INITIAL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY...

INITIAL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENTREPORT (SIAR)

Factory Name: Eurozone Fashion Ltd

Address: Plot # Ka-189/3, Jamaj Road, Joar Shahara, Badda,Dhaka Dhaka Dhaka Bangladesh

Assessor: Bureau Veritas

Date: 16 Apr 2015

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

The Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety /15

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:

Eurozone Fashion Ltd

Address: Plot # Ka-189/3, Jamaj Road, Joar Shahara, Badda, Dhaka Dhaka DhakaBangladesh


Date: 16 Apr 2015



GENERAL INFORMATION

General Information

Factory Name: Eurozone Fashion Ltd

Address: Plot # Ka-189/3, Jamaj Road, Joar Shahara, Badda, Dhaka Dhaka Dhaka Bangladesh

Country: Bangladesh

Province: Dhaka

City: Dhaka

Zip Code: 1229

Audit Duration: 7 Hours

Re-Audit: Re-Audit After 0 Months

Draft Report Date : 19-Apr-2015

Final Report Date : 12-May-2015

Are all Action ItemsFrom PreviousAssessmentCompleted?:

No

Buildings in Complex : There is one building in the factory premise which is the main production building. (N.B: The building is arented one. Eurozone Fashions Ltd. occupies 2nd floor to rooftop of the building. Ground and first floor arecurrently being occupied by two different textile factories. Approximately 35 % areas of ground floor wasassessed whereas rest of the area could not be assessed as that particular area is in use by building ownerhimself).

Number of BuildingLevels (Stories) :

Six stories with occupied roof (G+5+Shed on roof). (N.B: Eurozone Fashions Ltd. Occupies 2nd floor torooftop of the building. Ground and first floor are currently being occupied by two different textile factories).

Approximate BuildingArea (SF) :

Total area of the main production building is: 158,900.00 sft. Floor-wise breakdown as follows: - Ground floor:22,700.00 sft, - First floor: 22,700.00 sft, - Second floor: 22,700.00 sft, - Third floor: 22,700.00 sft, - Fourthfloor: 22,700.00 sft, - Fifth floor: 22,700.00 sft, - Sixth floor (Shed on roof): 12,300.00 sft, - Roof area open tosky: 10,400.00 sft;

Date of BuildingConstruction :

As stated by factory authority it has been confirmed that, the building was constructed into two phases: 1)Phase 1: Ground floor to third floor was constructed in 1993; 2) Phase 2: Rest of the floors were constructedin 2009;

Date of Last BuildingRenovation/Addition :

Fourth floor to sixth floor were constructed in 2009. Among these floors, sixth floor was constructed beyondoriginal construction.

Is the Building mixeduse?:

No

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



Ancillary Structures inComplex :

There is no ancillary structure in the factory premise.

Number of AncillaryLevels (Stories) :


Approximate AncillaryStructures Area (SF) :


Number of Occupants : Total number of occupants: 2149. Floor-wise breakdowns as follows: (Ground floor: 4, 1st floor: 350, 2nd floor:375, 3rd floor: 425, 4th floor: 475, 5th floor: 485, 6th floor: 35,).

Exterior FacadeDescription :

The perimeter facade of the building consists of masonry brick wall.A portion of entrance is cladding withdecorative glass. Columns of the entrance are circular type having double height. Main door is metallic slidingtype and windows are sliding glass in aluminum frame. Dampness and crack has been observed to the theexterior facade.

Structural SystemDescription :

The structure is a flat plate structure. Beam has been noticed in the stair landing. According to the structuraldrawing, foundation type is isolated column footing.

Issues were not foundduring the structuralintegrity assessment thatrequired the EmergencyEscalation Protocol (andreferral to NTC ReviewPanel)?:

Yes

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



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: FoS has been calculated considering the following: - Live Load: 44 Psf (ExtraLoad has been consdered for Roof top Shed), - Rebar Strength: 40 ksi (Asbuilding was constructed in 1993 and no challan copy is available) - Concretecompressive strength: 2045 psi for MCAC (as per Alliance standard) and 2537psi (Result obtained from UPV Test). Column ID: FoS for Minimum / FoS forUPV: Central: 1.77/ 2.08, Corner: 1.75/2.07, Edge: 1.54/1.82, FoS of allcolumns show inadequate result assuming the minimum concrete compressivestrength of MCAC.

Source of Findings: Uploaded Document: FoS Calculation Spreadsheet

Suggested Plan ofAction:

Under guidance of a qualified structural engineer conduct semi destructivecore test to validate the in-situ concrete compressive strength of structuralelements.

Suggested DeadlineDate:

30 Jun 2015

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



Description: A previous assessment was carried out by ARUP on 7th November 2013.Inthe report there were come Corrective Action Plans which are not completedby the factory. Observed issues were: 1)Verify concrete strength in ground andfirst floor 2)Concentrating high loading from water tanks on roof slab. 3) Highdensity of loading on storage area needs to be limited. 4)Localized cracking onbottom slabs in ceiling of 3rd, 2nd and 1st floor. 5)Non engineering steelstructure in 7th storey. 6)Water causing damage and future corrosion onstructure.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Assessment report reviewed on site

Suggested Plan of Under guidance a qualified structural engineer complete the action plan

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



Action: provided in assessment report.


30 Jun 2015

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

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

Priority Level: Medium


Description: -Approval Plan: The building has an approval plan issued from RAJUK. -Structural Drawing: As-built structural drawing was available for review. Afterreviewing the design documents it has been observed that, the building isdesigned as six storied building. No detail of roof top shed is available indesign documents. Also, professional membership number (MIEB.) of thedesigners are not mentioned in design documents. -Architectural Drawing: As-built structural drawing was available for review which contains the identity ofthe architect of record. Length of cantilever is not mentioned in architecturaldocuments. -Design report: Not available.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Documents reviewed on site.


Have a qualified structural engineer prepare credible as-built documents basedon the requirements of Part 8 Section 8.19 of the Alliance Standard.


30 Jun 2015

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

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



Description: The available documents do not indicate general conformance with 2006BNBC or other comparable applicable international model building code.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Available documents reviewed on-site.


Engage a qualified structural engineer to develop the required documents(i.e.design report) to confirm the structural integrity of the buildings.Documents must comply with Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.19 and 8.20


30 Jun 2015

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

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



Factory Buildings

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



Description: A cursory review of the available documents along with information providedfrom the factory representatives indicates that construction of the structure wascompleted in two phase 1993 and 2009. There is no indication in the designdocuments available to understand the consideration of wind and seismicloading during the design of the building.



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


30 Jun 2015

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?



Description: There is no indication in the design document available to understand theconsideration of wind and seismic loading during the design of the building.



Have a qualified structural engineer to prepare document compliant with theseismic and wind requirements stated in the BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5.3.


30 Jun 2015

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 on theentire structure analytically evaluated and confirmed by a qualified structuralengineer.



FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



Description: Following extensions have been made beyond original construction: - Steelshed on roof. - Two Overhead RCC water tanks with a capacity of 1800L and35000L.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Available documents reviewed on-site., VisualAssessment: Visually confirmed.


Have a qualified structural engineer complete an analytical evaluation of thestructural impact of the addition.


30 Jun 2015

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

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



Description: The building is a flat plate structure. Roof top shed is an non-engineeredstructure. Hence, further analysis is required to understand the redundancy.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visually confirmed.


Under guidance a qualified structural engineer complete further analysis forthe redundancy of the building.


30 Jun 2015

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

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



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: Eight plastic water tanks having a total capacity of (2000*5+2*1000+2000) L =14000L have been placed on roof surface. Boiler have been placed at 1st and2nd floor. Also, substation has been placed on slab of 2nd floor. Provisions(documentation) are not available for these concentrated loads.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Available documents reviewed on-site., VisualAssessment: Visually confirmed.


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.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.13 and 8.14

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: Areas exceeding 42 psf live load: - Storage zone of fabric rolls at 2nd floor (80psf); - Storage zone of fabric rolls at roof top shed (55 psf); The load capacityhas not been analytically confirmed and certified by an Alliance-qualifiedstructural engineer.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visually confirmed


Under guidance a qualified structural engineer provide analytical confirmationfor structural capacity to support the excess loads.


30 Jun 2015

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

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



Question: Are Certificates of Occupancy available for review?

Priority Level: Low


Description: The factory has not obtained the certificate of occupancy from the concernedauthority.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Documents reviewed on site.


Apply for issuance of Occupancy Certificate from concerned authority.


30 Jun 2015

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: Crack has been observed on the ceiling of 1st, 2nd and 3rd floor.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visually Confirmed.


Engage a qualified structural engineer to provide additional investigation intothe areas of distress, separations, or cracking and provide a remediation planif required.


30 Jun 2015

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: Crack has been observed on following zone: 1) Masonry wall (south side) ofroof top shed. 2) Masonry wall at toilet zone (north zone) and masonry wall(north east) of 4th floor.



Have a qualified structural engineer provide further testing and analysis ofdistress, settlement, shifting, or cracking in walls and provide a remediation

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



plan to correct noted issues.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standard 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: The structural members constructed with MCAC have not been investigated byan appropriate program of in-situ testing and representative destructive testingor core samples. FoS calculation result of corner & edge columns showinadequate result (below 1.86) for minimum concrete compressive strength ofMCAC.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual assessment conducted


Under guidance of a qualified structural engineer conduct semi destructivecore test to validate the in-situ concrete compressive strength of structuralelements.


30 Jun 2015

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: Roof of the building is of MCAC. No protective coating or sealing has beenobserved.



Option-1: Provide water poof coating (i.e lime coating) on slab as this isconstructed with brick chips. Or Option-2: Provide 2% slope on the roof level.This slope will help to maintain proper drainage.


30 Jun 2015

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

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



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



Description: - Eight plastic water tanks on roof. - Storage racks at roof top shed. - Storageracks at 1st floor. Above mentioned non-structural elements need bracing.



Adequately anchor and brace all non-structural elements to resist earthquakeforces to comply with the BNBC and Alliance Standard.


30 Jun 2015

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

Question: Have all areas of needed maintenance, including areas with efflorescence,dampness, standing water on rooftops, and corrosion been addressed.



Description: Following areas have been effected by dampness: -Masonry wall of toilet zoneat 1st floor & 2nd floor; - Masonry wall of 3rd floor; -Masonry wall (east side) of4th floor; - Ceiling and masonry wall of 5th floor; - Masonry wall (north & south)of roof top shed; - Around the entire stair case; Corrosion has been observedon the exposed re bars of the roof and on steel column. Standing water hasbeen observed on the roof.



Under guidance from a qualified structural engineer, address all areas ofneeded maintenance by correcting the identified issues. A maintenanceprogram/plan should be developed to address the areas in regular interval.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.26 Durability and Maintenance

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

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015





Description: Corrosion has been observed on the column of shed on roof.



Complete further testing on areas of deterioration and have a qualifiedstructural engineer develop a remediation plan.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.26

Question: Is the building free of active signs of water intrusion or ponding due to lack ofperformance of the façade system?

Priority Level: Low


Description: Dampness has been observed on all around of exterior facade. In someportion of the building a greenish layer has been witnessed on exterior facade.Also, vegetation growth has been noted.



Repair the exterior facade system to prevent water intrusion.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.26 Durability and Maintenance

Question: The exterior façade is free of cracking.

Priority Level: Low


Description: Crack has been observed on the exterior facade of front side.



Have a qualified structural engineer provide further analysis of the identifiedcracks to determine the appropriate course of corrective action.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.2

Structural Safety Programs

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



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: There is no program available which will ensure that the designated load ineach floor will not be exceeded.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Documents reviewed on-site.


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.


30 Jun 2015

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: There is no load plan available showing the actual maximum operationalloading that is allowable.



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


30 Jun 2015

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 Load Plan is available.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Available documents reviewed on-site., VisualAssessment: Visually observed


Have a qualified structural engineer develop Floor Loading Plans per therequirements of Part 8 Section 8.20.5.3. Once prepared post them is eachfloor of the building.

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015




30 Jun 2015

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: There is no load plan available and the areas are not marked to indicate theacceptable loading limits.



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


30 Jun 2015

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 Load Manager is designated yet.



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 specific factory. The Factory Load Manager shall serveas an ongoing resource to RMG vendors and be responsible to ensure that thefactory operational loads do not at any time exceed the factory floor loadinglimits as described on the Floor Loading Plans.


30 Jun 2015

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.9 Factory Load Manager

FactoryName:




Date: 16 Apr 2015



INITIAL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY...

Documents

Transcript of INITIAL STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY...