Join our Mailing List!
Sign up to receive our regular emails with details of new products and special offers.
Sign up to receive our regular emails with details of new products and special offers.
With the general election looming there is a lot of political hot air flying around about the billions to be saved from stemming government waste and delivering efficiency savings within the State Apparatus. A report last week by a Commons Select Committee shows how difficult this will be.
It was some time ago that this Government announced its plans to “modernize” the Fire and Rescue Services (FRS) which included FiReContol – the creation of nine super regional control (read call) centre’s to replace the 49 local centre’s. The FRS network was generally opposed and highly suspicious that the real motive was manpower reduction not service improvement.
The report published appropriately on April Fool’s day by the Communities and Local Government Committee of MP’s damned the project as “inadequately planned, poorly executed and badly managed leaving it in a precarious position”. The IT element is in its usual mess and the report concludes that there is currently no agreed project plan with the principle outside contractors. This is truly unbelievable incompetence that would be unacceptable in any other organization.
The financial figures are dire. The original project costs have risen from a projected £120 million in 2004 to £460million today whilst the projected FRS efficiency saving have plummeted from 28% of running costs per annum to just 9% down from £28 million to £6million /annum in cash terms and falling. Overall the project that was intended to save the taxpayer £86million is now projected to end in negative territory to the tune of £240 million.
The CLG argued that not all the money has been wasted. They had built 9 bright new shiny Control Centres and 3 even had furniture and IT equipment. Of course they are nowhere near operational and the project is already 2 years behind schedule.
Given the amount of our cash already spent the Committee conceded it is arguably too late to cancel the project but warned that unless the CLG department can secure “urgent agreement on a viable project plan in which the main stakeholders can have confidence”, cancellation was not ruled out.
And therein is the rub. For now at least there is no legal compulsion for the main stakeholders, the local Fire and Rescue Services, to integrate their services into the FiReControl project. As most were against the idea in the first place I can’t see them rushing to opt in if and when it finally gets operational.
Responding to the report, fire minister Shahid Malik – yes we have a minister for fire – said: “I believe the project is in a better position than ever before” from which we can only conclude it had been a whole lot worse if that were possible!!
Meanwhile the professionals in our local FRS’s continue to make significant strides to reduce accidental house fires. My own town registered a 25% reduction in 2009 over 2008 with fire injuries down 90% since 2006 thanks to community safety initiatives like free home checks, education in schools and free smoke alarms. Letting the experts do their job and encouraging them to look for efficiency savings that do not reduce fire safety will save the economy far more than the FiReControl project ever will.
Tony
The fire performance of modern methods of construction used in timber frame buildings came under the spotlight at an insurance industry event earlier this month. The insurance industry has a pretty significant influence on what can and can’t be built given that being refused insurance would make the building unsellable.
The RISCAuthority (“The Risk Insight, Strategy and Control Authority”, formerly InFireS), who organized the Seminar, represents many UK insurers with a remit to research and develop risk mitigation measures against fire and security risks. It publishes extensive guides and recommendations for risk mitigation in the areas of Fire and Security. The Risc Authority’s seminar was held in the wake of recent large fires in timber frame buildings and construction sites in London.
I am quite a fan of Timber Frame houses particularly the more aesthetically pleasing homes I have seen featured on Grand Designs. The Timber framed constructions at the centre of this story were more pragmatic multi occupancy affordable housing that utilized the twin benefits of using environmentally sustainable materials and being quick and presumably cheaper to construct than the usual concrete and steel methods.
As far as I can make out timber framed buildings present no greater risk from fire than conventional constructions and pretty detailed industry standards and building regulations are in place to ensure it stays that way. The evidence suggests the greatest fire risk is during construction rather than in completed buildings.
This begs the question as to how the Regulatory Reform (Fire safety) Order applies to construction sites. Clearly it must but by their very nature the potential fire risks on construction sites will be a constantly moving target, giving the Responsible Persons quite a headache to ensure conformity during every stage of the process.
There is also the cost factor. Economic reality dictates that although site safety is clearly paramount it is impracticable to be conducting interminable Risk Assessments and implementing fire measures that are quickly redundant.
The fire safety industry has come up with some solutions. Standalone and linkable fire call points and alarms like the Howler range can be installed to suit the site conditions and adapt to changing size. They have the benefit that at the end of construction they can be quickly dismantled and moved to the next site.
Wheeled mobile fire extinguishers are also ideal for this application and can be quickly deployed to counter a fire in any area of the site. Again once the job is done they can be easily moved to a new site location. They also have a far higher fire rating than the smaller portables with capacities up to 100litres.
The RRO also requires specialist construction site signage. This can get expensive if using the corrugated plastic and foam board versions as they are easily damaged and vandalised. The new TUFF Site Signs are virtually indestructible and despite being more expensive they work out cheaper in the long run as they can be used time and time again. The site safety manager therefore has the means to put together a mobile package of fire and safety equipment that can be deployed to suit individual site conditions.
Tony
Much has already been said in these pages regarding Fire Risk Assessments but the legal requirements for Risk Assessments in your place of work doesn’t stop there.
Regulations
The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 2002, also requires you to ensure chemicals and dangerous substances stored, used or sold from the workplace are stored and handled in a way that minimise the attendant risk to employees and visitors of exposure to these substances. You must also ensure that you also minimize the risk of environmental damage through leaks and spills.
DSEAR (Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002) is a further set of regulations concerned specifically with protection against risks from fire, explosion and similar events arising from dangerous substances used or present in the workplace.
Risk assessment
As with Fire Risk Assessments the COSHH and DSEAR risk assessment require employers (and the self employed) to conduct a detailed examination of the work place and working practices to identify any dangerous substances present or liable to be present in the workplace; the work activities involving them and an assessment of any risks (like sources of ignition) that may cause a fire, explosion and similar events that have potential to harm employees and the public.
Conducting a Risk Assessment requires a combination of knowledge of the substances used in the workplace, the hazards they pose and a fairly common sense approach to what constitutes a risk. It is then a case of implementing precautions that minimise this risk. Some typical examples are given below.
Store hazardous chemicals in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions in an appropriate container or cabinet clearly marked with a Hazard warning label. A range of cabinets designed to meet COSHH and DSEAR regulations are available.
Store the minimum quantity of hazardous substances necessary.
Look at the manufacturer’s safety data sheet and store incompatible substances separately.
Keep a spill kit close to storage areas to contain and clean up and leaks or spills that occur. Most approved flammable liquid and COSHH storage cabinets have inbuilt spillage sumps.
Issue staff with appropriate protective clothing (PPE) and ensure adequate ventilation when handling substances.
Make sure that any employees that handle dangerous substances are aware of what to do in the event of a spill or fire.
A risk assessment is required regardless of the quantity of dangerous substance present, and as like the Regulatory reform (fire safety) Order legislation, if you have 5 or more employees you must keep a physical record of the assessment and actions taken.
Finally if your business has oil storage containers, the Control of Pollution (Oil Storage) (England) Regulations 2001 or the Water Environment (Oil Storage) (Scotland) Regulations 2006 may apply.
The oil storage regulations apply if you store oil above ground in containers with a capacity of more than 200 litres. The regulations define Oil to include petrol, heating oil, vegetable and plant oil, and heavy oils such as bitumen and solvents.
You are not affected by the regulations if:
More reading on DSEAR can be found at http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg370.pdf and
COSHH at http://www.coshh-essentials.org.uk/
Tony
In what has been hailed as a landmark decision in Fire Safety the Welsh Assembly members voted on Wednesday 27th Jan this year to make the installation of automatic fire sprinklers compulsory in all new build homes in Wales.
The euphoria amongst the proponents may well be short lived as the Welsh vote is only the first step and now needs to be formally approved in both houses of Westminster before the legislation can receive Royal assent. Allocating parliamentary time this side of the General Election seems highly unlikely and the new incoming Administration may not be so keen on supporting such legislation.
Not that I am in any way against the wider use of automatic sprinklers but I do see some difficulties in enforcing any legislation. The powerful construction industry lobby may well have something to say as it will add a few thousand pounds to building costs. There is also the issue of ensuring regular maintenance and testing which is essential with Automatic Sprinkler Systems and will represent an ongoing annual cost for the householder.
Private and self build home builders could well argue that other equally effective options are available in the form of smoke alarms and the more versatile domestic friendly fire extinguishers like the ABF, that are already reducing the incidence of deaths and injuries from domestic fires. The figures bear this out with official statistics showing sustained year on year falls in death and injuries from domestic fires.
I also think Ronnie King, vice-chairman of the National Fire Sprinkler Network was letting enthusiasm get the better of his judgement in claiming the move would lead to making Wales the safest place in which to live in the United Kingdom. He went so far as comparing Residential Sprinklers to the installation of air bags in cars and added that “in the course of time fire deaths in Wales will be almost eliminated, and the horrific burns injuries reduced by up to 80% because of this wonderful visionary decision taken by the Welsh Assembly government.”
Now the current housing stock in Wales according to the latest Government statistics is 1.4million homes or thereabouts virtually none of which have, or will ever have sprinklers fitted. New house builds are running at around 5000 per year and demolitions at less than 100 a year. You don’t need to do the detailed math’s to see that “in the course of time” to reduce injuries by 80% will take a very, very long time indeed to achieve with sprinklers alone. Centuries in fact. It is akin to saying the World will end on Wednesday without specifying which Wednesday.
With the exception of multi occupancy complexes – where careless or reckless homeowners can put other residents at risk – legislation is arguably not the answer. A continuance of the high profile fire safety awareness campaigns, the free smoke alarm scheme and the low cost of alternative fire safety equipment will continue to make our homes a safer place. Promoting the undoubted benefits of sprinkler systems should obviously continue, but on the basis of choice and affordability rather than law enforcement.
Tony
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 rumbles on out into the business community and increasingly solicits frantic enquiries as to what it entails and how to conform. Now any small business out there can get hold of a copy and read it.
Visit www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/20051541.htm#53 but be warned it is not an easy read.
Here’s a typical clause from the section explaining the “Duties under the Order”.
(3) Any duty imposed by articles 8 to 22 or by regulations made under article 24 on the responsible person in respect of premises shall also be imposed on every person, other than the responsible person referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2), who has, to any extent, control of those premises so far as the requirements relate to matters within his control. ”
Simples!!!
You should also be mindful of the virtually limitless powers afforded the fire inspectors under the act. I quote from article 27 “Powers of inspectors” where ” (1) Subject to the provisions of this article, an inspector may do anything necessary for the purpose of carrying out this Order and any regulations made under it into effect and in particular, so far as may be necessary for that purpose, shall have power to do (so) at any reasonable time.”
This was driven home in no uncertain manner when this July the authorities prosecuted the Church of the Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries International (I could not have made this up) who they “raided”, no better word for it, during a Church Service for 1200 penitent souls, and threw the book at them for breaches of the RRO to the tune of a £30000 fine. A case of too much fire and damnation no doubt.
To help clarify the key provisions I will post a series of tips that will guide you through. To start with you must conduct a formal fire risk assessment. A fire risk assessment helps you identify all the fire hazards and risks in your business premises. The Act does not apply to domestic residences.
You can then decide whether any risks identified are acceptable or whether you need to do something to reduce and or control them. A risk assessment should be carried out by someone who has reasonable experience or knowledge of fire safety. In the RRO’s parlance this could be the Responsible Person or a trained member of staff or external consultant.
There are five basic steps to complete a Risk Assessment.
1. Identify the fire hazards - smokers, machinery, fuel stores, hot plates, heaters, electrical equipment etc
2. Identify people at risk - employees, customers, visitors
3. Evaluating the risks - decide how best to minimise and or control a fire and safeguard those at risk should it occur - typically staff training, means of escape, fire warning bells, fire fighting equipment , signage etc.
4. Record your findings - and put in a safe place with you other health and safety documentation. The inspectors will home in on this as a first step in assessing compliance. The requirement to record your assessment technically applies to businesses employing 5 or more people but I advise you do it anyway.
5. Review and revise - revise the Risk Assessment to record fire equipment maintenance schedules, changes to office layouts, training sessions, new fire safety equipment and added fire risks.
Having completed the Risk Assessment you must then take appropriate actions in line with your findings, putting in place safety management procedures, fire prevention and fire control measures. If you have a particular concern or question regarding the interpretation of the RRO post it here and we will try and help.
Tony
