1. THE NEED FOR ENVISIONTM
The Envision™ sustainable infrastructure rating system is an objective framework of criteria and performance achievements. It is designed to help users identify ways in which sustainable approaches can be used to plan, design, construct and operate infrastructure projects.
The goal is to improve the sustainable performance of infrastructure projects in terms of not only the technical performance but also from a social, environmental and economic perspective.
Envision™ provides an opportunity for infrastructure owners and designers to provide higher performing solutions by using a lifecycle approach, by working with communities, and by using a restorative approach to infrastructure projects.
THE NEED FOR ENVISIONTM

2. Resource Depletion
Over the last decade, the notion that society’s approach to economic development is not sustainable has moved from extremist thinking to mainstream opinion. Spiking energy prices, extended droughts and water shortages, overtaxed electrical power grids, traffic congestion, collapsing bridges, urban sprawl, frequent forest fires and unprecedented flood damage: incidents once seen as disturbing but manageable are now viewed as challenges to maintaining and improving our quality of life.
Viewed individually, these trends and events might be dismissed as the inevitable consequences of an increasingly complex world, problems to be addressed or perhaps tolerated in order to maintain a high standard of living. Viewed collectively, however, they can be interpreted as the consequences of society’s current approach to economic development. This is an approach that uses resources without much restraint, burdens our ecosystems with more waste and pollution, neglects the care and upgrading of our supporting infrastructures, and disrupts the social fabric of societies. These incidents are evidence of an unsustainable model for development, one which treats materials, energy and fresh water supplies as if they were inexhaustible and the environment as if it were infinitely regenerative.
In terms of its ecological footprint, the U.S. is operating as if it had 5 planets to work with instead of 1. The current world average usage is 1.5 planets. If allowed to continue, this overuse of natural resources and reduction of ecosystem services will have devastating consequences, not only for this country but also for the rest of society.
Contributing to the need for more sustainable infrastructure is the ever growing demand on the earths’ resources. Projections suggest that humanity’s footprint will grow to over double the Earth’s capacity by 2050.
The lifespan of infrastructure put in place today to a large extent determines resource consumption for decades to come, and will impact the size of this footprint in the future.

3. ASCE’s Report Card for America’s Infrastructure
15 categories rated
Overall grade of D
$2.2 trillion
Ranked 23rd worldwide
ASCE’s 2009 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure graded 15 categories of infrastructure and assigned an overall grade of D. None of the 15 categories received better than a C.
The estimated five-year investment need to bring our infrastructure into good condition is $2.2 trillion, up from $1.6 trillion in America’s infrastructure now ranks 23rd overall, between Spain and Chile
An efficiently-operating infrastructure is an essential component for a prosperous and growing economy. Effective transportation systems bring goods to market, workers to jobs, children to schools, and families to stores and recreation areas in a safe and timely manner. Dependable water and wastewater systems bring fresh water to industry, agriculture and people. Reliable electricity supplies allow businesses and factories to work unimpeded, and bring a high level of convenience and productivity to home life across the nation. Extensive telecommunication networks connect people and businesses across the globe and enable the fast flow of information essential to commerce.
An efficiently-operating infrastructure is one that delivers the required services at affordable costs while conserving the country’s natural resources and energy. Moreover, these services must be continually maintained and improved in order to remain competitive in the global marketplace. Unfortunately over the last several decades, the state of U.S. infrastructure has declined substantially, eroding our competitive base.
For a long time, the engineering community has studied this decline and publicly appealed for fixes. Since 1988, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has reported regularly on the condition of U.S. infrastructure in the form of a report card. In its most recent 2009 report, ASCE gave U.S. infrastructure an overall grade of “D” and priced the needed repair and refurbishment work at $2.2 trillion. ASCE further noted that this degraded condition is having a negative impact on the U.S. economy. For example, ASCE calculated that by 2020, the a continued degradation of the surface transportation infrastructure will cost the U.S. economy over 876,000 jobs and depress the U.S. gross national product by $897 billion. For the water delivery and wastewater treatment infrastructure, the estimated negative impacts in 2020 amount to the loss of 700,000 jobs and $206 billion in increased costs to businesses and households.
Should Be Updated

4. America’s Infrastructure Today
Leaking water pipes lose 7 billion gallons a day
Billions of gallons of untreated wastewater are discharged each year from aging systems
U.S. produces 254 million tons of solid waste a year
188 cities with brownfields sites awaiting cleanup and redevelopment
More than 4 billion hours a year stuck in traffic cost $78 billion
1 in 4 bridges structurally deficient or functionally obsolete
No access to bus or rail transit for nearly half of American households
Electricity demand has grown by 25% since 1990
All of this shows we can do better.

5. Development vs. Impact Briefly explain graph
The challenge faced by developed countries worldwide, is how to reduce our net environmental footprint, i.e., make a meaningful shift towards the sustainability quadrant, without sacrificing our quality of life. Clearly, there are a number of obvious actions to take, e.g., improving energy efficiency, reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase water recycling, reclamation and conservation, to name a few. However, our ability to instigate any comprehensive and well thought out action is severely hampered, not only by limited resources, but by multiple priorities and agendas of those potentially affected by the actions proposed.
In addition, this challenge is not small. Taken to its logical conclusion, reaching the sustainable quadrant involves, more or less, a complete overhaul of our nation’s infrastructure, replacing old components with those that are more effective and efficient. Absent huge and unprecedented investments or the emergence of some “silver bullet” technologies, progress will be made incrementally by project owners, designers and constructors delivering infrastructure projects that make significant improvements in performance across multiple dimensions of sustainability. To be efficient and effective, these projects must also integrate well with the infrastructure in the community, both existing and planned. Lastly, the designers must take into account changes in the environment in which the delivered works must operate.
The consequences of conventional building practices are substantially altering the practice of engineering. Shortages in resources, such as fresh water and energy, are changing the assumptions regarding their future costs and availability. Resource substitutes or recycled materials have different properties and performance characteristics, all of which need to be factored into the design. The effects of a changing climate are forcing designers to change their assumptions about design parameters in terms of the expected averages, variances and possible extremes. Variables such as increases in mean temperature, the possible cost of fuel, the length and severity of droughts or increases in rainfall intensity are now part of the conversation at the preliminary design stage. In addition, new parameters such as carbon emission rates and embodied energy of materials are emerging and need to be accounted for.

6. The Future of Infrastructure
Infrastructure is long lived. The highways, bridges, power stations and wastewater treatment plants we build today have design lives ranging from 20 to over 75 years. This means that the infrastructure we are building today will establish the energy, water and materials efficiencies, and ecosystem impacts for decades to come. Therefore, whatever we build today, we better get it right. We must do the best we can with existing technologies, designing and delivering the most resource and energy conserving infrastructure within the limits of budgets and priorities. In addition, the efficiency and effectiveness of infrastructure depends not only on its intrinsic design, but on how that design integrates and functions for the community in which it resides.
It is no longer enough that infrastructure work, that it be constructed on time and within budget, or even that it last.
It now must be sustainable.

7. EnvisionTM Is Uniquely Qualified to Address America’s Infrastructure
Envision™ applies to all civil infrastructure
Addresses design, planning, construction and maintenance
Applicable at any point in an infrastructure project's life cycle
Speaks to the triple bottom line: social, economic and environmental goals
Designed to keep pace with a changing concept of sustainability
EnvisionTM Is Uniquely Qualified to Address America’s Infrastructure
EnvisionTM applies to all civil infrastructure
Addresses design, planning, construction and maintenance
Applicable at any point in an infrastructure project's life cycle
Speaks to the triple bottom line: social, economic and environmental goals
Designed to keep pace with a changing concept of sustainability
Infrastructure rating systems must account for the new engineering design paradigm, one in which the engineering design constants and behavior of design variables of the past can no longer be taken for granted. At this juncture, there is no prescriptive solution for how to properly account for these changes. Instead, the rating systems need to incorporate a process by which the project owner, designer and constructor explicitly consider the possibility of new constants, new variable behaviors and new extreme values, and devise an effective approach for dealing with them. It is we these considerations that the Envision™ rating system was created.

8. Why Was EnvisionTM Developed?
Current rating systems for infrastructure in the U.S. are sector specific
No U.S. system covers all aspects of infrastructure
Envision™ is designed to fill the gap
During the development of the EnvisionTM rating system, over 900 rating systems from around the world were identified. However, none cover all aspects of civil infrastructure.
Current sustainability rating systems for infrastructure in the U.S., such as LEED and Greenroads are sector specific.
No U.S. system covers all aspects of civil infrastructure, so the EnvisionTM rating system was designed to fill that gap.
EnvisionTM covers the roads, bridges, pipelines, railways, airports, dams, levees, landfills, water treatment systems, and other civil infrastructure that make up the built environment. EnvisionTM does not include buildings or facilities, as these are well covered by existing rating systems.
EnvisionTM is not intended to replace existing sustainability rating systems. Rather it fills a gap, within North America, for a holistic rating system for sustainable infrastructure. While sector specific systems exist, (e.g., roads, ports) EnvisionTM is intended as an overarching tool that covers all aspects of infrastructure.
Why is a holistic approach to infrastructure important? Unlike buildings, convergence and optimization of the various elements of infrastructure are accomplished at the community level. At this level, community infrastructure development is subject to the resources and constraints of multiple departments and agencies, each with different schedules, agendas, mandates, budget cycles, and sources of funding. Thus, rating systems that evaluate and recognize sustainable performance in a single infrastructure element will miss the more important aspects of sustainable performance, i.e., how that element contributes to the overall sustainability of the community that it serves. Using the example of a highway, the first and most important sustainability question is not how much recycled material was used in constructing the highway. The question is whether a highway or some other mode of transportation best fulfills the mobility and access needs of the community, considering the triple bottom line.
EnvisionTM encourages the use of additional sustainability rating systems that may address in-depth specific or specialized aspects of a project. However, EnvisionTM is key to realizing the overall, and full, impacts of a project.

9. Advantages Restore Whole System Design Reduce, reuse, recycle
Phased development
Adaptive
Post-life
DRIVE TOWARD RESTORATIAVE PERFORMANCE
Sustain
Technology Advancement
Performance Goals
Improve
Improve
We have the opportunity to plan, design and build infrastructure that extends project boundaries, extends the usefulness of the project, and drives toward restorative performance.
Explanation of the axes
x - extend the usefulness of the project thru reuse and disassembly
y - drive towards restorative performance
z - extend the project boundaries
This rating system encourages opening up traditional project boundaries in order to maximize those opportunities.
Project life-cycle. Credit is given to project teams that extend design considerations to the full extent of the project life-cycle. Designs that offer increased durability and flexibility to extend the useful life of the constructed works are afforded additional recognition. Extending the useful life of constructed works means that replacement structures are needed less. More recognition is given for designs that incorporate deconstruction principles and enable reuse and up-cycling of materials and equipment.
Stakeholder collaboration. Credit is also given to project teams that look for opportunities to work with stakeholders, both internal and external. Internally, establishing a collaborative working relationship between the project owner and the project team will help create an environment for innovation and an inclination for raising the bar on project performance. Based on this positive working relationship, the project team can then engage effectively with project stakeholders to identify issues and concerns. In this rating system, the project team is encourages to contact nearby facilities in search of unused materials that could be used on the project. Moreover, project teams can work with regulators to identify regulations or policies that run counter to sustainability objectives and seek relief. EnvisionTM gives credit for these pursuits.
Design
Construct
O&M
Reuse
Disassembly
Conventional
EXTEND THE USEFULNESS OF THE PROJECT
Project team
Owner organization
Affected stakeholders
EXTEND PROJECT BOUNDARIES
Team Chartering
Understand/Integrate Community Needs
Deliver as Part of Owner Organization
Partner with Regulators
Partner organizations
Regulatory bodies

10. Collaboration ISI Founders (2010)
EnvisionTM was developed in joint collaboration between the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI) and the Zofnass Program for Sustainable Infrastructure at the Harvard Graduate School of Design.
The Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure, ISI, it is a not-for-profit education and research organization, dedicated to developing and maintaining a civil infrastructure rating system
ISI was founded by the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC), the American Public Works Association (APWA), and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Each of ISI’s founding organizations was developing a sustainable infrastructure program and saw the need for a standardized framework for classification of sustainability practices. The organizations decided to work together to form ISI to produce and administer a sustainable infrastructure rating system.

11. Education and Training Intergovernmental, Non-profit, Global Affairs
ISI Organization
Committees
Should Be Updated
Accreditation
Economics
Executive Director
Education and Training
Intergovernmental, Non-profit, Global Affairs
Recognition
The ISI board of directors is made up of three members from each of the three founding organizations
The ISI committee members are leaders in the sustainable infrastructure industry. Many represent ISI member organizations.
Accreditation Committee (Chair: Anastasia Harrison, Gensler) establishes criteria and qualifications for Sustainability Professional (ENV-SP) develops qualifications and testing procedures, conducts testing; supervises training programs for Sustainability Professionals and project verifiers; identifies and qualifies contractors as infrastructure project verifiers.
Economic Committee (Chair: John Williams, Impact Infrastructure) Establishes and develops metrics for evaluating the economic benefits of sustainable infrastructure projects, introduces those metrics into the Envision™ best practices, and articulates the business case for sustainable infrastructure.
Education and Training Committee (Chair: Tom Pedersen, CDM) Designs, produces and delivers educational and training products for members, the general public and public officials to include webinars, educational modules, conference sessions and symposia; produces education and training programs for the accreditation and project verifier function on behalf of the Accreditation Committee.
Intergovernmental, Nonprofit and Global Affairs Committee (Chair: George Crombie) Responsible for intergovernmental coordination with state and local agencies and organizations; international and global development; relationships with not-for-profit organizations; public testimony and general speaking engagements; organizes the Executive Forum for Sustainable Infrastructure series.
Recognition Committee (Chair: Nathan Beil, KCI Technologies) Develops and oversee the establishment of awards, criteria of eligibility, the management of the awards application process and the awards ceremonies associated with recognizing individual projects as qualifying sustainable infrastructure within the parameters of Envision™.
Research and Resource Committee (Chair: Cameron Thomson, Arup ) Responsible for research associated with the development of Envision™ and related infrastructure subjects; oversees ISI relationships with academia and research contracts; directs ISI sustainable infrastructure resource center.
Technical Committee (Chair: Mike Cline, HWC Engineering) Responsible for the design, content, development and continuous improvement of Envision™. This Committee is under development and will most certainly include several substantive sub-groups. We are in the process of deciding what organization works best for dealing with the myriad technical issues associated with decisions about the tool, its criteria, its resources, its philosophy and application in the marketplace. Persons named to this important committee will help us make these determinations
Research and Resource
ISI Board of Directors
Technical

12. ISI Members Membership benefits Charter Sustaining Public Sector
Discounts on training and professional accreditation
Discounts on project Verification
Networking opportunities
Listing in the member directory
Opportunities to serve on committees
Charter
Sustaining
Public Sector
Academia
Membership in ISI is open to:
Professional service firms, designers and consultants
Corporate entities, contractors, suppliers, manufacturers
Trade and professional associations
Governmental entities including units of local, regional and state governments, public utilities, and federal government agencies
University or college professors and students
Membership categories:
Charter Membership: For Businesses, Firms, Trade and Professional Associations, and Individuals with an institutional commitment to sustainable civil infrastructure, a desire to make a significant investment in the development of a new rating tool to help communities establish infrastructure priorities, and a dedication to the public interest. Charter Memberships, will at some point in the near future, be closed. Rates are based on the number of employees, members, or revenue depending on the type of business. A one-time membership fee locks in Charter Membership forever.
Sustaining Membership: For Businesses, Firms, Trade and Professional Associations, and Individuals with operational business interests in better decision making at all levels of management and government for sustainable civil infrastructure projects, OR For Trade and Professional Association Executives and Managers serving industry, government, academic and other constituencies with significant interests in sustainable infrastructure investment and decision making. An annual fee is required.
Public Sector: Membership is Complementary to full time public sector employees and officials.
Academia (faculty and students): Membership is complementary to full time academics and students
Membership benefits:
Discounts on training and professional accreditation
Discounts on project Verification
Networking opportunities
Listing in the member directory
Opportunities to serve on committees

13. EnvisionTM Sustainability Professional
Envision Sustainability Professional (ENV SP)
ISI Credentialed Practitioner Trained to Use the Envision Rating System
Available now
Role
Guide the project team in
using Envision
At least one person on the project team must be trained and credentialed to use the EnvisionTM web portal. That person guides the project team in applying the EnvisionTM rating system to their project. These credentialed project guides are called EnvisionTM Sustainability Professionals, or ENV SPs. Online training and testing is available to credential the project guide on their knowledge of the rating system and rating process.
A searchable list of ENV SPs is available on the ISI website.

14. EnvisionTM Verifiers
Independent, Third-party Verification of Project Certification Applications
Role
Mentor ENV SP in
Application Process
Verify Documentation,
Levels of Achievement,
and Overall Score
ISI Verifiers provide independent, third-party verification of an EnvisionTM assessment.
Professionals trained by ISI in the verification process will work under direct contract with ISI to assure an absence of a conflict of interest, overall uniformity, and quality in the conduct of evaluations and verifications.
Verifiers work with ENV SPs during the rating process and verify the documentation, levels of achievement for individual credits, and the overall rating score of the final project assessment submitted to ISI.
They ensure EnvisionTM project assessments are accurate and that the same standards are applied from one project to the next.
To become an ISI Verifier, you must
- Be credentialed as an ISI Sustainability Professional (ENV SP) before ISI Verifier training begins.
Have at least 10 years of professional experience.
Current licensure, certification, or credentialing if applicable to your professional field. And must be active in this profession.

15. What Types Of Infrastructure Will EnvisionTM Rate?
ENERGY
Geothermal
Hydroelectric
Nuclear
Coal
Natural Gas
Oil/Refinery
Wind
Solar
Biomass
WATER
Potable water distribution
Capture/ Storage
Water Reuse
Storm Water Management
Flood Control
WASTE
Solid waste
Recycling
Hazardous
Waste
Collection &
Transfer
TRANSPORT
Airports
Roads
Highways
Bikes
Pedestrians
Railways
Public Transit
Ports
Waterways
LANDSCAPE
Public Realm
Parks
Ecosystem
Services
INFORMATION
Telecommunications
Internet
Phones
Satellites
Data Centers
Sensors
First Point:
Most available sustainability rating systems for infrastructure are sector specific or regionally based. For example, there are rating systems specific to buildings, roads, airports, etc. And there are rating systems in use by a city or state. There is no comprehensive U.S. system that covers all aspects of infrastructure.
EnvisionTM is designed to fill this need. Over 900 rating systems were evaluated to identify gaps, develop goals, refine approach. There was collaboration with federal agencies, universities, consultants, professional societies, and municipalities. This tool was vetted by industry experts.
Envision™ is not intended to supplant existing, sector-specific infrastructure rating systems. It is intended to provide the essential context for their rating results. EnvisionTM measures outcomes, not intentions
Second Point:
The rating system for buildings are gaining popularity, but these aren’t applicable or transferrable for infrastructure projects. Much of the focus of these systems is on the comfort and health of the building occupants, but most infrastructure does not have occupants.
Infrastructure has different challenges than buildings . Buildings are under the control of a single owner or entity. You can readily optimize building systems.
For infrastructure, there is no single responsible entity. There are multiple departments with different issues, agendas, schedules, budgets, customers and integration needed at the city/community and regional levels.

16. 60 Credits in 5 Categories Purpose, Community, Wellbeing
Collaboration, Management, Planning
Materials, Energy, Water
Quality of Life specifically addresses a projects impact on communities from the health and wellbeing of individuals of the wellbeing of the larger social fabric as a whole.
Leadership is comprised of the tasks that demonstrate effective leadership and commitment by all parties involved in a project. The meaningful commitment from the owner, team leaders, & constructors.
Resource Allocation measures the use of renewable and non-renewable resources for the project. Benefits of managing resources needed will allow a longer life as we know it.
Natural World allows project teams to assesses the effect of the project on the preservation and renewal of ecosystem functions. This section addresses how to understand and minimize negative impacts while considering ways in which the infrastructure can interact with natural systems in a synergistic and positive way.
Climate And Risk looks at two main concepts: minimizing emissions that may contribute to increased short- and long-term risks and ensuring that infrastructure projects are resilient to short-term hazards or altered long-term future conditions.
Innovation Points are assigned in each of the 5 categories for both exceptional performance beyond the expectations of the system and the application of methods that push innovation in sustainable infrastructure. Innovation credits act as bonus points that are added to the project score. For example, a project where job development and training far exceed the restorative level and fundamentally revitalize a community’s economy, or a project where the stormwater management system is a community-wide resource for capturing stormwater, preventing erosion, and treating stormwater prior to release back into natural hydrologic systems.
Note to Speakers: You may want to provide the Credit List handout that shows all 60 credits.
Siting, Land & Water, Biodiversity
Emission, Resilience

17. Levels of Achievement Non-linear Scale
The amount of points earned in each credit depends on the Level of Achievement:
Improved: Performance that is above conventional.
Enhanced: Sustainable performance that is on the right track. Indications that superior performance is within reach.
Superior: Sustainable performance that is noteworthy.
Conserving: Performance that has achieved essentially zero impact.
Restorative: Performance that restores natural or social systems.
Not all levels of achievement are available for all credits. The guidance manual gives specific definitions of each level for each credit.
Notice that the allocation of points is non-linear across the levels. This gives acknowledgement of initial efforts, but encourages higher levels of sustainability achievement.
Note to Speakers: Click to add animations
An example
QL1.1 IMPROVE COMMUNITY QUALITY OF LIFE
INTENT: Improve the net quality of life of all communities affected by the project and mitigate negative impacts to communities.
METRIC: Measures taken to assess community needs and improve quality of life while minimizing negative impacts.
LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT
Improved: (2) Internal focus. Enhanced: (5) Community linkages. Superior: (10) Broad community alignment. Conserving: (20) Holistic assessment and collaboration. Restorative: (25) Community renaissance.

18. Input Portal EnvisionTM rating system is web-based.
To qualify for awards, at least one person on the project team must be credentialed to use the EnvisionTM rating system. This credentialed individual will act as a guide to helping the project team apply EnvisionTM to the project. Online training and testing is available to credential the project guide on their knowledge of the rating system and rating process.
During the initial public release of the EnvisionTM rating system, credentialed project guides are called EnvisionTM Provisional Sustainability Professionals, or ENV PVs.
In time, as Envision™ itself changes and grows, those who have achieved the ENV PV designation will be re-credentialed and the provisional designation dropped. It is felt that as Envision™ is actually used in the field, our knowledge of what constitutes minimum preparation for using the tool will change, and that new knowledge will be reflected in the credentialing process.
Using Envision™ requires that the credentialed ENV PV log in to the EnvisionTM web portal to register a project. Once there, they will see this interface with icons for each of the 5 credit categories. They will select the categories to review the associated questions.

19. Rating System
For example, this is the first few questions in the Quality of Life category.
The third column lists the credit question with a brief description and a link to more information in the guidance manual.
The fourth column indicates if the credit is required for consideration. The majority of credits are required. Some, for example the third credit here, are available for the project team to decide if they will include or exclude the credit from the overall evaluation.
In the fifth column, the user selects the appropriate Level of Achievement based on the credit specific criteria in the guidance manual.
The score in the sixth column adjusts automatically based on the Level of Achievement.
The last column lists the maximum number of points available for the credit. This column only changes if a credit is excluded based on the assessor decision option.
Finally, there is a notes field for each credit where the user indicates the type of evidence they will be submitting to support the Level of Achievement.
The project team works through this spreadsheet for all 60 credits.
The rating system is intended to be a tool used throughout the project phase, so it can be revisited and updated as many times as needed.

20. Scoring Summary
At any time, the user can select the “Section Totals Summary” to see a table and graph of the points earned.
The table lists:
each of the five categories
the maximum possible score (which may vary from project to project based on the credits included or excluded)
the points earned (regular, innovation, and the sum of both)
The graph shows the points earned out of the maximum possible points.

21. Check List

22. No minimum category percentage required
Award Levels
Recognition
Level
Minimum Applicable
Points
Minimum in
Each
Category
Bronze
No minimum category percentage required
Silver Award
Gold Award
Platinum Award
20%
Best in
Class
Award
30%
It’s almost impossible to get all the points (845)! There are so many ways to be sustainable, no project could incorporate them all.
Do not expect your project to achieve a score of 90% to 100% that is typically considered an “A” in academia. Many projects that were designed with environmental and social considerations in mind achieve 40 to 45% of the applicable points in EnvisionTM.
Note that there is a required minimum level of points required in each category as well as the minimum overall.
When the project team and ENV SP have complete the project and evaluation, they can submit the project to ISI for verification, but it is not a requirement. ISI assigns a Verifier to review and confirm the points achieved. The Verifier will make a recommendation for award based on the points achieved.
40%
50%

23. Fee Schedule Project Size ($) Non-Member Price ISI Member Price
Registration Fee: $1000
Verification Fee
Project Size ($)
Non-Member Price
ISI Member Price
Up to 2M
$3000
$2400
2-5M
$8500
$7000
5-25M
$17,000
$14,000
25-100M
$25,000
$21,000 M
$33,000
$28,000
Over 250M
$5000 per 100M above base price of $20,000
Appeals Fee: $500 per credit

24.
Envision™ is designed to do more than simply rate and rank projects in the built environment. It is designed as a template for planning, designing and constructing projects that contribute to the reduction of our environmental footprint while not diminishing our overall quality of life. At the same time, it helps engineers and other practitioners take into account the changes in operating conditions in ways that ensure the project will perform as specified over the entire design life. As such, Envision™ helps to create a new breed of sustainability engineer/practitioner, a person that has good knowledge of what it takes to design a project that truly contributes to sustainability.
The best place to get more information about EnvisionTM is the ISI website.
You can find resources, such as
The EnvisionTM guidance manual
The EnvisionTM Checklist, which is a yes/no sustainability checklist that can be used on small projects or the preliminary design stage of a larger project. No training is necessary to use the Checklist.
The most recent slides and handouts for presentations
Information on ISI membership
You can provide feedback on ISI and EnvisionTM and make suggestions for future resources.