Tag Archive for: Fire

fire

Fire safety in construction a bigger priority post Grenfell

/in ,

The construction industry has seen myriad improvements to fire safety since the Grenfell Tower fire, but there is frustration that the government has responded too slowly, a new study reveals.

Since the fire in June 2017, which killed 71 people, construction industry professionals have seen substantive changes in products used for cladding, insulation and fire doors, as well as greater demands for more fire testing of products.

A survey of construction professionals from all parts of the trade, conducted for UK Construction Week (UKCW), also suggested fire safety has become a bigger priority in revised procurement policies, tenders and contract terms, the survey reveals.

However, the government was widely criticised for taking too long to clarify new requirements since the fire and subsequent publication of the Hackitt Review on 17 May 2018.

One respondent to the survey said: “I just wish that action could happen more quickly”, while another said “things are changing, but way too slowly.” Another had particularly low expectations of the government: “The government will take a decade to produce yet another set of incomplete regulations together, and will probably produce another white paper. They need to set a clock on this.”

Asked what changes they had made since the tragedy respondents had most frequently reviewed project designs and specifications, commissioned additional fire risk assessments on projects and ramped up fire safety training.

They were also asked to pick the three changes they thought would most likely improve fire safety across the built environment, in buildings of all sizes and types. On average they most frequently cited greater involvement of some to conduct a full fire risk assessment to enhance design and specification – such as an architect, clerk of works, fire engineer, or fire and rescue service.

Contractor-led ‘Design and Build’

Many called for the end of contractor-led ‘Design and Build’ contracts.

Not far behind in second place was a sea change in specifying materials. Many backed the recently announced ban on combustible materials in exposed areas of a building, in particular cladding or insulation.

The aluminium composite material panels used on Grenfell Tower have been banned and more recent regulations will extend the ban to include plastics, wood and products that include combustible materials such as aluminium composite panels in the external wall systems used in residential buildings more than 18 metres tall. The only materials that will be allowed are those classed as A1 or A2, which includes elements such as metal, stone and glass, which seldom contribute to fires; or plasterboard, which makes no significant contribution.

The third most highly ranked change sought by construction professionals was the installation and regular maintenance of sprinklers and other active fire detection and suppression equipment into all buildings.

New regulations only ranked sixth on the industry’s list of priorities.

Asked to score out of 10 their confidence that the UK’s approach to fire safety in all buildings would now change for the better, respondents on average went for 6 out of 10.

Contractors, specialist sub-contractors and building products suppliers are marginally more confident than other groups (average confidence score of 7 out of 10).

“Our research shows that the industry has taken to heart every opportunity to change its practice and is already well along a process that will change the way all buildings are procured, design, built and maintained,” said Nathan Garnett, event director at UK Construction Week.

“This is an issue that will be discussed widely at next week’s event, and is likely to remain the highest agenda item for years to come. While confidence is quite good at this time, we must do all we can to maintain the positive attitude and momentum behind these changes.”

Geoff Wilkinson, managing director of Wilkinson Construction Consultants, a fire safety and building standards expert and one of the speakers at this year’s UKCW seminar on quality in construction post-Grenfell, says:

“It is very encouraging to see the industry getting on with it, despite the hiatus from Government. But what’s needed is an industry-wide coordinated response.

“The ban on combustible materials is long overdue. We need to be told why it has taken over a year to get to this point when a very simple changing of regulatory guidance could have achieved the same thing in days.”

Source: Ifsecglobal.com

Cladding

Combustible cladding over 18m to be banned

/in ,

The Government has confirmed it is banning the use of all combustible cladding on new residential buildings over 18m.

New building regulations will be introduced for external wall systems banning plastics, wood and other products that include combustible materials found in some aluminium composite panel systems.

Materials that would be allowed are those classed as A1 or A2 under the European Classification system.

Hotels and office building would be exempt because they have different evacuation strategies and the risks are lower.

Full details of the proposed ban have yet to be released. It is still not known whether the ban would apply to any material in wall construction from the internal face of the wall through to its external face, as first proposed.

If this proved the case internal wallpaper and paint, window frames, gaskets and seals, vapour membranes, surface finishes and laminated glass would likely be exempted.

To comply with the stricter requirements, it is estimated that for a 15-storey new build requiring 1,700m2 of cladding, a wall system which comprises only materials of A2 will cost an extra £25,000-£75,000.

Across England, this would equate to an expected overall annual cost of £7.5m-£11m assuming average build rates, according to the Government.

The Communities Secretary James Brokenshire confirmed the decision at the Conservative Party Conference.

“I can confirm that I will change the building regulations to ban the use of combustible materials for all new high rise residential buildings, hospitals, registered care homes and student accommodation.

“And bring about a change in culture on building safety.”

The new ban will be implemented through changes to building regulations to be brought forward in late autumn.

The plan to tighten up on materials use on building exteriors came as the Government also issued a further warning that even small amounts of combustible ACM cladding fitted to existing buildings must be removed.

Fresh guidance from the Government’s expert panel revealed that some experts were mistakenly advising building owners that combustible ACM cladding could remain on high rise buildings when fitted to small parts or strips of the building envelope.

The guidance says: “We have become aware that some building owners have received advice that indicates that it is acceptable to leave small or partial amounts of ACM cladding on their buildings.

“Given the risk of fire spread posed by ACM cladding systems, the independent expert advisory panel’s view is that leaving any amount of ACM cladding on a building would continue to pose a hazard to both residents and firefighters in the event of a fire.

“The clearest way to ensure the safety of residents is to remove all ACM, including small or partial areas of ACM, and replace it with a safe material. This remains the most appropriate remediation solution.”

However, the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) said the new regulations did not go far enough, claiming the move was “designed for political convenience”.

Class A2 materials such as plasterboard, which has limited combustibility, will continue to be permitted under the new rules.

Firefighters are calling for only A1 materials, which do not contribute to a fire at any stage – such as metal, stone and glass – be allowed.

The partial ban on combustible cladding will not be applied retrospectively to buildings that have already had the panels fitted.

FBU general secretary Matt Wrack said: “These measures do not deal with the existing cladding on nearly 500 buildings across England where people live and work every day.

“The government’s proposals only apply to buildings over 18 metres high, plus hospitals, care homes and student accommodation, when they should apply to all buildings, whatever their height or use.

“They continue to allow A2 materials, when they should permit only the highest standard of A1.”

Mr Wrack added: “This announcement is designed for political convenience, not for thoroughgoing change. The failings in the fire safety regime are far wider than just the materials used. The whole deregulated system and weak guidance needs to be overhauled.

“Many residents of high rise residential buildings and firefighters wanted more comprehensive action taken against flammable cladding. This government has failed to deliver.”

A spokesman for Mr Brokenshire said: “We are saddened to see the response of the Fire Brigades Union. We consulted on this very important matter and indeed went beyond what was asked of us.

“These measures will save lives, and we are clear building safety is at the very heart of what Mr Brokenshire is doing.”

Source: Construction Enquirer / The Independent

fire

Fire regulatory system is ‘broken’

/in ,

Shadow fire minister Karen Lee has said the fire regulatory system is broken and requires a radical overhaul, and “the government’s approach to the public’s safety in the 15 months since Grenfell has been characterised by inaction.”

Deregulation in the 1980s created a performance-based system, said Lee, in which “rather than prescriptive rule-making, the system outlines required outcomes, left open to industry to decide how they are met”. Lee said that successive governments had scrapped regulations at the expense of public safety and claimed that fire regulations had failed to hold industry accountable for their products.

“Building regulations relating to cladding assert that “external walls of the building[s] [should] adequately resist the spread of fire,” said Lee. “However, large-scale system tests and desktop studies allow for flammable cladding to be used despite this regulation. “The Fire Brigades Union, the Local Government Association, the housing, communities and local government select committee and the Royal Institute of British Architecture have all raised concerns with testing methods which allow the use of flammable cladding and insulation,” she said.

The solution according to Lee was a complete overhaul of fire safety. “The fire regulatory system is broken and requires a radical overhaul,” said Lee. Labour’s shadow minister also criticised the Hackett review set up in the wake of the Grnfell fire. “The government commissioned the independent Hackett review and presented it as an opportunity for fire safety reform following Grenfell. In reality, Hackett’s recommendations offered no change to regulations. The review acknowledged that existing regulations have caused the industry to “race to the bottom” but did not ban flammable cladding or the methods enabling its use,” Lee said.

Lee also questioned the panel of experts that advised the Hackett review. “It is important to note that the expert panel advising the Hackett review had members who had signed off the use of flammable cladding, such as the Building Research Establishment which delivers the testing that allows for installation of flammable cladding,” said Lee. “The Hackett review failed. The government then pushed the issue into another consultation on banning the use of flammable materials on external walls of high-rise residential buildings,” she said.

While she welcomed the consultation, Lee said that residents living in buildings wrapped in potentially dangerous cladding should not have to wait more than a year for their safety to be consulted on. As of August 16 2018, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government has identified 466 buildings that still have Grenfell-like cladding installed. Lee claimed that the threat to these buildings mirrors that of Grenfell and the government needed to take urgent action.

RIBA have also proposed a post Grenfell fire safety plan of work, and have opened a consultation including a draft document that can be viewed here

It will be open until October 11, 2018 as a means to address concerns raised in Dame Judith Hackitt’s Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety. The review was launched as a response to the Grenfell Tower fire.

RIBA has used the proposed overhaul of its existing process guidance to try and incorporate key recommendations in the Hackitt review that have called for improved “transparency, accountability and collaboration” across the construction and building services industry.

RIBA director of practice Lucy Carmichael said that the draft Plan of Work set devised as a resource that can be adopted as broadly as possible by stakeholders working across design, construction and longer-term building management.

A key recommendation is to ensure the earlier involvement of building control, fire authorities, building managers and tenants. This could lead to increased costs for the client.

Project team accountability would be enforced through new statutory duties based on the Construction Design and Management Regulations 2015 model.

Proposed review and sign-off procedures, and independent inspection, would also help to safeguard fire safe specification and detailing, according to RIBA.

Source: Architecture.com / hvnplus / UK Construction Week

 

dame judith

Construction standards shocking, according to Dame Judith Hackitt

/in ,

Dame Judith Hackitt has said she was “truly shocked” by standards in the construction industry when researching her report, Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety, published earlier ths year.

She also warned that another “catastrophic event” cannot be ruled out if regulatory changes aren’t made.

Hackitt was speaking at IOSH 2018, the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health’s annual international conference. She told delegates that she encountered construction companies trying to do things as cheaply as possible rather than worrying about quality when she embarked on her review after last year’s Grenfell Tower disaster.

She added that it was vital a culture change was implemented as soon as possible while Grenfell was still fresh in people’s minds.

Hackitt said: “When I looked from the outside into standards in the built environment, what I encountered was truly shocking. The system for fire safety in high-rise and complex buildings was weak and ineffective.

“People actually said things like ‘we always knew something like this would happen’. They knew the system wasn’t working but didn’t know how to fix it. There was a race to the bottom. Companies were looking to do things as cheap as possible, getting around the rules. It was about cost, not quality.

“Unless we fix the system, we have no way of guaranteeing that there won’t be another catastrophic event.

“We need to get to a point where people those who construct a building are as responsible for those who use it over the next ten or 20 years as they are employee safety. What we are calling for is collaboration and joined-up thinking across the built environment sector, not self-interested groups protecting their own turf, something I have seen a lot of.”

Hackitt said some industry groups and the government are already looking at how to implement some of the measures recommended in her final report, including bringing together bodies such as the Health and Safety Executive, local authority building control and fire and rescue authorities and having the same risk-based approach as there is across other industries.

But there also needed to be stronger powers of enforcement, to provide more deterrent to cost-cutting, she added.

“Right now, the level of penalties when people are caught out is not strong enough,” she said. “There is no deterrent.

“We also need a system where people can raise concerns in the knowledge they will be acted on. The same goes for within industry, for example we don’t want people thinking they don’t know who to tell if there are concerns.”

Source: Construction Manager Magazine

cladding

Flammable cladding is a breach of human rights

/in ,

The use of flammable cladding on Grenfell Tower and other high-rise residential blocks constitutes a breach of the residents’ human rights, according to the Equality & Human Rights Commission, and thus exposes public authorities to prosecution under the Human Rights Act 1998.

The Equality & Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has written to the Department for Housing, Communities & Local Government (DHCLG) outlining its concerns about the continued use of combustible cladding in existing buildings and advising the department of its responsibilities under human rights laws to protect lives.

The EHRC is supported by the British Safety Council in its challenge to the government over its failure to protect lives

In a briefing paper on the subject, the EHRC says: “A key issue in the Grenfell inquiry will be whether the building regulations banned the use of polyethylene-based cladding in high-rise residential blocks, due to the risk of fire associated with it. If the building regulations did ban its use, questions will be asked about the adequacy of the systems for monitoring and supervising compliance with those regulations, including in council buildings, to ensure that cladding was installed safely. Both scenarios raise questions about whether the UK has met its duty to protect life. Additional issues arise concerning fire safety regulations, including the installation of fire sprinklers in high-rise buildings.”

The EHRC has expressed its concern that the consultation on the use of external cladding omits any reference to the government’s duty to protect lives under article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998.

British Safety Council chairman Lawrence Waterman said: “The British Safety Council has participated in the consultation, calling for much tighter building controls, clearer guidance and effective enforcement. The EHRC intervention takes a wider view and supports our long-held and consistent argument that health and safety is a crucial underpinning of the human right to life.”

The EHRC explains: “The right to life is one of the fundamental guarantees in international human rights law. In many respects it is a prerequisite to, and closely linked with, the enjoyment of all other rights. The right to life is protected under international and European human rights treaties, including Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The UK government has signed up to these treaties and has to abide by them at all times.

“Article 2 of the ECHR is particularly important in the UK as it has been incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998. This means that all UK governments and public bodies – central, local and devolved – including all public officials, have to take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect people and, in some circumstances, by taking active steps to protect people if their lives are at risk. If they don’t do this, they can be taken to court.”

Solicitor Anjon Mallik, construction partner at Gordons law firm, commented: “The Human Rights Commission’s intervention that the use of flammable cladding on Grenfell Tower and other high rise buildings is a breach of human rights is an issue that the Grenfell Inquiry will not be able to ignore.  If it turns out that the use of polyethelene based cladding in high rise cladding had actually been banned by building regulations but its continued use had not been properly monitored, the public will rightly expect those in authority to be held to account.  And, unless and until those responsible face the severest consequences,  the clamour for heads to roll will continue.”

Source: construction index.co.uk

fire

New alliance formed to improve facade fire-testing

/in ,

A new international alliance aims to improve the facade fire-testing market in the UK, by increasing both the capacity and quality of large-scale fire testing of cladding and building systems.

The US-based global safety science business UL, which has nine sites across the UK, and the UK Fire Protection Association (FPA) have announced that they will be working together after signing a cooperation agreement aimed at transforming the testing and certification of facades and building envelope products within the UK itself.

Currently, the only UK-based facilities capable of testing facades for fire resistance are booked up for at least the next six months, driving many building product manufacturers to seek testing and accreditation outside of the UK.

The UL / FPA alliance will include an investment by UL in the FPA’s existing fire test and research facilities, enhancing the capability and broadening the scope of testing available to developers, social landlords, specifiers and manufacturers.

UL plans to offer product testing and certification from within the facilities’ test lab.

Significant changes are expected to the current British Standard (BS 8414) cladding test following a detailed critique of that standard by the FPA’s testing and research team earlier this year, commissioned by the Association of British Insurers (ABI). UL will test and certify to this updated standard.

Chris Hasbrook, vice president and general manager of UL’s building and life safety technologies division, said: “UL is committed to increasing the facade fire testing capacity in the UK as well as the quality of those tests, an area of weakness highlighted by the independent review led by Dame Judith Hackitt. We will ensure we play our part in rebuilding public confidence in a robust, reliable and real-life testing regime.”

Jonathan O’Neill, managing director of the Fire Protection Association, said: “Teaming up with the world class team at UL offers FPA an unrivalled opportunity. UL’s mission and expertise perfectly complements our own, and its global presence ensures our customers gain barrier-free access to world markets.

“The Hackitt Review confirmed problems in the UK fire testing market. This new venture aims to deliver the level of quality, expertise and experience required.”

James Dalton, director of policy at the ABI added: “The ABI commissioned the FPA earlier this year to review the current cladding testing regime of BS 8414, and it was found seriously lacking in five areas. This testing regime is not fit for purpose, so we welcome this partnership to improve fire safety testing and certification. We need multiple lines of defence to ensure the safety of all buildings in the future, not just high-rise blocks.”

In addition to testing and certification of building systems to UK, EU and USA requirements, UL will be able to offer building envelope inspection services and additional forensic services for building owners concerned about cladding, insulation and other materials.

Welcoming the partnership announcement, Jonathan O’Neill, Managing Director of the Fire Protection Association, said:

“The Hackitt Review confirmed problems in the UK fire testing market. Teaming up with the world class team at UL offers FPA an unrivalled opportunity to provide a market leading solution to cladding testing. UL’s mission and expertise perfectly complements the FPA’s, and its global presence ensures customers gain barrier-free access to world markets.”

Source: Construction Manager Magazine / thefpa.co.uk