Standard for Fire Risk Assessment

[lyledunn]

As someone who is charged with inspecting and testing electrical installations, fire alarm and emergency lighting systems I must reference my determinations to the relevant BS or BSEN.
As part of my inspection routine I will ask for a copy of any FRA and monitoring review that may have taken place. I hail from Northern Ireland where the statutory requirement for a specific fire risk assessment has just recently been introduced. Nonetheless, I find that many of my clients have been quick off the mark and have had the necessary assessment undertaken.
My intention in reviewing these FRAs is to determine whether they might contain information that would help me in my own determinations. Admittedly, I am also a little nosey. Those that I have looked at to date have been incredibly diverse in their substance even though most seem to adhere to a reasonably logical methodology (looks like Sir Colins influence). Many have been very comprehensive and have caused me to review my own findings. Others unfortunately look like they have been the product of a drive-by often lacking specific content. One of the latter type, conducted on a large Golf Club, did not even bother arriving at an evaluation of risk nor did it provide any useful recommendations. For example in the FRA under the general headings of "Emergency Escape Lighting" and "Giving Waring in the Event of Fire" it simply stated that an inspection of the emergency lighting and fire alarm systems should be conducted. I would have thought that any self-respecting assessor would have at least asked to see copies of such Reports (conducted annually in this case).
It is not for me to determine whether these FRAs are suitable and sufficient but at times I would really love to tell my clients that they have wasted their money. Is there a Standard or industry recognised code of practice for these assessments? I would not be long in informing my clients that their recently conducted FRA fell short of a recognised Standard but I would be loathe to engage in a subjective critique.
Regards,
Lyle Dunn

[nearlythere]

Hi Lyle
Whilst others are trying to turn the process into something akin to a technical specification for a space rocket I refer to the good advice given in NIFRS website to help to settle things down and bring everything back to earth again.

Hope you had a nice Xmas.
      

[kurnal]

BS PAS 79 is the best benchmark you will find in terms of approach and methodology.

You are really talking about the diligence and personal qualities of the individual assessor though. Many either cant be bothered to check, are not aware of the relevant standards or dont want to take legal responsibility for their report so hide behing a load of general overviews that simply pass the buck to others. Very common problem and most unfortunate that our industry, I suppose like any other, is ridden with so many such individuals only out to make an easy buck.

[colin todd]

Kurnal is right in his admiration of PAS 79.  Not that I am biased.

[kurnal]

Dont lets get carried away.

"the best benchmark you will find" was my comment.

I remember once being the best looking bloke on the beach and owning the best car in the car park.

I think the report template is poor and dont use it. The general approach is good though.

[Mike Buckley]

I would agree with kurnal PAS 79 is a good benchmark and, if I was reviewing a FRA, I would be looking for all the points in PAS 79 to be covered. If the FRA goes into more detail then all well and good, but if it does not cover the points then there are likely to be problems.

The other aspect you will need to look at is the size and complexity of the property you are looking at, a small shop for example would be well covered by the standard PAS 79 format. However it would be inadequate for something like a shopping centre.

At the end of the day there cannot be one simple format that will cover everything and PAS 79 is the best benchmark we have currently got. Given its history, (see the first issue of the guide for animal accommodation) I would not like to see a standard format produced by the CLG.

[lyledunn]

It seems strange that the whole country is head-long in to obligatory fire risk assessment without the benefit of a recognised National Standard. PAS 79 may be a very sound benchmark but it just simply does not have the weight and esteem of a British Standard. The merit of PAS 79 is in the promulgation of a common approach to reporting and regardless of whether folk love it or hate it, at least it provides a reasonable standard reference. My contention is that it is not enough. Some of the FRAs I have looked at do the professional fire risk assessment industry a mighty disservice. I have no bones to pick but my job requires me to look in at these deliberations and it concerns me that the worth of some is, to say the least, questionable. A British Standard may not be a panacea to squeeze out the fly-bys but I do think that it would bolster the integrity of those true professionals who do make every attempt to produce somethinh worthwhile.
Nearlythere; ditto! The NIFRS website is snazzy and does indeed simplify the various requirements.
Regards,
Lyle Dunn

[Mike Buckley]

"It seems strange that the whole country is head-long in to obligatory fire risk assessment without the benefit of a recognised National Standard"

That's government for you. However risk assessment has been around for a long time it came in with the Health and Safety at Work Act in 1974. As yet there is no National Standard for Health and Safety risk assessments either.

The idea of a standard sounds good until you try to apply it. How do you create a single standard that will work on a small corner shop, the British Museum, Buncefield, Canary Wharf etc.?

[lyledunn]

Mike,
The idea of a standard sounds good until you try to apply it. How do you create a single standard that will work on a small corner shop, the British Museum, Buncefield, Canary Wharf etc.?
They seemed to have been able to manage that for fire alarms, emergency lighting, electrical installations etc. I do not think it beyond our capability if the will is there.
Regards,
Lyle Dunn

[kurnal]

It can work if you are happy to have a thick report full of N/A.

[Midland Retty]

I think we need to look at this from another direction. Its not the template we need to standardise, it is the training and competency of the assessor and auditer.

As we know most Health and Safety practitioners have NEBOSH qualifications, it is a level of competency most employers ask for when employing their own HS Officers or when seeking the services of a consultant.

Maybe we need something similar for the fire industry.

Of course I do recognise that qualification, certification, and accreditation is all well and good and that not eveyone can afford the luxury, but we need standardisation in some shape or form.

[Mike Buckley]

Lyle,

The examples you gave are all "hard" systems where the item can be physically measured and either pass or fail dependant on the result, i.e. for fire alarm systems in hotels, does the fire alarm achieve 75 dB at the bed head?

When it comes to the "softer" more opinion based items it is more difficult i.e. housekeeping, how do you measure housekeeping? The number of litter bins per 100 sqm, how often does the cleaner come in, the percentage of free space on the work bench/desk?

The better way is to govern the assessors via accreditation etc. however the original belief of the government was that anyone could carry out a Fire Risk Assessment just by following the CLG guides which is where the problem started.

[lyledunn]

Mike,
I am an electrical inspecting engineer and I have been carrying out inspections of electrical installations, fire alarm and emergency lighting systems for many years. I often make subjective determinations where the relevant standard is ambiguous or lacking in detail. Standards are not always as prescriptive as you might suggest.
All I am arguing for is a relevant standard. The implications in PAS 79 with respect to what should be considered are fine, they just do not have the authority or esteem of a BS.
I look at the fire statistics and I wonder how any one could conclude that a fire risk assessment carried out by any one other than a well-experienced fire safety professional would address such a ponderous problem.
Yes, fire risk assessment for the duty holder should be undertaken just like, perhaps, a risk assessment of the electrical installation. But I firmly believe that, like electrical installations, buildings should be subject to inspection on a regular basis. That inspection should be carried out by a recognised professional who has a benchmark standard available to him (like BS7671 2008 for electrical installations).

The FRA for a local Club was recently completed by a member of the committee, perhaps eager to prove his worth. It was'nt a bad attempt. He missed any mention of the huge breaches in the compartment walls above the suspended ceilings, the equally huge breaches in the fire curtain in the loft area including the piles of paper and cardboard boxes plonked over the ELV lighting that protruded in to the loft from the lounge below,  the lack of emergency lighting throughout and especially on the external escape stairs etc. etc. Then again he was just a retired school teacher. Still it was all documented on a form not unlike Sir Colins template in PAS 79 so I guess thats ok!
Regards,
Lyle Dunn

[nearlythere]

Hidden holes and gaps above false ceilings is a very common problem Lyle. It's what suspended ceilings do well. Hide multitudes of sins.
Failings in separation of corridors above false ceilings where fire doors are installed is also a very popular sin.

But regarding your point about standards of Assessments one only have to look at FRA templates available from some F&R Service, LG and H&SE websites and compare them with the likes of PAS 79. To me if the enforcement authority makes a very simplistic and basic template available to use for FRAs then they cant really complain when they are used in a simplistic and basic fashion.

[Steven N]

Thats a fair point NT. I do feel though were damned if we do & damned if we don't with regard to the fire risk assessment. Smaller businesses in particular were told it was easy, it wan't rocket science then they find that it isn't. So many of them like a template to follow.