In attempting to minimize loss resulting from fire, accidents, and other natural and man-made events, risk managers can enhance their analyses and risk reduction strategies by using data developed through forensic engineering.

In forensic engineering investigations, an engineer follows evidence to a logical conclusion, often uncovering information directly related to a risk manager's core responsibility: assessing risks to reduce losses to acceptable minimums, or controlling risk by anticipating and preventing the occurrence of unplanned events.

Investigations by forensic engineers include water leaks, electrocutions, fires of electrical and/or mechanical origin, explosions, furnace “puff-backs,” slips, trip-and-fall incidents, auto accidents, recreational accidents, workplace accidents, and many other types of losses.

Forensic engineering investigations can provide risk managers with loss data that can assist with risk assessments, including identifying loss characteristics and consequences.

For example, a single-unit facility poses different risks to a risk manager–in both types and potential magnitude of risk–than a multiple-unit commercial or industrial facility. A loss in a single-unit facility might have a limited set of possible causes dictated by the relatively limited scope of the building and potential loss scenarios. A large commercial or industrial facility, however, presents a different set of risks and loss potential.

A simple example is an older facility constructed using previous versions of a building code. This presents a different risk than a new facility–current codes require more electrical receptacles than prior codes.

It is conceivable, therefore, that an older facility could use more extension cords than a newer one. This might increase the risk that an extension cord could short-circuit and ignite nearby combustibles. A forensic engineering probe might conclude a fire was caused by a short-circuit occurring in an extension cord.

Fixed wiring and mechanical systems might also have deteriorated. Such deterioration, including furnaces for which no spare parts are available or with deferred maintenance, pose other potential risks.

Similarly, an older facility is more likely to have been renovated. Such renovations are likely to have been performed, not only under different codes, but by different contractors. Renovations pose potential mechanical, electrical, structural and geo-technical risks.

A loss in a large commercial office building presents a different, and likely much broader array of causal factors and influential circumstances. If, for instance, an engineer is investigating a fire in a 350-unit office building with an apparent electrical cause, their analysis might reveal the fire was caused by a malfunction of a major piece of electrical equipment, such as a switchgear or transformer.

The forensic engineering report can provide data regarding the types of risks and the potential malfunctions associated with such equipment.

A fire in an industrial facility presents another loss scenario. Industrial facilities are more closely regulated and monitored than residential or commercial facilities, but have greater potential for increased property damage and loss of life.

Unlike variable incident settings, forensic investigation methodology must remain consistent. Each investigation should be conducted using a systematic analytical process to yield independent data and analysis. All possible causes should be identified.

The methodology consists of defining the problem, then collection and analysis of data. Until all data has been collected and analyzed in an investigation, no specific cause can be presumed.

Another important aspect of risk management concerns the consequences of failures. Engineers, through scientific methodology and investigation, collectively provide risk managers with a bank of information.

While the consequences of losses are often obvious–damage to residences and properties, business interruption, and personal injury and loss of life–the investigations into the cause of the consequences can provide vital information to the risk manager.

For example, if conditions that cause a furnace to produce soot, or a pressure relief valve to discharge water in such a way that ground water accumulates against a foundation wall are not corrected, the loss will continue to occur with more catastrophic consequences.

To reduce risk and loss to acceptable minimums, risk managers must be provided with the fundamental data and details of loss–the types of data and details forensic engineers can provide.

Professional understanding among risk managers and forensic engineers has practical benefits. The two fields, ultimately, have similar professional focuses, function, purposes and work-products. Recognizing this fact can only serve to help both professions.

Michael Plick is the founder of Michael Plick and Associates, a consulting forensic engineering firm in Narberth, Pa. For more information, visit www.plickandassociates.com

Reproduced from National Underwriter Property & Casualty/Risk & Benefits Management Edition, May 13, 2002. Copyright 2002 by The National Underwriter Company in the serial publication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as an independent work may be held by the author.