Paul Markham of the Fire Protection Association explains why compliant servicing, maintenance and certification are essential to ensuring sprinkler systems operate effectively when needed and remain legally
fit for purpose
Fire sprinkler systems are an integral part of the building fabric. Often overlooked, they can stand idle for long
periods of time, but when called into action, they are required to operate in earnest to allow evacuation of a building, protecting lives, property, and the businesses that operate within. This article explores the legislative requirements to maintain a compliant sprinkler system whilst ensuring it remains fit for purpose in changing environments.
Statistics
In May 2017, Optimal Economics published a report detailing the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Sprinkler Systems in the United Kingdom. In conjunction with the NFSN (National Fire Sprinkler Network) and NFCC (National Fire Chiefs Council) and supported by BAFSA (British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association), the data gathered provides significant insight into the sprinkler saves within both domestic, residential and non-residential fires. Extracts below from this report provide a brief overview based on four sectors accounting for 73 per cent of all non-residential fires – industry (manufacturing and processing), retail, warehousing and bulk storage, and education.
The impact of the sprinkler system is known for 178 of the 294 fires where the system operated. Figure 3 shows the effectiveness of the system in containing the fire for each industrial sub-sector. Across all industry sub-sectors, the sprinkler system contained/controlled or extinguished the fire in 99 per cent of cases.
In November 2020, the FPA published an article “Fires Risking Livelihoods” detailing analysis of 4,782 major UK fires between January 2009 and December 2019 with the average loss per incident being £657,074. Industrial processing and manufacturing buildings witnessed the largest financial impact through fire over the 10-year period with losses totaling £808m.
These figures act as a reminder that a fully compliant operational sprinkler system provides the reassurance that, when it is called into action, a fire can be contained or extinguished minimising the direct impact to life and business.
Introduction
If you were to consider a sprinkler system as your car, whereby keeping fluids topped up, air in your tyres, regular maintenance and taking precautions for adverse weather, this would keep you mobile and your car reliable. A sprinkler system should be treated the same way. Leaving fire pumps and installation control valves idle for long periods of time without exercise, water-filled pipework exposed to freezing conditions, or poor housekeeping around the sprinkler protection sites could lead to their failure to function in the event of a fire, with a part or full loss of premises or life. A sprinkler system is a significant investment by the building owner and should be serviced and maintained accordingly to ensure correct operation when called into action.
Legislation
The design, installation, testing, commissioning, and maintenance of sprinkler systems in the UK are commonly carried out in accordance with LPC Rules/BS EN 12845:2015 (Commercial and Industrial), FM /NFPA (US standards) or BS9251:2021 (Domestic and Residential). For the benefit of this article, we will be focusing on the requirements set out in LPC Rules/BS EN 12845:2015 – Rules for Automatic Sprinkler Installations.
The British (European) Standard covers automatic sprinkler protection to be installed for ‘safety of life’ purposes to satisfy building regulations, in which case BS EN 12845 (i.e. Part 1 of the LPC Rules) would apply and Section 20 covers maintenance requirements.
UK insurers routinely require automatic sprinkler protection to be installed for ‘property protection’ purposes, in which case the requirements of BS EN 12845 as updated and modified by Technical Bulletins (i.e. Part 2 of the LPC Rules) would apply, where TB203 covers maintenance requirements.
LPC Technical Bulletin TB203 provides a comprehensive guide to care and maintenance of automatic sprinkler installations, with significant updates and enhanced understanding against clause 20 of BS EN 12845:2015 (Part 1 of the LPC Rules). This should therefore be applied for ‘property protection’ applications, which would then also automatically include ‘safety of life’ coverage.
It is important to recognise that where premises have been third-party certified, for example under the LPS1048 scheme, the service and maintenance regime should be carried out in accordance with the appropriate standard – in this case LPC Rules/BS EN 12845:2015 – and by an approved LPS1048 contractor to the appropriate level to suit the type of sprinkler work required.
Often business owners have a budget in mind for the service and maintenance of their sprinkler system and subsequent negotiations with service providers can lead to cutting out some elements of the servicing to drive down costs. This however can lead to the provision of a non-compliant service and maintenance contract. Under the LPS1048 scheme and outlined in Guidance Note GN12, if the system is not serviced and maintained to standard (i.e. is non-compliant), then the system certification is invalid. If this were the case, would it be permitted by the authorities having jurisdiction and would the insurer pay out for fire damage if the system was not properly serviced? These considerations are essential when choosing the service and maintenance plan for your sprinkler system.
Sprinkler systems
Every sprinkler system is unique, designed specifically to protect the building occupancy and environment in which the business operates. As a result, there may be a variety of components which make up an effective sprinkler system. These could include: water supplies (consisting of storage tank(s) and single/multiple fire pump arrangements – electric and/or diesel); installation control valves (wet, dry, alternate, pre-action or deluge); zone and/or subsidiary valves; alarm system; frost protection measures; fire detection that works in conjunction with pre-action valves; and pipework network, support bracketry, and sprinkler heads.
These components rely on periodic inspection and testing routines to maintain good working order. The frequency and guidance to maintain compliance is outlined in TB203 – Care and maintenance of automatic sprinkler systems.
Responsible Person
Part 2, Article 17 of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (RRO) covers the maintenance of fire safety systems, outlining the legal obligation on the building owner/occupier’s Responsible Person (RP) to ensure their sprinkler system is suitably serviced and maintained.
It is a legal requirement for ‘safety of life’ sprinkler systems that the sprinkler system owner (the RP) appoints a competent individual or company who shall undertake specific tasks related to the sprinkler system. These individuals should receive basic outline training in order to carry out weekly and monthly checks of the sprinkler system. Security staff or employees should be given suitable levels of instruction to cover: purpose of a sprinkler system; how the system operates in the event of a fire; what to do if the system operates by fire or accidentally; keeping sprinkler heads clear of obstruction; the avoidance of damage to sprinkler heads and pipework; upkeep of records and documentation; emergency procedures; and contact details of the servicing company (24-hour call-out).
It is not uncommon to have staff trained on the sprinkler system. However, individuals can move on, and the knowledge is therefore lost, leaving the company vulnerable and having to use untrained or temporary agency staff. It is therefore crucial to keep staff training records up to date to ensure the sprinkler system is maintained and operated by trained competent personnel who, in the event of an emergency, can ensure swift and effective action can be taken.
Routines
LPC Technical Bulletin TB203 sets out the requirements for the service and maintenance routines of a sprinkler system covering both visual testing and maintenance inspections. The frequency consists of weekly, quarterly, bi-annual, annual, two-yearly, three-yearly, five-yearly, ten-yearly and every 25 years. However, these are typical routines covering the components installed and may not be applicable to all sprinkler systems.
Some routines require little specialist knowledge and can be carried out by the appointed responsible person with the correct training, such as weekly fire pump testing and installation control valve bell tests along with visual inspections of the system components. Others are more complex and shall only be carried out by a specialist sprinkler service contractor, who is third-party accredited (by UKAS) to the appropriate level.
An independent sprinkler inspection is a yearly requirement whereby the sprinkler system is inspected by a qualified person to assess whether the system is in accordance with the standard. This covers items such as, but not limited to, maintenance records, operation, and adequacy of risk. A report is generated and, where appropriate, a list of deficiencies identified against criticality will be issued for action. This periodic inspection must be carried out by an independent suitably trained person with knowledge and experience in all aspects of LPC Rules/BSEN12845. This impartial inspection cannot be carried by the system owner, building occupier, insurer, system installer, or service and maintenance provider (or by a competing service and maintenance provider). In other words, contractors cannot mark their own homework or that of competing contractors.
Review of hazard
Is your sprinkler system fit for purpose?
At 13-week intervals, a Review of Hazard should be carried out to monitor changes that may occur that might change the effectiveness of the sprinkler protection, so that immediate remedial action can be taken. The inspection can be carried out by the user’s appointed RP and takes the form of a tick box report which would be formalised by returning the form to the service and maintenance provider for review and immediate appropriate action. The forms are geared towards the user who would be best positioned to respond, example questions include:
Has there been any structural changes to your building?
Introduction of ceilings or wall/partition changes without consideration to the sprinkler protection could allow a small fire to increase in size and overwhelm the sprinkler protection.
Has any painting and decoration been carried out?
Painting without consideration for sprinkler heads will impede the operation time and/or water discharge pattern. Any sprinklers painted or damaged should be replaced without delay.
Has any new storage commodity been introduced?
New storage commodities and their packaging can impact the category of goods which could require a review of the existing sprinkler protection, as well as storage arrangements, location in the building, and permitted storage height. Additionally, the introduction of aerosols and idle wooden pallets require specific design approaches.
Storage proximity to the sprinkler heads?
Specific clearances are required between the top of goods and sprinkler deflector plates depending on hazard classification and product location to allow water discharge from the sprinkler to develop and cover the calculated area per sprinkler, whilst wetting and allowing rundown of the perimeter walls where applicable.
Is the building temperature within operational limits?
Sprinklers subject to higher temperatures than originally specified risk false discharge, likewise pipework permanently charged with water is subject to frost damage where the temperature drops below 4 degrees Celsius.
Where the Review of Hazard is undertaken by the user’s appointed RP, at least one of the four annual Review of Hazards shall be carried out by a competent person such as a qualified design/project engineer from a sprinkler service contractor. As with the checklist sheet, the annual inspection should be returned to the user’s appointed specialist sprinkler service and maintenance contractor for review and immediate remedial action undertaken where identified.
Summary
The primary purpose of a sprinkler system is to save lives and limit the damage to property. The building owner/occupier has a legal obligation (under ‘safety of life’ standards) to ensure the sprinkler system is serviced and maintained in accordance with the relevant standard. Regular Review of Hazard inspections will ensure the sprinkler system remains fit for purpose in ever changing environments.
The FPA offers Free to Download Sprinkler Service & Maintenance guidelines and a copy of TB203 – Care & Maintenance of Sprinkler Systems within our Index of Resources through the FPA website. Additionally, for more information of services the FPA can offer, such as Annual Sprinkler Inspections or Review of Hazard, visit our website: Sprinkler Services | Fire Protection Association
