Building Industry Authority Determination 2003/3 Commentary Paul Clements.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Welcome Safety Regulatory Function Handbook April 2006.
Advertisements

Reliability Provisions of EPAct of 2005 & FERC’s Final Rule
A guide to building regulation in New Zealand and the place of Acceptable Solution E2 in this regulation.
NC SWANA FALL 2014 MEETING Presented by Ed Mussler P.E., Wilmington, NC October 2014 DWM Post-Closure Landfill Use Concepts and Considerations.
European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims
HAYLEA CAMPBELL SUSTAINABLE PROCUREMENT IN THE EU.
Home Owner & Debtor Protection (Scotland) Act 2010 – key issues for the advice sector, lay representatives & solicitors Eleanor Hamilton, Principal Solicitor.
Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act of 1996 HIPAA for Researchers: IRB Related Issues HSC USC IRB.
Arbitration in Poland Practical issues Monika Hartung Legal Adviser, Partner Warsaw 16 June 2011.
September 14, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December.
The Brussels II Regulation The jurisdiction of courts.
Code Comparison Changes 2012 IBC to 2012 NPFA 101 Developed for the Florida Department of Business And Professional Regulation Building Codes and Standards.
Blueprint of a Bid Protest. …well, more of a thumbnail of a bid protest.
“Reform of the Child Care System: Taking Stock and Accelerating Action” South East Europe 3 – 6 July 2007, Sofia.
The New Mediation Regulation October 16, 2012 Commissioner Derrick L. Williams.
Not legally binding FP7 Rules for Participation and Grant agreement FP7 Helpdesk 
EU: Bilateral Agreements of Member States. Formerly concluded international agreements of Member States with third countries Article 351 TFEU The rights.
© 2003 Rule 1.9. Duties to Former Clients (a) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person.
Health and safety at work
Software Protection & Scope of the Right holder Options for Developing Countries Presentation by: Dr. Ahmed El Saghir Judge at the Council of State Courts.
Parliamentary Procedure (Robert’s Rules of Order)
UNECE and OSCE joint event, Almaty, May 2012
CHAPTER 16 Continuity of employment and transfers of undertakings.
New Zealand Building Code What is it?. The New Zealand Building Code is the first schedule to the Building Regulations All building work must comply.
Case Study on “Conflict of Interest” Reference: Feasibility Study (adopted from NSPE Case No. 88-1)
Legislation Concerning Disability Employment in Thailand National Office for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (NEP.), Ministry of Social Development.
Taking privacy cases through the Human Rights Review Tribunal Some observations on process and the roles of the Privacy Commissioner and the Director of.
Overview report of a series of FVO fact- finding missions and audits carried out in 2012 and 2013 in order to evaluate the systems put in place to give.
Appeals to the Upper Tribunal Against a Traffic Commissioner’s decision (Goods Vehicle Operator’s Licence) Jared Dunbar BSc, MA, LLB Associate, Dyne Solicitors.
SUMMARY OF INFORMAL COMMENTS Temporary Waiver of Terms Regulations May 2006.
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. 2 Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due.
Taking of evidence within the European Union Council regulation no 1206/2001 on cooperation between the courts of Member States in the taking of evidence.
2010 Florida Building Code: I nterpretation P rocess O verview.
1 Employment Equity Amendment Bill, 2012 PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON LABOUR 12 March 2013.
Appeals in patent examination and opposition in Germany Karin Friehe Judge, Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany.
1 Workshop on the Directive 96/61/EC concerning (IPPC) Integrated pollution prevention and control INFRA Public participation & access to environmental.
Lecture 4. OUTCOMES What must the equity plan include?. What must affirmative action measures include? Which factors are taken into account in determining.
Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication LA 310.
Engineering Analysis of NFPA 285 Tested Assemblies
1 A decade of revisions at UNCITRAL Special Course 6 – James Castello Lecture 5 Arbitration Academy PA R I S SUMMER COURSES
Unit 9 Seminar Business Organizations. Things to do this unit: UNIT 9 – Read Chapter 13 and 14 – Respond to the Discussion Board – Attend the Weekly Seminar.
Learning More About Oregon’s ESEA Waiver Plan January 23, 2013.
Local Pension Boards for the Firefighters’ Pension Schemes: A discussion document April 2014.
RULES GOVERNING PRIVATE MEMBERS’ LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS Presentation by NA Table to Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions.
Alternatives to BART Rule Discussion with WRAP Nov , 2006.
AMENDMENTS TO THE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE REVIEW GUIDE July 2006 IFTA Annual Business Meeting.
Angela Beazer Solicitor TCs AND STCs: ASSESSING WHAT MAY BE “CONTRARY TO THE INTERESTS OF AVIATION SAFETY”
1 Bonvillian v. Dep't of Insurance, 906 So.2d 596 (La.App. Cir ) What is the underlying dispute? Insurance Commission refused to renew a bail bond.
Fire Resistance Rated Truss Assemblies Educational Overview.
Change Orders, Extras and Claims Presented by Geoffrey Cantello, City of Ottawa.
Agreement concerning the adoption of uniform conditions for periodical technical inspections of wheeled vehicles and the reciprocal recognition of such.
Introduction to Procurement for Public Housing Authorities Sealed Bids Unit 5.
Authority Requirements Margit Markus Tallinn, 7 May 2009.
Improving Compliance with ISAs Presenters: Al Johnson & Pat Hayle.
To Satisfaction of the Administration Seminar on the Implementation of measures to ensure that safety standards are “to the Satisfaction of the Administration.
1 Consent to Subcontract Breakout Session # D12 Name: Rita Wells Daniel Johnson Anthony Simmons Date:July 12, 2011 Time:11:15 – 12:30.
The Mediation Centre of Chamber of Notaries in Gdańsk
IMPLICATIONS OF THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT IN THE MATTER BETWEEN EARTHLIFE AFRICA JOHANNESBURG V MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND OTHERS IN RESPECT OF.
Regulation of land use and building activities
Consent to Subcontract
Position Statement on Sealed Truss Placement Diagrams for the State of Texas Overview Revised 3/23/2017.
INTERCONNECTION GUIDELINES
Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards in Russia Roman Zaitsev, PhD, Partner 05/09/2018.
MEPAC March 2017 Task 95 Inland Fire Fighting Requirement's for towing vessel watch officers MASTERS/PILOTS Maritime Services Group of Louisian, LLC.
UNR116 splitting Informal document GRSG
ISO 9001:2015 Auditor / Registration Decision Lessons Learned
General Requirements of NFPA 101
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 15 February 2017 CASE C-499/15: W, X and V
Function of the International Court of Justice (ICJ):
Presentation transcript:

Building Industry Authority Determination 2003/3 Commentary Paul Clements

New Zealand Fire Service S. 29 of Fire Service Act S. 16 (e) of Building Act - party S. 17 (1) - Apply for a determination

Building Act S. 17 (2) BIA does not need to comply with same rules of law as apply to judicial proceedings - see 4.15 of the determination S. 19 (1) BIA may require applicant to provide additional information

Building Act S. 24 Territorial Authorities S. 56 Building Certifiers S. 20 (a) BIA is the final authority S. 49 (2) BIA documents not the only method of compliance with the Building Code S. 50 (b) A determination shall establish compliance with the Building Code } approving authorities

The Acceptable Solutions do not necessarily meet the intent of the Building Code, eg. C2.2 (a) - C/AS Limited area atriums C C/AS Fire rating of intermediate floors C (d) - C/AS (a) Spandrels

Spandrels S. 50 (b) states that a determination by the Authority establishes compliance with the Building Code of the determination therefore requires the minimum spandrel height to be 2.5m

3.2.1 The Authority has carefully considered all of the evidence and documents submitted to it in their entirety… The Authority takes the view that it cannot take account of modelling submitted after the hearing……. (after 18 months)

5.1.2 The Authorities task is to determine whether the building complies with the performance based Building Code. In doing so, the Authority may use the Acceptable Solutions as a guideline or benchmark when assessing other solutions.

5.3.3 The Authority does not accept …….. that the Authority may not lawfully assess compliance by comparison with the Acceptable Solutions.

5.4.8 (b) In several previous determinations, the Authority has made the following general observations about acceptable solutions and alternative solutions (a)……… (b) Usually however, where there is non- compliance with one provision of an acceptable solution it will be necessary to add some other provision to compensate for that in order to comply with the Building Code

5.4.9 The process by which the Authority makes a determination is quite different. Using the current acceptable solution as a guideline or benchmark, means that an alternative solution must achieve effectively the same level of safety as the acceptable solution. Therefore, no matter how strong the arguments a party to a determination advances to justify a lower level of safety in the particular building concerned, those arguments cannot be accepted for the purposes of the determination.

7.2.3 The Authority rejects any assumption that if a particular building element has a fire resistance rating of certain numbers of minutes then in a real fire the tested element will ensure that people necessarily have that number of minutes available in which to escape. A factor of safety must be included in any specific design to cover for this fact.

7.3.2 (a) The Authority does not dismiss the significance of modelling, but emphasises that the results of modelling must be judged against the performance criteria required by the Building Code and exemplified by the acceptable solution. It is not acceptable to judge the results of modelling against some other criteria, however soundly based. Those other criteria cannot be used unless and until C/AS1 is amended (or a verification method is issued) under Section 49 so as to give those other criteria statutory recognition. Also see 8.3.5,

the Authority points out that paragraph of C3/AS1 provides that car parking spaces within a building “shall be separate firecells”. Thus to comply with the acceptable solution it was necessary for any openings between the atrium and the car park area to be protected with 30/30/30 rated closures. The Authority does not accept that a smoke barrier down to 2m above floor level is an acceptable substitute for the required fire rated closure.

Again, this is an example of the design achieving criteria which, however soundly based, have not been related to the criteria specified by the Building Code and exemplified by, in this instance, C3/AS1. Note: The car parking is under an overhang of the building, and is not a separate firecell.

15.1 It is not for the Authority to decide how the building is to be brought to compliance with the Building Code (subject to any waivers or modifications granted by the territorial authority). This is a matter for the owner to propose and for the building certifier or the territorial authority to accept or reject, with any of the parties entitled to submit doubts or disputes to the Authority for another determination.

Summary The NZ Fire Service have the right to enter any building, excepting private residences, at any time, and to judge whether the building (in their opinion) complies with the Building Code. Note that there is no time limitation on this right. If the NZ Fire Service consider that the subject building does not comply with the Building Code, then they have the right to apply for a determination.

Summary The NZ Fire Service do not have to supply any technical information regarding the application to the BIA, unless the BIA request it The determination process is not required to comply with the rules of law as apply to judicial proceedings A determination establishes compliance with the Building Code

Summary The BIA will accept or reject information from its own or other parties experts without any technical ability to do so. The BIA may use the acceptable solution as a guideline or benchmark In a determination, the Authority will require any variation from the acceptable solutions to be compensated for to comply with the Building Code

Summary The Authority considers that fire tested elements cannot have their tested duration relied upon, and need a factor of safety. The Authority considers that fire modelling must be judged against the acceptable solution The Authority considers that a space with one wall and a roof is a firecell The final approving authority is the BIA, but it is an interactive process

Conclusion Will solely use the acceptable solutions as a benchmark Will insist upon compensatory measures for each item which does not comply with the acceptable solution Requires any fire modelling to relate directly to the acceptable solutions In a determination the Authority

Conclusion Will completely ignore any stochastic design, as the acceptable solutions are totally deterministic In a determination the Authority Will effectively ignore any arguments based upon the Building Code clauses

Where to from here? This determination takes fire safety engineering back 20 years to a 100% prescriptive code, where the fire safety designer may be permitted to apply for a dispensation from strict compliance.

Where to from here? The Authority has chosen to ignore S.17(2) of the Building Act, thereby removing the building code from consideration in the determination process.

Where to from here? One option is for the SFPE to make representations directly to the Minister in regard to ensuring that the Authority is instructed to comply with the Act, rather than enforcing a non- mandatory regime upon affected parties

Thank you for your time and attention