Fire risk warning over school kitchen extraction systems
Hundreds of schools across the UK could be at risk of devastating fires because the commercial extraction systems in their kitchens aren’t being cleaned to required industry wide standards. All kitchens in a commercial setting now need to be cleaned by specially accredited technicians in order to adequately remove dangerous volumes of grease which quickly build up in the extraction ventilations systems. Due to the flammable nature of the greases and oils in large-scale kitchens, there is a real risk that any fires could rapidly spread throughout school buildings. It is estimated that an entire building could be devastated within just 10 minutes. To alleviate the fire risks, a Building Engineering Services Competence Assessment (BESCA) Vent Hygiene Elite (VHE) scheme requires all commercial kitchens to be cleaned to what is known in the industry as TR19 level. However there are fears many organisations across the UK are unaware of this specification. Cumbria-based Hy5 Commercial Cleaning is one of only a handful of companies in the UK with the necessary BESCA accreditation, and its team is warning businesses of the potential dangers of not adequately removing grease from their kitchen extraction. Keith Simm, the Founder and Managing Director of Hy5, said: “All commercial kitchens will routinely be cleaned but many establishments will be totally unaware of the requirement to have the commercial extraction systems cleaned to such a high standard, and why it is so important to do so. “Over time, the amount of grease which builds up in the system is vast and they can easily catch alight due to the nature of them being around intense heat and open flames. These greases are highly flammable and once they catch fire, the flames spread extremely quickly. “It does not bear thinking about the worst case scenarios in schools and care homes where you could have hundreds of vulnerable people trying to get out of the building at the same time. “This is why the BESCA VHE exists and why we have significantly invested in becoming accredited because safety is of paramount importance to us. We are leading the way nationally in grease hygiene, and we want to raise awareness about the new specification to prevent any major disasters.” The BESCA VHE has the backing of all major insurance providers across the UK, and the companies will only provide full fire cover to establishments which have been serviced by accredited technicians. Keith added: “If commercial kitchens have not been cleaned by BESCA VHE accredited technicians, then they will not be properly covered by any insurance policies. “If there is sadly a fire, not only are you counting the cost of any damage, but you won’t get any payout from your insurance company either.” The VHE has been introduced by BESCA to provide a management process for controlling the risk of grease-related fires associated with commercial kitchen extraction systems. By cleaning the kitchen ventilation system to such a high standard, businesses remove contamination from the cooking processes to significantly reduce the fire risk presented, improve system performance and ensure the surrounding area is well ventilated. “When it comes to fire safety, the need for competence and compliance cannot be overstated,” said Duncan Sibbald who administers VHE on behalf of BESCA. “Many parts of our industry were effectively unregulated for years and initiatives like VHE were the result of responsible firms and individuals trying to take a stand against those less than scrupulous operators who seemed unperturbed by the fact their work was putting lives at risk. “Since the Grenfell tragedy, that work has taken on even greater significance and we are delighted that firms like Hy5 are clearly committed to improving professional standards right across our sector.” BESCA acts as a certification body as part of the wider Building Engineering Services Association (BESA) and aims to help UK businesses and individuals to meet industry standards, ensuring compliance and promoting best practice among the industry.
Legionella in Schools: Key points for good water management
Starting with management policy; it’s important to identify a hierarchy of authority (communications pathway/organogram) for water hygiene management ensuring that those responsible are demonstrably competent to undertake their role. Doing so will help the organisation to suitably delineate between management and operational water hygiene responsibilities. Moreover, estates, facilities and/or caretaking staff will invariably accept responsibility for planned preventative and reactive maintenance tasks (as ‘authorised’ or ‘competent’ persons), whereas staff members with a strategic water hygiene responsibility (often estates) may accept responsibility for managing the organisational written scheme of control (sometimes referred to as the water safety plan). The responsibility to manage and deliver the organisational written scheme of control typically falls within the role of the ‘responsible person’ (RP). Nominating a demonstrably competent person (known as the RP) for water hygiene is a legal requirement and is a role of significant responsibility as the duty holder, or ‘directing mind’ of the organisation – often the Chancellor or Principal, may be the head teacher of a school (depending on the type of school) and may not necessarily possess the technical knowledge, qualifications, water hygiene experience or expertise to adequately execute the duties of the RP and therefore authority may be delegated by the duty holder to an RP. This may help to ensure that the estate is managed in accordance with accepted practices and that assurances are provided to occupiers of the estate (teaching staff, students) regarding protection from waterborne pathogens such as Legionella and associated infection and disease. Good water hygiene management within school properties can be distilled into the following areas: 1 – Establishing the level of water hygiene risk; 2 – Devising an action plan proportionate to risk; 3 – Evidencing how risk has been suitably managed. ACoP L8 and HSG 274 Part 2 provide practical advice and guidance on how this can be achieved – to help ensure compliance with health and safety laws. Establishing the level of risk within school properties can be further compartmentalised into two main areas: 1 – Management policy; 2 – Operations. Whilst many of the operational and managerial water hygiene responsibilities may be delegated, it is noteworthy that the duty holder will retain accountability for ‘water and Legionella risk’. It may be prudent to consider this when planning the resources and budget required to ensure that all health and safety concerns are adequately addressed. The threat from Legionnaires’ Disease is considered ‘preventable’ and when contracted from an estate, invariably there will be legal ramifications… Once the management structure has been agreed and formalised within a policy document, water management considerations now become more ‘operational’. For example, a good starting point for a school, as for any organisation, would be to commission a site-specific water risk assessment with accompanying schematics. Carrying out a site-specific risk assessment is an absolute requirement under health and safety law. Provided that the risk assessment is accurate and completed in accordance with British Standard 8580-1 then the full extent of the water safety risk will be captured. The risk assessment should include a survey that includes all the systems that may contribute to or cause a risk of waterborne infection. Risks should be evaluated and quantified based on the likelihood of Legionella contamination within a given system and the consequence of infection from this bacteria, using a scoring system for example. School water systems that could present a risk will more than likely include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: Domestic cold-water systems – cold water (i.e. less than 20°C) is to be achieved at the outlet within two minutes. This should be confirmed by monthly monitoring from sentinel outlets (i.e. those nearest and farthest from the water source); Domestic hot-water systems – hot water should be heated to at least 60°C and be distributed to all parts of the system at 50°C or above. Hot water should achieve temperature within 1-minute of opening the outlet. This should be confirmed by monthly monitoring of sentinel outlets or, where there is pumped hot water circulation, by monitoring the temperature at the farthest point on the recirculating pipework; Showers – ensure that these outlets are cleaned and descaled at least quarterly and used or flushed at least once weekly. If showers are infrequently used they should be removed or flushed regularly. Flushing activities are to be captured in a documented programme with records kept as evidence; Wash hand basin tap outlets – ensure that all outlets are used or flushed at least once weekly. Similarly, if there are infrequently used outlets then they should be removed or captured in the aforementioned flushing programme; Cold water storage tanks (stored cold water) – ensure that temperature within the tank is less than 20°C and that storage capacity does not exceed 24-hours of supply; Hot water generators/boilers (stored hot water) – stored hot water should be no less than 60°C and therefore flow at no less than 60°C from the boiler; Thermostatic mixing valves (TMVs) – depending on the asset which the TMV is serving, then water temperature should be regulated to 41°C +/- 2°C in order to mitigate scald risk. However, this falls within temperature range that encourages the growth of waterborne bacteria (20-45°C ) and therefore these risk systems should be dismantled, cleaned, disinfected and functional checks at least annually. The HSE’s HSG274 Technical Guidance, Part 2, Table 2.1 provides practical guidance on the minimum requirements for the management of these systems. Therefore, whilst it’s not mandatory to follow the guidance, bear in mind that should the guidance not be followed then an organisation will need to demonstrate that they have achieved either an equivalent or better standard. Once the risk assessments have been completed, an assessment of perceived inherent and actual risk will be provided by the surveyor. In practice, this often generates recommendations on how water safety risk can be reduced within the estate. The risk assessment can therefore be used to inform the written scheme of control and assist with the development of an action plan that identifies the corrective action to be taken as well as realistic timescales for completion. Schools, as with all organisations, must at this