Portable appliance testing

[lyledunn]

Local council here in NI are required to assess the suitability and sufficiency of FRAs provided as part of the application process for entertainments licence. The officers carrying out these assessments of assessments have no significant background or qualification to do so other than one training-day with a certain Mr CT. I am a technical advisor for the Federation of Clubs in NI and I note that many clubs are being served with Notices from Council advising that they are in breach of the Fire Safety Regulations (NI) Order 2010.
Primary reasons given are;
No portable appliance testing
Staff not trained to use fire extinguishers
No evidence of fire drills being carried out.
Lack of recording of monthly testing of Emergency lighting, weekly checks on fire alarms.
I regard drill routines as an essential ingredient of any fire safety strategy, however, it seems that the implication is that portable appliance testing, whilst a useful tool in prevention, has become mandatory by the back door. I cannot see the point of a club carrying out a FRA, for the assessor to acknowledge in the action plan that appliance testing should be considered only to find that his judgement has been usurped by a council officers requirement!

[Dunbar]

PAT is a pain as enforcers can use it as an indicator of an establishments commitment to fire safety and therefore it represents a tick in a box. Realistically they should have it done but there is no need for annual testing and indeed I have been unable to find anything in guidance that suggests  annual testing is required.

I can see their point of view; no fire log book, no PAT testing no evac drills no staff training etc etc = no interest in fire safety. It is a fairly accurate assessment of the pub and club sector. Not 'all' pub and club owners/managers I fully appreciate that; but many are just too busy trying to make a living that the other regulated stuff drops off the radar.

I don't think there is any harm in the council bringing fire back on the radar as long as it is proportionate, as in many small bars the punters will just fall out of in a fire. However some are dangerous and in the event of a fire there could be serious injury or death. Check out the After Dark club in Bolton. That was a night club which got shut down immediately by the FRS and who knows how many thousands of innocent young people had been put at risk whilst enjoying a night out in that club. Thankfully fires are rare and therefore the unsafe clubs and pubs in the UK that open night after night after night get away with it and no harm comes to those on the premises.

[kurnal]

I don't try and defend ill trained and inexperienced officials who in some cases have never read the legislation or  guidance let alone understand it but there is another angle to this. The local council do have a wider remit under H&S and licensing  legislation that encompasses far more than fire safety issues.

 The Electricity at Work Regs are primarily about the safe use of electricity and protection against shock, remember the bad old days when many entertainers were electrocuted by their microphones and guitars. But good enforcement procedures require that for any requirement they should clearly and accurately identify the source legislation and guidance.

[nearlythere]

and indeed I have been unable to find anything in guidance that suggests  annual testing is required.

You won't Kinsale because the frequency of testing is by risk assessment.

[nearlythere]

 

Local council here in NI are required to assess the suitability and sufficiency of FRAs provided as part of the application process for entertainments licence. The officers carrying out these assessments of assessments have no significant background or qualification to do so other than one training-day with a certain Mr CT. I am a technical advisor for the Federation of Clubs in NI and I note that many clubs are being served with Notices from Council advising that they are in breach of the Fire Safety Regulations (NI) Order 2010.
Primary reasons given are;
No portable appliance testing
Staff not trained to use fire extinguishers
No evidence of fire drills being carried out.
Lack of recording of monthly testing of Emergency lighting, weekly checks on fire alarms.
I regard drill routines as an essential ingredient of any fire safety strategy, however, it seems that the implication is that portable appliance testing, whilst a useful tool in prevention, has become mandatory by the back door. I cannot see the point of a club carrying out a FRA, for the assessor to acknowledge in the action plan that appliance testing should be considered only to find that his judgement has been usurped by a council officers requirement!

The only part of the ISITEE (pat) i see relevant to fire Lyle is the visual examination. And of course the problem is that pat testers test the portable stuff, electricians test the fixed installations and very few test the hardwired gear in the middle.

[hammer1]

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 require that any electrical equipment that has the potential to cause injury is maintained in a safe condition. However, the Regulations do not specify what needs to be done, by whom or how frequently (ie they don't make inspection or testing of electrical appliances a legal requirement, nor do they make it a legal requirement to undertake this annually). The law simply requires an employer to ensure that their electrical equipment is maintained in order to prevent danger. It does not say how this should be done or how often. Employers should take a risk-based approach, considering the type of equipment and what it is being used for. If it is used regularly and moved a lot e.g. a floor cleaner or a kettle, testing (along with visual checks) can be an important part of an effective maintenance regime giving employers confidence that they are doing what is necessary to help them meet their legal duties.

[lyledunn]

NT, the visual inspection is indeed crucial, however, testing may reveal issues that could be potential concerns with respect to an ignition source. For example, an earth fault on an appliance with a solid but corroded earth connection could lead to fault currents that seriously extend disconnection times which in turn could lead to the thermal withstand of the flexible cable and perhaps the cable in the fixed installation being very much exceeded. Or the insulation resistance test may reveal deterioration that might result in arcing, a well documented ignition source.
You can see that I do not discount the value of PAT but it is something that should remain risk-based rather than prescriptive. If it is viewed as a breach of fire safety regulations when it is not done then it becomes prescriptive.

[Mike Buckley]

Check out two publications from the HSE both available from their website (download FREE!!)

Indg 236 (rev2) 2012 Maintaining portable electrical equipment in low risk environments and

HSG 107 (3rd ed) 2013 Maintaining portable electrical equipment.

Both give advice on the frequency of testing (risk assessment) and the type of testing required based on whether the equipment is Class I of Class II.

[Golden]

I would like to add this basic guidance from the HSE to Mike's list - http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg231.pdf - and I send my clients links to  this and HSG 107 in my reports. The original subject was about entertainments where the enforcers have traditionally held more power than the standard enforcing officer but I've heard some inspecting officers are now wanting to see details of an electrical safety strategy as part of a S+S FRA. It won't stop getting more detailed in my opinion so we may as well just get on with it!!

[Messy]

Lyledunn- I have had some experience where local authority licensing teams apply draconian and over the top fire safety measures due to lack of competency.

One example was a pharmacy/store selling alcohol. The outer London licensing team refused to grant a license unless a  maintained emergency light/sign was fitted about the glazed front door set in a fully glazed shopfront onto a busy and well lit high street. But worse than that, they insisted that 2 x mortise locks be removed from the back entrance (which led to a GPs surgery) as it was a MOE and such locks are not permitted. A simple look at my FRA would have shown them the mortise locks were unlocked when the shop was open & for use at night only owing to the amount of thievable drugs and alcohol in store.

We decided to live with the request for the EL/sign, but appealled by phoning a senior manager at the council and sending him a report detailing the simple FS rationale. Unsurprisingly we were successful.

Another London council (with lots of FS experience) didnt want to accept a fire engineered solution for a gentleman's club in the west end of London. The solution involved a shutter automatically closing and separating sleeping accommodation from retail below. The shutter would closed at night. They said they could not accept a shutter closing an escape route. The point was, it didnt block the escape route as an alternative was available. The LA lost that one too.

So if you are not happy with what the LA license teams are saying, appeal and argue as they are not always competent

[Davo]

Hi lyledunn


wot Mike B says!

davo

(can be up to 10 years frequency.....)