equivalent initial structural safetysfi.fairfactories.org/sfi_dev_files/1/audit_files/crescent...

EQUIVALENT INITIAL STRUCTURAL SAFETYASSESSMENT

Factory Name: Crescent Fashion & Design Limited

Address: Beximco Industrial Park, Sarabo, Kashimpur, GazipurGazipur Dhaka Bangladesh

Assessor: Bureau Veritas

Date: 17 Jun 2014

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

The Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety /19

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:

Crescent Fashion & Design Limited

Address: Beximco Industrial Park, Sarabo, Kashimpur, Gazipur Gazipur DhakaBangladesh


Date: 17 Jun 2014



GENERAL INFORMATION

General Information

Factory Name: Crescent Fashion & Design Limited

Address: Beximco Industrial Park, Sarabo, Kashimpur, Gazipur Gazipur Dhaka Bangladesh

Country: Bangladesh

Province: Dhaka

City: Gazipur

Zip Code: 1349

Audit Duration:

Re-Audit: Re-Audit After 0 Months

Draft Report Date : 06-20-2014

Final Report Date : 07-01-2015

Are all Action ItemsFrom PreviousAssessmentCompleted?:

No

Buildings in Complex : There are 31 buildings in the factory premises out of which ten are main production buildings and twenty oneare ancillary buildings. 1)Beximco Woven and Textile prefab shed (BTL),(2) Beximco Denim prefab shed(BDL),3) Beximco Knitting prefab shed (BKL),4) Beximco Printing prefab shed (BPL),5) CFDL and BAL-Production building,6) Esses Fashion Limited (EFL),7) International Knitwear and Apparels Limited (IKAL-U-2),8) International Knitwear and Apparels Limited (IKAL-U-2),9) New Dacca Industrial Ltd (NDIL),10) FreshtexBD pvt. Ltd.11)Turbine-1 building,12) Turbine-2 shed,13) Boiler-1 building,14) Boiler-2 building,15) Generator-1 building,16) Generator-2 shed,17) Security post -1,18) Security post- 2,19) Mosque ,20) Staff residencebuilding,21) Officer residence building,22) Foreigner residence building,23) Guest house building,24)Corporate office shed,25) Temporary dining shed,26) Store shed,27) Finished goods store shed,28) Workerdining shed ,29) Medical & childcare shed,30) Warehouse shed,31) Dining shed (Building 20,21,22,23 werenot in the audit scope)

Number of BuildingLevels (Stories) :

1)Beximco Woven and Textile shed:(Above grade: 1,below grade:0),2)Beximco Denim shed:(Abovegrade:1,below grade:0),3)Beximco Knitting shed:(Above grade:1,below grade:0),4)Beximco Printing shed:(Above grade:1,below grade:0),5)CFDL main production building:(Above grade:5,below grade:1),6)Productionshed (Esses):(Above grade:1,below grade:0),7)Production shed (IKAL-1):(Above grade:1,belowgrade:0),8)Production shed(IKAL-2):(Above grade:1,below grade:0),9)Production shed (NDIL):(Abovegrade:1,below grade:0),10)Production shed(Frestex):(Above grade:1,below grade:0),11)Staff residencebuilding:(Above grade:5 below grade:0),12)Officer residence building:(Above grade:5, belowgrade:0),13)Foreign resident building:(Above grade:5, below grade:0),14)Guest house building: (Abovegrade:3,below grade: 0),15 Dining shed (Esses):(Above grade:2, below grade:0),Remaining sixteen buildingsare single story(above grade:1, below grade: 0;

Approximate BuildingArea (SF) :

Total area of all buildings in the factory premises: 1,209,332 sft.

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



Date of BuildingConstruction :

Factory personnel informed the construction finishing year as follows: 1)Beximco Woven and Textile shed,Beximxo printing, CFDL production building, Boiler-1 building, Turbine-1 building, Generator-1building:2007,2)Beximco Denim shed & Knitting shed:1995, 3)Production shed(Esses), Production shed(IKAL-1), Production shed(IKAL-2), Production shed(NDIL), Production shed(Frestex):2013, 4)Turbine-2 shed,Boiler-2 building, Generator-2 shed:2008,5) Security post-1:2009,6)Security post- 2:2009,7)Mosquebuilding:2010,8)Staff residence building:2010,9)Officer residence building:2010.10)Foreigner residencebuilding:2010,11)Guest house building: 2012,12)Corporate office shed:2006,13)Temporary dining shed(NDIL):2012,14)Store shed(NDIL):2011,15)Finished goods store shed CFDL): 2012,16)Worker diningshed(CFDL):2012,17)Medical & childcare shed (CFDL): 2010,18)Warehouse shed (Esses):2011,19)Diningshed Esses):2012.

Date of Last BuildingRenovation/Addition :

No record for date of renovation or addition was found from factory personnel. During audit it was found that,Beximco Industrial Park internal and external road construction work was going on.

Is the Building mixeduse?:

No

Ancillary Structures inComplex :

1) Single story RCC turbine-1 building, 2) Single story turbine-2 shed, 3) Single story RCC boiler-1 building, 4)Single story RCC boiler-2 building, 5) Single story RCC generator-1 building, 6) Single story generator-2 shed,7) Single story RCC security post -1, 8) Single story RCC security post- 2, 9) Single story RCC mosquebuilding, 10) Five story RCC staff building, 11) Five story RCC officers building, 12) Five story RCC foreignerresidence building, 13) Three story RCC guest house building, 14) Single story corporate office shed, 15)Single story temporary dining shed (NDIL), 16) Single story store shed (NDIL), 17) Single story finished goodsstore shed (CFDL), 18) Single story worker dining shed (CFDL), 19) Single story medical & childcare shed(CFDL), 20) Single story warehouse shed (Esses), 21) Two story dining shed (Esses).

Number of AncillaryLevels (Stories) :

Building Name: Stories above grade, below grade,1) RCC turbine-1 building: 1,0,2) Single story turbine-2shed: 1,0,3) RCC boiler-1 building: 1,0,4) RCC boiler-2 building: 1,0,5) RCC generator-1 building: 1,0,6)Generator-2 shed: 1,0,7) RCC security post -1: 1,0,8) RCC security post -1: 1,0,9) RCC mosque building:1,0,10) RCC staff residence building: 5,0,11) RCC officer residence building: 5,0,12) RCC foreign residentbuilding: 5,0,13) RCC guest house building: 3,0,14) Corporate office shed: 1,0,15) Temporary dining shed(NDIL): 1,0,16) Store shed (NDIL): 1,0,17) Finished goods store shed (CFDL): 1,0,18) Worker dining shed(CFDL): 1,0,19) Medical & childcare shed (CFDL): 1,0,20) Warehouse shed (Esses): 1,0,21) Dining shed(Esses): 2,0,

Approximate AncillaryStructures Area (SF) :

1) RCC turbine-1 building: 4391.00 sft,2) Turbine-2 shed: 625.00 sft,3) RCC boiler-1 building: 4785.00 sft,4)RCC boiler-2 building: 1831.00 sft,5) RCC generator-1 building: 3603.00 sft,6) Generator-2 shed: 1437.00sft,7) Security post-1: 300.00 sft,8) Security post-2: 300.00 sft,9) RCC mosque building: 3000.00 sft,10) RCCstaff residence building: 12000.00 sft11) RCC officer residence building: 12000.00 sft12) RCC foreignerresidence building: 12000.00 sft13) RCC guest house building: 4500.00 sft14) Corporate office shed:35000.00 sft,15) Temporary dining shed (NDIL): 6000.00 sft,16) Store shed (NDIL): 11600.00 sft,17) Finishedgoods store shed (CFDL): 20000.00 sft,18) Worker dining shed (CFDL): 7620.00 sft,19) Medical & childcareshed (CFDL): 1933.00 sft,20) Warehouse shed (Esses):2496.00 sft,21) Dining shed (Esses): 3300.00 sft.

Number of Occupants : Total number of occupants: 15271.

Exterior FacadeDescription :

01. NDIL: The building is a steel frame structure with infilled masonry wall. Exterior face of the masonry wall isof brick pointing works. The main door of the building is a steel door and the windows are of sliding glass type.

Structural SystemDescription :

01. NDIL: Structural system of this building is steel frame. Foundation is isolated footing. Regular framing. 02.BAL & CFDL: Building is five storied RCC building frame system with one basement. Top floor is made ofsteel shed supported with RCC columns. Overall building frame is monolithic beam slab system supportedwith RCC columns. 03. IKAL - 1: This building is RCC column supported steel truss shed. Foundation isisolated footing. Regular framing. 04. IKAL - 2: This building is a RCC column supported steel truss shed.Foundation is isolated footing. Regular framing. 05. EFL: This building is a RCC column supported steel trussshed. Foundation is isolated footing. Regular framing.

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



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: 01. NDIL: This building is single storied shed, so FoS for the columns basedon preliminary calculation is not required. 02. BAL & CFDL: The FoS of CentralColumns noted below the acceptable limit. So, detail structural assessmentrequired. FoS of columns noted as below: Central Column: 1.68 (Needdetailed Evaluation) Corner Column: 2.73 Edge Column: 2.44 03. IKAL - 1:This building is single storied shed, so FoS for the columns based onPreliminary calculation is not required. 04. IKAL - 2: This building is singlestoried shed, so FoS for the columns based on Preliminary calculation is notrequired. 05. EFL: This building is single storied shed, so FoS for the columnsbased on Preliminary calculation is not required. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: Thisbuilding is single storied shed, so FoS for the columns based on Preliminarycalculation is not required. 06.2 BKL: This building is single storied shed, soFoS for the columns based on Preliminary calculation is not required. 06. 3BDL: This building is single storied shed, so FoS for the columns based onPreliminary calculation is not required. 06.4 BPL: This building is single storiedshed, so FoS for the columns based on Preliminary calculation is not required.07. Head Office: This building is single storied shed, so FoS for the columnsbased on Preliminary calculation is not required. 08. Freshtex: This building issingle storied shed, with 12~ 15 percent mezzanine floor. And, structuraldetails of mezzanine floor is not available. 09. Dining shed: FoS of columnsnoted as below: Corner Column: 7.22, Edge Column:3.15.

Source of Findings: Uploaded Document: Uploaded calculation of FoS, for CFDL, shows that theFoS of Central Columns noted below the acceptable limit.

Suggested Plan ofAction:

Engage a qualified structural engineer and carry out detail structuralassessment, for CFDL only, to identify what remedial action is appropriate,which may include retrofitting. For Freshtex building, engage a qualifiedstructural engineer to confi

Suggested DeadlineDate:

28 Feb 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

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



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



Description: 01. NDIL: There is no preliminary structural assessment done in this building.02. BAL & CFDL: There is a preliminary visual structural assessment carriedout by ACCORD for this building. The report outlines some recommendations.However, no evidence of structural integrity was provided by the preliminarystructural assessment. Instead, they mentioned higher stress columns in twolocations. For ancillary building of CFDL, Dining Shed, lateral stability isclaimed absent. 03. IKAL - 1: There was no preliminary structural assessmentdone in this building. 04. IKAL - 2: There was no preliminary structuralassessment done in this building. 05. EFL: There was no preliminary structuralassessment done in this building. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: There was no preliminarystructural assessment done in this building 06.2 BKL: There was nopreliminary structural assessment done in this building 06. 3 BDL: There wasno preliminary structural assessment done in this building 06.4 BPL: Therewas no preliminary structural assessment done in this building 07. HeadOffice: There was no preliminary structural assessment done in this building08. Freshtex: There was no preliminary structural assessment done in thisbuilding.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Confirmed by reviewing documents.


The recommendations suggested in the Previous Structural Assessment shallbe completed. 1) Building Engineer to check column locations in the mainbuilding structural drawings. 2) Building engineer to check , collect informationand produce ac


28 Feb 2015

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?

Priority Level: Medium


Description: 01. NDIL: There is no clear information available in the design documentregarding the storm surge and wind loadings. 02. BAL & CFDL: There is noclear information available in the design document regarding the storm surgeand wind loadings. 03. IKAL - 1: There is no clear information available in thedesign document regarding the storm surge and wind loadings. 04. IKAL - 2:The building was designed and constructed before 2006. 05. EFL: Thebuilding was designed and constructed before 2006. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: Thereis no clear information available in the design document regarding the stormsurge and wind loadings. 06.2 BKL: There is no clear information available inthe design document regarding the storm surge and wind loadings. 06. 3 BDL:There is no clear information available in the design document regarding the

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



storm surge and wind loadings. 06.4 BPL: There is no clear informationavailable in the design document regarding the storm surge and windloadings. 07. Head Office: There is no clear information available in the designdocument regarding the storm surge and wind loadings. 08. Freshtex: There isno clear information available in the design document regarding the stormsurge and wind loadings.



Engage a qualified structural engineer to confirm satisfactory structuralperformance of the buildings under wind loading or submit detail design reportas per BNBC 1.9.1.1.


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



Description: 01. NDIL: Structural system of this building is steel frame without any bracing.So lateral load system is not apparent and the redundancy is not known. 02.BAL & CFDL: Since there are multiple moment-resisting frames, the lateralload path is clear and redundancy is available. But in the northeast portion ofthe CFDL's 4th floor, few columns near expansion joints are not continuous.Hence, overall load path to resist lateral load is not clear. 03. IKAL - 1: As thisbuilding is an RCC column supported steel truss shed, lateral load system isnot apparent and the redundancy is not known. 04. IKAL - 2: As this building isan RCC column supported steel truss shed, lateral load system is not apparentand the redundancy is not known. 05. EFL: As this building is an RCC columnsupported steel truss shed, lateral load system is not apparent and theredundancy is not known. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: Since there are multiple moment-resisting frames, the lateral load path is clear and redundancy is available.06.2 BKL: Since there are multiple moment-resisting frames, the lateral loadpath is clear and redundancy is available. 06. 3 BDL: Since there are multiplemoment-resisting frames, the lateral load path is clear and redundancy isavailable. 06.4 BPL: Since this building is an RCC column supported steeltruss shed, lateral load system is not apparent and the redundancy is notknown. 07. Head Office: Since this building is an RCC column supported steeltruss shed, lateral load system is not apparent and the redundancy is notknown. 08. Freshtex: As the structural system of this building consists of steelframe without any bracing, lateral load system is not apparent and theredundancy is not known.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Confirmed visually.

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014




Have a qualified structural engineer complete further analysis of the structureand develop a remediation plan if required.


04 Aug 2014

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

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



Description: 01. NDIL: A partial set of structural and architectural drawings is available onsite for review. However, the design report is not available which is required asper BNBC 2006 clause 1.9.1.1. 02. BAL & CFDL: Partial set of structural andarchitectural drawings is available on site for review. However, the designreport is not available which is required as per BNBC 2006 clause 1.9.1.1. 03.IKAL - 1: A partial set of structural and architectural drawings is available onsite for review. However, the design report is not available which is required asper BNBC 2006 clause 1.9.1.1. 04. IKAL - 2: A partial set of structural andarchitectural drawings is available on site for review. However, the designreport is not available which is required as per BNBC 2006 clause 1.9.1.1. 05.EFL: A partial set of structural and architectural drawings is available on sitefor review. However, the design report is not available which is required as perBNBC 2006 clause 1.9.1.1. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: A partial set of structural andarchitectural drawings is available on site for review. No design report isavailable for review. 06.2 BKL: A partial set of structural and architecturaldrawings is available on site for review. No design report is available forreview. 06. 3 BDL: A partial set of structural and architectural drawings isavailable on site for review. No design report is available for review. 06.4 BPL:A partial set of structural and architectural drawings is available on site forreview. No design report is available for review. 07. Head Office: A partial setof structural and architectural drawings is available on site for review. Nodesign report is available for review. 08. Freshtex: Structural drawings areincomplete. Detail drawings like sections, joints of the superstructure membersare missing in structural drawings, only foundation drawing are available, nodesign report is also available.



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


04 Aug 2014

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



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

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



Description: 01. NDIL: The building is constructed after 2006. However, there is noindication that the building has been designed considering the seismic andwind load. 02. BAL & CFDL: The building was constructed between 2006 to2007. However, there is no indication that the building was designedconsidering the seismic and wind load. 03. IKAL - 1: The building wasconstructed after 2006. However, there is no indication that the building hasbeen designed taking into consideration the seismic and wind load. 04. IKAL -2: The building was designed and constructed before 2006. 05. EFL: Thebuilding was designed and constructed before 2006. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: Thebuilding was designed and constructed before 2006 06.2 BKL: The buildingwas designed and constructed before 2006 06. 3 BDL: The building wasdesigned and constructed before 2006 06.4 BPL: The building was designedand constructed before 2006 07. Head Office: From documents review,Windload criteria and seismic loading criteria are not indicated in the structuraldrawings. But the building was constructed in 2007. 08. Freshtex: The buildingwas constructed in 2004. However, there is no indication that the building hasbeen design taking into consideration the seismic and wind load.



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

Suggested Deadline 04 Aug 2014

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



Date:

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.17 Design for Lateral Loads and 2006BNBC Part 6 Section 1.5

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: 1) BAL & CFDL: There are five water tanks. One of them is placed in thecenter of the rooftop with a capacity of 2000 liter. The other four are 5000 litereach, with two located on the north end and the other two on the south end.There is no analytical information on the provision of these tanks in the design.2) Freshtex: This building is single storied steel frame structure, 61865 SF totalarea, 11468 SF area is mezzanine floor. Most loads are rest on grade andaccordingly transferred to the ground below. No major overloading inmezzanine floor or concentrated loading has been found. No concentratedloads have been observed for the rest of the buildings.



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.


28 Feb 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: 01. NDIL: This building is single storied steel frame structure. All loads areresting on grade and accordingly transferred to the ground below. 02. BAL &CFDL: The density of operation in the 4th floor's N-E and S-E portion exceeds42 psf due to the four 5000 liter water tanks on the rooftop and fabric rollslocated on the 3rd floor. 03. IKAL - 1: This building is single storied shed,where all loads resting on grade and accordingly transferring to the groundbelow. 04. IKAL - 2: This building is single storied shed, all loads are rest ongrade and accordingly transferred to the ground below. 05. EFL: This buildingis single storied shed, all loads are rest on grade and accordingly transferredto the ground below. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL:The density of operation does notexceed 42 psf. 06.2 BKL: The density of operation does not exceed 42 psf. 06.3 BDL: The density of operation does not exceed 42 psf. 06.4 BPL: The

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



density of operation does not exceed 42 psf. 07. Head Office: The density ofoperation does not exceed 42 psf. 08. Freshtex: The density of operation doesnot exceed 42 psf.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual assessment shows that 01. NDIL


For CFDL, have a qualified structural engineer confirm that capacity to supportthe load is available. Load Plans complying with Alliance Standard Part 8Section 8.20.4.3 should also be developed.


13 Aug 2014

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

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



Description: 01. NDIL: The building is designed and constructed after 2006 but there is noindication that the design accommodates the requirement of BNBC 2006. 02.BAL & CFDL: The building is designed and constructed during 2006 ~ 2007,but there is no indication that the design accommodates the requirement ofBNBC 2006. 03. IKAL - 1: The building is designed and constructed after 2006but there is no indication that the design accommodates the requirement ofBNBC 2006. 04. IKAL - 2: The building was designed and constructed before2006. 05. EFL: The building was designed and constructed before 2006. 06.Beximco: 06.1 BTL: The building was designed and constructed before 200606.2 BKL: The building was designed and constructed before 2006 06. 3 BDL:The building was designed and constructed before 2006 06.4 BPL: Thebuilding is designed and constructed after 2006 but there is no indication thatthe design accommodates the requirement of BNBC 2006. 07. Head Office:The building is designed and constructed after 2006 but there is no indicationthat the design accommodates the requirement of BNBC 2006. 08. Freshtex:The building was constructed in 2004. And, building code is not indicated insubmitted approval plan. No structural details, including design report, isavailable for the building.



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


04 Aug 2014

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

Structural System Construction

Question: Is the structural system free of distress, separations, or cracking that indicates

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



lack of performance or overstress of the lateral load-carrying system?


Non-Compliance Level:

Description: Significant crack is noted in ceiling of Beximco Ltd. Woven Unit (1-st RC;inverted beam slab)

Source of Findings:


Engage a qualified structural engineer to provide additional investigation andprovide a remediation plan if required.


15 Oct 2014

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: 01. NDIL: This building is a steel frame structure. 02. BAL & CFDL: Thestructural members constructed with MCAC have not been investigated by anappropriate program of in-situ testing and representative destructive testing orcore samples. The column stress calculated taking into account the strength ofconcrete shows overstress at 2045 psi. 03. IKAL - 1: The structural membersconstructed with MCAC have not been investigated by an appropriate programof in-situ testing and representative destructive testing or core samples. 04.IKAL - 2: The structural members constructed with MCAC have not beeninvestigated by an appropriate program of in-situ testing and representativedestructive testing or core samples. 05. EFL: The structural membersconstructed with MCAC have not been investigated by an appropriate programof in-situ testing and representative destructive testing or core samples. 06.BL: 06.1 BTL: Stone chips is used for construction of columns. 06.2 BKL:Stone chips is used for construction of columns. 06. 3 BDL: Stone chips isused for construction of columns. 06.4 BPL: The structural membersconstructed with MCAC have not been investigated by an appropriate programof in-situ testing and representative destructive testing or core samples. 07.Head Office: The structural members constructed with MCAC have not beeninvestigated by an appropriate program of in-situ testing and representativedestructive testing or core samples. 08. Freshtex: This building is a steel framestructure.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual inspection and calculation shows that In CFDLbuilding, the columns constructed of MCAC are overstressed. The FoS is 1.68fo central columns.


For CFDL building, conduct detailed structural assessment by qualifiedstructural engineer and carry out remedial action as necessary. As part of thedetailed assessment outlined, conduct destructive core testing to validate thein-situ concrete compressi

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014




28 Feb 2015

Standard: Reference Alliance Standards Part 7 Building Materials Section 7.2 Masonry-chip aggregate 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: 01. NDIL: There are racks which are not braced for earthquake force. 02. BAL& CFDL: In the store room, there are racks which are not braced forearthquake force. There are 5 plastic water tanks with considerable height,which are not braced or anchored properly. 03. IKAL - 1: There are rackswhich are not braced for earthquake force. 04. IKAL - 2: There are racks whichare not braced for earthquake force. 05. EFL: There are racks which are notbraced for earthquake force. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: There is no non-structuralmember which are required to be braced. 06.2 BKL: There is no non-structuralmember which are required to be braced. 06. 3 BDL: There is no non-structural member which are required to be braced. 06.4 BPL: There is nonon-structural member which are required to be braced. 07. Head Office:There is no non-structural member which are required to be braced. 08.Freshtex: In the storage room on the ground floor, there are racks which arenot braced for earthquake force. 09. Dining shed: There are two UPVC watertanks on the premise of dining shed and some racks at ground floor whichneed bracing and anchorage. No unbraced non-structural elements have beenobserved at rest of the buildings.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: This item reveals by Visual Assessment. 01. NDIL


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


04 Aug 2014

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

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



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



Description: 01. NDIL: Dampness has been found in infilled masonry walls . 02. BAL &CFDL: Dampness has been found in first and basement floor of the building.03. IKAL - 1: No major sign of efflorescence, dampness is found inside thearea. 04. IKAL - 2: Dampness has been found in infilled masonry walls . 05.EFL: Dampness has been found in infilled masonry walls . 06. BL: 06.1 BTL:Dampness has been found in infilled masonry walls. 06.2 BKL: There is nodampness, standing water found on roof top. 06. 3 BDL: There is nodampness, standing water found on roof top. 06.4 BPL: There is nodampness, standing water found on roof top. 07. Head Office: There is nodampness, standing water found on roof top. 08. Freshtex: No major sign ofefflorescence, dampness is found inside the area. Only sign of corrosion hasbeen found in bottom of the steel columns, in the southeast corner of the shed,which requires immediate maintenance. No distress has been observed for therest of the buildings.



Under guidance from a qualified structural engineer, address all areas ofneeded maintenance by correcting the identified issues.


04 Aug 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.26 Durability and Maintenance

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



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



Description: 01. NDIL: There are no sign of corrosion in the steel members of the structure.02. BAL & CFDL: There is no sign of corrosion in the steel members of thestructure. 03. IKAL - 1: There are no sign of corrosion in the steel members ofthe structure. 04. IKAL - 2: There are sign of corrosion in the steel members ofthe structure. 05. EFL: There are no sign of corrosion in the steel members ofthe structure. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: The Structural steel members is free ofcorrosion, physical damage or other types of deterioration. 06.2 BKL: TheStructural steel members is free of corrosion, physical damage or other typesof deterioration. 06. 3 BDL: The Structural steel members is free of corrosion,physical damage or other types of deterioration. 06.4 BPL: The Structural steelmembers is free of corrosion, physical damage or other types of deterioration.07. Head Office: The Structural steel members is free of corrosion, physicaldamage or other types of deterioration. 08. Freshtex: There is no sign ofcorrosion in the steel members of the structure.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: This item reveals by Visual Assessment.


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


04 Aug 2014

Standard: Alliance Standard Part 8 Section 8.26

Question: Is expansion joint material free from cracking and other forms of deterioration?

Priority Level: Low


Description: 01. NDIL: There is no expansion joint in the building. 02. BAL & CFDL:Existing expansion joints not properly constructed and maintained. 03. IKAL -1: There is no expansion joint in the building. 04. IKAL - 2: There is noexpansion joint in the building. 05. EFL: There is no expansion joint in thebuilding. 06. BL: 06.1 BTL: There is no expansion joint in the building. 06.2BKL: There is no expansion joint in the building. 06. 3 BDL: There is noexpansion joint in the building. 06.4 BPL: There is no expansion joint in thebuilding. 07. Head Office: There is no expansion joint in the building. 08.Freshtex:There is no expansion joint in the building.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual inspection shows that 01. NDIL


For CFDL building only, remove all the blockages from expansion joints forthem to be free for taking up the expansion.


05 Aug 2014


FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



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: 01. NDIL: There is no sign of water intrusion, ponding or dampness due to lackof performance of the façade. 02. BAL & CFDL: There are sign of dampnessand water intrusion on the exterior walls of the building. due to lack ofperformance of the façade.This needs to be remedied. 03. IKAL - 1: There isno sign of water intrusion, ponding or dampness due to lack of performance ofthe façade. 04. IKAL - 2: There is no sign of water intrusion, ponding ordampness due to lack of performance of the façade. 05. EFL: There are signof dampness on the exterior walls of the building. This needs to be remedied.06. BL: 06.1 BTL: There is no sign of water intrusion, ponding or dampnessdue to lack of performance of the façade. 06.2 BKL: There is no sign of waterintrusion, ponding or dampness due to lack of performance of the façade. 06.3 BDL: There is no sign of water intrusion, ponding or dampness due to lack ofperformance of the façade. 06.4 BPL: There is no sign of water intrusion,ponding or dampness due to lack of performance of the façade. 07. HeadOffice: There is no sign of water intrusion, ponding or dampness due to lack ofperformance of the façade. 08. Freshtex: There is no sign of water intrusion,ponding or dampness due to lack of performance of the façade.



Repair the exterior façade system to prevent water intrusion.


04 Aug 2014


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: There is no such program that ensures the designated load in each floor to notbe exceeded.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Confirmed by reviewing documents., Visual Assessment,Document Review: Confirmed by reviewing documents., Visual Assessment


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.


04 Aug 2014

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 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: There are no floor load plan available showing the actual maximumoperational loading that is allowable in every factory building .

Source of Findings: Document Review: Document unavailable., Visual Assessment, DocumentReview: Document unavailable., Visual Assessment


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


04 Aug 2014

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 is prepared and posted in any of the buildings.



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 all buildings.


04 Aug 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 floor load plan is available for all the buildings. There is no marking on thefloor walls to designate spaces and height for storage of work materials,except few storage areas in ancillary buildings.

Source of Findings: Visual Assessment: Visual assessment shows that the floor load plan is

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014



available for all the buildings. There is no marking on the floor walls todesignate spaces and height for storage of work materials, except few storageareas in ancillary buildings.


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


04 Aug 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: There is no designated representative (Factory Load Manager), who is on sitefull time, trained regarding the structural floor capacity, and serves as anongoing vendor resource and monitor of operational factory floor loadings.

Source of Findings: Document Review: Confirmed by reviewing documents., Visual Assessment,Document Review: Confirmed by reviewing documents., Visual Assessment


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


04 Aug 2014

Standard: Alliance Standards Part 8 Section 8.9 Factory Load Manager

FactoryName:




Date: 17 Jun 2014

