Page 43 - Campus Security & Life Safety, March/April 2019

readapted for different uses with vastly differ- ent risk profiles. Occupants of campus envi- ronments also tend to be transient, and popu- lations may vary drastically from day to day, or even hour by hour. Special events can also induce significant population increases, many of whom may be completely unfamiliar with the facility and their expected response during emergency procedures.
Construction, Renovation, and Additions
Design phase services for new construction, renovations, and additions will include risk mitigation features such as sprinkler protec- tion, fire alarm, mass notification, and pos- sibly even smoke control or specialized alarm and suppression requirements. Like- wise, passive risk mitigation is designed into these facilities as mandated by the applicable codes and insurance providers in features such as fire rated construction, compartmen- tation, and egress features.
However, consider a facility renovation that requires a portion of the building to remain open and operational during con- struction. To separate occupants from the hazards of a construction zone, previously available egress pathways may be blocked off and building features, such as fire suppression and alarm, may be temporarily disabled. In a campus environment, even completely new construction could affect egress routes from adjacent buildings or limit access to a public way due to construction zones, staging areas, and construction traffic. Existing exit signs may lead occupants toward exits that are inac- cessible due to construction activities.
In order to ensure that new construction and renovation projects do not negatively affect egress features or other safety features, construction phasing exercises must include egress studies, emergency responder access planning, and safety system impairment plans. It is not enough to verify that remain- ing egress routes are adequate for the expect- ed occupant loads, or that fire department access is maintained. Instead, careful and detailed assessment is necessary to address all risk-mitigation considerations such as emergency system impairment, existing exit sign locations, changes in egress routes, access to public ways, and hazards intro- duced by construction.
For example, hot works such as welding could introduce unacceptable risk if con- ducted in an area near floor refinishing or involving flammable liquids. In addition, pre-incident planning with the local emer- gency responder organizations is necessary to address plans for dealing with temporary impairments including fire hydrants that are out of service, or access to building fire department connections due to construction
“...changes to the landscape of risk happen often, even in the absence of such obvious modifications.”
staging, and re-routed building egress that could hamper emergency responder access.
Changes in Use
Less obvious than new construction is the risk of changing use over time. Research laboratories are just one example. As tech- nology and new research initiatives move forward, the equipment, tools, processes, materials, chemicals, and even occupants may change. The laboratory that may have been adequately designed for yesterday’s research may have woefully inadequate pro- tection as these considerations change over the life of the building. New research proj- ects may require the use of more hazardous chemicals or materials. Ventilation require- ments may change if different chemicals are required. Yesterday’s laboratory full of microscopes might house industrial ovens tomorrow, depending on research needs.
Retrofitting new research goals into legacy laboratory space could require researchers to adopt a “make due” attitude when things such as counter space or storage access are not designed to support the current research
efforts. This can lead people to inadvertently render risk mitigation features less effective or even useless.
For example, adding a table to the room to hold equipment too large for the available work benches could result in secondary egress doors becoming blocked in order to make room for a table to hold necessary equipment. Lack of storage space may result in researchers storing different chemicals together. Convenience may inspire users to store larger quantities of chemicals in the laboratory storage cabinets, instead of having to constantly retrieve them from hazardous storage areas. Finally, as researchers leave and new ones take over the space, they may be less knowledgeable about the active and pas- sive risk mitigation features of the space, making them more prone to unknowingly subverting their effectiveness through their use of different procedures and methods.
Even a simple advance in research that requires the use of different materials or chemicals of a higher hazard than were anticipated during facility initial design and construction could render a once-appropri- ate fire sprinkler system ineffective. Prod- ucts with higher heat release rates or increased combustible loads could poten- tially overwhelm a sprinkler system designed for lower hazards.
These are just a few examples of how facil- ity change can impact risk mitigation, and they illustrate why periodic audits are vital to ensuring the facility complies with both code and the facility risk strategy. Because people tend to be one of the most unpredictable fea- tures of change, the risk assessment strategy
March/April 2019 | campuslifesecurity.com 43