Risk Management and Human Error - Essay Example

? FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT OF A FURNITURE FACTORY Introduction Human error has wasted many precious lives and properties. We usually correlate human error as the cause of failure in every activity and undertaking. Most people and organizations have tried to reduce the risk of human error by careful planning. The right word perhaps is being ‘careful’, and being careful involves risk management. By listing possible errors and risks, we can avoid accidents and loss of lives and properties. Fires are caused by human error, or at least they are caused by laxity and ineptitude or carelessness. Fires can be avoided, or minimized, through careful risk management. Risk management involves listing down the risks involved in the premises and dealing with these risks. Human error – and fire – can be dealt with effectively with careful planning and an equal amount of study on the possible causes of fire. This paper is a risk management report on a furniture factory which manufactures dining room furniture and directly sells them to the public. Covered in this report are the application of methods of fire risk assessment and the necessary laws and regulations regarding safety in the workplace. We are concerned of the safety of people occupying buildings and premises. Qualitative and quantitative researches on fire safety are included in the discussion. The report will cover several aspects on fire prevention such as the materials used in furnishings and structures and their susceptibility to different types of fires, disposal and handling of dangerous substances that can cause fire in the premises, and many other aspects of fire safety. It is important to note that fire safety is a broad concept that carries many subtopics which are interrelated but relevant to this report. Fire safety is everyone’s concern but puts a lot of pressure and responsibility on the part of the owner and employer of business. The key legal requirements we would like to discuss in addition to risk management issues are the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR) and the Explosives Atmosphere Directives 99/92 EC (ATEX 137), which are closely related to our case study of a furniture factory. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 encompasses fire safety methods and prevention which are applicable only for England and Wales. This law covers many aspects of fire prevention and places a lot of responsibility on the shoulder of the employers and owners of business. It is also an extension of the first law, the 1997 Fire Precautions (Workplace) Regulations, which was not fully followed to the letter by employers and owners of business. (Grice, 2009, p. 23) Under the 2005 Order, the owner or employer acts as the ‘responsible person’ who is entrusted to prevent the risks of fire in his/her business premises, the area of responsibility, and must do everything in his/her power to conduct the necessary risk assessment. The provisions of the 2005 Order are clear about the different circumstances when the fire can occur. Risks of fire can be minimized by following the law. The responsible person must ensure that structures are constructed and maintained within guidelines prescribed by law. Fire prevention is safety itself, and this may correlate or link with the use of the right materials prescribed by the 2005 Order to ensure the safety of the persons in the premises. RISK MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES “Risk management starts and ends with quality.” (Kent, 2004, p. 31) Risk management means early identification of the threat of risks in the premises and finding out the proper solution to the identified risks. This is known as risk management process. It is one of the most important tasks for any company, business, or organization. Without the implementation of an effective risk management plan, the chances of failure of business are increased. Risk management planning is not only important for the success and stability of the business operation but also is instrumental for the security and safety of the employees working in a company or organization. Risks were simple when people were living without the amenities of technology and modern living. They multiplied during the industrial revolution, and subsequently after the introduction of technology. Machines and new equipment were applied to production and other business activities. More hazards and risks were acquired as more and more labourers work in factories. The practice of risk management began in the early 1950s. The change in attitude and philosophy and the shift to the risk management philosophy came to fore with the emergence of management science, which emphasizes on cost-benefit analysis, expected value and a scientific approach to decision making in the face of an uncertain future. As more and more people live close together, business has become more capital intensive, and our infrastructure is more vulnerable. There are terms we must define in this report. The term risk means deviating from the normal course of a particular structure, activity or establishment, which means it is probable that something could happen and this is within a range, which is from zero to a hundred percent probability. In other words, it could happen but it’s not a hundred percent certainty. Hillson and Simon (2007, p. 4) define risk as “any uncertainty that, if it occurs, would have an effect on achievement of one or more objectives”. When we talk of risk, we talk of the outcome or result. However, the results can be modified by at least determining what these risks are. This can be done through management and planning. Risk management involves supervision and management of an establishment or premises which has equipment, structures, and processes that need to be closely monitored in the course of production or operation. (Gallati, 2003, p. 5) Vaughan (1997, p. 8 cited in Brewer and Huque, 2004, p. 78) states that “Risk constitutes a condition in which there is a possibility of an adverse deviation from a desired outcome that is expected or hoped for”. Risks cannot be avoided, even if they ‘can be transferred, accepted, managed, minimized, or shared’ (Latham, 1994 cited in Rahman and Kumaraswamy, 2002, p. 131). Businesses face risks everyday in the course of their operations. These risks can range from economic downturn and adverse market conditions to losses arising from natural calamities or man-made accidents, fire, or as a result of corrupt practices of employees and managers of companies. Each contingency may generate financial losses that undermine businesses in achieving what must, no matter what other objectives are pursued, be regarded as the primary objective – namely maximizing profits. (Brewer & Huque, 2004, p. 78) Risk management (RM) is the protection of all of a company’s assets, including people, property, productivity, and profits. Managing risks involves taking care of the safety and security of individuals or organizations. (Saied, 1990, p. 46) Risk management has evolved as a way of preserving income and assets for minor losses, to protect people from danger and harm. In business, it is the job of management to protect the organization from more risks and further damage and losses. Risk managers have devised ways to do this by applying a scientific approach to deal with risk. This may require a step-by-step process. (Gallati, 2003, p. 11) Another term related to risk management that needs correct definition is ‘hazard’, which is according to Furness and Muckett (2007, p. 90) “presents a risk which causes an accident/incident which in turn causes injury, ill health, damage, or loss”. Oil and gasoline, paints, varnishes and other hazardous substances and combustible materials present in the premises of a furniture factory must be located in a secured and safety place. Terms such as peril, hazard, danger, and jeopardy are used interchangeably with each other and with the term risk. When we say there is risk, there is likelihood that something could happen to produce a loss – there is a possibility that the owner or manager could acquire a loss of the resources out of a peril. A peril creates the potential for loss. Perils include floods, fire, hail, and so forth. Peril is a common term to define a danger resulting from a natural phenomenon. (Gallati, 2003, p. 11) Fire safety aspects of buildings are of extreme importance for the health and safety of the employees and other persons present in and around the premises. The risks associated with fire include electrical short circuits, explosion risk, and some other forms of risks. Electrical connections can cause accidents and fire. This can be avoided through careful planning and design of the building. The design, construction, layout and furnishing of buildings play a key role in any fire safety management strategy. It is the prime responsibility of the electricians, electrical engineers, structure designers and architects to ensure safe and secured buildings or premises with safe and sound electrical works, and ensure that the fabric and materials that compose the building are not combustible, or comply with legislations and important laws of the state on fire safety and engineering. Fire risk management planning involves safety measures instituted by management to reduce accidents. It involves various critical factors like minimising flammable materials at the workplace, separating hazardous substances and explosives and placing them in secured locations, and ensuring that the structure can withstand fire. Initial measures for the fire risk reduction strategy include fire safety training for the company’s employees and the proper management of flammable waste materials. Long term measures include securing electrical wiring of the building, installation of effective fire control mechanisms, fire security alarms, designing the escape routes to be used in case of fire, and replacement and proper positioning of hazardous materials and substances. DESCRIPTION The offices bear the equipment and furniture of an ordinary office, with tables, chairs and computers, cabinets and other office stuff in place. The offices are not large enough and business can be conducted thoroughly and with ease. The risks can be pinpointed as we examine the floor plan, the activities inside the factory and the presence of materials in the factory. The factory has some violations if we base our assessment on the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. We have to examine first the facts around the premises and the various circumstances in relation to the number of persons present at one time, the structure, and other important aspects of this case study. The entire furniture building measures 43 meters wide by 28 meters deep and 6 meters high (4 meters in other areas). The materials used in construction of the furniture building were of steel frame with brick/breezeblock infill which is quite good and follows safety standards, which means building materials are not fire hazards. At one time, the premises are occupied by 100 occupants, distributed into several areas in the factory – 80 in the production area, which is approximately 37 meters wide by 21 meters deep by 6 meters high. Adjacent to, but which can still be considered within, the production areas, are the storage raw goods which are 50 square meters each. The storage raw goods consist of timber in ventilated stacks. The finished goods storage has goods stored on post pallets in multiple rows to a height of 3 meters. The storage raw goods and the production areas are themselves susceptible to fire and considered fire risks, considering that raw materials such as wood, fabric, dangerous substances such as paint, varnish and adhesives are commonly used but which are not properly handled and kept. There are no adequate precautionary measures in place, for instance, fire hydrants or extinguishers. There are fire extinguishers which are not properly commissioned. Although sprinklers have been installed, still sprinklers malfunction and the presence of a fire coordinator is not enough. The owner, or responsible person, should appoint a responsible fire assistant to conduct regular check up on the sprinklers. The fire coordinator must be responsible enough to conduct checks and recommendations on the factory situations on a regular basis. A considerable number of people are concentrated in the production areas but the exits are too far from the production areas. This is a dangerous spot. Walls cover a great portion of the production areas, perhaps for security reasons, but this is dangerous to the production workers who will be frustrated looking for exits when a fire takes place. It is the production areas where raw materials including the sawdust, varnish, fabric and other combustible materials are found and used in manufacturing. It is most likely that fire will start or originate from these areas. The production areas and the storage raw areas are the weakest spots where fire can occur and originate probably because of carelessness or accidents. The showroom and sales office are totally divided by a wall from the production area. Again this was planned probably for security reasons, but this puts the workers in a dangerous situation. The showroom’s exit is situated on the side of the building. This provides difficulties and barriers for people during emergency; the exit must be toward the backyard or back portion of the building where it will lead to a vacant area or fire point. It is not clear in the factory plan if there are other buildings situated adjacent to it. If there is any building, there has to be a space provided at the back of the factory so a fire exit can be provided. If it is a dead end, then it is very dangerous to the evacuating workers. The sides of the factory, too, have to be cleared. If there are buildings or other private premises, a way has to be allocated for the fire exit. At least 20 customers fill the showroom on Fridays, so this becomes a congested area. Again, an exit door becomes apparent in this situation. A space for exits and entrances has to be added to provide more freedom of action in case of fire. Taking into consideration the Regulatory Reform (Fire safety) Order 2005, it is the responsibility of the owner or employer who is described or referred to as the ‘responsible person’, to “make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks to which relevant persons are exposed for the purpose of identifying the general fire precautions he needs to take to comply with the requirements and prohibitions” under the Order 2005 (Article 9, Part 2). The provision for emergency routes and exits in case of fire is stipulated in Article 14 of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 which states that the responsible person (in this case the owner of the furniture factory) must ensure that emergency exits are provided in premises, and that these exits should be kept clear; that the exits should lead to a place of safety; that the persons must be possibly evacuated from the premises in case of danger; and that there should be adequate number of exits in the premises. The Fire Safety Code prohibits sliding doors to be used for emergency exits and fastened emergency doors which cannot be easily opened during emergencies. Emergency routes and exits must have signs and properly lighted. (Part II, Article 14) Other negative and positive points noted inside the factory include: All machineries have emergency circuit breakers and safely situated inside the factory. The height of the building is commendable but there is not enough ventilation which can easily ignite or cause fire. No cooking equipment other then microwave in the office. The date of last risk assessment which is 18 months ago is not advisable. This is laxity on the part of the government regulators because fire inspections are placed on their shoulders. But it is the duty of the responsible person to remind government personnel on inspection scheduling. Housekeeping is not properly executed as there are saw dust filtered into bins and in some places. A cleaner that comes in only at 9 pm is not a good practice. The owner should employ additional house help to perform janitorial work. There is a fire notice, located at the reception area, for all contractors and visitors of the premises. It is also not clear in the factory plan where the exits are, what kind of exit routes, whether they are properly lighted and whether the workers can easily leave premises during fire. The Raw Materials Warehouse Raw materials are stored in this area which measures 9m wide x 11m deep by 6m high. The raw materials are a mix of stacks of timber, paints and varnishes, plastic bags and cardboard boxes, natural fibres for seat upholstery, and polyester/cotton fabric material. These are all fire-risk materials. This is also a violation of the DSEAR Regulations – dangerous substances are not properly kept or disposed of, paints and varnishes are mixed with other flammable materials or easily combustible materials, making the area a high-risk point in the factory. The Finished Goods Warehouse The finished-goods and the raw materials warehouse both have sliding doors, clear violations of the Fire Safety Order 2005 on the subject of exits and sliding doors. This makes evacuation or exits of goods and personnel difficult in case of fire. Sliding doors should be replaced with normal close-open doors. Dangerous substances under the DSEAR Regulations 2002 The emergency exit leads to the courtyard which has the tank containing 1,000 litres of diesel. This is one of the weakest points in the furniture plan – the existence of the diesel tank. Once fire starts, it can easily spread and blow out the diesel tank. The diesel tank should be in a safe place. If it is possible, the diesel tank should be placed underground. Dangerous substances, such as varnish, paints, adhesives and diesel, are present in the workplace. Safekeeping and disposal of these substances are covered under the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002. Varnishes can cause fire if not properly handled in the workplace. (Health and Safety Executive, 2009) The regulations for correct and proper disposition and handling of dangerous substances and explosive materials are embodied in the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR) and the Explosives Atmosphere Directives 99/92 EC (ATEX 137). The HSE and Local Authorities, Fire Brigades and Petroleum Licensing Authorities are tasked to enforce these laws for the safety of premises and occupants therein. (DSEAR and ATEX Regulations, available at http://www.dsear-regulations.co.uk/) The DSEAR and ATEX regulations apply to organizations with 5 or more employees. The DSEAR places much responsibility on owners and employers of business establishments and premises. Dangerous substances are substances found in the workplace that can cause harm or accident if not properly handled or separated from the rest of other substances. Examples of this are varnish, paints, LPG, gasoline, and other flammable materials. (Health and Safety Executive, 2009) The DSEAR requires that employers or responsible persons must: determine what dangerous substances are present or being used in the factory or in the workplace; institute measures to remove them from the work areas, and if not possible, to keep them safe or separated from the other raw materials so that they cannot cause fire; introduce steps to keep these substances possible mishandling that can lead to accidents or fire; provide plans and steps that would be enforced in case of accidents, fire and other emergencies; inform employees of the presence of these substances, warn and train them on the proper measures to take in case these dangerous substances could cause accidents or fire; identify and classify work areas where these dangerous substances are located and to avoid any possible actions that could ignite the substances. (Health and Safety Executive, 2009) Application of the DSEAR and ATEX Regulations The provisions of the DSEAR are not clearly implemented in this case study of a furniture factory. The presence of diesel tank in the courtyard is a fire risk. The DSEAR recommends that this should be controlled by putting it in a safe place. A tank that is situated underground will provide a solution in this instance. Other recommendations provided by the DSEAR are for reduction of the dangerous substances in the factory or to keep it at a minimum; avoiding maximum storage of the dangerous substances; and store them in a totally safe place. If the diesel tank cannot be situated underground, perhaps reducing the diesel storage to the minimum and put it in a safe place. Fire Protection Alarms No fire alarms have been installed in the factory. A fire detection alarm system is a key element among the fire protection features of any premises (Moore, 2003, p. 5). NFPA defines fire alarm as “a signal initiated by a fire alarm-initiating device such as a manual fire alarm box, automatic fire detector, waterflow switch, or other device in which activation is indicative of the presence of a fire or fire signature” (NFPA Glossary of Terms, cited in Craighead, 2009, p. 143). A fire detection alarm is one of those needed in fire safety in the workplace to prevent further damage caused by the fire, or to warn the owner, or authorities such as the fire department, and the general public. Early detection can lead to early suppression of the fire and prevent it from spreading before it could cost much damage to the building or structure. The user of the fire alarm system must define the reason why the system is being provided. This step will identify the protection goals of the user and also the external factors that may influence the fire alarm system installation. The user may determine that the protection goal is the preservation of the lives of the persons occupying the building. Such a life safety goal and the protection features it dictates will help determine the type of fire alarm system. (Moore, 2003, pp. 5-6) There are 20 fire extinguishers which are not properly commissioned in the premises. The fire coordinator must ensure that the risks are properly addressed all the time. Risk Assessment of a Dining Room Furniture Factory What is the situation inside the furniture factory? This is a risk management report on a furniture factory which manufactures dining room furniture and directly sells them to the public. Covered in this report are the application of methods of fire risk assessment and the necessary laws and regulations regarding safety in the workplace. We are concerned of the safety of people occupying buildings and premises. Qualitative and quantitative researches on fire safety are included in the discussion. The entire furniture building measures 43 meters wide by 28 meters deep and 6 meters high (4 meters in other areas). The materials used in construction of the furniture building were of steel frame with brick/breezeblock infill which is quite good and follows safety standards, which means building materials are not fire hazards. At one time, the premises are occupied by 100 occupants, distributed into several areas of the factory – 80 in the factory, which means the production area, which is approximately 37 meters wide by 21 meters deep by 6 meters high. There are also people in the offices, in the storage areas and in the showroom. A considerable number of people are concentrated in the production areas but the exits are too far from the production areas. This is a dangerous spot. Walls cover a great portion of the production areas, perhaps for security reasons, but this is dangerous to the production workers who will be in frustration looking for exits when a fire takes place. It is the production areas where raw materials including the sawdust, varnish, fabric and other fire-risk materials are found and used in manufacturing. It is most likely that fire will start or originate from these areas. The production areas and the storage raw areas are the weakest spots where fire can occur and originate probably because of carelessness or accidents. The offices bear the equipment and furniture of an ordinary office, with tables, chairs and computers, cabinets and other office stuff in place. The offices are not large enough and business can be conducted thoroughly and with ease. The risks can be pinpointed as we examine the floor plan, the activities inside the factory and the presence of materials in the factory. How was risk assessment conducted on the furniture factory? The manager of the furniture factory consulted reliable personalities from the government and was guided to the HSE website where guidelines and instructions provided for the correct and legal ways to conduct risk assessment of a furniture factory. Following the guidelines set by the HSE, the manager identified the hazards. He did the following risk assessment activities. 1. The manager, who is described in the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 as the ‘responsible person’, identified the hazards of fire in the factory by doing the following: He made use of the “Essentials of health and safety at work” publication as his guidelines which guided him through the entire process of risk assessment. He made an up-to-date and a comprehensive look and observation at the inside of the factory, taking down notes on possible risks that could cause instant fire; He talked to workers, took down notes on their ideas and opinion and their suggestions for the possible avoidance of risks. He asked the suggestions of the various supervisors from the different departments, taking into account the experience and expertise of these people in dealing with contingencies, especially fire. He also dug up records and consulted the accident book and history of the furniture factory, noting the accidents and contingencies that establishment and the people have experienced all through the years of its existence. 2. The responsible person made a thorough analysis of his observation and wrote down who would be the victims of the hazards he had recorded and how would it possibly happen. 3. The responsible person recorded hazards, made an analysis and listed down possible solutions and controls on the hazards he had noted down. With good research, backed up by effective and talented workforce who have done good practice on other areas of interest in the factory, the responsible person compared the controls he had noted down to the good practice of government and private sectors in dealing with health and safety of furniture factory. The manager wanted to make sure that the controls he had listed down and the good practice that was consulted coincided and matched; if not, he wrote down what further steps and remedies he had to do on those controls by further consulting experts and experienced employees in the factory. 4. The risk assessment data and records were further analysed and more actions included the appointment of responsible people who would deal with the risks listed and what actions should be implemented. The risks and the solutions were pinpointed and properly recorded. 5. The responsible person discussed his findings with the fire coordinator. Analyses and reviews were conducted on the steps and actions instituted. They decided that the actions have to be done on a regular manner, possibly once a year and to be updated once changes in the factory are instituted. The risk assessment, including the problems and actions taken were recorded and published, and forwarded to all the workers and employees of the factory for their proper guidance. FACTORY MANUFACTURING DINING ROOM FURNITURE DATE OF RISK ASSESSMENT: 22/01/11 FACTORY MANUFACTURING DINING FURNITURE DATE OF RISK ASSESSMENT: 22/01/11 EVENT TREE FOR A DINING ROOM FURNITURE FACTORY This is the event tree for the fire protection system of the furniture factory. The scenario depicted in this event tree is the activation of sprinkler system. We have to ensure that the system works, or the sprinkler will function anytime a fire ignites. Four main events are being considered in the above event tree. Smoke is considered a threat in addition to fire. For the spread of smoke and fire, there are factors to be considered such as fire load, the susceptibility to fire of the materials in the premises, and the height and ventilation of the building. This can be analyzed with consideration of the reaction of the fire protection system on fire spread and smoke movement. References Brewer, B. and Huque, A. S., 2004. Performance measures and security risk management: a Hong Kong example. International Review of Administrative Sciences 2004; 70; 77. DOI: 10.1177/0020852304041232 Craighead, G. 2009. High-Rise Security and Fire Life Safety (Third Edition). New York: Elsevier Inc. DSEAR and ATEX Regulations (n.d.). What do DSEAR and ATEX stand for? [online]. Available at: http://www.dsear-regulations.co.uk/ [Accessed 26 January 2011]. Furness, A. and Muckett, M, 2007. Introduction to Fire Safety Management. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. Gallati, R., 2003. Risk management and capital adequacy. New York: McGraw Hill Publishing, Inc. Grice, A., 2009. Fire risk: fire safety law and its practical application. London: Thorogood Publishing Ltd. Health and Safety Executive, 2009. The Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 [online]. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/fireandexplosion/dsear.htm [Accessed 25 January 2011] Kelly, J. and Male, S., 1993. Value Management in Design and Construction: The Economic Management of Projects. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. Kent, J., 2004. Risk management. [e-journal] Available through: www. Housingzone.com [Accessed 29 January 2011]. Legislation.gov.uk., n.d. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 [online]. Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/1541/article/14/made [Accessed 25 January 2011] Liso, K. R., 2006. Integrated approach to risk management of future climate change impacts. [e-journal] Available through: Building Research & Information, ISSN 0961-3218 print ?ISSN 1466-4321 online # 2006 Taylor & Francis Read More