Fire hazard and fire risk assessem

STP 1150 Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment Marcelo M Hirschler, editor ASTM Publication Code Number (PCN) 04-011500-31 ASTM 1916 Race Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Fire hazard and fire risk assessment/Marcelo M Hirschler, editor (STP; 1150) Based on papers presented at a symposium held in San Antonio, Tex., on Dec 3, 1990 "ASTM publication code number (PCN) 04-011500-31." Includes bibliographical references ISBN 0-8031-1447-8 Fire hazard assessment-Congresses Fire risk assessmentCongresses I Hirschler, M M II Series: ASTM special technical publication; 1150 TH9446.3.F57 1992 92-16044 628.9'22-dc20 CIP Copyright © 1992 AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS, Philadelphia, PA All rights reserved This material may not be reproduced or copied, in whole or in part, in any printed, mechanical, electronic, film, or other distribution and storage media, without the written consent of the publisher Photocopy Rights Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by the AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS for users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Service, provided that the base fee of $2.50 per copy, plus $0.50 per page is paid directly to CCC, 27 Congress St., Salem, MA 01970; (508) 744-3350 For those organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged The fee code for users of the Transactional Reporting Service is 0-8031-1447-8/92 $2.50 + 50 Peer Review Policy Each paper published in this volume was evaluated by three peer reviewers The authors addressed all of the reviewers' comments to the satisfaction of both the technical editor(s) and the ASTM Committee on Publications The quality of the papers in this publication reflects not only the obvious efforts of the authors and the technical editor(s), but also the work of these peer reviewers The ASTM Committee on Publications acknowledges with appreciation their dedication and contribution to time and effort on behalf of ASTM Printed in Philadelphia, PA June 1992 Foreword This publication, Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment, contains papers presented at the symposium of the same name, held in San Antonio, TX on Dec 1990 The symposium was sponsored by ASTM Committee E-5 on Fire Standards Marcelo M Hirschler of Safety Engineering Labs in Rocky River, OH presided as symposium chairman and is the editor of the resulting publication Contents Ot'erview-M M HIRSCHLER INTRODUCTION TO FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT ~ Importance of Carbon Monoxide in the Toxicity of Fire Atmospheress M DEBANNE, M M HIRSCHLER, AND G L NELSON rife Risk Rating Schedules-J 24 M WATTS, JR USE OF FIRE TESTS FOR FIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT £qluating the Hazards of Large Petrochemical R U ACTON, AND W GILL adncal Cable Fire Hazard M M HIRSCHLER Assessment Fires-N R KELTNER, 37 with the Cone Calorimeter- 44 Pa-formance of Plastic Plumbing and Electrical Assemblies-1 B ZICHERMAN Products in Fire Resistive 66 FIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT Fire Hazard Assessment of Composite Materials: Current Hazard Analysis Methodology-p The Use and Limitations of J DINENNO AND C L BEYLER 87 Fire Engulfment of Pressure-Liquefied Gas Tanks: Experiments and Modelingu K SUMATHIPALA, G V HADJISOPHOCLEOUS, N U AYDEMIR, C M YU, C M SOUSA, F R STEWARD, AND E S VENART 100 Development of a Benefit Analysis for an Onboard Aircraft Cabin Water Spray System-R G HILL, c P SARKOS, AND T R MARKER 116 FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT How to Tell Whether What You Have is a Fire Risk Analysis Model-1 Predicting Product Fire Risk: A Review of Four Case Studies-R S W STIEFEL, F B CLARKE, III, AND J R HALL, JR A Reliability Methodology ComputerRooms-J Applied to Halon 1301 Extinguishing STECIAK AND R G ZALOSH v R HALL, JR 131 W BUKOWSKI, 136 Systems in 161 Overview Fire has been a scourge of society for a very long time now, both in terms of its human and economic impact: fire fatalities, fire injuries, and direct and indirect losses from fire North America, in particular, has the dubious distinction of hosting the highest fire fatality rate per capita in the industrialized world The traditional way in which fire studies have been made is by using fire tests, of various degrees of usefulness, which measure a particular fire property (or fire-test-response characteristic, in ASTM fire parlance) The results have then been used to rank materials based on a single fire property Unfortunately, fire performance (response of materials or products in fires rather than fire tests) is often poorly predicted by many tests which have usually not been designed based on sound engineering principles It has now become clear that there needs to be better predictive ways to make fire safety decisions These predictive tools are fire models, which are used to analyze (or assess) the danger (fire hazard) associated with burning a particular material, product, or assembly in a specified situation (fire scenario) Thus, ASTM has defined fire hazard as "the potential for harm to people, property, or operations" (ASTM Terminology Relating to Fire Standards, E 176-91d) However, fire hazard presupposes that a fire will take place Fire risk is a measure of fire loss (life, health, animals, or property) that combines (a) the potential for harm in the various fire scenarios that can occur and (b) the probabilities of occurrence of those scenarios, within a specified period, in a defined occupancy or situation As such, fire risk does not assume that a fire will take place, but it incorporates the probability of the fire occurring Thus, whereas fire hazard measures the potential for harm with respect to one single scenario, fire risk measures the potential for harm in the full range of all possible scenarios, using the probabilities of each one of those scenarios to measure the relative importance of each of them Therefore, a fire risk measure is a statistic derived from an underlying probability distribution on a measure of fire hazard It is important to stress, however, that by its nature, a fire risk measure is not applicable to the prediction of the occurrence or of the potential for harm of an individual fire With the expansion of the capability of large computers and the increased use of the personal computer, it has become possible for many people to manipulate large amounts of information, and to use it in order to predict fire performance Among the consequences of this has been the appearance of a number of fire models that can predict fire hazard or fire risk The ASTM board has adopted a policy on fire standards This policy acknowledges the existence of three kinds of fire standards: fire-test response standards, fire hazard assessment standards, and fire risk assessment standards The board gave committee E-S on Fire Standards the exclusive authority to write fire hazard or fire risk assessment standards In order to better understand what this involves, Subcommittee E-S.3S on Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment is working on standard guides for the development of fire hazard and fire risk assessment standards Several other subcommittees are also working, and have made various degrees of progress on a number of fire hazard assessment standards In order to aid in the understanding of fire hazard and fire risk assessment models, ASTM Committee E-S has organized this international symposium, conceived within subcommittee E-S.32 on Research, held in San Antonio, TX, on Dec 1990 The 16 papers published herein can be divided into broad categories: (1) Introduction FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT to Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment, (2) Use of Fire Tests for Fire Hazard Assessment, (3) Fire Hazard Assessment, (4) Fire Risk Assessment, and (5) Fire Risk Assessment and Building Codes Introduction to Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment This section includes papers that deal with important aspects that need to be considered in order to carry out a fire hazard or a fire risk assessment A common misconception in the public view of fire hazard is that fire hazard is primarily or exclusively a matter of smoke toxicity The paper by Debanne et al summarizes the two most important sets of human forensic studies carried out to investigate the issue of smoke toxicity and its implications for fire hazard The studies showed that the victim population distributions are very different for fires and non-fire carbon monoxide fatalities, but that the blood carboxyhemoglobin distributions, once equal populations are compared, are very similar Furthermore, the importance of carbon monoxide in fire atmospheres has not changed between the 1940s and the 1980s The authors conclude that death in fires, by smoke inhalation, appears to be overwhelmingly associated with carbon monoxide poisoning Moreover, their work shows that carbon monoxide can kill human beings (rather than test animals) at blood carboxyhemoglobin levels much lower than was previously thought possible The combination of this finding and the fact that most small scale smoke toxicity tests cannot predict carbon monoxide levels adequately means that such tests, and smoke toxicity in general, must playa small role in fire hazard assessment It is often thought that fire hazard and fire risk assessment is necessarily the result of complex mathematical models Watts shows that heuristic models of fire safety, which he calls fire risk rating schedules, can be used as indicators of fire safety He presents in his paper, three examples of fire risk rating schedules which have varying degrees of sophistication The first one is the prediction of heat release rates of upholstered furniture by using a model that combines laboratory scale heat release measurements with various empirical parameters The next one is the basis for ASTM Practice for Assessment of Fire Risk by Occupancy Classification (Commentary), E 931, which developed an occupancy classification based on a Delphi approach and assigned various weighting values to a number of elements Although this is no longer accepted as a form of fire risk assessment, it is a very useful simple means to give numerical results to common sense The final example is a trade-off model, again derived from a Delphi approach, to trade off various fire safety alternatives, such as active (smoke detectors, sprinklers) and passive (products with better fire performance) fire protection measures Use of Fire Tests for Fire Hazard Assessment The papers in this section deal with means by which fire tests can be used to predict fire hazard in a variety of fire scenarios One of the types of fire which has the most serious potential is the case of the high intensity fires which can occur in petrochemical facilities, or when liquid fuels are transported In ASTM Subcommittee E-5.11 there is work in progress to develop a standard test method to address such fires Keltner et al addresses one aspect of this problem, when dealing with petrochemical plant fires They show that it is essential in such cases to adequately characterize the fire environment Moreover, in that connection they discuss those cases where fire temperature is the dominant issue to be addressed and those other cases where fire heat flux is the more important parameter, since there is no univocal correlation between the two They conclude that for good fire testing practice both temperature and heat flux should be taken into consideration before making a fire safety decision rue Hazard Assessment The papers in this section address specific fire hazard assessment problems, by using computer models, statistics, a combination of models and engineering judgment, or a combination of experiments and analyses DiNenno and Beyler address the way in which new, unconventional materials (composites) might be used to replace traditional materials in naval applications The new materials had not been expected to offer the same degree of fire protection, but were known to yield various other advantages Thus, the authors indicate that the results of various fire response tests can then be used, in conjunction with a "fire hazard analysis package" to determine an acceptable level of fire hazard Unfortunately, the authors argue that the failings of the existing "packages" make it necessary to use sound engineering judgment to overcome their limitations, and to combine different approaches Once that has been done, progress can be made in evaluating fire hazard and in weighing the results against the other advantages and disadvantages Pressure liquefied gas tanks, especially when used in transportation, need to offer particular protection because of the potential intense energy of any resulting fire The best known examples of such fires are the Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosions (BLEVEs) which have caused many serious accidents Sumathipala et al have developed a zone fire model, which they call PLGS-l, together with computational rules, PLGS-2D, to describe the behavior of such tanks when there is an external pool fire in their proximity Results from experiments involving both midsize (40 L) and large externally-heated partially-filled horizontal cylindrical vessels have been compared with the predictions of the computer ARE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT models This work has focussed on heat transfer and pressure response parameters, in order to improve the understanding of the physical phenomena and develop fire protection strategies Fatal fires in aircraft seldom occur However, when such a fire occurs, often following a survivable crash, the results can be catastrophic Hill et al have initiated a study of the benefits and disbenefits of installing an on board aircraft cabin water spray system The study, which is currently underway, involves aviation authorities of various countries, including the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Canada This system has been shown by the authors in full-scale aircraft fire tests, to decrease fire temperatures, and thus, lower burning rates, heat release rates, and smoke emission rates On the other hand, such a system is generally incapable of extinguishing the fire and can cause a series of unwelcome consequences in case of false discharges The final result of the study will likely determine whether such systems will be installed in commercial aircraft Fire Risk Assessment This section contains papers which address the problem of fire risk, either by explaining what a fire risk model is, or by using one to apply to a specific fire scenario After lengthy discussions and disagreements, both based on fundamental concepts and terminology, the paper by Hall is an attempt to clarify what a comprehensive fire risk assessment is and is not The paper describes the most common misconceptions about fire risk analysis The paper also describes key concepts in fire risk analysis and shows how fire risk is simply one facet of overall risk In particular, it explains the types of fires and types of human behavior that should not be excluded The paper poses questions to the reader in order to ascertain whether the model in question is a fire risk assessment model or something else The concepts discussed by Hall are illustrated in the work of a research team put together by the National Fire Protection Research Foundation (NFPRF) to develop a comprehensive fire risk assessment methodology that could be applied to a large number of fire scenarios and a large number of products The paper by Bukowski et al is one result of that program The authors start by explaining the methodology developed, which is based on the use of the fire hazard model HAZARD I, followed by an 8-step procedure In this approach, after the product/occupancy set has been selected, representative characteristics are chosen and incorporated into the fire model The model is then run for a base case product, which can represent the average of what is presently being used, or a particular product of specific interest, for whatever reason The fire risk assessment is then carried out for the base case The product characteristics are then changed to those of a new product and the fire risk assessment carried out again The process ends with the two results being compared This paper describes four cases studied: (1) upholstered furniture in residences (the single fire scenario associated with the largest number of fire deaths), (2) carpets in offices (a very low fire risk scenario), (3) concealed combustibles (electrical cables) in hotels (a low fire risk scenario, but one which has been associated with public controversy), and (4) interior finish in restaurants (a case which would address heavily regulated products and would introduce vertical flame spread into the model) In every case, the results are compared with the fire experience The work succeeded in developing a methodology and applying it satisfactorily to a variety of scenarios A different kind of fire risk assessment methodology is applied by Steciak and Zalosh to the use of gaseous (Halon 1301) extinguishing systems in computer rooms The methodology uses occurrence probability data applied to the different failure scenarios for its calculations Finally, the effects of various measures, such as human intervention, inspection intervals, 240 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT A number of factors led the fire experts on the development team of the BCAF to simplify the relationships among the fire events described below and to consider these events as independent These reasons include the following: • The need to develop risk event trees at a macro level where the structure is selected to optimize the use of existing data and facilitate the estimation of probabilities and parameters by members of the Delphi Panel (described below) • The need to allow the use of results from existing and future detailed models (fire spread models, evacuation time models) outside the basic tree and to allow for the incorporation of these results within the macrostructure • The primary interest and the necessity to estimate risks associated with impacts of code changes The components and events of the fire risk tree had to reflect the building features that could be affected by code changes (for example, effects on smoke spread to means of egress only; effects of smoke spread to adjacent compartments, thus the zonal separation of means of egress and other adjacent compartments/buildings; destruction of fire separations and closures) • The requirement to limit the level of sophistication and detail that is practical in the actual application of the fire risk tree as a result of limits on availability of historical and other type data and the wide range of possible events and probabilities • The considerable effort that will be required to match the level of detail of a fire risk tree (including the entire realm of possible fire events and their interdependencies without any simplifications) to both the requirements of the lAC and the overall mandate of the BCAF Above all, it must be remembered that the BCAF is a strategic tool The changes in risk probability are compared with broad estimates (on a logarithmic scale) of acceptable and unacceptable risk probabilities and willingness to pay per year of life saved (see Fig 3) This permits a wide "factor of safety" in the calculations, while maintaining an acceptable level of credibility in decision making Description of Fire Events The first branch of the tree deals with the probability of ignition as the starting point of the fire in a compartment (the basic building space addressed by the building code) The second set of branches is concerned with the progress of fire, after ignition, within the area of origin Two mutually exclusive events are defined and considered for purposes of risk analysis (as with all other branches) The fire may remain in the preflashover stage or progress to postflashover Given that the fire does not progress beyond preflashover, the tree structure considers the possibility of manual or automatic extinguishment Occupant and/or fire fighter injuries may result from exposure to such conditions and even death in some cases as a result of smoke inhalation and/or burns Property damage to building elements and components may also result from these paths If the fire progresses to the postflashover stage, it can either remain confined to the compartment of origin or spread by convection or destruction (assuming either a predominantly convective or a predominantly destructive spread) Furthermore, this spread may result in smoke only, or in fire and smoke in the areas that it occurs Spread was assumed to occur in either of two areas: means of egress or adjacent compartments/buildings Therefore, any particular building may be schematically described as KATZIN ET AL ON CANADIAN FIG 3-Comparative BUILDING CODE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 241 risk assessment graph for the Canadian building code assessment framework having three zones: compartment of origin, means of egress, and adjacent compartments and buildings All paths in the fire risk analysis tree lead to four loss types (consequences) and, therefore, fire risk analysis deals with four risks: • risk of death to occupants, fire fighters, and others, 242 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT • risk of fire fighters' injuries (as a result of the fact that these injuries constitute on average approximately 40% of the total reported injuries), • risk of injury to occupants and others, and • risk of property damage to building elements, components, and structures Method of Fire Risk Analysis and Assessment This section discusses the use of statistics and expert opinion as a data source in the fire risk analysis process, the method of application of the fire risk analysis process, the method of application of the fire risk analysis tree, and the assessment method and use of results in the lAC Use of Existing Statistics and Expert Opinion There are two types of data that need to be obtained before the application of the fire risk trees: • the probability of different branch events per building type that may depend on the design, construction, and occupancy, and • the losses associated with a series of events (scenario); in the case of the fire tree, these losses are deaths, fire fighters' injuries, occupant injury, and property damage Published and unpublished provincial statistics for the different building types providing the probability of certain events such as ignition (all provinces) and confinement and/or extinguishment (a few provinces) may be obtained Similarly, available statistics may provide the value of the total losses related to a given building type However, for a number of fire events along the tree, statistics are not available from Canadian sources The share of each fire scenario of the total losses in a building type is also difficult to assess from statistics To complement the statistical values available and estimate the probabilities of events and loss shares, expert opinion is necessary A Delphi approach is used to estimate the needed probability values This approach is described in detail in the section below Estimates from experts in the field are used as substitutes for unavailable statistics until appropriate and reliable statistics are available for use in the lAC The Delphi Method The Delphi Method can be defined as a method of "structuring a group communication process so that the process is effective in allowing a group of individuals, as a whole, to deal with a complex problem" [31· This process is mainly concerned with the use of experts' opinions The communication process is usually structured so as to allow the following: • • • • a certain degree of anonymity for individual responses, feedback of individual contributions of information and knowledge, an assessment of the views and opinions contributed by experts, and some opportunity for individuals to revise judgment and views Applications The Delphi Method was developed in the early 1950s to estimate the probable effects of an atomic war on the United States Subsequent applications in the 1960s were mainly KATZIN ET AL ON CANADIAN BUILDING CODE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 243 concerned with technological forecasting Although technological forecasting remains one of the major applications, the Delphi Method is used today in other areas in which judgmental information is indispensable Applications include ascertaining values and preferences, simulated decision making, and evaluating policy issues This method is also used in management and operation research in which there is a need to incorporate subjective information (risk analysis) Delphi has also been used in solving societal problems in areas of health care, the environment, transportation, and fire safety [3J One example of its use in fire safety evaluation has been in identifying cost-effective fire safety retrofits in health care facilities [81 Another example is the use of Delphi input for decisions concerning the equivalence of fire safety alternatives [9J and the use of Delphi in the optimization of fire safety decisions [101 Delphi Approach in Risk Analysis The Delphi approach to the risk estimation used in the fire risk analysis of outlined below Note that the base case risk for each building type is carried Also, for purpose of efficiency, panel member comments are obtained for a proposed code changes (that is, several changes are presented at once, each evaluated independently) the lAC is only once "batch" of one being A panel of 30 to 35 fire experts is assembled The types of backgrounds reflected in the participant group include fire service officials, building officials, building scientists, building researchers, members of building industry associations, and private consultants Regional representation is also a consideration in the selection process A draft questionnaire is designed and pretested on a few of the participants The final questionnaire is developed taking into consideration the initial comments and feedback The structure of the final questionnaire used to obtain estimates of existing (base case) risk probabilities is as follows: • • • • • The overall purpose and mandate of the BCAF is described The components of the BCAF are described in general terms The approach to fire risk analysis and assessment is discussed Definitions of all fire events that are part of the fire risk tree are provided Schematic drawings and basic construction characteristics of the reference buildings are provided • Tables corresponding to each fire event are provided for the reference building in question The expert inputs his/her estimate in these tables • Tables to allow the estimation of a particular scenario's (path) percentage share of fire losses for each reference building are also provided Members of the Delphi panel are then interviewed on an individual basis The purpose of these interviews is to provide the experts with the questionnaire and answer any questions related to its structure During these meetings, the approach to risk estimation is explained as per the questionnaire described above and the questionnaire is discussed The questionnaire is then left with the participant to fill out The estimates required are related to existing (or base case) risks in different building types Experts are asked to give their best estimates based on knowledge, experience, and typical characteristics of building types involved A preliminary analysis of the results is carried out This includes a statistical analysis and qualitative assessment of participants' comments and suggestions A consultation paper 244 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT is then prepared incorporating a statistical summary (mainly the mean and standard deviation) and comments from the first round are sent back to the participants allowing for a second round of estimation To assure anonymity, the statistical summary does not indicate any names, and all comments are edited so as to maintain confidentiality In a typical Delphi survey, reiteration continues until consensus is reached before preparing a final analysis Consensus is assumed to have been reached when a certain percentage of votes fall within a prescribed range (for example, two units on a ten-unit scale) [3] In this case, a second round could be considered sufficient to reach an acceptable consensus between panel members on base case estimates A standard deviation of less than 15% is considered satisfactory for purposes of the BCAF (see discussion below) For a proposed code change, a similar process to the one described above applies Experts are asked to evaluate the change in base case risk estimates (based on consensus) as a result of a requirement(s) of the code change The experts are provided with a questionnaire structured as follows: • a description of the code change (that is, existing article and changes as provided by the official code development agency); • the reference buildings affected by a change and conceptual design and construction possibilities of how a change can be implemented; and • base case risk trees of the reference buildings affected, with the event and branch probabilities for the base case (consensus values) shown on them The interviewer presents the questionnaire, answers any questions related to the process and the code changes, and leaves the questionnaire with the expert The expert changes any branch event probabilities he/she judges affected A similar reiterative process and statistical analysis is carried out until consensus is reached (standard deviation of estimates is less than 15%) Statistical Analysis of Delphi Estimates The statistical analysis is based on a population of 30 or more, and is, therefore, carried out according to a large sample size For each estimate, the mean, standard deviation, and median are calculated The frequency and distribution of estimates is determined and plotted graphically This allows noting large scattering of estimates and which participants may have caused this Scattering is expected after the first round because of different backgrounds and views, and in this case, because of regional differences as well In addition to the above, a 95% confidence interval is determined for the mean based on maximum error of estimate Based on this range, the percentage of estimates falling within is determined as another indication of reaching consensus The degree of skewness of the results is also determined The above analyses make it easier to determine which estimates may not be part of the consensus group and enable the second round Delphi to concentrate on these areas and on comments from such participants Two final points should be noted First, the estimates are given in 5% intervals Second, in a transportation study using the Delphi method, the standard deviations after the third round were between 10 and 24% (16% on average) [11] This may give an indication of an acceptable deviation in this case and which may be below 15% In both the base case risk estimation process and the code change risk estimation process, standard deviations after the second round only varied between and 15% and were considered acceptable KATZIN ET AL ON CANADIAN BUILDING CODE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 245 Method of Application of Fire Risk Analysis Tree The following is a step-by-step description of the process used to determine a change in risk (fire deaths in this case) as a result of a proposed code change and for one particular building type Base Case Risk Estimation Step i- Assign base case branch probabilities based on statistics and/or expert opinion Step 2-Calculate path probabilities for the base case; path probability is the product of branch probabilities along that path Step 3-Knowing from statistics that on average there are, for example, 0.013 deaths occurring per fire in a certain RB type, the analyst distributes this risk among those paths ending with a death according to expert estimation Loss Constants Calculation Step 4-Calculate loss constants for each death path A loss constant equals the base case path risk (Step 3) divided by the base case path probability (Step 2) Code Change Risk Estimation Step 5- Assign new branch probabilities as a result of a code change as estimated by experts Step 6-Calculate new path probabilities for each death path Step 7-Calculate new path risks by multiplying the new path probabilities (Step 6) by the corresponding death path loss constants (Step 4) Step 8-Sum up all new path risks obtained from Step to get the new death risk caused by code change incremental Change in Risk Step 9-Calculate incremental change in death risk This equals the difference between the base case risk of 0.013 (Step 3) and a new risk determined from Step (assume 0.0152) Therefore, the incremental change in death risk as a result of the code change in this hypothetical example is an increase of 0.0022 deaths per average fire in that building type The changes in risks related to fire fighters' injuries, occupants' injuries, and property damage are assessed in the same manner Method of Assessment and Use of Results in iAC The incremental changes in risks determined from Step is the value that is transferred and used in the lAC Such a value is changed to years of life gained/lost over the life cycle of the building based on the average age of a casualty in a building fire and the individual's average life span It is then prorated to represent the total volume of new construction of a certain building type Other risks such as injuries are changed to monetary values and, with property damage, are prorated to total new construction To assess the socio-economic impacts in terms of overall societal expectations and standards, the results are applied to the Comparative Risk Assessment Graph (see Fig 3) This 246 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT graph is based on fundamentals of risk appraisal developed by a Swiss consulting engineering firm [12,13] The fundamental concepts have been adapted to the Canadian context for purposes of the BCAF Based on the graph, the dollar costs/savings per year of life saved/ lost and the probability of individual risk can be assessed according to established societal standards corresponding to different risk categories and degree of an individual's control over his or her environment This method enables a quantitative assessment of the results of the lAC Applications The BCAF has already been applied to more than 40 proposed changes to the OBC, and the results of the analysis have been taken into consideration by code development decision makers This paper presents the results of the assessment of one of the proposed code changes requiring that all residential dwellings governed by Part of the OBC have fire sprinklers designed and installed in conformance with NFP A 13D Standard for the Installations of Sprinkler Systems in One and Two Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes The analysis and assessment concluded the following: • The dollar cost to society per year of life saved is around $950 922 (1989 dollars) • Deaths are reduced by 67% in dwellings with sprinklers, which is comparable to a reduction of 63% estimated in a NIST study on sprinklers [14] • Dollar savings as a result of reduced number of injuries and reduced property damage are only about 0.5% of the costs involved in mandating sprinklers • The cost per life saved is around $35 180 000, which is comparable to the cost per life saved estimated independently by a Canada Mortgage and Housing and Corporation study • This cost is clearly higher than what society is willing to pay as determined from the Comparative Risk Assessment Graph Flexibility of Framework The overall approach and the BCAF are both flexible enough to incorporate future modifications and/or adjustments Experimental fire risk analytical models such as HAZARD I (Centre for Fire Research, NIST) can be used to supplement the fire risk analysis and assessment approach Possible uses of such models include the following: • • • • • validating and complementing statistical databases, complementing expert judgment, predicting risks for specific conditions, predicting path probabilities, and providing worst case/best case scenarios for use by the Delphi Panel The validity of HAZARD I scenarios in a Canadian context are being considered before attempting to make use of it for tempering the results of the BCAF The limitation of HAZARD I modelling of the OBC and the extent to which it can be directly linked to the BCAF are also being studied Further assessment of possible uses of HAZARD I and other experimental models with the BCAF can prove vital to enhance the BCAF to suit new users and new applications KATZIN ET AL ON CANADIAN BUILDING CODE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK 247 Conclusions The BCAF's approach to fire risk analysis and assessment provides a rational approach at a macro level to assess the fire risk impacts of building code changes The approach allows an optimum use of existing statistics and relies on a Delphi Panel to complement the statistical data and estimate fire event risk probabilities The use of a Delphi Panel has proven viable and necessary at this stage for applying the BCAF to more than 40 changes to the GBe This is supported by the results of assessment of mandating residential sprinklers which indicate a prohibitive cost per life saved and which are comparable to results from other studies The structure of the fire risk tree and the lAC allows for future integration of more statistical data to replace the Delphi values and is flexible enough to incorporate future modifications and/or adjustments and integrate experimental fire risk models In conclusion, the fire risk analysis and assessment approach used in the Canadian BCAF has proven to be a viable method for the systematic and quantitative assessment of fire risks as a result of proposed code changes The results of its application have generally been in accordance with expectations of code policy makers and with results of other assessments References [1] Rawie, C C, "Estimating Economic Impacts of Building Codes," NBSIR 81-2402, United States Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly National Bureau of Standards), Gaithersburg, MD, 1981 [2] Harvey, C S., "A Flexible Approach to Fire-Code Compliance," Architectural Record, 1988, pp 130-135 [3] Linestone, H A and Turoff, M., Eds., The Delphi Method, Techniques and Applications, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, MA, 1975 [4] Donegan, H A Shields, T J., and Silcock, G W., "A Mathematical Strategy to Relate Fire Safety Evaluation and Fire Safety Policy Formulation for Buildings," in Proceedings of Fire Safety Science the 2nd International Symposium, Hemisphere Publishing Corp., 1988, pp 433-441 [5] Beck, V R and Yung D., "A Cost-Effective Risk-Assessment Model for Evaluating Fire Safety and Protection in Canadian Apartment Buildings," paper submitted for presentation at the International Fire Protection Engineering Institute-V, Ottawa, 21-31 May 1989, National Research Council of Canada Ottawa, Jan 1989 [6] Beck, V R "A Cost-Effective, Decision-Making Model for Building Fire Safety and Protection." Fire Safety Journal Vol 12, 1987, pp 121-138 [7] Harmathy T Z "A Suggested Logic for Trading Between Fire-Safety Measures," Fire & Materials Vol 10 1986, pp 141-143 [8] Chapman R E Hall W G and Chen P T "A Computerized Approach for Identifying CostEffective Fire Safety Retrofits in Health Care Facilities," NBSIR 79-1923, National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly National Bureau of Standards) Gaithersburg MD 1979 [9] Harmathy T Z "A Decision Logic for Trading Between Fire Safety Measures by Delphi Group," paper to be submitted to Fire & Materials revised March 1988 [10] Harmathy T Z 'The Delphi Method-A Complement to Research," Fire & Materials Vol No.2 1982 pp 76-79 [11] Wilson D and Schofer J "Decision-Maker-Defined Cost Effectiveness Framework for Highway Programming." Transportation and Research Record 677, Transportation Research Board Washington DC, 1978 [12] Merz H A and Schneider Th "Who is Afraid of Risk Criteriary,'· Hazard Prevention Jan./Feb 1987 pp R-13 [13] Bohnenblust H and Schneider Th "From Legal Principles to Engineering Decisions: Where Do We Shift to Quantifications')." paper presented at the V International Safety Summer Symposium on Safety Science Leuven Belgium 1983 [14] Ruegg R T and Fuller S K "A Benefit-Cost Model of Residential Fire Sprinkler Systems," N BS Technical Note 1203 United States Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly National Bureau of Standards) Gaithersburg MD 19R4 Clifford S Harvey! The Measurement of Building Fire SafetyExample of the Application of an Existing Method for Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment at the Community Level REFERENCE: Harvey C S "The Measurement of Building Fire Safety-Example of the Application of an Existing Method for Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment at the Community Level," Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment ASTM STP 1150 Marcelo M Hirschler Ed American Society for Testing and Materials Philadelphia 1'i92 pp 24H-254 ABSTRACT: A proven method for the evaluation of community fire protection was implemented to accomplish fire and life safety goals without the usual increases in cost for equipment and personnel The method increases relative protection yet demonstrates an actual decrease in the cost of new construction Entry into the system was voluntary during the first years of activity; participation became mandatory when the savings became clear and no significant opposition was present The method relies on the understanding of equivalency concepts for code compliance KEY WORDS: measurement munity fire protection equivalency fire safety life safety goals management com- Those readers expecting this paper to be an engineering problem with an engineering solution will be disappointed As construction costs continue to rise, fire safety design will be driven by the need for mutual respect and understanding between fire professionals and the community they serve Buildings designed as fire safety systems will be less expensive to build and more user friendly None of the adopted codes will be met to the letter, but all will be met as to their intent Although firmly based on a sound understanding of the dynamics, growth, and control of fire, this paper will discuss the translation of those understandings into the philosophical approach necessary for acceptance by the community Implemented successfully, the method provides a solution for curbing increasing costs of manual fire suppression This paper will focus entirely on Boulder CO; the method, however, is germane to communities of all sizes Discussion of the Problem In 1968, Boulder had three fire stations housing four engines, one truck company, one squad, and 42 total members on three shifts As the city began to grow, no additional monies were provided to increase the fire fighting staff or equipment The need became so critical that, in 1976, a study was undertaken to determine what Boulder actually needed for fire protection, and further to explore innovative approaches for providing that protection The study group consisted of representatives from the local firefighters union, the fire chiefs 'Assistant fire chief Fire Department Boulder CO 248 HARVEY ON MEASUREMENT OF BUILDING FIRE SAFETY 249 office, and the city administration The goal was to develop a plan to provide adequate levels of fire protection, without the expected corresponding increase in dollars spent Development of the Solution Boulder's residential areas posed one problem; they were spread out in such a manner that acceptable response times to emergencies were many times not possible The commercial growth was another concern New construction was often beyond the fire fighting capabilities of the community even though new buildings were being built in compliance with national codes A single method of addressing both existing problems and future concerns was necessary if the community was to avoid the almost certain future fire disasters Enter the active thought process of "designing" the acceptable fire In the mid-70s two members of the fire department had attended a college level course entitled The Measurement of Building Fire Safety at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts This course had been developed by Prof Robert Fitzgerald and Rexford Wilson, both of whom spent a great deal of time fine tuning the concepts before offering the first classes The methodology had its roots in the systems concepts approach then being evaluated and molded by the National Fire Protection Association's (NFPAs) Technical Committee for Fire Protection in Structures The full range of fire development and extinguishment, from overheat, through full building involvement, and on to complete extinguishment, was thoroughly discussed Each event having an affect on how a fire grows and what slows that growth was discussed and evaluated At the end of the course, each participant had the skills to evaluate, that is, place a numerical value on, all conditions contributing to the growth and extinguishment of any fire With this knowledge the user could develop a strategy for community fire protection based on the inherent strengths and weaknesses it had built into its codes and manual fire fighting forces The measurement of building fire safety describes a series of events, each of which must be evaluated before a determination of fire safety can be made The events which are a part of the evaluation process are too numerous to discuss here, so it is strongly recommended that everyone reading this paper attend the next course session offered A short overview is, however, helpful and necessary Most importantly, remember that a fire will go out in one or more of only three ways Evaluating the Self-Termination Approach All fires eventually go out by themselves Because the fuel is dry and in close proximity to other fuel some fires not go out until they run out of fuel For others, because their fuel is densely packed, and in small amounts some distances from other fuel, fires go out without involving other fuel When something about the dynamics of fire is known one is able to evaluate the probability that a certain room will or will not go to full room involvement A weak fire room will have a low value, while a strong fire room will have a high value Using the methods and concepts learned at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), the group started its focus by evaluating how easy it would be to control the potential for any fire occurring in Boulder It was quickly seen that this was highly improbable to any measurable degree, except through the work of a strong fire code that was vigorously enforced Even with a strong fire code, it was impossible to control the type, amount, and configuration of fuel in any space A strong, vigorously enforced fire code will, however, allow a fire department to leave a strong fire prevention message with its residents, in a manner we usually refer to as the yearly fire safety inspection During this interface with the community, 250 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT engine companies and other fire prevention teams are able to have some effect on the configuration and type of fuel in the space being inspected, and can therefore have some level of control over the fire spread potential, although we know this control is limited even under ideal conditions Evaluating the Automatic Sprinkler Approach Next, a fire can be extinguished due to the efforts of an automatic sprinkler system Assuming the sprinkler system has been properly designed, properly installed, and is in service, we know the system has a very high probability of successful operation A poorly designed or maintained system has a lesser chance of successful operation, and would show a lower probability of success The group already had a great deal of information concerning the performance of sprinkler systems All the information seemed to point to one thing; an adequate sprinkler system is 98 to 99% effective in controlling a fire Further, multiple life losses in fully sprinklered buildings are unheard of The group was comfortable with the WPI concepts, so they evaluated all the events which must occur to have a strong value for success of the sprinkler system They found the success of almost all of those events was assured during the design, installation, and general maintenance of the system They also recognized how valuable sprinkler protection could be when folded into a community fire protection plan Evaluating the Manual Attack Approach Lastly, a fire has some probability of being extinguished by the local fire department, who accomplish the job manually Although people usually see their local firefighters as able to any job they are asked to regardless of its size, it is clear from studying the events for successful manual extinguishment that local fire departments are two things; they are crucial to ensuring that their community does not burn to the ground, but of very limited value when it comes to extinguishing fire Any local fire fighting force can be evaluated The many events leading to successful extinguishment of any fire can be evaluated, and a numerical value indicating the relative strength or weakness of each event occurring successfully can be assigned The study group began to focus on manual suppression and the realistic effect the fire department could have on a fire they were asked to extinguish Using current thinking and technology concerning how much equipment and personnel it took to fight a fire, it was determined that Boulder's capability at the time was less than 000 ft2 (185.8 m2) As this area seemed rather small to all of us, we did some research into past fires and a detailed analysis was performed using the measurement concepts learned at WPI Not only did our past experience verify our actual capabilities to be less than the 000 ft2 (185.8 m2), but the work done with the measurement concepts showed us where we might improve our service delivery With those changes made, we pegged our capability at 2000 ft2 (185.8 m2) The actual cost of providing fire suppression services was also discussed in detail In Boulder, the average yearly cost of providing just one firefighter on duty is about $45 000 On a three platoon schedule, providing one person on duty means hiring four people That amounts to $180 000 per year for that one position on one fire engine So the group had to keep the total number of firefighters to the absolute minimum while expanding the services they provided When one has completed evaluations and assigned values to each of the three probabilities that a fire will be extinguished, those three main events (self-termination, automatic sprinklers, and manual attack) are combined for a final, cumulative limit of flame spread value HARVEY ON MEASUREMENT OF BUILDING FIRE SAFETY 251 If the people are willing to accept the levels of actual capability determined to exist, no other work is necessary However, if they believe those levels are not acceptable, decisions need to be made to elevate the community to a higher level that is acceptable This was the task of our study group The Measurement Approach to Developing a City Fire Protection Plan Now that the group had evaluated the various ways a fire could be extinguished and had seen the relative strengths and weaknesses of each one, it set out to develop a community fire protection delivery plan which recognized those facts, that is, one which discouraged redundancy and encouraged equivalency through the use of sprinklers It was clear a fire prevention inspection program, no matter how rigorous, could only so much to prevent a fire The fire fighting capability of our community was limited, and expensive to increase to any noticeable degree They further saw the protection provided by sprinklers, protection which was ongoing year after year at only maintenance costs after installation In order to avoid as much staffing costs as possible, the group recommended that the city fathers build two small residential type fire stations, housing two-person engine companies They recommended reducing the total number of people on other equipment, from four to three They recommended that new equipment be purchased which would much of the traditional human work, thus allowing the reduced levels of personnel to concentrate on the tasks their equipment could not perform And they recommended a strong emphasis be placed on convincing people of the value of sprinkler protection The group stopped short of recommending a sprinkler ordinance, even though they felt it was appropriate They felt it would better serve the community to let it see for itself what the voluntary installation of sprinkler protection, in return for a large number of tradeoffs, could accomplish This was a far sighted recommendation, one which we believe made the ultimate implementation of a sprinkler ordinance virtually painless Implementation of the Study Group's Recommendations In 1978, the city opened a fourth fire station, and a year later opened a fifth and sixth It is important to recognize these were capital expenditures, and included only limited additional personnel costs Two of the three stations were situated in predominantly residential areas, and housed small pieces of equipment with two people assigned to them They were limited in their capability, but were closer to the fire or medical call, thus better able to handle the call with fewer people This recommendation has concerned our fire fighting personnel for some time, but statistically the decision has been very successful At no time have either of the two, twoperson pumpers ever come upon a situation they were not able to deal with until a backup engine arrived The saving on personnel alone currently amounts to over four million dollars This, with no increase in fire losses or deaths The other recommendation the city fathers adopted was more philosophical in nature They agreed that if the city was going to have codes, they were going to be enforced After a presentation concerning equivalency, they endorsed the concept of '"meet the codes or meet the curve," which referred to the graphical curves used to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses arrived at when evaluating the three ways fire could be extinguished Both the Building and Fire Departments were given a mandate that people needed to meet the codes to the letter or, in lieu of that meet the intent of those codes through equivalency 252 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT Recognize that this is a fundamentally different approach than simply passing a sprinkler ordinance The fire department, having been schooled in the art of equivalency determination felt very comfortable making decisions of this type For example, if a sprinkler system is installed where not otherwise required, it can take the place of rated walls, rated interior finishes, wire glass, and so forth Either one or the other can be used to limit the spread of fire The Building Department had a harder time with this, and since we were trading off their code requirements as well as ours, they felt very uncomfortable with the whole issue until they had received more training Further, builders initially felt we were mandating sprinkler protection where it was not required When we explained they had a choice to either meet the code to the letter or provide sprinklers in lieu of many code requirements, they felt more comfortable It was only after one builder embraced the program that its acceptance was ensured Case In Point- Builders and Developers We were presented with plans for a five story, 50 OOO-ff(1415.85 m~) office building The codes in place did not require the building to be sprinklered They did, however, require the corridors to be one-hour rated They also required rated interior finish, enclosed stairways, maximum dead end distances, secondary fire department equipment access, proper numbers and locations of hydrants, and so forth We asked the developer to a spreadsheet on the building which showed it meeting code to the letter That meant all the Building and Fire Codes, and all the Fire Department requirements for hydrants, access, standpipes, and so forth, had to be met to the letter He prepared the spreadsheet and showed us what it was going to cost him to build the building We then asked him to prepare another spreadsheet showing the voluntary installation of a full sprinkler system, but this time allowing for the list of trade-offs the City would allow for the building being fully sprinklered The difference in the two spreadsheets amounted to $50 000, or $10 000 per floor This was the amount he would save if he sprinklered and took advantage of the trade-offs Needless to say he provided the sprinkler protection Word spreao quickly, and virtually all new construction was presented, up front, as voluntarily sprinklered property Case In Point-Architects and Designers Several architectural firms approached us concerning design of Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) They knew we were encouraging equivalency to written codes, something they felt would allow their design juices to flow freely These firms also knew the Fire Department requirements, and felt many of these requirements might be eliminated or diluted if a building was self-protected with a sprinkler system We worked with these firms, and were able to eliminate some of the required access, the required turn around, and several of the required fire hydrants This meant they could design the building and its surrounding land area to work for the users of the building, not for massive fire department operations which would no longer be necessary They too now felt comfortable with our method of determining equivalency Case In Point-City, Land, and Urban Planners Since becoming proactive instead of reactive, the Fire Department has become highly visible in the community No higher visibility was accomplished than with the Planning HARVEY ON MEASUREMENT OF BUILDING FIRE SAFETY 253 Board itself With our strict enforcement and interpretation of the fire code, we were accused of driving the design process in the community with our requirements When the Planning Board wanted a building situated in a certain section of a lot, doing so invariably triggered a fire department requirement for additional access or hydrants Houses behind houses are a popular concept in Boulder now, but that sort of configuration creates a situation that is unmanageable for our fire department With the limited personnel in the department, we can not fight fires that are not easily accessible With the advent of meet the code or meet the curve, however, the Planning Board embraced the concept, because building projects they wanted to rearrange were routinely coming through as sprinkle red projects, not triggering any additional requirements of the Fire Department They too have actively endorsed what we are doing with the measurement concepts Codifying Every thing-A Good Faith Move The system of voluntary sprinklers in return for trade-offs worked very well but it took a greal deal of staff time to continually reinvent the wheel for new people After seven years of working with a voluntary, optional system, we felt comfortable that those involved in the building industry trusted us, trusted equivalency and liked the way the use of equivalency smoothed out the whole process When we proposed to require sprinkler protection however, there was some immediate flinching from those same people People in all phases of the building industry had a concern What happens if Chief Harvey and the Building Department personnel leave the City Who will replace them, and will they have the same philosophy that their predecessors had? This was a valid concern We drew up an ordinance which not only required sprinkler protection in most new (and some existing) construction, but one which codified the trade-offs, so when my counterparts in the Building Department or I should leave the City, the construction disciplines will be protected How is this different from what other communities have done? It is categorically different The usual way a sprinkler ordinance is passed is this; today we not require more than the national codes, tomorrow we will This sort of mandated, brick wall approach creates anger, frustration, and mistrust in the community Our way was to slowly get people up to the level of full sprinkler protection through voluntary installations with trade-offs, let them get comfortable with it, then pass an ordinance which, in essence, says that business as usual will continue Our public process was the smoothest of any community with which I have communicated Usually there is a great clamor of complaint; "I can not afford it, and so forth." Before we made anything mandatory, we showed the community they could not afford not to Our ordinance passed with unanimous approval something unheard of these days Further, we had representatives from the architectural planning, developing, and building ownership arenas standing up and supporting what we were doing Truly a winwin situation What Should We Have Done Differently? There are some inherent hazards to approaching community fire protection in the manner we did, hazards that were not apparent when we first began First and foremost, a fire department and its members become highly visible in the building community when undertaking a project such as this Until and unless all parties affected by the process feel comfortable with the concepts, there will be distrust and anger Builders may feel you are mandating installations that are not required Your Building Department may be very uncomfortable leaving the comfort of the written word in favor of something else Planners may feel you are placing their concerns for aesthetically pleasing results on the back burner 254 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT when you mandate code to the letter The answer to calming all these fears is found in one word, education Hold classes and seminars for whomever will attend Include city fathers and people from other city departments who might not even be involved The more people you can expose to this concept, the less trouble you will have with people's understanding of it Secondly, and almost more importantly, the question of consistency in code enforcement will most certainly surface In the old days, an office building was an office building, and all office buildings had to meet the same standards, even though those requirements might not be necessary or apply to a specific office building Certainly, everyone can see the differences between a three story, 30000-ftc (S49.51 mC) hotel, and a 50 story, 3000000 ftc (84 951 mC) hotel The codes might have identical requirements for both buildings, but the buildings should be treated differently Although they have the same function on the surface, one is clearly dealing with a different problem than the other, and should be dealt with differently Even though this is pure logic and pure use of a systems approach, many citizens will not take the time to try and understand it Conclusions Successful fire protection and life safety design depend on all areas of the many construction disciplines in our communities getting together with each other, including planners, building and fire officials, owners, designers, and builders New engineering methods and techniques will certainly smooth the implementation of, and enhance, fire protection decisions made by those communities People will have to consciously decide what level of protection from fire they prefer, and actively pursue the design of future buildings with that philosophy in mind A strong understanding of the methods used to determine specifically where any community stands from a fire protection standpoint is critical, and using the Measurement of Building Firesafety is an excellent way to accomplish this Only when a community knows its actual fire protection capabilities, will it be able to determine where it wants those capabilities to go And only after determining that, will they be able to design new and remodeled buildings to meet those goals Buildings in the future will be designed as systems rather than structures, and such design criteria will see buildings which not only hold the line from a cost standpoint but which are easier to use for their intended purposes Bibliography Fitzgerald R and Wilson R The Measuremelll of Building Firesafety, course workbook and study guide, 1975 and 1976 editions Lucht, D A "The Role of the Systems Concept in Firesafety," New Approaches to Evaluating Firesafety in Buildings, Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences Conference, National Academy of Sciences Office of Publications, Washington, DC, Sept 1978, pp 5-19 Roux, H J., "Design Alternatives Analysis," New Approaches to Evaluating Firesafety in Buildings Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences Conference, Sept 1978, pp 20-24 Walts, J M Jr., "A Review of the Past, Present, and Future of Education and Training in Systems Approaches to Evaluating Firesafety in Buildings." New Approaches to Evaluating Firesafety in Buildings, Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences Conference, Sept 1978, pp 137-141 Wilson, R., "An Introduction to the Measurement of Firesafety in Buildings," New Approaches to Evaluating Firesafety in Buildings, Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences Conference, Sept 1978, pp 83-118 Technical Committee on Systems Concepts for Fire Protection in Structllres, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy MA Standards Council, Guide to the Firesafety Concepts Tree, NFPA #550, 1986 Edition National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA 30 Dec 1985 Managing Fire Services, 2nd Edition, International City Management Association, Washington DC, pp.118-120 /" ... FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT to Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment, (2) Use of Fire Tests for Fire Hazard Assessment, (3) Fire Hazard Assessment, (4) Fire Risk Assessment, and (5) Fire. .. on Fire Standards the exclusive authority to write fire hazard or fire risk assessment standards In order to better understand what this involves, Subcommittee E-S.3S on Fire Hazard and Fire Risk. .. policy on fire standards This policy acknowledges the existence of three kinds of fire standards: fire- test response standards, fire hazard assessment standards, and fire risk assessment standards