Report from the Commission on application of the Council Recommendation of 22 December 1986 on fire safety in existing hotels (86/666/EEC)
Date: 2001-06-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumer protection, dissemination of information, fire protection, hotel industry, occupational safety, safety standard

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 27.06.2001
COM(2001) 348 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

on application of the Council Recommendation of 22 December 1986 on fire safety in
existing hotels (86/666/EEC)

1.

INTRODUCTION

On 22 December 19861
(86/666/EEC) on fire safety in existing hotels.

the Council unanimously adopted Recommendation

The purpose of the Recommendation was to define minimum safety standards for all
hotels in the Community on the principle that people needing to stay in hotels in
Member States outside their country of origin are entitled to adequate protection and
to be informed of the extent of that protection.

The Recommendation observed that despite the differences and economic, technical
and architectural constraints, it was possible to establish minimum safety standards
for all existing hotels, provided adequate time was allowed. This would, however,
have to remain within reasonable limits if the purpose of the Recommendation were
not to be compromised.

Where existing laws were not already sufficient, Member States were recommended
to take all appropriate measures to guarantee the safety standards set out in the
Recommendation, these being defined on the basis of the aims to be achieved
through the implementation of technical guidelines. Member States were also asked
to inform the Commission within two years of the measures adopted in this respect
and those envisaged over the next five years.

the available information on the impact

This Commission report sets out
the
measures taken in response to the Recommendation have had on regulatory systems
and actual practice in the Member States, and outlines the further activities planned
in this field. It is largely based on a study undertaken essentially to assess how the
requirements of the Recommendation have been interpreted by the Member States
and the measures they have adopted to implement them, and on a Commission
survey of the Member State authorities. It also takes into account comments and
information from operators in the tourist industry.

The purpose is therefore to take stock of the available information, and above all to
initiate an examination of the extent to which the recommendation’s objectives have
been achieved and whether any further action is necessary.

2.

BACKGROUND

Prior to the Recommendation, some Member States did not have any specific
regulations governing fire safety in hotels. Where rules existed, they were often
piecemeal, scattered among various other texts and were not always very effectively
enforced. In view of the continued growth of tourism and business travel, the need
was felt for minimum fire safety standards for all hotels within the Community.

The choice of a Council Recommendation as legal instrument was dictated by the
need to allow for the complexity of the problem and the variety of existing situations,
and by the diversity of national rules and regulations on the subject. Many Member

1 OJ L 384 of 31.12.1986, p. 60-68.

2

States did, in fact, have standards and regulations in respect of the aspects covered by
the minimum technical specifications in the Annex, hotels being only one specific
aspect of their scope.

Given such a vast array of laws and regulations and the nature of the existing
situation, a recommendation which, by setting out minimum technical requirements,
provided a guide to the measures to be taken to ensure the safety of existing hotels
while having the flexibility to adapt to the various situations encountered, was seen
as the most appropriate choice.

the European Parliament,

In May 1994,
in the absence of any information on
implementation of the Recommendation and taking the view that the lack of binding
Community standards was perpetuating a situation of risk, issued a resolution calling
upon the Commission to submit to it a proposal for a directive on fire safety in
hotels2, based on the existing Recommendation.

3.

RECOMMENDATION 86/666/EEC

The Recommendation acknowledges the entitlement of consumers and hotel staff to
protection against fire in hotels. It sets out a series of principles and requirements on
the basis of which Member States are called upon to take the appropriate measures.

The main objective is, in existing hotels, to reduce the risk of fire breaking out,
prevent the spread of flames and smoke, ensure that the occupants can be evacuated
safely and enable the emergency services to take action.

The Recommendation indicates the precautions to be taken to meet this objective.
These include the availability and accessibility of escape routes, structural stability of
the building, flammability of the materials used, the safe operation of technical
equipment and appliances, alarms, safety instructions and plans of the premises,
emergency fire-fighting equipment and staff training.

For hotels able to accommodate at least 20 temporary paying guests, Member States
are recommended to apply the technical guidelines set out in the Annex to the
Recommendation.

If, for economic, including anti-seismic, or architectural reasons, any of the technical
guidelines cannot be implemented, the Recommendation specifies that the alternative
solutions adopted must ensure the overall minimum safety standard the technical
guidelines are designed to establish.

In the case of establishments able to accommodate fewer than 20 temporary paying
guests, Member States are asked to adopt the most appropriate measures to guarantee
their safety.

the Recommendation specifies

that conformity with the minimum
Finally,
recommended safety standards is essential for continued operation and that hotels
must be subject to regular inspection.

2 OJ C 205 of 25.7.1994, p. 163.

3

The technical guidelines specify eight main areas in which safety precautions are to
be taken:

-

Escape routes

The provisions concern aspects such as design, fittings, signs and accessibility and
apply to doors (direction of opening), the presence of obstacles, the number of
staircases and the maximum distances to reach them, maximum length of blind
passages, etc.

-

Construction features

The fire resistance of building structures and floors, staircase enclosures, etc., are
covered according to the number of storeys. Fire resistance is also a factor for the
various types of internal compartmentation (partitions, doors, etc.).

-

Coverings and decorations

Depending on the area (escape routes, hallways, corridors, etc.) guidelines are given
on the fire behaviour of the interior coverings and decorations.

-

Electric lighting

The provisions cover both the principal and the emergency lighting systems.

-

Heating

This covers both central heating systems and individual heaters and the safety
considerations include the ignition and spread of fires, specific requirements for the
location of certain types of heating installations, shut-off devices for fuel supplies,
storage of fuel and, for example, maintenance of individual heaters and provision of
instructions for their use.

-

Ventilation systems

The provisions cover shut-off devices for ventilation systems, and their location and
identification, to ensure that they do not contribute to propagating fire, gas and
smoke.

-

Fire fighting, alarm and alerting equipment

Points covered by the provisions include emergency fire-fighting equipment
(availability of extinguishers, their location, accessibility and maintenance, etc.), the
presence and characteristics of an acoustic alarm system, the provision for alerting
the emergency services, training of staff in emergency procedures (instruction and
training exercises).

-

Safety instructions

The guidelines essentially cover the content, location and comprehensibility of safety
instructions to be followed in the event of fire, the various types of plans and
evacuation instructions.

4

4.

OTHER RELEVANT LEGAL PROVISIONS

in some cases even making compliance with certain of

While fire prevention in general is essentially the responsibility of the Member
States, since the adoption of Recommendation 86/666/EEC there have been various
individual
Community initiatives supplementing and supporting the efforts of
countries, or
the
Recommendation’s provisions compulsory (e.g. point 2.2 (stability of the building
structure) and point 2.3 (presence of inflammable materials). Among the most
important with regard to fire safety in hotels are Council Directive 89/106/EEC of
21 December 19883 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative
provisions of the Member States relating to construction products, and Council
Directive 89/654/EEC of 30 November 19894 on safety and health requirements for
the workplace.

In Directive 89/106/EEC relating to construction products, one of the essential
requirements is specific to fire safety (stability of the structure’s load-bearing
elements, limiting the outbreak and internal spread of fire and smoke, limiting the
spread of fire outside the building, possibility for the occupants to leave the building
unharmed or to be rescued, safety of rescue teams). Under this Directive,
the
from the
European Committee for Standardisation, on receipt of mandates
Commission, draws up harmonised standards on the fire resistance of construction
products, conformity with which by the manufacturer confers presumption of
conformity with the safety standards of the Directive. This Directive, in conjunction
with the appropriate standards, can contribute to increasing fire safety in new or
renovated hotels in respect of the types of product used in their construction or
conversion.

Directive 89/654/EEC similarly requires employers to meet minimum safety and
health requirements at the workplace. Since its entry into force, hotels as a workplace
are therefore subject to the provisions on fire prevention and detection and on
firefighting (the Member States required to bring their legislation into line by
31/12/1992 have all adopted the measures transposing the Directive and notified the
Commission of them).

There are also certain other provisions contributing directly or indirectly to fire
safety in hotels. Examples are Council Directive 73/23/EEC of 19 February 19735 on
the harmonisation of the laws of Member States relating to electrical equipment
designed for use within certain voltage limits, and European Parliament and Council
Directive 95/16/CE of 29 June 19956 on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States relating to lifts.

5.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE MEMBER
STATES

The Commission has taken a certain number of initiatives to ensure the monitoring of
implementation by the Member States of the Recommendation together with its

3 OJ L 40 of 11.2.1989, p. 12-26.
4 OJ L 393 of 30.12.1989, p. 1-12.
5 OJ L 77 of 26.3.1973, p. 29-33.
6 OJ L 213 of 7.9.1995, p. 1-31.

5

technical guidelines. These include a study on the implementation of
Recommendation and a survey of national authorities on its impact.

the

One of the main purposes of these exercises was to respond to the questions put by
the European Parliament concerning the concrete steps taken by the Member States
to implement the Recommendation.

a) Study7

A study was carried out for the Commission, the main purpose of which was to
check that all the provisions of Recommendation 86/666/EEC had been correctly
interpreted and transposed into the national law of all the Member States. This
involved comparing the various national legislation with the requirements of the
Recommendation.

Points to emerge from the report submitted to the Commission in 1996 were:

-
“The requirements of the Recommendation have, in nearly all cases, been
adopted as national provisions and can therefore be regarded as minimum criteria
which have been met and surpassed in most cases”.

-
“The Recommendation has had a considerable impact in countries in which the
regulations did not go far enough since, in most cases, it has been transposed into
national legislation almost as it stands”.

“Half the Community countries have not accepted measures with retroactive

-
effect. The measures are applied only in the case of conversion or extension work”.

This implies that the Recommendation’s impact on national legislation depended to a
large extent on the existing degree of protection when it was issued. Some Member
States (Germany, Austria, Spain, Denmark, Finland, United Kingdom, Luxembourg
and the Netherlands)8 opted to restrict application of the Recommendation to new
hotels or to conversion, improvement or extension work in existing hotels. As a
result, the rules applying to hotels already existing in these Member States are
inconsistent, and it is impossible to assess with complete accuracy how far they meet
the Recommendation’s objectives.

b) Survey of national authorities

In view of the crucial role played by the competent authorities in the Member States
in both market surveillance and supervision of the application of national legislation,

7 Study carried out in 1996 on fire safety in hotels and tourist accommodation in the European Community —
APAVE, 734 pages in French. The main purpose of the study, which was available to interested parties on
demand, was to examine how the Recommendation had been implemented in the provisions applied by the
the study presented the results of a survey on implementation of the
Member States. In addition,
Recommendation by way of information.
the limited sample on which it was based
In view of
(1 213 completed questionnaires) the Commission preferred not to use these results in the present report.
8 Further clarification is needed in the case of France: establishments in the second category (capacity of
the
between 20 and 100 guests) which did not meet
recommendation were ordered to bring their establishments into line by 25.8.1995. Those in the first category
(capacity of over 100 guests), on the other hand, were not subject to this obligation, as in most cases they had
been in line with the recommendation’s minimum requirements for over 20 years.

the minimum security requirements as per

6

the Commission worked in consultation with them in assessing the real impact of the
Recommendation on the basis, in particular, of a questionnaire sent to them in 2000.

Points to emerge from the replies were:

All

the Member States

they had implemented the
-
Recommendation’s guidelines. The degree of adaptation this entailed depended on
the degree of protection already provided under national legislation.

considered that

All Member States had monitoring mechanisms in place. Their nature and

-
effectiveness, however, differed according to their content, scope and frequency.

All the Member States considered that the degree of protection provided by
-
their own legislation was adequate for the risk in question, and none raised any
doubts about the implementation of the Recommendation by other Member States.

Around half the Member States, while not questioning the Recommendation as
-
such, thought it would be worth considering updating the requirements it contained,
particularly those of the technical guidelines.

c) Other sources of information

Finally, the Commission has received some expressions of concern from certain
the way in which the
consumer associations and tourism operators about
Recommendation is being implemented in certain Member States.

One topic of concern among tourism operators is apparently that Council Directive
90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours9
holds the tour operator responsible for the safety of its customers, whereas legal
responsibility for fire safety in hotels is not established at Community level, resulting
in many different situations which it is left to the tour operator to assess.

The Commission has very recently received a report from the United Kingdom
Federation of Tour Operators10. The report compiles and summarises surveys carried
out by UK tourism operators in 10 Member States at different periods and covering
different types of accommodation. The report has not been examined by the Member
States concerned. It points to substantial shortcomings in the practical application of
the Recommendation's guidelines in various Member States. However,
in the
absence of independent, recent and consistent corroboration, it is impossible to assess
how representative these conclusions are of the general situation in the Community
at the moment.

9 OJ L 158 of 23.6.1990 p. 59–64.
10 “European Hotel Fire Safety, An Analysis of the Implementation and Impact of the 1986 Recommendation

on Fire Safety in Existing Hotels”. A report by Stewart Kidd.

7

6.

CONCLUSIONS

a) Alignment of national regulations with the Recommendation

In the light of the information gathered (study/survey), the Commission concludes
that the impact the Recommendation has had on national regulations depends on
various factors:

The existing level of protection in the country concerned when the
-
Recommendation was issued. The less developed the national legislation at the time,
the greater the impact.

The way in which the Recommendation's requirements have been incorporated
-
into national
legislation. From the point of view of legislation in force after
Recommendation 86/666/EEC was adopted, the technical guidelines can be seen as
minimum requirements which in most cases have been met or surpassed by the
applicable national legislation. However, according to the study, various Member
States, following the principle of applying the legislation in force at the time of
construction, have essentially only applied the technical guidelines in the case of
improvement, conversion or extension of hotels already existing when the
Recommendation was adopted, and to hotels built subsequently.

Any alternative solutions adopted in the cases provided for by the

-
Recommendation where the technical guidelines cannot be applied.

It would appear on this basis that certain Member States have only partially
brought their regulations into line with the Recommendation.

b) The situation on the ground

According to Eurostat estimates11,
there are over 180 000 hotels or similar
establishments in the European Union, with a total of 8.9 million beds (an average of
48 per establishment), and tourists account for around 45% of nights spent in hotels
within the Community. In view of the size, variety and complexity of the sector the
together with other provisions of Community legislation (cf.
Recommendation,
point 4), has in overall terms helped to increase safety levels to the general standard
aimed at. However, the fact that the Recommendation has only been implemented
partially by some Member States has created disparate situations, making it more
difficult to compare countries applying the Recommendation to all hotels with those
which have opted to apply it only to new constructions or to improvement,
conversion or extension work in existing establishments. The lack of accurate,
consistent and independent
information on practical implementation and on the
effectiveness of the regular inspections required by the Recommendation is another
factor standing in the way of a comprehensive assessment of the situation.

It must therefore be concluded that, while Recommendation 86/666/EEC has, in
many cases, helped to improve safety levels, the objective of ensuring, via a
Community instrument, that the consumer can rely on minimum and clearly
defined safety levels applicable throughout the EU has not been fully achieved,
particularly in view of the fact that certain Member States have restricted its

11 Eurostat, "Panorama of European Business, 1999", CA-25-99-043-EN-C.

8

application to new hotels or new work on existing hotels. This should not in
itself be taken to imply that certain Member States and certain categories of
hotel present particular risks. However, in the absence of full, up-to-date and
consistent information, uncertainties remain as to the current application in
practice of the provisions designed to ensure that the Recommendation's
objectives are met.

c) Guidelines for possible future activities concerning fire safety in hotels

The Commission considers that the nature of the sector (complexity, variety of
national situations and legislative backgrounds) which prompted the choice of a
recommendation as legal instrument also provides grounds for maintaining a flexible
approach. Rigid harmonisation of all the technical requirements applicable to all
existing hotels in the Community is clearly not a viable prospect. Neither would a
proliferation of Community regulations on individual safety aspects of certain
services be desirable or effective. Nonetheless, in view of the above conclusions,
there is a good case for further action in the field of fire safety in hotels.

The Commission considers the first priority to be obtaining more detailed and
comparable factual information as a basis for identifying the exact nature and extent
of any remaining problems in respect of fire safety measures in hotels.

This should be followed up by a thorough examination, together with the Parliament
and the Member States, of how far Community-level initiatives are needed to
enhance safety in this area.

Points for joint discussion could include:

– The desirability of incorporating into a new recommendation more detailed,
appropriate and concrete provisions for existing hotels in cases where the
guidelines in Recommendation 86/666/EEC cannot be applied. This would
overcome the difficulties which led to the Recommendation not being applied to
existing hotels in several Member States. In particular, any new Recommendation
could provide that, where any of the technical guidelines of Recommendation
the
86/666/ EEC cannot be applied for economic or architectural reasons,
alternative solutions adopted should be subject to a fire safety assessment on a
case-by-case basis in the light of the objectives and principles of the new
Recommendation. On the basis of this assessment,
the competent national
authorities should identify any specific measures needed and ensure that they are
implemented. The new Recommendation could supply general criteria for such an
assessment.

– The advisability of increasing supervision and monitoring of fire safety in all
hotels. A new Recommendation could also include additional provisions on the
performance by Member States of their responsibilities in respect of supervising
and monitoring the implementation of the technical guidelines in all hotels. The
Member States should report regularly to the Commission on their monitoring
measures and on implementation of this Recommendation.

– Updating and improvement of the technical guidelines. Recommendation
86/666/EEC was adopted fifteen years ago. There is now a need for
reconsideration of and consultation on how far the technical guidelines meet

9

current needs, particularly in the light of the intervening technical and scientific
advances. If appropriate, updating of the guidelines could be considered in
collaboration with the competent authorities' experts in the Member States, and
possibly a new Recommendation proposed, taking account of the results of such
consultation. In addition, the aspects of the guidelines concerning management of
fire prevention measures by professionals within the sector, staff training and
consumer information could be extended and reinforced.

– The different types of accommodation. The emergence of different types of
accommodation is another element to be considered in ensuring that any new
Recommendation could be applied to other forms of accommodation similar to
hotels.

– Identification and dissemination of best practice in fire safety management
and monitoring. Finally, the advisability and potential means of identifying best
practice in fire prevention and circulating it among supervisory authorities and
professionals could be considered.

To conclude, the initiatives the Commission intends to consider in the field of safety
of services and the responsibilities incumbent on service providers could enhance the
impact and effectiveness of any new Recommendation brought in.

10