5306 Part 9: 2015.......thoughts???

[TFEM]

With the introduction of the above how will it affect third party suppliers?

Many extinguisher companies do not buy their parts from the original manufacturers and I see this standard as restricting their business. Will these third party suppliers be offering the "verified alternative declaration"? Will the extinguisher manufacturers allow them to or will they themselves offer it?

I hear that this will lead to a "no refill....buy new" policy. Is this right?

John

[wee brian]

The stuff you are suggesting is the sort of stuff that standards should not be able to do. I'm not familiar with the one you are looking at but it sounds like either you've got it wrong or the standard is defective.

[AnthonyB]

One supplier of third party refills has verified fire ratings for their additives so you can ensure you choose the right one, e.g. not using a 13A:113B fill in a 27A:183B extinguisher.

To be fair a lot of people don't fill, most others will ignore it, it's only the BAFE members that may be affected (expect the number of "Condemned - No spares" units to go up)

[kurnal]

Anthony this query from TFEM was a new one on me- I wondered if you might be able to find a few minutes  give us one of your potted summaries on the new part 9?

[TFEM]

Anthony......surely it's the extinguisher manufacturer that should be verifying that third party components are acceptable and not the third party supplier??

Wee Brian......this was my thought also. It's restrictive business practice.

I just find it difficult in a day when the quality of new equipment is far better than it has been ever before to now adopt an approach of "throw it away and buy new". How do you ethically tell a customer who uses an extinguisher that is 2 years old/6 months old/installed yesterday that he has to chuck it and buy new?

I don't like the way this industry is going.

John

[Fishy]

Had a quick look - seems simply to recommend that when you're refilling you use either OEM parts or parts for which the supplier has offered a 'Declaration of conformity', which is a "...statement by the manufacturer and/or supplier of a component or medium that a verified alternative ... is fit for the purpose for which it is to be used and that it ensures the continued safety, reliability and performance of the extinguisher...".  Can't see much wrong with that?  Parts can come from wherever so long as they have the DoC?

[TFEM]

Additional detailed labels to be applied (or existing labels re-designed). COSHH/MSDS data sheets to be supplied. All extra costs.

"to be fair a lot of people don't fill"........this standard will be a further contribution to the throwaway culture.

John

[AnthonyB]

I've not checked that the supplier who has the rated fills can supply a DoC certificate, I'll ask them. I doubt anyone is bothered about complying in any large number as otherwise the supplier, who does labels, would no doubt stock them.

I think that this part of the BS will be more ignored than any other realistically - I've seen no drop off in the sale of generic spare parts either such as universal O-rings, cheap copies of OK pins, etc.

Kurnal - in essence the standard is saying only genuine manufacturer's parts & refill agents can be used unless an alternative has been verified as not affecting performance and is accompanied by a Declaration of Conformity by the supplier or manufacturer of the component.
Stickers have to be applied where non OEM parts have been used.

Taken to the daft extreme you could end up with a vast array of identical parts on your van if you had to stick to OEM (especially if they brand them).

[kurnal]

Thanks Anthony. Does this mean that stickers have to be applied where there is no declaration of conformity or in all cases where none OEM parts are used?

Is there a prescribed form of wording for the sticker? If so would it frighten off the client?

Sounds like the BSI / fire extinguisher trade shooting itself in the foot again? The Chinese manufacturers of tat will be laughing all the way to the bank yet again!

[AnthonyB]

In all cases - if you use something non OEM without a DoC then you are non compliant.

Other than perhaps in specialised risk industries, where performance to fire rating is key the risks are no doubt low and it seems that fire ratings aren't being used for provision much these days anyway, installation appears to be based on mass and type like the pre rating days!

[kurnal]

On reading the new standard I agree with Anthony that there appears to be no major cause for concern. The standard is clear that where non OEM refills are used, a label should be affixed to show the details of the company carrying out the work and the refill products used in order that users have access to the correct MSDS.

Where non OEM refills are used the standard prescribes the following wording be displayed on a label "The performance of this extinguisher may vary in relation to its original marking".

The information on both labels may be combined on a single label.

[wee brian]

Where non OEM refills are used the standard prescribes the following wording be displayed on a label "The performance of this extinguisher may vary in relation to its original marking".

I'm reminded of a certain car manufacturer! its a silly thing to say really. The extinguisher is either OK, or it isn't.

[Mike Buckley]

In short all the loving calcultions I have done to find out how many fire extinguishers were needed have now gone out of the window because the 21A fire extinguisher is now no longer a 21A extinguisher after it has been serviced. Hey ho back to one every 400 sq. m.!

[kurnal]

Clearly the biggest limitation in terms of fire fighting performance is the skill of the user. Few of us could achieve the fire ratings against the test fire scenarios. Taking Wee Brians point perhaps we should have similar stickers on fire doors, fire alarms and euro fire exit signs.

"The performance of this exit sign may not be universally effective and some persons may misunderstand its intent". The sticker should be readable at the same viewing distance as the sign and be based on graphical symbols. Now as the sticker may be misunderstood every sticker should have an explanatory sticker adjacent to it...........  

big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite em........

And perhaps stickers may be the answer to Volkswagens current problems?

[wee brian]

Its clearly some good old fashioned protectionism by the manufacturers that sit on this committee. Something that BSI should have picked up.