| Fire laws fuel confusion |
|
|
The UK is sleep-walking into a potential crisis after fire laws changed last month, warns the Passive Fire Protection Federation. B&E hears from Chairman David Sugden about how developers, contractors and subcontractors could be caught up in the confusion. THE LAW on fire prevention and safety changed last month, but many building owners and contractors are unaware of the new order and its implications. As of 1 October, Fire Certificates will be defunct, but since the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (RRFSO) became law, there has been little coverage of this major event.The Government’s efforts to alert industry to the changes have been late, low key and woefully inadequate. With a “junk mail” style flyer and a 140-page document to download, it has “done its bit” as the budget would allow. Media coverage so far has been limited to the odd column in the back pages. The new fire law is fundamentally different from previous regulations and focuses on fire prevention. This will become the responsibility of the owner or nominated person in commercial businesses, shops and enterprises. The “responsible person” has to assess and maintain a building’s fire safety. Contractors and subcontractors working on a building may also be responsible. Nominated individuals must take responsibility for the safety of staff and buildings by conducting a risk assessment of active and passive fire protective elements. Passive fire protection measures should be built into buildings to ensure safe escape routes and prevent fires spreading, and risk assessments under the RRFSO must specifically cover these. But still, few people are prepared for the new responsibilities, or their potential impact. According to the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), a comprehensive self-assessment must be carried out. This includes identifying where a fire can start and who will be affected. The assessor must work out how to reduce risk and how to train staff. The assessment will then be reviewed and revised. The nominated responsible person is accountable for this assessment and ultimately the safety of the building and those in it, but how do they know what they are looking for or indeed how to check it? If the assessor gets the required fire risk assessment wrong, or ignores the requirement, lives are endangered, and businesses put at risk as their insurances may be void. Ultimately, those responsible are personally and criminally liable. But people don’t know what they’re looking for, or how to look for it. Most fire protection measures should be built into the fabric of a building – but how many will check beyond sprinklers and alarms? The Passive Fire Protection Federation (PFPF) advises identifying all Fire Separating Elements (FSEs). These are walls and ceilings that divide the building into manageable areas of risk. FSEs are in place to keep fire and smoke from spreading through the building. They limit fire and smoke damage and allow active measures such as sprinklers time to control the fire. The Construction Design and Management regulations 1994 (CDM) record all the safety processes for buildings from design to occupancy stage. When assessing the need for passive fire protection measures in buildings it is essential to refer to the CDM file. If a building is more than 12 years old and not covered by CDM it is advisable to speak to the local Fire Authority who will be able to give advice tailored to the specific premises. Any changes will have to meet the regulations. In newbuild, however, the basic requirements are set out in Approved Document B by the DCLG and should form the basis of passive fire protection in any new buildings unless a fire engineering study was part of the original design. Passive fire protection measures may have been improved to a suitable standard that the responsible person is satisfied with. But how can the average employee deem what is suitable and safe with so little available support? Without considerable training they would not understand or be able to recognise the need, for example, for detailed door gaps and closers, fire rated penetration seals, fire rated ductwork or properly fitted fire rated glazing. Indeed, even measuring the risk of major parts of a building such as incomplete fire separating elements or damage to structural steel protection, can only be done by a trained professional. Yet, if problems are recognised, the responsible person has the added task of employing accredited installers who have to prove their knowledge and ability through third party schemes. Even if the responsible person decides to outsource the risk assessment to a suitably qualified third party or installation contractor it does not absolve them from their liability in any small way, in the event of a claim that results from fire. This highlights the extent and gravity of the responsibility allocated to the nominated person. Indeed, if the Risk Assessment is not carried out or the procedures for doing so are not in place then the building insurance may well be invalidated and the responsible person may be fined or prosecuted. The aftermath of the new laws really centres on the responsibility of the nominated person in carrying out a complete Risk Assessment. However, that person needs to be trained and fully educated in active and passive fire protection; therefore the PFPF and Local Fire Authorities must continue to ensure that training and support is both available and widely publicised. |
