QP’s Statutory Responsibilities
While the regulatory approval process is being redesigned to improve the current user experience to navigate across multiple regulatory agencies, the regulatory agencies’ respective mandate and regime remains unchanged. Hence, the statutory responsibilities of the appointed QPs under the respective Acts and Regulations remains unchanged.
Under the RABW, part of the process requires joint submission by the relevant QPs within the project teams to the relevant regulatory agencies. To ensure clear delineation of responsibilities, the developer (or whoever is required under the respective Acts and Regulations) needs to first appoint the QP for the respective areas of work at the start of a project. The appointed QP will then be responsible for the relevant aspects of the submission.
Terms and Definitions
For the purpose of this Code of Practice, the following definitions shall apply:
| Term | Definitions | |
|---|---|---|
| RABW | Abbreviation for “Regulatory Approval Process for Building Works”, and refers to the new process involving 3 key sequential submission gateways to all Agencies for one collective and coordinated approval at each gateway. | |
| Gateways | Major submission milestones in CORENET X, where the submission needs to comply with multiple agencies’ statutory requirements at each Gateway.
•Multiple Agency requirements listed under each regulatory agency can be found here. •Multiple Key Gateway requirements listed under each gateway can be found here. | |
| Supporting Mechanisms | Similar to today, there are 3 supporting mechanisms will continue to complement the approval process: 1. Pre-Submission Consultation •Pre-submission consultation will continue to be available for industry to consult or seek clarification prior to submission. 2. Waivers •Where necessary, the industry may apply for waiver under the respective Act and Regulations and the respective agency will assess the applications accordingly. 3. Escalation Mechanism •Industry can table their case to seek resolution on inter-agency regulatory conflicts at the Inter-agency Coordinating Committee (IACC). | |
| Federated Model | Combined Building Information Model that compiles multiple models from different disciplines or sections of the project into a single, complete model of the project.
•Federated models support concurrent authorship of different aspects of the project by multiple parties. •Federated models also support multi-disciplinary coordination as models are geo-referenced to coordinates from the Singapore SVY21 coordinate system (EPSG: 3414) for Easing and Northing (x,y) and Singapore Height Datum (SHD) for Height (z). | |
| IFC-SG | New representations for local regulatory requirements, in the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) openBIM standard. More information of the mapping and configuration files for IFC-SG can be found here. | |
| Level of Details | As long as relevant IFC-SG data requirements are embedded in the respective BIM components and minimum dimensions represented, BIM components do not need to replicate their real-life equivalent. For example, trees can be represented as a lollipop object as long as IFC-SG parameters like “Girth”, “Height” and “Status” are represented. | |
| Non-BIM submissions | Besides BIM submissions in the IFC-SG format, CORENET X will be able to accept non-BIM submissions. | |
| Supplementary Documents | CORENET X will be able to accept non-BIM documentations that accompany each project team’s submission of IFC-SG models (e.g. design calculation reports, 2D supplementary drawings) | |