“At present there is no standardized approach for an owner to track the design and construction process. Often times an owner has a level of expectation of what he is paying for, but the finished product doesn’t match up. Historically, there was really no way to quantify or monitor those expectations. That’s what commissioning does. It’s to make sure that there’s a process that walks you through pre-planning, design, construction, and occupancy, and what’s expected with all of a building’s active and passive systems at all of those steps. It’s designed so that building owners can rest at night knowing they got what they paid for and everything’s been done the right way. Often times owners are really in the dark. They’re not building experts, they’re not fire protection experts, they’re not roofing experts. They have to put a lot of trust in the people they hire.”

This reminds me of a project we did for a major banking facility where the client became extremely concerned with the performance of their fire protection contractor:

We reviewed the existing project documents, as well as the system components that were in place and provided information and guidance to the client. The existing contract was ultimately terminated, and we were retained to carry out an assessment to determine the fire protection systems and features needed. We also designed the suppression and detection systems.

Working closely with the client and the contractor, installation drawings were quickly developed and approved, and the systems were installed, reviewed, tested, and commissioned within a very short timeframe. The total time from initial assessment to system commissioning was approximately eight weeks, allowing the client to meet their regulatory commitment to improve the overall fire protection for the facility.

Commissioning is vitally important in fire protection. It establishes a checks and balances system to ensure that your assets are protected and that you get what you pay for.

Three years ago, we were brought in during the later stages of a project to upgrade the heating and cooling systems.  Unfortunately, the heating and cooling system project was done with no consideration to the future sprinkler upgrades and as a result, we ended up with a much more obtrusive system than we could have if some better planning had been done on the previous project.

There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of variations of code approved fire sprinkler protection schemes. FPE’s have to specify a fire sprinkler system that takes into consideration:

• Occupancy and hazard classification
• Possible storage configurations
• Manufacturing processes
• Environmental and site conditions
• Risk tolerance
• Project budget
• …and much more

While there may be only a couple right ways to design a sprinkler system, there are thousands of wrong ways.

Kenneth Isman, the vice president of engineering for the National Fire Sprinkler Assn, wrote this summary in Specifying Fire Sprinkler Systems for Consulting – Specifying Engineer Magazine :

The specifying engineer is required to be competent and knowledgeable in the design of fire sprinkler systems. Without addressing the questions asked, a sprinkler contractor cannot provide an adequate fire sprinkler system that will allow the building owner appropriate use of the building.

The specifying engineer can best serve his or her client by addressing issues related to codes and standards, design objectives/intent, hazard classifications, commodity classifications, materials, water supplies, and unsprinklered spaces. The specifying engineer should consider aspects of planning a sprinkler system that require engineering judgment to be applied.

If specifications provide the appropriate information, the sprinkler contractor will have a much easier time installing a sprinkler system that allows the building owner to use the building in the intended manner. By correctly representing the needs of the owner, the specifying engineer can add value to the process of getting a sprinkler system installed in a building and can save clients a significant amount of money during the life of the building.

For a recent project on a historical building, we were advised that a future heating and A/C system project was going to happen. Accordingly, we configured the piping in the sleeping rooms so that there would be space available for future fan coil units without having to re-work the sprinkler piping. We also brought an architect onto our team specifically to deal with interior finish issues and help us make the appropriate selection of sprinklers for their ornate parlors.

Harrington Group takes pride in listening to our clients and asking questions to gain a thorough understanding of their needs. Whether it be a state-of-the-art mission critical information technology data center, telecommunications or broadcast facility, complex manufacturing or high hazard industrial facility, or storage and distribution facility, we have the knowledge and experience to help answer complex fire protection questions and specify not only the most effective, but also the most cost-effective system(s) for the job.

An underwriter can develop a conceptual design for a particular solution, but the competence for an accurate review of the full design or shop submittal package is held only by an FPE.  FPE’s are the only experts within the fire safety industry who can manage the entire fire protection design process. Unless an FPE is involved, a major error can go undetected.

The Undetected Design Flaw

A client of Harrington Group constructed a new raw materials warehouse attached to an existing factory.  The warehouse was designed to accommodate high rack storage, which presented a high fire risk.  The factory was considered to be a highly protected risk (HPR), and the client’s property insurance underwriter for this factory specialized in HPR properties.

The existing water supply equipment was inadequate to handle the severe fire risk presented by the new warehouse addition.  The risk required a new fire pump and tank large enough to provide 300,000 gallons of water for fire sprinklers and fire department hose streams.

A decision was made by the client to build that tank as an underground concrete box with a structurally reinforced concrete roof to allow car parking on top.  The sprinkler contractor developed the full design, and prepared the shop submittal package for the new fire pump and tank.  The shop submittal package was delivered to the client’s insurance underwriter for review and approval.

The underwriter’s loss control consultant performed a review of the contractor’s shop submittal package and approved it with no comments, but the client did not entirely trust this review.  We were then asked by the client to expedite a second review and approval process for the new fire pump and water supply tank, and provide quality assurance oversight.  Time was of the essence because the contractor had already begun construction.

Upon review of the tank and fire pump design drawings, I discovered a major design flaw in the tank that would prevent the fire pump from using one-third of the water.  In other words, the pump would be unable to draw out the last 100,000 gallons from the tank.  I raised the red flag immediately and provided a design sketch showing the problem and the solution, just in time for the contractor to incorporate this solution into the tank construction process.  The cost of the new tank was $200,000.  My work prevented one-third of this cost from being wasted – or about $67,000.

How To Ensure Competency

Unfortunately, underwriters are not designers.  They create conceptual specifications but lack the training and experience necessary to assess the quality of a full design or shop submittal package.   The loss control engineers that work for insurance underwriters never develop the design competence necessary to perform an accurate review of a full design or a shop submittal package because their employers do not enable this competence to be developed. If a full design solution or shop submittal package contains a serious error, a client’s inability to receive an accurate review by the underwriter poses a safety risk to both the client and the insurance underwriter.

In order to overcome the chance of an oversight, clients must be able to recognize incompetency and ask for help.  To perform, or supervise, such high level work, a fire protection engineer should have at least 10 years of design work experience.  At that point, a fire protection engineer is an expert in developing full detailed designs and performing accurate reviews of shop submittal packages.  It is an FPE’s responsibility to manage the entire fire safety process from beginning to end.  The process includes evaluating the risk, communicating with Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ’s), designing several solutions, choosing the optimal solution, and creating the full design for implementation.  Business owners should not have to worry about adequate fire protection within their facilities.  Hiring an expert fire protection engineer from the outset will lead to the implementation of optimal and accurate fire protection solutions that will decreases the fire risk and utilize capital dollars effectively.

The fire safety landscape may seem simple at first glance. If you have a large facility that needs strong but cost-effective protection against threats like fire, just call a property insurance underwriter, right? After all, many buildings meet all of the protection requirements of an underwriter and never encounter a serious fire loss.  But, at what cost?   Companies who believe property underwriters and their protection standards are the beginning and end-of-the-line are often advised to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on fire protection solutions in order to comply.  There is a chance the expense is justifiable, but businesses should not rely on a property underwriter’s loss control consultant to make the final judgment.  A Fire Protection Engineer (FPE) is the only individual qualified enough to manage the entire fire safety process and their expertise can save you thousands in unnecessary expenses.

Why Haven’t You Known About Fire Protection Engineers?

Building owners and operators trust insurance underwriters to provide accurate risk assessments, conceptually design fire solutions, and do a quality check during the installation process.  However, fire insurance underwriters are not the same as FPE’s.  Their loss control consultants lack key training, skills, and experience in alternative fire safety design and solutions. Not knowing the entire range of potential solutions can result in implementing a solution that is unnecessarily expensive.  An FPE’s knowledge and experience ensures that they will find the most affordable fire safety solutions, support them with data from research, and be responsible for the full design process from beginning to end.

Affordable Fire Solutions

For insurance underwriters, the more a client spends to reduce risk, even if it is overkill, the greater the benefit is to the underwriter.  An insurance underwriter must put the insurance company’s interests before the client’s.  Underwriters are more often referring to company’s internal codes and policies that prescribe prefabricated, company-approved solutions rather than developing the most affordable fire safety solutions.  At best, the canned solutions are correctly applied, but no alternatives are recommended.  At worst, companies can waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on an ill-fitting canned solution, when a more creative, but still effective alternative could have been employed at a fraction of the cost.  An FPE’s goal is to find the simplest and least costly solution that satisfies the fire safety objective.  They are independent of the insurance underwriter and committed to the best interest of their client.

Supporting Claims With Data

Assessing a fire risk can carry a degree of subjectivity.  For example, a new underwriter might visit a facility and, due to their discomfort in an unfamiliar situation, they might observe fire risks that other underwriters and FPE’s would not.  A conservative assessment that overstates risk, even if it is unreasonable, will be favorable to an insurance company since they are trying to protect their bottom line.  The primary concern of an FPE is an accurate fire risk assessment. Coming in from the outside, they can make an objective assessment.  Using research and data, FPE’s can prove or disprove risk assessments to make sure they are accurately stated.

Managing The Entire Fire Protection Design Process

An underwriter’s loss control consultant typically is not a fire protection designer.  He will create conceptual guidelines for a specific solution.  This conceptual design is too general to be constructed.  It must first be completed as a full design, then converted to a shop submittal package, then fabricated and installed.  The loss control consultant does not have experience completing the full design, therefore, does not possess sufficient experience to perform a thorough and accurate review of the shop submittal package.  However, the underwriter offers this service to clients representing their loss control consultant as an expert in shop submittal package review.  This practice poses a safety risk to both the client and the underwriter if the full design or shop submittal package has an error.  Often, the error is not identified by the loss control consultant due to their lack of training and experience.  An underwriter can develop a conceptual design for a particular solution, but the competence for an accurate review of the full design or shop submittal package is held only by an FPE.  FPE’s are the only experts within the fire safety industry who can manage the entire fire protection design process.  Unless an FPE is involved, a major error can go undetected.

Safely Save Money

If your underwriter is requiring expensive modifications to a new or existing facility, hiring an independent FPE will save you time, money, and frustration.  FPE’s provide building owners and managers with the expertise necessary to ensure the quality of a fire protection solution design and implementation.  A quality fire protection solution delivers the appropriate level of fire safety at a reasonable cost.  Ensuring fire safety, finding affordable solutions, and managing the entire design and implementation process will assure that the client’s and underwriter’s needs are both met.

“Understanding the harmful effects of fire and the means to protect against them are central to the practice of fire protection engineering. Given this specialized background, more and more frequently fire protection engineers are tasked with investigating the cause of fires and explosions, as well as the failure of fire protection systems and their effect on life and property loss.

Often, these failures or accidents lead to legal proceedings, and fire protection engineers, as with other engineering disciplines, are retained to provide specific scientific and engineering expertise in order for the legal proceedings to reach resolution. “Forensic engineering” services are becoming a common offering for organizations and companies with traditional fire protection engineering divisions. Forensic engineering is defined as, “the application of the art and science of engineering in matters which are in, or may possibly relate to, the jurisprudence system, inclusive of alternative dispute resolution.”

This brings to mind a case Harrington Group worked on several years ago. A fatal fire occurred in a single-family residence. Investigators working for the insurance company performed an analysis for the purpose of determining the fire’s cause and the key factors contributing to the fatality. It was determined that the home was not equipped with any smoke detectors. One expert concluded that the presence of smoke detectors at the time of the fire would not have provided occupants with additional time to escape, and the fatality would still have occurred.

We were brought in by an attorney to review the expert’s analysis, which included the use of a computer fire model. In reviewing the analysis we ultimately determined that several critical factors were either overlooked or omitted by the expert. These critical factors supported that the presence of smoke detectors in the home at the time of the fire would have provided sufficient warning to the occupants to allow all to escape and avoid the fatality. Harrington Group’s thorough analysis and conclusions ultimately enabled the client to receive a favorable settlement with minimal expenditure.

Verifying Recommendations

A client had two facilities where cardboard carton flats were stored in double-row racks. The insurance underwriter previously assessed the flats as a Class III fire hazard, but due to the presence of corrugated paper board box flats on the pallets, he later upgraded the risk to Class IV. To maintain insurance, the client was told to remove the current sprinkler system and replace it with another system capable of handling a Class IV risk.

After Harrington Group assessed the fire risk, we concluded that insurance underwriter’s assessment was inaccurate. The paper board flats were a moderate, not a high risk, fire hazard. Our conclusion was based upon literature that performed tests involving similar materials. We presented the literature to the insurance underwriter to support our conclusion. They overturned their decision saving the client approximately $60,000 in unnecessary fire safety equipment.

Second Opinions

Business owners, underwriters, and fire safety engineers share a common ground in that they want a building to be safe. A tug of war can occur when an underwriter expects a business operator to pay above and beyond the normal amount to maintain coverage. Fire protection engineers can step in on behalf of the client and appease both parties. Accurately defining risk backed up by data is a fire protection engineer’s specialty. With the right expertise and data, affordable solutions can be found that meet the needs of even the strictest underwriters.

Tunnel Vision

Insurance underwriters (IU’s) are pretty good at identifying fire safety risks. A few years ago, a client approached us regarding the expensive solution their IU had recommended in order to maintain coverage. The IU had correctly determined that the current storage in the warehouse posed a fire risk that the facility’s sprinkler system could not adequately manage. To overcome the fire risk, he recommended a new sprinkler system and a larger fire pump at a cost of roughly $250,000.

The Investigation

After discussing the current storage situation with the warehouse operator, Harrington Group found that an alternative storage situation could eliminate the identified fire risk. Instead of completely redoing the sprinkler system, an alternative storage and rack layout would reduce the fire risk to a level that the existing sprinkler and water supply systems could adequately manage. The client’s needs were completely satisfied in terms of storage capacity and efficiency. After negotiating the acceptance of the alternative solution with the IU, they rescinded their recommendation and the client saved $250,000.

Common Threads

An underwriter’s job is to identify fire risks and recommend prescriptive solutions condoned by their superiors. Investigating a building as a stagnant structure with fire risks that need to be combated with a limited set of solutions can leave affordable alternative solutions overlooked. At best, the canned solutions are correctly applied and no alternatives are recommended. At worst, companies can lose hundreds of thousands of dollars on a fire risk that could have been solved at a fraction of the cost. A FPE’s goal is to look at all of the possible solutions and find the most reasonable one that provides both safety and cost efficiency.

We make ourselves very accessible to our clients. If they can’t reach us on the office phone, they know that they can call our cell phones and get us. This is just part of the core values that make our firm different from the other, larger fire protection engineering firms out there. Our values are made up of Service, Competence, Honesty, and Integrity, where we satisfy the needs of others to a high degree through providing exceptional service.

This got me thinking about one of our international clients, who has manufacturing facilities in South America. Although they did not require it, we recruited and hired a fire protection engineer who was born in Colombia and now lives here in Atlanta. She speaks fluent Spanish and English and is able to communicate effectively with our Spanish speaking clients. We are planning on leveraging her bilingual abilities with technology even further in the months to come. Because fire and life safety training is so important, we will be developing bilingual online training courses for our clients abroad. This will allow us to bridge the distance and to continue to provide the exceptional service our client’s are accustomed to.

“Supplemental pumping is the key ingredient for a large-flow water delivery operation, especially when distant hydrants are needed to supply engines already operating and in need of more water. Often at large fires, the first few units will lay from hydrants close to the fire and spot in the area needed. This is when a water supply problem usually starts. These units have everything they need to attack the fire. They have the personnel, correct apparatus placement, and proper deployment of the discharge evolutions. Since these units brought in hydrants close to the fireground, the hydrant grid system in that area is becoming depleted of water or pressure.”

Recently, we were approached for water supply and sprinkler analysis by a chemical manufacturer who was retrofitting a manufacturing plant to fit their needs. They faced potential delays due to possible inadequacies in their fire protection systems. The local fire marshal, who understood the need for proper water flow, questioned whether or not the existing water supply infrastructure would be adequate for the sprinkler system. Harrington Group was responsible for the investigation process, the identification of hazards, and the determination of appropriate protection requirements. Beyond the standard testing protocol and analysis, we tested the fire pump, the flow of the private yard hydrants, and the hydraulic grade. Fortunately, we were able to prove to the fire marshal’s satisfaction that the fire water supply was in fact adequate. Through proper investigation, demonstration and AHJ management, we eliminated the potential for a costly delay in construction.

“Experimenting on a university dormitory that was scheduled to be torn down, fire researchers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology have demonstrated that the correct combination of automatic fire sprinkler systems, smoke alarms and closed doors provided enough time and safe conditions for residents to escape safely and for firefighters to perform their job without undue hazard.”

The NIST findings are nothing new in terms of research, but the study still highlights the problems universities face when they need to retrofit dormitories. The problems renovating dormitories are two-fold. First, the window for installation is very limited. Normally, two months in the summer is the only time construction is allowed. There cannot be any obstruction of the student’s living quarters once the semester begins. Second, the fire solution needs to blend into the current dorm construction. Dormitories require extra ingenuity in order to meet these strict requirements. Fire Protection Engineers have to develop an affordable solution that balances good looks with a quick installation. The experience and expertise required to do the job well are not easy to find. The unique difficulties that universities face retrofitting dormitories makes building a new dorm to replace the old one an attractive option.  The challenging conditions with an existing dorm often result in expensive fire safety solutions…unless you have hired Harrington Group to develop them.

Recently, we saved $200,000 for a North Carolina University and completed the project before their aggressive construction deadline. To achieve such significant savings, we were made responsible for the design advertisement and bid support, construction administration, and final acceptance testing of their nine-story, high-rise dorm. Our unique sprinkler system design eliminated the need for an electric fire pump and emergency generator. Additionally, a decorative soffit solution didn’t require breaching the existing metal lathe and plaster ceiling assembly. Through working with the state AHJ early in the design process, we received approval allowing us to complete the project ahead of the very aggressive deadline. The combination of eliminating unnecessary fire system components, implementing elegant design solutions, and proactively managing AHJ approval saved the university time and money. We didn’t just meet the unique criteria, we exceeded it. If you have specialized fire safety needs you don’t need a fortune, you just need the right Fire Protection Engineering Consultant.