Discussion paper: Draft National Building Product Assurance Framework - A Response to the Building Confidence Report

The proposed preferred terms are assumed to be only the three stated on page 5:

- Building product
- Non-conforming building product
- Non-complying building product
If this is correct then the 3 terms are reasonable

If the Glossary on page 4 is proposed then this does not appear to be appropriate. It is more suited to the acronym list used in the report. There is also reference to the Preferred Terms Publication which does not appear to exist on the ABCB web site. What does exist is the National Dictionary of Building and Plumbing Terms. Will the Preferred Terms replace this existing dictionary? Or is it intended to be another duplication?

NCC’s evidence of suitability provisions are inadequate. Of particular concern is the failure to define who the evidence is to be provided to and when. Having the evidence available to the end owners and users is critical. Part A5 of the NCC does not appear to define who designers are to provide their documentation and evidence to.

Building Certifiers who undertake annual fire safety and essential safety inspections have identified problems with obtaining copies of performance based solutions and fire engineering reports in order to complete their certification. Designers have claimed copyright, confidentiality etc to avoid provision of the documentation.

The WHS Acts in each jurisdiction already defines the exact information that is required to be provided by Manufacturers, Suppliers, Designers and Contractors. The NCC should be amended to comply with theses requirements or to reference these to avoid duplication and confusion.

Yes.

The NCC as stated previously should reference the current model provisions for provision of information under the WHS Act. Under the WHS Act - Part 2, Div 3 Section 23, 4

"(4) The designer must give adequate information to each person who is provided with the design for the purpose of giving effect to it concerning:
(a) each purpose for which the plant, substance or structure was designed; and
(b) the results of any calculations, analysis, testing or examination referred to in subsection (3), including, in relation to a substance, any hazardous properties of the substance identified by testing; and
(c) any conditions necessary to ensure that the plant, substance or structure is without risks to health and safety when used for a purpose for which it was designed or when carrying out any activity referred to in subsection (2)(a) to (e)."

in addition the NCC should address other regulations that define the minimum information content such as the QLD Building and Construction Legislation
(Non-conforming Building Products— Chain of Responsibility and Other
Matters) Amendment Act 2017 states -
"required information, for a building product,
means information about the product that—
(a) for each intended use of the product, states
or otherwise communicates the following—
(i) the suitability of the product for the
intended use and, if the product is
suitable for the intended use only in
particular circumstances or subject to
particular conditions, the particular
circumstances or conditions;
(ii) instructions about how the product
must be associated with a building to
ensure it is not a non-conforming
building product for the intended use;
(iii) instructions about how the product
must be used to ensure it is not a
non-conforming building product for
the intended use; and
(b) complies with the requirements for the
information, if any, prescribed by regulation
for this definition."

Also the Safe Work Australia - Safe design of structures, Code of Practice states - "include copies of all relevant health and safety information the designer prepared and used in the design process, such as the safety report, risk register, safety data sheets, manuals and procedures for safe maintenance, dismantling or eventual demolition."

It would be logical to align each of the current relevant regulations within the NCC to ensure the NCC captures the 'whole' building rather the current limited scope.

Yes

A statutory declaration only has benefit with regards to the authenticity of the document offered. It does not verify if the document and the information it provides or supports is relevant or useful

Please below response to item 7

The current Handbook appears to only focus on the following 4 elements of a building.

The handbook states "The use of the general evidence of suitability options contained in A5.1, A5.2 and A5.3 is subject to specific requirements for:
• certain plumbing and drainage products – in A5.3(1) to (4); and
• determination of fire resistance of building elements – in A5.4; and
• determination of fire hazard properties – in A5.5; and
• a ceiling having a resistance to the incipient spread of fire – in A5.6."

It would be appropriate for the handbook to address all relevant elements of a new building. Eg there is no reference to electrical systems, lifts and escalators, life safety, HVAC and other elements of equal or greater risk to the owners and users of a new facility.

Yes

The report identifies the most prevalent issues. The solution may lie in setting a use-by or end date for any product certification mark used and widening the current ACCC regulation to cover commercial products. Particularly as the products used more often become a consumers end problem.

Also publicly (web) available technical sheets and other evidence should be conditional on being able to sell or supply any product in Australia. Any audit or renewal of accreditation would be subject to meeting this requirement.

Yes

However under item (f) Instructions: for the installation, occupancy and maintenance instructions to ensure product compliance over the life of the building.

This should be aligned with the WHS Act to include use, operation, repairs, replacement and removal / disposal.

The regulations already in place require designers, manufacturers, suppliers and installers to provide the appropriate information outlined in the PTS. These costs are already included.

YES

Yes.
The use of say QR codes can be incorporated to include meta data as well as imbedded web links to relevant technical information. It would be appropriate to ensure that any product code marks used by suppliers includes the QR code with metadata via an embedded web link.

Any building product can form the basis of a critical or priority element. This can be via the product itself or via its use or integration into a wider element or system. All products need labeling. The gap is to utilise the current processes by suppliers and to include the linked meta data and technical information via the embedded web link.

Yes

The current design report process should be expanded to include detailed PTS and more importantly the designers own PTS on the selected products and materials to be used. How they are to be used, where and critical interfaces.

In turn contractors should provide matching PTS documents on the final products/materials used

It should be transparent within the completed Building Manuals the products and material designed and those actually used

I suggest you look at the NZ experience with leaky buildings to assess the costs of rectification vs proper design, product selection and installation.

A national product register would streamline the assurance process.

Yes

Yes
The register should include key PTS details plus those missing and identified previously in this response.

Register should be via industry subscription (small amount) and all data should be created and maintained by the manufacturer and or supplier. It should include compliance testing data, relevant product marks and a copy of their relevant product and third party insurance policy details.

The Register (Govt) should be tasked with audits of 10% of all listed products PA to ensure all are checked within 10 years. Errors or omissions should be recorded publicly. Deliberate acts to misrepresent, conceal or lie should result in removal and listing as non-complying.

Users should also be able to log problems, failures etc confidentially. Suppliers should be encouraged to offer solutions and to post information that may assist other users.

Where a fault or complaint is not addressed to the satisfaction of the user then the registrar should intercede to either mediate or direct a solution. If the supplier is reluctant then removal from the product register could be the final sanction. with publication of all complaints and reports.

See above

YES

See previous response

See below

The 5 elements identified as the National Building Product Assurance Framework as shown in the diagram Figure 1: Supply and demand relationships for building products. Does not address the relationship of the owner or facility user. As such the 5 elements do not appear to be adequate to cover the full scope required.

The Building Confidence Report focused on creating confidence in consumers that the building they buy and use is safe and fit for purpose. While much of the focus has been on increased regulation and administration, the BCR does identify one very clear point. That no amount of regulation will prevent either 'greed' or 'stupidity' . The two fundamental causes of all building failures past, current and future. The BCR did note on page 9 one low cost remedy identified in 1913, that “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants”.

The most critical element in the BCR is recommendation 20 which seeks to mandate the provision of a building manual. It is this document which would capture the information from designers, suppliers, developers and contractors that relates to the actual building. The information on the products and materials selected and installed such as PTS must be captured in the Building Manual, otherwise the entire process has no point. It is unlikely 10 years later to expect to find current information relevant to that building or the products used. The Building Manual is the end recipient of the product information and in turn the owners and users. Transparency leads to accountability.

This proposed framework should be amended to clearly include use of the Building Manual as the end repository for any product related information.