At first glance, the casual observer might be forgiven for thinking that fire alarms, though critically important in themselves, have very little impact on the broader business. Yet this is very far from the truth.

New organisation-wide legislation, whether generic or sector-specific, increasingly has implications for alarms and other life safety equipment: as a result, it has become ever more important for employers and those responsible for non-domestic premises to recognise their regulatory obligations and the risks and penalties associated with non-compliance.

Yet it is not surprising that end-user awareness today is typically low. The picture has until recently been both confused and, at times, downright contradictory, with over 120 distinct pieces of fire safety-related legislation, dominated by the Fire Precautions Act 1971 and the Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations 1997.

Historically, it was the responsibility of the enforcing authority to make an assessment of the level of fire safety provision required in each case. The introduction of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (RRFSO) - due to come into effect on 1 April 2006 and designed to rationalise and consolidate all existing fire safety legislation in England and Wales – is the culmination of a shift of responsibility for regulatory compliance to the ‘responsible person’, typically an employer or the occupier or owner of the premises.

In addition, there are a number of pieces of generic and sector-specific regulations that relate to the provision of fire safety equipment as part of a broader environmental or social remit.

The Health & Safety Act 1974 for example, which provides the framework for all related regulation and codes of practice, is designed to ensure that employers provide both ‘a safe place of work’ and ‘safe equipment and systems of work’. As part of this broad imperative to ensure a secure environment for staff, the employer must provide a fire detection and alarm system that confirms to the relevant standards.

In the UK, BS 5839-1:2002 is the code of practice for system design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of all parts of the life safety system, from smoke and heat sensors, call points and sounders to input and output modules and control panels. Under this code of practice, products must conform to a set of European standards: these include BS EN 54 Parts 2 and 4 for control equipment, Part 7 for heat detectors and Part 5 for smoke detectors.

The key to compliance throughout is third party accreditation, with all the relevant regulations placing strong emphasis on the competence of the designer, specifier, installer and maintainer of the fire system. In the event of a problem therefore, not only will a contractor have to provide independent endorsement of their ability to maintain the system to an appropriate standard, but other parties further up the supply chain may similarly have to demonstrate that the system provided was fit for purpose.

Under BS 5839, maintenance must not only be undertaken competently but also regularly. This has two implications. Under the current guidelines, any system should be checked and serviced every six months. In addition, any maintenance programme designed to ensure the continuing ability of the system to do the job must take into account the life expectancy of each component.

In some cases, for example, manufacturers recommend a life of ten years. Maintenance engineers therefore should be aware of any such limitations and consider the need for replacement at the appropriate time.

Having said that, it is common for buildings to undergo a significant change of use during the lifetime of the fire safety system and it likely therefore that changes and upgrades will be made to ensure that it is fully capable of meeting new demands: this will, of course, overtake the need to replace equipment at the end of its effective life.

In general, the basic elements of a fire safety system – comprising call points, heat and smoke detectors and a means of letting occupants know there is a fire in the building - remain the same, whether it is an office block, hotel, airport or factory. In each case however, there will be specific areas of higher risk, which are likely to require specialist equipment.

Though not covered specifically under Health & Safety legislation, effective evacuation procedures will also need to take into account the particular constraints of the individual working environment – whether a 40-storey office block, hospital or hazardous chemicals factory – in order to ensure a ‘safe place of work’.

Another piece of generic legislation which impacts on the provision of fire safety is the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), now fully in effect. Designed to ensure equality of access, under the Act a disabled person is someone with ‘a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities’ – a broad definition, which covers some 10 million people in the UK today.

Historically, fire warning systems have been auditory – typically bells – but under the DDA, a visual means of warning must be provided for the deaf or hearing impaired. Users interpret this requirement in a number of different ways. Some have taken a belt and braces approach, incorporating a visual alarm in every room: others, by contrast, focus on warning a responsible person, who can then alert those unable to hear the alarm.

The increased requirement of auditory devices has forced manufacturers to revisit the technologies involved from several different perspectives. The earlier, and long-established, Xenon flashlight-based devices tended to draw a significant amount of current, which did not present a problem when only a small number were installed in a typical system. With the dramatic increase in the number of devices required as a result of the DDA, LED devices drawing only a few milliamps have been developed, superseding the earlier technology.

In response to the demand for ease of installation, manufacturers have also incorporated visual and auditory alarms within the same device. By integrating a smoke detector, a sounder and a visual warning device within a single unit, only one wiring point is required compared to the earlier three, significantly reducing both cost and complexity.

In addition, regulatory and environmental pressures are starting to impact on fire safety systems. Under the EU’s Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive, now due to come into effect in July 2006 and which seeks to regulate the responsible recycling and disposal of such products, it is as yet unclear as to whether or not all fire safety equipment comes under the scope of the legislation.

In the absence of such clarification however, we have taken the decision that all Morley-IAS by Honeywell (Morley-IAS) and Notifier by Honeywell (Notifier) products should carry the ‘crossed out wheelie bin’ logo and traceability symbol required for all WEEE products produced after 13 August 2005. At the same time, we are monitoring compliance requirements as a potential producer and have advised customers and suppliers accordingly.

For end users and distributors there is no immediate impact with regard to either cost or required action: at the end of each product’s life however (typically around ten years in the case of life safety products), end-users will have to take any applicable products to an approved recycler.

By contrast it is clear that, from a strictly legal standpoint, fire systems products do not come within the scope of the equivalent Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive, designed to reduce the use of environmentally damaging materials in certain manufacturing processes. Yet again, in complying with the broader spirit of the regulation, we are aiming to achieve compliance for Morley and Notifier products by the effective date of July 2006.

Unlike WEEE, the RoHS Directive is self-managing: manufacturers therefore will simply advise customers that their products do not contain any prescribed hazardous substances, a declaration which would need to be substantiated only if challenged.

And finally, under the Construction Products Directive (CPD), any equipment or materials used in building (‘produced for incorporation in a permanent manner in works’) will require a CE mark – a common method of performance evaluation across the EC. In other words, those involved in the manufacture, specification, purchase and use of construction products in any building will require third party approval to ensure compliance with EC regulation.

This has caused a significant level of debate within the industry, with smaller companies in the UK especially concerned over the potentially huge costs associated with achieving compliance. The impact will be significantly less onerous on larger manufacturers, many of whom already have compliant, third-party accredited products: however fire safety products are not a priority under the Directive and it may well be five to ten years before it takes effect in this product area.

In summary therefore, in what is a highly sensitive area, it is essential that users, installers and manufacturers alike stay the right side of the law. After all, non-compliance means much more than a fine or custodial sentence…people’s lives may depend on it.

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend