A Project Manager I'm working with is insisting on locating a Cylinder Store, (and Gas Distribution system) for a new laboratory outside (which is good) but on a  Fire Escape Route.  The escape route is designed for 4 different factory units and 4 different companies.  The different companies do not know of the plans.

I have spoken with the BCGA Technical Manager and read CP4 & CP44. As far as I can see you cannot site a Cylinder Store on a Fire Escape Route.  The PM is going ahead with the installation.

I seem to be banging my head against a brick wall here and I'm hoping someone can point me in the direction of a solution or at least some evidence to support my advice in the way of court action.

I carried out the FRA and pointed it from the outset.  The gases are inert, I hate being the "you can't put that there" type of guy but its a fire escape route and I can't see a way around it.

I've asked for a written justification from the PM and evidence the insurers are happy. Neither have been forthcoming.

Interestingly a specialist gas system design/installer (I won't mention them),  not only said it OK where it is (its also less than 3 metres from the property boundary) and explained in great detail how an ACOP doesn't stand up in a court of law!!!!!  Please!!!!

Are the gas cylinders actually 'on' the fire escape route and really obstructing/limiting the width & availability of the fire escape route?

Or are the cylinders simply immediatley adjacent to the fire escape route? You have said they are inert gases. Presumably they are secured/chained etc so won't get pushed over etc to obstruct the fire escape route?

Hold your ground then

Get the PM to confirm your fire RA and get him to justify why he doesn't accept it. Pointing out #4, that what he is proposing is illegal.

Add the finding to your site risk register.

Yes illegal - if it is accepted by your company/all concerned that the route is an 'official' fire escape route (signed/marked etc) indicated on building plans etc. Is the fire route floor/route highlighted with floor paint etc?

Assuming, there is no alternative fire escape route or can the route be altered to go around the gas cylinders to a small degree?

thank you so much for all this info, its helps a lot !

Thank you for your replies. 

Just to update everyone,  we've had a second opinion from a Fire Risk Assessor.  He says it's fine as there are two exits from the building, one at the front, one at the back.  The one at the back has the Cylinder store and Manifolds placed directly on the fire escape route.   

I disagree but there you go.  Problem solved,  if you don't like the answer,  get someone who can give you the answer you are looking for.

Just to elaborate,  the cylinder store is obstructing, not blocking a Fire Escape Route.  It's not only a store but part of a designed system and is less than 3 metres from the boundary of the property (BCGA CP 4).  I'm pretty sure an ACOP has special legal standing.    

Edited by user 09 March 2020 14:24:47(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

BS9999

43.2 Escape routes

In order to ensure that escape routes are available for use at all times when the building is occupied:

a) all escape routes, including refuges, should be maintained free from obstruction;

b) goods, materials, unwanted furniture, etc., should not be stored within escape routes. Any obstruction should be removed immediately

There you have it!

I refer back to my comment at #9 - if the fire escape route has been formally accepted by the building/site plans etc, then the other fire risk assessor simply can't ignore and risk assess the issue away.

Unless he makes alternative/proposes an alternative fire escape route to give the same level of fire escape options.

As ever with these things gather your evidence - either from building plans, previous assessments etc and present to the site manager. Depends how much you want to continue to escalate the issue? Is the/are the building office blocks or is the work in the various buildings higher risk?

Enter your concerns on your site risk register.

You seem to indicate this is also a fire escape route for other businesses, they may be interested in what your company are going to do ?

I have been watching this and at one point you state this store will be within 3m of boundary, but I take it not up to the boundary. So, is there still enough room for people to get past? Could a protective wall be built to separate? Little confused if it actually fully blocks or if there was a wide walking area which is reduced, not cut off completely. Would, what is left, be considered wide enough for the potential use /quantity of people. There appears to be confusion over the exact set up.

Has this assessor put their recommendation in writing and their name to it?

Chris