High risk buildings - verification during construction: phase 1 of compliance plan approach - verifiers guidance

6. Methodology

In following this methodology, please refer to the appendices

Appendix 1 contains process maps which aim to highlight the steps anticipated in a normal building warrant and completion certificate journey. They do not seek to detail every step but provide a high level guide. The use of swim lanes attempt to show a usual blend of professionals involved and their potential roles. Actions by the local authority building standards verifier are shown with colour, which the actions of others without colour. This reflects that this guidance seeks to describe the actions of the verifier in following the compliance plan process.

Appendix 2 contains a model form for use in recording data during the prewarrant process. It should be completed by the building standards verifier and the projects duly authorised agent with as much detail as is possible. This form will be the basis for the expected application form for a prewarrant or compliance plan in principle application, a mandatory stage for defined buildings after legislative change.

Appendix 3 contains a model compliance plan form. This form is to be used by the local authority building standards verifier to issue the compliance plan, to update it during construction and consider it as a tool when considering the submission of a completion certificate. This form will be the basis for the anticipated statutory form of compliance plan after legislative change.

6.1 Step 1 – Prewarrant stage

Process map 1.00 in appendix 1 shows a high level flow with swim lanes for the prewarrant stage for different roles in the process. The process steps under the control of the verifier are shown in colour, with the best practice actions expected from the project without colour.

This guidance document describes the steps to be undertaken by the verifier to implement the principles of the compliance plan approach, which is why the process maps focus on their actions.

A prewarrant discussion is often held informally (since it is not recognised in legislation) between a proposed project and a local authority verifier. This is common practice for larger projects and normally focusses on issues of technical compliance, or designs which do not follow the prescriptive guidance in the technical handbooks but are intended to meet mandatory standards.

Projects will enter into a prewarrant discussion to achieve some surety with regards to their proposals before a building warrant application is submitted. The intention of a prewarrant stage in the CPA is to expand the opportunities for surety to procedural compliance and provide those benefits to both the project and the verifier, with a focus on life safety.

If approached by a RP, an applicant or their agent for a prewarrant meeting (step 1.02), the building standards verifier would accept the request and organise a date (step 1.09). At the same time the verifier would provide the RP, applicant or their agent with a blank copy of the prewarrant compliance and procedural form (appendix 2) (step 1.04). The verifier would request that the form would be completed as fully as possible and returned prior to the meeting.

The verifier may wish at this point to consider if there is sufficient value in having the prewarrant meeting and advise the project appropriately. This may be if the project is unwilling to provide sufficient detail through the prewarrant form but is at the discretion of the verifier (step 1.07).

The prewarrant process would expect to be carried out a minimum of three months before the expected submission of a building warrant application. This would be the expectation to maximise effectiveness and give the verifier time to prepare resources; however, verifiers can exercise flexibility as required.

The RP and/or their duly authorised agent should complete and return the form to the verifier (step 1.05). The verifier will then consider if the information, plans and details provided would support the prewarrant discussion. This should be focussed on compliance with building standards procedures and with how built compliance will be managed and evidenced. The verifier may request that additional detail is provided before the date of the arranged meeting or cancel the meeting (step 1.07).

If the RP or their duly authorised agent does not wish to participate in a non-statutory prewarrant process the verifier should develop the compliance plan in line with the guidance as far as possible during the building warrant assessment stage and issue the CP with the building warrant, as noted in step 2 below.

Whether the form has been completed fully, partially or not at all in advance of the prewarrant meeting, it must still be used as the basis and structure for the meeting, if one is held.

The verifier will use the form to capture salient information during the prewarrant meeting (step 1.10). Where information is missing the verifier should ask relevant questions and request that further information is provided to allow completion. The key message to the RP or their duly authorised agent is that this early gathering of information will assist in the processing of the application for building warrant when it is submitted and support the delivery of a compliant building within their planned timescales.

Specifically, regarding the staging or warrant applications, the verifier should consider the appropriateness of the stages proposed for the project, generally but also in terms of potential conflicts with contractor designed portions^[5] including the issues these can cause for certification of design.

Work included in a building warrant application, or an application for amendment for a stage, must be fully designed so that it can be assessed by a verifier on receipt or certified by an approved certifier of design in advance.

If there is a conflict, particularly where there is then a likelihood of work for a stage progressing on site without approval, the verifier can refuse the proposed staging of a building warrant application.^[6] A discussion on what stages would be acceptable can then be accommodated.

The verifier will record the outcome of the meeting for reference when the building warrant application is submitted. A copy will also be sent to the applicant/agent which could be used as a check list when preparing the building warrant application package, including drawings and supporting information, as well as any subsequent staged applications (step 1.11).

6.2 Step 2 – Building Warrant Application

Process map 2.00 in appendix 1 shows a high level flow with swim lanes for the building warrant stage for different roles in the process. The process steps under the control of the verifier are shown in colour, with the best practice actions expected from the project without colour.

This guidance document describes the steps to be undertaken by the verifier to implement the principles of the compliance plan approach, which is why the process maps focus on their actions.

A building warrant application for a defined HRB may be submitted to the verifier regardless of whether a prewarrant stage has or has not have been undertaken (step 2.02).

A completed pre-warrant stages provides clarity on requirements for both the project team and the verifier, in terms of consultations, information requirements, time constraints, allocation of resource and expectations.

When registering the building warrant application on their back office system, the verifier should insert a prefix to the description field of “HRB - “. This will allow BSD and partners to be able to identify HRB projects through the online Part 1 building standards register, without looking for monthly returns from all 32 verifiers.

During the assessment of the building warrant application the verifier needs to begin building the CP document (form found in appendix 3) which will be issued with the building warrant, replacing the CCNP for defined HRBs.

The information gathered during any prewarrant stage will be valuable for completing the CP document, but it is likely that further information will need to be requested from the applicant/agent.

Section 4 (3)^[7] of the Building (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2004 allows the verifier to require the applicant to submit to them at any stage such further information as they require. In the case of constructing the CP (step 2.03), this includes any information required to complete it, and it should be requested alongside any technical data requested through the standard process of assessment and reporting to the applicant.

The information to be requested will include but not be limited to the following:

• Details of the relevant person and confirmation that they are aware of their responsibilities to submit the completion certificate lawfully
• The key individuals involved in delivering the building and evidencing compliance to the relevant person for all elements of the work
• Details of any previous conversations with the verifier
• The approach taken to compliance with the building regulations, including any alternative approaches to the guidance contained in the Technical Handbook
• Any high risk compliance elements that have been identified and the mitigation measures to be put in place
• Proposed stages of the building warrant application
• Contractor design portions of work
• Quality plans and planning, including inspection and test plans
• Any certification of design and/or construction that will be used
• Any consultations, reports, or consents relevant to compliance
• If a Customer Agreement is required^[8]
• A proposed fire safety design statement.

As outlined in Step 1, the verifier determines whether or not to issue a staged warrant with suitable conditions and may reject the proposed staging by the relevant person, applicant, or their agents if there is a risk that any portion of work could proceed without proper approval.

The verifier should only issue the building warrant if they are satisfied that the work involved will be carried out in accordance with building regulations, and that nothing in any plan, specification or other information submitted with the application indicates that the building when constructed will fail to comply with building regulations.^[9]

One of the purposes of the CP is to hold information that will demonstrate that the building when constructed will comply with the approval and the regulations, and that all parties have delivered their actions as planned, or suitable alternatives have been developed, agreed and delivered. For this guidance, the focus is on the reasonable inquiry planned and carried out by the verifier, and not all the planned actions by the representatives of the RP.

The CCNP guidance inferred that only commencement and completion notifications were mandatory under legislation. However, section 59 (e)^[10] of the Building (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2004 allows the verifier to ’mandate‘ notification of completion of such other stages in the construction as they may require. The wording in this section, that ” any person carrying out work in pursuance of a building warrant granted under the Act shall give notice to the verifier” makes no differentiation between notice of commencement, completion or ”the date of completion of such other stages in the construction as the verifier may require”.

As part of the new CP requirements verifiers will now mandate all notifications made to them under the CP for HRB’s, expecting to receive them with a focus on being able to attend site to inspect critical areas of work, as part of their reasonable inquiry.

Where a notification has not been received, the verifier must decide what effective and equivalent action they will take. Recording this and the outcome of any actions on the CP.

Once the verifier has been able to produce the CP fully, it can be issued with the building warrant for information (steps 2.06 and 2.06). The verifier will retain the CP and include it in part 2 of the statutory building standards register (step 2.09).

6.3 Step 3 – Building warrant granted and CP issued

Process map 2.00 in appendix 1

The agreed CP is issued with the building warrant approval, normally for a HRB, to the nominated agent. A copy of the CP should also be sent to the applicant/relevant person, accompanied with information explaining the duty imposed on the relevant person to submit the completion certificate which certifies compliance with building regulations.

6.4 Step 4 – Construction Stage

Process map 3.00 in appendix 1 shows a high level flow with swim lanes for the construction stage for different roles in the process. The process steps under the control of the verifier are shown in colour, with the best practice actions expected from the project without colour.

This guidance document describes the steps to be undertaken by the verifier to implement the principles of the compliance plan approach, which is why the process maps focus on their actions.

As noted in the introduction, the CP issued with a building warrant approval for a HRB, will be considered as the verifiers plan for ‘reasonable inquiry’.

During construction the verifier would expect to be notified by the project to attend site or receive compliance evidence in line with the approved CP.

As has become good practice with the use of the CCNP, once the verifier is aware that works on site have commenced, they should contact the project or visit the site, explain the notifications required and the purpose of the compliance plan (step 3.04).

The use of mandatory notifications and planning inspections on the CP does not preclude the verifier from carrying out ad-hoc or follow up inspections as part of their dynamic approach to reasonable inquiry. As a record of the compliance journey, all inspections and evidence gathering should be recorded on the CP by the verifier (step 3.11).

In addition to the planned site inspections, verifiers should have regular engagement with the design and construction teams (step 3.12). This could be following or during any regular quality meetings or forums which are emerging as best practice^[11] in industry in the delivery of large construction projects.

While attending any such forums, the verifier should use the CP as the point of reference and the focus for any conversations around building standards. Verifiers must avoid giving design advice when discussing issues and maintain a focus on compliance with building regulations and the approved building warrant.

If the verifier is not notified of any planned inspection stages, or if required information is not submitted, the verifier must consider what alternative approach may be appropriate to evidence compliance (step 3.14) and should consider if it is necessary the use of any enforcement powers.

Alternatives to the planned measures must be as equally robust as the planned measures so that reasonable inquiry is not frustrated. In many situations this is likely to result in opening up or other intrusive work, the cost of which would be borne by the project, not the verifier, since their plan has been frustrated through the actions of the project and failure to notify a mandatory stage.

These decisions and revised requirements must be documented within the CP, with the applicant/agent, main contractor, and relevant person notified accordingly (step 3.19).

6.5 Step 5 – Completion Stage

Process map 4.00 in appendix 1 shows a high level flow with swim lanes for the completion stage for different roles in the process. The process steps under the control of the verifier are shown in colour, with the best practice actions expected from the project without colour.

This guidance document describes the steps to be undertaken by the verifier to implement the principles of the compliance plan approach, which is why the process maps focus on their actions.

The completion certificate must be submitted by the relevant person (RP) (step 4.06). The compliance declaration on the completion certificate submission may be signed by a duly authorised agent, but it is the relevant person who must submit in accordance with the requirements of the Building (Scotland) Act 2003.^[12]

Once received the verifier will log the completion certificate submission and place it on the building standards register (steps 4.09 and 4.11). The verifier is required to accept or reject any completion certificate within 14 days.

One of the aims of the CPA is to introduce transparency into the process of submitting a building warrant through to acceptance of completion certificate and reinforce existing responsibilities. The CP issued with a building warrant approval for a HRB, will be considered as an expression of the verifiers plan to carry out ‘reasonable inquiry’^[13] and all inspections and evidence gathering should be recorded on the CP by the verifier, including any inspections or checks which were not planned, or arose due to reinspection of non completed or non compliant work.

The Compliance Plan shall explicitly record both the intended and actual actions undertaken to evidence compliance by the representatives of the Relevant Person and by the verifier.

In considering acceptance or rejection of the completion certificate submission, the CP will be used as a tool by the verifier as the basis of their reasonable inquiry (step 4.12). The planned actions and the record of actual compliance evidence and actions will be of value to local authorities in their statutory enforcement role and their decision to accept or reject a completion certificate (steps 4.16 and 4.21).

Once the completion certificate is accepted, the final version of the CP must be recorded on the Part 2 Building Standards Register, and as such will be open for public scrutiny (4.22).