Standards New Zealand work in progress

Upcoming new Standards, revisions and amendments
NZS 4219: 2008	Specification for seismic resistance of engineering systems in buildings
AS/NZS 1547: 2008	On-site domestic wastewater management
Fire protection	Draft Standard for comment Free to download from our website: www.standards.co.nz DZ 4510 A1 Amendment 1 to NZS 4510: 2008 Fire hydrant systems for buildings Public comment on this draft closes on 25 November 2008.
Standards in development
Building - including plumbing, gas and building services	Specification - Seismic performance of engineering systems in buildings Committee: P4219 Project Manager: Stuart Ng Estimated Publication Date: Late October 2008 Comments: The draft Standard is currently being edited, and the worked examples revised to bring it into alignment with requirements of the Standard. Ballot of the Standard will then follow with publication expected in late October 2008.
	Code of Practice for concrete structures for the storage of liquid Committee: P3106 Phase 2 Project Manager: Hagen Kerr Estimated Publication Date: June 2009 Comments: Second meeting completed, work on the draft is required before release for public comment.
	Specification for performance of windows Committee: P4211 Project Manager: Hagen Kerr Estimated Publication Date: November 2008 Comments: Post-public comment completed, on schedule for publication in November 2008.
	Energy Efficiency - Small building envelope Committee: P4218 Project Manager: Sonia van Ree Estimated Publication Date: April 2009 Comments: The third committee meeting was the 12th of August. The public comment period began in October 2008.
	Revision of NZS3404 Steel Structures - Phase 1 and 2 Committee: P3404 Project Manager: Cas Cinque Estimated Publication Date: 2010 Comments: Committee meeting held on the 24th July to review draft Part 1 and agree plan for Part 2.
	Segmental concrete pavers Committee: P3116 Project Manager: Hagen Kerr Estimated Publication Date: March 2009 Comments: Currently at public comment with next meeting scheduled for November.
	Review of domestic wastewater systems Committee: WS-013 Project Manager: Karin Zentveld Estimated Publication Date: January 2009 Comments: A revision is under way of the Standards relating to on-site domestic wastewater treatment to update the Standards with respect to current industry practice, technological advances and alignment with regulatory and compliance frameworks. AS/NZS 1546 (parts 1, 2, and 3) were published in May 2008. The committee is about to review a number of comments on AS/NZS 1547 which resulted from the postal ballot process. Delay to publication is expected due to the high number and significance of comments.
Fire protection
	Fire hydrant systems for buildings Committee: P4510 Project Manager: Vicki Allison Estimated Publication Date: February 2009 Comments: The scope for the revision of NZS 4510: 2008 has changed to include an amendment to the recently published edition. The amendment includes a review of clause 3.2.1, which currently contradicts the open path length requirements of Table 3.3 of Compliance Document C to the Building Code. Amendment 1 to NZS 4510: 2008 will result in the Standard being able to be incorporated by reference in Compliance Document C/AS1 Fire safety. The draft amendment is now at public comment and feedback on the changes is sought by 25 November 2008.
	Fire protection in secure facilities Committee: P4545 Project Manager: Karin Zentveld Estimated Publication Date: On hold Comments: The objective of this new Standard is to provide clear requirements on the design, installation, testing and maintenance of fire protection systems in secure detention facilities. The project is currently on hold.

Determinations issued

Direction as to costs in respect of Determination 2008/30

The application

An application for a direction to recover costs from a building consent authority was made by the applicants in relation to the costs they incurred in a determination that was issued earlier in 2008.

The application was made under section 190 of the Building Act 2004 which says in section 190(2) that:

… the chief executive may, by written direction … require [a party] to meet some or all of the other party's costs in respect of the determination or application if, in the chief executive's opinion, the party has contributed unreasonably to costs or delays

In determining the application for costs, the principal question is whether one party has contributed unreasonably to costs or delays. If this test is not met, then the application for costs fails and must be declined.

The background and the submissions

The determination, to which the costs application related, decided that the building consent authority's decision to issue a code compliance certificate should be reversed. The parties involved were the prospective purchasers of eight units of an apartment building ('the applicants'), the building consent authorityand the developer.

Each of the parties provided comprehensive submissions in response to the application. The applicants claimed that the building consent authority had contributed unreasonably to costs and delays because it had:

• disregarded the findings of an expert engaged by the Department and had consequently sought its own expert opinion
• refused to accept the draft determination
• requested a hearing.

Discussion

A party is entitled to refuse to accept a draft determination and to respond to it as it sees fit. Only if there was no basis for its refusal within a reasonable time could it be said to be causing unreasonable delay, and that was not the case in this instance.

A hearing is held if requested by one, or more, of the parties. Confirming a date and venue may take some time, but a request for a hearing has never been regarded a ground for contributing unreasonably to costs or delays.

The view was taken that the requirement in section 186(1)(d) for the Chief Executive to comply with the principles of natural justice meant that any party to the determination could exercise the right to refuse to accept a draft determination and to request a hearing.

It was concluded that, as the test required by section 190 had not been met, the application had to be declined.

Only in situations where this test is satisfied could the nature and scope of the costs sought be examined and the extent, if any, to which an order might be appropriate. That was not necessary in the present case.

Direction

The parties had not contributed unreasonably to costs, or delays, and no direction as to costs was awarded.

Determination 2008/98:

Issue of a notice to fix concerning dangerous and insanitary aspects of a motel unit

The matter for determination

The matter for determination was the decision by the building consent authority to issue a notice to fix for a motel unit it considered was unsafe and insanitary. The building owners applied for the determination.

Background

The building is a single-storey, free-standing motel unit of timber-framed construction, with a timber floor and weatherboard and fibre-cement claddings. The original building was converted into a motel unit in the 1980s, but the work may not have been subject to a building permit. The owner wished to 'register the unauthorised work' on the motel unit, and engaged a firm of building consultants to provide a 'safe and sanitary' report. The report confirmed that the motel unit was not dangerous or insanitary, but did require maintenance.

The building consent authority issued a notice to fix listing items that required rectification and stating that a consent had to be lodged for any work remedying the 'damaged and insanitary' aspects of the motel unit.

The notice to fix required the consent to show compliance with 13 Building Code clauses.

The owner said that the conversion had taken place before the Building Act 1991 was enacted. Accordingly, the only action open to the authority was to declare the building to be dangerous or insanitary, which it was not. The building consent authority said that illegal non-consented work had been carried out, various elements required attention, the motel unit was dangerous and insanitary, and it was not suitable for motel accommodation.

Discussion

As the conversion of the original building to a motel unit had taken place before the Building Act 1991 was introduced, the terms 'consent' and 'change of use' used in that legislation did not apply in this instance. The building consent authority could only take any action if the motel unit was earthquake-prone, dangerous or insanitary.

Applying previous Court interpretations, and taking into account an independent report commissioned by the Department, it was found that the motel unit was unlikely to cause injury or death, or damage to other property, and was unlikely to be injurious to health. While it was accepted that some items of maintenance were required, the motel unit was found to be neither dangerous nor insanitary. However, if adequate maintenance was not carried out, there was a likelihood that the motel unit could become insanitary in the future.

It was also noted that a notice to fix is not the correct document to use to establish whether a building is dangerous and insanitary. Sections 124 to 130 of the Act set out the relevant powers of a territorial authority, if it considers that a building falls into either category. (Either a building consent authority or a territorial authority can issue a notice to fix, but only a territorial authority can issue a notice under sections 124 to 130.)

The decision

It was determined that the motel unit in its present state is neither unsafe nor insanitary, and the decision by the building consent authority to issue a notice to fix was reversed.

These are summaries only. The full determinations (along with all other determinations issued) can be viewed on our website: www.dbh.govt.nz/determinations