Discussion paper: National Registration Framework for Building Practitioners

Response 440828132

Back to Response listing

Personal Information

What is your name?

Name
Richard M Sapwell

What is your organisation?

Organisation
ecodesigns

Which best describes your industry sector?

Which best describes your industry sector?
Please select one item
Building Commercial
Building Residential
Building Commercial and Residential
Building and plumbing products
Building Certification/ Surveying
Ticked Architecture and design
Engineering
Plumbing
Compliance, testing and accreditation
Legal and Finance
Specialist - disability access
Specialist - energy efficiency
Specialist - fire safety
Specialist - health
Specialist - hydraulic/ plumbing
Student/ apprentices
Trades and other construction services
Education
Community and Non-Government organisations
Government
General Public
Other

Please select your State or Territory

State or Territory
Please select one item
ACT
NSW
NT
Qld
SA
Tas
Ticked Vic
WA

On whose behalf are you making this submission?

Please select one item
(Required)
Ticked I am making this submission on my own behalf
I am making this submission on behalf of a business
I am making this submission on behalf of an industry body
I am making this submission on behalf of a government agency

General Questions

Does the proposed NRF deliver an appropriate and proportionate response to BCR Recommendations 1 and 2?

Please select one item
Ticked Yes
No
Unsure

Will the NRF, if implemented, enhance confidence in the building industry by ensuring that key practitioners in the building process are registered?

Please select one item
Ticked Yes
No
Unsure

Do you foresee any risks in implementing this proposal, noting that the states and territories are responsible for implementation of the NRF?

Please select one item
Yes
Ticked No
Unsure
Please explain your reasoning.
My only concern is rather than the Certificate IV in NatHERS assessment the new qualification should be CPP41119 Certificate IV in Home Energy Efficiency and Sustainability (with the NatHERS component).

Do you think the proposed NRF will improve compliance with the NCC?

Please select one item
Ticked Yes
No
Unsure
Please explain your reasoning.
This will formalise the performance of a House Energy Rating by a 'certified / accredited' assessor.

NRF Discipline Specific Comments

Please provide your comments below.

Your comment relates to:
Please select one item
(Required)
Building design
Ticked Energy efficiency design
Disability access design
Geotechnical design
Structural design
Electrical design
Mechanical design
Hydraulic design
Plumbing design
Fire safety design
Fire systems design
Façade design
Building
Fire systems installation
Plumbing
Building surveying
Fire systems inspection
Project management
Registration levels
Accredited Residential Thermal Performance Assessor (House Energy Rater).
Descriptions/definitions
The appropriate qualification for accreditation of a House Energy Rater (Residential Thermal Performance Assessor) should be CPP41119 Certificate IV in Home Energy Efficiency and Sustainability.
Scope of work
Thermal performance assessment for Class 1a, Class 2 and Class 4 part of a building.

Please also note that changes are envisaged where 'the whole of house' may be taken into consideration in performing an assessment for compliance.
Qualification requirements
CPP41119 Certificate IV in Home Energy Efficiency and Sustainability.
Experience requirements
Given the history of this 'profession' 3 years would be better addressed by acceptance of relevant experience in other categories e.g. 3 years as a building designer, draftsperson architectural, builder etc.)
Any other comments for this discipline
Registration of NatHERS assessors would 'tighten' up what has been a 'loose' requirement (i.e. the NatHERS software being only what had to be accredited.)

Also a NatHERS assessor would have (in some cases) the abilities and knowledge to perform parts of DtS for Section J assessments.

Would you like to comment on another discipline?

Please select one item
(Required)
Yes
Ticked No

Other Comments

The ABCB is specifically interested in your comments on the registration levels for building surveyors. Do you agree with the criteria used to distinguish between with the two levels of registration for building surveyors and does it adequately accommodate the different levels of risk?

Please select one item
Ticked Yes
No
Unsure
Please provide your reasoning.
This is a necessary demarcation, to assist building surveyors to be able to obtain the necessary insurances (at viable levels.)