Coulter BIM Information Management

As the summer closes out, a few important developments have landed that deserve a closer look. This week we’ll dig into two major areas: Autodesk’s updates to model-based assets in ACC, and Ireland’s new circular on Green Public Procurement. Both touch directly on how information managers set up EIRs, BEPs and deliverables — and both show how BIM Information Management is evolving beyond coordination alone.

Autodesk Construction Cloud sharpens asset workflows

Autodesk Construction Cloud (ACC) has introduced significant refinements to how model-based assets are handled. While at first glance this might look like a set of minor interface tweaks, the underlying changes affect how we manage identifiers, how we reconcile asset data against design models, and ultimately how COBie and AIM handovers line up.

The update brings three main improvements:

1. Clearer mapping process – When publishing model elements into the asset register, Autodesk now provides more explicit guidance on how parameters are mapped. This reduces the risk of “mystery fields” appearing in asset lists where Revit families or IFC exports didn’t line up cleanly with the ACC schema.

2. Stable identifier checks – One of the biggest causes of asset duplication has been changing GUIDs or unstable naming during model revisions. The new update introduces a warning system: if identifiers shift between model versions, ACC alerts the user before creating duplicate records. For information managers, this means less post-processing in Excel to clean up “ghost assets.”

3. Detached assets concept – A new distinction is now made between assets that originate in the model and those added manually or via import. “Detached” assets are clearly flagged, making it easier to track which elements must be revalidated if models change.

Why it matters for BIM Information Management

These changes go beyond convenience. In practice, they tackle three long-standing headaches:

COBie alignment – When exporting COBie, mismatched identifiers or unexpected duplicates often undermine quality assurance. By improving identifier stability and mapping, Autodesk is directly reducing COBie QC effort.

AIM reliability – For clients who expect an Asset Information Model at handover, distinguishing between model-driven and detached assets helps maintain trust in the digital record. It allows you to show, transparently, which records have a model origin and which were added as “non-modelled placeholders.”

Information manager oversight – When writing a BEP, many of us already include rules for model-to-asset mapping. With these ACC changes, it is now possible to enforce those rules within the CDE itself rather than purely in Excel.

Conclusion

For BIM managers, this is a subtle but important shift: Autodesk is embedding data quality checks into the platform, reducing reliance on offline QA. If you’re responsible for COBie, AIM, or Uniclass-coded asset registers, it’s worth revisiting your BEP appendix on asset workflows and updating your training notes. Expect fewer “late-stage surprises” when exporting, provided your teams embrace the new identifier warnings and mapping rules.

Ireland’s push on Green Public Procurement

Ireland has released Circular 17/2025, strengthening requirements for Green Public Procurement (GPP) across all public works. While this might sound like a procurement issue, its impact will be felt deeply in BIM Information Management because it tightens expectations around the digital evidence needed to prove compliance.

The circular builds on existing Capital Works Management Framework (CWMF) obligations, particularly the cost and carbon templates introduced in line with ICMS3. Now, public bodies must show that GPP criteria are being applied consistently in tendering and project delivery. That translates directly into structured data requirements for project teams.

What it means in practice

EIRs will expand – Exchange Information Requirements are likely to include explicit sustainability-linked data fields such as embodied carbon values, life cycle costing references, and environmental product declarations. Information managers will need to ensure these requirements are clearly documented and mapped into deliverables.

Responsibility matrices will shift – If procurement criteria demand carbon data, someone has to provide it. Expect to see responsibility matrices allocating “environmental data deliverables” to design consultants, product suppliers, and contractors.

Alignment with international standards – The Circular doesn’t exist in isolation. It ties into the EU’s broader sustainability framework, so digital deliverables will increasingly need to align with both EN 15978 (life cycle assessment of buildings) and ISO 22057 (environmental product declarations in BIM).

Why it matters for BIM Information Management

For years, sustainability data was often treated as a separate stream, sitting in consultants’ reports or specialist tools. With Circular 17/2025, it becomes a mainstream requirement in procurement — meaning it must be tracked, structured and verified alongside the rest of the project’s information deliverables.

The key point here is that not all sustainability data needs to be inside a 3D model. In many cases, structured spreadsheets, schedules, or linked databases will be the most efficient way to capture what is required. The role of the information manager is to ensure that sustainability data is planned for in the EIR, properly allocated in the responsibility matrix, and exchanged in a usable format at the right project stage.

Conclusion

Ireland’s GPP policy is raising the bar for digital deliverables. For anyone writing EIRs or BEPs on Irish projects, sustainability data can no longer be “other consultants’ business.” It is a core part of information management, on par with COBie or drawings. This policy also signals where other jurisdictions may be heading — expect green procurement to become a standard driver of information requirements across the EU and UK in the coming years.