The growing and increasingly diverse safety considerations faced by those responsible for commercial buildings make it more important than ever to have in place a robust evacuation strategy. It is both a legal and a moral obligation for the managers and owners of buildings to uphold, and they must ask themselves whether, if an emergency arose, they have taken reasonable steps to protect the people in the building for which they are responsible.
If an emergency alarm was activated in your workplace right now, how many employees would recognise the danger and move safely towards the designated exit point?
It’s an important question to ask because an emergency situation is not the right time to develop a plan of action that should already be in place.
As part of a formal risk assessment of the building, there are a number of variables to consider in relation to evacuation, beginning with an attempt to identify the possible nature of the danger. Additionally, are there visitors who are unfamiliar with the building’s layout? Should the occupants of the building use elevators to get away? Are there any disabled people in the building with special requirements? How safe is the agreed exit route? Would the way out be visible in the event of a power blackout? Are the relevant detection and notification devices in good working order?
Addressing the danger
For many decades, the primary safety risk faced by commercial buildings was fire but the scope is expanding. While the latest available UK figures show that there were 22,200 fires in non-domestic buildings in 2013-14[1] more modern threats such as terrorism, social activism and crime should also be borne in mind as potential evacuation triggers. One need not look too far back in the media for shocking examples.
London’s flagship shopping centre, Westfield in Stratford, for example, suffered a bomb scare in September 2014, which caused all staff and visitors to be evacuated. This incident came just a few days after a similar evacuation at Luton Airport in Bedfordshire[2].
The world is less secure and we must adapt to this changing landscape. Risks will undoubtedly vary depending on the type and usage of the building in question and this should be a key item to address as part of the risk assessment, the conducting of which is a formal requirement under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.
This article will focus primarily on fire risk, since this is the area where most hard evidence exists. However, it should be noted that many of the same principles apply in different scenarios that require evacuation - even if the precise details of the response will be determined by the threat.
The potential consequences of failing to plan properly are difficult to overestimate. In total, there were 17 deaths and 1,083 casualties resulting from fires in non-domestic buildings in the UK in the year 2013-2014[3]. The preservation of life has to be the most important motivation but there are also financial costs to consider in terms of property and assets. According to figures from 2008, the cost of commercial fire damage in the UK was £865m[4].
An additional concern is the reputational damage that can result from neglecting to take all reasonable steps to ensure the safety of the people in the building you are responsible for. It is arguably even more important to protect reputation than to protect property. According to research from ACE, 81 per cent of companies in EMEA regard reputation as their most significant asset[5]. Allied to reputation is the risk to business continuity. It’s estimated that over a third of businesses never resume operations after a major fire.
Another set of potential consequences can be found in the legal arena. Enforcement of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 is leading to heavy fines, and even imprisonment for serious offenders.
This legislation requires commercial buildings, non-domestic and multi-occupancy premises in England and Wales to appoint a “responsible person” to undertake a “serious and sufficient fire risk assessment”.
The requirements can be briefly summed up as follows[6]:
- Carry out a fire risk assessment identifying any possible dangers and risks
- Consider who may be especially at risk
- Get rid of, or reduce, the risk from fire as far as is reasonably possible and provide general fire precautions to deal with any possible risk left
- Take other measures to make sure there is protection if flammable or explosive materials are used or stored
- Create a plan to deal with any emergency and, in most cases, keep a record of your findings
- Review your findings when necessary
According to statistics from the Fire & Rescue Authorities of England, some 67,266 fire safety audits were carried out in non-domestic buildings in 2013-14, leading to 18,733 informal notifications and 2,050 enforcement notices. The most common cause of non-compliance, at 13.7 per cent, was the failure to conduct risk assessments, closely followed by problems relating to emergency routes and exits, at 11.8 per cent[7].
There is clearly a question mark over the proportion of building owners and managers who are fulfilling their obligations under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, not least with regard to completion of risk assessments.
Perhaps an even more worrying threat for executives is embodied in the Corporate Manslaughter Act. While this has yet to be rigorously tested in the UK regarding fire, the Act allows for court proceedings to be brought against senior individuals within a company.
Improving awareness of the risks and relevant regulations have to be the first steps in better preparing commercial buildings for an emergency.
Taking action on evacuation
Current guidance in the UK suggests three minutes as the maximum time in which an evacuation should be completed. Doing so within that accepted limit is reliant upon swift and accurate detection of danger, fast and reliable notification of occupants and the orderly use of predetermined exit routes.
In the case of fire hazards, the latest fire systems combine detection and notification in a single control panel that, being ‘addressable’, indicate the location where the hazard was detected. This helps the appointed employees to guide occupants in the right direction towards safety, as well as reducing the time taken by fire services to locate and tackle the potential fire.
Rather than being ‘fit and forget’ solutions, these systems require regular testing and maintenance, with all actions properly recorded and logged, to ensure fire systems are ready to activate in an emergency. However, it’s a duty that may be overlooked.
Another consideration that may be neglected is how any building occupants in areas of high noise or with hearing impairments are notified of a need to evacuate, particularly if there is nobody nearby who could help. This is a concern that is driving increased usage of visual alarm devices (VADs); high performing flashing LED beacons that complement an audible alarm where further re-enforcement is required. Specifiers should be aware that there is a set of European standards, listed under EN54-23, governing the necessary light output from a VAD, as well as the recommended spacing between devices and the precise site of installation.
Due to the varied nature of disabilities, a diverse set of requirements should be considered. Exit routes, for example, are a vital area of concern. Those who are wheelchair-bound will clearly want to avoid stairways but many buildings have a programme in place that deactivates lifts in the event of an alarm being sounded, which can create additional problems.
Other life safety system components that can prove especially valuable to disabled people, particularly in high-rise buildings, are refuges with two-way communication points installed. These enable people who may be stranded on upper levels to have contact with a central communication point on the ground floor.
Exit routes should be made apparent by illuminated signage and emergency lighting, which are designed to help occupants of commercial and industrial buildings find their way out in the event of power being cut. High-output lighting has also been shown to improve the ability of people with sight impairments to find their way along an exit route.
Again, similarly to VADs, there are standards in place that advise on the lux output and positioning of emergency lighting, and it’s worth noting that a basic function test should be carried out on all emergency luminaires in a building on a monthly basis.
In locations that adhere to this requirement, testing is typically carried out manually, which has major implications in terms of staffing, scheduling and costs. All activity must also be logged for compliance purposes and the scope for human error is not insignificant. For all these reasons, there’s an increasing move towards adopting automatic testing technology to improve compliance, accuracy, time-saving, cost reduction and responsiveness.
For example, Frankfurt Airport - which houses some 55,000 individual emergency luminaires and 550 central battery back-up devices - turned to Eaton to provide an automatic monitoring system that would seamlessly carry out routine tests, identify faults in real time and log all data.
Staying on the subject of public buildings, it is vital for owners and managers to be aware that visitors, unlike employees, will not be fully aware of action plans and exit routes. In these environments, voice alarms are worthy of consideration since they allow for pre-recorded and live announcements to be made via a public address system to instruct occupants.
These voice alarms can be integrated with everyday public address systems that play music, for instance. This is a useful demonstration of the way in which safety systems are becoming increasingly integrated to provide building owners and managers with a more unified solution.
In fact, the growing level of integration that is possible is likely to be a key trend that develops in the immediate future. Another such trend is dynamic sign technology that is more responsive to a given hazard and provides evacuation guidance accordingly.
However, as we stand today, the solutions and expertise to help buildings meet their obligations are available now, and it is advisable to seek accreditation from your suppliers, such as BAFE registration. Such resources need to be harnessed for everybody’s sake, because tomorrow could be too late.
[1] Stats: Department for Communities and Local Government, Fire Statistics: Great Britain April 2013 to March 2014
[2] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2757960/Westfield-Stratford-shoppers-staff-evacuated-suspicious-package-found.html
[3] Stats: Department for Communities and Local Government, Fire Statistics: Great Britain April 2013 to March 2014
[4] ‘Tackling Fire: A Call For Action’, Association of British Insurers, December 2009.
[5] Reputation the Hardest Risk to Manage, says ACE Research’ July 23, 2013
[6] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/14879/making-your-premises-safe-short-guide.pdf
[7] www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government/series/fire-safety-law-and-guidance-documents-for-business
