 projects. Pathway A is new for
Envision v3, and the fees associated with that pathway are outlined in Appendix E.
4. May I re-submit an already verified project in order to attempt to increase my score?
Refer to Policy 3.8.6, Policy 3.8.10, Policy 3.8.11 and Policy 3.10.1 for the conditions under which a
previously Envision-verified project may re-submit for verification.
5. How long does it take for the verifier to review my project once I submit it for
verification?
Refer to Section 4.3 of this document for the Envision verification timelines which vary by verification
pathway.
6. Will the verifier visit the project site as part of the verification process?
No, the verification process is an online review of project documentation only; there are no site visits
as part of the verification process.
7. What project boundary should I use to define my project?
ISI does not dictate what project boundaries are appropriate for Envision verification; rather, ISI and
its team of verifiers rely on submitting teams to clearly define the boundaries of their project(s)
being submitted for verification. Project boundaries must remain consistent across all credits. Refer
to Section 3.3.3 for more information.
8. Will ISI recommend a firm to help us with our project submission for verification?
ISI will not recommend specific organizations to assist with project applications. We do, however,
have a list of Envision Qualified Companies on our website. These are ISI member companies that
44
have one or more Envision Sustainability Professionals on staff. (If you do not see your company
listed here, please contact ISI by email at info@sustainableinfrastructure.org.)
9. Can I choose my verifier?
Verifiers are hired at ISI’s sole discretion; however, you will be given an opportunity to review a short
list of verification companies in order to perform a conflict of interest check. Refer to Section 4.1 for
more information on verifier selection.
10. I’ve never submitted a project for verification before. Is it possible to get pre-
verification assistance from ISI?
While ISI does not provide consulting services to applicants, there are many benefits to registering
your project for verification, including a pre-verification credit review. Refer to Section 2.2.3 for more
information.
Also, you might consider working with one of the Envision Qualified Companies listed on our
website. These are ISI member companies that have one or more Envision Sustainability
Professionals on staff. Many of these firms have submitted one or more projects for verification.
11. Why are the verification fees for Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction higher than
verification under Pathway B: Post-Construction?
Under verification Pathway A, up to two (2) design reviews and one (1) post-construction review are
included in the verification fees for a total of up to three (3) reviews of the project, whereas under
Pathway B, up to two (2) post-construction reviews are included. Due to the higher number of
project reviews included in Pathway A, the verification fees are slightly higher as the verifier requires
more time to verify projects pursuing verification under Pathway A.
12. Is it possible to pay for a portion of the verification fees upfront, and a portion later?
It is possible to split up the verification fees across two payments or split the fees across more than
one firm, however, ISI will not return scores until all applicable fees (e.g., registration fees and
verification fees) have been paid in full. Refer to Policy 3.8.9. This applies to projects that are
submitting for verification under both Pathways A and B.
13. Is it possible for me to have direct contact with my verifier if I have any questions about
the verification process or the feedback he/she provided?
If you have questions or require clarification pertaining to any of the verifier comments, you may
contact your ISI project manager to discuss or schedule a conference call with the verifier – refer to
Section 4.2.3 for more information. Any other direct communication between the verifier and the
project team is prohibited per Policy 3.8.7.
45
14. Does ISI have verifiers capable of reviewing documentation in other languages, such as
French or Spanish?
Yes, ISI has a limited number of verifiers who are able to verify projects in other languages, such as
French, Spanish, and Italian. If you are planning to submit a project in a language other than English,
please contact ISI to make arrangements.
15. Will ISI share information about my project publicly?
Please refer to Policy 3.11.2 and 3.11.3.
16. How can I become a member to receive the discounted verification fees for my project?
Contact ISI at info@sustainableinfrastructure.org for membership information and assistance.
17. What are the benefits of registration prior to verification?
There are many reasons why project teams benefit from registering their project in advance of
submitting it for verification. Refer to Section 2.2.3.
18. Is a project required to proceed to verification following registration / can a project

register and not proceed to verification?
While ISI certainly prefers that projects not register unless they are intent upon pursuing verification,
you may cancel your registration at any time. Registration fees paid are not refundable or
transferrable - refer to Policy 3.4.4.
19. How many reviews of my project is included in the project verification fee?
The verification fee covers up to three (3) reviews of the project by a third-party verifier and ISI staff
for projects pursuing verification pathway A: Design + Post-Construction and up to two (2) reviews of
the project by a third-party verifier and ISI staff for projects pursing verification pathway B: Post-
Construction.
Refer to Section 2.1 for an overview of the two verification pathways available to projects pursuing
verification under Envision v3.
20. What factors should be considered when choosing the right verification pathway for my
project?
Verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction may be suitable for your project if:
• It is a long-term project in the planning and/or design stage

• Early recognition is important for the owner and/or project team
46
• The owner or project team wishes to confirm the sustainability of the project design prior to the
start of construction
• More reviews of the project by a third-party verifier would be beneficial to the owner or project
team
Verification Pathway B: Post-Construction may be suitable for your project if:
• The project has already been constructed

• The owner or project team wishes to confirm the sustainability of the project as constructed
• The owner or project team wishes to retroactively apply Envision on a constructed project and
use the experience/lessons learned to inform future projects
21. If my project earns an award after going through the verification process, how do I
obtain a plaque or trophy to commemorate the achievement?
Plaques and/or trophies are available for purchase through our exclusive awards manufacturer,
Eclipse Awards. Visit www.envisionawards.org to see the range of products available and refer to
Section 2.2.7 for more information on Envision awards and recognition.
22. If I did not pursue one or more credits in my initial Envision project submission, am I
allowed to submit those credits for review later (e.g., when I re-submit my project for
another review)? In other words, am I allowed to submit new credits for review after
receiving feedback from the verifier in an effort to boost my score?
See Section 4.2.3 and Policy 3.8.11.
23. If new information becomes available to support a higher level of achievement for a
credit after my project has completed the verification process, may I re-submit that credit
with the additional documentation for another review in an attempt to boost my level of
achievement/overall project score?
There is an option for projects to submit one or more credits for an additional review over and
above the number of reviews included in the verification fees. Refer to Section 4.4.2 along with Policy
3.8.11, Policy 3.10.1 and Policy 3.10.2 for more information.
24. Does ISI have any information on how to specify the use of Envision or incorporate
Envision into procurement documents or design guidelines?
Given the range of infrastructure projects covered by the Envision sustainable infrastructure
framework and the number of project delivery and procurement methods used by projects, ISI does
not at this time provide guidance on how to incorporate Envision into procurement documents, how
to specify the use of Envision or how to incorporate Envision into design guidelines. As more and
more Envision users share case studies and examples with us, ISI plans to build a library of such
resources and make them available.
47
LIST OF ENVISION VERIFICATION POLICIES
3.0 VERIFICATION AND AWARDS
3.1 MINIMUM PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS AND PREREQUISITES

3.1.1 Compliance with Minimum Program Requirements
3.1.2 Minimum Program Requirements Updates and Revisions
3.1.3 Program Prerequisites
3.1.4 Program Prerequisites Updates and Revisions
3.2 PROJECT ELIGIBILITY

3.2.1 Project Type
3.2.2 Project Phase
3.3 PROJECT REGISTRATION

3.3.1 Project Registration
3.3.2 Payment of Registration Fees
3.3.3 Registration Timeline
3.4 REGISTRATION CLOSURE AND CANCELLATION

3.4.1 Registration Closure
3.4.2 Registration Closure Sunset Date for Registered Projects
3.4.3 Registration Cancellation After Sunset Date
3.4.4 Registration Cancellation by Project Teams
3.4.5 Registration Cancellation Due to Inactivity
3.4.6 Effect of Registration Cancellation
3.5 ROLES
3.5.1 Envision Sustainability Professional
3.5.2 Project Leader
3.5.3 Verifier
3.5.4 ISI Reviewer
3.6 INQUIRIES & INTERPRETATIONS

3.6.1 Credit or Rating System Inquiries
3.6.2 Credit Interpretations
3.7 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS & CONFIDENTIALITY

3.7.1 Credit Submittals
3.7.2 Credit Coversheets
3.7.3 Evaluation Criteria and Documentation
3.7.4 Credit Applicability
48
3.7.5 Classified Information and Export Controls

3.7.6 Non-Disclosure Agreement
3.7.7 Transfer of Registration or Online Scoresheet Ownership
3.8 PROJECT SUBMISSION AND REVIEW

3.8.1 Project Submission
3.8.2 Quality Assurance
3.8.3 Project Verification
3.8.4 Notice of Submission
3.8.5 Verification Timelines
3.8.6 Project Completion
3.8.7 Direct Contact with Verifier
3.8.8 Verification Fees
3.8.9 Payment of Verification Fees
3.8.10 Credits Not Pursued
3.8.11 New Credit Submittals
3.9 VERIFIER POLICY

3.9.1 Verifier Selection
3.9.2 Use of Tools and Guidance Provided by ISI
3.9.3 Direct Contact with Project Team
3.9.4 Scoring Disagreements
3.9.5 Project Confidentiality
3.9.6 Verifier Anonymity
3.9.7 Suggesting Higher Performance than Submitted
3.9.8 Assessing Credits not Submitted
3.10 ADDITIONAL CREDIT REVIEW & APPEALS

3.10.1 Additional Credit Reviews for Previously Submitted Credits Following Verification
Completion
3.10.2 Additional Credit Review Fees
3.10.3 Appeals
3.10.4 Appeal Fees
3.11 AWARDS POLICY

3.11.1 Physical Awards
3.11.2 Public Announcement
3.11.3 Use and Disclosure of Project Information
3.11.4 Revocation
3.11.5 Change of Award Level
Note: Policies listed above are subject to modification and new policies may be added from time-to-
time. Always visit the ISI website (www.sustainableinfrastructure.org) to access the latest ISI Policies.
49

230201-Guide To Envision Verification Applicants

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

230201-Guide To Envision Verification Applicants

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

230201-Guide To Envision Verification Applicants

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guide to Envision

Verification for Applicants

This guidance document contains

Released: September 12, 2018

2.0 ENVISION VERIFICATION.......................................................................................... 6

3.0 PREPARING YOUR PROJECT FOR VERIFICATION.................................................... 16

4.0 WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE VERIFICATION PROCESS ......................................... 25

5.0 POLICIES ................................................................................................................. 31

PROJECT INFORMATION ........................................................................ 32

MINIMUM PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS ................................................. 33

PROJECT PREREQUISITES ....................................................................... 34

ENVISION CREDIT COVERSHEET TEMPLATE .......................................... 35

VERIFICATION PRICING SCHEDULE ....................................................... 37

RELEVANCE TO ENVISION V2 PROJECTS ................................................ 38

VERIFICATION SUBMITTAL QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECKLIST ............. 40

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS .......................................................... 43

LIST OF ENVISION VERIFICATION POLICIES .......................................... 48

1.1 THE ENVISION FRAMEWORK

1. Envision Guidance Manual: The written framework.

• Quality of Life: Wellbeing, Mobility, Community

• Resource Allocation: Materials, Energy, Water

2. Envision Pre-Assessment Checklist: An early-phase high-level pre-assessment.

The Envision Pre-Assessment Checklist is an Excel-based tool structured as a series of yes/no

4. Envision Sustainability Professional Credential (ENV SP): Professional training in Envision

5. Envision Verification: Independent third-party project review process.

6. Envision Awards: Recognition for qualifying verified projects.

1.2 USING ENVISION

• Determine the right project to pursue;

Operations and Maintenance: During operations and maintenance, it is important to measure

1.3 BENEFITS OF ENVISION AND VERIFICATION

• Long-term viability through increased resiliency and preparedness;

1.4 DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR VERIFICATION

Envision is not designed to evaluate human-occupied, interior conditioned buildings as stand-alone

• The submission is for physical infrastructure (see above).

2.0 ENVISION VERIFICATION

• Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction

Figure 1: Envision v3 Verification Pathways

Verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction

Step Description Section

1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet and Conduct Self-Assessment:

Table 1: Steps in Verification Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction

Verification Pathway B: Post-Construction

Step Description Section

1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet and Conduct Self-Assessment:

Table 2: Steps in Verification Pathway B: Post-Construction

2.2 VERIFICATION PROCESS STEPS

2.2.1 Create Envision Online Scoresheet

2.2.2 Conduct Self-Assessment

2.2.3 Register Project

There are many benefits to registering your project:

2.2.4 Start Verification

During this stage of the verification process, you will:

• Provide additional details about your project (refer to Appendix A).

2.2.5 Design Review

• Determine the appropriate levels of achievement, and

2.2.6 Post-Construction Review

1.1.1.1 Projects pursuing Pathway A: Design + Post-Construction

1.1.1.2 Projects pursuing Pathway B: Post-Construction

• Determine the appropriate levels of achievement, and