A recent determination on the omission of intumescent strips and smoke seals on bedroom fire doors in a hotel gives cause for concern, says the Passive Fire Protection Federation.
The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) determination concluded that the 215-bedroom hotel did not have to commit to fitting intumescent strips and seals to all of its bedroom doors, and that it was sufficient to record and justify their absence in the fire risk assessment.
The determination was based entirely on the circumstances of the hotel in question and the particular circumstances of the case.
“The PFPF recognises that, whilst in some cases a justification can be prepared which leads to the omission of intumescent strips, this should be the exception rather than the rule,” said Niall Rowan, technical officer for the Association for Specialist Fire Protection, a PFPF member.
“The PFPF has a very strong and legitimate concern that this determination will be used to justify the omission of intumescent and smoke seals on all bedroom doors in all hotels, in contravention of Approved Document B and other guidance issued by DCLG.”
“In reality, the desire to omit seals will be driven by financial considerations and not by any informed or objective evaluation of fire risk,” he added.
Mr Rowan said that while the Fire Safety Order requires that a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment is undertaken, it is not a full check of compliance with Approved Document B or any other document.
“The PFP industry understands that there is no requirement under the [Fire Safety] Order to impose current guidance onto older buildings or to retrospectively upgrade buildings to the latest standards. But, if a fire risk assessor is in any doubt about the adequacy of fire protection, he or she should recommend that fire doors are upgraded or replaced to satisfy the guidance currently issued by DCLG. This includes the fitting of intumescent and smoke seals,” he said.
