From insufficient specifications to missing risk data, it has become increasingly clear that incomplete information is a major cause of BSR (Building Safety Regulator) rejections. Kevin Mangan, Technical Director at K Systems explores how standardised product data, consistent information requirements, and better digital tools could improve the quality of Gateway 2 submissions, especially in higher-risk façade and EWI systems.
The housebuilding sector is under increasing pressure to meet government targets to deliver 1.5 million homes by 2030.They must also do this against a backdrop of stricter performance expectations driven by the Building Safety Act, the Future Homes Standard and wider sustainability requirements. The challenge facing housebuilders and specifiers is not just building more homes, but building them safely, compliantly and at pace.
Insufficient specification detail
One of the biggest obstacles to progress is not materials or methods, but information. Gateway 2 submissions are often delayed or rejected because they do not clearly demonstrate what products are being used, where they are located, what risks they are addressing and how they will perform throughout the building’s lifecycle.When the documentation is fragmented or of poor quality, regulators have to interpret the intended design which can lead to queries, revisions and delayed approvals.
From a BSR perspective, this information is critical. The regulator needs confidence that what is being proposed can be built safely, will perform as intended over its life, and aligns with the ‘golden thread’ of building safety information. When submissions rely on generic specifications, outdated data sheets or assumptions that will be ‘resolved on site’, that confidence simply isn’t there.
The complexity of housing design is increasing with regulatory changesimpacting and reshaping internal layouts, fabric performance and façade design. At the same time, labour shortages are pushing the industry towards more standardised, system-based approaches. In theory, this should make Gateway 2 submissions easier but only if those systems are clearly defined, properly tested and consistently specified.
Standardised product data
This is where standardised product data and digital tools can make a tangible difference. Clear, structured datasets covering fire classification, thermal performance, durability, installation requirements and warranty acceptance can reduce ambiguity and improve submission quality. When this information is embedded into digital design workflows early, rather than bolted on at the end, it supports better decision-making and fewer late-stage substitutions.
For specifiers, early collaboration is no longer optional. Engaging with manufacturers and installers at design stage helps ensure that proposed façade and EWI systems are suitable, compliant and buildable. It also means that the information required by the regulator is readily available, accurate and consistent.
Ultimately, faster BSR approvals are unlikely to come from regulatory shortcuts. They will come from better information that is shared earlier, structured more clearly and backed by robust evidence. For an industry under pressure to deliver at scale, getting this right could be one of the most effective ways to build safely at scale.
For more information please visit K Systems
