Portable Fire Extinguishers: to use or not to use?

Gillian Nightingale - Workplace Law Network
Online advisor - 175 posts

Mark

The White papers on our website are part of the new expanded content available only to premium members of Workplace Law Network. The complete list of current white papers can be found at http://www.workplacelaw.net/news/whitepapers, and we will be publishing new ones each week.

If you would like a free 7-day trial of our premium membership package, you can apply for free using the link in the blue box on the left-hand side on our home page below the blue membership panel.

http://www.workplacelaw.net/freeTrial

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

The answer to this is fairly simple and providing you have been trained and feel confident that you can attack the fire without putting yourself at risk - then do so. If you do not have the necessary training and skills - leave well alone and get out of the building and wait for the professionals. There is no offence committed in not trying to fight a fire but if you endanger someones life then you may find a different outcome.

Chris Johnson
Member - 1 post

Portable Fire Extinguishers are fitted to deal with a small fire, if you feel competent to do so, without putting yourself or others at risk. Or to help you escape the building.
The Fire Risk Assessment should clearly specify the Classification of Risks in all areas, the equipment specified, commissioned on site (many units are damaged or lose charge in transit), installed to BS Requirements and Maintained. All by a Competent Qualified Person. Far too many "Authorities" are specifying 9L Water or Powder Extinguishers when they pose other risks and are limited value.
Often the specification reads, install a 9L Water Extinguisher. This in general gives you a 13A Fire Rating, the better ones 21A. It gives you lift and drop risks and can be a danger near live electrical equipment. 13 or 21A can be specified as the protection required, but better comprehensive protection can be obtained with a smaller, lighter 3L or 6L AFFFoam Extinguisher, the latter can give up to 27A (OVER DOUBLE THE PROTECTION OF A 9L WATER!). They also give B Class protection for flammable liquids and liquefiable plastics, being a spray, it is safer for indirect use in the proximity of live electrical equipment; beware the puddle! Have a 35kv test.
Powder Extinguishers are great at putting out fires, A, B, C, E. You can get a 13A Fire Rating in a 2kg unit. (Beware the cheap plastic heads, non serviceable or rechargeable), or the B,C units, often used for vehicles. However, the powder cloud will obscure exits. Not just for you, but others that could be following you. They often create panic and choking. Not nice in the eyes, ears and lungs! Again specify a C Risk but ensure the location of the equipment is in a safe place, and as with all-important subjects, good Training is so important.
Trade Tip, ask your Fire Extinguisher Engineer to let your staff fire off the Fire Extinguishers, when they are due 5 year extended service. This requires test discharge; some companies use this to give free or cost effective training in a comprehensive service (and you know, the test discharge/internal inspection/service and recharge has been done!) Chris Johnson 18/102007

Maxine Phipp
Member - 2 posts

Please can anyone tell me:-
Whilst checking fire extiguishers around the premises have found a foam extinguisher that does not have a pressure gauge on it. Does this make it a defect or is it still safe to use ?

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Maxine, Not all extinguishers have pressure gauges and in all probability providing it has been serviced by a competent company and not tampered with since the last service ( should be within last 12 months) it will be safe to use. Many companies fit a little plastic tag through the safety pin which if broken may indicate that it has been tampered with. Hope that helps.

Maxine Phipp
Member - 2 posts

Thanks Alan, Much appreciated
I learn something New each day

Peter Travers
Member - 3 posts

There is a train of thought that I have some empathy with. In low risk environments such as offices, now that smoking is banned- regular-PAT-Fire Marshals and approved contractors checking fire precautions checks i.e alarms etc then why have fire extinguishers at all. If a fire starts then an evacuate-call the Fire Service Policy reduces the risk of someone attempting to extinguish a fire and possibly putting themselves and others at risk. Such a policy would remove any possible misunderstanding on what action to take in the case of a fire.

Steve Bull
Member - 3 posts

Maxine,
Re fire extinguishers - we received the following safety alert notice from a client.

BP Safety Alert
Failure of Gas Cartridge Fire Extinguisher

Description of Event
A fatal injury occurred in Indonesia resulting from the operation of a gas cartridge type dry chemical powder filled fire extinguisher. Upon activating the fire extinguisher, the bottom of the extinguisher body failed. The fire extinguisher propelled upwards and struck the fire extinguisher operator in the neck and chin area resulting in fatal injuries.

There were signs of corrosion on the base of the extinguisher - it is thought that this may have contributed to the fire extinguisher failure. As a precautionary measure it is advised that all cartridge type fire extinguishers (in simple terms those which do not have a pressure gauge attached) should be inspected immediately. Those which show signs of significant corrosion or severe pitting should be removed from service and replaced.

NB: An investigation team is currently working to determining the system causes of the incident and will report in due course. This may result in further recommendations.
Photograph of Fire extinguisher



ACTIONS To Be Taken

Visually inspect all gas cartridge operated fire extinguishers that are located in potentially corrosive environments. Please check for signs of significant corrosion or severe pitting on the body and base of the fire extinguisher. Where there is a sign of corrosion or severe pitting on the extinguisher, take the extinguisher out of service immediately and replace it with a new unit.


During inspection, accessories such as rubber bases or mounting brackets should be removed to ensure a complete visual examination of the unit. If you are in doubt to the severity of the corrosion, take the extinguisher out of service and have it tested in line with manufacturer’s guidelines. Potentially corrosive environments include:
• fire extinguishers stored outside, unprotected from the weather
• fire extinguishers stored in wet or damp environments, or in potential standing water
• fire extinguishers stored near marine environments, jetties, platforms, shipping any facility located near salt water
• fire extinguishers stored on or near chemical processing facilities

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Peter, I have heard this proposal from many of my clients that have a policy of instructing their staff not to fight fires - they argue "if we don't provide first aid fire fighting equipment - we don't need to train the staff either" this will be another cost saving move that we can make. Many of my health and safety colleagues have also put together some very interesting risk assessments supporting this theory but when I say to them - what happens when the Fire Service don't attend as quickly as usual, or they are taking industrial action or you are trapped by a small fire that if you had a fire extinguisher you could extinguish? What will the owner and insurers say about that nice building that burnt to the ground because there were no fire extinguishers and what will you say when your insurance premium rises because of the increased fire losses.If there is no one trapped in a building the Fire Service may decide to let the building burn rather that endanger firefighters lives - how will that be received when someone says it was only a small fire and if I had a fire extinguisher I could have put it out.
What is a "low risk building" is it a building that we can afford to burn down or one that is unlikely to burn down?
Many people take the choice of removing Fire Hose Reels because of the cost of maintenance and training but I remember my time in the Fire Service when I used the first aid fire fighting equipment that was installed to extinguish the fire because it was there and immediately available. I know that some Fire Authorities also support the removal of hose reels because they feel it can encourage people to be heroes but I always advise my clients to think quite carefully about the decision.
Many small fires are extinguished using fire extinguishers and remember that large fires generally start as small fires.
I hope that puts a slightly different aspect on the argument.
Regards Alan

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Steve,The problem that you refer to has been with us for over 30 years which was when I advised my employers to move over to Stored Pressure Fire Extinguishers.For those persons that are not aware of the difference - stored pressure extinguishers have the pressure required to expel the contents of the extinguisher in the body of the extinguisher, whereas the type that Steve is talking about is a cartridge type extinguisher, here a small high pressure cylinder is stored within the body of the extinguisher which when operated discharges its contents into the body of the extinguisher which the discharges the fire fighting medium.
The problem is caused by poor extinguisher maintenance/design because the extinguisher can sit there for up to 20 years and some of the older extinguishers did not have a plastic liner so corrosion was even quicker and this is why plastic liners were introduced. Whilst this was a great step forward liners sometimes developed pin holes which caused them to fail early and it was not unknown for some fire exitinguisher maintenance companies to use a srew driver to encourage the extinguisher to fail earlier.With the cartridge operated extinguisher a sudden increase in pressure could cause the body to rupture if it had been weakened by corrosion. With stored presure extinguishers this did not happen because the pressure was constant within the body and the first thing that happens here is you get a leak and loose pressure.
When I took this decision to change 30 years ago many people thought that it was the wrong thing to do but I think that time has proved that it was the right thing to do because the majority of extinguishers now on the market are stored pressure.
Regards Alan

b hannon
Member - 4 posts

Alen, your arguments are indeed cogent and you appear to be very knowledgeable. However, as a former firefighter with 20yrs city experience, i would suggest that unless there is a strong risk to life or being trapped, in the first instance on finding a fire, operate the fire alarm alert all you can then call the emergency services, dont fight the fire unless it is really small and relatively contained or risking life. People rarely remember most of what they are taught in extinguisher training and it is so easy to be overcome by smoke and fumes when your body's adrenalin is racing around. The human being in us panics when things go wrong, even firefighters die because of this. We should be concentrating on risk reduction not fire fighting skills.I believe that we should be leaving firefighting to the people with the protective equipment- so i will be out first then!

Peter Travers
Member - 3 posts

Alan -if there is small fire how will anybody be trapped by it?
A small fire in a low risk office I suggest could be circumvented quite easily without the need to fight the fire. How would you define small fire? One that could easily be put out with an extinguisher perhaps? In that instance then unless the "small" fire was on the fire protected route then again how would a person be trapped by it? If the fire was on the fire exit route then that, I would suggest is due to poor housekeeping. It follows if the housekeeping was that poor it is highly likely the extinguisher would not have been maintained anyway so may not function. You raise this very point in another of your responses, also dated the 30 Oct. It must also be considerd that not all staff or a visitors in all buildings have had training to use an extinguisher. Such a non-trained person confronting a "small" electrical fire (trapped or not) may in ignorance, but with best intentions, use a water extinguisher. In low fire risk offices there will be more than one fire exit. If there is only one fire exit route then I would not class that as a low risk office space.
I still maintain if there is the slightest risk to life then get out and let it burn. Re insurance,this is not applicable in our 37 offices. I like many thousands of others work for the government and as you will know the govt rarely insure any building against fire as the insurance preimuum costs to the taxpayer are likely to outweigh any costs that may be incurred due to a fire. Hence due to very good monitored housekeeping, FRA and fire precautions the risk of fire is very low. In my many years in different govt offices I have known of only one serious fire causing costly damage and that was caused by an arsonist outside the office working hours. (High risk govt property - MOD for example have their site own specific risk management strategy in place) Re the industrial action etc delaying the arrival of the fire service. This rare eventuality should be considered as part of any FRA as in my organaisation for example.In such an instance the Fire Marshalls have, as part of the FRA, the duty to patrol the premises evey 30 mins and report back to the Incident Controller. Finally the comment that it "was only a small fire I could have put it out with an extingisher." Did not the Mayor of London back 1666 (I think) say something very similar, albeit if more crudely, about the Great Fire of London.

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

B Hannon
I think that you have reitereated the points that I made and I would be interested in knowing if you support the training of staff in the use of portable fire fighting equipment because your last paragraph appears to be saying that we should leave firefighting to the people with protective equipment - is this true in all cases?
I too have served in both a city and county fire service, I worked in the NHS as the Regional Fire Advisor and before I started my own fire and safety consultancy I was the Senior Fire and Safety Officer at HSBC. I have worked and studied in many countries and I have seen many approaches to this problem and assisted in a number of research papers that have addressed the problem and without exception training in basic fire fighting is seen as an important aspect.
One incident that I remember well occured in 1976 during the Fire Service Strike and involved a very serious basement fire in a large District General Hospital - the actions of the staff on that night clearly prevented a major tragedy and if they had decided that it was not their job then the outcome would have been very different. Obviously, the NHS views training in basic fire fighting and patient evacuation as very important and on this occasion it certainly proved its worth.
If you also look at current guidance issued by HM Government it states "The actions of staff if there is a fire are likely to be crucial to their safety and that of other people in the premmises. All staff should receive basic fire safety induction training and attend refresher sessions at pre-determined intervals. People with no training should not be expected to attempt to extinguish a fire. However, all staff should be familiar with the location and basic operating procedures for the equipment provided, in case they need to use it.
Appropriate staff should be trained in the use of all such equipment"
This is the guidance that any building owner/employer will be required to meet when inspected or following a fire and if you look at one of my previous posts I stated "The answer to this is fairly simple and providing you have been trained and feel confident that you can attack the fire without putting yourself at risk - then do so. If you do not have the necessary training and skills - leave well alone and get out of the building and wait for the professionals. There is no offence committed in not trying to fight a fire but if you endanger someones life then you may find a different outcome".
I look forward to your reply.
Alan

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Peter, I'm not sure if you read my previous post before you replied as I note they were posted at the same time, however, I will assume that you didn't.
You have made a lot of points so I will try and deal with them one by one.
In respect of your comments about the Great Fire of London and the Lord Mayor's alleged comments I don't think that you are referring to a "fire extinguisher" - more about bodily actions.
Whilst I agree that strikes by the Fire Service are rare if you read my previous post I have highlighted a case where that happened and the role of hospital staff was critical.
I think that where you say "If the fire was on the fire exit route then that, I would suggest is due to poor housekeeping." is very misleading as I have known many fires start in fluorescent lights for example and whilst you may think that you could easly bypass this - if it was on a dead end I can assure you that if you have a non fire rated diffuser on that light and it sets on fire you will not find it quite so easy. Do you know if your lighting diffusers are fire rated and have they been checked on the Fire Risk Assessment? I know of a number of similar fluorescent lighting fires in hospital wards where because the staff were unable to reach the lighting fitting with an extinguisher the whole ward had to be evacuated - if you are a patient and non ambulant its a very traumatic time.
The statement relating to poor housekeeping and the fire extinguisher probably not working is also very misleading and I fail to see the relationship - I think that what you are saying is that if buildings have poor housekeeping then that may be indicative of poor fire safety standards.
You have asked how you would define a "small fire" and of course what may be a small fire to me may be a large one to you but a rule of thumb would be if you can put it out with one fire extinguisher then this would be a reasonable guide.
Where you state "In low fire risk offices there will be more than one fire exit. If there is only one fire exit route then I would not class that as a low risk office space." - I think the here you are confusing risk with exits and assuming that a low risk office will have more than one exit - this does not follow because there are many low risk offices with only one exit and these meet current regulations - whilst the number of exits does enter the equation you also have to consider the occupants, what they do, how ambulant they are, the travel distance, active and passive fire precautions and the construction of the building.
Would you consider a bank to be low risk where customers are only allowed into the front part of the building and there is a high degree of security - I can tell you that one bank considered this to be low risk until 12 people died because staff only had one way out.
In respect of insurance I was aware that the government self insure as do many banks but the cost has to be met from somewhere and in the governments case it is from the taxpayer. I am not aware of the details of fire losses in government buildings and the only one that comes to mind is the fire at the MOD Depot in Donnington in 1983 and if I recall correctly the losses here were considerable because they government choose not to install sprinklers.
I hope that I have covered everything and look forward to your reply
Alan

Mark Talbot-Sykes
Member - 16 posts

Chaps, I find the whole topic and your comments interesting, keep it up but in the mean time, I thought Donnington had sprinklers and the Fire Service decided to turn them off – or is this another urban myth???

Gavin Inches
Member - 11 posts

I am interested to see Peter Travers suggestion that one might do without Fire Extinguishers. I think it would be a very brave "Responsible Person" whose Fire Risk Assessment would determine that in their premises these were not required. I would suggest that anyone thinking along these lines should study carefully Section 13 of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 before making any such decision.

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Mark, I am fairly confident that Donnington did not have sprinklers and that was why the damage was so severe. I think that the fire that you are referring to where the Fire Service turned off the sprinklers at an early stage in the fire was at Digital in Hampshire - this cost the County Council in excess of 20 million pounds - sorry the tax payer.Alan

Mark Talbot-Sykes
Member - 16 posts

Thanks Alan. I am a little confused (new member) can anyone tell me what the original questions was? I am new member and the first post in this list, but I didn’t ask the question, so who did and what was it?

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Mark, As you are aware the original question that prompted the debate was related to "Portable Fire Extinguishers - to use or not" and how to obtain the White Paper - whilst of course I am aware that your original question was answered I thought for those people that had not seen the paper I would post a simple answer to the question and this is obviously what sparked the comments.
I personally feel that it is good for everyone to be aware of different views and whilst I have not read the paper I think that some interesting views have been aired.
As you will have seen from my comments I have encountered some very interesting situations and I think that the more that people know about, what at first may appear to be a very simple question, the more they will understand the complexity of fire safety.
Regards Alan

Brian Paice
Member - 3 posts

I have found your coments on the use or not use question very interesting.
Some years ago I serviced fire extinguishers for a living, I was called to an office to refil a used extinguisher. The unit had been used to extinguish a small waste bin fire. The operator had been trained or at least on a course.The extinguisher used was 9ltr water, fired it into the bin shooting the contents up into the air, landing on his desk setting fire to the papers and destroyed his office. Presence of mind to close the door and prompt arrival of the fire service prevented loss of life or further damage. To use or not to use fire extinguishers, when a blanket will do?
Brian

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Brian, Yes, a blanket may have been better but you are unlikely to find a fire blanket in an office unless there is a kitchen nearby. I remember when I was studying in the USA I spent some time with a consultant that went around hospitals and one of his demonstrations was how to extinguish a fire in a waste basket using a piece of paper - and yes it did work - he slid the paper quickly across the top of the bin thus preventing air reaching the fire. I some times repeat it when I am explaining the combustion process and people are quite amazed. Regards Alan

Mark Talbot-Sykes
Member - 16 posts

Alan, Again thanks for the comment and actually I didn’t realise it was my question that sparked the debate! and yes I fully agree, the more people know the better they will feel and more they will understand, as someone that’s been involved in Safety for a lot of years, there is the real problem ‘opinion and interpretation’ and although goal setting legislation is an excellent way of empowering people, it does by the same token cause a lot of problems and opens the door for your more unscrupulous types! I have not really commented on some of the issues discussed but rather enjoyed the debate but I will just say having done a lot of Extinguisher Training and been involved in a number of Risk Assessment, I can see both sides of the argument but I could never foresee a situation where I could justify telling someone not to have FAFA’s, say in a populated work place! So I would say ‘Training and use’

Mark Talbot-Sykes
Member - 16 posts

Brian. The benefits of good training will identify that type of situation. Unfortunately a lot of trainers have little experience or practical hands on and only teach from training school procedures or what they have been shown, which is ok in a controlled environment. Also a number of well know companies produce DVD’s for Extinguishers Training and I have (to date) never seen one that teaches the correct way to use extinguishers, in particular the Dry Powder (Dry Chemical as it is referred to). A blanket could be used but again good training will identify when and when not to use, locations you are likely to find them and the advantages and disadvantages, how to use etc, so back to the main question ‘to use or not to use’ Use but make sure the training you are paying for meets your needs and is delivered by experienced trainers. Mark

Mark Talbot-Sykes
Member - 16 posts

For some reasons the ending to my comments were not displayed so here they are - comments that end my reply to Alan --- but of course every situation is different and I am always open to suggestion, opinion and am always willing to learn or try a new approach. Mark

Brian Paice
Member - 3 posts

Alan. Yes you would be unlikely to find a fire blanket in an office but is the only reason for this that standards do not recommend it? The cost to extinguisher suppliers would be rather high if this were to occur.
Mark I agree good training cannot be seconded, I have seen many courses over the years some good, some like a recent one I witnessed looking out of a window, consisted of the trainees firing extinguishers into a hedgerow at the edge of a very crowded car park. while this type of inadequate training is lulling people into a false sense of safety, fire extinguishers accessible to the ordinary worker will always be a hazard.
Brian

Phillip Simmons
Member - 1 post

When considering the advisability of staff being trained and authorised to use fire fighting aids - 'if confident and if it is safe to do so' - most comments originate from office or factory based staff. Can I 'throw in' the added complication of residential care homes, where residents are now much more elderly frail, mentally frail or recieving nursing care.

The RRO requires that the responsible person has systems and proceedures in place to enable the staff to evacuate all perosns to a place of safety - 'without relying on assistance from fire and rescue'. Clearly, it is entirely likely that the fire and rescue services will arrive in a timely manner and put the fire out, but if there is any delay, the staff must be in a position to complete the evacuation.

This brings me to the use of fire extinguishers. In the event of a care home, given the difficulties likely to be encountered assisting a number of frail residents, would it not be much better to train staff to fight small fires. Clearly, evacuation drills should continue until the fire and resue services confirm that the home is safe, but perhaps, suitable and sufficient training of staff could save lives?

Alan Cox
Member - 36 posts

Phillip, If you look at my previous comments about the NHS you are in very much the same position - many of the newer hospitals are designed and built so that patients can be evacuated on beds into an adjacent fire compartment but the majority of care homes don't have this facility so first aid fire fighting training is essential. I do know that you are in a very difficult position as I used to be part of the Health Authority Team that inspected homes so I have seen your problems at first hand.It is not easy to practice the evacuation of real patients for obvious reasons and in certain circumstances you may have to leave some patients for the Fire Service but nevertheless your fire evacution stratagy and training should allow for all these eventualaties. Regards Alan