Most buildings regardless of scale generally provided at least one plant room. These rooms are essential to the buildings operations and typically house a variety of different plant and equipment. These may include:

·        Air handlers Boilers,
·        Chillers, Heat exchangers,
·        Water heaters and tanks,
·        Water pumps (for domestic, heating/cooling, and fire fighting water),
·        Main distribution piping and valves,
·        Fire fighting equipment (Sprinkler distribution piping and pumps),
·        Back-up electrical generators,
·        Elevator machinery, HVAC (heating, ventilation and air-conditioning) equipment,

Most owners and occupiers understand that the equipment in the plant rooms provides the means for the heating and cooling for the building but often little thought to the safety of the included equipment on and ongoing basis. Plant and equipment located within such rooms may be 10, 20 or even 50 years old and it is increasingly evident that this plant and equipment, although compliant  with the codes of the day, can poses a significant risk to the health and safety of the people that are required to maintain it.

Due to the very nature of the plant and equipment located within these rooms there are substantial implications to technicians, and maintainers of such equipment. Plant, as defined within workplace health and safety terms, is a major cause of workplace death and injury in Australian workplaces.

Severe injuries to technicians, and maintainers of such equipment can result from unsafe design, manufacture, installation, maintenance and use of plant. Plant and equipment located within such rooms have moving parts and the action of moving parts may have sufficient force in motion to cause injury or death. In addition to the moving parts there are non-mechanical risks including harmful emissions, contained fluids or gas under pressure, chemicals and chemical by-products, and electricity and noise; all of which can cause serious injury to technicians and others if not adequately controlled.

The importance of the equipment contained within these rooms are paramount to the smooth operation of the building and as such technicians are required to periodically assess, maintain and repair these items of plant and equipment  to guarantee the ongoing performance of the building.  

Risks to health and safety exist throughout the lifecycle of the plant from manufacturing through to installing, commissioning, using, maintaining, repairing, decommissioning and disposing of the plant. As such building owners , facility managers as well as persons who conduct a business or undertaking (PCBU)must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the fixtures, fittings and plant are without risks to the health and safety of any individual.

In order to ensure that the risk associated with the items of plant and equipment are controlled, a systematic process involving the following should be implemented:

o   Identify hazards – find out what could cause harm from using the plant;
o   Assess risks if necessary – understand the nature of the harm that could be caused by the hazard, how serious the harm could be and the likelihood of it happening;
o   Control risks – implement the most effective control measures that are reasonably practicable in the circumstances;
o   Review control measures to ensure they are working as planned.

Designers, manufacturers, importers, suppliers and installers of plant are also required apply this process as a way of making plant as safe as possible before it is used within the building in addition to obtaining and providing information about plant so other duty holders can fulfil their responsibility to manage risks. 

The most readily available source of information pertaining to the safe operation and maintenance of plant and equipment is contained within the equipment operations manuals. WHS legislation requires (amongst other things) persons who supply machinery to, so far as is practicable, ensure that persons using the machinery in the manner intended are not exposed to hazards. As part of this obligation suppliers are required to provide adequate information in respect to any dangers associated with the machinery, the proper maintenance of the machinery and the correct use the of  machinery.

Given that most of the equipment located within such rooms may have been present from the day of completion, the reality unfortunately is that operator's manuals are frequently not available.

Building owners, facility managers as well as persons who conduct a business or an undertaking must ensure information pertaining to the safe operation and maintenance of the plant and equipment is readily available and up to date.

Andrew Angelides
Functional Risk Solutions

One of our fundamental needs is the feeling of safety and security. This is evident across all cultures and historical periods. What deviates however is the strategies by which these needs are addressed. 

More recent events such as natural disasters and the frequency at which they are now occurring has heightened public awareness and interest toward efforts to protect people, building and operations from their devastating effects.
Within Australia safety and public liability of common and tenanted areas are covered by a variety of applicable health, safety & environmental legislation, Australian Standards, Codes of Practice and the National Construction Code (NCC).

The National Construction Code (NCC) defines types of building and structures and also contains technical provisions for the design and construction of buildings and other structures, covering such matters as structure, fire resistance, access and egress, services and equipment, and energy efficiency as well as certain aspects of health and amenity.

The goal of the NCC is to enable the achievement of nationally consistent, minimum necessary standards of relevant health, safety (including structural safety and safety from fire), and amenity and sustainability objectives efficiently. All buildings are required to have essential services fitted and maintained in an
operational state to ensure adequate level of safety over the life of the building. So we take this as inherent safety mitigation and a minimum design standard. This level of safety mitigation alone however does not necessarily achieve what may be reasonably considered a safe building. It does however provide a suitable base level of design in developing safe and functional buildings for most users through all stages of the building life.

Facility and property managers are faced with many challenges in ensuring the health and safety of tenants, workers (including contractors) and the public within the buildings they manage. Further complicating the matter are additional inherent safety and environmental risks associate with older building stock and associated superseded design standards, fittings and fixtures. Recurrent fit outs and improvement undertaken by tenants over time add additional layers of complexity. 

With the above in mind it seems fit to explore the relationship and continuum formed between safety, building design and property management and how risk management can influence the function and
safety of a building.
With Risk Management being defined in ISO 31000 as “the effect of uncertainty on objectives, whether positive or negative”. 

The objective for applying a systematic risk management approach to facilities and property management is to prevent undesirable events proactively through responsible action, as well as a detailed and timely allocation of responsibilities in the event of a disruption or incident.

In simple terms risk management is a process for identifying, assessing and systematically controlling events that may lead to a loss. In order to achieve the objective above, given that there are many tools and techniques that can be used, it can be helpful to consider the complexity of the problems, the nature and degree of undertenancy based on the information available, the extent of resources that are required, the desired output in terms of qualitative or quantitative data and the timing. 
 
Although risk management processes potentially present a powerful tool, as with all tools, if it is not used with care and understanding, the outcomes may well be totally incorrect and lead to inappropriate decisions being made that are not practicable and ultimately not successfully implementable.
 
Examples of key safety risks in buildings include: 

• Slip Trip Fall hazards in building entrances, especially where rain is tracked inside;
• Contractors staff and tenants working at height, confined spaces, plant and under exposure to electromagnetic radiation;        
• Inadequate lighting affecting building users’ ability to identify and negotiate hazards in their immediate environment;    
• Security for both staff and public; 
• The analysis and management of the interaction between vehicles and pedestrian using the facility;        
• Types and location of hazardous materials (e.g. asbestos, lead, PCBs);      
• Inadequate way finding signage;        
• Poor siting and design of car parks can have a significant impact on the safety of buildings where sightlines, lighting requirements and direct access by pedestrians is affected;        
• Inadequacy of emergency services and their communication preventing an effective response.

With the use of both active and passive measures, the benefits of the risk management approach to managing safety within facility or a building provide both direct and indirect benefits that may include premium reductions, reputation, and increased savings. They can assist with meeting due diligence obligations as well as in providing a safe and healthy environment for tenants, employees, contractors and the public.


Andrew Angelides
Functional Risk Solutions

“The Russians knew that Chernobyl was fatally flawed, even at the design stage” - Askold Krushelnycky, Prague, May 2003

Being safe is a universal interest to all people. However, as technology has advanced so too has the risk to health and safety through the consequential appearance of new hazards. The need to control these hazards has also evolved in order to continue being safe. Technological advances have extenuated the scale and effect of many old and well known hazards such as fire, as well as introduced relatively new hazards such as the relationship between the use of fossil fuels and atmospheric pollution, or the prevalence of automobiles raising road fatalities.   

Work Health and Safety legislation across most of Australia generally imposes a duty to designers to ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that any building or structure is to be designed to be without risk to health and safety for the whole of its life cycle. Functions, activities and phases relating to a building’s life cycle vary significantly and can evolve with the building. These may include but not be limited to:

·        Varying the use for which the building or structure was initially designed;

·        Any handling and storage that occurs within the building;

·        Its construction;

·        Any foreseeable activity for which may be later applied;

·        The manufacture, assembly, commissioning and de-commissioning of the building or structure;

·        As well as its demolition and disposal.

The direction of the SiD process therefore extends well beyond just the occupants of the building. To effectively address the entire life cycle of a building, all the potential for harm to all persons involved in, or even affected by each of these phases must be suitably considered.

Work Health and Safety legislation is generally state based legislation, and variations therefore do occur between states. The fundamental premise of designer responsibility however is generally explicitly stated, or at least directly implied in all instances.

As a concept, SiD involves a planned and disciplined risk management approach early in the design to lessen potential hazards to all affected persons related to the facility or structure. It attempts to formalise an approach which is capable of considering safety systematically throughout the design process. It also provides a suitable process to document the safety-related decision making undertaken, and communicate the risks between the designer, operator and other stakeholders. This in turn fosters collaboration, with all stakeholders actively engaged in the process.

Responsibility for achieving a safe design ultimately rests with those who control or manage design functions. But how can this be accurately defined?  In practice, a diverse range of individuals are directly involved in decision making and therefore ultimately design and design outcomes. In essence, the architect/ engineer, client, developer, manufacturer, managers and directors can all be considered ‘designers’ if their decisions or guidance are a direct influence.

The benefits of implementing a SiD process are extensive and multifaceted. Intervention at the design phase has the greatest potential impact on the safety of the building or structure as the opportunity to eliminate risks is strongest at this phase. Attending to identifiable hazards at a later phase of the building’s life may only allow far less powerful mitigation strategies.

To designers, SiD provides a system to formally document a process demonstrating systematic risk management. To clients, cost savings may be found in preventing future retrofitting and downtime. Insurance premiums may be reduced as well as the risk of litigation. Occupiers may see benefits in reduced injury management interventions, increased useability, reduced maintenance costs, and improved productivity to name just a few. The benefits can extend exponentially depending on the effectiveness of the process implemented.


Andrew Angelides
Functional Risk Solutions

George Xinos
Functional Access Solutions

Andrew Angelides of Functional Risk Solutions was recently recognized by client Exxon Mobil for his contribution in managing Occupational Health and Safety during the planning, construction and hand-over phases of the Perth Exxon Mobil office refurbishment.

Andrew's involvement in the project included overseeing and implementing the Exxon Mobil Loss Prevention System (LPS); facilitating the Exxon Mobil Operation Integrity Management System (OIMS); training the construction workforce under these systems; as well as assessing, monitoring and implementing practical mitigation control measures.

Congratulations Andrew in receiving this award and delivering a safe project.

Incorporating the requirements of current Occupational Health and Safety legislative requirements with a heritage building can be challenging to say the least, as such buildings were constructed at a time when persons were expected to assume their own risk and, as such, were more likely to avoid hazards.

Although it is still a requirement for a person to avoid hazards, it is no longer acceptable as the only form of risk control. Current Occupational Health and Safety legislation requires people who carry out activities involving heritage buildings to actively manage health and safety risks from the design stage throughout the life cycle of the building to the end user.

In general, building codes and regulations are for the construction of new buildings and structures, they are also applied to existing buildings when they are subject to significant renovation or a change in use.

Building codes and regulations mainly focus on safety and health in the areas of fire, structural failure, indoor air quality and hygiene, and not necessarily within the traditional realms of Occupational Health and Safety. Building regulations play an important role in protecting the community from catastrophic losses with requirements to mitigate losses resulting from fire, structural collapse and natural hazards. They also address issues associated to the protection of human rights such as access to buildings for persons with physical disabilities. The eight-storey commercial building that collapsed in Bangladesh on April 24 highlights the importance of Building codes and regulations. These, however, do not necessarily aim at mitigating losses or harm from end user hazards (occupational), but direct the majority of their intent at the mitigation of a major hazard (the one-off catastrophic).

Clients, developers, building owners, occupiers, design professionals such as architects, engineers, industrial designers, health and safety professionals, construction workers and users all have a role in the identification and control of the existing latent hazards. A safe work environment and effective safety outcomes do not happen by chance or by guesswork planning but through the effective coordination of all the relevant stakeholders.

Each stakeholder must ensure they are aware which of their activities are likely to harm people. It is important to understand what could go wrong, what the consequences could be and to inform those that could be impacted.

Risks associated with heritage buildings should be identified and addressed following a systematic process including:

• Identifying hazards – what could cause harm?
• Assessing risks – how serious the harm could be and the likelihood of it happening?
• Controlling risks – implement an effective control measure that is reasonably practicable
• Reviewing control measures to ensure they are working as planned.

This process should be documented and shared between the stakeholders as information transfer is key in the effective management of risk.

Areas that pose high risk to all users include:

• Exiting base building electrical wiring
• Walk ways and stair cases
• Indoor air quality
• Use of hazardous material (asbestos, PCBs, Lead Paint etc)
• Manual handling and ergonomics
• Fire
• Structural failure

The objective is to achieve a maximal level of protection for the health and safety of the building occupants while minimising the impact on the heritage significance of any given building.

There will be no one solution to a problem. Different buildings will have varying levels and items of heritage significance and exist within different settings and environments, and there may well be a range of possible solutions. Each case will need to be assessed on its own merits and the most practicable set of solutions found.

Very little attention is given to this issue in the literature readily available regarding refurbishment of buildings of heritage significance. A multitude of publications and guidelines in preserving heritage buildings, or modifications in this area which address environmental sustainability and access for people with disabilities, however scant consideration to Occupational Health and Safety is generally offered.

Andrew Angelides
Functional Risk Solutions

http://designbuildsource.com.au/workplace-health-and-safety-for-heritage-buildings