FireNet Community
THE REGULATORY REFORM (FIRE SAFETY) ORDER 2005 => Guides and Legislation Links => Topic started by: jokar on September 30, 2006, 09:41:29 AM
-
The new Procedural Manual of Building Controal and Approved Inspectors consulatation is available from the Planning Portal. Have a read, it gives more information on RR(FS)O and the Governments expectation. Can anyone tell me what FRS have to do now other than comment on B5 or BS5588 Part 5?
-
Jokar
Yes, DCLG have rejigged their website again! Have they nothing better to do???
Eventually used the search engine but still can't find it.
A web thingy would be v useful, ta
davo
-
Try this link for the PDF version of the guidance.
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDFs_firesafety.pdf
-
Having just had a quick look at the guidance it is interesting to note the the guidance clearly states that " There should be no need for extra building work to be undertaken at the end of a building project and before the building can be occupied for its intended use".
I have carried out a number of recent fire risk assessments in new buildings where in my opinion they have not complied with building regulations or systems have not complied with British Standards. When the omissions are raised the stock answer from the architect or developer is " The Building Inspector have issued a completion certificate so it must be OK".
They seem not understand what the purpose of the fire risk asessment is. They may be still thinking of the statutory bar which applied to the Fire Precautions Act. This not the case with the RRO.
Examples of omissins I have encounterd recently are fire exits in a nurserys where cot evacuation is used, discharging onto steep sloped grassed areas, exit doors with no fire alarm break glass call points adjacent, no test facilities on emergency light systems, Fire resisting doors not fitted with smoke seals, sliding doors on exit routes.
The difficulty for the building occupier is that they move into what they think is a nice new safe
building and then are advised that there are areas of fire safety that need to be addressed.
I hope this guide will help to reduce this happening BUT I will wait and see, my experience is that it will be a fight all the way.
If others are encounting this on new buildings I would be interested in how they have dealt with it as many archirects and builders having obtained the completion certificate and their Fee are just not interested.
-
The link I found is slighty different:
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/BR_PDFs_firesafety.pdf
edit note: No its not it just shortens it when posted - Cheers!!
-
Interseting isn't it. In this brave new world of self regulation that the presriptive standards of the Builiding Regulations are not totally enforced within the guidance, and I do stress guidance that is available and that in a number of the cases recommendations in other guidance is not complied ie BS5839 as posted above. As correvtly identified, there is no Statutory Bar and the government document on consultation states that further work should not be needed once the certificate is issued. My question is, where is a Fire Risk Assessment in that?
-
The magic word here is "should". If the BCB and the FRA have worked together with the design team
Clearly if somebody has screwed up then the FRA may(should?) pick it up. Of course the BCO may have decided that full compliance with a particular standard was not necessary (risk assessment).
On the other hand he may just have been overworked like everybody else and didnt spot the non compliance.
If anybody on the site has never made a mistake or missed something they should have picked up then I would be interested in hearing from them.
-
Without going into the principles of the procedural guidance it is much more basic than that, in the words of a fire safety consultant, formulating a strategy in support of a poorly designed building ;
" I am not here to provide fire precautions that are achievable, I am here to atain building regs. approval"
There is a difference in the two, particularly when clients can shop around for building control bodies, to provide a cost effective ! solution to approval.
Following the introduction of the RRfsO, it is now up to FRS to grasp the nettle and issue 'enforcement notices or alterations notices' and enforce them robustly, this should send a message to developers/and designers etc. to build buildings that are safe with flexibility in use, as part of the design brief. Also certain fire safety consultants are using creative accountancy to atain building regs approval.
Risk assessment should not be part of Building regs. unless they can be specific at the time of building as to the use and owners etc. as many designers etc. state they have risk assessed the fire strategy before they know the occupier or specific use, they use generic titles that suit their purpose of providing cheap building costs and unsatisfactory buildings. I am not an advocate of 'prescriptive' codes but a believer in honesty and integrity ( I know how naive) . If designers,consultants and now building control bodies, did not have a financial incentive there would not be the problems now appearing.
Sorry for that rant !!