Kevin Munson, managing director of Ruskin Air Management, is continually disappointed with people who choose to do something badly because they think they will save money
The inquest into the fire at Lakanal House in South London that killed six people in July 2009 should have been a wake up call for the industry, according to Kevin Munson, managing director of Ruskin Air Management since 2003.

'I believe that in life and work we always have a choice,' he says. 'Sadly, too many people in our industry choose to do the quick fix. I always ask if they would make the same choice if they were putting a member of their own family at risk.'
He likes to use the analogy of a child's car seat to challenge people to confront the choices they make.

'You could choose to chuck the manual in the boot, just muddle through and hope the seat will work properly in an emergency. Or you can choose to install it properly and ensure the safety of your child. The people faced with life safety decisions everyday in our industry need to confront themselves with the same dilemma.'

At the Lakanal House inquest, fire fighters reported that partitions in the flats where the victims died had just four and a half minutes of fire resistance instead of the one hour minimum required under the Building Regulations. Ironically, the partitions were installed as part of a recent refurbishment that had been prompted by a need to replace asbestos.

The nine-week inquest heard that the surveyor hired by the refurbishment contractor was 'not familiar with building regulations which relate to fire spreading'. He admitted that the contractor installed 'materials that were less fire resistant than what was there before'.

According to his testimony, Southwark Council (the landlord) did not instruct him to make sure the refit met building regulations and had told him the responsibility lay with the contractor. As a result, the fire walls collapsed and the situation was exacerbated by a ventilation system that helped to spread the fire and smoke rather than contain it.

'It doesn't matter how tough legislation is if it is not properly enforced,' says Kevin. 'If people are intent on cutting corners and are not looking over their shoulders in fear of an inspector, they treat the regulations with contempt. However, they always have the choice to do the right thing.'

A landlord is ultimately responsible for ensuring work complies, but that does not make it right for the contractor to simply install the cheapest material he can find, according to Kevin. 'It's often assumed it will cost them more to do something properly. Why? In fact, it is always more expensive to do it wrong.'

Making responsible choices is increasingly important for contractors faced with tight budgets and clients determined to cut costs in the current economic climate, he believes.

'Fire safety requires ventilation system designers to think carefully about the type of fire dampers they are planning to specify,' says Kevin. 'Despite the fact it is a key component of any building's fire safety strategy, there is often no way of knowing if some fire dampers will operate when called upon.'


Dampers largely ignored

The nature of dampers means they are largely ignored when it comes to risk assessments, standard service and maintenance programmes. The difficulty of gaining access to the ventilation ductwork; disruption to the operation of the building; potential cost; and the physical difficulty of opening and closing the dampers manually all combine to leave the majority of mechanical, spring-operated dampers 'out of sight out of mind'. This type of damper is by far the most common in the UK.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order (RRO), which came into force in 2006, has highlighted this potential Achilles' heel in many buildings. Under the Order a 'responsible person' must ensure that all components of the fire safety system are kept in 'efficient working order' and 'good repair'.

'This means they should have carried out a fire safety risk assessment and then put a planned maintenance regime in place,' says Kevin. 'Fire officers can check up on this and the building owner could be in big trouble if they haven't taken the right steps. Also the building can be closed down.'

However, he is concerned that the current pressure on maintenance budgets means that regular damper testing is even less likely to be carried out. Manual testing involves a service engineer physically closing the damper and then having to manually reset it back into an open position in often cramped and elevated areas with little means of support. Many buildings also have hundreds of dampers installed so the task is considerable - hence the fact it is rarely done.

He proposes, therefore, that the use of electrically motorised dampers becomes standard practice as these can be linked directly to the fire alarm or ventilation system. 'This allows testing to be carried out remotely and automatically as part of standard maintenance.

'Motorised dampers are more expensive upfront than their less sophisticated mechanical cousins, but the fact they can be tested from a work station, quickly and easily, is a considerable cost saving over a long installed life,' adds Kevin. 'So, choosing to do the right thing will save money in the long run.'

It is partly this concern about ensuring standards of onsite work remain high that prompted Ruskin to seek accreditation from the SAFEcontractor programme. This is expected to enhance the company's ability to attract new contracts and its commitment to safety should be viewed positively by its insurers when the company liability policy is up for renewal.

'We joined the SAFEcontractor programme primarily to support the installation work carried out by Naco, which provides a complete design, drawing, supply and install service for the Naco louvre and sunscreen systems,' says Kevin.

'We take the issue of factory and onsite health and safety very seriously and we believe that safety should be regarded as a core part of any project-based activity,' he adds.

Another development this year that could have a positive impact on installation consistency is the introduction of mandatory CE marking from July 1 under the European Construction Products Regulation (CPR), he believes. All building services products covered by the harmonised European standards will have to display a CE mark from that date.

'Compliance will be challenging as third party testing and reports, certification, factory testing and audit trails are all needed,' explains Kevin. 'Time is running out fast and developing new products and completing the testing and documentation to meet CE mark standards can take many months.'

Among the products subject to CE marking are: flues, chimneys and fittings; heat and smoke extraction fans; fire and smoke dampers; fire rated ductwork systems; radiators and heat emitters among others.

Helping to raise standards

Kevin believes that manufacturers should welcome the new law because it will help to raise standards, particularly in life safety applications and installations. However, he has the same concerns about enforcement, and there are many questions yet to be answered about the transition to the new regime.

'There is no information yet about how building control, trading standard officers and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) plan to police this,' he says. 'What are the implications for existing projects and the design of new systems for future projects? We know the deadline is July 1, but how does this apply to orders that are in the pipeline now or specifications that are already set?

'At Ruskin, we have a large number of specifications and orders for projects that will not be complete until long after July 1 - so what happens to those? We have already completed much of the necessary testing. However we are concerned that the lack of clarity will be used to allow manufacturers and suppliers to place non-compliant products onto the market using ignorance as their legal defence.'

Fortunately, Ruskin's sales and marketing director David Fitzpatrick is chairing CIBSE's Working Party on CE Marking and is attempting to galvanise local and national enforcement bodies to produce a strategy.

'There is plenty of legislation and a great number of initiatives in place designed to ensure the industry acts responsibly,' says Kevin. 'However, in the end it is up to people to make the right choices for the right reasons. This is not about money or covering your back legally; this is a straightforward question of right and wrong.'

The lowdown on Ruskin Air Management

Ruskin Air Management is a market leader in air distribution and fire and smoke control. It combines Actionair; Air Diffusion; and Naco and boasts 520 years combined sales experience. The three companies work together to provide complete hvac solutions for the built environment.

The group operates out of two modern production centres in the UK. One is at Bridgnorth in Shropshire where Air Diffusion grille and diffuser products are designed and assembled together with Naco metal and glass louvre ranges. The other is in Whitstable, Kent where Actionair fire and smoke control dampers and fan coils are fabricated.

Actionair has been producing fire, smoke and air control products, including a full range of dampers and fan coil units, for over 36 years. Naco produces glass louvres, standard metal louvres, natural air ventilators and sunscreens / brise soleil. It has been manufacturing since the early 60s offering the full design, draw, supply and install service. Both factories have recently been upgraded with new machinery and rationalised production systems.

This year marks the 40th anniversary of Air Diffusion, which is regarded as one of the UK's top manufacturers of standard and bespoke air distribution products. It has a comprehensive range of air terminal devices including swirl diffusers, louvre face diffusers, slot diffusers, fixed blade diffusers, jet nozzle diffusers, panel floor grilles, floor swirl diffusers, roll out floor grilles, linear bar grilles, and external louvres.