16 | Opinion
CONFIDENT YOUR TIMBER IS CORRECTLY FIRE-TREATED?
Most specifi ers rely on their supply chain to deliver products fi t for purpose.
Fire-retardant timber is a case in point. You’re given the paperwork to tick the box. But is that enough? And do you know what to ask to ensure correct treatment? asks Mark Eggleston, managing director of WJ Group
There’s a concerning discrepancy between the EU and the UK. The Construction Product Regulation (EU no. 305/2011) requires ‘the business placing the product on the market, or the manufacturer’ to issue a CE mark and a Declaration of Performance. Where fi re retardant treated timber is concerned, the EU interprets this as the treater, whereas the UK literally believes it’s the business selling the end-product.
But the seller is one step removed. They don’t have the treatment records. And many don’t know what should have been done. As a result, some fi re-treated timber products entering the supply chain might not have been correctly treated. And there’s no system to monitor and police this in the UK.
In my opinion, morally, and in terms of fi re safety, this is wrong. Specifi ers, architects, and contractors must educate themselves to understand the evidence behind the documents they’re supplied. Whilst we’re always happy to talk through the detail, asking your fi re-retardant timber supplier these three questions will uncover many facts: 1. Does the treater issue the CE mark and Declaration of Performance?
Aside from WJ Timber Treatments, this is rarely the case. So, how can your provider suffi ciently understand the testing and third-party auditing required to create these documents?
2. Is the Declaration of Performance specifi c to the timber species?
Reputable treaters will have a Constancy of Performance certifi cate that summarises the Fire
Classifi cation Report for each species. Robust auditing by the notifi ed body that issued the fi re classifi cation report on behalf of the fi re-retardant chemical supplier will be in place. A generic Declaration of Performance is, quite frankly, dangerous.
3. If you’re supplied with a Factory Production Control document, was it audited against the correct harmonised standard? For example, that would be EN14915/2013 for cladding. The CPR does not make this clear. So, it’s easy to have a disconnect between an irrelevant standard and the control document. This is another risky situation.
Believing it’s our moral responsibility to do so, we provide a CE mark on our Burnblock fi re treatment process in addition to a species-specifi c Declaration of Performance. We’re regularly audited by a notifi ed body (Finotrol) ensuring a Constancy of Performance on our treatment process (see pp55-57). We don’t have to do this. The CPR says we’re not the business placing the product on the market. Nor are we the manufacturer. But by fi re-treating the timber like cladding, we’re signifi cantly changing its properties and are therefore in scope of AVCP system 1. We should be doing this to provide total confi dence and traceability. Our CE mark and Declaration of Performance covering INT1, INT2, EXT fi re retardant treatments and decorative coatings is backed by a chain of testing and auditing to prove the fi re-retardant timber is fi t for purpose. I fi rmly believe the UK should interpret the CPR as the EU does and fully control a life-protecting treatment process. ■
TTJ | May/June 2021 |
www.ttjonline.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85
