Belgian Sprinkler Campaigns
On 6 August 2009 nine elderly people died in a care home fire in Melle in East Flanders, Belgium. Two months later two more elderly people died in a care home fire in Genappe in Walloon Brabant, Belgium. Neither building was sprinklered. The care home in Melle was new and met the latest fire safety code. Yet nine people died. Our Belgian members asked that the EFSN respond so we brought them together, discussed what we could do together and who might help us.
As in many countries, the Fire Brigade is influential in deciding what fire safety measures should be applied in a new building and in making changes to the fire safety building code. In Belgium the Fire Brigade is the Authority Having Jurisdiction. We therefore reached out to the Belgian Fire Brigades and conducted training seminars for fire officers at PIVO, a Fire Brigade School near Brussels. A sprinkler demonstration unit has been installed at PIVO and is regularly used to show fire officers how well sprinklers suppress a fire.
To support our efforts we set up the Belgian Fire Sprinkler Network (BFSN), whose members include all the major fire sprinkler installers and suppliers in Belgium. With their membership fees the BFSN is now able to fund a part-time chairman who runs the organisation and represents the members on various codes and standards committees. The EFSN continues to work closely with the BFSN.
Sprinklers are now better understood and more widely used in Belgium. The Flemish government funded a series of fire tests to evaluate the benefits of sprinklers in care homes, leading to guidance favourable to sprinklers. A revision to the national fire safety code introduced a requirement for sprinklers in large underground car parks. The Brussels Fire Brigade introduced guidance for existing buildings with sprinklers proposed in some otherwise non-compliant situations.
The BFSN continues to organise sprinkler seminars. It has also worked with all stakeholders to draft various codes of practice, such as for pumps, above-ground sprinkler tanks and foam proportioners.
British Sprinkler Campaigns
Inspired by the National Fire Sprinkler Network in the UK, which was set up in 1998, the European Fire Sprinkler Network was set up in 2003. As well as the NFSN, the British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association actively promotes sprinklers in the UK. The NFSN membership includes every Fire & Rescue Service in the UK and has secured much support from the Chief Fire Officers’ Association. On occasion the Association of British Insurers has also conducted sprinkler campaigns focussed on loss prevention and the Business Sprinkler Alliance was set up to drive these campaigns.
The EFSN works with all these groups and others, providing support where needed while avoiding duplication of effort. Together, we have seen the introduction of a regulation in Wales which requires sprinklers in all new housing, in care homes and some hostels. This campaign met enormous resistance from housebuilders and water suppliers. We managed to secure political support, including from a determined champion, a former Deputy Speaker of the Welsh Assembly. Working together we were able quickly to refute the disinformation regularly spread by our opponents and won the argument.
Scotland mandated sprinklers in new care homes and high-rise residential buildings back in 2005. Today, sprinklers are required in all new apartment buildings in Scotland, as well as in all new social housing, including single-family homes.
England was slower to take up residential sprinklers in statutory guidance but in response to the Grenfell Tower disaster updated its regulatory guidance to call for sprinklers in apartment buildings with a floor higher than 11 m (higher than four storeys). At the time of writing the government has proposed that sprinklers be required in new care homes. Sprinklers already permit an open-plan ground floor in three-storey house loft conversions and are an alternative to a second staircase in a four-storey house. The EFSN has been deeply involved in drafting BS 9991, BS 9999 and BS 9992, codes for fire safety design in residential buildings, most other buildings and railway buildings respectively. These codes offer many design freedoms if sprinklers are installed, such as open-plan apartments, longer corridors, reduced fire resistance, narrower escape stairs and exit widths.
School fires have not killed anyone but they cause huge community disruption and remain one of the leading fire loss categories in the UK. We were able to show that sprinklers dramatically reduce the damage, allowing a school to remain open. Scotland and Wales mandated sprinklers in all new schools.
The EFSN was also involved in the drafting of BB100, which calls for sprinklers in new English schools. This campaign brought together Fire Chiefs, insurers, the Education Union and Fire Brigades’ Union, the sprinkler industry and many others to secure cross-party political support and eventually ministerial support. This coalition is campaigning against any weakening of the sprinkler requirements. The EFSN has also supported the BSA in its commissioning of research to demonstrate the financial and environmental benefits of sprinklers in industrial and commercial buildings.
As a result of all our efforts more new buildings in the UK are being fitted with sprinklers than ever before and there is a large residential sprinkler market.
Car Parks
Many countries require sprinklers in underground car parks. More are likely to join them as concerns grow about the hazards posed by electric vehicle fires. The EFSN has been involved in successful campaigns in a number of countries.
Belgium
Firefighters in Belgium became concerned about their inability to fight large, enclosed car park fires, having seen major incidents in neighbouring countries. After lengthy discussions between a government appointed committee of stakeholders, to which the EFSN provided evidence, the government mandated that new, underground car parks larger than 5,000 m2 or larger than 2,500 m2 and more than 7 m below ground be protected with sprinklers.
France
As in The Netherlands, France had experienced a series of major underground car park fires. It was a fire in the Place Vendôme car park near The Louvre in the centre of Paris that led to change. The Paris Fire Brigade, which was unable to fight this fire, later investigated it and found that the smoke extraction system had drawn in air and intensified the fire without providing visibility. The EFSN provided information and French fire-fighters became convinced that sprinklers were needed in these spaces. The government now requires sprinklers in car parks with more than two underground levels. Meanwhile insurers report that many car parks are voluntarily fitting sprinklers and that fire brigades, who represent the authorities in France, are requiring retrofits in some jurisdictions. The Paris city water supply is able to feed the sprinkler system so there is no need for a pump or tank and installation is relatively inexpensive.
Netherlands
A series of huge fires in Dutch underground car parks showed that while lives were not lost, the existing measures were inadequate to prevent serious property loss and business interruption. The fire brigade found that it cannot safely fight these fires. Electric vehicle fires increased concern among fire brigades. The EFSN provided details of more car park fires, of research in other countries and of code requirements elsewhere to fit sprinklers.
Some fire safety experts claimed that fires do not spread between cars in car parks. The long list of fires where tens of cars were destroyed helped to correct this misconception, as did research conducted by BRE in the UK, where it was shown that fire could even spread from one vehicle to another across an empty parking space. Some experts also claimed that sprinklers would not help because cars are designed to keep out rain. Sprinklers cannot be expected to extinguish fires inside a car but the BRE tests showed that they prevent spread from one car to another and cool the area near the fire. Under these circumstances fire brigades would have no difficulty in dealing with the fire. Without sprinklers the fire can spread to 10, 20 or more cars. After a major fire in an Amsterdam car park the fire brigade issued a call for sprinklers to be fitted in underground car parks.
Our Dutch colleagues cited the international experience and research in articles in fire trade magazines, parking trade magazines and in presentations at conferences. They also discussed it with fire brigades, who in The Netherlands approve buildings for fire safety. Reaching out to the car park industry they joined its fire safety committee. A major fire can shut an underground car park for many months, during which the car park owner suffers a large loss of income and shops and businesses lose custom because of a lack of parking availability. As a result of the educational efforts by our Dutch colleagues many Dutch car park operators voluntarily decided to fit sprinklers to protect their business from fire. The government also introduced its first regulatory sprinkler requirement. From January 2024, car parks beneath new buildings where people sleep must be protected with sprinklers.
Care Homes
In a fire, residents of care homes or homes for the elderly may not be able to get out of a building unaided. Yet in most countries the fire safety regulations assume that they will or that the staff will help them. Due to finding pressures many care homes only have one or two staff on duty at night. It can take two or more people to move one person, so reliance on staff is unrealistic.
Sadly the risks described above are not just theoretical. Many countries have experienced and continue to experience major loss of life in care home fires. While sprinklers cannot always save people who are already in delicate health if their clothing or bedding catches fire, sprinklers are the only measure that will help someone who does not leave the room of fire origin. They also prevent a fire from spreading to other rooms and keep smoke to below dangerous concentrations in corridors.
For these reasons regulators in Denmark, Finland, Norway, Scotland, Sweden and Wales have introduced requirements to fit sprinklers in care homes, while in England they are an alternative to self-closing fire doors on each bedroom. Regulators in many other European countries are looking at this issue. Meanwhile the first care homes have been sprinklered in Belgium, Germany and The Netherlands, while in France there are several projects under discussion.
Despite the evident need for change, it does not happen by itself. The EFSN gave presentations and wrote articles explaining the risk, talked to regulators and politicians, who were often sympathetic, and highlighted the tragedies that take place under current regulations. Cost-benefit analyses funded by the British government showed there was an economic case for fitting sprinklers in care homes. Fire services became supportive and brought the campaign to more politicians, regulators and other authorities. Meanwhile fire tests in Sweden and the UK showed that residential sprinklers are also effective in European settings and several countries began to draft national residential sprinkler standards. In Sweden the EFSN provided information to support a campaign by Sprinklerfrämjandet, the Swedish sprinkler association and EFSN member. This campaign culminated in a prime-time television programme which powerfully made the case and in an interview with the minister pressed her into making a pledge to require sprinklers in healthcare buildings. In the UK the EFSN supported fire officers and others in regular contact with politicians, occasionally making direct contact. Sadly it took a major fire to lead to a change in the regulations in Scotland; Wales now requires sprinklers in care homes as part of its requirement for sprinklers in all new housing.
In Belgium working with colleagues at the Belgian Fire Sprinkler Network we have seen a positive series of fire tests, funded by the Flemish government, demonstrate the benefits of sprinklers in this application. In France fire tests funded by local government also showed benefits for sprinklers. Our colleagues in VEBON-NOVB in The Netherlands, again with government-funded research, have changed the consensus in favour of the voluntary fitting of sprinklers in new hospitals and many new care homes. In Germany we work with bvfa, which has gathered considerable support for sprinklers in care homes and seen the first systems installed. In other countries the EFSN is in contact with regulators who are updating fire safety regulations and are interested in sprinklers in care homes.
Dutch Sprinkler Campaigns
For many years The Netherlands had promoted sprinklers although no individual was tasked with leading these campaigns nor did the efforts have specific targets. The EFSN encouraged the Dutch sprinkler association to apply for seed funding from the International Fire Sprinkler Association to fund someone full-time to coordinate Dutch sprinkler campaigns. The EFSN worked closely with the Dutch association, since renamed VEBON-NOVB, to define and support the different campaigns. While the IFSA seed funding period has now expired the EFSN continues its close support.
The Dutch fire safety building code does not mention sprinklers. Instead it sets out limits on compartment area and on building layout for escape. Sprinklers are one means to obtain permission for larger compartments or to relax the criteria for escape routes.
Given that almost all sprinkler projects are alternatives to the code design, it was vital to secure the support of those who propose and approve building fire safety designs. Approvals are made by fire officers so many meetings have been held with them to discuss how sprinklers can be used to achieve an equivalent level of safety. Presentations at fire safety seminars, articles in fire magazines and an informative web site have also helped to inform this important group.
The Dutch sprinkler campaign manager represents the EFSN and his association members on many standards committees. His campaigns are for sprinklers in healthcare buildings, in underground car parks, in residential buildings and in general as an alternative to other fire safety measures. Fatal fires in Dutch hospitals and care homes have shown that the existing measures were inadequate. By showing from statistics in other countries what could be achieved with sprinklers and that many other countries require sprinklers in these risks, our campaign secured wide-spread support among consultants, fire officers and end users. Most new Dutch hospitals and an increasing number of new care homes are now fitting sprinklers.
A series of huge fires in Dutch underground car parks have shown that while lives have not been lost, the existing measures are inadequate to prevent serious property loss and business interruption. Moreover, the fire brigade cannot safely fight these fires. The EFSN provided details of more such fires, of research in other countries and of code requirements elsewhere to fit sprinklers in these areas. Many Dutch car park operators are now fitting sprinklers to protect their business from fire.
The EFSN organised a Dutch study tour to London to hear about the fire safety code requirements and incentives to fit residential sprinklers in the UK, to hear how London Fire Brigade supports sprinklers and to see a number of sites where residential sprinklers were being installed. The Dutch sprinkler campaign coordinator has led the drafting of a Dutch residential sprinkler standard and an accreditation scheme for residential sprinkler installers.
To encourage the use of sprinklers as an alternative to the prescriptive passive fire protection measures in the Dutch building code, VEBON-NOVB has funded research to show that sprinklers and exposed structure steel are a viable alternative to concrete. It will fund more such research.
Today more new buildings in The Netherlands are being fitted with sprinklers than ever before and there is a developing Dutch residential sprinkler market.
Flemish exemption for diesel emission limits from sprinkler pump drivers
In Flanders in Belgium the authorities published a regulation on the NOx and particulate emission limits from stationary diesel engines. These stationary engines fall outside the scope of European Regulation 2016/1628 for emissions from non-road mobile machinery so countries or regions are free to introduce their own limits. Commercial and industrial sprinkler systems in Belgium are supplied by a pump and tank, with the pump usually driven by a diesel engine. The Flemish regulation imposed a very low limit, well below the Californian limits which are currently the toughest in the world. The Flemish limits could not be met by any diesel pump driver on the market, and the Flemish market is too small to justify development of a unique engine. Furthermore, the technology that would have to be used to reach the limits would reduce engine power and increase risk of failure. Finally, the Flemish regulation required the emissions to be measured for existing diesel engines on site but did not suggest how this could be done. Emissions are measured on a test rig in a laboratory and there is no recognised method to conduct these measurements on site.
EFSN worked with the Belgian Fire Sprinkler Network (BFSN) and brought together our sprinkler installer, pump manufacturer and sprinkler pump diesel driver members to share knowledge and agree a common position. After much discussion with officials, the Flemish regulation was revised to grant an exemption for stationary diesel engines that run for less than 100 hours per year. In this way sprinkler systems were granted an exemption. This was agreed because these engines emit relatively little per year and are an essential piece of emergency equipment.
Should this issue surface in another European country the compromise agreed in Flanders will be an excellent reference and could be proposed again.
French Sprinkler Campaigns
The EFSN began promoting sprinklers in France in 2003 but it was not until 2008 that we took on someone in France to coordinate those campaigns. Funded by income from our many French members, we were able to engage a consultant on a part-time basis.
In France there are many pages of building fire safety regulations but in 2003 relatively few requirements to fit sprinklers in buildings. Those regulations are highly prescriptive and there is often a need to find an alternative solution. In most such cases the opinion of the Fire Brigade, as an independent source of expertise, is sought. The EFSN therefore focussed its efforts on educating French fire officers about sprinkler systems. Since 2010 two courses, each of two days, have been run at the French Fire Officer Training School (ENSOSP) in Paris. The course content, which covers sprinklers and water mist systems, is jointly agreed by ENSOSP and the EFSN, with most of the training given by the EFSN and its members. Well over 300 French fire officers have completed this official course and we have seen the French Fire Service become much more positive about sprinklers.
France has many underground car parks. There had been several fires that had destroyed dozens of cars but it was when a fire on 8 March 2012 occurred in the high-profile Place Vendôme car park in the centre of Paris that the authorities decided to act. An investigation by the Paris Fire Brigade showed that the smoke extraction system had caused the fire to burn more intensely; it had not cleared the smoke so that firefighters could access the car park. Thanks to our education programme all parties agreed that sprinklers were the answer and a change to the regulations was drafted which included a requirement to fit sprinklers. The change has not yet been adopted but meanwhile many car park owners are fitting sprinklers.
The EFSN has organised two study tours to the UK for French officials, fire officers, consultants, architects and sprinkler installers to learn about residential sprinkler systems. We have also conducted seminars, written articles for fire magazines and worked with the French Burns Victims’ Association to lobby ministers. Our efforts led to a series of fire tests being conducted in September 2016 in an apartment building in Bayonne, southwest France. The tests were attended by many fire officers, officials from Paris, the local Mayor and Members of Parliament. We are hopeful that in 2017 we will see the first use of residential sprinklers in France.
The French high-voltage safety code of practice, NF C13-100 banned sprinklers in these areas due to a fear of electrocution. High voltage equipment is a known fire risk, with combustible oils and cables present. EFSN’s French insurer members brought the ban to our attention. We employed a consultant who was expert in the French and international electrical codes to advise us. By working with him and our members we were able to give evidence to the relevant committee, UF 99, show that in other countries it is normal practice to protect these areas with sprinklers, and to draft new text to repeal the ban. Our campaign was successful and sprinklers are permitted in the 2015 edition of NF C13-100.
German Sprinkler Campaigns
The EFSN began promoting sprinklers in Germany in 2003 and was an active supporter of those who were proposing that sprinklers be required in a model high-rise building code being drafted at that time. We provided evidence of the performance of sprinklers in fire, and details of regulations in the many countries which already required sprinklers in these buildings. The code calls for sprinklers in buildings higher than 22m, unless they are divided into compartments smaller than 400 m2 and there is a non-combustible balcony or wall to prevent external fire spread from one floor to another.
It was not until 2012 that the International Fire Sprinkler Association agreed on behalf of the EFSN to co-fund someone in Germany to coordinate those campaigns. The co-funding partner was the German fire protection trade association, bvfa. After three years the IFSA seed-funding period ended and the bvfa took on the full cost. Since 2012 the individual leading the sprinkler campaigns in Germany changed twice. It is currently Jörg Wilms-Vahrenhorst of the consulting firm WilmsWeiler. Jörg is contracted for about three days each week.
Jörg and his predecessors have reviewed German fire safety regulations, which vary between the 16 German States. They have organised seminars at high profile fire safety events and held discussions with regulators, academics and influential consultants. In Germany, the fire brigade is not a statutory consultee. Nevertheless the fire brigade has an influence on fire safety regulations and so to help gain its support, sprinkler training seminars have been held at the Fire Brigade training school in Würzburg.
Articles in influential trade magazines and presentations at fire safety conferences have helped raise the profile of sprinklers as a means to save life, rather than just as a property protection measure. There is now a German guideline for the design of residential sprinkler systems, VdS 2896, and VdS has approved some residential sprinklers. Care homes are the first campaign, and several have now voluntarily been protected with sprinklers. As yet no German State requires sprinklers in these buildings (one has a modest incentive) but a series of fatal fires has drawn attention to the weakness of the current approach, which relies on passive fire protection and swift evacuation by staff and fire-fighters.
A further priority is to persuade the owners of small and medium-sized businesses of the need for sprinklers. Education is the key to changing attitudes. Small and medium-sized businesses are particularly vulnerable to fire because they usually only have one site.
High-Rise Buildings
When the EFSN began operating in 2003 most European countries did not require sprinklers in high-rise buildings. While some still do not most have since introduced a requirement to fit sprinklers in high-rise buildings. The national definition of a high-rise building usually ranges from 20-30 m. Above this height firefighters cannot fight the fire or rescue people externally. Their ladders are too short and so they must enter the building. This can take an additional 15 minutes, during which the fire continues to grow.
Sprinklers will control or extinguish the fire, giving people more time to escape and firefighters more time to reach what will be a much smaller fire. The EFSN worked with national campaigns and the authorities in many European countries to show how well sprinklers can deal with this problem and how their benefits are already recognised in some countries. Today sprinklers are required in high-rise buildings in Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and the United Kingdom. We expect this list to grow. In many other countries sprinklers are already routinely imposed in high-rise building by the authorities, even if this is not yet codified.
Germany was an influential country in this country-by-country change. The Berlin Fire Brigade conducted an exercise where firefighters had to climb a high-rise building carrying their equipment. Physiological tests showed that all but one were so exhausted they could not function as firefighters. Another concern was the potential for fire to spread externally from one floor to another. In real fires this had happened, showing that an external non-combustible wall of 1 m to separate windows on successive floors was ineffective. Sprinklers would prevent the fire from spreading between floors and would limit fire size so that firefighters have more time for deployment. The EFSN provided officials with information about the performance of sprinklers, how they can be fitted to control high-rise fires, and details of the requirements for sprinklers in high-rise buildings in other countries.
Sprinkler height thresholds
Height, m Country
>22 m Germany (32 m with other measures)
>28 m Portugal
>30 m Hungary, Ireland, UK
>32 m Austria
>45 m Lithuania
>55 m Poland
>60 m Luxemburg
>70 m Netherlands
>80 m Spain (50 m in Catalonia)
>200 m France
Housing
In 2003, when the EFSN began operating, no European country had any requirements or incentives to fit sprinklers in housing. Sprinklers were believed to be a property protection measure or to prevent large-scale loss of life, such as in shopping centres in some countries. Yet in the United States fire tests in the 1970s had shown the potential for sprinklers to protect people in their own homes and the first residential sprinkler ordinance was passed in San Clemente, CA in 1978.
The EFSN gathered the evidence of the performance of residential sprinklers and worked with colleagues in other organisations to support or lead national campaigns. The campaigns not only pressed for sprinklers as an additional fire safety measure but also for relaxations in other fire safety measures if sprinklers were installed, so as to make them attractive to the construction industry, which only sees the initial costs and not the long-term benefits.
Politicians became interested, having learned that most fire deaths occur in the home and that the young, old, disabled and poor are much more likely to die. This was particularly relevant in Norway, where the government’s commitment to universal design meant that homes also had to be safe for all. To help with this, since 2010 all new apartment buildings in Norway must be sprinklered.
Several governments have funded research which showed that residential sprinklers are also effective in European homes. A cost-benefit analysis showed that sprinklers made economic sense in certain residential buildings but not in houses, largely because the UK assigns a much lower value to a human life than the US. Recognising the arbitrary nature of this number, a determined politician in Wales and member of the Fire Brigades Union launched a campaign to fit sprinklers in all new Welsh housing. It took her many years but she was successful and since 2016 all new housing in Wales must be sprinklered. Throughout her campaign the EFSN and our colleagues provided technical arguments against the many incorrect claims made by our opponents.
Scotland introduced a requirement to fit sprinklers in apartment buildings higher than 18m; England put the threshold at 30m. In the UK there are restrictions on the internal layout of a house or apartment which are intended to ensure an escape route is available if there is a fire. These were relaxed with sprinklers. Corridors in apartment buildings may be longer (which can save staircase) and a four-storey house need have only one staircase. English fire Brigades will often allow hydrants to be further from a building or fire brigade access to be less than ideal if the building is sprinklered.
In Sweden fire engineers often use sprinklers as a compensatory measure where the structure is combustible (wood) or compartmentation is inadequate. In Finland the building code only allows apartment buildings of 3-8 storeys if they are sprinklered. Today there are substantial markets for residential sprinkler systems in housing in Norway, Sweden and the UK, and to a lesser extent in Finland and The Netherlands. This list is set to grow.
Repeal of a French ban on sprinklers in high voltage areas
NF C 13 100 is a French standard for safety in high voltage areas. It banned sprinklers in such areas and was brought to the attention of EFSN by its French insurer members. High voltage equipment often contains combustible liquids, such as transformer oil. Fire and explosion is not unusual. Sprinklers are a well-established, proven measure to deal with these fires. The French committee which drafted the standard, UF-99, was concerned about the risk of electrocution. This risk can be avoided by a means to trip current when a fire starts.
EFSN and its French members collected facts and evidence of practices in other countries where sprinkler protection is normal in high voltage areas. They engaged a consultant, expert in French and international electrical standards, to help negotiate access to the relevant committees. EFSN members drafted some revised text and through the consultant proposed it to UF-99. After several meetings and much discussion the new text was accepted and included in the 2015 edition.
Repeal of a European ban on sprinklers in ammonia refrigeration system machinery rooms
EN 378-3 addresses the safety of refrigeration systems. It is little-known in the fire protection world and only came to the attention of the EFSN when our French insurer members complained that the authorities were insisting that existing sprinkler systems in ammonia refrigeration machinery rooms be decommissioned because this standard had a ban on sprinkler systems in these areas.
Insurers recognise that ammonia can burn and that there are ignition sources in machinery rooms. Sprinklers would be an ideal way to mitigate this risk. The EFSN found out which CEN committee had written this standard (CEN TC/182) and arranged a meeting with the chairman and secretariat. This revealed that the chairman and other committee members were concerned that if water were poured on liquid ammonia this could generate clouds of toxic ammonia gas. For this to happen there would need to be liquid ammonia released in the machinery room, i.e. a catastrophic leak, and sprinklers to open at the same time in the absence of a fire (a fire would burn the gaseous ammonia). Both events are highly unlikely and if there were a level of liquid ammonia in the machinery room the ammonia concentration in it would almost certainly already be fatal.
The EFSN collected these and other facts and worked with its members to inform the committee members. A powerful argument was that it has been standard practice for many years in the US to fit sprinklers in these areas. The British delegation was soon convinced. A French insurer joined the French mirror committee and with the assistance of French colleagues of a fire protection company (and EFSN member) that has a sister business in refrigeration secured support for change. At a CEN meeting the French delegation accordingly proposed revised text removing the ban and was supported by the British delegation. In a vote all countries except Germany voted in favour of the change. Germany insisted that German regulations banned sprinklers in these areas and applied for an A-deviation, which is a CEN procedure to be exempt from part of a standard if it conflicts with national legislation. An EFSN insurer member lodged a formal objection and the German Federal Government confirmed the reference document was a voluntary code of practice and thus there was no basis for an A-deviation.
A revised edition of EN 378-3 was published in December 2016, without a ban on sprinklers!
Schools in the UK
In many countries schools are not insured against fire damage because they are owned directly or indirectly by the government, which can absorb the loss of a school fire. In the UK most schools were privately insured, the majority with one insurer. This meant that insurer became aware of the high claims it was receiving for school fires. For decades school fires have represented one of the highest single categories of fire losses in the UK, with losses disproportionate to the sums insured. Fire brigades also became aware of the devastation caused by school fires, with hundreds of schools suffering major damage. Most fires start during the school day and a high proportion are deliberate. Educational programmes by fire brigades and schools have reduced the frequency of fires but there are still two school fires each day with losses between £60 million and £100 million each year. Thousands of children have their education disrupted, many having to travel to different schools, which become overcrowded. British Government research has found that missing just one week of school can harm a child’s education. Moreover, schools are widely used by local communities outside school hours, so their loss through fire can impact many people.
All the experts agreed that sprinklers could substantially reduce this damage and analysis showed that they would pay for themselves several times over the lifetime of a school. The EFSN worked with colleagues in the fire brigade, insurance industry, teachers’ organisations, National Fire Sprinkler Network and British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association to explain the need for sprinklers to local and national politicians. Together we held hundreds of meetings around the country and had stands or spoke at political events. Several local authorities decided they would voluntarily fit sprinklers in new schools in their area. In Scotland when all but one local authority had taken this positive decision the Scottish Government revised its regulatory guidance to require sprinklers in all new schools. In Wales the Welsh Assembly made funding for new schools conditional on fitting sprinklers.
Meanwhile in England a Member of Parliament (MP) with whom the EFSN had worked for many years on its sprinkler campaigns became the Minister for Schools. He received a letter calling for sprinklers in schools which was signed by every Chief Fire Officer in the country and instructed his officials to work with the EFSN and others to draft guidance for fire protection in schools. The guidance, Building Bulletin 100, does not require sprinklers in schools but includes a risk assessment which in most cases will identify a need to fit sprinklers. The guidance was announced during a parliamentary debate in 2007 in which all the major parties expressed their support for fitting sprinklers in schools.
Initially about 70% of new English schools fitted sprinklers. This was lower than expected and we found that many local officials still believed fire and major fire damage were unlikely. Nevertheless over 800 schools in the UK are now sprinklered and these sprinkler systems have successfully acted in many fires. Successive governments in 2010 and 2015 did not enforce BB 100 and today 35% or fewer new English schools are sprinklered. BB 100 is currently being revised and officials have proposed a weakening of the sprinkler guidance. There has been a huge response with questions from MPs, articles in all the national newspapers, letters from voters to their MPs, articles in dozens of local newspapers and stories on regional television. It is unfortunate that we must repeat the campaign of a decade ago but we are determined to be successful again!
Fire suppression in tunnels
When the EFSN began operating in 2003 the European Commission was drafting a Directive on fire safety in tunnels. Major fires with serious loss of life in France, Austria and Switzerland had persuaded governments to act and so the European Commission was asked to draw up a common approach for road tunnels on the trans-European network. The EFSN became involved in the process, which was already far advanced and while fire suppression systems are not included we made submissions to the Member of the European Parliament coordinating its input to the draft, who added a clause providing an option to take a different approach to the Directive’s prescriptive passive measures.
Until this time the fire protection industry had not been greatly involved in tunnel fire protection. The EFSN began to engage with those who write the national and international standards for fire safety in tunnels and met a new group of people. Many of them had no experience of fire safety or fire protection in other applications. Unfortunately it was their consensus that sprinklers were a bad idea and their standards all banned sprinklers, claiming they could cause explosions, car accidents and spread fire rather than suppress it. After some time we discovered this was because in a fire test in Switzerland in the 1960s, sprinklers put out a gasoline fire in a tunnel but the water was turned off before the hot surfaces were cooled. As a result the hot vapours reignited, causing injury to one of the researchers. Not cooling the hot surfaces was a basic error and would also be dangerous if a fire brigade were extinguishing a fire with a hose stream.
After many meetings, presentations at conferences and articles in trade magazines the EFSN began to find people who shared our view. The World Road Association brings together government representatives from most countries to write guidance documents. Several of these representatives were also members of NFPA 502, the standard used for tunnel fire protection in the US. The EFSN joined the NFPA 502 committee in 2004 and discovered that NFPA 502 also was against sprinklers, claiming a risk of explosion. Over 50 years of experience in Japan and 20 years in Australia had shown these fears to be groundless. Instead both countries had a very positive experience with sprinkler deluge systems in road tunnels. In the 2008 edition of NFPA 502 the negative text was retained but commentary added to explain why these concerns were no longer believed to be appropriate. Furthermore some requirements and incentives added to support the use of sprinklers. In subsequent editions the negative text was removed and more incentives were added.
Meanwhile in Europe the EFSN joined or submitted proposals to various committees and expert groups, presented at tunnel fire safety conferences and wrote trade articles. Gradually the consensus changed, much helped by fire tests conducted in Scandinavia which showed that truck fires could develop a much greater heat release rate than had been thought, much higher than could be handled by any heat extraction system. Several water mist system manufacturers also conducted fire tests which showed that their systems could prevent fire spread from one vehicle to another. Governments in France, Germany, Singapore and Sweden funded tests with deluge sprinkler or water mist systems, all of which showed positive benefits for fire suppression systems.
Today most large road tunnel projects in Europe and North America fit fire suppression systems.