The targets of operation function checks are the firefighting targets in Annex 2 of the enforcement decree of the Act on Fire Prevention and the Installation, Maintenance, and Safety Control of Firefighting Systems. Excluded firefighting targets are specific targets that correspond to Article 22, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the enforcement decree of the Act on Fire Prevention and the Installation, Maintenance, and Safety Control of Firefighting Systems. Table 1 lists the targets of operation function checks.

Operation function checks are performed by relevant persons concerned with specific firefighting targets, fire safety managers, firefighting facility managers, or other registered technical personnel. Regarding inspection frequency, these checks must be performed at least once a year. Specifically, operation function checks must be performed (1) within six months of comprehensive precision checks, (2) by the end of the month in which the building was granted use approval, (3) beginning in the year after the receipt of building use approval for buildings that newly received approval (or beginning in the same year as receipt of use approval in cases where use approval was granted within one year after receiving a firefighting facility completion inspection certificate), and (4) throughout the year for other inspection targets.

The targets of comprehensive precision checks are as follows: specific firefighting targets with fire extinguishing equipment (e.g., sprinkler and water spray systems) and a total floor area of at least 5,000 square meters; apartments with a total floor area of at least 5,000 square meters and at least 11 floors; specific firefighting targets with a total floor area of at least 2,000 square meters that contain multi-use facilities as defined in Article 2, Paragraph 1, Item B of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Act on the Safety Control of Publicly Used Establishments[7] and Paragraphs 2 (excluding video theaters), 6, 7, 7(2), and 7(5) of the same article; tunnels equipped with smoke control systems; and buildings with a total floor area (the product of the length and average width for tunnels and underground passages) of 1,000 square meters that are equipped with indoor fire hydrant systems or automatic fire detection systems, among public institutions, in accordance with Article 2 of the Regulations on Fire Safety Management of Public Institutions. Public institutions where firefighters work (fire stations) are excluded in accordance with Article 2, Paragraph 5 of the Framework Act on Firefighting Services.

Comprehensive precision checks are performed by a firefighting facility management company (when firefighting facility managers are involved) or at least one firefighting facility manager or fire professional engineer who has been appointed as the fire safety manager. These checks should be performed at least once a year. The inspection frequency is double, that is, at least twice a year, for the targets listed in Table 1.

Comprehensive precision checks should be performed (1) in the month in which the building was granted use approval, (2) beginning in the year after the receipt of building use approval for buildings that newly received building use approval (specifically, by the end of the month of use approval), (3) based on the use approval date of the building with the earliest use approval date among all the relevant buildings in cases where there are two or more buildings to be inspected within the boundaries of a single site, and (4) at least once a month (an exterior inspection that relies on the visual or physical senses) for firefighting facilities installed in public institutions, in accordance with Article 2 of the Regulations on Fire Safety Management of Public Institutions. (5) In the case of electric facilities, inspections should be performed before use, in accordance with Article 63 of the Electric Utility Act; there should be regular inspections, in accordance with Article 65 of the same act; and inspections of general electric equipment should be conducted, in accordance with Article 66 of the same act. (6) In the case of gas facilities, inspections should be scheduled and performed in accordance with Article 17 of the Urban Gas Business Act, Articles 16(2) and 20(4) of the High-Pressure Gas Safety Control Act, or Articles 19 and 27(2) of the Safety Control and Business of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Act.

Regarding the basic manpower to be deployed during the self-inspection of firefighting facilities, one firefighting facility manager and two auxiliary personnel are defined as comprising a single inspection manpower unit, and one or two auxiliary personnel may be added to the unit. For operation function checks, which are small-scale inspections, one inspection manpower unit is organized, with one auxiliary person.

The total floor area of a specific firefighting target that one inspection manpower unit can inspect in one day during a self-inspection is (1) 10,000 square meters for comprehensive precision checks and (2) 12,000 square meters for operation function checks. Whenever an auxiliary person is added to an inspection manpower unit, the inspection limit area expands by (3) 3,000 square meters for comprehensive precision checks and (4) 3,500 square meters for operation function checks. (5) The area to be inspected in a day when the inspection is performed by a management company is calculated by applying the following criteria to the inspection area, which should not exceed the inspection area limit: (6) For the inspection of apartments (including public, additional, and welfare facilities), the number of apartment households that one inspection manpower unit can inspect in a day is 300 for comprehensive precision checks and 350 (90 for small-scale inspections) for operation function checks. Whenever an auxiliary person is added to an inspection manpower unit, the number increases by 70 for comprehensive precision checks and 90 for operation function checks. Furthermore, the number of households a management company inspects in a day should not exceed the inspection volume limit, which is capped at the number of households to be inspected multiplied by 0.1 when sprinkler systems are not installed, 0.15 when fire extinguishing equipment (e.g., a water spray system) is not installed, and 0.1 when smoke control equipment is not installed. Finally, (7) when comprehensive precision and operation function checks are performed in a single day, the value obtained by multiplying the inspection area of the operation function check or the number of households to be inspected by 0.8 is calculated as the comprehensive precision check inspection area or the number of households to be inspected. Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the sequential firefighting facility inspection procedure for new and existing buildings, respectively.

According to the Fire Services Act, the maximum area that one firefighting facility manager and two auxiliary personnel can inspect in a day is 10,000 square meters, equivalent to 300 apartments, for comprehensive precision checks and 12,000 square meters, equivalent to 350 apartments, for operation function checks. With the exception of special cases, most buildings with a total floor area of approximately 10,000 square meters are equipped with indoor fire hydrants, sprinkler systems, and automatic fire detection systems. Consequently, a day is insufficient to inspect all these firefighting facilities. Moreover, the regulations allow for the one-day inspection area to be expanded by 3,000 square meters if an auxiliary person joins the inspection unit. In the field, however, additional inspection manpower should not translate to inspecting a larger area. Instead, the inspection area should be adjusted practically to ensure the thorough inspection of firefighting facilities, which would, in turn, improve the reliability of firefighting facilities in the event of a fire. Specifically, the total floor area coverable during a one-day inspection should be determined by the type of firefighting facility.

The relationships between property owners and buildings’ firefighting facility management companies (represented by firefighting facility managers) are generally governed by power dynamics. For example, the profit-seeking contractor feels compelled to meet the demands of property owner, and the building owner can exploit this dynamic to evade proper maintenance of the building’s firefighting facilities, which could lead to situations that result in human injury, including casualties, as well as severe property damage in the event of a disaster such as a fire. Furthermore, firefighting facility inspections of specific firefighting targets do not differentiate between new and existing buildings. However, new buildings have a firefighting facility defect repair period that should not be overlooked. This period is legally fixed at three years for firefighting mechanical equipment and two years for firefighting electrical equipment. Thus, for new buildings, inspections of firefighting facilities are performed on the volition of the building owner for three years. After this period elapses, building owners tend to view investing in firefighting facilities as wasteful. Consequently, firefighting facility inspections inevitably become dependent on the perspective and preferences of each individual building owner. This necessitates the dissolution of the power dynamics between these parties through the implementation of an open bidding system.

Approximately 80% of the firefighting facilities that must inspected are on private property. Most inspection targets, except public institutions, implement a bidding process that selects the lowest bidder who can render services suitable for the affected persons. Among medium and small inspection targets, private contracts are granted through close relationships with persons associated with inspectable properties. The lowest bidder system inevitably leads to technical skill degradation at the inspection company and ultimately to poor inspections. This system is problematic because inspections are performed without the supervision of a firefighting facility manager, who is an expert in firefighting facilities. Such inspections are unreliable because the facilities are inspected solely by auxiliary personnel who have a limited understanding of firefighting facilities. To prevent these negative effects, inspection targets are urged to notify the relevant fire department and fire station in advance, so that they may ensure that a firefighting facility manager will be present at the inspection, but this is merely a formality.

Furthermore, contractors who secure nepotistic private contracts with inspection targets may, in many cases, overlook important and costly inspection items as part of the transactional relations that maintain the relationships between property owners and inspection companies. To address these problems, a budget price bidding system or standard estimate for firefighting facility inspections should be instituted.

As previously mentioned, firefighting facility managers are experts on firefighting facilities. However, the content and outcomes of the firefighting facility management test indicate that this is untrue. The basic qualifications firefighting facility managers must possess are stipulated by law, but anyone with a science or engineering degree qualifies and can take the test if they gain a certain amount of work experience. The legally stipulated qualifications alone make producing the firefighting facility experts the field urgently needs difficult. In reality, test takers’ information retention capacity determines whether prospective firefighting facility managers pass the test. Although the test was recently revised to incorporate some practical work, the practical portion can also be completed based on memorization. This necessitates further revision of the test to shape higher quality fire safety experts.

Firefighting facility inspections are conducted by a single unit comprising one firefighting facility manager and two auxiliary personnel. To ensure that auxiliary personnel are adequately qualified, the Korea Fire Safety Institute implements test-based certification after candidates complete a training program. The Institute assigns auxiliary personnel to inspection tasks immediately, provided they have passed the test following completion of four to five days of training. This short training period is grossly insufficient to ensure the reliability of firefighting facility inspections. Consequently, many auxiliary personnel lack a comprehensive understanding of firefighting facilities, a problem that necessitates the revision and reinforcement of the legal standards governing the process of attaining this important position. Specifically, acquiring national certification should be mandatory, and auxiliary personnel should be assigned to on-site inspections only after completing a thorough training course.

Suppressing fires in their early stages is crucial. Firefighting facility management involves issuing fire warnings and managing facilities to guarantee the capacity to extinguish fires. More importantly, conditions that could lead to a fire should be eliminated promptly. Failure to do this exposes precious lives and property to the threat of sustaining fire damage. The weakness of present-day firefighting facility management lies in this aspect. Countries that are leaders in firefighting advocate that relevant parties proactively undertake firefighting facility management rather than having the responsibility foisted upon them legislatively. The success of this advocacy in such countries is evidenced by the prevalence of fire insurance, among other examples. Moreover, insurance discounts are in effect for buildings that are deemed to be relatively safe from the threat of fire; conversely, those considered to be at a higher risk are charged more. As described above, perfect firefighting facilities alone cannot ensure fire safety. Minimizing the occurrence of fires demands proper management of combustibles and ignition sources, as well as the installation of fire partitions to prevent the spread of fire if one occurs. Perpetually maintaining reliable firefighting facilities is also a requirement.

The countermeasures for the extant problems with firefighting facility inspections are summarized as follows. First, the total floor area for one-day inspections should be determined according to the type of firefighting facility. Second, the power dynamics between inspection stakeholder groups should be rebalanced by implementing an open bidding system. Third, a budget price bidding system or standard firefighting facility inspection estimate should be introduced.