Call to make Australian Standards Free to Australian businesses.

See the following below articles from the Safety Institute of Australia regarding opening up Australian standards from the monopoly that SAI Global currently holds.

https://www.sia.org.au/news-and-publications/news/media-release-call-australian-standards-be-free-australian-businesses

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/australian-standards-unfair-exchange-david-clarke/

Holding Redlich – Combustible Cladding Assessments

Combustible cladding assessments for building industry professionals and fire engineers: golden goose or road to ruin?

In response to public concerns about the use of combustible building materials, the Queensland Government has introduced a new regime to assess the safety of existing cladding on buildings.

On 1 October 2018, changes to the Building Regulation 2006 (Regulation) commenced, affecting privately-owned class 2 to 9 buildings of type A or type B construction, (ie mainly, but not exclusively, commercial buildings over three story’s )[1] for which a building development approval was given after 1 January 1994 but before 1 October 2018 for building work to build the building or to alter the cladding on the building.

The new changes have ushered in a process for such building owners to assess whether buildings have potentially combustible cladding (i.e. made of a material not consistent with the Building Code of Australia (BCA)), or deemed combustible under AS 1530.1-1994.

This new regime may provide a golden business opportunity for some building industry professionals and RPEQ fire engineers with the ability to cater to this new market need. However, building industry professionals and fire engineers should carefully consider whether to undertake this type of work as there are risks involved.

………

Read the full story at https://www.holdingredlich.com/combustible-cladding-assessments

 

QFES Building Application Position Statement – Combustible Cladding

The Queensland Fire and Emergency Services have put out a position statement,

“To inform stakeholders involved in the development of Class 2 – 9 buildings of Type A or Type B construction in Queensland of the Queensland Fire and Emergency Services’ (QFES) expectations with respect to the fire safety performance of buildings affected by combustible cladding.

This position statement is intended to be a readily identifiable policy applied by QFES as a Referral Agency for the purposes of Section 22(2)(b) of the Planning Regulation 2017.”

For the full position statement please see https://www.qfes.qld.gov.au/buildingsafety/cladding/Pages/Cladding-Position-Statement.aspx

CMI is officially partnered with CCIC in China

CMI is officially partnered with CCIC in China. Our offices are located in the CCIC building in Shandong China Certification & Inspection Group (CCIC) is an independent third party certification and inspection organisation  dedicated to providing inspection, verification, certification and testing services, with accreditation by General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China(AQSIQ), Certification and Accreditation Administration of the People’s Republic of China(CNCA) and China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment(CNAS).

Developed over 30 years, CCIC has become a comprehensive one-stop service provider for international clients in the fields of quality, safety, health and environmental protection. CCIC enjoys great reputation worldwide and is the most influential and comprehensive multi-national inspection & certification organization in China.

CCIC now owns approximately 300 offices, 200 cooperative labs, over 16,000 employees. CCIC’s business network covers major ports, cities and trade centers in over 20 countries and regions

Bypass bridge steel found to fail tests in New Zealand

Breaking_News_LogoA article has been published by Radio NZ today that sixteen hundred tonnes of steel from China has been found to be too weak.
This steel was to be used for four bridges on the $450 million Huntly bypass that forms part of the $2 billion Waikato Expressway.

Contractors building the ‘Road of National Significance’ chose a very low bid for the steel tubes.

But the test certificates for them have turned out to be wrong, and now an expensive fix-up job is under way.

The contractors, Fulton Hogan and HEB Construction, have admitted to RNZ News the steel tubes were not good enough. They did not comply with standards for structural steel, which for bridges were very high as they must resist impacts, heavy loads and low temperatures.

It was only after a third lot of testing that the contractors found out. The first tests were done in China by the steel mill and the tube manufacturer; it is understood the second tests were done in New Zealand on samples sent here from China.

Both lots of tests said the steel met the New Zealand standard….

 

Read the full article on www.RadioNZ.co.nz

Statement of Clarification

Aluminium Composite Panels (ACPs)

The fallout from the Docklands fire and the ongoing debate (at the highest level of government) has resulted in changes to not only ACPs in the market place, but also, tangible and actionable new requirements under the NCC and State and Territory regulations.

CMI has been in consultation with a number of industry stakeholders regarding the use of composite panels. This includes the Victorian Building Authority (VBA), Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) and the Joint Accreditation Scheme-Australia New Zealand (JAS-ANZ). CMI have also been in discussions with several prominent building surveyors regarding future use of the CodeMark Certificate of Conformity as well as the evidence required in the use of the CodeMark Certificate of Conformity.

CMI’s discussions with the VBA have resulted in the requirement for a performance solution in support of the product. This is required either on a case by case basis for each building or part of the supporting evidence within the CodeMark Certification Certificate. This is due to the VBA’s position on the limited application of Deemed-to-Satisfy clauses for combustible products. For example, specification C1.1 Clause 2.4 requires the attachment not to cause an undue risk of fire spread. This is a performance detail within the DtS clauses which can only be demonstrated through evaluation to the Performance Requirements by an appropriately qualified engineer.

Discussions with the ABCB indicated that a product Evaluation Report by CMI is required with support from a professional fire engineer. In addition, the ABCB have advised that the CodeMark Certificate of Conformity will have a format change to be introduced in late June or early July. The purpose of this change is to greatly enhance the mandatory information contained on the Certificate of Conformity. The proposed format will provide a more useful document that facilitates the granting of consent on building projects.  By having an Evaluation Report supporting the certificate, the information will be transposed from the Evaluation Report to whatever format the certificate may take. During this time, it is considered important that a consistent Evaluation Report be generated.

 

So where to from here?

1 – Test evidence

ACPs will need appropriate testing on a small and large scale. This applies to all panels on an individual basis.

For internal use of the panel, the following testing is required:

  • ISO 9705

Any testing from 1 May 2016 will require documentation detailing a group number under AS 5637.1:2010 from testing to:

  • ISO 9705 or
  • AS/NZS 3837

For external use of the panel, the following testing is required:

  • Core testing to AS 1530.3
  • Assembly testing to AS 1530.3 (panel as a whole)
  • Full scale façade testing
    • NFPA 285
    • BS 8414 or ISO 13785.2 (independent of AS 5113)
    • AS 5113 (BS 8414 or ISO 13785.2)
  • Performance evaluation by a professional fire engineer registered on Engineers Australia NER demonstrating compliance of the product against the Performance Requirements CP2 and CP4.

From the above testing and performance solution additional information relating to the product such as installation manual as well as technical fixing detail for various configurations will be needed. This includes walls, around doors and windows, awnings and the like.

CMI will then complete an Evaluation Report of the product which will be publicly available and supplement the CodeMark Certificate of Conformity.

The CodeMark Certificate of Conformity will be updated in its current format following review of the testing, performance solution and installation details.

When the ABCB releases the final formatting of the enhanced CodeMark Certificate of Conformity, CMI will make the necessary changes as required in consultation with the Certificate Holder. The details will be extracted from the Evaluation Report, which will remain consistent.

Currently, many Certificates of Conformity are at different stages based on various changes. CMI requires that all Certificates of Conformity including new applicants meet the CMI Acceptance Criteria for ACPs with their supporting evidence.

CMI is committed to following directions set by the ABCB, JAS-ANZ and Building Consent Authorities to build confidence in the evidence and application of the CodeMark Certification Scheme.

2 – Next step

As a consequence of the requirements outlined above, the minimum requirement for CMI to approve a new certification or to maintain a current ACP certification will be:

  • A CMI Evaluation Report
  • A performance solution
  • Full scale testing
  • Core material testing
  • Assembly testing

Many CodeMark Certificate Holders will need additional testing or information (Supporting Evidence) to validate their certificates. CMI will work with all ACP applicants and current Certificate Holders to assist in achieving the conformity requirements. CMI will complete a technical analysis of each ACP certificate, and a gap analysis report will be provided to current Certificate Holders.


Update – August 2016

Please note that the small scale testing of AS/NZS 3837 and ISO 5660.1 are no longer accepted, and have been removed from the article.

Termite Risk Management

Technical Notice
Termite Risk Management

Over the coming weeks CMI will be reviewing all the products and systems certified by us that have a termite risk management application. This will be undertaken to ensure conformity of certifications to the requirements of the Nation Construction Code (NCC) 2016.

There are changes in the NCC that will have an impact on termite management systems. Of particular impact is Volume 2 Part 3.1.3 Termite Risk Management, and Volume 2 Part 2.1.1 as well as Queensland state variation Part 2.1.3.

We note the following changes that may have a potential impact on current certifications.

  • The NCC 2016 deleting any specific reference to the following clauses:
  • 1.3.1 Application
  • 1.3.2 Installation of termite management systems
  • 1.3.3 Concrete slab-on-ground edge exposure
  • 1.3.4 Sheet materials
  • 1.3.5 Granular material
  • 1.3.6 Chemical
  • 1.3.7 Attachments to buildings

All of the above are now included in the NCC referencing AS3660. 1; 2014 Part 1 – New building work.

(2)  the deletion of the requirement Queensland requirement for two durable notices to be placed on the building, one in the meter box and the other in the kitchen cupboard.

(3) the Queensland variation for primary building elements to include door jams, window frames, reveals, architraves and skirting’s is now included in Part 1.1 Interpretation.

As the performance requirements referenced in the NCC under P2.1.1 Structural stability and resistance to actions are limited to P2.1.1 (b) (XV) termite actions and as CodeMark certification is based on the performance requirements of the NCC

 

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS

P2.1.2 does not apply in Queensland.

Note: Building work in designated flood hazard areas is regulated by the Building Act 1975 and Development Code 3.5 -Construction of buildings in flood hazard areas.

In Queensland after P2.1.2 insert QLD P2.1.3 as follows:

QLD P2.1.3

(a)    The risk of primary building elements in a Class 1 or 10 building being damaged by subterranean termites must be adequately minimised by the use of a suitable termite management measure that—

(i)      if it serves a non-temporary Class 1 building, has a design life of at least 50 years; or

(ii)     if it serves a building not specified in (i), has a design life of at least 50 years or the specified design life of the building, whichever is the lesser; or

(iii)    is easily and readily accessible for replenishment or replacement and is capable of being replenished or replaced.

(b)    A termite management measure required by (a), to the degree necessary, must—

(i)      be accessible to enable the installation, maintenance and inspection of the termite management measure to be carried out; and

(ii)     incorporate suitable measures to adequately minimise the risk of the termite management measure inadvertently being damaged, bridged or breached.

Explanatory information:

QLD P2.1.3(a) requires a termite management measure in Queensland to have a design life of at least 50 years unless it is easily and readily accessible for replenishment or replacement and is capable of being replenished or replaced. In recognition that some buildings other than non-temporary Class 1 buildings may be designed to last less than 50 years, the option of the termite management measure having a design life at least equal to that specified for the building is given. If this option is used, the design life of the building should be agreed upon by all relevant stakeholders at the design stage and should form part of the documentation kept by the appropriate authority. It should not be assumed that the design life of 50 years in QLD P2.1.3(a)(i) and (ii) applies to any other provisions of the BCA, unless stated.

An example of a termite management measure that may satisfy QLD P2.1.3(a)(iii) is a chemical reticulation system beneath a concrete floor slab laid directly on the ground, provided that the system is easily and readily accessible for replenishment and is capable of being replenished.

An example of a termite management measure that may not satisfy QLD P2.1.3(a) for a non-temporary Class 1 building is a hand-sprayed chemical beneath a concrete floor slab laid directly on the ground if the chemical does not have a design life of at least 50 years. The concrete floor slab being laid directly on the ground would prevent the area beneath the slab from being easily and readily accessible for replenishment or replacement of the termite management measure.

An example of a termite management measure being inadvertently bridged or breached is when a person places a garden or mulch over the top of or above the level of a termite management measure enabling termites to bypass the measure.

P2.1.2 does not apply in South Australia.

 

PART 3.1.3 TERMITE RISK MANAGEMENT

Appropriate Performance Requirements:

Where an alternative termite management system is proposed as a Performance Solution to that described in Part 3.1.3, that proposal must comply with—

(a) Performance Requirement P2.1.1; and

(b) the relevant Performance Requirements determined in accordance with 1.0.7.

Acceptable construction practice

3.1.3.1 Application

Compliance with this acceptable construction practice satisfies Performance Requirement P2.1.1 for termite risk management.

Explanatory information:

The intent of these requirements is to provide for a termite management system that deters termites from gaining entry to a building via a concealed route. The installation of a termite management system will not stop termite activity from occurring on the site.

 

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS

In Queensland delete 3.1.3.1 and replace with the following: 3.1.3.1 Application Compliance with this acceptable construction practice satisfies Performance Requirements P2.1.1 and QLD P2.1.3.

3.1.3.2 Requirements for termite management systems

(a) The requirements of this Part apply where:

(i) a Class 1 or 10 building is constructed in an area where subterranean termites are known to present a potential risk of attack; and

(ii) a primary building element of a Class 1 or 10 building is considered susceptible to termite attack.

(b) For the purposes of (a), a primary building element consisting entirely of, or a combination of, any of the following materials is considered not subject to termite attack:

  • Steel, aluminium or other metals.

(ii) Concrete.

(iii) Masonry.

(iv) Fibre-reinforced cement.

(v) Timber — naturally termite resistant in accordance with Appendix C of AS 3660.1.

(vi) Timber — preservative treated in accordance with Appendix D of AS 3660.1.

Explanatory information:

  1. 3.1.3.2(a): Termites are not considered to be a risk in Tasmania and a lesser risk in parts of Victoria. The appropriate authority may have records of termite activity for each area and may be able to advise on whether termite risk management is needed.
  2. 3.1.3.2(b): Where individual primary building elements are susceptible to termite attack and the remainder of the primary building elements are constructed of termite resistant materials, only the susceptible elements need to be provided with a termite management system.
  3. 3.1.3.2(b)(iii): states that masonry is not subject to termite attack, however termites may gain entry through mortar and other joints.

 

SITE PREPARATION

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS
In Northern Territory delete 3.1.3.2(b)(v) and replace with the following: (v) Timber — naturally termite resistant timber in accordance with Appendix C of AS 3660.1 in areas where Mastotermes darwiniensis are not prevalent

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS
In Queensland delete 3.1.3.2 and replace with the following

3.1.3.2 Requirements for termite management systems
(a) The requirements of this Part apply where:
(i) a Class 1 or 10 building is constructed in an area where subterranean termites are known to present a potential risk of attack; and
(ii) a primary building element of a Class 1 or 10 building is considered susceptible to termite attack.
(b) For the purposes of (a), a primary building element consisting entirely of, or a combination of, any of the following materials is considered not subject to termite attack:
(i) Steel, aluminium or other metals.
(ii) Concrete
(iii) Masonry.
(iv) Fibre-reinforced cement.
(v) Timber — naturally termite resistant in accordance with Appendix C of AS 3660.1.
(vi) Timber — preservative treated in accordance with Appendix D of AS 3660.1.
(c) A termite management system installed in a Class 1 or 10 building to minimise the risk of termite attack to primary building elements shall be in accordance with clause 3.1.3.3.
d) The termite management system required by (c) must have—
(i) for a non-temporary Class 1 building, a design life of at least 50 years; or
(ii) for other than a non-temporary Class 1 building, a design life of at least 50 years or the specified design life of the building, whichever is the lesser.
(e) A termite management system need not comply with (d) if it is easily and readily accessible for replenishment or replacement and is capable of being replenished or replaced
(f) Where a chemical is used as an external perimeter termite management system, it must be—
(i) installed by excavating trenches, treating the exposed trench and backfilling the trench with treated material; and
(ii) covered by a concrete cover strip not less than 50 mm thick and 300 mm wide measured from the external wall of the building.

 

3.1.3.3 Termite management systems

Where a termite management system is required it must—

 (a) be selected appropriate to Table 3.1.3.1; and

(b) comply with—

(i) AS 3660.1; or

(ii) have been tested and passed the tests required by Section 5 of AS 3660.3; and

(c) have a durable notice installed in accordance with 3.1.3.4; and

(d) where a chemical termite management system is used, the chemical must be included on the appropriate authority’s pesticides register

Explanatory information:

3.1.3.3(b)(ii) provides the option of having a chemical termite management system tested to AS 3660.3. In order for the test results to remain valid, the system would then have to be installed as tested.

 

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS

In the Northern Territory delete 3.1.3.3(d) and insert 3.1.3.3(d) and (e) as follows:

(d) include additional termite risk management measures in areas where Mastotermes darwiniensis are prevalent; and

(e) where a chemical termite management system is used—

(i) the chemical must be included on the appropriate authority’s pesticides register; and

(ii) when used as an external perimeter termite management system for Mastotermes darwiniensis, it is—

(A) installed by excavating trenches, treating the exposed trench and backfilling the trench with treated material; and

(B) covered by a concrete cover strip not less than 50 mm thick and 300 mm wide measured from the external wall of the building.

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS

In Queensland delete 3.1.3.3 and replace with the following:

3.1.3.3 Termite management systems Where a termite management system is required it must—

(a) be selected appropriate to QLD Table 3.1.3.1; and

(b) comply with—

(i) AS 3660.1 subject to clause 3.1.3.2(d), (e) and (f); or

(ii) have been tested and passed the test results required by Section 5 of AS 3660.3; and

(c) have a durable notice installed in accordance with 3.1.3.4; and (d) where a chemical termite management system is used, the chemical must be included on the appropriate authority’s pesticides register

3.1.3.4 Durable notice

A durable notice must be permanently fixed to the building in a prominent location, such as in a meter box or the like, indicating—

(a) the termite management system used; and

(b) the date of installation of the system; and

(c) where a chemical is used, its life expectancy as listed on the appropriate authority’s register label; and

(d) the installer’s or manufacturer’s recommendations for the scope and frequency of future inspections of termite activity.

Explanatory information:

  1. Appropriate authority

For the purpose of the pesticides register, the appropriate authority is the government body responsible for the registration of pesticides. Currently, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APMVA) coordinates the registration scheme.

  1. Durable notice

Where a durable notice is required by 3.1.3.3 a durable notice must be fixed to the building in a prominent location advising the building occupants that the system should be inspected and maintained.

The notice should be clearly written, on a material that will not deteriorate or fade over time and be located in or near the electrical meter box or similar location so that it can be easily seen and read by future owners of the building. Additional information may be included if desired by the person placing the notice.

Source NCC 2016 Building Code of Australia – Volume Two
Table 3.1.3.1
ACCEPTABLE TERMITE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS

Building Element Termite management system or component
Concrete slab-on-ground

 

Slab perimeter or external wall

perimeter

Slab edge exposure
Slab perimeter or external wall
Sheet material
perimeter
Penetrations/control joints/area beneath the slab

(see Note)

Sheet material
Granular Material
Chemical
Suspended floors Sheet material
Granular Material
Chemical
Attachments to buildings Termite management system to the attachment or inspection zone
                                         Building Element Termite management system or component
Note: The entire area beneath the slab must be treated when the slab-on-ground is not designed and constructed in accordance with AS 2870 or AS 3600.

 

Explanatory information:

  1. Component

A component of a system as referred to in Table 3.1.3.1 is one that when used in combination with other components, will form a “full system”.

For example, if a concrete slab is used as a component of a system, it in itself will not provide a complete termite management system. Depending on the construction methods and the site conditions, additional requirements will be necessary for service penetrations through the concrete slab. Each of these are “components”, when integrated, will form a “full system”.

  1. Integrity of the termite management system

There are more than 350 species of termites in Australia, about 30 of which achieve economic importance by causing costly damage to building structures. Due to the nature of termites, it is extremely difficult to prevent them gaining access to a building.

In addition to correct installation of a termite management system, its effectiveness will rely on regular maintenance and competent inspection.

  1. Attachments to buildings

Attachments referred to in Table 3.1.3.1 include downpipes, service pipes, steps, verandahs, porches, access ramps, carports, trellises, decks, heated water systems, air conditioners and the like.

 

STATE AND TERRITORY VARIATIONS

In Queensland delete Table 3.1.3.1 and replace with the following: Table 3.1.3.1
ACCEPTABLE TERMITE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS

Termite Management system or component (AS per AS 3660.1  FOOTING SYSTEM
Concrete Slab-on ground complying with AS 2870 Concrete Slab-on ground Not complying with AS 2870 Suspended floors
Penetration and joint controls Slab perimeter Beneath slab (includes Penetrations and Joint controls) Slab perimeter
Slab edge exposure Not suitable Suitable subject to 3.3.3.2(d) Not suitable Suitable subject to 3.3.3.2(d) Not applicable
Termite shielding Not suitable Not suitable Not suitable Not suitable Suitable subject to 3.3.3.2(d)
Stainless steel mesh Component: or full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) Component: or full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) Suitable subject to 3.3.3.2(d)
Graded Stone Component: or full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) Component: or full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d) Component: or full system subject to 3.3.3.2(d)
Chemicals Full system beneath slab subject to 3.3.3.2(d) and (e) Perimeter system subject to 3.1.3.2(d)and (f) Full system beneath slab subject to 3.3.3.2(d) and (e) Perimeter system subject to 3.1.3.2(d)and (f) Full system beneath slab subject to 3.3.3.2(d) and (e)

 

CodeMark Scheme Rules

In accordance with Clause 5.6.2 of the CodeMark Scheme Rules whenever the BCA is amended, the CodeMark certificates are to be updated within 3 months of the amendments coming into effect. NCC 2016 will come into effect on 1 May 2016. Any updated information and completion of the updated certificate will be required by 1 August 2016.

 

Please contact us should you require further information on the above detail.

VBA Industry Alert

From time to time Australian building jurisdictions provide industry notifications. Yesterday the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) issued their Industry Alert February 2016 relating to External Walls, and BCA compliance.

The VBA has put their opinion forward regarding the compliance of composite panels. CertMark along with other certificate holders had a meeting with the Australian Building Codes Board late last year, where it was expressed that the opinions and views of the VBA are not shared amongst all jurisdictions. CMI recognises the role we play in the certification of your products, but also recognises that we are uniquely placed to provide support and assistance in the continued certification of your products.

The VBA has provided a definition of Cladding, whilst this term is not used substantially throughout the Code, it is useful.
In addition, the VBA has defined an external wall, being all integral elements that provide compliance, being structural or protection such as insulation and weatherproofing, must be non-combustible.  The VBA details that combustible attachments are permitted for fire walls but not walls that do not require an FRL. The VBA details that ‘if external wall remains fully compliant, then the material or product is likely to be an attachment’. A key element is that the attachment can be removed and a compliant wall remains. We note that the VBA does not detail that a non-combustible lining is required behind the composite panel.

The VBA has highlighted that where a combustible lining or other attachment is fixed to an external wall, it must meet the fire hazard properties of Specification C1.10 and specifically attain a Group number of 1, 2 or 3. The VBA highlight that canopies clad in composite panels have not demonstrated appropriate compliance amongst other areas and that the panel must satisfy the relevant Performance Requirements.

It has been identified that the VBA industry alert addresses a combination of product and specific building design issues. The industry alert has provided a summary of how to achieve a Deemed-to-Satisfy solution. This solution option is based on the VBA opinion and presents its own challenge. A key factor in the continuance of the use of composite panels will require a greater understanding of the fire performance of the core material. It is recommended that the core material be tested to AS 1530.3. In addition, a greater level of specific installation detail such as around required exits is recommended.

We are developing a proposal for change to the BCA to continue the use of composite panels on all external walls of buildings. We will need the support of our composite panel certificate holders in this process. Furthermore, a strategy is required to continue the use of the products for the next three years. CMI is here to help. We aim to provide further guidance on the VBA industry Alert as developments occur. We do suggest that a greater knowledge of panels cores be a priority through AS 1530.3 testing. Given the VBA’s opinion, maintaining a Deemed-to-Satisfy product will not be available within Victoria. Enhancements to any Alternative Solution on the products will need to be considered.


 

 

Contact Us

We would appreciate any views or comments on this industry alert, please contact our friendly team members by email info@CertMark.org.