Fire Alarm Standards in Offices

[jakespop]

I have recently inspected a three storey building used as offices. Alternative external escape from all floors and one protected internal staircase. Existing alarm consists of manual call points with smoke detection in protected staircase and in a couple of risk rooms. I believe this to be sufficient, yet a fire alarm installer has now recommended upgrading to L2 system to comply with new regs. Have I missed something? Any views would be welcome.

[nearlythere]

I have recently inspected a three storey building used as offices. Alternative external escape from all floors and one protected internal staircase. Existing alarm consists of manual call points with smoke detection in protected staircase and in a couple of risk rooms. I believe this to be sufficient, yet a fire alarm installer has now recommended upgrading to L2 system to comply with new regs. Have I missed something? Any views would be welcome.

Key words here are recommended to comply with new regs.
On what grounds should it be and has installer carried out a FRA?

[kurnal]

This is happening everywhere. Too many people are taken in by this - there is a constant drive particularly by one of the big names in the alarm industry to meet sales targets and in the current challenging business climate they are doing this by convincing their maintenance clients that they need to upgrade to L1 "to comply with the new standards".

And the sad thing is that their standing and reputation means that people listen. I specced one office building for a local council as Cat M- it finished up with L1. As a result of this victory the same firm has now convinced them that the perfectly adequate and serviceable L3 system in HQ needs to be replaced with a new L1 system.

[nearlythere]

Jakespop.
Where necessary (whether due to the features of the premises, the activity carried on there, and hazard present or any other relevant circumstances) in order to safeguard the safety of relevant persons, the Responsible Person must ensure that-
(a) the premises are, to the extent that it is appropriate equipped with.........fire detectors and alarms.

It is the responsibility of the Responsible Person to determine the level of detection that should be provided which will be based on the level of fire risk that has been assessed. It may well be none.

[Chris Houston]

In most offices there would be very little difference between an L1 and an L3.

[jakespop]

Thanks for responses. I am actually carrying out the fire risk assessment and if it had no detection at all I would not be concerned. I would assess it as category M, but certainly not L2. I understood there was an amended 5839 just out, has it changed anything in particular. Mr Todd may like to respond???

[Allen Higginson]

I have recently inspected a three storey building used as offices. Alternative external escape from all floors and one protected internal staircase. Existing alarm consists of manual call points with smoke detection in protected staircase and in a couple of risk rooms. I believe this to be sufficient, yet a fire alarm installer has now recommended upgrading to L2 system to comply with new regs. Have I missed something? Any views would be welcome.

Is the access to the internal and external staircases protected by smoke detection (i.e. - the corridors leading to same).
Aside from an L5 system (which is for a specific solution to a specific requirement) the minimum an L4 system would cover is the staircases plus corridors leading them.Additional detection over and above this in areas of specific risk would still be counted as part of the main category design (L4) - presently (and Im assuming that there is a corridor) your current system in this case would not be an L4.An L2 would be additional detection in the corridor plus rooms leading onto it.
However,I agree that the use of the words "recommended" and "to comply" is sales man talk but it may be valid in this case.
Something that might fit this situation is a site I used to maintain in Belfast that was a three storey old house converted into offices.It had a main front door with a front staircase,from which there was access to three offices on each floor.There was also an external rear staircase that the first and second floor offices had access to. Detection had been installed in the front staircase at the ground,first and second floors.My point on this one was that although there was a straight (-ish) corridor within the offices between the two exits there was no protection for this escape route if you were in one of the offices off it.Client was in agreement that,as a minimum,they install detection in the office escape routes to the actual staircases.

[Clevelandfire 3]

In most offices there would be very little difference between an L1 and an L3.

You've lost me there Chris could you ellaborate?

[Chris Houston]

In brief summary L3 = all escape routes and all rooms that open into escape routes. In most offices I see most rooms either are escape routes or open into escape routes.

[kurnal]

Yes fair enough Buzz but a fire risk assessment MAY have found that a single main staircase was satisfactory and the external escape was unnecessary to meet the benchmark guidance standards for this building and the way it is used.There are many old buildings now used for  offices and commercial purposes   that had formerly been residential buildings or had multiple occupiers for which external staircases were required. Many of these are a liability in terms of safety, maintenance costs and security and the owners are often relieved when told that the thing can be dismantled if we focus instead on protection to the single internal staircase.

[jakespop]

Taking into account the guidance in RRO Office guide, these offices have two direction travel, no dead ends, satisfactory travel distance, no high risk process/storage and a protected staircase. I still cannot see why it is necessary to move away from Category M albeit this premises already has limited detection.

[Allen Higginson]

Not being up to brigade assesments etc. - what is the maximum number of employees permitted in a building before a fire alarm is necessary?

[nearlythere]

Not being up to brigade assesments etc. - what is the maximum number of employees permitted in a building before a fire alarm is necessary?

Buzz. Basically under current N.I Legislation a Fire Certificate incorporating a means of giving warning in the event of a fire is required in a building where there is more than 20 persons employed or more than 10 on other than the ground floor (office, shop or factory), a hotel, B&B or guest house where sleeping accommodation is provided for more than 6 persons including staff, a leisure centre owned,managed ansd maintained by a Council, premises requiring a license or permit to operate under the betting and gaming legislation.
Anywhere else it is a recommendation.
When the new fire safety legislation commences next year, similar to mainland legislation, it will be as the FRA determines under the new Order.

[Midland Retty]

Hi Buzzard

The requirement for a fire warning and detection system isn't based on the numbers of persons expected to use the premises.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order states that the responsible person must provide measures for detecting fire and giving warning in case of fire.

In a premises with a simple layout the shout of fire may be sufficient in achieving that requirement, rotary gongs or air horns maybe also be sufficient

However in a larger more complex premsies you might need to look at installing a manually operated fire alarm system consisting of manual call points, alarm sounders and in areas where fire could go undetected you may need to look at providing automatic fire detection.

You might think it rather onerous to provide a comprehensive fire alarm system for just a couple of employees (and in most cases probably would be) but it all depends on the size and layout of the premises, and this in particular is where risk assessment comes into play.

[Allen Higginson]

Hi Buzzard

The requirement for a fire warning and detection system isn't based on the numbers of persons expected to use the premises.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order states that the responsible person must provide measures for detecting fire and giving warning in case of fire.

In a premises with a simple layout the shout of fire may be sufficient in achieving that requirement, rotary gongs or air horns maybe also be sufficient

However in a larger more complex premsies you might need to look at installing a manually operated fire alarm system consisting of manual call points, alarm sounders and in areas where fire could go undetected you may need to look at providing automatic fire detection.

You might think it rather onerous to provide a comprehensive fire alarm system for just a couple of employees (and in most cases probably would be) but it all depends on the size and layout of the premises, and this in particular is where risk assessment comes into play.

See Nearlys post - not quite out of the caves yet!
I agree that a good RA is ideal to determine detection levels,just not confident in those doing RA's!!