cpt cathay - common fire safety violations found in buildings and scdf enforcement case studies[1]

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING 2010COMMON FIRE SAFETY VIOLATIONS FOUND IN

BUILDINGS AND SCDF ENFORCEMENT CASE STUDIES

Introduction

Roles of Fire Safety Managers

Enforcement Statistics

Common Non-Compliances and case studies of serious fire safety violations

Lessons Learnt

SCOPE OF PRESENTATIONFIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING

INTRODUCTION

To create a fire safe environment for public byenforcing requirements of FSA, and achieved through

Scheduled checks e.g. FC SchemeCED responses to public feedbackConcerted efforts by SCDF and FSMs

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING

Main Responsibilities and RolesLaunched in 1994 Aimed to ensure and enhance fire safety within buildings through self regulationOversee maintenance of fire safety systemsTrain occupants in basic fire fighting and rescue

ROLES OF FIRE SAFETY MANAGER FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING

Main Responsibilities and Roles (cont.)

Liaise with SCDF on matters relating to fire safetyConduct at least 2 TTXs and 2 emergency evacuation drills annually Prepare and implement ERP and APPNotify SCDF immediately of any occurrence of fire incidents in premises

ROLES OF FIRE SAFETY MANAGER FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING

Current Situation2705 FHANs, 78 NOCs and 842 NFSOs in 2009

Fire safety non-compliances remain prevalent in public and industrial buildings

Number of fires are relatively low, however

STATE OF FIRE SAFETY IN OUR BUILDINGSFIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING

Escalated Enforcement ActionsGraduated enforcement actions against recalcitrant fire safety offenders Temporary suspension of operation using Fire Hazard Abatement and Prohibition OrdersRecord quantum of fines issued Deterrence to building owners

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFINGSTATE OF FIRE SAFETY IN OUR BUILDINGS

2007 2009 2011

FHANNOC

COURTCHARGE

FIRE HAZARDORDER

TYPES OF NON COMPLIANCES

Common Types of Non-CompliancesNon-maintenance of fire fighting provisions Obstruction to means of escapeObstruction to fire fighting provisionsChange of usageExcessive storage of P and FMUnauthorised fire safety works



Non-Maintenance of Fire Fighting Provisions

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING01 DEMERIT POINT


Obstruction to Means of Escape

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING01 DEMERIT POINT


Excessive Storage of P and FM

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING03 DEMERIT POINTS


Unauthorised Fire Safety Works/ Change of Usage

FIRE SAFETY MANAGER BRIEFING03 DEMERIT POINTS

Fire broke out on 21 April 10 at Level 5 of MSCP

SCDF alerted to fire at about 1530 hrs

Fire contained within storage area on Level 5 of MSCP

Post fire investigation revealed unauthorised fire safety works and change of use of MSCP

SERIOUS FIRE SAFETY VIOLATIONS


Unauthorised structures blocked the natural ventilation openings of the MSCP

This caused an extensive smoke logged situation and greatly impeded the fire fighting process

SCDF took 45 min to put fire under control



Patrons were either unaware of fire or thought it was a fire evacuation drill as fire alarm and public announcements could not be heard clearly in all areas within shopping complex

Confused patrons exited building and stood around as there was no designated assembly point



Due to severity of fire safety violations and consequence, operator was charged in court and fined record quantum of $60,000


Recalcitrant commercial building operator allowing fire hazards to recur

Fire hazards include Overcrowding



Fire hazards includeObstruction to common passage ways and escape routes



Fire hazards includeNon-maintenance of fire fighting provisions


Over the years, operator received $35,600 in total fine amount. However this has not motivated them to change

SCDF conducted OPS Abate on 31 Dec 09

Imposed Fire Hazard Order (Abatement Order) on 06 Jan 10


Overcrowding remains a problem after FHO (Abatement Order)

Applied in court for FHO (Prohibition Order) for partial closure of problematic level

Imposed 40 hrs long Prohibition Order on 08 April 10

A SAFER PLACE


05 May 06

Fire destroyed 3 units of single-storey flatted factories involved in paint, marine engineering and furniture trades

Excessive stockage fuelled fire

** SCDF PAD footage

FIRE INCIDENT. CAN WE PREVENT THIS?

LESSONS LEARNT

Public placed in danger

Danger of fire risk to neighbouring units

Extensive damage to properties and loss in revenue

Inspections carried out at errant premises entails stern enforcement actions


POSITIVE SIGN

FSMs stepping forward to engage SCDF to help in alleviating fire hazards

SCDF welcomes such initiative and look forward to more FSMs taking proactive measures towards fire safety


MOVING FORWARD

Work in Progress More stringent regulation in pipeline e.g. DPS

Role expansion with future developments e.g. CERT in FSM Buildings

Raising FSM profile and credibility as fire safety expert


FSM of Old Enhanced FSM

CONCLUSION

FSM SCHEME has reaped success

New initiatives to enhance fire safety standards

FSMs to play roles dutifully and effectively


THANK YOU

Slide Number 1Slide Number 2Slide Number 3Slide Number 4Slide Number 5Slide Number 6Slide Number 7Slide Number 8Slide Number 9Slide Number 10Slide Number 11Slide Number 12Slide Number 13Slide Number 14Slide Number 15Slide Number 16Slide Number 17Slide Number 18Slide Number 19Slide Number 20Slide Number 21Slide Number 22Slide Number 23Slide Number 24Slide Number 25Slide Number 26Slide Number 27

cpt cathay - common fire safety violations found in buildings and scdf enforcement case studies[1]

Documents

safety works

safety violationsfire

safety manager briefingstate

safety manager briefingtypes

safety noncompliances

safety systemstrain

fighting process scdf

appnotify scdf