Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Mark Dutton.
Has anybody done a risk assessment specifically for a fire door. Our Fire Officer wants one for each door (27 in total). (Don't ask why he is just being awkward).
I would be grateful if you could share it with me.
Thanks in hope
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Rod Douglas
Mark,
As the "Fire Officer" he/she is the competent person, therfore it should be down to him/her to undertake such Risk Assessments, if he/she won't wear that, I can send you a Template for Fire Risk Assessment and can acess the whole area.
Yours Aye
Rod D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Craven
Mark
As your predecessor at Stockport College, am I correct in thinking that the "Fire Officer" refers to the Station Officer based at the local Fire Station as opposed to the College manager/employee with responsibility for Fire Safety matters?
If so, I have no idea why he should be asking you for a risk assessment for each door but, if that is what he wants, can I suggest that you produce a check-list that considers the following issues:
* Is the door of an appropriate design/thickness?
* Is any glazing in the doors of an appropriate design/thickness?(BS476?)
* Is the door self-closing and do the self-closers work?
* Are smoke seals/intumescent strips provided?
* Is the door signed with the "Fire door - keep closed" sign?
* Is the door designated as a fire door with the approprate signage ("running man", wording, directional arrows, etc)?
* Does the door open in the desired direction of travel in case of fire?
* Is the door opening wide enough for use?
* Is access to the door clear and free from obstruction?
Other posters may wish to add further checks?
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Geof
Someone's having a laugh!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Steve Langston
I agree with Mike:
Run through a checklist of "must comply" issues and find out what if anything is wrong. I guess the fire officer has identified failures in each of the doors that requires rectification. Although why he hasnt said what the issues are is a little bemusing.
In my experience the majority of failures (of fire doors) when I was working in enforcement was due to
poor fitting fire doors,
doors being propped open by door wedges
poor condition of fire doors (knocked to hell by students/tea trolleys or residents or
intumescent strips that had been gloss painted over by the local decorator or caretaker.
It may be the fire officers way of letting you know that all the doors are non-compliant?!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mark Dutton.
Thanks for the responses. I have done pretty much what was suggested already and was wondering if anybody else had had to risk assess something so specific. I too thought he was having a laugh, but unfortunately he is not. He seems to think that risk assessment is an execuse for us to do everthing and is not offering much help/advice.
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Steve Langston
No not aware of similar issue, although does he really want an assessment for EACH of the 27 doors or AN assessment that covers all of the doors? I guess you do not have it in writing?
I would say that an assessment for each individual fire door is unreasonable.
One basic assessment that states the hazards and controls etc should suffice. The controls should include a management plan that identifies when a fire door is damaged or is not operating correctly how is it noted and rectified, (i.e. someone who knows what they are doing (competent) checks them on a 6 monthly basis for example against set criteria). This is a basic property maintenance/asset management check. This would be in addition to the weekly sounding of fire alarms that would activate the self closers on site etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Linda Crossland-Clarke
Hi
If your fire officer was on the same fire risk assessment course I was on last week, then I can understand where he was coming from. We were told (for example) the glass with the wire in it (I'm doing this off the top of my head without looking at my notes)is designed to be say X hour withstanding, however if the beading around the glass is 1mm different to what its meant to be, or if it is wood beading and not metal beading then its properties are reduced to 2 and a half mins. If the glass is the posh stuff without wire, and if it was fitted after the door was hung (not bought as an entire unit from a quality supplier)then you again chance the reduction in its properties due to the mis-handling of the glass. Also glass is only treated on one side, and that lets off loads of smoke (which is the killer) so depending what side of the door the fire is at, depends on your time to get x amount of people out.
If you want the technical explanation to all this, contact IFC or reply and I'll give you their details.
Linda
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ian Alexander
it would have to be mentioned on a fire risk assessment the degree of protection the door affords,ie 1/2 hour or 1 hour protection.Most firecheck doors on the hingeside will have a coloured plastic dot which is the indication of protection afforded(on newer doors-last 10 years).i say this as a former joiner now into H&S.Any further info then e-mail me direct.
cheers
ian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
This is taking things to a ridiculous extent. I just hope that J Clarkson isn't reading this one. Does the Fire Officer also want individual risk assessments for every wall, floor, ceiling, stairway, etc, etc? A few general questions within a building wide assessment such as 'Is fire compartmentation adequate and sufficient?' and are all fire doors operating correctly, kept closed or held open on magnetic holders connected to fire alarm/automatic fire detection system? and supported by detailed assessments for any remaining fire risk found to be significant should suffice in this respect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Geof
We're on the same side on this one Ken, I can't believe people are seriously contributing to this.
As you say why stick at doors when there are windows, walls, plasterboard, brick to have a go at.
Guys, stand back and look at what you are trying to achieve - then have the courage to argue the point.
We risk assess hazards - a hazard is fire.
A fire door is part of the control measures - we may examine a fire door and look at its spec - we do not individually risk assess it.
Certainly you can generate as much paperwork as you like but we need to get out a bit more if we think this is the way forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Craven
Geof
Things aren't always as clear as they seem!!
The reason why I for one took this one seriously is that Mark has been asked to do this by the Fire Officer from Gtr Manchester Fire Service(enforcing authority as opposed to the company fire safety person). However, to be fair to yourself, Ken and others, I am a former H&S Manager at the organisation in question and am aware that there is a "history" to this one and, having spoken to Mark directly, am aware of further information.
Mark may wish to elaborate further, but the background is that certain fire doors have failed to open in cases of emergency due to ongoing problems with a security system.
Mike
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Geof
So you review the security system, not risk assess the physical attributes of individual doors!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ken Taylor
- and (as I have said elsewhere on the Forum) you correct the defect (permanently or provisionally if necessary) without delay and don't treat it as a hazard of the workplace to be risk assessed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.