Dangerous Substances

[johno67]

Is there an enforcer out there who could give me some guidance on dangerous substances, please? I believe that the enforcer of the FSO, in cases where dangerous substances (i.e. flammable, explosive etc) are found, has to make a decision on whether the general fire precautions for the premises are adequate in relation to the risk caused by those dangerous substances. How can the enforcer make that decision unless they have a good understanding of the what should be in place to minimise the risk, including storage, protection of processes, maintenance of equipment, not to mention the properties of those dangerous substances? And if it is the case that they require that knowledge, how many enforcers are likely to have it? - any advice or guidance would be greatly appreciated.

[Chris Houston]

These seem like obvious questsions.  I would think that they would need to know about the factors you list, and that most would, but if they didn't they would have the resources to find out.  Just my guesses.......

[jokar]

Not as simple as that.  The RP has to know and undertake the FRA taking into account the danger from substances from and in a fire and their effect on relevant persons.  An enforcer will ask how through the FRA have they provided protection for relevant people from a fire in or on the premises from the dangerous substances and make a judgement on enforcement on how that process has gone.   Articles 12 and 16 make this clear as they are part of the Fire Safety Duties which are the responsibility of the RP and not the enforcer.  The decisions are with the the RP not the enforcer.

[johno67]

Thanks for the replies. Whilst I totally agree with the fact that the decisions and the responsibility are with the RP, am I right in thinking that as an enforcer you would have to have a thorough knowledge of the acceptable standards that should be in place, perhaps to the level that a H&S enforcer would have, in order that you could make a decision on whether you considered the residual risk be to high, medium or low, which would dictate the standards that you would expect in the general fire precautions. Therefore would it be unreasonable to expect the enforcer to be familiar with the DSEAR guides covering, storage, maintenance, etc. I ask as I'm due to deliver training on dangerous substances in the near future and I'm finding it difficult to establish what depth I should be teaching it to, and exactly what should be included.

[finsp]

All of our FSOs are qualified by the APEA in auditing and inspecting under DSEAR, this not only helps with enforcing the FSO but also backs up the countless hours spent on the Fire Service College courses, the main requirement would be to truly understand the Risk assessment process, and how to identify adequate control measures such as those descibed within the RRFSO i.e Articles 8 - 22 +38 with due attention to Article 12 and the associated schedule.

[johno67]

Thanks fin, is the APEA course specific to petrol filling stations or is it more generic and can be applied to all flammable/explosive materials? Would your FSO's be able to look at the storage of drums of a flammable chemical or flammable materials in process in a factory and know what the expected standard of precautions against fire should be, or would they be looking purely to establish that the risk assessment for those dangerous substances had been carried out properly and addressed the requirements listed in the schedule to the FSO?

[kurnal]

You have highlighted a very relevant point johno. Its not just the enforcers that have this problem of all encompassing competence.

Not many competent   fire risk assessors are competent persons in respect of DSEAR.

Not many competent DSEAR assessors are competent fie risk assessors under the RRO.

How far do you go as  fire risk assessor in assessing the risk to basic fire precautions posed by the dangerous substances- - well the DSEAR assessment carried out by the employer  (and enforced by the HSE) should have covered the process risk so its a matter of taking aco**** of the significant findings of this and the control measures recommended, checking as far as you can that the control measures are in place, then making a decision whether the residual level of risk leads to a low, medium or high risk in terms of basic fire precautions, risk of spread of fire, means of escape and alarm etc.

In these cases the DSEAR assessment MUST be carried out first, by a DSEAR competent person.

[CivvyFSO]

I will be quite honest here. I have had minimal training with regards DSEAR. If I see that a premises that has dangerous substances I look carefully at the controls they have in place, I expect to see the safety data sheets available for attending crews, and look at general storage, signage, specific procedures (Nominated fire teams, secondary evacuations etc), spill kits, nominated trained BA wearers in certain situations, capability/use of bunded areas, correct DSEAR zoning and the appropriate standard of electrics in the zones, information supplied to employees/contractors. If I was not confident that issues were addressed then I would be phoning for another officer who would be more experienced in the field, or even phoning the HSE to do a joint inspection. Common sense may go a long way, but it doesn't always stop you missing important details.

With regards COMAH sites, it has been raised as an issue within this brigade that now we are the enforcing authority we need competent officers to inspect them, and it seems to only suitable officers we have are the old HAZMAT trained operational officers who have had FP training also. (But these officers will eventually retire, leaving just us civvys with the appropriate FP experience but no HAZMAT training.) The problem with HAZMAT training is that the HAZMAT courses that are available are looking at the problem from the operational side only. The possible solution here is again, joint inspections with the HSE.

[AndyB]

My impressions are that the Fire brigade are only carrying out the General fire precautions for COMAH sites and that the HSE are still inspecting in terms of process fire precautions (inventories, DSEAR regs etc).
I have a document (Special Premises - Ian Kay - 2nd draft), which is published through CFOA and Cheshire FB, which states this is the case.
I have also had several visits from our local brigade stating they will only audit the buildings and general fire safety of process areas (escape distances, emergency lighting etc), but not the Process fire safety itself.
Is this not the case in your areas?

[jokar]

AndyB, in the RR(FS)O process fire safety is the remit of the HSE.  I believe that one of many problems is that the inclusion of part of DSEAR into the RR(FS)O makes the RP analyse the fire risk from substances which can start or sustain fire.  It also makes enforcing groups auditing premises have to some knowledge of substances as well.

[PhilB]

I believe that one of many problems is that the inclusion of part of DSEAR into the RR(FS)O makes the RP analyse the fire risk from substances which can start or sustain fire.  It also makes enforcing groups auditing premises have to some knowledge of substances as well.

I don't think that this really causes much of a problem. As some posters have correctly pointed out the Fire Safety Order deals with general fire precautions. The HASAW deals with process risks and DSEAR is a relevant statutory provision of the HSAW, again enforced by HSE.

Yes FSOs need to take account of process risks to consider how they may affect the general fire precautions but,  in the scariest places , the RP has a duty to appoint competent persons to assist him in such matters and they can provide any specialist advice that the FSO might need.

Therefore the FSO does not need to have a degree in chemistry or nuclear physics. They do however need to recognise matters of evident concern that should be reported to the HSE and hopefully their training as a fire-fighter will assist in this matter. This does of course open up the can of worms regarding non operational inspectors and in that case there may be additional training required.

Consultants are another matter, and if they do not have the competence to assess the premises they should not be undertaking the task.

[jokar]

PhilB, A number of Brigades now have IO's who have not had firefighter training so there background is not as good as some others.  However, some of the training given to trainees now is not as comprehensive as in the past and with no statutory exams to study for difficult subjects such as chemicals may not be such a good choice for some to read up on.

Without offending anyone, surely it is incumbent on enforcers and others alike to know something.

[PhilB]

Yes Jokar I agree, competence of some FSOs is clearly an issue.

Yes everyone involved needs to know something of the matter but an in depth knowledge of DSEAR or process fire risks is not necessary for enforcers in my opinion.

[johno67]

Many thanks for all the replies, there are some very interesting points. I have come to the conclusion that enforcers of the FSOrder do need to have a reasonable knowledge of DSEAR and the associated guides. Although the processes etc. are the responsibility of the HSE, the FSO will need to understand what should be in place, so he can assess the suitability of the existing general fire precautions. I don't think you can rely on a specialist appointed by the responsible person to tell you if everthing is correct. It would be like sending someone with very little knowledge of fire safety into a premises to assess if the fire risk assessment and existing fire safety protection measures were suitable, then relying on the fire risk assessor (appointed by the responsible person) to tell them if everything is ok. Yes I know it is ultimately the RP who has responsibility, but it is the FSO's responsibility to enforce. If they can't do that what's the point of them being there.

[Mike Buckley]

Just to add a bit of confusion into the matter, bear in mind that the local council will also have an interest in the matter. They enforce the Pollution Prevention and Control Regs which deals with a whole range of processes including those using Volatile Organic Compounds. However looking at the DSEAR regs the HSE has the power to grant exemptions, so to me it does not look clear as to whose responsibilty the enforcement is.