Risk Assessment

  1. The proposed amendment is intended to be risk neutral, i.e. there should be no increase in the risk of injury or death from fire. However, as a consequence of increased engineering of some building products in order that they achieve the same fire resistance periods under the new test methods (paragraph 21), it is possible that this may result in a small decrease in the number of reported injuries and possibly deaths over time.

Options

  1. Two possible options have been identified:

However, in reality it is felt that there is really no other alternative other than to follow Option 2, since England & Wales must recognise the new harmonised system of fire standards having implemented the CPD through the Construction Products Regulations (paragraph 17). An alternative option for phasing the new standards over a longer time scale so as to reduce the potential impact on industry is also not possible as the timetable for adopting the standards (paragraphs 22 and 23) has been set, in effect, by the Commission and the availability of the harmonised product standards.

  1. Option 1 could result in the possible resistance to the use of construction products in England & Wales that were not tested in accordance with British Standards methods. This would breach European treaty obligations and leave the UK open to infraction proceedings. In addition, it could lead to a manufacturer of products tested to the new harmonised European methods seeking legal redress if they cannot be specified in England & Wales.
  2. During the period of transition, Option 2 would permit the specification of construction products, for the purposes of the Building Regulations, by either British Standard or European test methods, neither being compulsory, and therefore meet EU legislative requirements. In other words, during the transition period there would be two methods of compliance, in relation to the named specific test methods, indicated within the guidance that supports the Building Regulations.

Issues of equity and fairness

  1. In terms of equity and fairness it would seem reasonable to have parity between construction products tested under either the British Standards or the European harmonised standards. Through the two research projects (paragraph 25) manufacturers have been closely involved in evaluating the testing procedures for their products. The transition period will give those manufacturers who wish to apply the CE Marking to their products sufficient time to adjust products and public safety will be maintained. The duration of the transition periods is still the subject of much debate and is in effect dictated by the general availability of the relevant harmonised product standards, associated classification documents and the supporting test methods. There would in effect be a shared burden across the EU as all Member States adopt the harmonised standards having implemented the CPD. Although England & Wales must recognise the new standards, and are very supportive of them, CE Marking is not mandatory in the UK.

The benefits

Option 1

  1. Option 1 would provide no benefits other than the avoidance of costs as discussed below in the section Compliance Costs. However, as mentioned above, it could leave the UK open to infraction proceedings from the EU.

Option 2

  1. The main benefit of Option 2 would be that construction products, which have followed the new harmonised standards and supporting fire test methods, could be specified in the context of Building Regulation applications. In the transition period there would in fact be two methods of compliance with Building Regulations.
  2. There would be wider benefits for manufacturers of construction products which have met the new harmonised standards in that they would be able to market their products throughout the EEA. These though are benefits that stem from the CPD rather than through the European amendment document to Part B. As such they are discussed further in Annex A.
  3. It is also possible that Option 2 could lead to a small reduction in fire injuries and deaths over time (paragraph 31). However, this is very difficult to quantify because it is unknown how many manufacturers will utilise the new harmonised standards and supporting fire test methods as a means of indicating compliance with Building Regulations. It is also difficult to predict exactly how manufacturers will re-engineer their products and it will take time for the 'new' products to be widely used in the building stock. Because of these difficulties it has not been possible to quantify this benefit.

Compliance costs

Option 1

  1. Option 1 imposes no costs.

Option 2

  1. As stated at the beginning of this RIA, England & Wales must recognise the new system of harmonised product standards and supporting fire standards having implemented the CPD through the Construction Products Regulations. This is not a Building Regulations requirement. As a result, the only Building Regulation related cost following the implementation of this proposal would be for those affected (e.g. materials producers, builders, developers, specifiers etc.) to acquaint themselves with the amendments of Approved Document B and where necessary invest in recruitment and appropriate professional and technical training. There would be a similar burden on Building Control Bodies who administer the system. This would be a non-recurring cost.
  2. The construction products manufacturers' sector comprises around 15,000 producers, of whom up to 7,500 actively promote themselves as suppliers of construction products. The sector is, however, characterised by diversity - with more than 30 industries producing materials for construction use. In addition, there are just under 15,000 intermediaries, which reduce to around 7,300 when agents and retailers are excluded7. Assuming that approximately half of them (7400) would be affected by this change and that they would need to spend half a day to become familiar with the amendments of Approved Document B this would amount to a cost of some £0.75 million.

  1. Assuming around 15% of the 110,000 or so construction professionals engaged in design and specification in England and Wales8 will take some steps to familiarise themselves with the changes it is likely that there would be a cost in the order of £1.75 million.

  1. There are about 450 Local Authorities in England & Wales and some 30 Approved Inspectors (either registered as companies or individuals). Assuming they would invest in sending 1 person to a seminar or similar event who would subsequently disseminate this information internally the cost would be in the order of 1.0 million:

480 bodies :1 person incurring £ 30 seminar (part) cost
£ 50 travelling cost

£100 attendance time
£180

480 bodies :Internal dissemination £400/day x ½ day x 10 = £2,000
(Average 10 persons for ½ day)

480 bodies x (2,000 + 180) = £1,046,400

  1. The total costs for manufacturers, construction professionals and building control bodies of familiarisation with the amendments to Approved Document B is likely to be up to £3.5 million

Summary of costs

Organisations

No affected

Cost (£)

Total Costs

Para

Construction product manufacturers

7,400

100

740,000

36

Construction professionals

16,590

100

1,659,000

37

Building Control Bodies

480

2,180

1,046,400

38

 

Total costs:

3,445,400

  

  1. There are other costs associated with the harmonised European standards but it is important to stress that these are attributable to the CPD as implemented through the CPR and not the amendments of Approved Document B. These costs are recurring and can be considered in two parts:
  1. An indication of likely testing and re-engineering costs is given in Annex B.

Extent of consultation

  1. The proposed amendment (Option 2) has been subject to consultation with industry through their close involvement with fire testing research undertaken by Warrington Fire Research Centre (paragraph 25). The amendment has also been subject to consultation with the Building Regulations Advisory Committee (BRAC) appointed by the Secretary of State. As discussed above the proposed amendment has now been subject to full public consultation and revised in the light of those comments.

7 A study of the UK Building Materials Sector. Report prepared for Construction Products Association, www.constprod.org.uk

8 suggested by RIBA & RICS membership figures.

Previous Page - Building regulations assessment regarding Soundproofing Index - Next Page