Fire Safety Engineer in Rome:
CPI and SCIA Filings
Fire safety design, SCIA and renewal of compliance, with the Fire Prevention Code (D.M. 03/08/2015) or the vertical technical rules.
Public bodies, schools, hotels and historic assets.
Complete fire compliance
From the first technical feasibility assessment to fire safety design, from the SCIA filing with the competent Fire Brigade Command to the periodic renewal of compliance.
Direct knowledge of the procedures of the Rome Fire Brigade Command and of the Sicilian provincial Commands, built up on public bodies, hospitality structures and historic assets subject to control.
- Fire Prevention Certificate (CPI): cat. A, B, C
- SCIA antincendio filings: submission and renewal
- Upgrading: public administration, schools, hotels, historic assets
- Fire-safety feasibility studies at design stage
- Fire Safety Engineering (D.M. 03/08/2015, Section M)
- Advice on detection and suppression systems
Main subjection thresholds (D.P.R. 151/2011)
| Activity | Subjection threshold | Category |
|---|---|---|
| Hotels and hospitality structures | over 25 guest beds | A: 26–50 · B: 51–100 · C: over 100 beds |
| Offices, public or private | over 300 people present | A: 301–500 · B: 501–800 · C: over 800 people |
| Car parks, public or private | covered area over 300 sqm | A: up to 1,000 · B: 1,000–3,000 · C: over 3,000 sqm |
| Schools of every order, grade and type | over 100 people present | A: 101–150 · B: 151–300 · C: over 300 people |
When the floor plan does not match the building
The fire-safety upgrading campaign for school buildings carried out in past years produced a significant volume of filings. Some done rigorously; many, not. The recurring anomaly is always the same: the fire-safety design was drawn up on cadastral plans or approximate surveys, without a site visit to verify the correspondence between the drawing and the actual premises.
A dwelling inside a school brings ignition sources the school activity does not have: open flame in the kitchen, a gas installation, domestic appliances running when the building is closed. Italian rule D.M. 26/08/1992 therefore requires separation rated at least REI 120 with no communications, or communications only through REI 120 doors, with independent access to the flat. The weak point, though, is not the wall: it is the penetrations. A REI 120 wall crossed by a gas pipe, a cable tray or a drain not sealed with devices of the same class is no longer REI 120 — it is a wall with a hole in it. That is where compartmentation is lost, and on site you find it by opening the ceiling void and the riser, not by looking at the door.
The stair is there, visible, usable: it looks like an escape route, and for years everyone treated it as one. But its footprint falls outside the school’s plot, and that is not a cadastral detail — it is the difference between an exit that exists and one that does not. It almost always arises the same way: the building was put up hard against the boundary, the boundary is not physically marked — no wall, no fence, just a line on the map — and the external stair, added later precisely for fire safety compliance, ended up beyond it. It is the one anomaly of the three that does not surface on site, because there is nothing to see: you find it by laying the escape plan over the cadastral map.
Nobody built anything: they simply started putting things into a classroom that was no longer needed. First the boxes from a move, then two shelving units, then twenty years of archive. Yet the building’s fire safety has changed, because the fire load of a paper store is not that of a classroom, and the fire resistance required of the compartment follows precisely from that load. A silent change of use is a fire safety alteration in its own right, even though it passed through neither a building site nor a signature. It is the easiest anomaly to find and the easiest not to look for: the door still says «classroom», because nobody changed the sign.
What the three cases have in common is not their gravity: it is the mechanism. The filed document describes a building that does not exist, and the document outlives the people. It passes from one head teacher to the next, from one tender to the following, and at every step it gains authority merely because it is old: if no one has challenged it in ten years, it is taken as good. Whoever signs the renewal does not inherit a file, they inherit the errors of whoever wrote it — and take them on the moment they stamp it.
The remedy is not a better designer: it is a better starting point. Before the design, half a day of site visit is needed, plan in hand and a red pencil: the escape routes are walked and counted, the doors are opened to read what class they really are, the rooms nobody usually opens are entered. It costs little and should be budgeted, because it is the only thing that stops the error from passing to the next document. A body that has it done once does not buy a formality: it stops inheriting, with every filing, the problem of whoever came before.
Extracts of the Studio's real drawings, cropped well away from the title block, with no recognisable data.
Frequently asked questions
Regulatory content updated 30 July 2026
Is your activity subject to a fire certificate (CPI)?
Let us check the requirements together and manage the whole filing.
Request a conversation