Search Results for: Fire Resistant Glazing

In a recent GGF Regional meeting the topic of conversation was based around the imminent introduction of the Future Homes Standard that has now been published, and what has felt like bombardment of regulatory announcements over the last few years. Consultations, reviews of Harmonised Standards, EU CPR 2024, PAS 24, PAS 2000, and Building Regulation updates, all coming with such frequency that even the most diligent organisations are feeling overwhelmed.

For me though the Construction Product Reform White Paper published on Wednesday 25 February should not be read as another bureaucratic hurdle. It represents a necessary and long‑overdue evolution for the construction sector. A shift from a CE marking system designed primarily to facilitate trade, to one built around safety and accountability, fundamentally building trust across the entire supply chain.

Transparency of Product Information

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry and green paper consultation responses revealed dishonest and misleading marketing and poor-quality product information, making safe specification and installation difficult. The overhauls listed in the new White Paper makes it clear that there will have to be greater transparency around testing and product claims.

For years, the sector has operated in an environment where information is fragmented and often difficult to verify. Product data sits in multiple formats, performance claims are sometimes disconnected from test evidence, and voluntary schemes have operated without consistent oversight. This making extremely difficult as a specifier to compare performance of products side by side.

As the White Paper acknowledges, this has created uneven standards and, in some cases, misleading or incomplete claims making their way into specifications and installations. You overlay this with a complex supply chain, then who takes responsibility when a product is used outside its limitations? The existing regime has struggled to answer these questions with sufficient clarity, particularly for products and systems that fall outside designated standards.

The core principle of the white paper is “safe products, used safely”. However, my take is the central promise of Construction Product Reform is fairness. By introducing explicit duties around product information, traceability and competence, the new regime rewards businesses that already invest in doing things properly. Those with robust test histories, accurate declarations of performance and clear installation guidance will no longer be undercut by competitors relying on vague marketing claims or selective disclosure.

A compliant, successful company under the new regime looks very different from the bare‑minimum operator of the past. It maintains complete and accessible product records, discloses test evidence (including failures where relevant) and ensures that performance claims are aligned with designated standards or, where none exist, the new General Safety Requirement. It understands that UKCA or CE represents constancy with a designated standard, marking is a declaration of performance, not a badge of safety, and what needs to become more visible is the support to various people in the supply chain of its limitations on use.

Just as importantly, it treats competence as part of product safety. For safety‑critical applications such as fire‑resistant glazing, I see installer competence and system‑level assurance becoming integral to compliance, not optional. Quite simply, you need the right skills and knowledge to do the job to the correct standards.  

The OPSS Placing Heat‑Soaking in the Spotlight

The recent Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) report on heat‑soaking should be read as a clear signal of intent. While focused on a specific process, its implications are far broader. The report represents the need for accurate and correct documentation. For the Building Safety Regulator to operate effectively, construction products claims have to be supported by evidence.

Whilst some may see some mistakes on Declaration of Performance (DoPs) as just administrative, incorrect documentation can lead to a significant misspecification. Product information must improve so that those that do provide the best products can clearly demonstrate this and be rewarded for doing so.

Whilst the goal is to align with EU Construction Products Regulation 2024 and updates to designated standards, there may be additional requirements in safety critical products and systems. Factory production controls need to be followed, DoPs need to be accurate and up to date, Initial type testing and production tests must be recorded, and product claims must be supported by evidence.

The big challenge is not just with manufacturers but across the supply chain in ensuring they have the relevant documentation for the products they are specifying or installing, and that when a product is changes the design responsibilities they are taking on. The days of an installer picking up alternate fixings from trade counter on the nearest industrial estate without approval are gone.

Call to Action

The Construction Product Reform recognises that cultural change is as important as legislation. Businesses that embrace digital product information, disclose test histories and invest in competence will find themselves better placed, not only with regulators, but with specifiers, contractors and clients.

In short, the call to action is clear, manufacturers, processors and installers across the glass supply chain should use this moment to audit their product information, and review marketing claims. Transparency is no longer just about compliance; there is a need for integrity both individually and organisationally. Trust in a product doing what it is designed to is the new currency. The challenge is not easy but the sooner you start, the sooner you stand out as the benchmark.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/construction-products-reform-white-paper

The Construction Product Reform White Paper sets the future tone for the construction regulatory framework, the core of the reform is the principle of “safe products, used safely”. Moving away from a system that has in many ways helped facilitating trade toward one centred on product safety, accountability, and trust across the supply chain. Rather than representing another regulatory hurdle, the reform should be viewed as a necessary evolution following systemic failures highlighted by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

UKCA and CE marking are reaffirmed as declarations of performance against designated standards, not assurances of safety. This is not to say that two are not linked but we must move a focus to an understanding of how a product performs not just on its own but part of a system. Under the new regime, safety must be demonstrated through accurate, transparent, and verifiable product information, including clear limitations on use and evidence‑based performance claims.

A central focus of the White Paper is the overhaul of product information transparency. Consultation responses and inquiry findings exposed widespread issues with misleading marketing, fragmented data, selective disclosure of test results, and inconsistent oversight of voluntary schemes. These weaknesses have made it difficult for specifiers and installers to compare products reliably or confirm suitability. The reform introduces explicit duties around product information accuracy, traceability, and accessibility, creating a more level playing field by rewarding businesses that invest in proper testing, honest declarations, and clear installation guidance.

Where designated or harmonised standards do not exist, the introduction of the General Safety Requirement (GSR) provides a mechanism for products to be placed on the market but also how they can specify correctly and safely. Whilst the consultation for GSR has just launched, there are concerns on how this will work where manufacturers make components of wider systems, or where “white labelling” of products is carried out. That said it is likely it will require that manufacturers and suppliers demonstrate that products are safe for their intended and foreseeable use, supported by proportionate and documented evidence. This shifts reliance away from CE marking alone and places greater emphasis on clear product limitations, traceability, and substantiated claims. For the glass and glazing sector, whilst it begins at manufacture, the GSR reinforces that safety must be actively demonstrated, documented, and communicated throughout the supply chain.

The paper also highlights the need for a system-based approach that is supported by competent workforce, who understand the importance of compliance to design, particularly for safety‑critical applications such as fire‑resistant glazing. Installer knowledge, correct specification, and system level assurance are positioned as integral to delivering the safe outcomes.

Regulatory intent is further underlined by the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) report on heat‑soaking. While focused on a specific process, it highlights that documentation errors are no longer minor administrative issues. Inaccurate declarations of performance can directly result in misspecification and unsafe installations. Factory production control, initial type testing, production testing, and evidence‑supported claims must all be accurate, current, and auditable.

Importantly, responsibility extends across the entire glass and glazing supply chain. Substituting products, altering fixings, or deviating from approved systems without evidence now carries clear regulatory risk. Informal or undocumented changes are no longer defensible, the person that makes a change carries design responsibility.

Call to Action for GGF Member Companies

GGF Members should act now. Audit all product information, declarations of performance, and marketing claims for accuracy and alignment with test evidence. Ensure product limitations and conditions of use are clearly communicated and digitally accessible. Review competence in your business, prioritising gaps for safety‑critical work. Construction Product Reform demands not only compliance, but a cultural shift toward transparency, integrity, and evidence‑led decision‑making. Organisations that respond early will not only meet regulatory expectations but set the benchmark for trust and professionalism in the sector.