Article 15 of RRO

[CivvyFSO]

Does anyone have a definition of "Serious and Imminent Danger" as per Article 15 of the FSO? (And article 8 of MHSW)

Or, can I have your interpretations of it, as it seems to be causing a difference of opinion here.

Some interpret it as including general fire and fire drills. Others interpret is as a seperate entity. i.e. explosive atmospheres, special risks of spillage/explosion etc that require special procedures / further evacuations / extra quick evacuations.

I am leaning more towards it being relative to the type of procedures you would possibly see more on COMAH sites and around specific process risks, but I seem to find alot of published procedure documents on the internet that seem to address this article with their general fire drills/procedures.

[PhilB]

It simply means You must have procedures in place to evacuate the building in the event of fire...i.e an emergency action plan. Nothing to do with COMAH sites.
Article 16 requires additional procedures if dangerous substances are present.

[jokar]

Whilst this Article is a cut and paste from the Managment Regs, it has a completely different meaning under RR(FS)O.  Why is not clear as evacuation plans are also required under Article 13.  In the drfat of the guide for enforcers the stance is as suggeated above by Phil, the difficulty with that is the meaning associated under MHSWR and its code of practice which H&S professionals have used for a long time.  Perhaps a question to the DCLG website will provide the all important answer.

[CivvyFSO]

Thanks. The reference to COMAH was just to demonstrate the type of 'imminent danger' I was assuming it refers to.

It can seem like all of this should be covered in article 21, training. Or could it be classed as: Article 15 is the responsibility to make these procedures etc, and article 21 is the responsiblity to pass these procedures on to staff through training?

[wee brian]

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmdereg/684/684.pdf

page 44

[CivvyFSO]

Excellent. Issue resolved!

[terry martin]

I agree that Article 15 is the 'emergency action plan' but what about Article 11?
Is that not also about  the 'emergency action plan'? if it is, whats the difference?

[CivvyFSO]

Article 11 is more to do with the management of the preventive and protective measures. i.e Some sort of formalised plan so that the whole fire safety subject is not something that is done once then left to stagnate.

I suspect you are looking at the audit form and not the legislation? If so I would suggest that the audit form is missing the point, as it seems to in other sections too.

[terry martin]

funny you should mention the audit form, it certainly is an issue. i have addressed this issue only to be told flat it is about the EAP. I don't agree.
 I do agree with you that Article 11 is not really about the EAP, i see it being more about ensuring that there is sufficient content contained within the RA, and its management.
 i.e. article 9 states the requirement of a risk assessment and 11 goes on to state what should be considered and/or contained within it.  
 With regards to leaving it to stagnate would'nt this be covered by Article 9 (3)?
Reads as follows:-

Any such assessment must be reviewed by the responsible person regularly so as to keep it up to date particularly if-

(a) there is reason to suspect it is no longer valid; or

(b) there has been a significant change in the matters to which it relates including when the premises, special, technical and organisational measure or organisation of the work undergo significant changes, extensions or conversions.

[CivvyFSO]

I think that is just the review of the risk assessment, not the monitoring/management of fire safety in general.

The risk assessment to me is really just something showing where/what the risks are. Once this assessment has taken place then they can address the risks.

If I am marking someone as compliant for Article 11 it will generally be because fire safety is taken seriously, and they have procedures in place such as daily checks, weekly checks, reporting procedures in place and a system to deal with any faults found.

I split them up as follows:

Article 9: Do they have a good risk assessment that is reviewed 'regularly'?
Article 10: Have they taken preventive and protective measures as appropriate?
Article 11: Are these measures monitored/managed to ensure they remain effective.

i.e. A change in work processes would not necessarily make existing measures ineffective, they would generally create new risks possibly warranting new measures.

This is just the way I see it, I am sure other people will see it all differently, and I am always open to suggestions.

[PhilB]

Article 11 is about managing fire safety planning, organising, controlling, monitoring and reviewing the preventive and protective measures. Nothing in article 11 refers to emergency action plans, they are dealt with in article 15.

The confusion is probably being caused by the audit form that you are using. In my humble opinion that form is seriously flawed.

[wee brian]

Which audit form are we all talking about?

[CivvyFSO]

Its a standardised form for Inspecting Officers to use while 'auditing' someones compliance with the RRO. It is split into sections with reference to each article of the RRO, but some of the condensed 'explanations' of the articles given on the form do not seem to match up with the actual desired meaning of the actual articles. (In my opinion)

[Nearlybaldandgrey]

Always worth keeping a copy of the fire safety order to refer to and get the full written article from.

I have a folder with all the articles on the audit form printed in full with some interpretation as a reference for myself. Works for me!!

[wee brian]

So can anybody get a copy of this dodgy form or is it a secret?