Peter Barker, Head of Consultancy, Chiltern International Fire, discusses fire risk management and the importance of following up the fire risk assessment.

One of the most important tasks for facilities managers is to ensure that there are robust fire precautions and emergency evacuation procedures in place to safeguard employees in the event of fire. This has always been a prime responsibility for any employer. However, when the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order (RRFSO) came into effect in October 2006, it greatly changed the fire safety philosophy for England & Wales, moving towards adaptable, risk-based, fire safety management. Legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland sets out broadly similar requirements.

The RRFSO requires that all premises must appoint:

• A responsible person – this could be the employer, occupier or owner of the building, often the facilities manager, who must carry out a fire risk assessment (FRA), provide adequate ‘general fire precautions’, consider the safety of all relevant persons, record both the significant findings and the control measures taken and provide adequate training for staff.
• A competent person – who must have ‘sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities to properly assist in undertaking the prevention and protection measures’. He/she will assist the responsible person to fulfil his/her duties (it is possible to have a ‘competent responsible person’).

In a large organisation, the appointment of a competent person would often fall within the remit of the facilities manager, who might choose to source a specialist fire and safety consultancy to advise on all aspects of fire risk management.

The FRA will report back any significant findings - any element(s) of the building or business operation that could pose a threat to the life safety of the occupants in the event of a fire, the perceived risk level and therefore the urgency with which any risk needs to be reduced or removed. It will be the duty of the responsible person – whether they have carried out the FRA or nominated a competent person to do so on their behalf - to ensure that the findings are acted on and implemented.

One of the most common issues identified by risk assessment process is whether the fire doors are capable of providing the required fire resistance. In the majority of cases, where the fire resistance of a door cannot be clearly established because of its age, condition and/or lack of supporting evidence, this will be highlighted within a risk assessment. It might state nothing more, however, than ‘ensure doors are rated for X minutes in accordance with BS476: Part 22: 1987’.

Although this is not particularly helpful, it does make the responsible person aware that

• A particular door should be fire-rated;
• The door has been deemed potentially inadequate for X minutes’ fire resistance
• The door must provide X minutes’ fire resistance to maintain the compartment line.

The door(s) in question may have to be upgraded to meet the required fire resistance, or replaced with new ones. Small to medium-sized companies, in our experience, will tend to opt for upgrading, because it is seen to be cheaper, quicker and easier than replacing the doors – and it is preferable in terms of waste.

Numerous products on the market claim to be suitable for upgrading doors to 30/60 minutes’ fire resistance, but not all will be suitable for all the different types of doorsets to be found in buildings. Even after an appropriate upgrading method has been selected, this does not automatically mean that the door will perform for the required period of fire resistance, because no one component of a fire door can be considered in isolation.

Essentially the responsible person has two choices (which are in fact very similar to the choices that have to be made before carrying out the risk assessment in the first place): to decide whether he/she is competent to carry out a survey on the fire doors and to implement the appropriate upgrading measures, or to enlist instead the services of a specialist fire consultancy - which can save money in the long term.

It is also important to understand how a doorset’s fire resistance performance can be drastically altered over time, say through the fitting of incompatible ironmongery. For example, we were contacted by a global organisation to undertake a site survey on existing fire doors at one of its premises. The facilities manager was genuinely shocked to learn that nearly all of the 120 doorsets surveyed were no longer suitable as fire resisting doorsets.

The doors were originally installed in the mid-90s as high quality, proven, fire-rated doorsets, but at some stage security hardware had been installed. Significant proportions of the leaf and frame had been removed and the hardware had interrupted large sections of the perimeter intumescent seals. Until the doors were surveyed, everyone in the building was blissfully unaware that the 60-minute compartment line separating each office/store room/lobby etc had been reduced to as little as 10-15 minutes.

Managing fire risk is as much about what you don’t know as what you do know. Employing a third party for individual areas of fire safety does not extend solely to covering oneself in a court of law, but could potentially save a considerable amount of money, time and effort.

There is little point undertaking a risk assessment if the findings are not implemented fully and correctly. In the eyes of the law, ignorance is no excuse.

Chiltern International Fire Ltd
Stocking Lane
Hughenden Valley
High Wycombe
Buckinghamshire HP14 4ND

t +44 (0) 1494 569800
f +44 (0) 1494 564895
e This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
w www.chilternfire.co.uk