Rank: Super forum user 
|
The HM gov fire guidance touches on the different types of risk in relation to the premises under assesment. It mentions the term lower risk, normal risk etc. Its doesnt seem however to give a formal defintions of the terms. Back in the old days I know the fire precautions act did give some quite clear definitions. Does anyone know if any clear definitions of risk still exist any where?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
I have never seen any clear definitions of risk and I doubt I ever will. Risk is too subjective in my opinon. Even the concept of low, medium and high which we are all familiar with have degrees between them which may give rise to questoining whether something is actually medium or high, or vice versa. I suspect your are looking for the 'holy grail'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
My fra has the defs below, I think they're from PAS79 Likelihood of fire:
LOW: usually low likelihood of fire as a result of negligible potential sources of ignition.
MEDIUM: potential ignition sources with fire hazards subject to appropriate controls
HIGH: Lack of adequate controls applied to significant fire hazard, significant increase in likelihood of fire.
I put them into a matrix with: Potential for harm: SLIGHT: Outbreak of fire unlikely to result in serious injury
MODERATE: Outbreak of fire could foreseeably result in injury but it is unlikely to involve fatalities.
EXTREME: Significant potential for serious injury or death of one or more occupants.
Hmm how do I paste the jpeg of the matrix, but maybe you can work it out, from trivial risk, tolerable, moderate, substantial to intolerable risk
Edited by user 21 March 2017 20:16:29(UTC)
| Reason: typo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Thanks very much for the replies. Upon reflection I have decided not to include a risk matrix in my FRA template.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
OK. The example I quoted above is what I use at chemical and engineering factories. Other places like retail, care homes etc would be different with maybe more emphasis on means of escape and other factors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Originally Posted by: JohnW  OK. The example I quoted above is what I use at chemical and engineering factories. Other places like retail, care homes etc would be different with maybe more emphasis on means of escape and other factors.
Hi John,
They certainly would be different. I have always identified any work premises where people sleep, for example, as high risk. Though I don't know for sure where this comes from and don't know of an source for definitions. It could perhaps have all been in 'Fire Safety - An Employers Guide', but I no longer have a copy to check...
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.