Presented by John Valiulis, P.E. Fire Protection Engineer, Hilti, Inc.

1. Risk assessment using Scoring System Methodology (SSM) as holistic substitute for Height & Area Table Presented by John Valiulis, P.E. Fire Protection Engineer, Hilti, Inc.

2. The challenge • H&A Table [overly?] prescriptive • Incomplete with respect to assessing all relevant factors that make a given building size safe or unsafe • Goals: • Holistic approach • Acceptable level of fire safety for communities, occupants, emergency responders

3. Scoring System Methodology • Widely used throughout global economy for risk assessment • pioneered by banking industry to assess likelihood for default with loan applications • Other applications: • IRS audit decisions • Parole board decisions • Mass mail and telemarketing decisions • Insurance industry customer screening • Hospital patient procedure decisions

4. Other formal risk assessment tools • What-If Analysis : Forward Modeling of Accidents • Proceed from an initiating event and branch to a set of possible or final events. • useful for modeling the impact of risk reduction options • Fault Tree Analysis: Backward Modeling of Accidents • proceed from the complete or final event and branch back to root causes • useful in identifying risk prevention options • identify the minimal set of necessary conditions for the accident to occur • Checklists • Qualitative risk assessment. • Avoids direct characterization of risk. • Decision making through constraints. Inspect for compliance with performance code which implies that risk is being maintained below some acceptable level. • Easy to implement ‘either-or’ decisions but ignores trade-off or substitution activity in risk management. • Scoring Systems: Risk Index Models

5. Example using SSM

6. SSM development for IBC • Define one or more risk metrics • For each risk measure, define set of measurable and observable risk factors, • defined with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) • Examples: • Occupancy classification • Height • Area • Full menu of active and passive risk mitigation measures • Expected emergency response • Set needs to be reasonably complete • Define relative importance of each risk factor • Use statistical data when available • Risk factor weights usually determined by SMEs • This process needs to be systematic; specific procedures have been developed (ref papers) • Define acceptable levels of fire safety for each risk measure • Determined with SMEs

7. NAME: Prof Frank Noonan TITLE: Associate Professor of Management Affiliated with WPI’s Fire Protection Engineering Program WPI Ombudsperson - Special Assistant to the President COLLEGIATE AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION Lesley College, Cambridge, MA – M.A., 1996, Major: Counseling Psychology University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA - Ph.D., 1973, Major: Industrial Engineering & Operations Research Northeastern University, Boston, MA – M.S., 1968, Major: Mathematics Boston College, Boston, MA - B.S., 1963, Major: Physics TEACHING EXPERIENCE 1978 to present: Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), Worcester, MA Associate Professor of Management & Industrial Engineering Affiliated with Manufacturing Engineering Program Affiliated with Fire Protection Engineering Program Affiliated with School of Industrial Management 1975- 1978: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI Assistant Professor of Industrial & Operations Engineering BUSINESS, PROFESSIONAL, MILITARY EXPERIENCE 1977-present: Consultant to over 10 businesses, universities and non-profit organizations in operations risk analysis. 1999-2001: Special faculty sabbatical appointment with the U.S.C.G. R&D Center. Available to give it a try…..