Normative legal acts of the Russian Federation establish that the criteria for assigning control objects to the categories of risk of causing harm should be formed based on the results of the assessment of the risk of causing harm.
In the developed countries of the world, as a rule, the distribution of objects of control by risk categories and the substantiation of the frequency of their inspections are carried out depending either on the point risk assessment, or on the number and importance of the violations of mandatory fire safety requirements revealed during the inspection of the object of control.
The purpose of this work is to substantiate the frequency of scheduled inspections of the objects of control by the state fire supervision bodies depending on whether the objects of protection belong to a particular category of risk of causing harm.
As a criterion for assigning control objects to various categories of risk of causing harm, it is proposed to use the risk of causing harm (damage) as the result of fire in the buildings of various classes of functional fire hazard, which is understood as the product of the probability of fire occurrence, the probability of causing socio-economic harm (damage) as the result of fire and the value terms of socio-economic harm (damage). A mathematical model was developed to determine the risk of causing harm (damage) as the result of a fire in a building, and an assessment of its values for the buildings of various classes of functional fire hazard is given.
Distribution of the buildings by categories of risk of causing harm (damage) was carried out depending on the calculated value of the risk of causing harm. It is shown that the distribution of control objects by risk categories significantly depends on the degree of detail in the fire record card of the characteristics of the building in which the fire occurred. The optimal terms for carrying out scheduled inspections of the objects of control are proposed depending on the category of risk to which they are assigned. Proposals are formulated concerning the improvement of the risk-oriented approach in the activities of the state fire supervision bodies of the EMERCOM of Russia.
2. Matyushin A.V., Kondashov A.A., Matyushin Yu.A., Sibirko V.I. Technique for Justification of Optimum Frequency of Planned Inspections of Fire-Prevention Condition of Objects of Protection by Bodies of GPN EMERCOM of Russia. Pozharnaya bezopasnost = Fire safety. 2019. № 2. pp. 72–80. (In Russ.).
3. Matyushin A.V., Firsov A.G., Matyushin Yu.A., Goncharenko V.S. Methodology for the Distribution of Objects of Protection by Categories of Risk Causing Harm (Damage) to the Objects of Protection in Case of Fire. Bezopasnost truda v promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2020. № 5. pp. 64–72. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2020-5-64-72
4. Poroshin A.A., Kondashov A.A., Zobkov D.V., Ryzhikov A.I. Mathematical Model for Determining Risk Categories of Objects of Protection in the Field of Fire Safety. Aktualnye problemy pozharnoy bezopasnosti: materialy XXXII nauch.-prakt. konf. (Current fire safety issues: Materials of the XXXII scientific-practical conference). Мoscow: VNIIPO, 2020. pp. 30–37. (In Russ.).
5. Reforming safety compliance checks: international experience in implementing a risk-oriented approach. Available at: https://bstudy.net/628848/ekonomika/reformirovanie_proverok_sootvetstviya_pravilam_bezopasnosti_mezhdunarodnyy_opyt_vnedreniya_risk_orienti#807 (accessed: May 7, 2021). (In Russ.).
6. Hampton P. Reducing administrative burdens: effective inspection and enforcement. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/bud05hampton_150305_640.pdf (accessed: May 7, 2021).
7. Black J. Risk-based regulation: choices, practices and lessons being learn. Risk and regulatory policy. Improving the governance of risk. Paris: OECD, 2010. pp. 185–224. DOI: 10.1787/9789264082939-11-en
8. How FDNY uses analytics to find potential fire traps. Available at: https://gcn.com/Articles/2013/08/01/FDNY-data-analytics.aspx? (accessed: May 7, 2021).
9. GOST R ISO/IEC 31010—2011. Risk management. Risk assessment methods. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200090083 (accessed: May 7, 2021). (In Russ.).
10. Risk assessment and decision selection criteria. Available at: https://bstudy.net/600170/ekonomika/otsenka_velichiny_riska_kriterii_vybora_resheniya (accessed: May 7, 2021). (In Russ.).
11. On technical regulation: Federal law of December 27, 2002 № 184-FZ. Available at: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/901836556 (accessed: October 1, 2021). (In Russ.).
12. Technical regulation on fire safety requirements: The Federal Law of July 22, 2008 № 123-FZ. Available at: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/902111644 (accessed: May 7, 2021). (In Russ.).
13. On the approval of methodology for determining the calculated values of fire risk in the buildings, structures, and constructions of various classes of functional fire hazard: Order of EMERCOM of Russia of June 30, 2009 № 382. Available at: https://www.mchs.gov.ru/dokumenty/668 (accessed: May 7, 2021). (In Russ.).
14. Saaty T. Mathematical Principles of Decision Making (Principia Mathematica Decernendi). Pittsburgh: RWS Publications, 2010. 615 p.
15. Determination of the risk level and its dimension. Available at: https://cyberpedia.su/ 14x132d2.html (accessed: May 7, 2021). (In Russ.).
16. On the federal state fire supervision: Resolution of the Russian Federation Government of April 12, 2012 № 290. Available at: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/902341612 (дата обращения: 30.07.2021). (In Russ.).
17. Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation: Federal Law of December 29, 2004 № 190-FZ. Available at: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/901919338 (accessed: October 1, 2021). (In Russ.).