FPA submits responses to series of Government consultations

In a detailed submission to the consultation on creating a regulated fire risk assessor profession, the FPA has laid out its position backing the power of a regulator with the authority to extend competency requirements beyond Article 9 of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.

The FPA stated: “The regulator should have the power to introduce mandatory competence requirements where the duty involves professional fire safety judgement and compliance with the Fire Safety Order and its secondary legislation.”

The consultation response also highlights the importance of defining competence boundaries to prevent assessors exceeding their capabilities and “would help ‘Responsible Persons’ understand who is competent to advise” and would “reduce the risk of assessors working outside of their capability”.

Further, the FPA strongly supports the view that fire risk assessments for premises with a high potential risk to life safety should be restricted to regulated professionals only, noting that “higher-risk or complex buildings should not rely on unverified competence”.

A consistent competency framework for individuals and organisations is identified by the FPA as being critical to improving standards and enforcement. The organisation’s response stresses that “individual competence is essential because the assessor will show professional judgement on-site and in the report”. Organisational certification provides assurance on “QA, supervision, Continuing Professional Development, insurance, document control, validation and management systems”.

Clearer distinction

The need for clearer distinction between fire risk assessors and fire engineers also features prominently, with the FPA response arguing that the former should recognise when matters require specialist input, particularly so where issues involve “detailed design, engineering judgement, intrusive investigation or specialist product or system knowledge”.

Accredited certification and independent oversight have been raised as key to building confidence. The FPA also supports the introduction of a central fire risk assessor register with “clear referral routes, information sharing and better understanding so that professional misconduct and Fire Safety Order breaches are handled consistently without confusion or double jeopardy”.

Overall, the FPA response endorses a phased and risk-based implementation. “Mandatory competence requirements, a consistent competency framework, accredited certification, a professional Code of Conduct, a central register and proportionate sanctions should improve confidence in fire risk assessments.”

Industry training

Elsewhere, the FPA has provided feedback to the consultation on the Government’s proposal to bring together the Engineering Construction Industry Training Board and the Construction Industry Training Board to create a single, unified Industry Training Board that would act on behalf of the construction and engineering sectors.

While the FPA sees benefits in the streamlining of the points of contact for both employers and training providers and ensuring one process for funding applies for both industries, the organisation has raised issues with the merger. As they represent and serve different industries and training standards, the merger may impact the current scope and level of funding for both sectors.

The FPA’s feedback has stated: “Many companies who cannot afford the level of training use the Construction Industry Training Board levy fund. If the scope of the funding changes in application or cost, this would detrimentally impact raising standards and competency in the sector.”

The third lot of feedback relates to the consultation on the fire safety of domestic upholstered furniture. The FPA response disagrees with the proposal to introduce reformed furniture fire safety sector legislation based on a smoulder test, observing: “We agree that steps should be taken to reduce the quantity of toxic fire retardants in furniture. However, we do not agree with reducing the fire safety requirements to achieve this. We believe it’s possible to reduce the use of fire retardants without reducing fire safety.”

Demonstrating compliance

In addition, the FPA has expressed disappointment that “a flame-retardant technology hierarchy is no longer being proposed”. It was hoped that this could provide a template for the rest of the fire sector, not just furniture.

However, the FPA does agree with the proposal to allow businesses to use composite/representative sample testing or component testing to demonstrate compliance with the new regulations.

The FPA concluded: “Testing the product as a system, rather than as individual components, allows products to demonstrate the performance of composite components such as barrier fabrics or fire protective covering materials.”

*Further information is available online at www.thefpa.co.uk