FireNet Community

FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: JC100 on August 12, 2008, 07:55:46 AM

Title: Dd 9999
Post by: JC100 on August 12, 2008, 07:55:46 AM
Does anyone know if this is has been released as a BS? I thought it was still in draft form but have seen a course in november advertised on BS 9999:2008 Code of practice: Fire safety in the design, Management and use of buildings. I can't find the standard anywhere though apart from as a DD.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: CivvyFSO on August 12, 2008, 09:03:18 AM
I think it is scheduled for about September. It was released earlier in the year as a BS DPC (Draft for Public Comment) and comments were due in before some time in May IIRC.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: The Colonel on August 12, 2008, 12:57:56 PM
Friend of mine is a FSO and on return from a course had indicated that we can expect it to hit the streets in the next couple of months
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: Ricardo on August 12, 2008, 05:04:23 PM
It is one of the topics to be covered in a workshop at this years BAFSA conference in November at Chepstow
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on August 12, 2008, 07:12:49 PM
As in a different thread on the subject of BS 9999 in the technical section, the BS is due out in October 2008.  It will replace all of the BS 5588 series apart from part 1 which will stay.  The 5588 series will be available to run alonside 9999 for 6 months and will then be removed.

The document is a large tome of 500 plus pages and is quite contradictory in its clauses.  I have been reading through a proofed copy sent to the printers and found errors in it.  It also contradicts and challenges some of the sections of ADB which I find disconcerting.  The risk assessed methodology also is quite difficult to get your head around and because the document is a cut down version of the 5588 series there is alot of cross referencing of clauses which is quite liable to drive a reader mad.  One section, clause 19.1 has 9 x references in 9 lines and I am lost as to what it actually means.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: Davo on September 19, 2008, 02:01:42 PM
Jokar

Have you any update on this, please?
FPA are offering one day courses starting 14 Oct London on to Taunton in January 2009
I would rather not book (20 Nov York) unless I know the BS is out

In regard to your comments, shifting from travel distances to travel times etc as you say, there will be a lot of fingers in the air!

davo
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on September 24, 2008, 02:34:21 PM
No,

I am attending a 2 day course on 7 and 8 October which is being put on by the ABE at which we will get a full copy.  As far as I am aware the 1 October is the key date.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: Fishy on September 24, 2008, 04:06:51 PM
Will be issued on Monday 6th of October.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on September 24, 2008, 04:35:58 PM
Thats close then.  Hope I get a proper copy for the 7th.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: JC100 on October 09, 2008, 08:09:07 AM
Quote from: jokar
No,

I am attending a 2 day course on 7 and 8 October which is being put on by the ABE at which we will get a full copy.  As far as I am aware the 1 October is the key date.
I'm on a course run by ABE in November, how was it? Has the BS been released and is it definatley not replacing 5588-1?
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: Nearlybaldandgrey on October 09, 2008, 04:21:54 PM
October 13th is the release date .......
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on October 09, 2008, 08:36:06 PM
No its been put back to 15 October, no year stated though.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: nearlythere on October 10, 2008, 08:01:18 AM
Assuming that DD9999 will be introduced, has the FRA approach to fire safety suddenly grown horns and teeth and turning into a monster. What was initially a common sense approach by employers to fire assessment in the workplace, which was portrayed as something that they could quite comfortably carry out, has turned into something that more and more employers will be less capable, never mind competant, of doing. Can you imagine handing DD9999 to an average employer and telling him that this is the standard of FRA expected.
This is red tape gone mad which was not the intention, according to its architects.
Good for Fire Risk Assessors. Pretty horrific for someone trying to run a business. Can certainly see most private sector employers willing to take a chance and not doing one unless they are required to for registration or licensing purposes.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on October 10, 2008, 08:30:40 AM
Really, the BS is a design guide and we will have some large buildings with extended travel but probably covered by sprinklers and AFD.  The major problem will be when they change the use and the risk profile changes and have to increase the numbers of exits and protection.  I think that the safe way for new builds is for the FRS or other enforcer to issue Alterations Notices to these premises once built.  Trying to risk assess a premises, part of a builiding, that have been built to 9999 will be difficult if the assessor does not understand the ethos and ethics of the design.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: nearlythere on October 10, 2008, 09:08:03 AM
Quote from: jokar
I think that the safe way for new builds is for the FRS or other enforcer to issue Alterations Notices to these premises once built.
Not quite sure I get your drift here jokar. Can you elaborate please?
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on October 10, 2008, 09:19:53 AM
The risk profiling isspecific to a building or building design.  If you change the use, say from an office to a shop, the risk profile changes and the factors that make up the profile are different.  Therefore, the travel distances, exit widths and type of alarm can change with a change of use.  This could end up with narrower exits for doors and stairs and longer travel than the risk profile would allow.  The only way to monitior this as it would not necessarily appear in an FRA is for the enforcer to issue an Alterations Notice to ensure that they are consulted with regard to what was agreed at design stage.  Afetr all, now it is an existing building it is the ebforcer role to enforce under the RR(FS)O.  Quite difficult to explain in words, you have to understand the tables, all 16 of them, and how they make up the risk profile.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: wee brian on October 10, 2008, 09:31:38 AM
Why would you want to monitor this - it's no different from any other premises.

When the risk changes - revisit the FRA. If the Travels distances and door widths are inadequate then do something about it.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: nearlythere on October 10, 2008, 10:00:52 AM
Quote from: wee brian
Why would you want to monitor this - it's no different from any other premises.

When the risk changes - revisit the FRA. If the Travels distances and door widths are inadequate then do something about it.
Thats what I would have thought. If the purpose use substantial changes then approach it as if it is its first FRA. A FRA is completed for the purpose use not what it may have the potential to be at a later date. If someone changes the purpose use then he has a duty to review the FRA just as he has a duty to complete one in the first place.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: CivvyFSO on October 10, 2008, 10:05:09 AM
It is also classed as a guide for risk assessing existing buildings. I agree that risk assessors need to have a good knowledge of this, as do inspecting officers.

Why should we go to the extent of issuing alterations notices? Even if a risk profile changes, it is up to the RP to comply with the RRO regardless of what the building used to be used for.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: jokar on October 10, 2008, 11:45:32 AM
So, FRS are not interested in the fact that a premises changes to allow the consumption of alcohol, licensed or not, and the travel distances, stair widths and door widths decreases by 25% as indicated in 9999 but no one does anything about it as in an FRA the premises are still an office but a significant finding is that the MD  can have a swift half in his office.  Seems a little strange to me.  But hey, all I was doing is highlighting something that is new and suggesting a solution.  Normally FRS are very prescriptive in their outlook but in this case they will not be proactive in their approach.

Never mind the advent of 9999 as a BS will be interesting.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: CivvyFSO on October 10, 2008, 12:14:59 PM
I see where you are coming from, but FRS will not want to put alteration notices on all premises built to BS9999. I could see a law suit coming from BSI if we even suggested we might.

FWIW, some Fire Engineering companies have challenged FRS's trying to put alteration notices on extensively engineered buildings and have often won. (Well, won or FRS backed down) There is quite a bit of inconsistency with how FRS's deal with alterations notices nationally so I cannot speak on behalf of any particular FRS.
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: Davo on October 12, 2008, 07:49:42 PM
If you are out there Mr Todd sir, lets have your opinion on 9999

ta v much

davo
Title: Dd 9999
Post by: Davo on October 13, 2008, 10:20:20 AM
Ladies and Gents

Its out !

on ihs/tech indexes if you have access

davo