In May 2014, the Building Code of Australia changed a range of provisions that pertained to Part 3.1.3 headed ‘Termite Risk Management’ based on advice provided in a TAG ‘Proposal for Change’ that was presented upon to the National Technical Summit of the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) in 2007.

In 2007, TAG was advised in a letter from the ABCB to take the issue to Standards Australia as the ABCB believed the situation could be more appropriately addressed in the first instance through a proposed revision to the Standard (AS 3660.1 – 2000   Termite Management – New Building Work).

It is now a matter of record that the Standards Committee (the BD-074) failed to provide a revision of the Standard until 2014 and further, that the initial draft of AS 3660.1 – 2014 failed to address the issue at all.

Their collective and unanimous advice to TAG in early 2009 was that all of the members of the BD-074 believed that the information in the Termite Management Standards was ‘TECHNICALLY CORRECT!

It clearly was NOT TECHNICALLY CORRECT!

To provide this advice shows that the members either know little about the subject of Termite Management or they were entirely corrupt!

TAG established that the BD-074 was corrupt and had several committee members safeguarding the pecuniary interests of commercial entities from whom they often derived monetary rewards, financial inducements and incentives as employees, contractors, promoters or licencees thereof.

These commercial entities had strong interests in having the Standard continue to falsely promote their products and systems as Termite Barriers with some systems having even being prescriptively-listed in the Standard.

This occurred despite these products and systems being “unable to perform the function for which they were designed for”, in direct deference to a primary tenet of the BCA/NCC which require building products and systems “to be fit for purpose”.

The Standard misled both Homeowners and Builders as to the capacity of these products and systems performance.

In fact, there was NO PERFORMANCE CRITERIA provided by the BD-074 to establish the Barrier Status provided to these products and systems!

ALL TESTING performed by the CSIRO relied upon ‘BRIDGING IMPEDIMENTS’ that prevented ‘BRIDGING ACCESS’ whereby termites could walk straight over the products and systems, as would be the case when these products and systems were emplaced in a structure.

Million Dollar Warranties were trumpeted whilst ‘BRIDGING’ of the product or system was an EXCLUSION – (ie. Not considered to be a product failure!)

Million Dollar Warranties relied on the term “FAILURE OF THE PRODUCT’ and ‘BRIDGING’ was NOT CONSIDERED to be ‘PRODUCT FAILURE’!

SCARY, BUT TRUE!

The reality was that termites could ‘bridge’ these products and systems in minutes and members of the BD-074 knew this to be a fact!

The ABCB and TAG combined to force the BD-074 to AMEND the Standard and REMOVE the word ‘BARRIER” where it applied to termite management systems.

The second draft of the amended Standard removed ALL 156 uses of the word ‘BARRIER’ utilised in the initial draft to provide the second draft of the Standard.

TAG is advised that the NEW Standard will be published in August 2014 whilst the ABCB’s Building Code of Australia (BCA), now discussed as the National Construction Code (NCC), will reference the NEW Standard (i.e. AS 3660.1 -2014 Second Draft) [probably in May 2015 when the next edition of the BCA/NCC is published.

The NCC currently references AS 3660.1 – 2000 until the next publication of the NCC!

Until this time, the NCC references a Standard that continues to mislead all and sundry.

The scary reality is that for fifteen years, about 3-4 million homes have been constructed utilising the wrongful advice provided in the Standard that these products and systems were ‘Termite Barriers’ and for fourteen years the BCA/NCC has advised that NOT ONLY were these products and systems  ‘Termite Barriers’, but also that they provided ‘Termite Protection.

The next question is as to whether the wording or verbiage that replaces the words ‘Termite Barrier’ is either defining or accurate.

‘Termite Barrier’, is now replaced with ‘Termite Management System’!

The Question is “HOW DO THEY MANAGE?”

TAG’s advice is POORLY!

WHY?

Simply because they can be BRIDGED IN MINUTES and INSPECTIONS are generally AN ANNUAL EVENT!

THIS COULD WELL LEAD TO AUSTRALIA’S LARGEST CLASS ACTION.

The bureaucrats and committee members who cobble together these important documents are simply ultracrepidarians.

Faceless men who do not face the consequences of their discombobulated actions in these important matters.