EQUIVALENT INITIAL STRUCTURAL SAFETY - …sfi.fairfactories.org/sfi_dev_files/1/Audit_Files/Mark Wash... · The governing building code for this building based on the year of construction

EQUIVALENT INITIAL STRUCTURAL SAFETYASSESSMENT

Factory Name: Mark Wash & Dyeing Ltd

Address: B.K. Bari, Taltoli, Mirzapur Bazar, Gazipur SadarGazipur Gazipur Dhaka Bangladesh

Assessor: Walter P. Moore

Date: 01 Mar 2014

Created with EO.Pdf for .NET trial version. http://www.essentialobjects.com.

The Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety Page 1/12

Introduction to the Report

The following report contains a site profile and summary of non-conformities identified during an onsite assessment commissioned by theAlliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety (Alliance) and conducted by a third-party Qualified Assessment Firm (QAF). The assessment wasconducted against the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety Assessment Protocols (APs) and Fire Safety and Structural Integrity Standard,which is harmonized with the factory assessment guidelines developed by Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) forthe Bangladesh National Tripartite Plan of Action (NTPA). The goal of the Alliance process is to provide clear and practical technicalrequirements by which Bangladeshi Ready Made Garment (RMG) Factories producing for Alliance members may be consistently and fairlyevaluated for fire, structural, and electrical safety in a non-duplicative manner. Each assessment will prompt action plans that will be used byRMG factories to systematically and sustainably improve safety conditions for garment workers. Beyond tracking and reporting on actionsteps taken in a transparent manner, the Alliance organization and its members will seek to further support factory improvements throughtechnical assistance, training, implementation support for functional Worker Committees, and in some cases financial assistance and wagesupport for workers if factories are closed for remediation.

The contents of the report do not constitute a guarantee of compliance with the applicable laws, the Alliance Standard or the absolute orcontinued safety against fire, electrical and/or structural integrity issues that may lead to injury or loss of life. The report is designed to providea non-exhaustive summary of risk issues, based on a limited sampling and duration of time onsite by the named QAF. Neither the QAF northe Alliance can certify or guarantee the quality, outcome, or effectiveness of actions taken in response to the report.

For more information and report feedback please go to: www.bangladeshworkersafety.org.

FactoryName:

Mark Wash & Dyeing Ltd

Address: B.K. Bari, Taltoli, Mirzapur Bazar, Gazipur Sadar Gazipur Gazipur DhakaBangladesh


Date: 01 Mar 2014



GENERAL INFORMATION

General Information

Factory Name: Mark Wash & Dyeing Ltd

Address: B.K. Bari, Taltoli, Mirzapur Bazar, Gazipur Sadar Gazipur Gazipur Dhaka Bangladesh

Country: Bangladesh

Province: Dhaka

City: Gazipur

Zip Code:

Audit Duration: 1 Days

Re-Audit: Re-Audit After 0 Months

Draft Report Date : June 6 2014

Final Report Date : November 7 2014

Are all Action ItemsFrom PreviousAssessmentCompleted?:

N/A

Buildings in Complex : 1 factory building (Washing Building) and 14 Ancillary buildings.

Number of BuildingLevels (Stories) :

Single story with partial plan mezzanine

Approximate BuildingArea (SF) :

118,303

Date of BuildingConstruction :

2006

Date of Last BuildingRenovation/Addition :

Not provided

Is the Building mixeduse?:

No

Ancillary Structures inComplex :

14 ancillary buildings: Toilet Block, Crincle Section, Hand Brush Room, PP Spray Unit 1, PP Spray Unit 2(under construction), ETP, Workshop, Utility Building, Bonded Warehouse, Daycare/Doctor Building, TaggingBuilding, Dining Hall, Security Room, and Time Section

Number of AncillaryLevels (Stories) :

All ancillary buildings are single story

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



Approximate AncillaryStructures Area (SF) :

Not provided

Number of Occupants : Not provided

Exterior FacadeDescription :

The perimeter façades of the buildings generally consist of non-bearing masonry infill walls. In some cases thewalls are covered with a plastered and painted wall finish, but at most buildings the façade is composed of theunaltered exposed brick veneer.

Structural SystemDescription :

The factory building is a pre-engineered steel framed structure. The structural floor system of the mezzanineconsists of concrete fill over metal deck in combination with composite steel beams. The lateral force resistingsystem appears to be beam/column moment frame "bents" in the transverse direction and tension-only rodbraces in the longitudinal direction. The ancillary buildings on the complex are a combination pre-engineeredsteel framed building, structural steel sheds, and cast-in-place reinforced concrete structures. These structuralsystems are typically combined with perimeter masonry infill walls.

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

Structural System Design

Question: Are the available FoS for the columns adequate based on Preliminarycalculation?

Priority Level: High

Non-Compliance Level: 3

Description: 1) Production Shed (Unit-01): Considered fy = 36 ksi, Central Column: 1.51(satisfactory), Corner Column: 2.00 (satisfactory), Edge Column: 1.40 (notsatisfactory), 2) Utility Shed: Considered fy = 36 ksi, Central Column: 3.73(satisfactory), Corner Column: 4.73 (satisfactory), Edge Column: 3.53(satisfactory). Other structures in factory premises are single storied shed. So,FoS is not required.

Source of Findings: Uploaded Document: FoS Calculation Spreadsheet

Suggested Plan ofAction:

Under guidance from a qualified structural engineer arrange DetailEngineering Assessment of the production shed (Unit-01).

Suggested DeadlineDate:

30 Dec 2014

Standard: Provide results of preliminary calculations in space provided. a) columncapacity; FoS > 1.86 - Safe b) column capacity; FoS 1.5 -1.86 - NeedsEvaluation c) Column capacity; FoS 1.25-1.5 - Needs Evaluation d) Columncapacity; FoS <1.25 - Unsafe In case of a critically low FoS (<1.25), considerImmediate Escalation Protocol

Question: Are credible structural design documents available for review and kept on site?

Priority Level: Medium


Description: Complete original structural documentation was not available for review andreference. Verbal information was provided factory representatives and is usedas a reference.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Document Review


Structural documents, if available, should be made available for review


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.19 Required Structural Documentation forNew and Existing Factories

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



Question: Can credible structural documentation indicating general conformance with2006 BNBC or other comparable applicable international model building codebe produced?



Description: A cursory review of the available documents along with information providedfrom the factory representatives indicates that construction of the WashingBuilding was completed in 2006. The governing building code for this buildingbased on the year of construction is the Bangladesh National Building Code(BNBC) 1993, although there is no documentation to indicate this code wasthe basis of design.



Engage a qualified structural engineer to develop the required documents toconfirm the structural integrity of the buildings. Documents must comply withAlliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.19 and 8.20


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Reference Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.2 Structural Integrity of ExistingFactory Buildings

Question: If built after 2006, can documented compliance with the seismic and windrequirements of the 2006 BNBC be provided?



Description: The governing building code at the time of construction was the BangladeshNational Building Code (BNBC) 1993. The pre-engineered building proposaldocument, which was written six years after the construction of the WashingBuilding, cites the 2006 version of the BNBC. From the limited review of theavailable drawings, we were not able to determine if the structural designincludes special seismic detailing provisions for the lateral force resistingsystem members.



Have a qualified structural engineer document compliance with the seismicand wind requirements stated in the 2006 BNBC.


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.17 Design for Lateral Loads and 2006BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5

Question: Can documentation be provided that the building is compliant with therequirements for wind loading and storm surge loadings as detailed in BNBCPart 6 Section 1.5.3?

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014





Description: The governing building code at the time of construction was the BangladeshNational Building Code (BNBC) 1993. The construction documents do notexplicitly refer to this code as the basis for design of the Washing Building.



2006 BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5. Compliance may be waived if the FactoryOwner provides satisfactory evidence of a cyclone operations plan thatincludes full evacuation of the factory in advance of any approaching cyclone"


31 Dec 2014

Standard: 2006 BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5. Compliance may be waived if the FactoryOwner provides satisfactory evidence of a cyclone operations plan thatincludes full evacuation of the factory in advance of any approaching cyclone"

Question: Is a clear and redundant load path to resist lateral loads provided?



Description: The building lateral force resisting system for wind and seismic loads appearsto be beam/column moment frame "bents" in the transverse direction andtension-only braces in the longitudinal direction. However, it is not clearwhether a clear and redundant path is available to resist lateral loads.Furthermore, the tension-only bracing was noted to be in poor conditionincluding cases where the braces were sagging, cut, removed, and/or lackingtautnes. The adequacy of the overall lateral load resisting system should beconfirmed by a structural engineer.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual inspection


Have a qualified structural engineer complete further analysis of the structureand develop a remediation plan if required.


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.17 Design for Lateral Loads and 8.3.3.2006 BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5

Question: Where density of operations, storage of materials, or equipment weightsrequire live load capacity in excess of 2.0 kN/m2 (42 psf), do the designdocuments confirm that the required load capacity exists? Or has the loadcapacity been analytically confirmed and certified by an Alliance-qualifiedstructural engineer?



FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



Description: We observed one localized area where the extent of stacked materials couldpotentially overload the floor. This condition was observed in front of theconference room on the mezzanine level of the Washing Building. Denimjeans were observed piled on the floor up to an approximate height of 6’-0”. Inthis area the floor structure appears to be subject to loads greater than that forwhich it was designed.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual assessment


Storage of work materials in the noted areas should be reduced to a level thatis within the design floor load capacity. The Factory Owner may provide anengineered analysis that demonstrates that the floors have adequate designcapacity to safely supp


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.15 Minimum Floor Design Loads

Question: Are Certificates of Occupancy available for review?

Priority Level: Low


Description: Certificates of Occupancy were not available for review



Provide Certificates of Occupancy for review.


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.3 Preliminary Structural Assessment

Structural System Construction

Question: Is the structural system free of distress, separations, or cracking that indicateslack of performance or overstress of the lateral load-carrying system?



Description: We observed the tension only rod braces used both horizontally and verticallyin the pre-engineered steel buildings to be in poor condition including caseswhere the rods are sagging, cut, removed, and/or lacking tautness. In thiscondition, the braces will not be effective in performing their intended functionof resisting lateral forces.



The tension-only rod bracing used in both horizontal and vertical applicationsin the Washing Building, Crincle Section, Dining Hall, Utility Building, and Mark

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



Ltd. Main Building should be repaired and/or replaced as required. Conditionswhere the rods a


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.3.3

Question: Is the structural system free of distress, settlement, shifting, or cracking incolumns or walls?



Description: In the Bonded Warehouse, we observed cracking at the interface of an interiornon-bearing masonry partition wall and the adjacent concrete roof beam andslab. It appears that the cracking occurs primarily in the plaster finish and isnot an indicator of settlement or other structural distress.



Investigate the crack further by removal of the plaster finish and inspection ofthe concrete structure beneath. The Factory Owner should retain a qualifiedstructural engineer for this investigation, to determine if structural repair workis required,


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.3.3

Question: Are structural steel members free of corrosion, physical damage or other typesof deterioration?



Description: In each of the pre-engineered steel framed buildings tension-only rod bracingis utilized to resist wind and seismic lateral forces. These buildings include theWashing Building, Crincle Section, Dining Hall, and Utility Building (operatedby Mark Wash & Dyeing Ltd.), and the Mark Ltd. Main Building. These rodswere generally observed to be in poor condition including cases where therods are sagging, cut, removed, and/or not taut. In this condition, the braceswill not be effective in performing their intended function of resisting lateralforces.



The tension-only rod bracing used in both horizontal and vertical applicationsin the Washing Building, Crincle Section, Dining Hall, Utility Building, and MarkLtd. Main Building should be repaired and/or replaced as required. Conditionswhere the rods a

Suggested Deadline 31 Dec 2014

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



Date:

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.26

Structural Safety Programs

Question: Are floor loads in compliance with posted plans?



Description: There are no posted plans



Once floor loads plans are posted redistribute floor loads to comply with theFloor Loading Plans.


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.10 Floor Loading Plans (Load Plans).

Question: Have Load Plans been prepared for each floor documenting the actualmaximum operational loading that is intended and/or allowable on each floor.

Priority Level: Low


Description: Load Plans been have not been prepared for each floor documenting theactual maximum operational loading that is intended and/or allowable on eachfloor.



Have a qualified structural engineer develop Floor Loading Plans per therequirements of Part 8 Section 8.20.5.3


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.10 Floor Loading Plans (Load Plans)

Question: Are Floor Load Plans posted as required?

Priority Level: Low


Description: Floor plans are not posted as required

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: visual assessment

Suggested Plan of Have a qualified structural engineer prepare load plans including the

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



Action: information required in Section 8.20 of the Alliance Standard


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.20.5.3

Question: Are areas used for storage of work materials and work products, clearlymarked to indicate the acceptable loading limits as described in the Load Planfor that floor?

Priority Level: Low


Description: Areas used for storage of work materials and work products, are not clearlymarked to indicate the acceptable loading limits as described in the Load Planfor that floor.



Provide signage or the appropriate markings at all areas used for storage toindicate the acceptable loading limits detailed in the Load Plan.


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.11 Floor Load Markings

Question: Is a designated representative (Factory Load Manager), who is onsite full time,trained regarding the structural floor capacity, and serves as an ongoingvendor resource and monitor of operational factory floor loadings?

Priority Level: Low


Description: There is not a designated representative (Factory Load Manager), who isonsite full time, trained regarding the structural floor capacity, and serves asan ongoing vendor resource and monitor of operational factory floor loadings.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Document review


Designate a representative as the Factory Load Manager. The Factory Ownershall ensure that at least one individual, the Factory Load Manager who islocated onsite full time at the factory, is trained in calculating operational loadcharacteristics of the


31 Dec 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.9 Factory Load Manager

FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014



FactoryName:




Date: 01 Mar 2014

