Author Topic: Fire risk assessment in a factory  (Read 5068 times)

Offline Mushy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« on: January 25, 2008, 09:30:16 PM »
Hi

I came on here not long ago and got some knowledgable replies to my question.

I have another if thats ok

If a fire risk assesser is doing a risk assessment in a factory that has inflammables do they also do the dangerous substance risk assessment too or is that done seperately?

thanks

mushy

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2008, 09:42:44 PM »
The normal scenario would be that the fire safety risk assessment must take account of the presence of any flammable substances from a fire safety point of view only.

Other laws (Care of Substances Hazardous to Health COSHH etc) will dictate that assessments of all such chemicals are undertaken and this will consider the wider implications of having chemicals on site and the risks to humans from touching, breathing, ingesting, spilling, igniting etc that chemical.

It might be the case that both assessments are done by a health and safety expert who is competant to do them both, or it might be the case that a fire safety expert does the first one and the health and safety expert does the second one.  But they will be separate things, albeit with a wee overlap in some areas.

Both assessments should consider "are the quantities of flammable substances kept as low are practical" and "could a non flammable substance be used instead".

Offline Mushy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2008, 09:49:43 PM »
Thanks very much Chris it is much appreciated

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2008, 10:04:50 PM »
No worries, and a happy Burns night to you.

Hopefully some others will wade in with their opinions too.

Offline Redone

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2008, 07:01:18 AM »
Hi Mushy, note any requirements under DSEAR that are complied with or not... found a battery charging station in a lubricant store, 2000lrs of various oils for decanting, ventilation was provided by wedging the fire door open!

Offline kurnal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6489
    • http://www.peakland-fire-safety.co.uk
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2008, 08:54:42 AM »
The DSEAR Regulations (Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regs)  require that where there could be a risk of explosions of vapours, dusts, gases, powers, mists etc  in a workplace that a competent person  should carry out an assessment of the risk and steps taken to eliminate or reduce risk to a residual level. Part of this involves zoning the workplace depending on the liklihood and risk of an explosive atmosphere being present and providing appropriate safety provisions within higher risk zones- intrinsically safe electrical apparatus within a high risk zone for example. Competence to do this is more specifically defined than in other regulations.

The fire risk assessment takes the findings of the DSEAR assessment into account in determining the basic fire precautions for the fire risk assessment- overall level of risk, is the risk well controlled,  travel distances, means of escape, fire fighting equipment.

So whilst there is some overlap  between the two they are considered seperately. Fire assessment would normally find that the residual risk is high leading to short travel distances etc even if the DSEAR hazards are well controlled - due to the potential consequences of a fairly small failure.

Hope this makes some sense. Most of us fire consultants and enforcement officers  are not deemed competent under the DSEAR regs to carry out the DSEAR assessment. Its a special skill - you can do a course at the HSE (BASEEFA division based at  Buxton) I hope to be doing one myself next month.  Whilst I did many years as an petroleum officer this was too specialist to give all round competence.

Offline fireftrm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 673
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2008, 12:45:10 PM »
As Kurnal and Chris say the competence required may not be held by one person, however any Fire Risk Assessment should nto areas that present risks of fire, or in case of fire and the rleevant controls. This would mean taking account of flammable chemicals, or that any products could eb released/affected by involvement in a fire. The control may be to have a separate DSEAR assessment carried out. I pointed out, in another post, that the risk assessment should seek to have the highest level of control and so any FRA should address thjat and not just fire risk controls (electricity and CO2 extinguishers versus electrical safety measures to remove/reduce the hazard beingt he prior example).
My posts reflect my personal views and beliefs and not those of my employer. If I offend anyone it is usually unintentional, please be kind. If it is intentional I guess it will be clear!

Offline John Dragon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 189
Fire risk assessment in a factory
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2008, 09:11:00 PM »
Quote from: Chris Houston
The normal scenario would be that the fire safety risk assessment must take account of the presence of any flammable substances from a fire safety point of view only.

Other laws (Care of Substances Hazardous to Health COSHH etc) will dictate that assessments of all such chemicals are undertaken and this will consider the wider implications of having chemicals on site and the risks to humans from touching, breathing, ingesting, spilling, igniting etc that chemical.

It might be the case that both assessments are done by a health and safety expert who is competant to do them both, or it might be the case that a fire safety expert does the first one and the health and safety expert does the second one.  But they will be separate things, albeit with a wee overlap in some areas.

Both assessments should consider "are the quantities of flammable substances kept as low are practical" and "could a non flammable substance be used instead".
That'll be "CONTROL of substances hazardous to health" won't it?