Comments please. Property protection & environmental issues.

[novascot]

I have recently seen the audit proforma which FRS's will use for auditing FRA's in Scotland. I don't know if England & Wales will be the same but there are requirements on this form which have not been legislated for.

ie. Property protection & environmental issues. There is no provision or requirement for the responsible person to evaluate these topics in the Fire ( Scotland) Act Part 3 2005 or The Fire safety (Scotland) Regulations 2006.

Can some FSO working in Scotland (or anyone else with any comment) tell me if there have been time trials to complete this form by FSOs  and was there any training given to them to estimate fire spread and timeline/square area of damage? Also there is a section regarding whether the fire will stay in the room of origin (ROO) or spread and where will it spread and how long will it take to get to full room/corridor/building involvement.

Again what training has been given.

So the BFPEM is not dead?

[wee brian]

Whilst the Responsible person is not required to deal with these things the Fire and Rescue Authority is. As I understand it the audit form isnt just about compliance but it also covers intelligence gathering for firefighting.

[Pip]

thats right, part of the form is about data gathering to build up a risk profile to feed into IRMP's,the other part is about compliance with the FSO.

[novascot]

Thank you both.

How long is it expectred to take an FSO to complete this audit?

Again what training has been given to be accurate in the Fire Performance part of the form?

[CivvyFSO]

It is only really an estimate to work out the potential loss so that a suitable amount of appliances can be sent.

Imagine you own a 3000m2 factory, all open plan, fuel all over the place.
Someone else owns a 2 storey office, 100m2 per floor, compartmented to building regs.
Both are set on fire at the same time.
FRA have 4 available appliances nearby.
The data given will immediately point towards 3 of the appliances going to your factory (depending on the life risk) and they can also start pulling in resources from further afield.

I am sure you can see it doesn't need an exact science to facilitate this.

(Average time for an audit seems to be about 5-6 hours in total.)

[Mike Buckley]

Unless things have changed the information is used to work out a Pre Determined Attendance. Hence in CivvyFSO's example the 3000 building would have an initial attendence of more appliances than the smaller office building. In the old days of the risk areas the attendance was initially determined on the area hence a building in an "A" risk area would get three pumping appliances within a specific time no matter what it was. The Local Fire Service could then increase the attendance if they considered it necessary (Special Risks) but there was no time scale for the extra appliances.
The situation now appears to be that the brigades work out the attendance required, on the risk posed by the premises hence the need for the information gathering. It is not based on the number of appliances available. So if the factory is judged to need three appliances and its nearest fire station only has two then an appliance from another station is mobilised to the factory.
One of the jobs of the staff in the control room is to ensure that there are always appliances available to answer other calls. So if the factory is on fire and all three appliances are committed to the fire, the control room will move other appliances in to fill the hole. So even if the incident is the size of Buncefield there will still be appliances ready to respond to other calls.
If you look at it from the corner shop principal, the problem is not how many pots of strawberry jam you sell but to make sure there are always enough pots of jam available for people to buy.

[val]

Novascott

Unless Scottish one is very different, it doesn't matter much if the data collection is accurate or not. Look at the scoring behind the form. Sprinklers move the score by up to 20 points....fire alarm and most other sections by about 0.00000000001. Never quite got my head around it all.

[novascot]

Hello Val,
thanks for the door brochure.
If it doesn't matter about the accuracy, why do it at all.

As you say Val to subtract 20 points just because the building has sprinklers is a bit much. What about all walls in rooms being 1 hour FR? That will keep the fire in the ROO until the arrival of the F&RS. Don't you take 20 points off for that?
It will do the same job as sprinklers.

Strange way of thinking. Lets do this fantastic new way of working out the PDA, but hey, it doesn't really matter how accurate it is?

It could have been a great concept if resources had been made available for proper training.
This is Building Fire Performance Evaluation Methodology in disguise. There are courses available for this.
Give me a call I still have my notes. haha

[CivvyFSO]

The relative risk score is related to the inspection frequency, the sprinklers will make that frequency longer but will not necessarily mean that less appliances are sent in the event of fire. If 1 hour compartmentation means  the largest area that can be affected by fire is 100m2 then that might alter the number of appliances.

There are 3 sections of data on the form, 1 is for FSEC, which is the compartmentation/life risk/community importance/value/firefighter risk/environmental risk data etc, that part is directly related to turnout. Another is for the compliance level which gives an 'enforcement expectation' (i.e. You don't comply with RRFSO hardly at all, enforcement is likely but also dependant on other factors) and the final section helps fine tune the relative risk level, which alongside the compliance give a reinspection frequency.

Alot of IO where I am agree that sprinklers seem to knock too much off, but I am guessing that is all backed up by statistics that prove the efficiency of sprinklers on containing/extinguishing a fire.

Another thing to think about is sprinklers as part of an engineered solution. Does that also mean the risk is less when its part of a system of various elements all relying on each other for the maths to work? The data is blind to the difference between life/property protection or when it is a compensatory feature.

[Pip]

The relative risk score is related to the inspection frequency, the sprinklers will make that frequency longer but will not necessarily mean that less appliances are sent in the event of fire. If 1 hour compartmentation means  the largest area that can be affected by fire is 100m2 then that might alter the number of appliances.

There are 3 sections of data on the form, 1 is for FSEC, which is the compartmentation/life risk/community importance/value/firefighter risk/environmental risk data etc, that part is directly related to turnout. Another is for the compliance level which gives an 'enforcement expectation' (i.e. You don't comply with RRFSO hardly at all, enforcement is likely but also dependant on other factors) and the final section helps fine tune the relative risk level, which alongside the compliance give a reinspection frequency.

Alot of IO where I am agree that sprinklers seem to knock too much off, but I am guessing that is all backed up by statistics that prove the efficiency of sprinklers on containing/extinguishing a fire.

Another thing to think about is sprinklers as part of an engineered solution. Does that also mean the risk is less when its part of a system of various elements all relying on each other for the maths to work? The data is blind to the difference between life/property protection or when it is a compensatory feature.

Well done-couldn't have put it across better!

[novascot]

Hello Civvy FSO and thanks for the input. Regarding sprinklers and stastistics;

"Alot of IO where I am agree that sprinklers seem to knock too much off, but I am guessing that is all backed up by statistics that prove the efficiency of sprinklers on containing/extinguishing a fire."

For years there has been a push towards encouragiing more premises to have buildings protected by sprinkler systems. There is a requirement in Scotland now for new build Res Care homes to have sprinklers fitted. There is at the present time a survey being carried out to do the same with new build schools.

This has very little to do with life safety but everything to do with the required Pre-Determined Attendance and getting the numbers of wholetime fire-fighters down.

There is a huge political agenda behind the gathering of these statistics.

[ian gough]

London have done a survey of fires attended by the brigade and where a sprinkler has actuated. It makes for impressive reading. If you want further details try the BAFSA website: www.basa.org or contact me.

Other brigades should do similar, so that you and your colleagues novascot, can speak with some authority on this topic. Indeed, my old brigade did this before I became convinced of the benefits. They do work you know!

[wee brian]

Sprinklers are much more effective than firefighters. But they cant cut you out of a car!

[ian gough]

Correct again Wee B!

[wee brian]

I'm an expert you know.