Building Approval for Factory Projects

Chapter 10 of 10 · 10 min read

Evidence, approvals and the building's records

Assemble evidence of suitability for each product and system, follow a NSW-style approval path to occupation, and keep the fire safety records that keep the building compliant.

The earlier chapters made decisions. This one is about proving them. A certifier cannot approve a building on the strength of a good design conversation. Every product, system and calculation the design relies on needs evidence of a form the NCC accepts, and the approval has to be carried through construction, inspection and occupation into a set of records that will outlive the project team.

This chapter explains the NCC’s rules on evidence of suitability, follows the running case through a NSW approval path, shows how one substituted product nearly undid a compliant design, and sets out the records an owner needs to keep the building compliant for its working life.

Evidence of suitability

Part A5 of NCC 2022 Volume One requires materials, products, forms of construction and designs to be fit for their intended purpose (A5G1). Being fit for purpose means being supported by evidence under A5G2 and A5G3 and being properly constructed or installed. A5G2 requires the form of evidence to be appropriate to what it relates to, and any copy of documentary evidence to be a complete copy of the original.

A5G3(1) lists the forms of evidence that can show a Performance Requirement or a Deemed-to-Satisfy Provision is met, alone or in combination:

Figure 1Forms of evidence of suitability, NCC 2022 A5G3(1)
Forms of evidence of suitability, NCC 2022 A5G3(1). CodeMark: a current CodeMark Australia or CodeMark Certificate of Conformity. Certificate of Accreditation: a current certificate under the relevant scheme. Certification body certificate: stating that specific BCA requirements are met. Accredited Testing Laboratory report: describing the tests, results and any other information relied on. Professional engineer or qualified person: a certificate or report certifying compliance and setting out its basis. Other documentary evidence: such as a Product Technical Statement, showing compliance and its basis CodeMark a current CodeMark Australia or CodeMark Certificate of Conformity Certificate of Accreditation a current certificate under the relevant scheme Certification body certificate stating that specific BCA requirements are met Accredited Testing Laboratory report describing the tests, results and any other information relied on Professional engineer or qualified person a certificate or report certifying compliance and setting out its basis Other documentary evidence such as a Product Technical Statement, showing compliance and its basis
Summarised from NCC 2022 Volume One. The form of evidence must suit what it relates to (A5G2), and a copy must be complete.

An Accredited Testing Laboratory is defined in the NCC: broadly, an organisation accredited by NATA for the relevant tests, an overseas organisation recognised through a mutual recognition agreement, or one recognised in legislation at the time of the test. A report from a laboratory that was not accredited for that test is not this kind of evidence, however thorough it looks.

The evidence register for the running case

This is an illustration. The designer kept a register listing every element the code relied on, the clause it satisfied and the evidence for it. Part of it:

Figure 2Extract from the running case evidence register
Extract from the running case evidence register. Fire wall between office and workshop: Clause relied on C3D3, C3D8; Evidence held test report for the wall system at the required FRL, with installation details. Fire doors in the fire wall: Clause relied on Specification 12; Evidence held test report and door tags for the specified door and frame size. Service penetrations through the fire wall: Clause relied on Specification 13; Evidence held test report for each penetration type: cable bundle, copper pipe, PVC pipe. Mezzanine floor, stair and barriers: Clause relied on B1, D3D14 to D3D22; Evidence held professional engineer's certificate and drawings. Hydrants, hose reels, extinguishers: Clause relied on E1D2, E1D3, E1D14; Evidence held installer certificates to the referenced standards. Emergency lighting and exit signs: Clause relied on E4D2 to E4D8; Evidence held installer certificate to AS/NZS 2293.1 Clause relied on Evidence held Fire wall between office and workshop C3D3, C3D8 test report for the wall system at the required FRL, with installation details Fire doors in the fire wall Specification 12 test report and door tags for the specified door and frame size Service penetrations through the fire wall Specification 13 test report for each penetration type: cable bundle, copper pipe, PVC pipe Mezzanine floor, stair and barriers B1, D3D14 to D3D22 professional engineer's certificate and drawings Hydrants, hose reels, extinguishers E1D2, E1D3, E1D14 installer certificates to the referenced standards Emergency lighting and exit signs E4D2 to E4D8 installer certificate to AS/NZS 2293.1
This is an illustration. Each line names the specific configuration the evidence covers, so that substitutions can be checked against it.

The register was started at concept design, not at construction. Every time a chapter’s check relied on a product or system, a line was added with the evidence still marked “to obtain”. By the time the builder was appointed, the register was also a list of the evidence the builder had to deliver, and it went into the building contract as a handover requirement.

Two habits made the register useful. First, each line names the exact configuration the evidence covers: door size, wall thickness, pipe material and diameter. Second, the register is kept on site during construction, so that what is installed can be compared with what is evidenced.

A substitution that broke the evidence

At the penetration inspection, the certifier found that a PVC drainage pipe through the fire wall had been fitted with a fire collar of a different brand from the one in the register. The plumber had substituted it because it was in stock. The substitute had its own test report, but for a smaller pipe diameter than the one installed.

The penetration therefore had no valid evidence. The fix was to remove the collar and install one with a test report covering that pipe material and diameter, then update the register. The cost was half a day. Found after the wall was lined, it would have meant cutting the lining.

How was it detected? The certifier compared the label on the installed collar with the register, line by line, which is only possible when a register exists. The underlying lesson is the one in substitutions and tested assemblies: evidence belongs to a configuration, and “equivalent” is not an evidence category.

Deemed-to-Satisfy, Performance Solutions and the record

The running case finished with an entirely DTS design. That was a choice. The fire wall in Chapter 4 and the stair move in Chapter 6 each replaced a possible Performance Solution with a DTS answer. For a small owner, DTS answers are usually cheaper to approve and much cheaper to live with, because they carry no special conditions.

Where a Performance Solution is used, A2G2 requires a defined process: identify the relevant Performance Requirements, including those in other Parts affected by the solution; prepare a performance-based design brief with the relevant stakeholders; carry out the analysis; evaluate the results against the brief’s acceptance criteria; and prepare a final report. The final report records the Performance Requirements and DTS Provisions concerned, the Assessment Methods used, the steps taken, confirmation that the Performance Requirements are met, and any conditions or limitations. Those conditions follow the building for its life.

The practice of documenting decisions is not new. The supplied BCA 2004 introduction already recommended keeping documentation of each Alternative Solution: the relevant Performance Requirements, the Assessment Methods, any Expert Judgement relied on with the expert’s qualifications and experience, the tests and calculations, and the standards relied on. What NCC 2022 adds is that the process and report are now part of the code’s requirements.

A NSW approval path

Approval processes are set by state law. In NSW, a project like the running case typically moves through the steps below. Names and details differ in other states, and the certifier will confirm the path for a specific project.

Figure 3A typical NSW path for the running case
A typical NSW path for the running case. 1. Planning: confirm with council whether the change of use and works need development consent. 2. Construction certificate: the certifier assesses the design against NCC 2022 before work starts. 3. Principal certifier: appointed to oversee the work and carry out the required inspections. 4. Construction and inspections: including inspections of fire safety work before it is covered up. 5. Occupation certificate: issued when the building is suitable to occupy, with the fire safety schedule. 6. Ongoing: owner's annual fire safety statement on every listed measure 1 Planning confirm with council whether the change of use and works need development consent 2 Construction certificate the certifier assesses the design against NCC 2022 before work starts 3 Principal certifier appointed to oversee the work and carry out the required inspections 4 Construction and inspections including inspections of fire safety work before it is covered up 5 Occupation certificate issued when the building is suitable to occupy, with the fire safety schedule 6 Ongoing owner's annual fire safety statement on every listed measure
This is an illustration of the sequence. Whether a development consent is needed depends on the planning rules for the site and use; the certifier and council confirm the actual path.

Working with the certifier

A certifier is not the owner’s designer or adviser. Their role is to assess the design and the work against the code and to issue approvals, and in most states they are regulated to act independently even though the owner engages and pays them. That independence is useful to the owner: it is the reason a lender, insurer or future buyer can rely on the approval.

The relationship works best when the owner treats the certifier as an early, critical reader. In the running case, three short meetings did most of the work:

  1. Before design was fixed: edition, classification, the mezzanine threshold reading and the compartment basis (Chapters 1 to 4).
  2. Before lodgement: the occupant basis, the travel distance routes, the sanitary basis and the mezzanine access question (Chapters 5 to 8).
  3. Before construction of fire safety work: the evidence register, the inspection points and what would be checked before linings went on (this chapter).

Each meeting had a written agenda and finished with written answers. None of them asked the certifier to design anything; each asked how the certifier would read a clause or what evidence they would accept.

What gets inspected, and when

Fire safety work is often hidden within days of being installed. Penetration seals disappear behind linings, fire wall junctions behind cladding, and mezzanine connections behind paint. The inspection plan therefore matters as much as the design. The running case’s builder listed the hold points in the construction programme: the fire wall before lining, every penetration before closing, the mezzanine structure before the deck was loaded, the stair before handover, and the commissioning of hydrants, hose reels, emergency lighting and exit signs. At each hold point, the builder photographed the work with the relevant evidence label in view and added the photograph to the register.

The photographs cost nothing and repaid themselves twice: once when the certifier could verify a concealed penetration without opening the wall, and again a year later when the first annual fire safety assessment asked what had been installed behind a lining.

How the running case ended

The project finished as a single-storey Type C building with two fire compartments, three workshop exits and two office exits, a 190 m² mezzanine with a centrally placed stair, hydrants, hose reels, extinguishers, emergency lighting and exit signs, and sanitary facilities sized to a documented workforce. Every requirement was met by the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions. The owner’s original sketch, with a 240 m² mezzanine, no fire separation, an east-end stair and a single inherited toilet, would have failed at least five of the checks in this book.

None of the fixes was expensive, because each was found on paper. That is the book’s central argument: the code’s numbers are simple enough for an owner to check, and checking them before the design is fixed costs far less than discovering them during inspection.

The fire safety schedule and the annual statement

In NSW, the fire safety schedule for a building lists its essential fire safety measures and the standard of performance for each. For the running case, the list would include the fire wall and its fire doors, the penetration seals, the hydrant system, hose reels, extinguishers, emergency lighting and exit signs, and the required exits and paths of travel.

Each year, the owner must provide an annual fire safety statement. It confirms that an accredited practitioner (fire safety) has assessed each measure on the schedule and found it to be performing to its standard, and it is given to the council and to Fire and Rescue NSW. Measures that are critical to safety may also need a supplementary statement at shorter intervals. The NSW planning department’s fire safety certification pages describe the current requirements, which are set by regulation and change from time to time.

The practical effect is that the decisions in this book become annual obligations. A fire door wedged open, a hose reel behind a pallet or a new unsealed cable through the fire wall will be found at the next assessment, and must be fixed before the statement can be given.

Records that outlive the project

The project team disperses at handover. The building’s compliance history then lives only in what the owner keeps. The running case’s handover pack contains:

Figure 4Handover pack for the running case
Handover pack for the running case. Done: Approved drawings and the construction certificate, with the NCC edition recorded. Done: Occupation certificate and fire safety schedule. Done: Evidence register with every report, certificate and label photograph. Done: Compliance file: classification plan, compartments, occupant counts, travel distances, fixture counts. Done: Design limits: mezzanine 190 m², documented workforce of 30 and 12, solvent storage 80 L. Open: Maintenance contracts for every essential fire safety measure, to be signed before occupation Approved drawings and the construction certificate, with the NCC edition recorded Occupation certificate and fire safety schedule Evidence register with every report, certificate and label photograph Compliance file: classification plan, compartments, occupant counts, travel distances, fixture counts Design limits: mezzanine 190 m², documented workforce of 30 and 12, solvent storage 80 L ? Maintenance contracts for every essential fire safety measure to be signed before occupation
This is an illustration. The pack is kept with the property records and copied to the facilities manager and maintenance contractor.

The design limits line is the one most often missing. The building complies because the mezzanine is 190 m², the workforce is documented at 30 and 12, and the solvent store holds 80 L. A future manager who does not know those limits can break the compliance without touching the building fabric, simply by changing how it is used. The practical completion and defects liability chapter covers the contractual side of handover; this list covers the regulatory side.

When to go back to the certifier

After occupation, the owner should treat these changes as triggers for advice before acting:

  • any new or extended mezzanine, or a change in its use;
  • a change in the use of any area that changes its class, its occupant rate or its sanitary basis;
  • any new opening, duct or cable through the fire wall;
  • any change to exits, door hardware or paths of travel, including a new machine layout that narrows them;
  • storing flammable liquids or combustible goods beyond the recorded quantities or heights;
  • an extension of the building.

Many of these will need approval; some will not. The point is to find out before the change, when the options are still open.

A simple way to make this stick is to put the trigger list into the business’s own change process. The running case added one line to its capital expenditure request form: “Does this change any item on the building compliance trigger list? If yes, attach the certifier’s advice.” The question costs the requester a minute. It has already stopped one well-intentioned change, a cable tray punched through the fire wall for a new machine, before the hole was cut.

Exercise: assess a proposed change

Three years after occupation, the operations manager proposes converting the mezzanine store into a quality office for six inspectors, with desks and two computers. List the questions the owner should ask, citing the chapters.

Worked answer. The change of use affects almost every chapter:

  • Classification (Chapter 2): an office on the mezzanine may be a Class 5 part inside the Class 8 workshop.
  • Storeys (Chapter 3): the mezzanine is still 190 m², so it stays below the threshold, but any extension must be checked.
  • Occupants (Chapter 5): at 10 m² per person, the 190 m² mezzanine counts as 190 ÷ 10 = 19 persons, up from 7, and the workshop total rises from 144 to 156. Under D2D8(2), 56 persons over 100 is three part-increments of 25, so the aggregate exit width rises from 1.5 m to 1 + 3 × 0.25 = 1.75 m, still well within the 3 m provided.
  • Travel distance (Chapter 6): office partitions change the paths, and the routes must be re-measured.
  • Fire equipment and lighting (Chapter 7): check coverage and emergency lighting in enclosed rooms.
  • Access (Chapter 8): an office is an area normally used by occupants, so the D4D5 exemption argued for a store is unlikely to apply; a lift or ramp may be needed.
  • Records (this chapter): the design limits, evidence register and fire safety schedule must be updated.

The answer is not “no”. It is that the change needs a design review and probably approval, and that the access question alone could decide whether it is worth doing.