Today’s Separate and Concurrent Regulatory Approval Process
upstream
downstream
Industry
- Plans are prepared by different professionals independently
- Plans are submitted separately to different agencies at different milestones concurrently
Agencies
- Each of the 7 agencies has a different regulatory mandate
- Comments from one agency may lead to resubmission/ amendment to others
- Approved plans can be conflicting; no single integrated view of the approved plan
Construction
- Plans contain conflicts that need to be resolved during construction
- Rectifications = Abortive Works
- Delayed issuance of TOP/CSC
A key impetus for change is because of today’s fragmented approval process. In today’s process, the industry prepare submissions independently, and they then submit these plans separately to the different regulatory agencies.
This silo working environment is not conducive for coordinated design and regulatory reviews upstream, which often results in iterative submissions as well as conflicting or disjointed building information downstream during construction. This leads to abortive works, or resubmissions which delays TOP/CSC, ultimately affecting construction productivity.
See also:
Latest CORENET X Circulars