INITIAL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENTsfi.fairfactories.org/sfi_dev_files/1/Audit_Files... · · 2017-09-22The goal of the Alliance process is to provide clear and practical technical

INITIAL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENTREPORT (SIAR)

Factory Name: Lovecraft Garments (Pvt) Ltd

Address: 7 & 8 A C Roy Road Armanitola Dhaka DhakaBangladesh

Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014

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

The Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety Page 1/14

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.


Address: 7 & 8 A C Roy Road Armanitola Dhaka Dhaka Bangladesh

Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



GENERAL INFORMATION

General Information



Country: Bangladesh

Province: Dhaka

City: Dhaka

Zip Code: 1100

Audit Duration: 12 Hours

Re-Audit: Re-Audit After 0 Months

Draft Report Date : 22 May 2014

Final Report Date : 28 August 2014

Are all Action ItemsFrom PreviousAssessmentCompleted?:

No

Buildings in Complex : One (1)

Number of BuildingLevels (Stories) :

Seven (07) - Ground + 6

Approximate BuildingArea (SF) :

43,400 square feet

Date of BuildingConstruction :

Ground to Level 2: 1978-1980 Levels 3 to 5: 1990 Level 6: 2010~1990

Date of Last BuildingRenovation/Addition :

2010

Is the Building mixeduse?:

No

Ancillary Structures inComplex :

None

Number of AncillaryLevels (Stories) :

Not applicable

Approximate Ancillary Not applicable



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



Structures Area (SF) :

Number of Occupants : 640

Exterior FacadeDescription :

Unreinforced brick masonry wall has been used as exterior wall in the building. Sixty five (65) windows havebeen provided in the front side of the building.

Structural SystemDescription :

RCC beam column frame structure with individual column footings.



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

Structural System Design

Question: Has evidence of structural integrity been provided using a PreliminaryStructural Assessment?

Priority Level: High

Non-Compliance Level: 3

Description: i) A BGMEA Engineering Team inspected the factory building on 10th October,2013. They reported that the factory building is safe for operating garmentsactivities. ii) Engr. Md. Mahbubur Rahman, IEB-Fellow(Applied), IMOVELPROPERTIES LTD, House no:

Source of Findings: Document Review: i) Visual inspection report by BGMEA ii) Assessment reportby IMOVEL PROPERTIES LTD

Suggested Plan ofAction:

Under guidance from a qualified structural engineer arrange DetailEngineering Assessment of the structure (as mentioned elsewhere).

Suggested DeadlineDate:

15 Oct 2014

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

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



Description: According to the Alliance Standard, a floor live load of 42 psf was assumed incalculations for checking the adequacy of column factors of safety. 2045 psiwas assumed for concrete compressive strength as per Alliance Standardrecommendations for MCAC.

Source of Findings: Uploaded Document: Column FoS calculations spreadsheet, Review Panelfindings.


Under guidance from a qualified structural engineer arrange DetailEngineering Assessment of the structure. This assessment should becompleted immediately and should include destructive core testing to validatethe in-situ concrete compressive strength o


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Provide results of preliminary calculations in space provided. a) columncapacity; FoS > 1.86 - Safe b) column capacity; FoS 1.5 -1.86 - Needs



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



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

Priority Level: Medium


Description: No original structural design drawings are available for the building. Moreover,the construction of the building was completed in 1984 and it is uncertain what,if any, building code was utilized for the design.

Source of Findings: Document Review: No original structural design drawings were available


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


15 Oct 2014

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

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?



Description: No such document/structural drawing is available that could confirm that thethe building is compliant with the requirements for wind loading and stormsurge loadings as detailed in BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5.3.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Original structural design drawings of the building are notavailable. Only as-built structural design drawings are available and thesedrawings do not mention whether the building is compliant for such loading.


Engage a qualified structural engineer to confirm satisfactory structuralperformance of the buildings under wind loading.


15 Oct 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: If the structure has been previously expanded, was the structural impact onthe entire structure analytically evaluated and confirmed by a qualified



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



structural engineer.



Description: The top floor of the building was constructed in 2010 but its structural impactwas not evaluated by a qualified structural engineer.

Source of Findings: Document Review: No structural design document was available for theconstruction of the top floor. Only an as-built structural drawing was available.


Have a qualified structural engineer complete an analytic evaluation of thestructural impact of the addition (top floor of the building).


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Reference Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.1 Applicability of BuildingCode.

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?



Description: Floor loading at Levels 1 and 5 were observed to be more than 42 psf.Additionally, storage loading was observed at the cantilever floor portions ofthe building. Findings from the Review Panel indicate that "the live load duringthe operations shall not

Source of Findings: Photograph: Large floor loading., Uploaded Document, Photograph: Largefloor loading., Uploaded Document


Have a qualified structural engineer confirm that capacity to support the load isavailable. Load Plans complying with Alliance Standard Part 8 Section8.20.4.3 should also be developed. Per the recommendations of the ReviewPanel, prior to confirmation o


15 Oct 2014

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



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



Question: Have provisions been made in floors or decks for a concentrated load (such asheavy equipment, water tanks, stored materials, etc) applied at a locationwherever this load acting upon an otherwise unloaded floor would producestresses greater than those caused by a uniform load?



Description: One water tank (1000 liter) was resting atop the roof and was not consideredin the original structural design.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Photograph of water tank on roof


Engage a qualified structural engineer to confirm and document that provisionshave been made to accommodate concentrated loads. If provisions have notbeen made, have a qualified structural engineer develop a remediation plan.


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.13 and 8.14

Question: Are Certificates of Occupancy available for review?

Priority Level: Low


Description: No certificate of occupancy was available during inspection.

Source of Findings: Document Review: No certificate of occupancy was available duringinspection.


Provide certificates of Occupancy for review


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.3 Preliminary Structural Assessment

Structural System Construction

Question: Are the performance of key structural elements such as columns, slendercolumns, flat plates and transfer structures satisfactory?



Description: Columns: Column factors of safety are not satisfactory (detailed elsewhere)Beams: Beam sizes are not adequate for shear Flat plate: None presentSlender columns: None present

Source of Findings: Uploaded Document: i) Excel file of FoS calculation for columns ii) Excel file of



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



beam capacity calculation


Engage a qualified structural engineer to confirm structural performance of thestructure.


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.3.3

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



Description: Some cracks were observed in the columns, beams and slabs of the building.As the building was newly painted it was very difficult to identify the cracks, soadditional hidden cracking may exist.

Source of Findings: Photograph: Slab and column cracking.


Engage a qualified structural engineer provide additional investigation into theareas of distress, separations, or cracking and provide a remediation plan ifrequired.


15 Oct 2014




Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



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



Description: Some sign of cracking in columns was found during the inspection. It wasnoted that most of the cracks had been plastered over.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Photograph of repaired crack in column


Have a qualified structural engineer provide further testing and analysis ofdistress, shifting or cracking in columns and provide a remediation plan tocorrect noted issues.


15 Oct 2014


Question: Is the structure free from any major/progressive distress?



Description: Though the building was newly painted and it was very difficult to identifydistress, some repair work to hide cracking in columns and slabs was foundduring the inspection. Coupled with the fact that the preliminary column FoScalculations were found to

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Photograph of repaired cracks in column and slab


Engage a qualified structural engineer to confirm the causes of such distressand suggest appropriate remedial measures. This assessment should becompleted immediately.


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.3.3

Question: If yes, have the structural members constructed with MCAC been investigatedby an appropriate program of in-situ testing and representative destructivetesting or core samples?



Description: MCAC was used in the major structural elements of the building. UltrasonicPulse Velocity (UPV) testing was performed during the inspection on 11th May



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



2014 and the concrete strength was found to be only 800 psi. However, due tothe unavailability of dest

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Photograph of UPV test in the factory.


Have a qualified structural engineer assess the durability aspects assuggested in Alliance Standard part 7 Section 7.2 and take appropriateremedial measures. This assessment should include concrete core testing oncolumns to determine the in-situ compre


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Reference Alliance Standards Part 7 Building Materials Section 7.2 Masonry-chip aggregate concrete (MCAC)

Question: Are any structural elements constructed with MCAC exposed to rainfall orother sources of water sealed with a protective coating to prevent waterintrusion?



Description: The roof slab is constructed with MCAC and is exposed to rainfall, but it is notsealed with a protective coating to prevent water intrusion.

Source of Findings: Photograph: Exposed and unsealed roof slab.


Provide a protective coating at the structural elements constructed with MCACexposed to rainfall or other sources of water. Have protective coatingapproved by the Alliance or a qualified structural engineer.


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 7 Building Materials Section 7.2 Masonry-chipaggregate concrete (MCAC).

Question: Are all non-structural elements suspended from, attached to, or resting atopthe structure adequately anchored and braced to resist earthquake forces?



Description: The following elements were noted to not contain adequate anchorage orbracing to resist seismic forces: -Storage racks at Ground Level and Level 1 -Rooftop water tank



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



Source of Findings: Photograph: Unanchored elements.


Adequately anchor and brace all non-structural elements (storage racks andwater tank) to resist earthquake forces to comply with the BNBC and AllianceStandard.


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.18 Seismic Bracing of Key Non-StructuralElements and 2006 BNBC Part 6

Structural Safety Programs

Question: Is a program in place to ensure that the live loads for which a floor or roof is orhas been designed will not be exceeded?



Description: No such program was found in the factory during inspection.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual inspection on 11th May 2014


Develop a program to ensure that all live loads for which a floor or roof hasbeen designed for will not be exceeded. The designated Load Manager shalloversee this program and ensure it is enforced.


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 13 Section 13.7 and Part 8 Section 8.9.

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: No load plan was prepared.

Source of Findings: Document Review: No floor load plan was available during inspection.


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

Suggested Deadline 15 Oct 2014



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



Date:

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: No floor load plan was available.

Source of Findings: Document Review: No floor load plan was provided to the assessors


Have a qualified structural engineer prepare load plans including theinformation required in Section 8.20 of the Alliance Standard. Floor load plansshould be visibly posted on all levels of the building.


15 Oct 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: No marking was found during inspection to indicate the acceptable loadinglimits.

Source of Findings: Document Review: No load plan is available, Visual Assessment, DocumentReview: No load plan is available, Visual Assessment


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


15 Oct 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: No Factory Load Manager was assigned.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: No Factory Load Manager was found during inspection on



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014



11th May 2014


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


15 Oct 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.9 Factory Load Manager



Assessor: EIMS

Date: 11 May 2014

