Impact Workstream Meeting 19-05-2025

IMPACT WORKSTREAM MEETING 19-05-2025

TERENCE HORSMAN We created quite a comprehensive model, evaluating a variety of different parameters pertaining to assets becoming non-functional. And this model was kind of distributed prior to the meeting as well. Now, Rich and I actually had a meeting a couple of weeks back to try and operationalise this model. And we’ve come up with the idea of filling in the details as much as possible just to evaluate whether the models fit for purpose.

And did it on a variety of different asset types. I’ve done so with our parent company, MCFT. Or, and i keep coming back to this example for measuring the impact of an ice cream machine going down. And then Richard, I don’t know if you’ve had a chance to look at the fire assessments?

RICHARD FREER We did some work on the Excel that you produced.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yes. This one I’ve now set up with the ice cream machine. Let me just go through this first because when I was filling this in I became aware that I ended up with some questions that I wanted to open up to the group as well. Because I think some areas might be slightly duplicated and in other ways we might be slightly exposed as well, so going through the exercise was very useful. (referring to the document displayed on screen) We started this at the top, so commercial context, the idea of describing in what context the business operates in which this asset is installed and what system it is part of.

Because that forms an important part of what your maintenance regime looks like and what the impact of that asset downtime looks like. So, for an ice cream machine, we’re looking at McDonald’s in the Philippines here, we’re trying to maximise product sales, we’re limiting operator costs so that it needs to be as accessible as possible, limited training, get up and go. Limiting downtime because you want to maximise product sales. Market position is clearly low cost products, fast food, this isn’t 5 star dining. And in terms of a commercial model on the maintenance it’s cost plus.

So, there is an initial purchasing cost with a warranty period, but after that it’s purely cost that you have against the asset. In terms of controls, we’re looking at the parent system, so in this case it’s just part of the kitchen’s electrical system. It isn’t part of an HVA system or anything more comprehensive. But when we’re looking at fire maintenance, for example, you can imagine that the all-encompassing system could be very important. The same thing is true with, for example, kitchen equipment that is gas equipped as well because you need to make sure that pressures are maintained, water systems are maintained etc.

In terms of maintenance, there’s an SFG20 reference for that which we adhere to and then in terms of parts failure, there are exploded parts diagrams. We actually ran some data analysis over the last 5 years, what type of parts are most consumed against these assets. And what we’re finding is some form of compressor changes against the heat pump. And we’re finding something called a tune up kit where we’re actually replacing a number of different components, that’s a scraper blade, motor components. And the manufacturer also recommends this to be replaced every 5 years to extend the life cycle of the asset, but it depends on the usage cycle against that particular asset.

Service agents, is MCFT at the moment. Digital maturity is interesting, this also raised a question with me whether we need to create some form of scale to rank digital maturity, but in this case it’s fairly limited. There are IoT upgrades available for these type of machines where you monitor performance, energy consumption, downtime directly from the asset itself. But that’s not something that comes out of the box there after market add-ons.

Then on the risks, correct me if I’m wrong but I think we have the duplicate here. When we compare risks and we have the risk matrix, we also have a risk matrix really under compliance, with risk of consequences, severity and likelihood. I think there is a significant overlap there.

GORDON PRINGLE Is it maybe not that the risk of hazard is the risk of hazard of the device and the operator effectively. And then the impact compliance risk is effectively what risk is it to the commercial organisation for the downtime of the device. You’ve got the human operator risk and then you’ve got the commercial risk, if you’ve not got ice cream to somebody actually turn tail and disappear and doesn’t end up buying the burger, or whatever it is. It is McDonald’s, so they’re maybe not going in for ice cream, it’s the whole package.

HOWARD HALL But that’s where you’d normally build in contingency.

GORDON PRINGLE Yeah, whether you’ve got another machine or whatever, or effectively you’re firmly going back, Terence, to your discussion about first line spares, do you actually hold a spare there? Is it a technical technician that needs to fit it?

HOWARD HALL Particularly on that risk, to say whether it’s a, it’s a key building asset, isn’t it? So, you’d identify the assets, you’d profile them as to whether they were operational, that they were mandatory for operational delivery. So, it’s a critical asset. Typically off of the back of it you’d actually classify what type of asset because otherwise certain elements of risk profiling wouldn’t be required. If it’s just a nice to have or an add-on, but if it’s a critical business delivery element.

If your job is purely producing ice cream it’s a critical business element. If you’re just doing it as part of an extended retail outlet it may just be a different business stream. So, I think I’d put a classification as to what type of asset it is and then you can actually put it as a BAU when it’s a business critical.

TERENCE HORSMAN That makes sense. Are there standards?

HOWARD HALL Yeah, typically, if you look at SFG20, that typically will dictate all of your critical business pair/per? 7 mins 51 secs the assets. Based on your ability to use the space or the building. And that’s typically what most asset management refers to is their categorisation. They give you the life cycle and the replacement and everything else arrangements for it. Other than that, it depends on what the actual business is and as to what the content of the building is and what the output.

GEORGE STEVENSON I think, Howard, SFG20 is more about maintenance procedures.

HOWARD HALL Yeah, but the point being that it will identify what needs to be maintained and therefore what is critical. Because you could argue the fact that if you’ve got something in place and you’ve got a statutory provision against it, then that makes it critical by the nature of the potential penalty. But equally, if you start at the SFG20 then it does give you a starting point to at least agree when it’s applicable or not. Otherwise, you’ve accept that the business is mature enough to have been able to have done a business critical asset list.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yeah, a really fair point. Certainly someone from BESA 9 mins 0 secs side that we could repurpose, so asset criticality is a pretty good addition. So, then we have the risk of hazards which is our rams, I suppose. And you put in your method statements and mitigation strategies and parts replacements strategies in place to mitigate those hazards. Still not sure about the compliance consequences. Gordon, you were saying it’s the risk of downtime, the risk of business impact.

GORDON PRINGLE Yeah, well, that was just my thought process when we came on to that second sphere of risk. Is that the impact that they’re thinking about? From a business impact, rather than from a health & safety impact from the appliance as such. I was just offering that up for comment, more than anything else.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. I’ve tried to incorporate that as well in the cost incurred. Which made me think that actually there’s a bit of a grey area here around these two parameters because we have lost revenues, or opportunity cost. And then costs incurred as well, and then maintenance costs, sort of as well. So, they’re overlapping a little bit, I think we could define them a little bit more clearly.

HOWARD HALL If you’re putting maintenance costs in there, then what about statutory or mandatory inspection? Shouldn’t that be above this? Because that would be part of it, on the basis if something is subject to statutory or mandatory inspection or maintenance then actually that needs to be factored in.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yeah, absolutely, the legal requirements that drives your maintenance need. Except if it impacts asset performance, but even then…

HOWARD HALL There’s no point having something that works perfectly that hasn’t been inspected, because you shouldn’t actually be using it. So actually it could be at risk on the basis of actually using something that hasn’t been maintained or inspected. The classic one is lifts. You install a lift to Cat A stage, but you don’t get around to using it until the Cat B fit out has been done, but that can be 2 or 3 years hence. In which case you’ve then got an un-inspected list that you have to start afresh with.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yeah. And I suppose the prosecutions, in some way SFG could help with this as well. Especially if there is a definition, I think they track…

HOWARD HALL Yeah, exactly, so that gives you the whole life cycle.

GORDON PRINGLE Have we had buy in from SFG20?

GEORGE STEVENSON Buy in, in what way?

GORDON PRINGLE Has there anybody been approached from SFG20? Or do we have any experts within SFG 20? I was speaking to them last week about direction of travel with certain pieces of guidance with regards to IoT and APIing data from could systems that feeds into the CAFM and CMMS systems. And they’re only just probably starting on that journey. George, what you said earlier on, it is a maintenance guidance portal, if you like. They are trying to get it up to speed with taking data from devices to feed into that process to make it a more reactionary maintenance scheduling process, rather than just PPM. Planned preventative maintenance sometimes has you doing maintenance for just doing maintenance, rather than actually does the asset really need it.

HOWARD HALL SFG is a guidance and it’s not a British Standard, so it can sit there quite happily on the basis that there’s no legal mandate to actually follow SFG20. It’s just would it be used as what would be classed as best practice industry standard. And the argument I think nowadays in court would be yes, it is.

GORDON PRINGLE Yeah, it’s the only thing that’s there, isn’t it?

HOWARD HALL Exactly, there is nothing else, unless you go down.

GEORGE STEVENSON It was actually originally compiled, I was involved right at the very beginning back in the late 80s with it. And it was originally created by some of the big FM companies under the HAVCA (the Heating and Ventilation Contractors Association) to create a level playing field for tendering. So that everybody was tendering based on a similar set of procedures that would be at a level. So, that’s how it originally started and in many cases that’s really what it is now.

GORDON PRINGLE And I know that it’s become slightly dispatched from BESA because it’s become such a big, forgive me if I’m speaking out of turn, it’s become such a big profit centre that it’s become a bit dominant in what it actually does. And it’s not really listening to BESA and the technical committees. So, I think there is some resistance, there is some friction between the two and it would be interesting to see, did you speak to David Fries?

GEORGE STEVENSON I haven’t yet, but I do need to. As I’ve said to you, I think there are some challenges that are happening at the moment, which you’ve just touched on there, that there’s new people come in from the management point of view within the SFG20 arena. They’re driving income and revenues without, and I think there is a bit of a disconnect in terms of the service. We’re finding that a number of big maintenance organisations, their customers are not so happy at the moment. And that’s not to say that we should be not using SFG20, but the way that they’re driving its use is being driven by their commercial drivers, rather than from a proper operational perspective.

GORDON PRINGLE Service delivery aspect. Yeah, I would agree with that, it’s the same kind of comments that I’ve been getting from some of the customers that we’re speaking to. But it’s the only game in town, so it’s the only place that we can refer back to. Hence the reason for the question, are we engaging with SFG20 individually? It’s Paul somebody, the technical officer, that’s the name that I’ve been given.

TERENCE HORSMAN I think interesting developments. So, insurance, legal requirements and then this all kind of made sense to me, operational disruption makes sense to try and map that into the financial model as well. Howard, you already mentioned what are the alternative assets, are they available? That makes a significant impact. And then environment, try to do carbon calculations based on power consumption of the units. Which I think makes it nicely quantifiable, especially with potential ESG agendas.

I wasn’t aware if there was a standard that we could refer to in relation to this. Obviously CIBSE has got standards for life cycles which I’ve referenced. Life cycles, asset condition, but I’m not sure if something exists at the moment in relation to carbon footprints and carbon consumption and waste disposal.

HOWARD HALL The only thing you can do that's probably refer to TOMS, isn't it? On the basis that for a lot of sustainability now people are just referring to TOMS, which is a nightmare.

TERENCE HORSMAN Can you enlighten me?

HOWARD HALL TOMS is the sustainability criteria that go into the different evaluation points and assessments for carbon. So they’ll talk about, including carbon, so they have elements where they’re talking about logistics, materials, manufacturing, all of the elements of delivery within a project. And then they’re saying there’s certain offsets that you can have with regard to carbon reduction, both in the manufacturing source and delivery and the actual installation. So, that’s the only one that I’ve come across, but they’re a bloody nightmare to operate.

And you almost often need to have a complete, you need to first of all decide as an organisation what level of sustainability that you’re going to sign up to. Whether it’s contractual, or whether it’s optional, because you will then need to have a complete sustainability manager on working through everything. Most of the larger contracts and frameworks now are just asking it for commitment, normally up to a maximum of 5% of fee as a carbon offset.

And then the delivery chain was then putting that as a final submission at the end of, either as a period return, annual return, or at the end of the project. So that the client can then confirm what their carbon offset has been throughout the project. But that’s the only one that I’ve come across, outside of BRIAM?? 20 mins 26secs and anything that’s specific about how something has been built with regard to a standard.

GORDON PRINGLE There’s some stuff on embodied carbon from SIBS? 20 mins 34 secs as well, some recent documentation that’s came out from there.

HOWARD HALL But it’s from a practical point of view…

GORDON PRINGLE It's a bit early days for it to be honest, because there's a lot of data sheets from manufacturers that are not really getting up to speed with that.

HOWARD HALL Yeah, and equally but when you look it’s about 20 tonnes, so 20 different categories and there’s only 3 that are motorised. Which is basically talking about use of recruits or graduates or training and then obviously you’ve got the carbon offset for travel. The rest of it is a percentage calculation, which you’re going to be a math genius or you’re going to be a sustainability manager of new breed. Because for old school, just ignore it and we just go on and we just go on.

Let’s just employ graduates, make sure that they’re trained, see if they’re going to a university or going to do a college course and then we can claim the offset to it. It’s fairly new, I’m not normally that fussed about it. The only way that you introduce carbon is when you’re looking at utilities heating systems and we’re trying to use that as a business case justification because you can drive more efficiency. I’m a cynic, so don’t necessarily go on my view, I don’t know what you think and what you’ve come across.

GORDON PRINGLE As distributors of products I get very occasionally asked for data and we endeavour to try and get that data from the manufacturers as best we possibly can. But as I said earlier on, it’s very, very early days conception. I can’t remember what the reference is for it Terence, but I’ll maybe stick that in the notes when I come across it, it’s TM something.

TERENCE HORSMAN That would be useful, thanks. And then TOMS.

TERENCE HORSMAN We’ve gone reputational? 24mins 55secs will get pretty self-explanatory in terms of how that’s defined. I just wanted to open up to the group, having sorted this duplication and having added an additional section on asset criticality rating and statutory inspection requirements, are there any obvious purchase or missing parameters that you’re seeing? Would this be suitable to your projects as well?

GORDON PRINGLE I think you’ll only find that out when you start to map it against other pieces of equipment and other processes. The other things will drop into it, but I would imagine that’s 90% of what’s going to be replicated across all different appliances or application of product.

HOWARD HALL Could I ask a cynic’s question? If you’re saying that this is for every asset then I’m not sure that you would actually do this for every asset, it’s a large process. Wouldn’t you apply this to business critical assets? On the basis of making sure that you’ve qualified the risk. Because literally a building could have hundreds of thousands of assets. So, it’s a case of as a strategy and approach, yeah, no problem at all. It’s just what the application would be.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yeah, I think that’s really fair. I think you would only try to do this for business critical assets. If you did this for everything it’s pointless, it’s a red tape exercise, isn’t it? You’re never going to see the return.

HOWARD HALL So, this could be the sanity check for business critical, or to clarify whether somebody’s business critical.

GORDON PRINGLE Start the debate effectively, it's all relative to what department they're representing, isn't it?

HOWARD HALL Yeah, but just got to be careful we’re not putting this as a process map that needs to be followed by every asset. It's almost as if when you're looking at your asset list, you do actually want to sort of customise or profile the assets to begin with to see if they are business critical, or they've got a high trending sort of maintenance replacement cost. What they've got a business impact.

GEORGE STEVENSON I agree entirely. That’s easily done in terms of data templates and attributes against certain things. So, we can do that based on an asset type level, that’s the way we would typically do it.

HOWARD HALL Yeah, to me it’s a radio button that you switch on and off, But what we’re saying is so you can actually have a complete assessment should you wish to, this it template that you should follow. Where you believe that it’s necessary or it’s business critical, that could be for whatever purpose.

TERENCE HORSMAN Yeah, that’s good. George, I know that you sent me an email about an hour ago with some views from your side. Would you mind sharing that?

GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, what we’re doing is we’ve been talking with the HSE, for probably 18 months now, about standardising a lot of the health & safety file. And also, looking at things from a point of how risks are assessed. (shares screen). The HSE has been working with Uniclass to classify risks, to come up with a standardised convention for risks under Uniclass. And Chris Lucas, one of the senior guys at the HSE, he shared this with me which is their master risk table. I’ve not properly looked at it yet, but it’s looking at things from a CDM perspective.

And what I’m interested in is to see if, as far as Active Plan is concerned for example, we can put this in as libraries so that when you’re looking at a 360 photo, for example, you can assign against an asset or a system or a space a risk. And you could do that just in the same way that you can do that against a condition of an item, or whatever. So, it just occurred to me, Terence, that when we’re looking at what the risks are that we might want to follow this methodology.

HOWARD HALL George, how big is that document? Because if you’re not careful, that’s risk by questionnaire, isn’t it? Not by assessment.

GEORGE STEVENSON No, no, no, I agree. I guess the point is it’s a library…it’s1900.

HOWARD HALL What I’m more interested in, if you scroll to the right please. it’s the categorisation of risk. So, it’s Column E. If you just scroll down that what’s interesting is what they believe the risk is.

HOWARD HALL So, what they are is basically a sanity check for the individual risks.

TERENCE HORSMAN This is very interesting, I mean what we’re doing is for the risk assessment method statements we have similar type of definitions for specific risks. But if they’re linking this to Uniclass that is a game changer because all of a sudden for a particular asset type you’d be able to seed a specific risk profile.

GEORGE STEVENSON Let me just see Uniclass.

HOWARD HALL George, are you able to share that?

GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, I think so.

HOWARD HALL I’d like to look at it because I suppose the question going through my head is what’s the purpose of that? Is it so that it gives non-practitioners a guide as to what to ask or what to review? Or is it there as a prompt to assist? And given the fact the HSE dual role, to me I think it’s the former rather than the later because they don’t issue guidance anymore.

GEORGE STEVENSON No.

GORDON PRINGLE It seems to be a personal protective system as well, it’s all about the risk to the operator.

GEORGE STEVENSON It is definitely CDM. I’m just trying to remember where the Uniclass risk table is.

HOWARD HALL If we start expanding Uniclass that’s going to become unworkable.

GEORGE STEVENSON OK, I know that there is a risk table, I can’t find it at the moment. You’d have thought you’d be able to search on risk management. There’s definitely a risk management table, it’s not giving me that information. I’m happy to share that. As you understand, Howard, is what we’re always trying to do is see if we can standardise as much as possible, so that when people are doing things we’ve actually got a standard way of describing them.

HOWARD HALL Yeah, I’ve got two thoughts going through my mind. One is the fact that if you try and incorporate that into Active Plan then you’ll make everyone paranoid because everything will then be flagged as a potential risk. So if you do it as a work reference, this is why I was looking at categorisation we’ve got in, then you’re going to have to have so much linkage in managing 100 lines, which could be awkward. If it’s put as a, if you take the Active Plan approach of creating a library reference, if you put them as topics you’d say risk and this is per topic. These are the typical risks and these are the typical questions.

I think that’s a very useful guide for people within Active Plan to go and have a look at, if they’ve got a particular topic. And then you just need a single icon that says a help function for risk. But to try and incorporate those as prompts within the creation or the population of Active Plan would be a nightmare.

GEORGE STEVENSON What we’ve done here, this is just our early thoughts, we’ve selected an item. We can then look at that from a point of view of…we’ve got an operational status, a grade, a condition and also we’ve downloaded, you can assign certain risks to an asset and they’ll be different.

HOWARD HALL You could always put HSE risk and then if they wish to then they could go for further guidance.

GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, I think it looks as though they’re classified in some sort of way as well, Howard.

HOWARD HALL Yeah, I’m nervous to an extent because if you’ve got an operational premise then all of the risk should be in the O&Ms anyway. And it’s down to the operator and staff, not necessarily be so it’s…

GEORGE STEVENSON Yeah, I think it’s a matter of accessing the information. Because as we know, stuff should be in the O&MS and often isn’t.

HOWARD HALL Well, it won’t be, we know that.

GEORGE STEVENSON So therefore a part of our thought with this is to try and replicate what was done years ago with Safety Base which is the thing that HSE Gordon Crick pioneered. So, this is something that it would be dead easy for us to add into Active Plan. And that’s really what I’m thinking from our commercial perspective, but also having some standardised risks with standardised solutions to those risks. So that you could have some sort of flow through.

HOWARD HALL If you look at the commerciality, Active Plan is to be a commercial application. Do I want to be reminded of something that I haven’t considered as a prompt, or as something I can choose to reference? If it’s put there and I’ve got to risk status, then as long as I’ve got an icon that says HSE risk guidance, if I choose to follow it that’s fine, if I don’t, it’s not mandated. Otherwise, I’m almost going to demonstrate that I haven’t considered the risk because of what the HSE changing risk profile is.

I can choose to make a judgement on the risk as an operator. The HSE guidance is an ideal, this should happen, this should happen, but we know the operational it’s the operator as reasonably practicable to apply their duty of care. Otherwise it’s getting very prescriptive and what we’re doing is almost creating an HSE checklist if we’re not careful, whereas if it’s a reference point I can choose to go to if I haven’t considered.

GEORGE STEVENSON Don’t we want to, forget the commerciality of it for the minute, Howard, and you know I do that all too frequently. But would we not want to say that to include in the asset information model an alert to somebody that if, for example, they’re going to drill a hole in a compartment wall, that these are the things that they need to be aware of?

HOWARD HALL It is, but then I would argue that what I’m looking at then is the RAMS and the competence of the person carrying out the task, nothing to do with the asset itself.

GORDON PRINGLE I would agree with that, it’s down to the competency of the individual that’s carrying out the task.

HOWARD HALL The asset, there’s enough of a task just to get people to tag and attach to the integral data to an asset and then to apply the inspection maintenance replacement regime to it and put a life cycle cost against it. If you then start to extend in to what is the correct procedure to carry out that particular process, if you’re not careful we’re blurring what this is trying to be. If it’s put as an annex which is then a guidance to the safe, or guidance to the risk associated with that particular product or that particular asset, brilliant, it’s further information and it adds to the credibility of the asset documentation. But it’s nothing to do with the actual asset itself. If there’s any risk involved with that asset it’s how it’s operated and how it’s manufactured and installed, which is all down to the O&Ms and your warranties.

GEORGE STEVENSON It’s down to the activity that’s being carried out, rather than the asset.

TERENCE HORSMAN It’s a mix, isn’t it?

HOWARD HALL Yeah, but all of that should be within your warranties and your commission and your O&M detail. If you’re looking at the PPM, then this is a risk associated with the operation of a PPM, as opposed to it being integral risk for the asset. Because you shouldn’t be putting faulty equipment in in the first place, or dodgy equipment. And if they’re looking at CDM, you rely on the warranty of the particular product that you’ve put in and you’ve selected.

GORDON PRINGLE If it sits in isolation as an operating asset, for example the ice cream maker has an electrical point, it has a mains water point. But they’re kind of associated with a supply position to their asset and the asset’s functioning in its independent self. At the same time, heating and cooling systems, you’ve got individual components in there that make that whole bigger system work.

The problem you have with that is some manufacturers become so silo fixated in their component in a bigger system, that it’s all about them rather than that full system. And you’re now getting devices that are looking at the operation of the system and anything that is shared commonly with the system. And that’s where it’s quite interesting. And if you go back to SFG20, that’s where I think SFG20 is still fixated with individual components and the silo mentality.

GEORGE STEVENSON I agree.

HOWARD HALL This is where you should have an FM strategy, you should have an Am strategy, which go over the two. All of the asset management is in making sure that you identify how your strategy then applies to a known asset list. And if you have an asset, can I at least have the right data or up-to-date data on what that asset is and what my options are for the life cycle.

GORDON PRINGLE And make no mistake, some of that demand for that asset information comes from client’s experience of failure. It’s what you mentioned Terence, the reason that you’re looking at the ice cream machine which seems strange to people, is because of the cost of failure that they had in an operational building, so they don’t want it to happen again. So, that’s where the focus is.

But the vast majority of building owners don’t actually own 500 buildings or franchises across with multiple, and they all think that they’re having one problem because they think it’s their problem and their problem alone. And in reality it’s not, the whole flipping industry is having the same problem. It’s just they’re not getting the information back that it’s actually resolvable or how it can be resolvable or fixed a bit for the better.

TERENCE HORSMAN I think that’s really sensible and George to come back on the HSE risk assessment, I think it could be of added value, not as the prescriptive measure, but as a reference guide. Because I think when it comes to RAT/RAMS? 45 mins 44 secs, it’s a mixture of the site risks, so what are the risks of that particular system or in your example, what are the points of failure and the risks associated with that system. What’s going on that site? What is the asset type? So, there are particular risks inherent to the type of asset and its operations. And then the individual works carried out against that asset.

So, depending on whether you’re doing PPM or reactive work or whatever the instructions are, there are different risks associated with that. So, it’s a complicated matrix when you get to that point, but I think it could be of added value for a maintenance contractor.

HOWARD HALL Another way of viewing it, a bit anarchic would be that whilst you’ve got an asset list you also have a separate tab which is risk. You can replicate your asset list and then you can create a separate risk profile, and that could be a different functionality or different deliverable within Active Plan. So, in other words if you look at Active Plan being your Golden Thread, first of all you need to know what it is, I need to be able to demonstrate what it is and then the associated life cycle. We could then have a separate tab, George, which is risk.

And actually what you do is you replicate the data that you have and then you can create a different risk element, a risk profiling element for them as a separate functionality. I wouldn’t try and merge risk into what is a data capture because then you’re going into assessment and evaluation. But I’ll certainly have it as a reference point, i think it’s brilliant. And also it means you can throw it back at the HSE, you’re trying to be as helpful as possible.

One feedback that allegedly you may have received…supposedly the government council who was partly responsible for writing the Building Safety Act was quite frustrated last year because they believed that they’d been told b the industry and by ministers and such like that there was no Building Safety Act support or software that could help them. But the reality there is Active Plan, perfect position for me is that it gives you the structure and the fire safety elements of the Building Safety Act. For relevant buildings and for the re-scoping as it extends past high-risk.

In which case the Building Safety Act doesn’t look at risk yet, it looks at can you just tell me what you’ve got, Part 1. Part 2 is then managing it, what’s the active risk management for that site. So, to me there is a phase 1 and there’s a phase 2. Introducing risk around and such like is a part of the operational, and what we need to do is screw it down that people know what assets that they’ve got. I don’t know any multisite or complex organisation that can hand on heart say they know how many assets they’ve got. So, bite sized principle, yeah.

GEORGE STEVENSON We did a poll last week at the forum meeting and the results of it in terms of the feedback, I think we had about 70 people responded, and it was really shocking, but not surprising. 72% of people said that they didn’t believe that the O&Ms were correct or being updated. I think 92% said that they didn’t believe that they would get the fire and emergency information and that it would be accurate. Which is really, I’m feeding this back to Tim Galloway. Tim Galloway has been in touch with me at the weekend, he’s the director of building safety at the HSE, so I think we’re getting some high level engagement, or interest let’s say.

HOWARD HALL It is because also the HSE are failing rapidly because they’re rejecting everything. So the problem there is that they’re losing credibility straight away, the second director within the operation of a new unit which is supposed to be all singing, all dancing business grow in the UK. And at the moment it’s a restriction, it’s causing project delay and it’s a nightmare. So, Tim needs to do something to reassure pounds, shillings and pence that actually ?? planning?? 51 mins 11 secs.

GORDON PRINGLE I’m just surprised they never saw it coming. They’ve kind of lifted the bonnet and they’ve been surprised as to what they’ve seen underneath the bonnet, which is a surprise to me. Anybody in the industry finds it a surprise.

HOWARD HALL Yeah, but they also haven’t been able to prosecute anybody yet because they know that they’re at fault themselves, one could allegedly suggest. So it’s an interesting one, but to me focus on being able to identify the asset. if we get these nuggets coming along we add them as a reference point and a potential to then build a separate functional list.

TERENCE HORSMAN Thanks everyone for their contributions. I think in terms of next steps and deliverables for this work stream, I would love to do another mapping. George, you suggested in the last meeting that we do another example for a part of the fire system, such as a fire damper. I think that would be really valuable to do that. Then we have the ice cream example, we have the fire damper example. Gordon, I don’t know if we’ve got the model to a stage where perhaps it’s useful for you to populate an example as well, with the distributed heating systems. I don’t know if this is fit for purpose now.

But as we discussed in the meeting I think having the model is one thing, but going through and filling it out operationalises it and potentially shows flaws or opportunities for improvement.

HOWARD HALL If I could make one suggestion. If you could pick it, you start with MEP and then say an element of MEP. So we identify, we show the ability of Active Plan. So you identify MEP which is part of structural, you go to MEP and then you go to the fire dampers within it, you can show all of the Building Safety Act requirements in one example. Because you're listing them all and how they're interconnected. If you just go straight to fire dampers people think you’re talking about a fire. What we’re saying is a fire element within the MEP which is part of the structure. And then this is the reason why the Building Safety Act came in because structure…you can see the logic of flow.

GORDON PRINGLE It’s certainly something that I mention in a lot of the presentations, to try and tell people that the Building Safety Act is not going to stop at high-rise buildings and fire and protective sleeving, it’s just the start of it. And for goodness sake, wake up and get to grips with where you know you’re potentially not quite achieving your best in buildings. You’re going to have to get there pretty soon because the MOT certification of buildings, whether it be new or whether it be existing or whether it be to be validating PFI that’s getting handed back to the UK government, they want MOT certificates.

And they’re getting nothing, they’re getting no evidence on some of these buildings. Particularly in MEP provision. And they don’t like it and they’re getting really nervous about it and rightly so. And the PFI owners are getting really nervous about it and rightly so, but they’re all scurrying around trying to do something.

GEORGE STEVENSON So, what about a smoke damper, Howard? I’m trying to think of things that are part of an MEP delivery.

GORDON PRINGLE The smoke damper gets a wee bit more specific and still sticks you in that fire protection process. So, it kind of self-validates everybody to just say right OK yeah, I know that you’re all banging on about fire protection. We’re kind of getting there, but (taking Howard’s point) you might want to take them a curve ball and say listen, it’s bigger than this.

HOWARD HALL If I take a hypothetical. So, existing building being remodelled, refurbed, but it’s going to have part occupation. Five floors, so a typical office block. 1, 2, 3 is actually occupied, one is retail, second, third up to fifth is actually multiple clients. And then you’re going to refurb 4 and 5. But in doing 4 and 5 you actually cut off the fire alarm system for the whole building, so you put an active watch in.

And secondly you haven’t considered the smoke vent or you haven’t considered the dampeners because you’re going to change the occupation, therefore you’re going to change the MEP. You’re going to go from open plan to individual offices, or individual to office plan. One of the key elements that is always forgotten would be the MEP, the dampeners and the smoke exhaust within the building. Especially when you’ve got part occupied and refurbed. And that is something that I allegedly could come across every day.

TERENCE HORSMAN If we work towards filling out, if I distribute the model as we’ve got it right now and we can come back and review an example of MEP or smoke dampers. Howard, would you be able to contribute to that?

HOWARD HALL Yeah, unfortunately I try and call in all of these meetings, so if my diary permits I will. But if not I’ll be in the background with George anyway.

GORDON PRINGLE In that regard, there’s only specific products that I can contribute to that we distribute.

GEORGE STEVENSON But if you could contribute Gordon, your knowledge on the detail side.

GORDON PRINGLE Yeah, absolutely. Howard, are you going to UK Reef? 57 mins 16secs

HOWARD HALL No, I always manage to dodge that. The reason why I say that is that UK Reef is a networking, I’m too old in the tooth to actually carry on networking, I just talk to people I enjoy. My networking is making sure that the clients go.

GEORGE STEVENSON I’m going, Howard, so if there’s anything I need to be introduced to, if you could put me on the radar.

HOWARD HALL The only thing I will say is that AI at the moment in design, D&E and potentially coming into asset management, is getting really interesting. There’s little bits of software that AI is…and I’m too long in the tooth to be asked or to want to get involved in it. There’s far wiser and younger colleagues that do it.

GEORGE STEVENSON If there’s somebody either in Tetratek or any of your customers who you could connect me to that would be welcome.

CHAT

Gordon Pringle

Paul Bullard is one of names I have at SFG20
Embodied carbon in building services: a calculation methodology (TM65) | CIBSE
BTW we spoke yesterday about CAFM data integration and for those not aware of this session at noon GMT today https://www.sfg20.co.uk/dpp/webinar/integration