FSO guides

[black arts]

ok the guides have been out for a week, I would like to hear your views ,comments,
likes, dislikes.
I find an awful amount of duplication extending thoughout the guides.
Apart from attaining extra revenue I cannot legislate for so many guides.
I would like to see a precis of all the guides in one book, but overall the contents are quite good

If you have read any of the guides and have produced a powerpoint lecture please post

[jokar]

Not too many changes from standards that we know and love at the moment.  Slight differneces in the wording of Significant findings and changes to how the 5 steps are looked at but other then that Fire Safety is Fire Safety is.... Yes I have aPPt but against the draft guides and I need to check it against the real deal before it is readily available.

[peanut]

I have a comment.

The guide for sleeping accommodation (page 55) states that an LD2 or LD3 system has "...detectors sited in the escape routes (including rooms that open on to escape routes), detailed in BS 5839-6"

You sure DCLG?  I don't think BS 5839-6 makes any mention of "rooms that open on to escape routes" for an LD2/3 systems.

[jokar]

Peanut.  There will always be gtrammatical and other errrs in these guides due to the process undertaken.  We all see waht we want when drafting things.  We all know what it really means, although unfortunately the RP may not but those who enforce can do a bit of eduaction as well.

[peanut]

Grammatical error?  It is a complete misinterpretation of the BS, and even more unacceptable when you consider who the guides are aimed at - people who won't have access to the BS.

Who writes these guides?  Do they not take the time examine their reference material?  Does nobody read these things before they get printed?  If a mistake like this is so easy to find, imagine what we will find when we scratch the surface.

[jokar]

Only trying to be helpful.  You will probably find many errors if you look hard enough and then the DCLG will revise each one, providing that people let them know.  I am sure Andy Jack at DCLG will embrace your point of view and make the necessary amendments as and when.  As one who didn't want the guides in the 1st instance because of the trials and tribulations that they will bring I can only sympathise with your viewpoint.

[Tom Sutton]

Offices page 16

"Radiation heats the air in the same way as an electric bar heater heats a room."

I would considered the above definition incorrect heating the air is convection not radiation. The second paragraph I accept.

Offices page 7

"Where you agree that there is a need for improvements to your fire precautions but disagree with the enforcing authority on the technical solution to be used (e.g. what type of fire alarm system is needed) you may agree to refer this for independent determination."

By whom?

[val]

Twsutton

Determination will be take place under Article 38 (I think) by a panel set up by the DCLG. Probably a CBI representative, a fire service representative and a civil servant chairing.

We still await details from the DCLG

[val]

Peanut

You are right, there are some errors. This is regrettable but don't think that these haven't been through the mill a hundred times. Every man and his dog, (except you of course), has had their pennys worth.
Believe me...it was really, really difficult to accomodate everyones views.
Give them a chance...they are not only reflecting modernish fire safety but also having to accomodate a non-prescriptive regime.

[fred]

I wonder how long it will be before it is generally accepted, within the Fire Service, that the only opportunity we have ever had, at a key stage in the modernisation process, to establish a direct correlation (if not a common identifer) between fire safety standards, building regulations purpose groups, IRMP inspection categories, and the Fire Service Emergency Cover business identifiers, and mobilisation FDR1 codes has just been lost - probably forever.  It hasn't been a matter of defeat being grasped from the jaws of victory - we never got anywhere near victory.

Interestingly the RRO refers to 'any place' yet the guides seem to be pointed towards the 'main use' of the building.  As a result we are now in a situation where many premises are likely to require more than one guide (pubs with sleeping accommodation for instance)

We now have computer codes that no longer differentiate between a residential care home and a nursing home; 23 levels of life risk (from 2-8 in 0.25 graduations); surgeries that Building Regulations consider are places of Assembly and Recreation, but require the RRO guide on 'Healthcare' ..... and so on and so on

Sorry to bore you chaps with my personal thoughts but what a wasted opportunity.

So sad .....

[PhilB]

Peanut

 Every man and his dog, (except you of course), has had their pennys worth.
Believe me...it was really, really difficult to accomodate everyones views.

If only that were true Val. They only consulted certain stakeholders. Whilst the guides were in draft form I and many others like me gave constructive criticism that was largely ignored. The result, as expected is poor guidance.

One of many examples is the guide for sleeping risks. Take a look at the diagrams showing fire alarm requirements. Bedrooms on upper floors shows AFD in rooms and corridors. In the same building lower floors with no sleeping areas, AFD in corridors only. I would like early warning of a fire in any room in a building containing sleeping risks not just the bedrooms or the floors containing bedrooms.

This is just one example of many errors that will lead to confusion.

[black arts]

I see 274 people have viewed this item, you must have a view please express
right or wrong we will shoot you down!!
Some people have suggested that only certain steakholders were invited to
participate, that might be true, certain steakholders as, consultants ,had a strong vested interest in all areas of training were it is complusary yet other areas are wishywashy.
Others have moaned after the Act and guide notes have come out, well, fire safety has a history of 'stabledoor legislation'
As a serving fire safety officer I'm stuck with it, in two years I too can become a
gamekeeper

[Gasmeter]

Having perused several of the guides, my feeling is that they are generally appropriate for their target audience, bearing in mind the fundamental need not to be prescriptive.  I'm sure there are parts that will need revision and we all have a responsibility to bring those areas to light.

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

But thats what they are ............. Guides, not a book that states "you will do .....", although there is reference to "as a responsible person you must"

I hope that people use the guides, and to good effect, so long as they can be understood!!

[jokar]

Baldyman, the bits you reference that state, must, are absolute duties from the RR(FS)O and just copied out in the Guides for information.  The rest as you say is guidance.  I have read all those in draft and published now and agree that they are a reasonable solution providing all that need to use the guidance in them do so in a reasonable manner.  No "must do" from FRS and reasonable recommendations from consulatants and others.

There is a problem though and that is with HMO's.  A number of local councils and Boroughs in London are using their own guidance which is very prescriptive for these types of premises.  12/92 was repealed on 5 April with the 1985 Housing Act.  New builds, ADB exsisting buildings from 1 October Sleeping Riks Guidance.  In the meantime, what?