Last week, a massive fire tore through a Jim Beam warehouse in Kentucky, destroying 45,000 barrels of the company's whiskey. The blaze continued for days as barrels of the flammable liquid were purposefully allowed to burn to avoid further contaminating a nearby river by adding more water to the fire that could then run into the river, according to CNN. Officials say a lightning strike was likely the cause. Similar scenarios have played out over the years in Kentucky. In 2003, a lightning strike at a Jim Beam warehouse in Bardstown, Kentucky, set the wood-frame structure ablaze and sent 800,000 gallons of flaming bourbon into a nearby retention pond. Seven years prior, a fire broke out at Heaven Hill Distillery, also located in Bardstown, and burning whiskey created what one employee described to the Kentucky Standard newspaper as "a river of fire." And in 2000, a fire at a Wild Turkey distillery in Lawrenceburg, Kentucky, destroyed nearly 1 million gallons of bourbon. I wrote about distillery fires and the resources that exist to protect these facilities from fire for the March/April 2018 edition of NFPA Journal. While the piece—"Small Scale, High Proof"—largely focuses on the boom the United States has seen in recent years in small, craft distilling operations, the fire safety threats and fire protection concepts detailed in the story apply to any distillery, no matter how large or old. The article, for example, shows that hard liquor, usually 40 percent alcohol by volume (ABV) or higher, can give off enough vapor to ignite in air, at relatively low temperatures. It typically has a flashpoint of 79 degrees Fahrenheit, the article says, compared to pure ethyl alcohol with a flashpoint of 55 degrees F. Read more at nfpa.org/safedistilling.
Are you responsible for enforcing apartment buildings where residents want to use grills? Have you been faced with landlords or condo associations who are seeking education on the risk of grills and cooking appliances? Do you see office buildings with grilling/patio areas located too close to the building? Why does a Fire Code care about the occupant use of grills? NFPA 1 provides limitations for the use of grills, hibachi, and similar devices used for cooking and heating to ensure both the safety of occupants and protection of property. For other than one- and two-family dwellings, no hibachi, grill, or other similar devices used for cooking, heating, or any other purpose is to be used or ignited on any balcony, under any overhanging portion, or within 10 ft (3 m) of any structure. This keeps the ignition source a safe distance from the structure, such as an apartment building or dormitory, and away from exterior areas. In addition, these grills/hibachi cannot be stored on balconies. Where grills are stored on balconies, the probability is high they will be used there as well. With regard to the application and enforcement of this provision in the Code, a frequently asked question to NFPA staff is whether electric grills are including in this provisions. The answer is yes, they must follow the same rule as other fuel fired grills noted above. In 2006 the Code read as follows: 10.11.7 For other than one- and two-family dwellings, no hibachi, gas-fired grill, charcoal grill, or other similar devices used for cooking, heating, or any other purpose, shall be used or kindled on any balcony or under any overhanging portion or within 10 ft (3 m) of any structure. Listed electric ranges, grills, or similar electrical apparatus shall be permitted. However, the underlined sentence was removed in the 2009 edition and all subsequent editions. From 2009 on, the requirement as stated in Section 10.11.6 is intended to include electric devices when enforcing this requirement. Listed equipment permanently installed in accordance with its listing, applicable codes and manufacturer's instructions is permitted, however. We understand the challenges you may face in your role as a fire inspector when enforcing this provision. The inspection of every balcony of every multifamily dwelling is an impractical enforcement task. Compliance through public education is more readily achievable. As an AHJ, you can provide written notification of these requirements to condominium associations, property management agencies, and others who are affected. When the potential danger posed by grills is understood, voluntary compliance is easier to obtain. Landlords can also include this prohibition in leases to ensure that tenants are aware of the restrictions. NFPA also offers safe grilling tips and other resources for grilling safety. Here you will find a safe grilling tip sheet, grilling statistics infographic, a video with grilling safety tips, and also a video to show how to check your gas grill for leaks. All important information for consumers and enforcers alike. Who says grilling is only for the summer? If you grill year-round you should stay safe year-round. You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Thanks for reading!
Standpipe systems are fixed piping systems with associated equipment that transports water from a reliable water supply to designated areas of buildings. Such systems are typically provided in tall and large-area buildings. These systems can significantly improve the efficiency of manual fire-fighting operations by eliminating the need for long and cumbersome hose lays from fire apparatus to a fire. Even in buildings that are protected by automatic sprinklers, standpipe systems can play an important role in building fire safety by serving as a backup for, and complement to, sprinklers. So, how does this impact you as a fire inspector? As an inspector utilizing NFPA 1 you need to know three things about standpipes when determining if a building and system is compliant with the Code: (1) Where are standpipes required, (2) What type of system is required and (3) Has the system been properly inspected, tested, and maintained. Where are standpipes required? The Code required standpipe systems, designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 14, in new buildings that meet any of the following conditions: (1) More than three stories above grade where the building is protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system, (2) More than two stories above grade where the building is not protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system, (3) More than 50 ft (15 m) above grade and containing intermediate stories or balconies (4) More than one story below grade (5) More than 20 ft (6.1 m) below grade In addition, standpipes are required in high-rise buildings and some stage areas in assembly occupancies. Some occupancies also mandate the presence of standpipes, such as detention and correctional occupancies, airport terminals and piers, at certain thresholds. As a fire inspector, you will be utilizing a number of codes and standards when inspecting buildings. You might find that the standpipe thresholds vary in the codes. NFPA 1 might mandate the presence of standpipes where NFPA 101 does not, for example. This is because the scope of a fire code, life safety code, and building code differ. When enforcing the provisions for standpipes, the most restrictive provisions of the applicable codes apply. Did you know that there are instances where the AHJ can permit the removal of existing occupant-use hose lines? Where (1) NFPA 1 does not require their installation, (2) The current building code does not require their installation, AND (3) The AHJ determines that the occupant-use hose line will not be utilized by trained personnel or the fire department, existing occupant-use hose lines can be removed per the AHJ. This was added to the Code to place emphasis on the preference for untrained building occupants to evacuate rather than attempt to extinguish a fire using hose lines. What type of system is required? In addition to the Code mandating where standpipes are required it will also specify what class of system is required for a particular installation. Standpipe systems are designated as Class I, Class II, and Class III. Note that sprinkler systems with hose connections are not necessarily considered to be standpipe systems. Such systems are often regarded simply as sprinkler systems. The design of a combined system is similar to any other Class I or Class III system, except that the water supply and pipe sizes may be larger to accommodate the added sprinkler system demand. The process of designing a standpipe system begins with determining the intended use, that is, whether it is for (1) full-scale fire fighting, (2) first-aid fire fighting, or (3) both. These three uses correspond with the three classes of standpipe systems. Most aspects of system design, such as the required water supply, layout, and system components, are also affected or dictated by the class of system. Let's look at a Class I system, as an example: A Class I system provides 2½ in. (65 mm) hose connections at designated locations in a building for use by the fire department. A Class I system is typically required in buildings that have more than three stories above or below grade because of the time and difficulty involved in laying hose from fire apparatus directly to remote floors. For these reasons, Class I standpipes are the required system in high-rise buildings. Requirements for inspection, testing, and maintenance of standpipes systems Finally, a standpipe system installed as required by NFPA 1 must be properly maintained to provide at least the same level of performance and protection as designed. Specific details for inspection, testing, and maintenance of the system are found in NFPA 25. The owner is responsible for maintaining the standpipe system and keeping it in good working condition. Are you required to inspect buildings with standpipe systems? What types of buildings in your jurisdiction have standpipe systems? Have you sited compliance issues? Are there any resources you find could help you do your job better when enforcing standpipe or other building systems? Comment below and join the discussion! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Thanks for reading!
I just returned from Paris this past Saturday after a week of meetings with the ISO committee that deals with Sustainable Cities and Communities. Part of the goal of this committee is to look at a range of critical issues such as resilience, community risk reduction, smart city concepts and transportation options, and the ways in which we measure how good, or how not so good we all are doing in these areas. Recognition of the importance of preservation of heritage sites and historically significant buildings is among the topics that we often discuss either in the meetings or during the more informal settings. Like many others, I heard about the awful fire at Notre Dame Cathedral yesterday afternoon. While I had the privilege to tour the building when I was there in 2007, I simply did a “walk by” during some free time I had on my most recent trip. While it is way too early to determine or speculate why this fire occurred, that will come later, there is no argument or question that the loss of significant portions of this magnificent structure and some of its contents will have a lasting impact not only on the citizens of Paris and France, but clearly on the world community as a whole. I do not overlook the fact that no one was killed or seriously injured. Likewise, I also acknowledge that sometimes losing a piece of history can also be a devastating experience. Fires in historic buildings are often times difficult to judge, extinguish or control. Failure of wood structural members alter the behavior of remaining structural elements. Exterior walls that were once tied together by overhead elements become freestanding façades that could collapse on first responders for any number of reasons. Beyond the physical loss, such fires leave a gaping hole in a community or a larger society. Application of best practices in the form of codes, standards — norms as they are sometimes referred to in Europe — can all work to help minimize the impact of fire even in buildings that are more than 800 years old. Innovative and novel designs have allowed sprinkler systems to be retrofitted in these older structures. Use of specialized systems such as beam detection and air aspirating devices can be used to apply and blend in effective smoke detection into the architectural features of these buildings. These and other measures require the delicate balance of providing fire protection and life safety systems that are both effective, yet minimally obtrusive. Maintaining the historic fabric of the structure is a critically important goal of the designer. Determining what operating plans can be put in place to supplement the systems must also be considered. In other words, what roles can the staff members who are at the building day in and day out play in keeping the occupants as well as the building safe from the effects of fire. All of these measures are among the criteria provided into specialized NFPA codes that deal with these environments. NFPA 909, Code for the Protection of Cultural Resource Properties — Museums, Libraries, and Places of Worship and NFPA 914, Code for Fire Protection of Historic Structures can work hand-in-hand to offer meaningful solutions to protect these important buildings from fire as well as other potential hazards. NFPA 914 in particular is developed by a committee of experts who know about the delicate balance mentioned above. The requirements in this code have been carefully evaluated to bring to bear all of the unique options and solutions that might be applied to these structures. From management operational systems, fire prevention, security and special precautions that should be taken during renovation projects, NFPA 914 provides a wide range of criteria that can mitigate the effects of the fire. While the fire at Notre Dame will bring attention to the importance of having the right measures in place to prevent or minimize the impact of a fire, it is important to not lose sight of the fact that fires in places of worship are not totally unheard of. At about the same time the fire in Paris was burning, another fire was burning at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. Early reports are that this fire was contained rather quickly in this 1300 year old structure and that perhaps minimal damage occurred to the Mosque. Most of us probably never heard of St. Mary Baptist Church in Port Barre or the Greater Union Baptist Church or the Mount Pleasant Baptist Church, both located in Opelousas. These three churches in Louisiana were targeted by an arsonist in the last three weeks. Historic by US standards, the churches stood for over 100 years and were a focus of the local community. As the caretakers for these structures, used for religious purposes or not, historic or not, applying the right mix of building design, operating features and vigilance requires a group effort to protect and maintain the heritage that these buildings represent. Those that are interested in historic preservation or protection of specialized cultural resource facilities might be interested in these NFPA Journal articles: St. Patrick's Cathedral Culture Codes, September/October 2014 Saving History, November/December 2018
Today's blog was written by Val Ziavras, a Fire Protection Engineer at NFPA. Special thanks to Val for her contribution to this blog and discussing one of the many subjects addressed in the Fire Code! Fire-resistance-rated assemblies play a vital role in fire safety. However, an assembly is only as good as its weakest point - the openings. How do you know if an opening in a fire-resistance-rated assembly is protected appropriately, or if the opening is even permitted? Not all openings are created equal. Door openings, for example, usually can't be avoided as they are needed for the movement of people and equipment throughout the building, and for security and privacy. Windows or transom openings, on the other hand, are not necessary for the building to function; they tend to be installed for aesthetics, environmental reasons, or other architectural purposes. To understand the requirements for opening protectives, it is required for one to first understand the difference between a fire-protection-rating and a fire-resistance-rating. Although often used interchangeably, they are different. Most opening protectives (assemblies protecting openings in a fire-rated assembly) have a fire-protection-rating whereas the wall/floor/ceiling assembly has a fire-resistance-rating. There are some exceptions where an opening protective may also be fire-resistance rated, but it is not the majority. There are a number of tests that will result in a fire-protection-rating, such as NFPA 252 and NFPA 257. When a product has a fire-resistance-rating it has been tested to ASTM E119 or ANSI/UL 263. If the opening protective is being tested as a wall; it will be subject to the same fire test as the wall itself. NFPA 252, NFPA 257, and ASTM E119 all expose the test specimen to a fire-based on the standard time- temperature curve. A big difference between the tests is the performance criteria. For products undergoing a test resulting in a fire-protection-rating, some amount of openings, specifically around the glazing, are permitted and there are no limitations on the amount of heat transferred from one side to the other. Products tested to ASTM E119 are held to different test criteria based on their performance needs. There can be no passage of flame or gases hot enough to ignite cotton waste on the unexposed side and the temperature on the unexposed side of the wall cannot increase more than 250OF above the original temperature. To properly protect an opening in a fire-resistance-rated assembly, the proper fire-protection-rating is required. Section 12.7.6 of NFPA 1 addresses opening protectives in fire-rated assemblies. It should be carefully noted that this table DOES NOT require the fire-resistance-ratings. The fire-resistance-rating will be mandated somewhere else in the Code and Section 12.7.6 will provide the required fire-protection-rating of the opening based on that mandated fire-resistance-rating. Wherever the Code refers to a fire-protection-rated door assembly or fire door assembly, it is referring to the entire assembly. If any single component is not properly provided, installed, and functioning, the assembly is not a fire-protection-rated assembly. For example, if a listed fire door leaf and frame are installed with positive latch and hinges but the required self-closing device is omitted, the assembly cannot be considered a fire door assembly and is not considered to have any fire-protection-rating. For example, a new exit stair enclosure that connects 2 stories would require a 1-hour fire-resistance-rating based on how the Code requires exits be protected. Table 12.7.6.2.2 provides the minimum fire-protection-rating of the openings in “Vertical shafts, including stairways, exits, and refuse chutes”. Based on the Code requirement for a 1-hour fire-resistance-rating, the table tells us that opening protectives must have a minimum 1 hour fire-protection-rating. How does this impact a fire inspector? AHJs are responsible for confirming that openings have been properly inspected, tested, and maintained and met the provisions as referenced in NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives (also extracted into NFPA 1, Section 12.4). An inspection of an opening protective will determine if the proper opening has been installed; the proper fire-protection-rating being one of the first pieces of information that an inspector will look at on the label on the opening protective. The inspections themselves, required annually, may be done by a person also serving as a fire inspector, by a facility manager/facility staff, or by someone who is in a role specific to the inspection, testing and maintenance of openings. NFPA offers a plethora of resources related to protecting and inspecting fire-rated opening protectives including training and online learning. A recent article in NFPA Journal highlights the importance of clearances and gaps around fire door installations, particularly in health care occupancies. It also addresses the connection between the maximum gaps permitted by NFPA 80 versus the criteria tested for by NFPA 252 and how proposed research and testing can further the knowledge on the performance of opening protectives and their impact on building and life safety. NFPA offers annotated handbooks on the 2010, 2013, and 2016 editions of NFPA 80 if you are in a role where you require expanded knowledge of the standard, in addition to the application for fire-rated openings in NFPA 1. Thanks for reading, stay safe! Please visit www.nfpa.org/1 to view the free access version of NFPA 1 2018 edition. Follow along on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Looking for an older #FireCodefridays blog? You can view past posts here.
It was clear that the destroyed homes we saw were more flammable than the vegetation around them. On a tour of the devastation wrought by the Camp Fire in Butte County, my colleagues Ray Bizal and Tom Welle and I saw textbook cases of the impacts of embers, structure-to-structure ignition and wind-driven wildfire all through the communities of Paradise and Magalia. We were part of a group invited by the Western Fire Chiefs Association, who coordinated a learning tour of the area along with CAL FIRE and the local fire chief on January 22. The goal was to include not only fire service professionals but also researchers, insurance industry representatives, and those involved in safety outreach and advocacy such as NFPA. We welcomed the rare opportunity to gain a first-hand local perspective on the event from CAL FIRE and local officials. We observed that the wildfire was an equal opportunity destroyer, leveling high-end homes and more modest manufactured homes across the communities of Paradise and Magalia. According to the incident synopsis provided by the Western Fire Chiefs Association, one of the major considerations was “ember ignition, ember ignition, ember ignition. The Camp Fire was all about ember ignition. Paradise and surrounding area are in a Pine forest, the ground was littered with pine needles. Ponderosa Pines drop about 1/3 of their needles each year…even those who had ‘raked' their yards had a new fuel bed due to the wind.” The synopsis also indicated that there were areas where urban conflagration took place – when one structure ignited it provided enough radiant heat and embers as it burned to ignite the next structure, and so on. We received materials on the tour including wildfire preparedness brochures and guides developed by the Butte County Fire Safe Council, a long-active group that has promoted safety guidance including NFPA's Firewise USA® program. While wildfire preparedness was embraced among many residents, the age, condition and proximity of homes to brush, trees and debris as well as to one another at the time of the fire made home destruction in this intense, fast-moving, wind-driven wildfire inevitable. Paradise officials and residents also planned and practiced evacuations, but according to the fire chief, they had never contemplated having to evacuate the entire town simultaneously. His own parents were two of the people who made it out of danger through harrowing hours on the road, and who also lost their home. The fire's destruction was typical in terms of unprepared homes that were more flammable than the vegetation surrounding them and often close enough to one another to cause an urban conflagration – both elements hallmarks of American wildland/urban interface fires. What stood out for me was the sheer size of the damage footprint. We drove miles and miles to encounter the same terrible story at every stop – unconsumed large trees and completely destroyed homes and vehicles. The region has enormous challenges ahead in recovery. Even residents whose homes survived are still out of their homes due to benzene in the drinking water. Small business owners whose physical locations survived have few customers left in the area. The wholesale destruction of thousands of residences in a region where the housing market is already squeezed and contractors are in short supply predict a long and difficult road ahead. There are a number of positive efforts occurring locally to support those made homeless by the event and related recovery needs, and insurers are busy providing claims services to help people back on their feet financially. But everyone should understand the magnitude of the destruction and the huge challenges that the whole community faces for the future. Former FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate was recently quoted talking about our society's failure to plan for the worst case scenario. A quick Google search shows that he's been talking about this for at least a decade, imploring not only emergency managers and government agencies to start a shift in thinking, but also calling on residents to recognize and acknowledge that government alone cannot avert the destruction and suffering from the next flood, hurricane or wildfire to come along. If nothing else, I hope the Camp Fire is the motivation for communities all over the country facing natural hazard risks to engage, plan and act to address the situation long before the next deadly event occurs. Photos taken by Michele Steinberg, NFPA, in Magalia, California, January 22, 2019 Page 2Americans are working hard this week at home and at restaurants to prepare for the Thanksgiving holiday. According to the National Restaurant Association, almost one in 10 (9 percent) of adults plan to eat their Thanksgiving meal at a restaurant. And, in addition, 4 percent of those planning a holiday meal at home intend to purchase it from a restaurant. On Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving and notoriously one of the biggest shopping days of the year, research by the National Restaurant Association indicates that 72 percent of the 43 percent of adults that head out shopping that day intend to visit either a full- or quick-service restaurant while they are out. That's a lot of commercial cooking equipment being put to use just this week alone! NFPA 1, Chapter 50, addresses the design, installation, operation, inspection, and maintenance of all public and private commercial cooking equipment and, new to 2018, mobile and temporary cooking operations. Compliance with Chapter 50 and NFPA 96, Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations, is required for this equipment and operations. This week, I caught up with the Staff Liaison for NFPA 96 and Fire Protection Engineer at NFPA, Jacqueline Wilmot, to learn more about the latest requirements from the 2017 edition of NFPA 96, referenced by NFPA 1. Here are Jacqueline's responses: Can you tell us about the scope and purpose of NFPA 96? Jacqueline: The requirements in NFPA 96 provide the minimum fire safety requirements, both preventative and operation, related to the design, installation, operation, inspection, and maintenance of all public and private cooking operations. Often people forget that NFPA 96 applies to residential cooking equipment if it is being used for commercial cooking operations. Although NFPA 96 doesn't define “commercial cooking operations” some examples of residential equipment being used for commercial cooking include nursing homes or college dormitories that have cooking procedures that produce grease-laden vapors. The overall goal of NFPA 96 is to reduce the potential fire hazard of cooking operations, irrespective of the type of cooking equipment used and whether it is used in public or private facilities. Once users of NFPA 96 can identify the purpose of the document, it becomes more clear that the type of cooking appliance does not dictate if an exhaust system or extinguishment system is required, as both of these decisions depend on whether or not the cooking process itself will produce grease-laden vapors. Were there any major changes in NFPA 96, 2017 edition? Jacqueline: The 2017 edition adds Normative Annex B on mobile and temporary cooking operations. The normative annex is written in mandatory language but is not intended to be enforced unless specifically adopted by a jurisdiction or is applied on a voluntary basis. This annex includes requirements not limited to clearance, hoods, ducts, terminations, fire extinguishing systems, carbon monoxide detectors, location, training, generators, LP-gas, as well as procedures for the use, inspection, testing, and maintenance of equipment. Another big change to the 2017 edition was to require the frequency of how often training is to be provided for new employees and existing employees on the use of portable fire extinguishers and the manual actuation of the fire extinguishing system. The 2017 edition of NFPA 96 requires the management of the commercial cooking operation to provide instruction to new employees on hiring and to all employees annually. Industry experience revealed that many commercial cooking operations employees have not been instructed or have forgotten their training, resulting in inappropriate response to a fire. Providing instructions at regular intervals after initial instruction will reduce the likelihood of inappropriate response. Are there any major changes planned for the 2021 edition? Jacqueline: A majority of the discussion during the 2 day First Draft Technical Committee Meeting was on Chapter 10, Fire-Extinguishing Equipment and Normative Annex B, Mobile or Temporary Cooking Operations. When it comes to Chapter 10, the Technical Committee would prefer to use language consistent with NFPA 17A, Standard for Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems. Additional provisions to clarify the shutoff device requirements of manual resetting prior to fuel or power being restored were discussed and also the location of manual actuation devices were reviewed. The conversation about Normative Annex B was around the idea to move the language from the annex to the body of the standard. What are some of the major issues that restaurant owners should be managing and AHJs enforcing to help make sure facilities stay safe through the holiday season? Jacqueline: NFPA 96 puts a lot of weight on owners to carry through the provisions of the standard. The owner is responsible for cooking equipment, hoods, ducts, fans, fire-extinguishing equipment and special effluent or energy control equipment installed in their facility be maintained to ensure the entire system works properly and provides the appropriate level of protection. In addition, the owner is responsible for the inspection, testing, maintenance, and cleanliness of the ventilation control and fire protection of the commercial cooking operation, provided that this responsibility has not been transferred in written form to a management company, tenant, or other party. How does an owner manage all of this? Here are some simple tips for owners and enforcers to share with facilities in their jurisdiction: Clearance. Section 4.2 of NFPA 96 states where enclosures are not required, hoods, grease removal devices, exhaust fans, and ducts are required to have a minimum clearance of 18 inches to combustible material, 3 inches to limited-combustible material, and 0 inches to noncombustible material. These clearances apply in the ongoing operational life of the system, so move those boxes on top of a hood or directly against the side of it! Train your employees on how to use the extinguishing equipment. All employees should know the location of these manual pull stations as well as how and when to operate them. Inspect, Test and Maintain Your Equipment. Fire inspectors are responsible for verifying inspections, testing and maintenance procedures and frequencies have been met. Although conducting inspections for grease buildup and fire extinguishing systems at specified intervals are typically contracted out (and always completed by person(s) acceptable to the AHJ), there are several items that can be inspected on a daily basis by restaurant employees through a training program in which you develop and have your manager enforce. Have employees routinely look out for normal wear and tear of equipment (i.e. broken seals, missing screws, exposed wires). All employees should start their routine with inspecting the equipment to ensure it was properly cleaned from the previous night (or shift), confirm that if the equipment requires a fire extinguishing system, the nozzles are clear and not clogged with grease. Many restaurants utilize heaters to keep the food hot after it's been cooked; make sure employees know to check that are no flammable materials on top of or near the heaters. Before starting the fryer, employees should check to make sure the oil level isn't too low because if the heating coil is exposed above or close to the oil surface, residue and oil can catch fire. These are all very simple, yet effective steps in the fire protection program of your facility that do not require hiring and outside contractor to perform the work. Clean. Since 1 in every 5 of the fires had a failure to clean as a factor contributing to its ignition, cleaning seems like an easy and obvious solution to mitigate fire risks. Since 1 in every 5 of the fires cited in Evart's report had a failure to clean as a factor contributing to its ignition, cleaning seems like an easy and obvious solution to mitigate fire risks. Special thanks to Jacqueline for all of this great information that will help owners and enforcers make sure everyone working with commercial cooking equipment to prepare food for others and those enjoying a meal out can stay safe this holiday season! Have you conducted fire inspections on facilities with commercial cooking equipment? What issues have arose with enforcing NFPA 1 in these spaces? Thank you for reading, stay safe, and Happy Thanksgiving! Please visit www.nfpa.org/1 to view the free access version of NFPA 1 2018 edition and nfpa.org/doc## to view other standards referenced in this post. Follow along on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Looking for an older #FireCodefridays blog? You can view past posts here. Page 3
It seems inevitable at this time of the year that several news stories pop up about a haunted house business or a home or building being converted into a makeshift haunted house being shut down due to safety concerns. Haunted houses are a common form of entertainment over these next couple of weeks. They come in many forms, whether it's a standalone seasonal building that operates as a haunted house or a building such as a church, a community center, or a school that creates a haunted house, maybe for a town event, a fundraiser, or a feature to a festival. Large or small, permanent or temporary, professional or amateur, haunted houses and the like are everywhere, especially in buildings not originally designed to accommodate such a use. Without the proper knowledge and understanding of the codes that apply, haunted houses can be a safety nightmare. Per NFPA 1, Fire Code, a haunted house is considered a special amusement building. By definition, a special amusement building is "a building that is temporary, permanent, or mobile and contains a device or system that conveys passengers or provides a walkway along, around, or over a course in any direction as a form of amusement arranged so that the egress path is not readily apparent due to visual or audio distractions or an intentionally confounded egress path, or is not readily available due to the mode of conveyance through the building or structure." A special amusement building is an assembly occupancy regardless of occupant load. Buildings designed as assembly occupancies have a head start on those that aren't, but try to accommodate a haunted house type attraction. A big risk, and often why many of these attractions are shut down, is because they are located in a structure that was not designed with a haunted house use in mind and they do not understand the type of occupancy and hazards associated with that occupancy that have been created. The Code is not against haunted houses and there is no ill intent when they are shut down. Ultimately, it's for the safety of those attending and those that work at these facilities and the responsibility of those inspecting the Fire Code to ensure that a horrific fire event is prevented. Haunted houses use special effects, scenery, props, and audio and visual distractions that may cause egress paths to become not obvious. In haunted houses in particular, the presence of combustible materials and special scenery can also contribute to the fuel load should a fire occur. Because of this, the Code requirements are purposely strict to in hopes of avoiding a potentially disastrous fire event. Code provisions for special amusement buildings are found in Section 20.1.4 of NFPA 1. The Code requirements for haunted houses are summarized below: Haunted houses must apply the provisions for assembly occupancies in addition to the provisions of Section 20.1.4. Automatic sprinklers are required for all haunted houses. If the haunted house is considered moveable or portable, an approved temporary means is permitted to be used for water supply. Smoke detection is required throughout the haunted house where the nature it operates in reduced lighting and the actuation of any smoke detection device must sound an alarm at a constantly attended location on the premises. Actuation of sprinklers or any suppression systems, smoke detection system (having a cross zoning capability) must provide an increase in illumination of the means of egress and termination of other confusing visuals or sounds. Exit marking and floor proximity exit signs are required. Where designs are such that the egress path is not apparent, additional directional exit marking is required. Interior wall and ceiling finish materials must be Class A throughout. Per Section 10.8.1, emergency action plans are required. Other requirements, not specific just to haunted houses or special amusement buildings, may also apply: Permits (see Section 1.12) Seasonal buildings (see Section 10.12) Special outdoor events, fairs and carnivals (see Section 10.14) As we move into the Halloween and haunted house season, it's easy to get caught up in the fun and overlook the safety issues that may arise. Through the provisions in NFPA 1, which can assist fire code officials and inspectors enforce safe haunted houses, and NFPA's halloween resources for consumers, everyone can stay safe this season. Thank you for reading, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Hello – Happy Friday! Today's topic comes to you from Val Ziavras, a Fire Protection Engineer at NFPA. Special thanks to Val for her contribution to this blog and discussing one of the many subjects addressed in the Fire Code. This week is Fire Prevention Week (FPW) and the campaign is “Look. Listen. Learn. Be aware. Fire can happen anywhere.” For those of you who aren't familiar with FPW, check out the FPW webpage and last week's Fire Code Friday for some additional information. In honor of FPW, we are going to focus on home fire safety issues in the Fire Code again this week, more specifically the provisions for smoke alarms. The “Listen,” portion of the campaign is to remind people to listen for the sound of the smoke alarm. Today, residences are filled with furnishings and contents made mostly of plastics and synthetic materials and responding quickly to the sound of the smoke alarm is more important than ever. A resident may have as little as one to two minutes to escape safely from the time the smoke alarm sounds. Flashover can happen much faster than it used to. For a look at how much faster, check out this side by side comparison of modern room furnishings and 1970s room furnishings. The smoke alarm requirements in the Fire Code are primary extracted from two source documents, NFPA 101 (The Life Safety Code) and NFPA 72 (The National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code). NFPA 101 is going to regulate where smoke alarms are required while NFPA 72 is going to regulate how they are installed. Section 13.7.2 of the Code addresses the occupancy specific requirements for fire alarm and smoke alarms. Typically, smoke alarms are required where we expect to find occupants sleeping. For example, Section 13.7.2.13.1 of the Code requires smoke alarms or a smoke detection system in new and existing one- and two-family dwellings. Section 13.7.2.13.1.1 requires that smoke alarms be installed in all sleeping rooms, outside of each separate sleeping area, in the immediate vicinity of the sleeping rooms, and on each level of the dwelling unit, including basements. Other occupancies that also require smoke alarms in some capacity per NFPA 1 are day care homes, lodging or rooming houses, hotels and dormitories, apartment buildings, board and care facilities. (See Section 13.7.2 for the specific conditions for each occupancy.) Section 13.7.1.8 of the Fire Code contains general installation criteria for smoke alarms including requirements for the interconnection of smoke alarms in new construction and more specific requirements for where smoke alarms should be installed. Interconnecting smoke alarms is important because it helps ensure that occupants can hear the alarm even if doors are closed or if the smoke alarm that operates is on a different level. While the Life Safety Code will tell you what rooms/areas need smoke alarms, NFPA 72 provides additional guidance on installation criteria and identifies an area of exclusion. The area of exclusion includes a 10 ft. radial distance from a stationary or fixed cooking appliance, think stoves. Any smoke alarm installed between 10 ft. and 20 ft. from a stationary or fixed cooking appliance needs to be equipped with an alarm-silencing means or use photoelectric detection. The Code does outline some exceptions for situations where a smoke alarm that uses photoelectric detection can be installed closer than 10 ft., but not less than 6 ft. In addition to cooking appliances, the Code also specifies a minimum distance from a door to a bathroom containing a shower or tub. Unless the smoke alarm is specifically listed for close proximity to such an area, a distance of at least 36 inches should be provided. The Code specifically outlines an area of exclusion to minimize the chance of nuisance alarms. By reducing the number of nuisance alarms, building occupants are less likely to remove or disable a smoke alarm that is there to protect them. Fire inspectors play a critical role in educating the public about smoke alarms and their importance. Whether through generic home inspections, public education efforts, or design and review work, those that enforce the Code can have a big impact on home fire safety. With Fire Prevention Week drawing to a close, everyone can remember to take steps to better protect themselves and the public. Test smoke alarms and make sure they are less than 10 years old. Working smoke alarms will provide early notification of a fire. Also, be sure to create a home fire escape plan! Knowing two ways out of every room in the event of an emergency is important. Thanks for reading, Happy Friday! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Hello – Happy Friday! Today's topic comes to you from Val Ziavras, a Fire Protection Engineer at NFPA. Special thanks to Val for her contribution to this blog and discussing one of the many subjects addressed in the Fire Code. With Fire Prevention Week (FPW) right around the corner, October 7-13, what better time than now to talk about home fire escape plans and means of escape requirements for dwelling units? For those of you who aren't familiar with FPW, the main goal is to educate the public on how to stay safe during a fire. While many of us in the fire protection field, immediately check for sprinklers and look for a second way out when we enter a building, that isn't always the case for the rest of world. One goal of FPW is to get people thinking about what they should do in the event of a fire. It has been an NFPA sponsored event since 1922. President Calvin Coolidge made FPW a national observance in 1925, making it the longest-running public health observance in the United States. This year the campaign is “Look. Listen. Learn. Be aware. Fire can happen anywhere.” The “Learn” portion of the campaign is focused on encouraging everyone to learn two ways out of every room and making sure all doors and windows leading outside open easily and are free of clutter. A great place to start is in your own home! The best way to do it? Create a home fire escape plan. So by now, you may be wondering what this has to do with the Fire Code, well ultimately NFPA 1 (and NFPA 101 as well as the building code) are going to regulate the number of means of egress, or in this case the number of means of escape. Means of escape usually applies to dwelling units while means of egress applies to all other buildings. A person's means of escape is going to happen within their own dwelling unit (example: an apartment) but their means of egress is going to happen as soon as they leave the front door and enter the common hallway. The concept behind both means of egress and means of escape is similar: they should provide a reliable and unobstructed way out. However, the requirements for means of escape are not as stringent as for the means of egress. Like many topics, NFPA 1 defers to a source document and extracts requirements. In this case, provisions are extracted directly from NFPA 101. Most houses have at least two doors, but what if a person were trapped in the bedroom and a fire was blocking the only door to that room? How would they escape? These are exactly the sort of questions we want to be asking ourselves, our families, and the people we work with and educate, when developing a home's fire escape plan. NFPA 1, Section 20.11.1 requires all new and existing one- and two-family dwellings comply not only with Section 20.11 but also NFPA 101, which requires every sleeping room and every living area in dwellings or dwelling units of two rooms or more have not less than one primary means of escape and one secondary means of escape. The primary means of escape can be a door, stairway, or ramp providing a means of unobstructed travel to the outside of the dwelling unit at street or the finished ground level. The image below is taken from the Life Safety Code Handbook and shows a floor plan with the primary means of escape and secondary means of escape identified for every room. Section 24.2.2.3 of NFPA 101 outlines what can serve as a secondary means of escape. The secondary means of escape could be: Another door, stair, passageway, or hall that provides a way to get out that is independent of the primary means of escape Passage through an adjacent non-lockable space that is independent of the primary means of escape An outside window or door that meets certain size and operational requirements A bulkhead meeting certain size requirements Ladders or steps that meet certain requirements In addition, NFPA 1 requires that, where approved on secondary means of escape, security bars, grates, grilles, or similar devices be equipped with approved release mechanisms that are releasable from the inside without the use of a tool, a key, special knowledge, or force greater than that which it takes for normal operation of the door or window. This ensures that the common practice of installing supplemental devices for the purpose of security do not impair the operation of a door or window for escape purposes. This Section is important to the Fire Code and for fire inspectors performing inspections on multi-family units, hotel/dormitories, apartment buildings where this practice may be more common. As enforcers of the Code, it is important to enforce the provisions of the Code that will ensure a safe means of escape be provided during a fire or other emergency. Part of enforcing this important Code topic also means using times like Fire Prevention week to educate people about making AND practicing a home fire escape plan, maintain their means of escape, and the overall importance of fire safety. Be sure to check out next week's blog which will feature another Fire Prevention Week theme and discuss requirements for testing smoke alarms. Thanks for reading, Happy Friday! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Today's post is from NFPA staff member, Jennifer Sisco. Jen is a Fire Protection Engineer in the Building and Life Safety Department where she serves as Staff Liaison to multiple NFPA Technical Committees, including Smoke Management systems responsible for the development of NFPA 92. Special thanks to Jen for her contribution! This Friday Code Friday is all about Smoke Control Systems. Unfortunately, they will not help you when the smoke from your campfire keeps changing in your direction, but they are important building fire protection systems which have unique testing and inspection requirements. Section 11.8 of the Code addresses smoke control systems. It should be noted that Section 11.8 does not require smoke control systems but mandates that, where such systems are installed for Code compliance, an approved maintenance and testing program must be provided to ensure operational integrity. A smoke control system dedicated to emergency use only will not be subject to dialed use, and therefore, maintenance and testing of smoke control systems are necessary. Per Section 11.8, newly installed smoke-control systems are required to be inspected by the AHJ and tested in accordance with the criteria established in the approved design documents, NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems, and NFPA 204, Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting. NFPA 92 applies to the design, installation, acceptance testing, operation, and ongoing periodic testing of smoke control systems. It incorporates methods for applying engineering calculations and reference models to provide a designer with the tools to develop smoke control system designs. NFPA 204 applies to the design of venting systems for the emergency venting of products of combustion from fires in buildings. NFPA 1, 2018 edition, references NFPA 92 2015 edition and NFPA 204, 2015 edition. The smoke control system's performance objectives and acceptance criteria should be approved by the AHJ prior to its installation. In some cases, the code mandating the system specifies the performance objectives. For example, in accordance with NFPA 101®, atria require an engineering analysis to demonstrate that smoke will be managed for the time necessary to evacuate the building. In addition to the initial inspection and testing, smoke control systems are required to be operationally tested on an approved schedule, per NFPA 1, Section 11.8.2.1; which NFPA 92, Section 8.6 clarifies is annually for dedicated systems, and semi-annually for non-dedicated systems. Smoke control systems fall into one or two categories, as outlined in NFPA 92, Section 4.2: Smoke Containment Systems or Smoke Management Systems. Smoke containment systems are designed to either contain smoke to a given zone or keep smoke from entering a given zone through the use of differential pressure. Examples of these systems include zoned smoke control, and pressurization systems for stairwells, elevators, vestibules, or smoke refuge areas. Smoke management systems are designed to maintain tenable conditions, set forth in the design, for large-volume spaces through the use of both natural and mechanical ventilation and air movement. Examples of these systems include atrium and mall smoke control systems. Smoke control systems can include many components including: initiating devices, fans, dampers, vents, controls, smoke barriers, fire stopping, doors, and windows. Each of these components is required to be inspected, tested, and maintained as part of the smoke control system. Therefore, it is important to understand the individual components of a given system. It is the responsibility of the owner/occupant to retain records pertaining to inspection, testing, and maintenance of the systems per NFPA 1, Section 10.2.5. Smoke control systems are a significant part of life safety, and therefore any time that a system is impaired for more than four hours, the authority having jurisdiction is required to be notified. The AHJ has the authority to require the building to be evacuated or provided with an approved fire watch for the duration of the impairment per NFPA 1, Sections 11.8.4 and 11.8.5. Thanks, again, to Jen for contributing to this blog. And thanks to all for reading, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Page 4
This past week was a busy one for NFPA 1. I finished some of the final pieces for the 2018 edition of the Fire Code Handbook (shelf date June 2018) and at the same time began preparation for the upcoming 2021 revision cycle (stay tuned for a future post highlighting the many issues we will be addressing this cycle!). Even once a Code has been newly published, NFPA staff's job as Staff Liaison is never done. There are ongoing items that must be completed year-round to finalize the development of one Code and then to prepare for the next one. Exciting things to come for NFPA 1! This week I also taught portions of NFPA's 2 day hands-on course for facility managers. We cover provisions from NFPA 25, 72, 101, 80, 96, 3 and 4…all over 2 days while also offering facility managers the opportunity to work hands on in a fire safety lab with equipment they deal with on their jobs daily. I was excited to see a lot of enthusiasm about fire door safety as well as answer some questions on NFPA 1. Facility managers cannot possibly know the Codes cover to cover, but must be able to manage the needs of systems in their building along with general housekeeping and fire safety issues. One question I received was about storage in a boiler room and if it was permitted. Searching through Chapter 10 of NFPA 1, which covers general safety requirements (a chapter important to fire inspectors but also to facility managers), we came across Section 10.18 for the storage of combustible materials. More specifically, Section 10.18.5 addresses equipment rooms, as follows: 10.18.5 Equipment Rooms. 10.18.5.1 Combustible material shall not be stored in boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, or electrical equipment rooms. 10.18.5.2 Materials and supplies for the operation and maintenance of the equipment in the room shall be permitted. The use of equipment rooms to store items, such as those needed for the equipment in the room, is normal. The storage of materials and supplies related to the operation of the equipment is permitted in accordance with 10.18.5.2. Equipment should be stored in cabinets or other protected areas to limit the hazard. Spaces such as boiler rooms, mechanical rooms, or electrical rooms are designed for a particular purpose and should not be seen as an opportunity for free storage within a building. Storing combustible materials within one of those spaces increases the risk and also the fuel load within the space should a fire occur. Controlling the combustible storage in these spaces can help to lessen the risk of a fire developing and/or interfering with the boiler equipment, mechanical equipment or electrical equipment. Materials that are not associated with the equipment are not permitted to be stored within equipment rooms. Section 10.18 also addresses other generic storage conditions. Storage of combustible materials, regardless of location, must be orderly and it cannot interfere with the location of sprinklers. Storage is also not permitted in exits. Attic, under-floor, and concealed spaces used for storage of combustible materials must comply with the protection from hazards requirement for storage rooms in NFPA 101. Finally, any fueled equipment, including items like motorcycles, lawn care-equipment or portable cooking equipment cannot be stored, operated or repaired within a building unless the building has been constructed for that purpose using the building code or is allowed by another provision of NFPA 1. Have you found storage in these equipment rooms in your facility? How did you prevent this Code violation from occurring? Thanks, as always, for reading! Happy Friday, stay safe! (Follow along with the development of the 2021 edition of NFPA 1 here. You can also view the 2018 edition of the Code for free here.) You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Earlier this week it was revealed that a deadly fire at Trump Tower in Manhattan in early April was an accident and the cause of the fire was declared to be “multiple overloaded power strips”. Reports also found that there were no working smoke alarms in the apartment where the fire began. Even a well-known landmark building can't escape basic fire safety practices. There is also information circulating about sprinklers in the building, retrofitting, etc. but in this post I will focus on the cause of the fire and its connection to the Fire Code. A common code violation with regards to electrical safety provisions in NFPA 1, Fire Code, relates to power strips (referred to as power taps in the Code.) Section 11.1 of NFPA 1 provides provisions for basic electrical safety. Topics addressed in this section include relocatable power taps, mutiplug adapters, extension cords, temporary installations and building disconnect. The approval of new electrical installations or approval of modifications to an existing electrical system is a function typically performed by an electrical inspector or other building code enforcement official using the requirements of NFPA 70®, National Electrical Code®. In many cases, prior to a building or other facility being constructed or occupied, fire marshals or fire inspectors perform periodic inspections to ensure that the safety systems and features of the premises are in place, are in proper working order, and have not been compromised or adversely modified. However, like other provisions applicable in residences (for example: prohibition to store grills on a balcony) basic electrical safety requirements can be difficult to enforce. Education and awareness is important for consumers to understand the impact of their actions. NFPA 1 can provide basic guidance to fire inspectors to assist with identifying proper and safe electrical installations. With regards to relocatable power taps (power strips), Section 11.1.4 of NFPA 1 states the following: Relocatable power taps shall be listed to UL 1363, Standard for Relocatable Power Taps, or UL 1363A, Outline of Investigation for Special Purpose Relocatable Power Taps, where applicable. (11.1.4.1). **New to 2018, UL 1363 and UL 1363A were added as specific listing standards for relocatable power taps.** The relocatable power taps shall be directly connected to a permanently installed receptacle. (11.1.4.2) Relocatable power tap cords shall not extend through walls, ceilings, or floors; under doors or floor coverings; or be subject to environmental or physical damage. (11.1.4.3) Power strips are commonly used for computers, printers, and other electronics at workstations, offices, and dormitories, residences, where additional electrical power receptacles are needed. During inspections, power taps that are plugged into other power taps (daisy-chained) should be removed, because such arrangement is prohibited. Relocatable power taps are for temporary use and should not take the place of permanently installed receptacles. In addition, power strips should not be connected to extension cords to extend their reach. Ideally, where extension cords are used for other than temporary purposes, additional permanent receptacles should be installed to accommodate the power strips. Understanding basic electrical safety practices can be instrumental in preventing fires in residences, hotels, dormitories and offices, among other locations. For additional information, check out NFPA's resources on electrical safety. Thanks for reading, stay safe! Don't miss another #FireCodeFridays blog! Get notifications straight to your email inbox by subscribing here! And you can always follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Photo: Twitter Tragedy has once again placed a national spotlight on fire sprinklers. A recent fire at New York City's Trump Tower claimed the life of 67-year-old Todd Brassner and injured six firefighters, reports ABC News. The 50th-floor residence had no working smoke alarms or fire sprinklers. The fire's cause is believed to be accidental. Completed in 1983, the building was constructed prior to the passage of a 1999 city law requiring sprinklers in new, residential buildings with four or more units. The law also applies to existing residential buildings that "undergo renovations costing 50 percent or more of the building's value," reports ABC. According to one safety advocate in New York, this and subsequent state laws don't go far enough to protect the public. In an interview this week on ABC's "Good Morning America," Jerry DeLuca, executive director of the New York State Association of Fire Chiefs, said fire sprinklers must be required in all settings and homes. For years, he and others have championed for a sprinkler requirement for all New York homes, but the state's building code council has chosen not to adopt the model building code requirement for sprinklering new, one- and two-family homes when updating its building and fire codes. "Fire sprinklers absolutely save lives by giving people time to escape a fire," DeLuca, also a member of the New York Fire Sprinkler Initiative, told ABC. "They might not always put out the fire, but they allow residents time to escape." The story's reporter also cited NFPA's statistic on sprinklers reducing the risk of dying in a fire by 80 percent. Always the vocal safety advocate, DeLuca is constantly championing for safer homes. Read the commentary he submitted to NFPA last year following two home fires in two days that killed eight people. Please join him by becoming a vocal advocate for sprinklers in your region. Page 5
It's back! After missing out on a few Fridays, I am happy to be back with a Fire Code Friday post! The past few weeks have been busy here at NFPA. I have been working most days preparing the (almost) finishing touches for the 2018 NFPA 1 Handbook , due out in a couple of months, as well as beginning the preparation for the upcoming 2021 Code revision cycle. Things never slow down with code development. One of the many responsibilities of NFPA technical staff is to answer code interpretation questions. Over the past few weeks I have received several questions regarding a change to the 2018 edition of NFPA 1 related to new Chapter 38 on marijuana growing, processing and extraction facilities. More specifically, I have been asked “what is the occupancy classification of a facility growing or processing marijuana?” I hope to provide some insight on this question here. Chapter 38 is a new chapter applicable to the growing and processing of marijuana within new and existing facilities. Chapter 38 does not create a new or separate occupancy classification. To clarify this to users, new Section 38.1.5 states that “the occupancy of buildings or portions of buildings where the growing or processing of marijuana occurs shall be in accordance with Chapter 6 and the applicable building code.” Thus, prior to applying Chapter 38 to a building or portion thereof, it would require an occupancy classification from those defined in Chapter 6 (industrial, storage, business, etc…). The provisions of Chapter 38 apply in addition to, in replacement of, or as a modification to the requirements of the Code for the determined occupancy of the building. The marijuana “seed to sale” process involves a number of steps starting with the growth and cultivation of the plants through to the sale of the end product. Some facilities may be used only for the growing of the plants while others may be specific to the extraction process. A grow facility where the only function of the facility is to grow plants, may be classified as a storage occupancy, which is defined in 6.1.13.1 as “an occupancy primarily for the storage or sheltering of goods, merchandise, products, or vehicles”. Where the plants are being processed in any manner, the facility may require a classification of an industrial occupancy, defined in 6.1.12.1 as “An occupancy in which products are manufactured or in which processing, assembling, mixing, packaging, finishing, decorating, or repair operations are conducted.” Facilities used for the extraction process may also be classified as industrial occupancies. A facility may also have portions of both growing and processing of the plants which could warrant a multiple occupancy protection strategy. (Note: Chapter 38 does not apply to the retail sale of marijuana where growing and processing does not occur. A retail facility would generally fall under the provisions of a mercantile occupancy and not those in Chapter 38, which are unique to the grow/extraction process and have minimal impact on a retail facility.) As the occupancy classification of a facility is confirmed by the local AHJ, authorities should be considering how the space is being used and the hazards present relative to its final occupancy classification. Are plants being stored and nothing other than stored? What types of processes are occurring? Is a high hazard classification (industrial) warranted? Is the marijuana growing/processing portion within a building with another occupancy such as business or mercantile? All of these are questions for consideration when determining the final occupancy classification. The purpose of Chapter 38 was not to create a new occupancy classification. Rather it was to address the unique hazards of facilities where the growing and processing of marijuana occurs. Thanks for reading, everyone. Stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
No further detail is needed to understand that the events that took place last week in Parkland, Florida were horrific and devastating. It will no doubt have an impact on building and occupant safety going forward and the issues that our Codes face in the future. As both a mom and fire protection engineer I find myself bouncing back between thoughts…from ”I'll do whatever it takes to keep kids safe” to “I need to be smart and think about fire safety, too”. How do we keep our children secure in schools (and malls, and movie theaters, and concert venues) but how do we keep them, and all occupants, fire safe, too? It's easy to react and let emotion take over but I can't let the clear need for increased security result in overriding other safety issues that can put occupants at risk, such as fire, and the issues that could arise by not thinking about consequence of emotional reactions. This is a battle we, as fire safety professionals, will continue to address, especially in light of current events, during the upcoming Code development cycle for NFPA 1. How can we further integrate provisions for security while achieving that safe balance with life safety from fire and other emergencies? It's a discussion I wish we didn't have to have, but one that I am looking forward to participating in to make positive and impactful changes in our Codes. A facility's emergency action plan (EAP) is a critical component to being prepared for a (hopefully unlikely) emergency. A coordinated effort, via the execution of an EAP, can no doubt contribute to a more successful response and outcome during and after an emergency. NFPA 1, Fire Code, requires in Section 10.8.1 that emergency action plans be provided for high-rise, health care, ambulatory health care, residential board and care, assembly, day-care centers, special amusement buildings, hotels and dormitories, detention and correctional occupancies, educational, underground and windowless structures, facilities storing or handling materials addressed in Chapter 60 (hazardous materials), or anywhere required by the local AHJ. The Code is a minimum. Nothing prohibits a building that may not be listed above from developing their own emergency action plan. The details regarding the emergency action plans are extracted from NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, whose Technical Committee on Fundamentals manages the requirements for what should be included in the emergency action plan in Chapter 4 of that Code. A minimum of (7) items must be addressed in a facility's EAP: Procedures for reporting of emergencies Occupant and staff response to emergencies *Evacuation, relocation and shelter-in-place procedures appropriate to the building, its occupancy, emergencies, and hazards Appropriateness of the use of elevators Design and conduct of fire drills Type and coverage of building fire protection systems Other items required by the AHJ EAPs are to be submitted to the AHJ for review, if required, and must be reviewed and updated also as required by the AHJ. Provided in the Code is lengthy Annex language to supplement the provisions for the emergency action plans. While the Code mandates a minimum of (7) items that every EAP should address, it also provides a list of (18) additional items that should be considered in preparing an EAP (See NFPA 1, A.10.2.8.1). These items include, for example: roles and responsibilities, procedures specific to each type of emergency, assisting people with disabilities, training, documentation, inspection and maintenance of building's life safety features, drills, and post-event planning and review. EAPs will be and should be different for each facility. While fire is one of the prominent emergencies that the Code addresses these EAPs will address any likely emergency that a building may encounter. In my opinion, one of the most important details of an EAP, and even more so I believe after last week's tragedy, is identifying and describing the appropriate evacuation strategies for each emergency event. Evacuation may be specific to the building, its occupants and occupancy and the types of emergency. The referenced Annex section contains an abundance of information to provide to building owners or inspectors when developing and reviewing EAPs. It is assumed that a majority of buildings will use a total evacuation strategy during a fire, the primary emergency addressed by the Code. But, evacuation from a building could occur for reasons other than a fire, and for those events, careful consideration should be given to evacuation strategies. I encourage all who read this to also read the information in A.10.8.2.1 to further your knowledge and understanding about the types of evacuation strategies, what's appropriate, and how to manage and implement such strategies. Requiring an EAP is just one piece of the Code that can address both security and safety from fire. NFPA is also furthering its efforts to address security and hostile acts with the development of a new standard, NFPA 3000. For only the second time in NFPA's 121-year history, provisional standard status has been authorized by the NFPA Standards Council for NFPA 3000, Standard for Preparedness and Response to Active Shooter and/or Hostile Events. As part of the standards process, NFPA 3000 is now open for input until February 23, 2018. NFPA 3000 may be available for use as early as this April and will provide the minimum criteria for the level of competence required for responders organizing, managing, and sustaining an active shooter and/or hostile event preparedness and response program based on the authority having jurisdiction's (AHJ) function and assessed level of risk. Please check out the document information page for further information on the scope and development of this important document. Do you have ideas for how the Code can improve its requirements for emergency action plans? Have you worked with facilities in developing, implementing or reviewing EAPs? Please leave a comment below, your ideas can impact the next edition of the Fire Code. You may also submit any proposed changes online here. You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Since February is half over I can now say we are closer to March, which means we are closer to spring, which means warmer weather. But, who's counting? But, until then, the inevitable cold winter weather means a more frequent use of portable electric heaters (space heaters) and other heating appliances to get us through. While it may seem like a harmless practice, portable heaters come with a risk. Both users and code officials must be aware of safe practices to help ensure fires caused by heating devices are kept to a minimum. NFPA 1, Fire Code, provides requirements for portable electric heaters in Section 11.5.3 as follows: 11.5.3 Portable Electric Heater.11.5.3.1The AHJ shall be permitted to prohibit use of portable electric heaters in occupancies or situations where such use or operation would present an undue danger to life or property. 11.5.3.2Portable electric heaters shall be designed and located so that they cannot be easily overturned. 11.5.3.3All portable electric heaters shall be listed. Portable electric heaters are used in many locations, including a common used under desks in offices. Although placing a heater under a desk or table lessens the chance of the heater being easily overturned, the heater also can easily be forgotten. A heater that is left on for an extended time can overheat combustible materials that might also be stored under the desk or table. Managers of facilities that allow the use of electric space heaters should be instructed to remind employees to shut them off at the end of the day and keep combustible material away from the heater. In addition, because of the amount of electric current drawn by space heaters, electric heaters should be used only where they can be plugged directly into appropriate receptacles or extension cords of adequate current capacity. (See 11.1.5 for requirements addressing extension cords.) Just the other day I was at a Doctor's appointment and the room that I was in had a space heater to supplement what I was told was unpredictable temperatures throughout the building. Most rooms that I poked my head into had their own space heater, too. Fortunately, they were plugged directly into a wall receptacle, were not near combustible materials and were clear of anything that could potentially fall onto them or knock them over. While I was waiting to be seen I even checked that they had a mark from a recognized testing laboratory (they did!) The AHJ is permitted to prohibit the use of space heaters where an undue danger to life or property exists. The AHJ can use past inspection findings, such as portable heaters that were left turned on and unattended, fire incidents, and other reasons to prohibit the use of such heaters. Within Section 11.5, the Code also addresses the installation of stationary liquid fuel-burning appliances, including but not limited to industrial-,commercial-,and residential-type steam, hot water or warm air heating appliances; domestic-type range burners; and portable liquid fuel-burning equipment. In addition to compliance with Section 11.5, these devices are to be installed in accordance with NFPA 31, Standard for the Installation of Oil-Burning Equipment.For the installation of gas-fired heating appliances, in addition to compliance with Section 11.5, they must also comply with NFPA 54, National Fuel Gas Code. NFPA 54 addresses the installation of fuel gas piping systems, fuel gas utilization equipment, and related accessories, including piping systems, operating pressure, installation, combustion, ventilation air, and venting. The use of unvented fuel-fired heaters is prohibited by NFPA 1 and NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, in numerous occupancies, unless they are approved units that comply with NFPA 54. The use of such equipment is prohibited in all residential board and care occupancies regardless of compliance with NFPA 54. To view all the requirements for heating devices you can use our free access feature to read NFPA 1 at www.nfpa.org/1. And, for additional information on heating safety, check out NFPA's Safety Tip Sheets. Thanks for reading, stay safe! You can always follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
If you're one of the few people who doesn't watch “This is Us”, here's an update on what's been happening with the show and fire safety. "This is Us" is a highly popular, one-hour program on NBC that's brought quite a bit of attention to two fire safety issues. In a recent episode, viewers learned that a lead character died in home fire as a result of smoke alarms with missing batteries. In the latest episode, it was revealed that the cause of said fire involved a slow cooker. Showing that smoke alarms need to have working batteries in order to protect you, and more pointedly, dramatizing the deadly consequence that can result when batteries are missing, is an incredibly powerful message. The show was able to reinforce the potentially life-saving importance of making sure smoke alarms are always equipped with batteries, which has immeasurable impact on the show's millions of viewers. Unfortunately, the show missed the mark in representing a realistic cause of home fires. While cooking is, in fact, the leading cause of U.S. home fires, slow cookers do not play a significant role in them. Between 2011 and 2015, an annual average of 70 cooking fires involving slow cookers resulted in two civilian injuries, no deaths and $3.3 million in direct property damage. This data shows that slow cookers are a statistically insignificant factor in the home cooking fire equation and can be used safely. So the next time you're planning to use your slow cooker or small appliance in the kitchen, consider the following action steps: Inspect plugs and cords to make sure they are not frayed or broken (and replace if necessary), which will help keep electrical fires at bay Keep the slow cooker (or other small appliance) away from the edge of the counter so hands and elbows don't push it off the edge causing burns or scalds from the hot liquid and food inside Follow the manufacturers' instructions for proper and safe use of the appliance Follow instructions for recipes carefully using the right amount of liquid and heat when preparing your meal to prevent overheating For additional cooking fire safety tips and data on cooking fires, visit www.nfpa.org/cooking.
When I'm asked, “What is the required rating for a door in a particular wall?” nine times out of 10 my answer is, “It depends.” (This is the standard answer for nearly everything code-related.) In the Life Safety Code, required ratings for doors and other opening protectives (e.g., windows) depend on the required hourly, fire-resistance rating of the barrier in which the opening is located and the function the barrier is serving. Not all fire barriers are created equal. A door in an exit enclosure fire barrier will probably require a different rating than a door in a similarly rated corridor or hazardous area enclosure. Or a smoke barrier. Or a smoke partition. Or a shaft enclosure. (You get the idea.) At first glance it may seem convoluted, but the code does a good job of consolidating the opening protective rating requirements in one location. In the 2018 edition, you'll find the required door rating in Table 8.3.3.2.2 (what I'll refer to as “the table”). In the 2015 and earlier editions, the required ratings were located in Table 8.3.4.2. Prior to the 2003 edition, there was no handy consolidated table. If you're using the 2000 or earlier edition, you'll have to sort through a series of requirements and exceptions to determine the required door rating. (If you're using the 2000 or earlier edition, you're using a code that's some 20 years out of date, and it might be time to join the rest of us in the 21st century. But I digress.) To use the table, you'll first need to establish the fire barrier's purpose as required by the code. The table lists the purpose under the heading “Component.” Components include: Elevator hoistways Elevator lobbies Vertical shafts Horizontal exits Exit access corridors Other fire barriers Smoke barriers Smoke partitions This is where the table has, at times, caused some confusion. Some have misinterpreted it as prescribing minimum fire-resistance ratings for various fire barriers. For example, the bottom row addresses smoke partitions. The second column specifies fire-resistance ratings for smoke partitions (half hour and one hour). Some have been led to believe that based on the table, all smoke partitions must have a minimum fire resistance rating of a half hour. This is not the case for smoke partitions or any of the other components listed in the table. The requirements for smoke partitions are located in Section 8.4; you'll find no fire-resistance rating requirement there. Smoke partitions require a rating only where required by another section of the code. An example would be corridor walls in new, large, residential board-and-care occupancies, which require a half-hour rating (32.3.3.6.2). Once it's determined that the smoke partition requires a fire-resistance rating, then refer to the table to determine the required fire-protection rating of any doors. In the case of a half-hour rated smoke partition, doors must have a one-third hour, or 20 minute, fire-protection rating. In short, use the table to determine the required opening protective rating when a barrier is required by another section of the code to have a fire-resistance rating. Fire barriers having a one-hour rating might require one-hour doors, three-quarter-hour doors, or one-third-hour doors. Again, it depends on the barrier's application. Fire barriers having a two-hour rating generally require one-and-a-half hour doors. Fire barriers with a rating exceeding two hours are rarely required by the code, except for a few occupancy separation fire barriers involving relatively hazardous occupancies. I sometimes get the question, “Why does the code allow a 20-minute door in a one-hour barrier? Why not just require a one-hour door?” This would certainly make life easier when applying the code, but it also might require a more expensive door than is actually needed for life safety. Where the code requires 20-minute doors, it's usually in a barrier that the committees primarily wanted to be smoke resistant. Before the days of smoke partitions, which first appeared in the 2000 edition, when a committee wanted a smoke resistant barrier (e.g., a corridor wall), it was simpler to mandate a one-hour barrier than to come up with criteria to evaluate smoke resistance. Since they really wanted a nominal degree of fire resistance, rather than mandating a substantial one-hour door, they were comfortable with a 20-minute door, which would inherently resist the passage of smoke. Other reasons for the difference in fire barrier ratings and door ratings are the tests used to establish the ratings. You might have noticed I refer to the fire-resistance rating of a fire barrier, whereas a door has a fire-protection rating. Fire barrier assemblies are tested at a lab using a standard like ASTM E119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, which yields a fire-resistance rating. Fire doors are tested using a standard like NFPA 252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, which yields a fire-protection rating. Comparing the ratings from the different tests is not an apples-to-apples comparison. An hour's worth of fire resistance (fire barrier) is not necessarily equivalent to an hour's worth of fire protection (fire door). And although it's not a very scientific reason, this is the way the code has done it for many years and it seems to work. To this point, there has been no compelling reason to change the approach. If it's not broken, there's no need to fix it. For more details on fire door installation, inspection, testing, and maintenance, check out NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives. NFPA also offers online training for NFPA 80 ITM requirements and classroom training on NFPA 101 and NFPA 80 fire door inspection for health care facilities. Thanks for reading, and as always, stay safe. Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free Access.” Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH Page 6
As 2017 draws to a close, I'm proud to say that NFPA has been able to bring some 90 fire service members and wildfire specialists to our training, Assessing Wildfire Hazards in the Home Ignition Zone, this year under a generous award from the DHS/FEMA Fire Prevention Safety Grant. In addition to these funded courses, where participants received a travel scholarship to attend, the class was also taught at the IAFC WUI Conference in Reno in March and at several locations where organizations contracted with NFPA to bring the class to their locations. NFPA also provided this training to state forestry wildfire specialists from 25 states this fall in Boise. At the FEMA-funded offering in Jacksonville, Florida this October, I met participants from all over the country. These individuals were highly motivated and engaged throughout the two-day classroom, and especially enthusiastic about the hands-on opportunity to visit two nearby homes to test their knowledge. NFPA is grateful to the local contacts in all of the states that have helped us get onto private property with permission from the homeowner in so many locations. This exercise truly helps participants learn how to interact with residents in a pre-fire situation. One participant, after only the first day of class, commented to me that he planned to actually change the way his department addressed wildland/urban interface issues based on what he had learned. This statement from a long-term veteran of fire and emergency services was a testament to the value of the science and approach on which this course is based. As NFPA prepares to launch its next round of FEMA-supported classes and scholarship competition, I hope fire departments everywhere will take a few moments to review the information at www.nfpa.org/hiz to learn about the valuable information and knowledge available to them through this training. Whether you send a lucky candidate on a scholarship, register through the IAFC WUI conference offering, or bring the training to your local facility, you'll be taking a step toward a future of safer homes and communities. Photo by Michele Steinberg, NFPA: Assessing Structure Ignition Potential from Wildfire training participants inspect a home in the Jacksonville, Florida, area. We want to hear from you! It's easy to comment on posts: just look for the login link above to login or register for your free account on Xchange. Xchange is more than a blog; it's an online community that connects you with peers worldwide and directly with NFPA staff. Get involved today!
High-rise buildings have garnered significant attention in the fire safety world over the years. Because of the nature of high-rise buildings, a great number of people have to travel great vertical distances on the stairs to evacuate in an emergency. Historically, it has been said that occupants should never use an elevator during a fire or similar building emergency. However, after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, this position was reevaluated. Some buildings are better equipped with elevators intended for use during an emergency. These types of elevators will be clearly marked that they are safe to use in the event of an emergency. Elevators that meet section 7.14 of the Life Safety Code© may be used for occupant evacuation. However, it is never required. Where elevators are used for occupant egress, the elevator shall not count as one of the required means of egress, it shall not be included in determining the capacity of the means of egress, and it shall not be used to satisfy the arrangement of means of egress requirements. There are numerous other requirements that must be met in order to use an elevator for occupant evacuation during a fire or similar emergency including, but not limited to, marking of the elevator, building fire alarm requirements, building sprinkler system requirements, and two-way communication systems in the elevator lobby. Regardless of what occupancy type the elevator is in, the requirements can be found in section 7.14. NFPA's High-rise Apartment and Condominium Safety tip sheet covers how to escape during an emergency based on various scenarios.
It can be hard to keep track of code development and stay up to date with the latest and greatest editions of codes and standards as they are released. NFPA 1, like a majority of NFPA codes and standards, is revised on a three year revision cycle. Believe it or not, the newest edition, 2018, is out and available for adoption and use. The 2018 edition was finished over the summer and became official early this fall. It was issued by NFPA's Standards Council on August 17, 2017, with an effective date of September 6, 2017 and an edition date of 2018. (Even harder to believe, the Fire Code Technical Committee begins its work on the 2021 edition this coming spring…no rest for the weary here!) Lots of changes are included in the new edition. These changes respond to the needs and requests of our stakeholders by addressing new technologies, industry challenges, fire fighter safety, and even topics that have never been addressed by the Fire Code in the past, but where guidance is needed to keep occupants, buildings and fire fighters safe. Like all new editions of NFPA 1, this edition includes new definitions in Chapter 3, updates to referenced publications in Chapter 2, as well as hundreds and hundreds of revisions to the code sections extracted from 50+ other NFPA codes and standards that combine to make this document the comprehensive resource for fire inspectors. These extract updates reflect the most up to date requirements from the editions of these codes and standards as referenced in Chapter 2. Technical changes (other than those changes to extracted text) to the 2018 edition of NFPA 1, Fire Code, include, but are not limited to, the following: New Section 1.4.1.1 provides guidance for the AHJ on compliance with subsequent editions of referenced publications. New 1.7.2 adds NFPA 1031 and NFPA 1037 as mandatory professional qualification standards for fire inspectors, plans examiners and fire marshals unless otherwise approved by the AHJ. New 10.2.7 establishes minimum fire prevention inspection frequencies for existing occupancies. Revisions to 10.11.1 provide additional criteria for premises identification. Revised 11.12 on photovoltaic systems to address marking for rapid shutdown, updates for roof access and ground-mounted PV installations. New 16.7 on rubberized asphalt melters. Updates to dimensional criteria for fire department access roads as well a new listing requirement for electric gate operators and systems. New 31.3.10 provides requirements on the outside storage of biomass feedstock. New 34.10.4 address the outside storage at pallet manufacturing and pallet recycling facilities. New Chapter 38 provides fire safety requirements for marijuana growing, processing and extraction facilities. New 50.7 addresses mobile and temporary cooking equipment (food trucks are included in its application). Complete rewrite of Chapter 52 to reflect new and current technologies for energy storage systems. New Chapter 55 on cleaning and purging of flammable gas piping systems mandates reference to NFPA 56. New Annex F on Fire Fighter Breathing-Air Replenishment Systems. Stay tuned for future blogs where I will dive deeper into each of the major changes. For now, you can view the 2018 edition of the Code for free at www.nfpa.org/1. Also on that page, under the ‘next edition' section you can track the development of the 2018 edition and how and why the Technical Committee voted to put the new revisions into the 2018 edition. Which changes do you see as impacting your jurisdiction the most? Does your jurisdiction have plans to adopt the 2018 edition of NFPA 1? Share your stories below. ***NFPA Members: Don't forget, join me on Wednesday, Dec 13 at 1PM Eastern as I discuss seasonal fire safety requirements from NFPA 1. During the live event I will also be answering follow-up questions submitted through NFPA's online community, Xchange. Join in and be part of the conversation!*** Thanks for reading, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Following the approximately 70 deaths and 70 injured from June's Grenfell Tower fire, a British architect group is demanding that fire sprinklers become a component of all new housing. According to an article appearing in The Times, a British publication, the Royal Institute of British Architects (Riba) is calling for more stringent building regulations, including the increased use of residential fire sprinklers. “The Grenfell Tower fire was a tragedy that must mark a turning point in the UK's approach to fire safety regulation and building procurement,” Adrian Dobson, executive director of Riba, said in the article. “We must significantly strengthen and simplify the building regulations. This includes prohibiting the use of combustible materials and materials of limited combustibility in external wall construction in higher risk buildings, requiring more than one staircase in tall buildings, and including central alarm and sprinkler systems in all new residential buildings. Just like the introduction of seatbelts in cars, simple measures can save many lives.” Riba, which has more than 30,000 members, also suggested that local fire brigades take a more active role in risk assessment of building projects. Sprinklers have been embraced by Riba and other groups because the facts support this technology. Download and share our fact sheets that underscore this research.
The U.S.has seen its share of natural disasters this year. Following Hurricane Harvey, in particular, which ravaged parts of Texas, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) supplied manufactured housing units to area residents. One unique feature of these units: all of them included fire sprinklers. This technology will make its way into future manufactured housing units supplied by FEMA, a decision that was "no small feat of engineering—or of political maneuvering," reports NFPA Journal. In a feature story highlighting this safety achievement, Journal's associate editor Jesse Roman interviewed key sources that led to this decision and those impacted by it. “Most fire deaths occur in single-family homes, and the data clearly shows that fire suppression systems like sprinklers save lives,” said Chris Connealy, the Texas fire marshal and a member of the Texas Fire Sprinkler Coalition. “We always appreciate when fire prevention and safety equipment are taken into consideration.” “The complexity of it just boggled my mind. I came from the fire protection industry, so I thought, ‘sprinklers in a manufactured home? Boy, that's a no brainer—that should take me about three hours to install,'" Lawrence McKenna, Jr., a fire protection engineer at the USFA, told NFPA Journal. "Well, putting sprinklers in one unit is easy. Putting them in 20,000 on a couple weeks' notice, not knowing where the homes are going to end up, not knowing what the water supply situation is going to be—that's an entirely different matter." Learn how this idea to sprinkler FEMA's manufactured housing came to fruition by reading the Journal article.
Image: Wikimedia Commons Over the 20+ years I've been working with NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, the concept of multiple-occupancy buildings hasn't been all that controversial. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it's been relatively straightforward—until recently. Over the past couple weeks, I've seen a spate of questions relating to buildings with multiple tenants having the potential for different occupancy classifications. I've also seen some interpretations from authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) that don't align with the code's intent. While I recognize that the AHJ has the final say with regard to code interpretation, it doesn't make an incorrect interpretation right. I don't like disagreeing with the AHJ; I was one for several years, and I know how difficult the job is given the volume of work and limited resources. AHJs take their responsibilities very seriously; after all, the safety of the public and emergency responders is in their hands. But my job is to educate and inform about the intent of the Life Safety Code, and when I know it is being misapplied, I have a duty to share that information. NFPA is transforming from a codes-and-standards organization into a knowledge-and-information organization. Here is some knowledge and information to help everyone get on the same page with regard to multiple-occupancy buildings. Occupancy classification is addressed in Section 6.1 (all references are to the current 2018 edition). The term “multiple occupancy” has the following definition: 6.1.14.2.1 Multiple Occupancy. A building or structure in which two or more classes of occupancy exist. NFPA's headquarters in Quincy, Massachusetts is an example of a multiple-occupancy building. Our building contains offices (business occupancy) and a cafeteria with an occupancy load of more than 49 persons (assembly occupancy). Where a building contains multiple occupancies, it must comply with the requirements for mixed occupancies in 6.1.14.3 or the requirements for separated occupancies in 6.1.14.4, as prescribed by 6.1.14.1.1. Here is the key takeaway: use of the separated-occupancy criteria is not mandatory unless specified by another section of the code. This occurs only in a few instances. For example, a health care occupancy (e.g., a hospital or nursing home) is permitted to be in a building containing other occupancies only when it is separated from the other occupancies by a two-hour fire barrier (see Chapters 18 and 19 for details). Even if a building looks like it contains multiple-separated occupancies, nothing prohibits it from being classified as a multiple-mixed occupancy as long as all of the occupancies comply with the most restrictive requirements of the occupancies involved, unless separate safeguards are approved, as stated in 6.1.14.3.2. Conversely, situations exist where the code mandates the use of the multiple-mixed occupancy provisions. Where multiple occupancies lack separation by fire barriers (occupancy separations) as required by 6.1.14.4, the occupancies are mixed by default. Also, where multiple occupancies share common exit access travel paths (e.g., corridors) as described in 6.1.14.1.2, the occupancies are mixed. Note that multiple-separated occupancies are permitted to share common exits (e.g., stair enclosures). Let's take a closer look at 6.1.14.1.2: 6.1.14.1.2 Where exit access from an occupancy traverses another occupancy, the multiple occupancy shall be treated as a mixed occupancy. I'm aware of a jurisdiction extrapolating this to mean where exit access from an occupancy does not traverse another occupancy, the multiple occupancy must be treated as a separated occupancy. This is not the case; the code doesn't work like that. If that was the code's intent, it would specifically say so, and it does not. Part of the confusion arises from the definition of “mixed occupancy” and the use of the undefined term “intermingled”: 6.1.14.2.2 Mixed Occupancy. A multiple occupancy where the occupancies are intermingled. What constitutes intermingling of occupancies? Based on the mandatory requirements in the code, intermingling occurs where multiple occupancies share exit access paths or lack occupancy separation fire barriers, or both. The definition describes a condition resulting from the mandatory code provisions. As an example, consider the generic “strip mall” depicted in the accompanying figure. This is a classic example of a multiple-separated occupancy building provided that the partitions separating the different tenants are fire barriers meeting the requirements of 6.1.14.4. Also, each tenant space is provided with independent exit access. As a result, the code's requirements for each occupancy are applied independently. If the space identified as an assembly occupancy is a new nightclub, it requires automatic sprinkler protection (12.3.5.1). If the occupancies are separated, the code requires the installation of an automatic sprinkler system only in the assembly occupancy; the other occupancies would be permitted to remain nonsprinklered. But does anything require these occupancies to be separated by fire barriers? The answer is no as long as each occupancy meets the more restrictive requirements of the occupancies involved. It's less expensive to build non-rated partitions to separate the tenant spaces. If the owner can show that the entire building meets the most restrictive requirements, they have the right to use the mixed occupancy provisions even though the occupancies are separated by non-rated tenant separations and have independent exit access. I suspect this is really an enforcement issue. Once the building is constructed with non-rated tenant separations, it might be challenging for the AHJ to enforce the separation requirements when a tenant comes along that impacts the other tenants or needs to be separated so as to not adversely impact the other tenants (e.g., the previously described nightclub). In my experience, this needs to be addressed at the permitting stage. Building permits for “speculative-use” buildings (i.e., the occupancy classification is unknown) should be for the “shell building” only. Certificates of occupancy should only be issued once the occupancy classification is known and inspected. Subsequent certificates of occupancy should be issued only after being reviewed by the AHJ whenever a change of occupancy classification occurs as required by NFPA 1, Fire Code. If the shell building tenant separations are to be non-rated, make it clear in the permit process that additional protection in the form of occupancy separation fire barriers might be required depending on the occupancies ultimately present. If the building owner chooses to go this route, it's their problem down the road if upgrades are needed. An example: I once had the pleasure of telling a tire storage facility that their occupancy wasn't permitted in a spec-use warehouse protected by an ESFR sprinkler system that wasn't designed to protect the hazard – after they had moved in. Good times. The job of the AHJ isn't always sunshine and lollipops. I'm sure there were some animated meetings between the owner and the tenant after I broke the bad news. Buyer beware. It's important for developers and AHJs to work together to achieve a safe building design. The mixed- and separated-occupancy protection strategies are both safe, and the owner has the right to choose which one works best for their building unless the code explicitly mandates the use of one or the other based on the arrangement or occupancies involved. I know this will put me in the doghouse with at least some jurisdictions, but I didn't take this job to be popular. You can relate to that, right AHJs? Hopefully we're all on the same page now. #InfoKnowledge Thanks for reading, and as always, stay safe. Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “FREE ACCESS.” Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH Page 7
This morning, NFPA learned of one of the largest safety recalls made by the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The recall, which “involves 134 models of Kidde fire extinguishers manufactured between January 1, 1973 and August 15, 2017, including models that were previously recalled in March 2009 and February 2015” impacts 37.8 million units. The reason for the recall is that “the fire extinguishers can become clogged or require excessive force to discharge and can fail to activate during a fire emergency. In addition, the nozzle can detach with enough force to pose an impact hazard.” For additional information, check out the latest blog from Cathy Longley, Communications Manager at NFPA. Cathy highlights an important aspect regarding the use of fire extinguishers; although they are used to save lives and property and can contain a small fire until the fire department arrives, they should not be used in place of fire fighter response and occupants should not attempt to take fighting the fire into their own hands. The top priority is for occupants to evacuate a building safely. Fire extinguishers should not be used in lieu of that goal. For more information on the requirements for fire extinguishers in NFPA 1 check out these past posts: Location and placement of portable fire extinguishers. Where are fire extinguishers required? NFPA 1, Fire Code, addresses another type of fire protection system for occupant use, hose lines. New to the 2015 edition of the Code, Section 13.2.2.6 addresses the removal of existing occupant-use hose lines as follows: 13.2.2.6* The AHJ shall be authorized to permit the removal of existing occupant-use hose lines where all of the following are met: (1) This Code does not require their installation. (2) The current building code does not require their installation. (3) The AHJ determines that the occupant-use hose line will not be utilized by trained personnel or the fire department. A.13.2.2.6 It is not the intent of 13.2.2.6 to permit the removal of portions of the existing standpipe system other than hose lines, and that such remaining system components be maintained and available for use by the fire department or other appropriate fire suppression personnel. The provisions of 13.2.2.6 are intended to explicitly allow the removal of non-required, occupant-use standpipe hose from buildings. The fire protection approach utilizing 1 ½” hose lines for occupant use has significantly evolved over the last 50 years. While it use to be a common occurrence to require this type of protection, the codes have evolved away from this approach finding it better to evacuate rather than asking individuals that are untrained to attempt to fight a fire (same concept as with fire extinguishers noted above.) There are numerous existing situations where 1 ½” hose are present in occupancies that no longer require hose to be present for occupant's use. Some AHJ's were allowing the removal of this hose while some AHJs might have been wary of permitting the removal of occupant use hose, lacking any Code language stating its removal was permitted. Provided that the hose is not required by NFPA 1 or the applicable building code, and no trained on-site fire suppression personnel would be expected to utilize it, the hose can be removed. It is preferable for untrained building occupants to evacuate rather than attempt to extinguish a fire using hose lines. Thanks for reading, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
A topic that sometimes prompts a bit of animated discussion when I teach NFPA's three-day Life Safety Code Essentials seminar is incidental uses. It is not always clear when a portion of a building should be treated as an incidental use or as its own occupancy. In today's #101Wednesdays post, I will attempt to provide some guidance. Before getting into the NFPA 101 requirements, it's important to recognize we live in a world in which the Life Safety Code co-exists with building codes. In most cases, the building code is the International Building Code (IBC), which is promulgated by the International Code Council. Both the IBC and NFPA 101 use the term incidental; however, the term has different meanings in each code. In NFPA 101, incidental refers to “minor” uses that are accessory to and/or support the predominant occupancy and do not warrant their own occupancy classification. This concept in the IBC is known as accessory occupancies. In the IBC, the term incidental uses refers to what NFPA 101 calls hazardous areas. The concepts are very similar, but the terminology is different. Be sure to understand how each term is used in each code so you're not comparing apples to oranges. Classification of occupancy is addressed by Chapter 6 of NFPA 101, and it is based on how a building is used. The Code's requirements are predicated on occupancy classification, which directly relates to occupant characteristics and their associated risks. It is common for buildings to be comprised of more than occupancy; these are known as multiple-occupancy buildings (see 6.1.14 of NFPA 101, 2015 edition). Multiple occupancies are then treated as either mixed multiple occupancies (6.1.14.3) or separated multiple occupancies (6.1.14.4). In each case, the requirements applicable to all involved occupancies must be evaluated. However, 6.1.14.1.3 permits some, but not all uses to be considered incidental. For example, where an office building (business use) has an office supply closet (storage use), the AHJ is permitted to judge the storage use to be incidental to the predominant business use and classify the building as a business occupancy, not a multiple occupancy (business and storage). The requirements of Chapter 38 (new business) or 39 (existing business) apply, as applicable, and the AHJ ignores the storage occupancy requirements of Chapter 42. If that same office building has a cafeteria with an occupant load of 50 or more, however, that is an assembly occupancy, and the building must be treated as a multiple-occupancy building (business and assembly). Here is how it works: Certain uses that are permitted to be considered incidental subject to the determination of the AHJ are specified by 6.1.14.1.3: mercantile, business, industrial, and storage uses. Examples of each might include: Incidental mercantile: newsstand in an office building lobby (business occupancy) Incidental business: supervisor's office in a distribution warehouse (storage occupancy) Incidental industrial: repair shop in a bicycle store (mercantile occupancy) Incidental storage: raw materials storage in a manufacturing plant (industrial occupancy) For these uses, no measurable threshold in terms of area or occupant load applies. Whether one of these uses is incidental or its own occupancy is strictly up to the AHJ. This requires sound, reasonable judgment. Other nonresidential uses having an occupant load fewer than that established by each occupancy classification's definition are also considered incidental. Determining whether these areas are incidental requires no judgment. The occupant load based on how the area is used is determined, and if the occupant load is less than that established by the occupancy's definition, it's incidental. Examples of these might include: Incidental assembly: café with an occupant load of fewer than 50 in a book store (mercantile occupancy) Incidental educational: tutoring for fewer than four students through the twelfth grade in an office building (business occupancy) Incidental day care: child care service for fewer than four kids at a health club (assembly occupancy) Incidental health care: limited skilled nursing care for fewer than four patients in an assisted living facility (residential board and care occupancy) Incidental ambulatory health care: oral surgery and recovery provided to fewer than four patients in a dentist's office (business occupancy) Note that residential uses (one- and two-family dwellings, lodging or rooming houses, hotels and dormitories, apartment buildings, and residential board and care) can never be considered incidental. This is to ensure that the requisite protection for sleeping occupants, namely smoke alarms, is always provided. An on-call physicians' sleeping room in a hospital is NOT incidental; rather, it's usually a lodging or rooming house occupancy, and the requirements of Chapter 26 apply in addition to the requirements of Chapter 18 or 19 for health care occupancies. Also be aware that even though an area is incidental, it might still need to be protected as a hazardous area by automatic sprinklers, 1-hour separation, or both (e.g., a soiled linen storage room in a hospital). It's interesting to note that the IBC takes a different approach to accessory occupancies. The IBC states that occupancies can be considered accessory if they are ancillary to the main occupancy of the building and do not exceed 10 percent of the floor area of the story in which they are located and do not exceed the allowable area for nonsprinklered buildings for each accessory occupancy. For example, in a 500,000 ft2 building used predominantly as a warehouse, up to 10 percent of the area (50,000 ft2) could be used for offices (assuming Type I construction), and the office area could be considered an accessory occupancy subject only to the requirements applicable to the storage use. To me and to the Safety to Life Technical Committees, 50,000 ft2 of offices is a lot of business use area to treat as accessory (IBC) or incidental (NFPA 101). This is not to disparage the IBC; it's only to point out the different protection philosophies provided by each code. I hope this overview of incidental uses in the Life Safety Code has been useful. Thanks for reading, and until next time, stay safe! Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Image above courtesy of timeout.com
BREAKING NEWS: On Thursday, September 14, a fire broke out at an apartment building under construction in Weymouth, Massachusetts. According to local news reports, the structure has been destroyed. Multiple large-scale fires have occurred at construction sites in 2017, resulting in multi-millions dollar losses - both in direct property damage and losses beyond the structure of origin. Many, if not all, of these incidents could have been prevented with the safeguards included in NFPA 241, Standard for Safeguarding Construction, Alteration and Demolition Operations. The requirements in NFPA 241 are not optional. They are required in every state that has adopted NFPA 1, Fire Code®, NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code®, the International Building Code® or the International Fire Code® (IFC), regardless of a construction project's size. Unfortunately, many people aren't aware of this requirement. Building owners, contractors, installers, insurance companies, facility managers, system designers and code officials all carry some responsibility for ensuring fire safety throughout the construction process. Each plays a role in following and implementing NFPA 241: Code officials must know and enforce the requirements of NFPA 241 on the building owner. Fire chiefs must be involved in the creation of a pre-fire plan and train all personnel on that plan. Building owners and facility managers responsible for a building under construction, alteration, or demolition must have a fire prevention program manager (FPPM) per NFPA 241. Contractors and others working on a job site must follow NFPA 241 and the direction of the FPPM. To learn how NFPA 241 can help prevent damage to construction sites and adjacent buildings; help keep workers, civilians, and first responders safe; and help avoid potential work stoppages, delays and costly fines, sign up for our new online NFPA 241 training series, which is targeted to anyone responsible for building fire safety. Completion of the three-hour online course series allows participants to qualify for .3 CEUs, which have been approved by the American Institute of Architects (AIA). You can download our NFPA 241 bulletin, which provides an overview of NFPA 241 and the reasons why construction sites present increased fire risks.
September is National Preparedness Month (NPM), when we focus on taking steps to prepare for emergencies in our homes, businesses, schools, and communities. The goal of NPM is to increase the overall number of individuals, families, and communities engaging in preparedness actions at home, work, business, school, and places of worship. NFPA has joined forces with the FEMA in championing this cause. Each week of PrepareAthon has its own theme. Week 1: September 1-9 Make a Plan for Yourself, Family and Friends Week 2: September 10-16 Plan to Help Your Neighbor and Community Week 3: September 17-23 Practice and Build Out Your Plans Week 4: September 24-30 Get Involved! Be a Part of Something Larger This week's focus is on making an emergency plan. NFPA's toolkit, “Get Ready! Preparing Your Community for a Disaster,” includes an emergency plan form, emergency plan cards, and an emergency supply kit checklist that community members can use to be prepared in the event of a disaster. Page 8
Photo submitted by Jennifer Berry of Gary and Mugsy Berry September is FEMA's National Preparedness Month and is a good time to revisit your family's evacuation plan in the event of a wildfire. Being prepared before a wildfire disaster can help keep everyone in your family safer. One family member often overlooked is the family pet. Taking simple steps to prepare pets for an evacuation can make it easier for everyone else. Some steps that you can take to make the process easier for your pet are: Have a crate ready for your pet that is the right size for your pet. Practice with your pet getting into the crate so that it is easy and familiar for your pet. It will make it easier for you both. Make sure that you have organized important documentation for your pet including, Special needs documentation (a list of the pet's current physical disabilities or illnesses, emotional or behavioral problems and how to deal with them, special feeding schedule requirements, dietary restrictions, allergies), copies of ownership records (adoption records, registration paperwork, pet health insurance policies, municipal or county license tags and paperwork), Microchip paperwork. Create a kit for your pet in a plastic tub and use a sharpie to update the contents inside. (some items to include are a 3-7 day supply of pet food, a can opener and spoon if your pet is eating canned food, water and food dishes, clean water for 3-7days, collar or harness, leash, cat litter tray and scoop, bedding, toys, dog waste bags, first aid kit, and cleaning supplies including spray disinfectant and paper towel). Keep the kit where it will not get too hot or too cold. List of important pet related phone numbers because internet access may difficult. Include veterinarian, local animal control agency, animal shelter/boarding facility, list of nearby pet friendly hotels, and even friends that may be willing to temporarily take your pet while you are away from home (this may be neighbors who are part of a buddy system network where neighbors help evacuate each other's pets). Focusing on your pet can help remind you what your two-legged family members will need as well, and can help make emergency planning engaging for children. Don't forget to check out NFPA's TakeAction website for some great resources available to help you prepare your pet in the event of an evacuation for a wildfire, including a downloadable pet evacuation checklist.
Our friends at the Blue Mountains Fire & Rescue in Ontario sent us a comparison of two fires in their community and the astounding results of each. A cigarette that accidentally dropped onto bedding inside a residence ignited one of the fires. The elderly resident attempted to extinguish the fire with a pail of water. When that didn't work, he fled to his balcony and called 911. Firefighters arrived in minutes, but fire suppression was delayed since rescue operations were performed first. The fire destroyed the residence, resulting in thousands of dollars in damage. The aftermath is documented in the above photo. A more recent fire was the result of a damaged chord on an oscillating fan. Since the structure was in a rural setting, the fire department's response time was considerably longer. However, the fire activated the fire sprinklers, which extinguished the fire. Damage was estimated to be $1,000. "Had this structure not been monitored and sprinkler-protected...it would have surely been a total loss," stated Duncan Rydall, chief fire prevention officer with Blue Mountains Fire & Rescue, in an email to NFPA. "The automatic sprinklers truly saved this building." We love hearing about fire sprinkler saves! Please email us any that occur in your town or that you see in the news.
Hello – Happy Friday! Today's post comes to you from Eric Nette, Engineer in the Industrial and Chemical Engineering Department, at NFPA. Special thanks to Eric for his contribution to this blog while I am out on maternity leave, and discussing one of the many important subjects addressed in the Fire Code. Good morning! This week on Fire Code Fridays we will be discussing Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LP-Gas) and the newest edition of NFPA 58. A commonly used LP-Gas would be propane. NFPA 1 states:69.1.1.1 The storage, use, and handling of liquefied petroleum gases (LP-Gas) shall comply with the requirements of this chapter; NFPA 58 and Sections 60.1 through 60.4 of this Code. This makes it very important to stay up to date on your ancillary codes. NFPA 58 was revised last year to the 2017 edition of the code. This edition has several exciting and significant changes. I will try to summarize one of the more important changes, but it's important to look into the new code to determine if any pertinent changes have occurred for your applications. Some of the new items added to NFPA 58. 2017, were skid tanks and porta-pacs (a restructure of portable storage containers and portable container classification), changes to the requirements for vehicle barrier protection, and the allowances for containers less than 2 lbs. water capacity. More information on NFPA 58 can be found at www.nfpa.org/58 and a new food truck handout can be found at www.nfpa.org/foodtrucksafety. The food truck handout now includes a cross section of requirements/recommendations from 4 NFPA standards, including NFPA 58, with exact references on where each is found in each document. Additional requirements from NFPA 58, 2017 edition, will be extracted from NFPA 58 into the new section on portable cooking equipment in Section 50.7.There is one major technical change to NFPA 58, 2017 edition, that although not included in NFPA 1 2018 edition directly, is important for users of NFPA 58 outside the scope of the Fire Code, to be aware of. NFPA 58 has in the past excluded containers in all transportation situations and deferred to the corresponding transportation authorities (DOT, FAA, Coast Guard, etc.). In this edition the committee struggled with allowing the filling of hot air balloon containers. These containers posed a challenge as they are widely filled safely by properly trained filling personnel but were completely unrecognized by NFPA 58. Several hot air balloon festivals were experiencing issues attaining filling services because propane suppliers did not want to accidentally violate the code.Hot air balloon containers operate in a very different environment than that experienced by gas grill containers. Due to this operation the containers must be able to expel bursts of LP-Gas at a higher than normal altitude to operate the burner. The pilots depend on the burner to operate and steer the hot air balloon. Regular containers utilize an “Excess Flow Valve” that automatically operates if a large flow rate is experienced on the outlet of the container. This is a safety mechanism that is installed for those cases in which a line could break and expel a large flow rate of LP-Gas at once. Hot air balloon containers cannot utilize these valves without triggering them and accidentally turning off their burner mid-flight.Under compression LP-Gas converts itself into a liquid. This is why sometimes when you turn on your gas grill cylinder it will get cold. For the LP-Gas to leave the cylinder it must convert from a liquid to a gas, which requires heat energy from its surroundings (called the autorefrigeration reaction). At higher than normal altitudes the environment around the containers is much cooler than it would be on the ground. Therefore the containers must be heavily insulated. The containers are inspected yearly by the federal aviation administration (FAA), but NFPA 58 requires regular cylinders to have all of their insulation/wrappings removed prior to filling to verify the lack of corrosion on the container. Corrosion on the cylinder has led to several incidents in the past (the most recent being the food truck explosion in Philadelphia). Removing these wrappings on a hot air balloon container can take up to an hour. The NFPA 58 technical committee removed hot air balloon containers from the exclusions of the scope. The FAA regulations were also added to the list of container requirements, and their inclusion in the pilots log was added for filling requirements. These containers were excluded from the requirement for removing the wrappings/insulation for every fill and the pilot/crew are now allowed to assist in filling operations. The pilot/crew license requires training with LP-Gas filling. The refresher training for these licenses occurs at shorter intervals than required by NFPA 58 for regular filling operations. Again, the provisions for hot air balloons are excluded from NFPA 1 as they are outside the scope of a Fire Code. However, the provisions are important to understand for those jurisdictions who utilize NFPA 58 or may be trying to further understand the comprehensive set of changes to the newest edition of this Code. Thanks again, Eric! Happy Friday, stay safe!
Hello – Happy Friday! Today's post comes to you from Brian O'Connor, Fire Protection Engineer in the Fire Protection Systems Department, at NFPA. Special thanks to Brian for his contribution to this blog while I am out on maternity leave, and discussing one of the many important subjects addressed in the Fire Code. Looking for information on what occupancies require fire extinguishers? Check out this post first! Brian O'Connor here to help continue the legacy of NFPA's #FireCodefridays. I am the Staff Liaison for NFPA 10, Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers, and today I will be talking about some of the location and placement requirements for portable fire extinguishers. In NFPA 1, portable fire extinguisher requirements are located in section 13.6 under chapter 13, Fire Protection Systems. Location and Placement The first step in figuring out where to place your fire extinguisher is to size up your building and see what types of hazards are around. If you have a kitchen area then a class K rated fire extinguisher should be nearby, for flammable liquids a class B rated extinguisher, if there is potential for energized electrical equipment to be involved one would use a class C rated extinguisher, etc. Common sense and NFPA 10 say that the fire extinguisher should be located where they are readily accessible and available in the event of a fire. These are typically located along normal paths of travel so that you can grab one with ease in the event of a fire. Fire extinguishers should be visible, but if visual obstructions cannot be avoided then arrows, lights or signs to help indicate where a fire extinguisher is located. This cuts down on response time and could play a critical role in getting the fire under control or extinguished. When looking at how to place your extinguisher in the location that you have decided, one thing to consider is the elevation. The bottom of the extinguisher needs to be at least 4in off the ground and the top not more than 5ft from the ground, unless it is heavier than 40lbs. In the case where it is heavier than 40lbs, the top of the extinguisher cannot be more than 3.5ft above the floor. This includes extinguishers in cabinets but does not include wheeled extinguishers. One question that I often get is about fire extinguishers that are subject to malicious use. In these situations cabinets are allowed to be locked but there still needs to be a means of emergency access. This is done through several ways, the most common being breakable glass doors on the front with a small mallet attached. The above requirements apply to all portable fire extinguishers but there are different location requirements for extinguishers for different class fire hazards. Class A, Required anywhere ordinary combustibles are present. The minimum number of fire extinguishers you need per floor is outlined in table 13.6.3.2.1.1. To find this number one would take the total floor area and divide it by the maximum floor area to be protected per extinguisher. For example, if there is a 67,000 ft2 light hazard area, take this and divide it by the maximum floor area for an extinguisher (11,250ft2) then one would find that a minimum of 6 fire extinguishers with at least a 4A rating (3,000ft2 * 4 = 12,000ft2) is required. 2A rated portable fire extinguishers are permitted as well but then the requirement of having a maximum floor area per unit of “A rating” decreases the maximum floor area per extinguisher from 11,250ft2 to 6000ft2 (3,000ft2 * 2 = 6,000ft2). In this case one would need a minimum of 12 fire extinguishers to cover an area of 67,000ft2 (67,000ft2/6,000ft2 = 11.2). In addition to the requirements in table 13.6.3.2.1.1, fire extinguishers for class A hazards must be locates as to not exceed a 75ft travel distance. Class B Required where there is a potential for flammable liquids fires. Table 13.6.3.3.1.1 is a more straightforward table that lays out the maximum travel distance to extinguishers based on the type of hazard (low, moderate or high) and the extinguisher rating. Travel distance to extinguisher can't be more than 30ft or 50ft depending on the extinguisher rating and type of hazard. Class C Required where energized electrical equipment can be encountered. An extinguisher is rated Class C in addition to a Class A or B, so you would follow the distance requirements for either the Class A or Class B hazards. Class D Required in areas where there is a potential for fires involving combustible metals. Class D rated portable fire extinguishers should not be placed more than 75ft of travel distance from the hazard. Class K Required where there is a potential for fires involving combustible cooking media (vegetable or animal oils and fats). They should not be located further than 30ft from hazard. I hope this sheds some light on the location and placement of fire extinguishers. If you have any comments or questions please feel free to post a message below! Thanks, Brian! And thanks for reading! Happy Friday, stay safe. Page 9
Hello – Happy Friday! Today's post comes to you from Jacqueline Wilmot, Fire Protection Engineer in the Fire Protection Systems Department, at NFPA. Special thanks to Jacqueline for her contribution to this blog while I am out on maternity leave, and discussing one of the many important subjects addressed in the Fire Code. In a 2012 reported titled “Structure Fires in Eating and Drinking Establishments” by Ben Evarts, U.S. fire departments responded to an estimated average of 7, 640 structure fires per year in eating and drinking establishments between 2006 and 2010. These fires caused an average annual loss of two civilian deaths, 115 civilian injuries and $246 million in direct property damage. Provided with this information, it's no wonder why fire protection is at the top of the menu for many people in the restaurant industry. Section 50.5 of NFPA 1 extracts material from NFPA 96, Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations, which is a standard that provides preventative and operative minimum fire safety requirements related to the design, installation, operation, inspection, and maintenance of all public and private cooking operations. More specifically, NFPA 96 provides users with the requirements for exhaust systems, clearance requirements, construction materials for hoods, types of fire extinguishing equipment, routine cleaning, employee training, solid fuel cooking, and the inspection, testing, and maintenance of the equipment in the facility. Since 1 in every 5 of the fires cited in Evart's report had a failure to clean as a factor contributing to its ignition, we will close in on Chapter 50.5 of NFPA 1 which provides the minimum requirements for the procedures for the use, inspection, testing, and maintenance of equipment. One of the biggest misconceptions when it comes to the ITM of cooking equipment occurs in the frequency of which exhaust systems need to be inspected and/or cleaned. Section 50.5.4 requires the entire exhaust system to be inspected for grease buildup by a properly trained, qualified, and certified person(s) acceptable to the AHJ and in accordance with Table 50.5.4. Unfortunately many people make the mistake of interchanging the word “inspected” for “cleaned”. Section 50.5.6.1 delineates between the inspection frequency and when cleaning is required. It states that if upon inspection, the exhaust system is found to be contaminated with deposits from grease-laden vapors, the contaminated portions of the exhaust systems shall be cleaned by a properly trained, qualified, and certified person(s) acceptable to the AHJ. This requirement delineates between the inspection frequency and when cleaning is required. How do you know if your exhaust system is contaminated with deposits from grease? The methods of measurement is a depth gauge comb, which is scraped along the duct surface and for example, a measured depth of 0.078 inches indicates the need to remove the deposition risk. Who is a “trained” “qualified”, and “certified” person? The definition of “certified” simply specifies that it is a stated recognition and approval that the person has demonstrated an acceptable level of competency. The level of competency that is demonstrated is typically specified by a third-party certifier. While a person might be certified, it is left to the AHJ to determine the acceptability of the certification. Thank you for reading. Happy Friday, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Why areas of refuge? The Life Safety Code is not an accessibility code. Accessibility for persons with disabilities is addressed by other laws and regulations, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, the Code does recognize that many buildings are designed to accommodate people with severe mobility impairments (defined by the Code as the ability to move to stairs but without the ability to use the stairs). In such buildings, the Code might require accessible means egress to be provided. Simply stated, if a building is going to be made accessible to occupants with severe mobility impairments, it might need to be provided with an accessible path(s) of travel to the public way or to a safe location within the building. Areas of refuge are sometimes used to provide such safe locations within the building. What is an area of refuge? Two parts of the Code tell us what an area of refuge is. The first is the definition in 3.3.22 (2015 edition): 3.3.22* Area of Refuge. An area that is either (1) a story in a building where the building is protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system and has not less than two accessible rooms or spaces separated from each other by smoke-resisting partitions; or (2) a space located in a path of travel leading to a public way that is protected from the effects of fire, either by means of separation from other spaces in the same building or by virtue of location, thereby permitting a delay in egress travel from any level. (SAF-MEA) Part (1) of the definition indicates a floor of a fully sprinklered building is an area of refuge. It is assumed that an occupant with severe mobility impairment, if unable to get to the public way on their own, can remain on the floor of fire origin during the emergency because the automatic sprinkler system will either extinguish, or at least control, the fire. The one caveat is that the occupant must have access to a room other than the room of fire origin separated by smoke-resisting partitions to get away from the immediate effects of the fire (e.g., smoke, heat, and steam from the water discharged on the fire). Part (2) of the definition refers to what has been traditionally thought of as an area of refuge. The detailed requirements for these areas of refuge are found in 7.2.12. Areas of refuge described in Part (2) can be created by horizontal exits, or they can be fire rated enclosures that provide a means to get to the public way, perhaps with assistance, using an extra-wide stair or specially protected elevator, without having to leave the area of refuge and potentially re-enter the room or area of fire origin. If the sprinkler option in Part (1) of the definition is used, standard stairs and elevators can be utilized; this might serve as an incentive for building owners to install sprinklers where they are not otherwise required. In all cases, irrespective of sprinklers, areas of refuge require two-way communications systems to allow occupants with severe mobility impairments to let emergency personnel know they are in the building and require evacuation assistance. When are areas of refuge needed? In the context of the Life Safety Code, areas of refuge are means of egress components in the same way that doors, stairs, and ramps are means of egress components. As such, 7.2.12 does not mandate their use; they are permitted components in all occupancies. Areas of refuge become required when they serve as the termination points of accessible means of egress, which is defined in 3.3.172.1 as: 3.3.172.1 Accessible Means of Egress. A means of egress that provides an accessible route to an area of refuge, a horizontal exit, or a public way. (SAF-MEA) The key question then becomes, “When are accessible means of egress required?” To answer that question, we have to look at 7.5.4, which requires accessible means of egress from areas accessible to people with severe mobility impairments, other than in existing buildings. Key point here: NFPA 101 exempts existing buildings from the requirements for accessible means of egress, so areas of refuge are not required in existing buildings by the Code. If the ground floor of a building is accessible, accessible means of egress can likely be provided via a level or ramped path of travel that complies with ICC/ANSI A117.1, Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities, leading out to the public way – no areas of refuge are needed. On floors accessed by occupants with severe mobility impairment via elevators, areas of refuge will likely be needed to satisfy the requirement for accessible means of egress. Again, the areas of refuge can be elevator lobbies with specially protected elevators or oversized stair landings with extra-wide stairs… or horizontal exits can be used… or the building can be sprinklered and the owner no longer needs to worry about special (read expensive) stairs and/or elevators. NFPA's technical committees and staff work closely with the disability community to ensure its codes and standards, including NFPA 101, work in concert with other laws and regulations affecting accessibility. A concerted effort is made to avoid conflicts with other accessibility rules. It is NFPA's goal to develop codes that will protect the broadest population possible, from the very young to the elderly, and from fully mobile occupants to those with severe mobility impairments. Thanks for reading, and as always, stay safe. Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH
Hello – Happy Friday! Today's post comes to you from Tracy Vecchiarelli, Senior Fire Protection Engineer in the Building Fire Protection and Life Safety Department, at NFPA. Special thanks to Tracy for her contribution to this blog while I am out on maternity leave, and discussing one of the many subjects addressed in the Fire Code. NFPA 1 isn't a document I work with a lot, so when Kristin asked me to write a guest post for her Fire Code Fridays blog, I was a little intimidated. Luckily, NFPA 1 includes literally HUNDREDS of referenced standards, a few of which I know pretty well- like NFPA 220, Standard on Types of Building Construction. NFPA 220 is referenced in Chapter 12 of the Code. In addition, scattered through NFPA 1 are requirements related to construction type. Many of these are special exemptions depending on the construction type. For example in Chapter 28 (Marinas and Boatyards), if you have Type I or Type II construction (and no combustible contents) you are not required to provide an automatic fire-extinguishing system. NFPA 1 can also point out required construction types, for example in Chapter 21 (Airports and Heliports), airport terminals are required to be Type I, Type II or Type IV. NFPA 220 is the document that defines these types of construction. NFPA has 5 construction “Types” and 10 variations of those types, depending on the rating of specific construction elements. See below for an explanation and an example of NFPA's construction types. There is also a helpful table within NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code (Annex A.7.2.1.1) that compares the construction type labels used by NFPA, UBC, B/NBC, SBC and the IBC (See below). Thanks for reading. Happy Friday, stay safe! (you can follow both Tracy (@TracyNFPA) and I (@KristinB_NFPA) for additional fire safety information.)
NFPA has released a free 1st Responder Connection App for firefighters, EMS, command staff, wildland fire personnel, public educators and AHJs that offers in-the-palm-of-your-hand access to best practices, safety tips, and relevant emergency response content. Conversations with fire leaders and first responders over the past year consistently pointed to the need for easy digital access, via smartphone devices, to NFPA resources, interactive tools, and training that will help stakeholders stay current in their roles. The NFPA 1st Responder Connection App covers topics including: • Emerging issues – energy storage, alternative fuel vehicles and civil unrest • Public and worker safety – new fire hazards and confined space • Firefighter occupational health and wellness – contamination, cancer and cardiac issues• Firefighting technology and data – unmanned aerial systems, smart cities, biometrics and fire department tools• Educational tools – safety bulletins, tip sheets, training and at-risk audience engagement• Wildfire prevention and response – community mitigation, home ignition zone and trends • Standards and research – code enforcement, guidelines and reports The NFPA 1st Responder Connection App puts prevention, education and response tools in the hands of emergency responders so that they can continue to perform at a high level and meet the changing needs of society. Much like the industry it serves, the NFPA 1st Responder Connection App will continue to evolve and address new fire problems, hazards and solutions. Free download of the 1st Responder Connection App is available via Apple or Android today.
Photo courtesy of CNN According to an NBC News report, 12 people have died and 78 people were injured at Grenfell Tower, a high-rise residential building in West London, England, after a fire broke out at the 24-story apartment “block” early Wednesday morning. The cause of the fire, which reportedly spread quite rapidly, has not yet been determined; additional fatalities are expected. More than 250 firefighters and 40 fire trucks were on-scene, battling the fire through the night, and it has yet to be fully extinguished. NBC reports that Grenfell Tower has approximately 130 units; a BBC News article noted that the tower houses between 400 and 600 people. “In my 29 years of being a firefighter, I have never, ever seen anything of this scale,” said London Fire Brigade Commissioner Dany Cotton. “This is a major fire that's affected all floors of the 24-story structure from the second floor upwards.” A New York Times article reports that Grenfell Tower was constructed in 1974, and underwent a $12.8 million renovation that was completed last year, which included the installation of insulated exterior cladding and replacement windows. Whether those features contributed to the fire's quick spread has yet to be determined. Exterior cladding has been a contributing factor to high-rise fires in Dubai, including The Address Hotel fire that occurred on New Year's Eve in 2015. NFPA offers a wealth of resources on high-rise building fires, including statistical reports, investigation reports, emergency evacuation planning guides and more.
Today marks the one year anniversary of the attack at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando. At the NFPA, we honor the 49 innocent individuals that were taken that day by marking this week as the beginning of the development of NFPA 3000: Standard for Preparedness and Response to Active Shooter and/or Hostile Events. The Pulse incident, along with several others throughout the past year, highlight a need for first responders, emergency managers, facilities, hospitals, and communities as a whole to be on the same page when these incidents occur. The resilience displayed in places like Orlando, Boston, London, Connecticut, and many others show that we as a community can and must work together to ensure that we never allow terror or evil to win. NFPA 3000 will give communities a resource to be prepared in the event that the unthinkable happens. The process of developing NFPA 3000 began with a request by Fire Chief Otto Drozd III from Orange County Florida in October of 2016. Since then, we have sought public comment and committee applications to form a Technical Committee to develop the Standard. In just four short months we received over 100 positive comments and committee applications. In April of 2017, the NFPA Standards Council unanimously approved the new Standard and Technical Committee. The Technical Committee is chaired by Richard Serino, recently retired COO of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, former Chief of Boston EMS, and current faculty member at Harvard University. The Committee has representatives from the DHS, DOJ, FBI, International Association of Police Chiefs, International Association of Fire Chiefs, National Association of EMTs, IAFF, EMS Labor Alliance, Hospitals, Facility Managers, Private Security, Universities, and more. This broad group collectively brings over 200 years of experience to the table, many of which include experience responding to active shooter/hostile incidents. On June 9, 2017 Chief Drozd authored an editorial in the Orlando Sentinel highlighting his reasons for requesting that the Standard be developed. One important issue that he points out is that there are numerous guidance documents from individual organizations, but currently no consensus standard. He also speaks to the inspiration he felt in the aftermath of the Pulse attack and his motivation for wanting a tool for others to use so that more lives can be saved in the future. We honor those that were lost at the Pulse with this work and hope that others may live on thanks to the lessons learned and their memories. As Chief Drozd says, “So that Others May Live.” The NFPA and the Technical Committee need the help of the public to make this the best standard it can be. Anyone can come to a meeting or make inputs and comments to the draft once it is posted. If you would like to know more and follow along with the development of NFPA 3000, please go to www.nfpa.org/3000 and then click "receive email alerts" to receive updates on the development process as they are posted. Its a big world, let's protect it together! Page 10
A Nebraska grandmother, who lost family to fire, has launched a campaign stressing the importance of dual sensor smoke alarms. According to WOWT News, Jo Lynne Lehan's son's family had working smoke alarms the morning of a fire in their home, but not dual sensor. In October 2016, Michael and Michelle Speer, along with their four girls were killed in the fire. “No one should have to go through what our families have gone through, losing people we love,” Lehan is quoted as saying. An ionization smoke alarm, in general, is more responsive to flaming fires, and a photoelectric smoke alarm, in general, is more responsive to smoldering fires. For the best protection or where extra time is needed to awaken or assist others, both ionization smoke alarms and photoelectric smoke alarms or combination ionization-photoelectric alarms, also known as dual sensor smoke alarms, are recommended. Install smoke alarms in every sleeping room, outside each separate sleeping area, and on every level of the home, including the basement. Larger homes may require additional smoke alarms to provide a minimum level of protection. Interconnect all smoke alarms throughout the home for the best protection. When one sounds, they all sound. It is especially important to have interconnected smoke alarms if you sleep with doors closed. The smoke alarm section of the NFPA website, along with the smoke alarm safety tip sheet and community toolkit on smoke alarms provide additional safety information.
Many exciting changes are coming to the 2018 edition of NFPA 1, Fire Code, that will address a number of new technical topics as well as revise and expand on existing topics. Changes such as a completely revised and updated chapter on Energy Storage Systems, new requirements for mobile cooking operations (food trucks) and even a new chapter on marijuana growing, processing and extraction facilities reflect how the Fire Code stays up to date with industry needs and technological developments. New Chapter 38 will address the growing and processing of marijuana (which includes all forms of cannabis as well as hemp) in both new and existing buildings. It does not establish provisions for the retail sales of marijuana where growing and processing does not occur. You might be asking, "how did NFPA become involved in developing code requirements for marijuana buildings?" because yes, I have been asked that a bunch of times during this revision cycle. The background on how this new chapter came about is important to both understanding how codes and standards are developed and is also a prime example of how NFPA is responding to the immediate needs of its stakeholders. Photo from NFPA Journal Sept/Oct 2016 article "Welcome to the Jungle" In the fall of 2015, a member of the Fire Code Technical Committee was approached by an AHJ about the increase in these types of facilities in their jurisdiction and the need for a model code to provide guidance on how jurisdictions can protect them as well as keep those responding to fires in these facilities safe. These jurisdictions needed help, and NFPA 1 was a logical place to start. During the First Draft meeting, the NFPA 1 committee approved a Committee Input which introduced a draft of the new chapter. Throughout the year leading up to the Second Draft meeting a task group consisting of both committee members as well as industry professionals worked to refine and develop a revised draft of the chapter. This new Chapter 38 was presented to the fill NFPA 1 Technical Committee at their Second Draft Meeting last October and after additional work during the meeting was accepted as a Second Revision and will be included in the 2018 edition of NFPA 1 when it is approved by the Standards Council later this summer. Not every jurisdiction is dealing with these facilities. However, as a country, we are seeing more and more states who are legalizing the use of marijuana either recreationally or medically. To meet those demands, there are facilities, either built new or fit into an existing structure that have to grow and process the marijuana into the various products used by consumers. There needed to be a baseline for those responsible for inspecting and enforcement of these facilities. When developing the provisions for new Chapter 38, the task group was focused on addressing those hazards that are unique to marijuana growing and processing all while relying on existing provisions in the Code that may help contribute to the safety of the facility. For example, it was not the goal of the task group to rewrite egress provisions when NFPA 101 adequately addresses egress and is contained in Chapter 14 of NFPA 1, or to copy electrical requirements as those are already addressed by Chapter 11 and NFPA 70. The chapter is organized to address general provisions, provisions specific to growing and production, and those requirements specific to extraction processes. The extraction section is then split up by general provisions and then requirements specific to the extraction solvent, as follows: 38.1 Application 38.2 Permits 38.3 Fire Protection Systems 38.4 Means of Egress 38.5 Growing or Production of Marijuana (including ventilation, fumigation, and pesticide application) 38.6 Processing or Extraction General (extraction room, staffing, operator training, signage, equipment, approval for equipment with no listing, equipment field verifications) LP Gas Extraction Flammable and Combustible Liquids Extraction CO2 extraction Transfilling Those interested can view the current draft of NFPA 1 and view new Chapter 38 in its entirely. It is hopeful that the provisions introduced in this Chapter will help those jurisdictions faced with enforcing, inspecting and responding to incidents at marijuana processing and extraction facilities. NFPA is also offering additional resources for our stakeholders including educational sessions at this years NFPA Conference, journal articles, photos, and links to existing regulations used in some jurisdictions that also contributed to the development of NFPA 1 requirements. Check them out today! Thanks for reading, Happy Friday! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
For many, the month of May signals the home stretch of the school year. However, this shouldn't be a time to overlook required safety practices in the event an emergency should occur. Just this past Wednesday, a fire destroyed the Appleseed Academy school in Mesquite, Texas. A cause of the fire has not been determined but it is being reported that the building is a total loss. Fortunately, the building's fire alarm system notified the occupants and everyone was able to evacuate the building with no injuries. The school's director did confirm that students and staff participate in drills monthly, and are capable of evacuating the building in about two minutes.Emergency egress and relocation drills are required as mandated specifically by a particular occupancy in Chapter 20 of NFPA 1, Fire Code or in Chapters 11 through 42 of NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, or as deemed necessary by the local AHJ. Requirements for drills are extracted from NFPA 101 but are located in Chapter 10 in NFPA 1 under General Safety Requirements. Fire inspectors play an important role in regulating and managing drills in facilities throughout their jurisdiction, especially in schools. Drills should always be designed and conducted in cooperation with the local authorities as the procedure and details of drills will vary jurisdiction by jurisdiction. Factors such as occupant demographics and location may all impact the details of the drill. The purpose of emergency egress and relocation drills is to educate the participants in the fire safety features of the building, the egress facilities available, and the procedures to be followed. Speed in emptying buildings or relocating occupants, while desirable, is not the only objective. Prior to an evaluation of the performance of an emergency egress and relocation drill, an opportunity for instruction and practice should be provided. This educational opportunity should be presented in a nonthreatening manner, with consideration given to the prior knowledge, age, and ability of audience.Additionally, NFPA 1 also contains the following provisions for drills:Frequency: Drills are to be held at sufficient frequency so as to familiarize occupants with the drill procedure and to establish conduct of the drill as a matter of routine. Means should be provided so that all persons subject to the drill are able to participate.Orderly and organized: Emphasis should be placed on drills being orderly rather than focusing on the speed of the evacuation. When occupants are not organized and not aware of their responsibilities during the evacuation, drills can become inefficient and cluttered. This only leads to evacuation taking more time. Focusing on orderly evacuation will benefit all occupants by allowing a faster and more efficient evacuation to occur.Simulated conditions: Drills must be held at both expected and unexpected times and under varying conditions. As fire is always unexpected, if the drill is always held in the same way at the same time, it will lose its value and effectiveness.Relocation Area: Drill participants must relocated to a predetermined location and remain at the location until a recall or dismissal signal is given.Documentation: A written record of each drill is to be completed by the person responsible for conducting the drill and maintained in an approved manner. Included in the documentation should be information such as date, time, participants, location and results of the drill.Both new and existing educational occupancies, such as those facilities like the Appleseed Academy elementary school, mandate the conduct of emergency egress drills via Section 20.2.4.2 in the Code. They are required to comply with the provisions noted above from Section 10.5 as well as additional details from Section 20.2.4.2. Other occupancies may also supplement additional provisions for drills in their facilities in addition to whats required by 10.5. Drills in educational occupancies are required at the following frequency:Not less than one drill every month the school is in session (there are exemptions recognizing climates where weather is severe)One additional drill (other than schools open on a year round basis) is required within the first 30 days of operationFortunately, all students and staff at the Appleseed school were safe, in part thanks to the effective and diligent conduct of drills. Provisions from NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 can help ensure occupants well prepared for drills are also well prepared for emergencies. Thanks for reading, Happy Friday!
This past weekend I seemed to drive by property after property burning brush leftover from winter's damage. I even saw reports in my town of brush fires, perhaps from those taking advantage of the warm spring weather to burn. In Massachusetts, where permitted by the individual community, the season for open burning is Jan 1 through May 1 but this many vary in your state (Historically, April is the busiest month for brush fires in Massachusetts). Residents, or anyone, wishing to conduct an open burn should first contact their local fire department, regardless of location, to determine local requirements and restrictions for open burning in their town/state as provisions differ community by community. Per NFPA 1, Fire Code, permits are required to conduct open burning and should follow the provisions of Section 1.12 of the Code. By requiring permits for certain activities, the AHJ can ensure that operations are performed in a safe manner. Often times communities may limit the number of permits they issue so that the town can control the amount of burning that occurs as well as ensure they have adequate resources available should an emergency situation arise. Where the burning is conducted in public property or the property of someone other than the applicant, the applicant must demonstrate that permission has been given by the appropriate agency, owner or authorized agent. In addition, when limits for environmental conditions or hours restrict burning, the limits must be designated in the permit restrictions (example: check your local community for restrictions due to weather conditions or time restrictions where limited available fire fighting services may be available, and never assume that burning is permitted). Once an open fire is approved and permitted a few additional steps should be taken to ensure the burn stays confined and is done safely: Fires shall be located not less than 50 ft (15 m) from any structure. In the event that brands and embers are given off, or that the fire becomes out of control, the 50 ft (15 m) requirement provides some distance between the fire and the structures. Depending on conditions, the AHJ can increase this distance to provide adequate protection. Burning hours are to be prescribed by the AHJ. The AHJ can determine the hours that burning is to take place. Many jurisdictions permit burning hours during daylight hours and others only at night. The fire department and the dispatch center should be kept informed of where burning is taking place, because they may receive calls from surrounding residents reporting smoke or flames in the area. Open fires must be constantly attended by a competent person until the fire is extinguishes. The person is required to have a garden hose connected to the water supply or other fire-extinguishing equipment readily available for us. The presence of a competent person who has access to readily available fire-extinguishing equipment and knowledge of how to use that equipment is important to maintaining a safe outdoor fire. Outdoor fires frequently burn out of control because no one is in attendance to notify the fire department and to take action to prevent fire spread. The AHJ should establish guidelines for safe burning and can require fire apparatus to be present where the situation warrants. What regulations does your jurisdiction enforce around outdoor fires and burning? Have you been involved in a situation where a permitted burn got out of control and required the fire department? Thanks, for reading. Happy Friday, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Its the last day of March, and some of New England is forecast to get up to 8" of snow this weekend (luckily not where I live!) so maybe its best if I first reference this post about clearance around fire hydrants. Who knew we would be thinking about shoveling on March 31? But, let's not think about snow! Today, I wanted to feature a topic from NFPA 1, Fire Code, that falls under the portion of the Code's scope of access requirements for fire department operations. Elevators are an essential means for the fire service to access areas of a building during a fire. They can be especially important during fires in high-rise buildings. Per the Code, all new elevators are required to conform to the Fire Fighters Emergency Operations requirements of ASME A17.1/CSA B44, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalator which includes a provision that elevators must be equipped to operate with a standardized fire service access key. These keys provide access to the elevators so that the fire service is able to take control of the recalled elevators during an emergency and manually control them to move to the necessary floors for tactical needs. In addition to the requirement for number of elevator cars, protection of elevator machine rooms, and elevator testing which are extracted from NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, NFPA 1 provides its own provisions for standardized fire service elevator keys. The requirements of 11.3.6 mandate the standardization of fire service elevator keys to reduce the number of keys necessary for accessing elevators in an emergency. All new elevators must be equipped to use standard keys as approved by the AHJ, and all existing elevators with fire fighters' emergency operations must be retrofitted to use standard keys within 1 year of the adoption of the Code by the jurisdiction. Where the physical limitations of existing elevators do not permit such retrofit, the Code permits the installation of access boxes opened by standard fire department keys for the housing of nonstandard elevator keys. The access box must be compatible with an existing rapid-entry access box system in use in the jurisdiction and approved by the AHJ. The front cover of the access box is required to be permanently labeled with the words "Fire Department Use Only - Elevator Keys" and must be mounted at each elevator bank at the lobby nearest to the lowest level of fire department access at a location also approved by the AHJ. In buildings with two or more elevator banks, a single access box may be permitted if the banks are separated by not more than 30 ft (9140 mm). If they are separated by a distance greater than that, additional access boxes are needed. Where an access box is required and provided it is important that it be used only for its purpose to store elevator keys. Contents of the access box are limited to the keys only. Other items relevant to emergency planning or elevator access should only be stored in the access box where authorized by the AHJ. This prevents the access box from being used for any other purpose other than storing the keys. Extra materials can hinder the fire department's ability to quickly and efficiently access to the keys and may increase the risk that the keys go missing from the access box. You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
As the popularity of food trucks continues, so do concerns around the potential for fires and related hazards. NFPA has taken several steps in response to these issues, including the development of an updated food truck fact sheet, which maps out specific areas of the truck with corresponding tips and information on proper usage and maintenance. As for NFPA's codes and standards, NFPA 1, Fire Code®, NFPA 58, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code, NFPA 96, Ventilation Control and Fire Protection for Commercial Cooking Operations, and NFPA 1192, Standard for Recreational Vehicles, all contain requirements that contribute to addressing the fire safety hazards associated with mobile cooking operations, but there are other safety concerns that are not currently addressed in these existing documents. Consequently, the International Fire Marshals Association (IFMA) created a task group, which developed 16 pages of content covering permits, portable fire extinguishers, separation, communication, training, generators, wood burning and LP-gas to submit as a new chapter in NFPA 1 and NFPA 96. (To view this document, visit www.nfpa.org/foodtrucksafety.) The NFPA 1 Technical Committee, which worked to incorporate the language IFMA submitted into the Fire Code, met last October for its Second Draft Meeting. NFPA 1 will be discussed and the Certified Amending Motions will be voted on by the membership at the 2017 NFPA Conference and Exposition in Boston, MA, this June. Meanwhile, the Technical Committee responsible for NFPA 96 developed a task group to incorporate the existing requirements within NFPA 96 as they applied to temporary cooking operations. The addition of mobile and temporary cooking operations is now Annex B of the 2017 edition of NFPA 96. (NFPA 96 provides the minimum fire safety requirements - preventative and operative - related to the design, installation, operation, inspection and maintenance of all public and private cooking operations.) Revisions included requirements for clearance, exhaust hoods, exhaust duct systems, fire-extinguishing equipment, training for employees, solid fuel cooking, egress, communication protocol, as well as fire department access and procedures for inspection, testing and maintenance of cooking equipment. Many of these requirements and recommendations are reflected the new fact sheet, which can be downloaded for free. Page 11
It's been a busy week in fire news. Earlier this week an eight alarm fire, fueled by high winds and dry conditions, devastated a neighborhood in Overland Park, Kansas. The fast-moving fire destroyed one four-story apartment building, damaged another and sparked additional fires at 17 single-family residences nearby. This past Wednesday, March 22, about 20 minutes from NFPA, a seven alarm fire tore through an abandoned warehouse in Rockland, MA. The fire was contained to the warehouse but forced the evacuation of 20 nearby homes. Both fires highlight the importance of two requirements in NFPA 1, Fire Code; safeguards during construction and fires in vacant/abandoned buildings. Another important issue and often a contributor to these fires, is smoking. According to NFPA's report. "The Smoking-Material Fire Problem" published in July 2013: There were an estimated 90,000 smoking-material fires in the United States in 2011. These fires caused 540 civilian deaths, 1,640 civilian injuries and $621 million in direct property damage. One out of four fatal victims of smoking-material fires is not the smoker whose cigarette started the fire. Most deaths result from fires that started in bedrooms (40%), or in living rooms, family rooms or dens (35%). Nearly half (46%) fatal home smoking-material fire victims were age 65 or older. Home structure fires dominated all these measures of fire loss in 2011 except for fire incidents. In 2011, an estimated 17,600 smoking-material home structure fires caused 490 civilian deaths (19% of all home structure fire deaths), 1,370 civilian injuries and $516 million in direct property damage. The other 72,400 smoking-material fires in 2011 were mostly outdoor fires (60,200 fires in trash, vegetation and other outdoor combustibles). It is clear that smoking materials are still a major part of the problem in the United States. For the purposes of NFPA 1, Fire Code, smoking is defined as carrying lighted pipes, cigars, cigarettes, tobacco, or any other lighted type of smoking substance through an area. People might mistakenly believe that they actually have to be smoking a tobacco product in order to violate the non-smoking designation. Certain areas are often designated as non-smoking areas because of the presence of combustible materials or the possible presence of flammable vapors or gas. Carrying lighted tobacco products through, or depositing them in, non-smoking areas can be as dangerous as actually using the products in proximity to such materials, vapors, or gases. NFPA 1 addresses provisions for smoking in Section 10.9 of the Code. Both fire code officials as well as building owners/staff play an important role in making sure that smoking is controlled and regulated at a building site. Where smoking is considered a fire hazard, the AHJ is authorized to order the owner in writing to post "No Smoking" signs in conspicuous, desigated, locations where smoking is prohibited. The “No Smoking” sign should be large enough to be readily seen, and either the sign or the lettering on the sign should be of a color that contrasts with the background of the location where it is posted. The sign text also needs to be in languages appropriate for the building occupants. In areas where smoking is permitted, noncombustible ashtrays must be provided to reduce the likelihood of the careless disposal of smoking materials igniting combustible materials in the area. Finally, the removal or destruction of any required "No Smoking" sign is prohibited. AHJs will be looking for appropriate signage when performing inspections. Building owners and/or staff should be aware of the signage location and make sure that signage is being maintained. Smoking or depositing any lighted or smoldering substance in a place where required "No Smoking" signs are posted is prohibited. Are designated smoking areas hard to control in your building? How have you as the AHJ or building owner had to address code violations related to smoking? Have you had a fire occur from smoking materials? Happy Friday! Stay safe!
photo credit to Kctv5 Three major fires this year have cast a spotlight on fires in apartments under construction and a need for the safety measures defined in codes and standards like NFPA 241: Standard for Safeguarding Construction, Alteration, and Demolition Operations which is referenced in both NFPA 1: Fire Code and the International Fire Code. In early February, fire ripped through an upscale apartment complex under construction in Maplewood, New Jersey. Over 120 firefighters fought the blaze that destroyed roughly two-thirds of the 235-unit complex. Last week, Raleigh, North Carolina experienced their biggest fire in the downtown area in nearly a century, when fire quickly consumed a five-story apartment building and damaged nine buildings in total. Then yesterday, an eight alarm inferno, fueled by high winds and dry conditions, devastated a neighborhood in Overland Park, Kansas. The fast-moving fire destroyed one four-story apartment building, damaged another and sparked additional fires at 17 single-family residences nearby. The common thread for these fires? Each took place in wood-framed apartment complexes that were under construction. Without passive fire protection measures like sheetrock and other finishes installed yet, flames quickly spread to exposed lumber and plywood causing extensive damage to the apartment buildings and abutting structures. In Raleigh, news outlets reported that the 240-unit Metropolitan apartment complex had been inspected nearly 50 times, with the most recent visit occurring just three days before Thursday's fire. So what were inspectors using as a guidepost? The building plan? Or the building's overall fire safety program, as required in NFPA 241? Organizations like the American Wood Council have proactively emphasized the importance of building and life safety codes during construction, as wood-clad design and sustainable products grow in popularity. NFPA 241, in particular, ensures that fire safety standards are maintained throughout the building process. It requires building owners to create an overall construction fire safety program and designate a fire prevention manager to oversee all fire-prevention efforts during construction. Key considerations of NFPA 241 include: The development of a program that includes on-site security, fire protection systems, organization and training of a fire brigade, and the establishment of a pre-fire plan with the local fire department. The owner is required to appoint a person who is responsible for the fire prevention program and ensure that it is carried out to completion. This individual will have knowledge of the applicable fire protection standards, available fire protection systems, and fire inspection procedures. Where guard service is provided, the fire prevention program manager will be responsible for that guard service. The role entails many other responsibilities including weekly self-inspections and records management, adequate provision of fire protection devices and maintenance of such equipment, proper training in the use of fire protection equipment and the supervision of the permit system. These recent incidents demonstrate that the threat of fire is real on construction sites and when jobs feature combustible construction. The current issue of NFPA Journal® looks at these two factors in the article, Burned Again about real estate developer Avalon Bay, owners of the New Jersey complex that burned earlier this year and two other communities that have experienced large fires since 2000. An NFPA research report shows that U.S. fire departments responded to an estimated average of 830 fires in multi-unit residential properties under construction. These fires caused an estimated average of 12 civilian injuries, 70 firefighter injuries, and $56 million in direct property damage per year.
It's a scenario we've seen time and time again: occupants unable to escape a burning building because of locked egress doors. A fundamental tenet of the Life Safety Code is free egress; occupants must be able to get out of the building without the use of any keys, tools, special knowledge, or effort (with a handful of exceptions). The Code has its roots in fires such as the historic Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in New York City on March 25, 1911, which killed 146 garment workers, most of them young, immigrant women, who were unable to escape because the owners locked the stairwell doors. And just a week ago, 40 teenage girls died in a Guatemala youth shelter fire when the girls were locked in a classroom during a series of disturbances. The Code is very clear: an occupant must be able to open an egress door with not more than one latch and/or lock releasing operation (residential dwelling units can have two operations, or three if existing). Operation of the releasing mechanism must be readily obvious under all lighting conditions, including no light. If you encounter anything other than this arrangement, it needs to be closely looked at. Only a few exceptions to the free egress rule exist in NFPA 101. The most obvious applies to detention and correctional occupancies, which are sub-classified based on five “use conditions.” Depending on the use condition, certain doors can be locked against egress. Additional life safety features must be provided commensurate with the use condition. Related to detention and correctional occupancies, some other occupancies are permitted to have lockups to temporarily secure occupants (e.g., a holding cell in a police station that does not meet the criteria of a full-fledged detention and correctional occupancy). Assuming the youth home in Guatemala was classified as a dormitory, Chapter 29 permits lockups in existing hotels and dormitories, subject to the special lockup provisions in 23.4.5. Lockup requirements vary and can include: staff training and capability to quickly release locks, detention-grade hardware on locked doors, automatic smoke detection, and automatic emergency forces notification. Similarly, doors in health care occupancies (hospitals, nursing homes, and limited care facilities) have long been permitted to be locked in the direction of egress for patient and staff safety based on patient clinical needs. Examples include locking doors in the direction of egress in a psychiatric or dementia care unit. In such cases, staff must be able to readily unlock doors and undergo regular training as part of the facility's emergency action plan. More recently, in the 2009 edition, the Code introduced provisions to allow locking of egress doors in health care occupancies for “patient special needs.” These criteria are intended to address the need to lock doors from newborn nurseries to prevent infant abductions. The provisions include a series of enhanced life safety features to ensure the locks can be quickly released in the event of an emergency. Other exceptions to the free egress rule include special locking arrangements: delayed-egress locking systems (which will be known as “delayed-egress electrical locking systems” in the 2018 edition – 7.2.1.6.1), access-controlled egress door assemblies (which will be known as “sensor-release of electrical locking systems” – 7.2.1.6.2), and elevator lobby exit access door assemblies locking (7.2.1.6.3). Where these special locking arrangements are utilized, the additional life safety requirements that accompany them must also be implemented. Ensuring egress doors are not compromised needs to be a top priority. Don't be misled into thinking that security takes precedence over life safety. The Code recognizes the need for balance; see the special locking provisions described above. They can effectively enhance security while still maintained the needed level of life safety from fire. Coming in the 2018 edition, the Code will provide criteria for locking devices to prevent unwanted entry in locations such as school classrooms, recognizing the modern threat of active shooter scenarios. Like the other special locking arrangements, the use of such devices will also require a series of life safety requirements to be met. Honor the lives lost in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory and the Guatemala youth shelter by being vigilant in the enforcement of, and compliance with, the Code's free egress provisions. Thanks for reading. And as always, stay safe. Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH
I don't find March too appealing. It's a long, cold month. Today it has barely reached 32 degrees with a balmy windchill of 22 degrees here in Quincy, MA. Last week us New Englanders were soaking up the sun and near record heat. How quickly things change up here! Good thing spring is on its way. What better time to conduct maintenance on fire protection systems or check compliance with Fire Code requirements. Today's focus is provisions for portable fire extinguishers. One of the more common questions I get about fire extinguishers is "where are they required?" Section 13.6 of NFPA 1, Fire Code, addresses the provisions for portable fire extinguishers. Most of the requirements are extracted from NFPA's source document for this equipment which is NFPA 10. The provisions for selection, installation, inspection, maintenance, recharging and testing of portable fire extinguishers all resides in NFPA 10 and is extracted info the Fire Code. However, within the section extracted from NFPA 10 is Section 13.6.1.2 which determines first where fire extinguishers are required, and is governed by NFPA 1: 13.6.1.2* Where Required. Fire extinguishers shall be provided where required by this Code as specified in Table 13.6.1.2and the referenced codes and standards listed in Chapter 2. Portable fire extinguishers are required by the Code to be installed in the occupancies specified by Table 13.6.1.2. The Code requires portable fire extinguishers in buildings of every occupancy classification other than one- and two-family dwellings, whereas NFPA 101 requires portable fire extinguishers in far fewer occupancies. The different requirements of NFPA 1 and NFPA 101 are sometimes, incorrectly, perceived as a conflict, but they are not. The scope of NFPA 1 includes occupant safety, emergency responder safety, and property protection; the scope of NFPA 101 is limited to occupant life safety. The broader scope of NFPA 1 warrants different protection requirements — in this case, more stringent requirements than those of NFPA 101 for the installation of portable fire extinguishers. By meeting the more stringent requirements for portable fire extinguishers of NFPA 1, the requirements of NFPA 101 are also met. A conflict would exist only if one code required portable fire extinguishers and another code prohibited them. Do you require portable fire extinguishers in your facility? What common issues have you seen with the portable fire extinguishers? Training? Inspection? Recharging? Thanks for reading. Happy Friday! Download our free fire extinguisher resource to see which occupancies require extinguishers and where they should be placed within them.
You'll sometimes hear users of the Life Safety Code refer to hazardous areas, protection from hazards, special hazards, and other variations on the same theme. So what exactly is a hazardous area and what sort of protection does it need? The answer, as in the majority of cases when we're talking about codes, is: “It depends.” Remember that NFPA 101 predicates its requirements on the risk to a building's occupants, which varies depending on occupant characteristics. Workers in an office building have different characteristics with regard to life safety than, say, patients in a hospital. Because occupant risks vary from occupancy to occupancy, so do hazardous area protection requirements. In general, any area having a degree of fire hazard greater than that normally associated with the general occupancy is considered a hazardous area, as described in Section 8.7 of the 2015 edition of NFPA 101. You don't necessarily need a room full of flammable liquids to be considered a hazardous area. In fact, in many cases, a storage room with ordinary combustibles is considered a hazardous area due to the concentrated fuel load. The occupancy chapters list specific areas that must be protected as hazardous areas. In all cases, the AHJ can also judge an area to be hazardous and mandate the requisite protection. Where an area is deemed to hazardous, it can be protected by one of three means: Separation from the remainder of the building by 1-hour fire barriers Installation of automatic sprinklers and separation by smoke partitions (some existing occupancies exempt the smoke partitions) A combination of fire barriers and sprinklers where the hazard is deemed to be severe The occupancy-specific hazardous area protection requirements are usually in the X.3.2 subsection of the applicable occupancy chapter, where X is the chapter number. If we want to determine the protection requirements for a storage room in a new business occupancy, we would go to 38.3.2 and see the following: 38.3.2.1* General. Hazardous areas including, but not limited to, areas used for general storage, boiler or furnace rooms, and maintenance shops that include woodworking and painting areas shall be protected in accordance with Section 8.7. Based on the usual life safety characteristics of business occupants, a storage room can be protected by any of the means described in Section 8.7. This gives the designer the choice of providing a 1-hour separation, or providing automatic sprinklers with a smoke partition separation. Either method will provide the necessary protection. On the other hand, if we wanted to know the protection requirements for a storage room in a new hospital, we would go to 18.3.2 and find the following: 18.3.2.1.2 The following areas shall be considered hazardous areas and shall be protected by fire barriers having a minimum 1-hour fire resistance rating in accordance with Section 8.3: (1) Boiler and fuel-fired heater rooms (2) Central/bulk laundries larger than 100 ft2 (9.3 m2) (3) Paint shops employing hazardous substances and materials in quantities less than those that would be classified as a severe hazard (4) Physical plant maintenance shops (5) Rooms with soiled linen in volume exceeding 64 gal (242 L) (6) Rooms with collected trash in volume exceeding 64 gal (242 L) (7) Storage rooms larger than 100 ft2 (9.3 m2) and storing combustible material If the storage room is larger than 10 ft X 10 ft and contains combustibles, it needs to be separated from the remainder of the hospital by 1-hr fire barriers; and, by the way, it will also require automatic sprinklers because all new health care occupancies must be fully sprinklered. The requirement for 1-hour separation and sprinklers implies that storage of combustibles in a hospital poses a severe hazard to the occupants due to their inability to self-evacuate in the event of a fire. High-hazard contents are those materials in a building that are subject to very rapid fire development or pose an explosion hazard. Protection of high-hazard contents usually involves reviewing the code or standard that applies to the specific hazard (e.g., NFPA 30 for the protection of flammable and combustible liquids). It's important to note that NFPA 101 currently only considers fire hazard; other hazards, such as health and physical hazards (e.g., corrosives and radiological hazards) are not addressed by the Code. The upcoming 2018 edition of NFPA 101 will start to introduce broader hazardous material protection requirements – stay tuned. In summary, to determine whether an area is a hazardous area requiring any special protection, the occupancy classification must be known, and the appropriate occupancy-specific requirements must be reviewed. If there's ever a question, the general provisions in Section 8.7 always apply such that if the AHJ believes an area is a hazardous area, it's a hazardous area. Where separation by fire barriers or smoke partitions are required, the doors have to meet the applicable requirements, and always need to be self-closing – no wooden wedges! Be sure to protect those hazardous areas. If you do, you'll – stay safe! Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH Page 12
The full video is available for free here when logged into Xchange.Fire barrier walls and fire door assemblies carry a fire rating. Fire barrier walls receive a fire resistance rating based on fire testing in accordance with ASTM E119 or UL 263. Fire door assemblies receive a fire protection rating based on fire testing in accordance with NFPA 252, UL 10B or UL 10C.The terms ‘fire resistance rating' and ‘fire protection rating' are different and not interchangeable as fire barrier walls are held to a different performance level than fire door assemblies. For example, in the fire test for walls, there is a failure point where too much heat is transmitted through the wall, to the unexposed side, establishing the potential for the ignition of combustible contents. In the fire test for doors, there is no criterion for limiting heat transmission through the door as combustibles should not be stacked against the door.Some fire door assemblies are tested like walls. Where the door assembly meets all the fire test criteria applicable to walls, the fire door assembly receives a fire resistance rating and can be used to satisfy code requirements for a wall. Regardless of whether the fire door assembly carries a fire protection rating or a fire resistance rating, it must be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with the applicable standards.Relative to health care occupancies, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require compliance with the 2012 edition of NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code® as a condition of participation in the Medicare and Medicaid Programs. NFPA 101-2012, in turn, requires fire door assemblies to be installed, tested and maintained in accordance with NFPA 80-2010, Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives. NFPA 80 requires fire door assemblies to be inspected and tested yearly.Not all doors in a health care occupancy are required to be fire rated. So, do you know how to determine if a door is required to be fire rated? Whether an existing door assembly is fire rated? Whether the fire-rated door is code-compliant? If a wall is required to be fire rated, the doors in that wall are typically required to be fire rated. But there are exceptions to every rule. For example, a health care occupancy smoke barrier is required to be fire rated, but the cross-corridor smoke barrier doors are not required to be rated as it is important, for day-to-day function, that the door not have a latch. All fire protection-rated door assemblies are required to be latching.To ensure an efficient review of fire-rated doors, it's important to prepare an inventory of all the fire-rated doors in your facility; conduct the yearly inspection and testing of those doors; perform any required maintenance; and prepare and retain records. It is these records that CMS or accreditation agency surveyors will require you to produce at time of survey.For more detailed information on fire door ratings, watch the full video clip for free when you login or register for NFPA Xchange. It was taped during a one-day NFPA 101/NFPA 80 training hosted by NFPA and the Door Security & Safety Foundation (DSSF). Additional trainings, to be held in the coming months, will address the following issues:• door types encountered in a health care facility• door locking means permitted• thirteen verification points required for the yearly inspection of swinging fire door assemblies• the skills required to serve as the qualified person permitted to perform inspection and testing in accordance with NFPA 80Here are the dates: March 6, 2017 - NFPA Headquarters, Quincy, MAMay 15, 2017 - NFPA Headquarters, Quincy, MAJuly 10, 2017 - NFPA Headquarters, Quincy, MAOctober 5, 2017 - NFPA Headquarters, Quincy, MADecember 4, 2017 - NFPA Headquarters, Quincy, MA
This past Monday, February 13, a fire broke out in the Mickey & Friends parking garage at Disneyland in Anaheim, CA. The fire was reported to officials prior to 5 p.m. While the exact source of the fire is still under investigation, news sources are reporting that officials have targeted one or two vehicles where the fire may have started. The fire resulted in damages to 8 vehicles that reported direct damage from the fire or indirectly from radiant heat at a cost of at least $180,000. Seven Disney employees were sent to the hospital to be treated for smoke inhalation. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 29, addresses protection requirements for new and existing parking garages. Chapter 29 covers parking garages or structures that include buildings, structures, or portions thereof used for the parking or storage, or both, of motor vehicles. Parking structures come in many forms and are permitted to be enclosed or open, to use ramps, and to use mechanical control push button–type elevators to transfer vehicles from one floor to another. Motor vehicles are permitted to be parked by the driver or an attendant and are permitted to be parked mechanically in automatic facilities. Chapter 29 is a short chapter. In fact it only has three subsections and makes use of references to other expert documents on the topic of parking structures. As stated in Chapter 29 of the Code: 29.1.1 The protection of new and existing parking garages, as well as the control of hazards in open parking structures, enclosed parking structures, and basement and underground parking structures shall comply with this chapter and Section 42.8 of NFPA 101. 29.1.2 Construction and protection of new parking garages shall also comply with NFPA 88A, Standard for Parking Structures. 29.1.3 Chapter 29 shall not apply to parking garages in one- and two-family dwellings. Section 42.8 in NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, address the life safety requirements for parking garages (structures) which NFPA 88A covers the construction and protection of, as well as the control of hazards in, open and enclosed parking structures. NFPA 88A does not apply to one- and two-family dwellings. Parking structures have some unique characteristics that are considered in the requirements contained in NFPA 101 and NFPA 88A: High fuel load due to the presence of fuel in vehicles. May or may not have a high number of occupants present. (examples: A parking garage in a city that serves commuters may only have a higher occupant load during peak work travel times, such as 8 am and 5 pm while the rest of the day the occupant load is very low. A parking garage in Disneyland has a much higher rate of turnover and will experience a more consistent occupant load during operating hours.) Vertical openings. Parking structures are built as one big vertical openings with floors being connected by ramp systems. This could allow for smoke and fire to spread quickly. Openness. Many parking structures are open to the outside air which aids with natural ventilation of fire and smoke. Those that are enclosed require additional protection measures. Unfamiliarity of occupants. I can never find my way out of a parking garage. I follow signs for stairs and exits and always seem to get lost. I can't be the only one! Fortunately, we do not seem to hear about fires in parking structures all that often. Our codes and standards do their job in protecting occupants and property and provide adequate access for fire department operations such that these occupancies do not tend to be in the spotlight. Fortunately, when a fire does occur in a parking structure, fire protection systems and the fire department are usually able to do their job quickly and with minimal damage. Happy Friday, stay safe! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
In New England, February brings the heart of winter. A balmy 20 degrees, a fresh 12" of blizzard blown snow, and 50 mph winds. What more can we ask for? For those of you in the warmth and sunshine, I envy you. Unfortunately, winter comes with its share of safety hazards, especially during and after a snowstorm. A few weeks ago I wrote about the importance of digging out fire hydrants and providing adequate clearance for fire department operations. I checked this morning and all hydrants in my neighborhood are clear, another snowstorm success! While a hazard all year round, another hazard especially present during the cold winter months is carbon monoxide. During and after a snowstorm, vents for dryers, furnaces, stoves and fireplaces can become blocked by the pile up of snow. Generators may be used when there is a loss of power. People often warm up their vehicles in advance. Heating equipment is used more frequently and could malfunction or may be used in unsafe locations. All of these situations pose a threat to the development of CO. In 2010, U.S. fire departments responded to an estimated 80,100 non-fire CO incidents in which carbon monoxide was found, or an average of nine such calls per hour. The number of incidents increased 96 percent from 40,900 incidents reported in 2003. This increase is most likely due to the increased use of CO detectors, which alert people to the presence of CO. (source: Non-Fire Carbon Monoxide Incidents," by Ben Evarts, March 2012.) NFPA 1, Fire Code, requires carbon monoxide detection equipment in certain scenarios. These requirements are included in NFPA 1, but are extracted from NFPA 101, Life Safety Code. Even though they are governed by another Code, being aware of CO equipment provisions is extremely important for a fire inspector and AHJ, as well as for consumers and residents. Per NFPA 1,2015 edition, the following provisions apply: 13.7.1.14 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detection and Warning Equipment. Where required by another section of this Code, carbon monoxide (CO) detection and warning equipment shall be provided in accordance with NFPA 720, Standard for the Installation of Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detection and Warning Equipment. [101:9.12] Paragraph 13.7.1.14 provides a reference to NFPA 720, Standard for the Installation of Carbon Monoxide (CO) Detection and Warning Equipment, where such equipment is mandated by another section of the Code. It should be noted that not all occupancies are required to be provided with carbon monoxide (CO) detection and warning equipment. Such equipment is not currently required by the Code to be installed in any existing occupancy; its use is generally limited to new occupancies in which occupants might be asleep or otherwise have decreased capability of self-preservation and where vehicles, combustion equipment, or appliances are present. The occupancies requiring CO detection and warning equipment are as follows: 1. New educational occupancies (13.7.2.3.4) 2. New day-care homes (16.6.3.4.5 of NFPA 101) 3. New and existing health care occupancies containing fireplaces (18.5.2.3 and 19.5.2.3 of NFPA 101) 4. New one- and two-family dwellings (13.7.2.13.2) 5. New lodging or rooming houses (13.7.2.14.6) 6. New hotels and dormitories (13.7.2.15.6) 7. New apartment buildings (13.7.2.17.6) Exhibit 13.26 from the NFPA 1 Handbook illustrates an example of a CO alarm. It is important to note that all CO detectors and alarms have a limited service life — typically about 5 to 10 years. CO detection equipment must be replaced at the end of its service life; the recommended replacement date is required by NFPA 720 to be marked on the device. The requirements for CO detection and warning equipment are not based on safety to life from fire considerations. Rather, they are intended to mitigate the risk to building occupants posed by exposure to CO gas, which is a natural product of incomplete combustion of hydrocarbon fuels. Where combustion gases from equipment in a building (such as a fuel-fired furnace) are not properly vented, or where CO gas infiltrates a building from a space like an attached garage, occupants are at risk of CO poisoning. CO gas is sometimes referred to as the silent killer because it is colorless and odorless. Without CO detection and warning equipment, as required by the Code, its presence is virtually impossible to detect. For additional information on carbon monoxide check out NFPA's safety resources, including a tip sheet, toolkit, facts and figures and research report. Happy Friday! Stay safe...and warm!
A few weeks ago, in my #101Wednesdays post about escape rooms, I talked about the importance of not locking occupants in buildings. Quite simply, when people are locked in buildings and a fire occurs, they have a tendency to die. So the Life Safety Code goes to great lengths to ensure occupants have the ability to open doors and get out of the building when they need to. (There are, of course, exceptions for occupancies like detention and correctional and health care, where occupants are secured in the building for their safety and ours.) The Code does, however, recognize the need to secure doors in the closed position, and that's fine as long as people can easily get out. Thus we have the requirements for door locks and latches in 7.2.1.5 of NFPA 101 (you can review them online, for free ). In summary, occupants must be able to open an egress door with not more than one simple operation, without the use of keys, tools, special knowledge or effort, and under all lighting conditions, including no light. Traditionally, doors have been secured closed mechanically; go up to the door, operate the releasing mechanism which mechanically retracts the latch, and the door opens. These days, thanks to Alexander Hamilton's invention of electricity* (that was for my daughter), doors can be secured closed by electronic means, using electromagnets and electronic control hardware. Instead of mechanically releasing a latch, the occupant operates a releasing switch, which sends a signal to the control hardware, which in turn drops the power to the electromagnet and allows the door to open. From the occupant's perspective, this door operates the same as a door with mechanical latching hardware. Mechanical latches are pretty simple – not a lot of opportunity for failure. Electronic systems are more complicated and have more potential failure modes, so the Code needs to address them. The requirements for electrically controlled egress doors are located in 7.2.1.5.6 of NFPA 101. Six criteria are specified: (1) The hardware for occupant release of the lock must be affixed to the door leaf. (2) The hardware must have an obvious method of operation that is readily operated in the direction of egress. (3) The hardware must be capable of being operated with one hand in the direction of egress. (4) Operation of the hardware must interrupt the power supply directly to the electric lock and unlock the door assembly in the direction of egress. (5) Loss of power to the listed releasing hardware must automatically unlock the door assembly in the direction of egress. (6) Hardware for new installations must be listed in accordance with ANSI/UL 294, Standard for Access Control System Units. Where these criteria are met, the door should operate just like any other egress door, and it is not considered a special locking arrangement. Special locking arrangements are addressed in 7.2.1.6; I'll discuss those in a future post. Just yesterday, I had an advisory service call about electronic locks. I knew immediately what the caller was going to say – I hear it all the time. “I have a door that's locked with an electromagnet. To get into the facility, you swipe a key-card and the door unlocks.” No problem, NFPA 101 doesn't care about occupants' ability to get into the building - only their ability to get out. Caller: “It's also tied into the fire alarm system, so the magnet will release when there's a fire.” To which I replied, “I see. And how does someone get out under normal conditions?” Caller: “Oh, they have to swipe a key-card.” Me: “I see. What if they don't have their key-card?” Caller: “Well, it will unlock if the fire alarm goes off.” Me: “What if the fire alarm doesn't go off for some reason?” Caller: “Oh, there's a push-to-exit button on the wall by the door.” President Trump: “WRONG!” While this might sound like a compliant arrangement, it's not, because to open the door, an occupant would need to know about the push-to-exit button, which might not be visible in an emergency if the lights go out (special knowledge). The door has to be able to be opened by releasing hardware attached to the door leaf, which is typical of mechanically latched doors, and is a requirement for electrically controlled egress doors. Another question we sometimes get relates to standby power. If the electronic locking system is provided with standby or emergency power, are the doors required to unlock if the building loses power? The answer is no, as long as the system functions like it's supposed to when powered by an alternate source. If the electronic system loses primary power and there's no backup, the locks are required to fail-safe – that is, unlock. The Life Safety Code got its start as the Building Exits Code; I can't overemphasize the need to provide building occupants with free egress. If the provisions I've described here are followed, security can be provided without sacrificing life safety. I hope you'll return for a future installment of #101Wednesdays. Until then, stay safe! *IMPORTANT HISTORICAL ACCURACY DISCLAIMER: For all you 8th graders doing your science fair projects on egress doors, Alexander Hamilton didn't invent electricity. As we all know, Hamilton was a hip-hop artist who founded the American financial system and died in 1804, years before the invention of electricity by Al Gore, who also invented the Internet. #ItsMyBlogICanHaveFunIfIWant Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH
The topic of vacant buildings seems minute in the scale of the Fire Code provisions, and the provisions can often be overlooked. However, vacant buildings, especially those of combustible construction, pose a hazard to adjacent exposures, fire fighters, and the community and can often be the scene for disastrous fires during the cold winter months. For example, 6 fire fighters in Worcester, Massachusetts, died on December 3,1999 fighting a fire in an abandoned cold storage warehouse. Two Chicago, Illinois, fire fighters died while fighting a fire in an abandoned warehouse on December 22, 2010. Section 10.12, NFPA 1, Fire Code, requires that every person owning or having charge or control of any vacant building, premises, or portion thereof shall remove all combustible storage, waste, refuse, and vegetation and is required to lock, barricade, or otherwise secure the building or premises to prohibit entry by unauthorized persons. Reducing the fuel load in a vacant building (buildings used on a seasonal basis are exempt) is critical because, in the event of a fire, little or no combustible contents should contribute to the spread of the fire. In addition, vacant buildings are subject to vandalism and arson and, therefore, must be kept secure by placing substantial barricades on all doors, windows, and other openings at all levels where access can be gained. All fire protection systems must be maintained in service in seasonal and vacant buildings unless otherwise approved by the AHJ. (With the approval of the AHJ, fire protection and fire alarm systems in these buildings may be removed from service, see Section 10.12.2.1) All fire protection systems, including fire alarm, sprinkler, and standpipe systems, and all associated waterflow and supervisory alarm systems must be maintained in a manner acceptable to the AHJ. The maintenance of the associated alarm systems and supervisory systems is important to ensure that they are monitored properly and have the ability to transmit alarms when needed. Vacant buildings of totally fire-resistant construction that are void of any combustible contents and that pose no hazard to exposures might be exempt from maintaining fire alarm, sprinkler, and standpipe systems where approved by the AHJ. The AHJ may also require other systems or components pertaining to fire protection to also be maintained. This might include fire doors, fire barriers and other passive or active systems. Finally, the AHJ has the authority to require an inspection and test of any fire protection system or fire alarm system that has been out of service for 30 days before restored back into service. Whenever a fire protection system is shut off for an extended period of time, an inspection and test of the system for system integrity are necessary before the system is put back in service. When any system is out of service, the potential exists for damage or vandalism that might not be detected until the system is tested. Moral of the story...don't neglect vacant and seasonal buildings. Even though they may not be occupied, they still pose a threat to firefighters and the environment around them. Following the guidelines of the Code will help make sure these buildings stay on the radar and are properly maintained. You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Page 13
Confined space hazards know no borders. Less than two weeks after three workers died in a confined space in Florida, four workers died from atmospheric hazards while preparing to clean a sewage pit at a Bangkok market on Thursday. The same story-just a different country. The incident occurred in a Bangkok marker area where workers were about to carry out maintenance on a 3 meter deep sewage pit. The first worker opened the cover, leaned over, and likely was overcome by the atmospheric hazard and fell into the space. A second worker entered in an attempt to save the first worker. A third worker entered and also became non-responsive. His brother proceeded to enter to try to save him, making him the fourth victim. A team of rescue workers arrived on scene and assumed that four men had been electrocuted while cleaning the pit. After turning off the power to the entire market, one rescue worker proceeded to enter the space on a rope but without a proper respirator such as an airline respirator or an SCBA. The rescue worker passed out but fortunately was pulled to safety using the rope. Without that rope, he likely would have become victim number 5. This first fatality that started this incident began before the first worker had even entered the space. NFPA 350 Guide for Safe Confined Space Entry and Work discusses "adjacent space" hazards that occur in the vicinity of confined spaces and provides safe practices to prevent incidents such as this from occurring. Note- these recent tragedies have authorities across the country looking to NFPA to learn more about the codes, standards and safety practices related to confined space entry. NFPA offers an online confined space training series for those that design, work in, or supervise a facility that has one or more confined spaces. Content is ideal for facility managers, risk managers, safety directors, architects, engineers, industrial hygienists, construction workers, and technicians.
A few week's ago I wrote about NFPA 1's requirement to provide automatic sprinkler protection for new buildings housing emergency fire, rescue, or ambulance services. In addition to that requirement, there are many other instances in the Code where sprinkler protection is mandated. Section 13.3.2 of NFPA 1, Fire Code, addresses those scenarios. As NFPA 1 extracts from 50+ other NFPA codes and standards, the requirements for sprinkler protection may also be included elsewhere. However, Section 13.3.2 is where to start to determine if a building/structure needs sprinklers. The first subsection, 13.3.2.1 reminds users that were required anywhere in NFPA 1 or by the referenced codes and standards in NFPA 1, the automatic sprinkler system is required to be installed in accordance with the provisions of 13.3.1, which mandates compliance with NFPA 13. NFPA 1 requires automatic sprinkler protection in the following scenarios: Basements exceeding 2500 ft2 (232 m2) in new buildings. (13.3.2.2) New building housing emergency fire, rescue, or ambulance services (13.3.2.3) New buildings three or more stores in height above grade (13.3.2.4) Stand-alone open parking structures that are detached from other occupancies are not required to be protected with sprinklers. (13.3.2.5) In addition to the conditions specifically noted by NFPA 1, other requirements may drive the need to automatic sprinkler protection. Section 13.3.2.6, extracted from NFPA 13, addresses exterior roofs, canopies, porte-cocheres, balconies, decks, and similar projections. Section 13.3.2.7 begins a series of code sections, extracted from NFPA 101, that address the occupancy specific sprinkler requirements based upon the occupancies (new and existing) that are contained in the Life Safety Code. Section 13.3.2.26 mandates that all new high-rise buildings be protected by sprinklers. Existing high-rise buildings must be fully sprinklered within 12 years of adoption of the Code. Finally, Section 13.3.2.27 requires automatic sprinkler protection for all occupancies containing areas greater than 2500 ft2 (232 m2) used for high-piled storage of combustibles. Any occupancies containing areas greater than 12,000 ft 2(1115 m2) used for general storage of combustibles must also be sprinklered. An automatic sprinkler system is also required throughout all occupancies containing storage commodities classified as Group A Plastics in excess of 5 ft (1.5 m) in height over an area exceeding 2500 ft2 (232 m2) in area. Sprinkler requirements for other facilities such as mini-storage buildings, bulk storage of tires and woodworking operations are extracted from NFPA 5000. There are a lot of instances that trigger the need to automatic sprinkler protection. With the importance of these life saving and property protecting systems its critical to understand where in the Code to locate and identify these requirements...Section 13.3.2! Happy Friday and thanks for reading! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
The 2012 edition of the Life Safety Code was recently adopted by the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a federal agency under the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. In over-simplified terms, this means medical facilities, such as hospitals, nursing homes or skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs), and free-standing emergency departments (EDs), must comply with the 2012 edition of NFPA 101 in order to receive Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement. (I'm not an expert on Medicare or Medicaid, so I'll stick to the Code issues.) NFPA 101 is an occupancy-based code, so it's very important to classify occupancies correctly. Otherwise, the wrong requirements will be applied. This could result in occupants being provided with insufficient life safety features, or conversely, a building owner spending more money than necessary on life safety features that aren't warranted. Three occupancy classifications exist in the Code that could apply to medical facilities; they are: Business Occupancies, Ambulatory Health Care Occupancies, and Health Care Occupancies. The NFPA 101 definitions and a brief description of each, as they apply to medical facilities, follow. Business Occupancy. An occupancy used for the transaction of business other than mercantile. While this might not sound like a medical facility, the definition does capture the correct classification for facilities such as doctors' offices, dentists' offices, and urgent care clinics, provided that no more than three occupants are incapable of self-preservation at any time (as will become apparent momentarily). In these types of medical facilities, patients are fully capable of evacuating under their own power in the event of an emergency. The occupant life-safety risk is no different than that found in an office building. Granted, when I was a call-fire fighter/EMT back in the day, we ran the occasional ambulance call to the local doctor's office, usually for someone who was brought there because they weren't feeling well, only to find out they were having an MI (myocardial infarction, or heart attack… I remember some of what I learned in EMT school nearly 30 years ago!). While those patients were incapable of self-preservation due to their medical condition, that did not make the doctor's office anything other than a business occupancy. Those patients simply went to the wrong facility. (They should have dialed 911 and gone to the hospital.) Ambulatory Health Care Occupancy. An occupancy used to provide services or treatment simultaneously to four or more patients that provides, on an outpatient basis, one or more of the following: (1) Treatment for patients that renders the patients incapable of taking action for self-preservation under emergency conditions without the assistance of others (2) Anesthesia that renders the patients incapable of taking action for self-preservation under emergency conditions without the assistance of others (3) Emergency or urgent care for patients who, due to the nature of their injury or illness, are incapable of taking action for self-preservation under emergency conditions without the assistance of others The big difference between business occupancies and ambulatory health care occupancies is the presence of four or more patients who are incapable of self-preservation because of a variety of reasons. The other key to this definition, and what differentiates it from health care, is the phrase “on an outpatient basis.” This means that a doctor has not signed an order admitting the patient to a facility for longer-term care with housing and sleeping accommodations. When patients are outpatients, they receive medical treatment or observation and are then subsequently admitted to a facility as inpatients, or they go home. Part (1) of the definition describes something like a dialysis clinic. The treatment renders the patient incapable of self-preservation because of the lack of ability to evacuate without the assistance of staff due to being hooked up to a dialysis machine. Part (2) of the definition describes something like an ASC, in which the patient walks into the facility, is then rendered incapable of self-preservation by anesthesia for a procedure, is moved to a recovery area for observation, and then walks out of the facility, typically on the same day. A dentist's office could be classified as ambulatory health care if, at any time, four or more patients are rendered incapable of self-preservation. Part (3) of the definition, which was new in the 2003 edition of the Code, can apply to an emergency department (ED), whether it is attached to a hospital, or a detached, free-standing facility. If attached to a hospital and classified as ambulatory health care, it must be separated from the remainder of the building by two-hour fire barriers (see 18.1.3.4 of the 2012 edition and 18.1.3.5 of the 2015 edition). The advantages to classifying an ED as ambulatory health care include: it is not subject to suite size limitations applicable to health care occupancies, patient rooms can be open to the corridor, and the health care occupancy corridor protection requirements don't apply. Again, the key is the patients in the ED are outpatients; once four or more inpatients who are incapable of self-preservation are present, the facility is classified as health care. Health Care Occupancy. An occupancy used to provide medical or other treatment or care simultaneously to four or more patients on an inpatient basis, where such patients are mostly incapable of self-preservation due to age, physical or mental disability, or because of security measures not under the occupants' control. Health care occupancies are like ambulatory health care occupancies in that they contain four or more patients who are incapable of self-preservation; however, health care patients are inpatients, rather than outpatients, and are provided with housing and sleeping accommodations to facilitate extended care. Examples are hospitals, nursing homes (SNFs), and limited-care facilities, which could include something like psychiatric hospitals. These facilities are provided with the highest level of life safety features due to the number of patients expected to be unable to evacuate themselves on an around-the-clock basis. For health care occupancies, the Code utilizes a defend-in-place strategy, in which patients are moved from the area of fire origin to an adjacent, protected smoke compartment, without requiring vertical travel in the building. While all three of these occupancies provide varying degrees of health care services, the protection requirements for life safety from fire vary significantly, all dependent on the occupant risk. It's important to note that it's always the authority having jurisdiction's (AHJ's) responsibility to determine occupancy classification. The AHJ always has the authority to apply the Code in the manner it deems appropriate. My discussion is based on how the Code is intended to be applied as developed by NFPA's Technical Committees on Safety to Life. If you have any thoughts on the occupancy classification of medical facilities, please post them in the comments below. Thanks for reading, and until next time, stay safe! Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Now you can follow me on Twitter: @NFPAGregH
Image courtesy of Jake Pauls With the recent move from the 2000 edition of NFPA 101 to the 2012 edition by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), we've been getting questions at NFPA periodically about the Code's requirements for door inspections, particularly as they apply to health care occupancies. Here's a little history on the Code's door inspection provisions. In the 2009 edition, Chapter 7, which addresses means of egress, introduced a new set of requirements titled ‘Inspection of Door Openings' (see 7.2.1.15 in the 2009 edition). The provisions were intended to ensure reliability of egress doors, especially in areas like assembly occupancies, where door hardware might be subject to accelerated wear due to high-frequency usage. The provisions were formatted to apply where required by Chapters 11 through 43, and served as a ‘menu item' that could be referenced by the various occupancy chapters where the applicable technical committees deemed it appropriate. In addition, the provisions only applied to those egress doors that were required to swing in the direction of egress travel – generally, doors serving a room or area with an occupant load of 50 or more, doors serving exit enclosures, and doors serving high-hazard content rooms. The annual inspection included items such as: Inspection and testing in accordance with NFPA 80 where the door is a fire door Functional testing to ensure proper operation Visual inspection to assess the door's overall condition Verification of the following: The door can be opened fully and closed freely Opening forces do not exceed maximums prescribed by the Code Latching and locking mechanisms comply with the Code Releasing hardware is installed between 34 in. and 48 in. above the finished floor Doors installed in pairs comply with the Code's releasing requirements Door closers are properly adjusted Projection of door leaf into egress path does not exceed Code maximums Powered doors comply with Code requirements Any required signage is intact and legible Any special locking arrangements comply with Code requirements Security devices that impede egress are not installed The annual inspection was to be documented and kept for inspection by the AHJ. Further, any deficiencies were to be repaired or replaced “without delay.” Fast-forward to the 2012 edition; the door inspection provisions were revised so that rather than applying to doors that swing in the direction of egress travel, they would apply to any of the following: Doors equipped with panic hardware or fire exit hardware Doors in exit enclosures Electrically-controlled egress doors Doors with special locking arrangements (delayed-egress locks, access-controlled egress doors, and elevator lobby door locking) Further, a requirement for inspection and testing of smoke door assemblies in accordance with NFPA 105 was added. The occupancies that mandated the 7.2.1.15 annual egress door inspection were: Assembly occupancies Educational occupancies Day care occupancies Residential board and care occupancies This is where a bit of confusion comes in for health care occupancies. Since the 7.2.1.15 door inspection criteria is not referenced by either Chapter 18 or 19 for new or existing health care occupancies, respectively, does that mean doors in health care occupancies, including fire doors, are not required to be inspected? The answer is no, fire doors need to be inspected, regardless of occupancy classification or the lack of reference to 7.2.1.15. The inclusion of the reference to NFPA 80 (and NFPA 105) in 7.2.1.15 was well intended; it was supposed to remind users that, while you're doing your required egress door inspection, if the door also happens to be a fire door, it needs to be tested and inspected in accordance with NFPA 80. In the 2012 edition, you get there via 8.3.3.1, which requires fire doors and windows to comply with NFPA 80, including its inspection and testing requirements. This confusion got cleared up in the 2015 edition. The references to NFPA 80 and NFPA 105 were removed from 7.2.1.15 and moved to Chapter 8 – 8.3.3.13 requires fire door inspection and testing per NFPA 80 in all cases, and 8.2.2.4 addresses smoke door maintenance. Although most health care occupancies must comply with the 2012 edition, the revision in 2015 clarified the Code's intent. The 2015 edition added a couple other inspection items: Verification of the presence of required door hardware marking Verification of the presence and proper function of emergency lighting at access-controlled egress doors and doors equipped with delayed-egress locking systems So what can you expect for the 2018 edition of NFPA 101, which will be released later this year? Not much has changed this time around with the egress door inspection requirements, other than some changes in terminology: ‘Electrically controlled egress doors' will be known as ‘electrically locked egress door assemblies' ‘Delayed-egress locking systems' will be known as ‘delayed-egress electrical locking systems' ‘Access-controlled egress door assemblies' will be known as ‘sensor release of electrical locking systems' I hope you found this installment of #101Wednesdays to be informative. Now I have to figure out why there's a red light flashing on and off on the (relatively newly installed) GFCI outlet in my kitchen. Buy a house, they said… It'll be fun, they said… Good thing I know where the NEC guys sit at the office! Until next time, stay safe! Got an idea for a topic for a future #101Wednesdays? Post it in the comments below – I'd love to hear your suggestions! Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.”
Three construction workers died when they entered a manhole Monday without taking any of the precautions needed to safely enter a confined space. The hazards of the space were readily predictable and preventable. Many workers have died in manhole entries. Any one of several key confined space safe entry procedures likely would have prevented this tragedy. The incident occurred when a private contractor who was fixing a roadway in Key Largo climbed into a 15 foot deep hole to investigate complaints of sewage backups in the neighborhood. Reportedly the first man went in and lost contact with his coworkers above. The second worker climbed down in search of the first coworker and also lost consciousness. A third man then went down in a desperate search to find his two coworkers. A volunteer Key Largo firefighter attempted to rescue the downed workers and entered the space without an SCBA since the space was so narrow. He became incapacitated within seconds of entering. The space was later tested and found to contain elevated levels of methane and hydrogen sulfide as well as decreased oxygen levels. Atmospheric hazards in confined spaces are typically the result of material previously stored in the space, or in this case likely were the result of decaying organic material and rust. While many news reports point to the lack of “air packs” being used as the problem, respiratory protection, such as self-contained breathing apparatus are the last line of defense to be used only after all other control measures are applied. They can rarely be used in spaces such as manholes due to the small configuration of the space. The real reason for this incident involved the lack of confined space entry procedures that would include; Recognition that this was a confined space and evaluation of the atmosphere using a calibrated gas monitor Identification of all hazards in the space and control of the atmospheric hazards using ventilation Issuance of a permit by the on-site entry supervisor that included rescue procedures If the workers had recognized that the space was a confined space and used a properly selected and calibrated gas monitor, they would have known the space was unsafe to enter. If the workers had identified the atmospheric hazard and used ventilation to remove the hazardous atmosphere, they would not have entered until the atmosphere was verified as safe to enter. Finally, if confined space entry procedures were followed, an entry supervisor would have issued a permit that would describe the hazards and control measures for the entry and would have established a non-entry rescue procedure. A non-entry rescue procedure would require the first worker to enter the space with a harness attached to rescue equipment such as a tripod/winch system so that the attendant could remain outside the space and winch the first worker to safety should the worker become incapacitated or the atmosphere become unsafe. If the confined space procedures had been established, there would be no need for the second or third worker or the firefighter to enter for rescue. These basic requirements have been present in OSHA's confined space regulation 1910.146 for over 20 years. In an effort to further improve confined space safety, and recognizing that confined space incidents continue to occur, the recommendations in NFPA 350 Practices for Safe Confined Space Entry and Work were established to provide more detailed information on “how to” implement the requirements in the OSHA standard. NFPA 350 explains how to select, calibrate and use the atmospheric monitoring equipment and how to ventilate a space depending on the hazard. Competencies are included for those performing various aspects of the confined space entry and a rescue procedures with pre-plans are established. For more information you may view NFPA 350 free of charge at www.nfpa.org/350. You will also find a free 5 minute video on confined space identification as well as information about on-line and instructor lead confined space training.
Last weekend, our region received its first "real" snowfall of the season. A solid 17" of snow fell at my house. I can't complain as a few days in the 50s this week has melted most of it! Snow accumulation can quickly obstruct fire hydrants and block access from fire department vehicles. We all think about shoveling our driveways and front steps, and making sure there is a clear means of escape during and after a snowstorm is very important, too! However, we can't neglect our responsibility to ensure the fire department has the necessary access to water supply should they need to respond to a fire. Yes, fires happen in the snow, too. NFPA 1, Fire Code, requires the following clearance around fire hydrants: 18.5.7 Clear Space Around Hydrants. 18.5.7.1 A 36 in. (914 mm) clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants except as otherwise required or approved. 18.5.7.2 A clear space of not less than 60 in. (1524 mm) shall be provided in front of each hydrant connection having a diameter greater than 21⁄2 in. (64 mm). Our property has a fire hydrant by the street so we are lucky enough to add another item on the snow removal "to-do" list. I was proud to see that all other hydrants in our neighborhood were also cleared during and after the storm. This hydrant should have at least a 36" clearance around the circumference of the hydrant, unless another dimension is approved by the local AHJ. The requirement of 18.5.7.2 is new to the 2015 edition of the Code. It is intended to ensure fire department pumper apparatus have the ability to park adjacent to a fire hydrant and have adequate room to connect a large-diameter hose from the hydrant's steamer outlet to the pump inlet. Parked vehicles and other obstructions within 60 in. (1524 mm) of the front of the hydrant pose an undue hindrance to fire suppression operations. Snow certainly isn't the only potential obstruction to fire hydrant access. A quick google image search results in the many issues one may find with blocked hydrant access: parked cars, overgrown landscaping, utilities, service vehicles, construction work, mobile cooking vehicles. to name a few. For those of you in areas where snow isn't a concern, other potential issues may be just as prevalent! We all should take responsibility for clearing hydrants in the snow. I feel safer knowing that if a fire occurred in my home there is immediate and efficient access to a water supply for fire fighter operations. What type of fire hydrant obstructions have you seen? Comment and share your stories or photos! Thanks for reading, Happy Friday! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Page 14Welcome to premier edition of #101Wednesdays (with apologies and all credit to my colleague, Kristin Bigda, who inspired me with her weekly posts on NFPA 1 in #FireCodeFridays (be sure to follow her @KristinB_NFPA). Each week I'll explore an issue related to NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, and hopefully generate some discussion. My goals are to share some of what I've learned working with the Code over the last 20 years, and also to learn from you, the usersin the real world. This is a two-way street. I'm looking forward to getting the conversation started. In this edition, in the wake of last week's tragic Oakland warehouse dance party fire that claimed 36 lives, I'll review some of the basic NFPA 101 requirements for assembly occupancies. The first thing that is important to understand is, “What exactly is an assembly occupancy?” The Code defines an assembly occupancy as an occupancy (1) used for a gathering of 50 or more persons for deliberation, worship, entertainment, eating, drinking, amusement, awaiting transportation, or similar uses; or (2) used as a special amusement building, regardless of occupant load (6.1.2.1 – references are to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101). For this discussion, I'll focus on Item (1) in the definition, which is a “typical” assembly occupancy. Item (2) refers to things like haunted house attractions, and the like. Based on the definition, two criteria must be met for an occupancy to be classified as assembly: there must be 50 or more people, AND they must be collocated in the occupancy for one of the specified purposes (deliberation, worship, entertainment, eating, drinking, amusement, awaiting transportation, or similar uses). If 50 or more people are working in a densely occupied call center, it's most likely a business occupancy based on its use. If there are 50 or more people in a large conference room, that is an assembly occupancy. The 50-person threshold is determined based on the calculated occupant or the actual expected number of occupants, whichever is GREATER (7.3.1.2). With the occupancy classification established, let's look at some of the basic life safety requirements. MEANS OF EGRESS The importance of providing adequate means of egress from assembly occupancies can't be overstated. For new assembly occupancies, the general rule is at least two means of egress are needed for not more than 500 occupants; three are needed for 501 to 1,000 occupants; and four are needed for more than 1,000 (7.4 and 12.2.4.1). For existing assembly occupancies, two means of egress are good for up to 600 occupants; the other thresholds are the same as for new assembly occupancies (13.2.4). Early reports indicate the second floor performance space in the Oakland warehouse was accessed by a single, makeshift stair. NFPA 101 would have required, in all likelihood, at least two stairs because of the strict 20 ft common path of travel limit for egress paths in assembly occupancies serving more than 50 people (12.2.5.1.2 and 13.2.5.1.2). In addition to adequate numbers of means of egress, sufficient egress capacity (width) is needed. As a Boston area native, I make an analogy to the old Central Artery, which was an elevated highway that snaked its way through Downtown Boston. Before the infamous “Big Dig,” I-93 was a relatively wide, three- and four-lane highway north and south of Boston. Where the highway hit the city, however, it narrowed down to two lanes in each direction. This narrowing resulted in traffic jams, day in and day out. The same phenomenon exists where occupants attempt to egress through a relatively narrow doorway or via a stair. The reduction in egress width results in queuing; the wider the opening, the shorter the wait time to move through the opening. Section 7.3, 12.2.3, and 13.2.3 provide all the details on means of egress capacity. If insufficient capacity is provided, the occupant load must be carefully controlled to prevent overcrowding and exceeding the available egress capacity, or additional egress capacity must be provided. An additional egress consideration is the main entrance/exit. People will have a natural tendency to try to go out the way they came in. In an emergency, if everyone makes their way to the main entrance/exit, the evacuation can be significantly delayed. For this reason, the Code requires the main entrance/exit to be sized to accommodate at least half of the occupant load. For certain new assembly occupancies, such as nightclubs, the main entrance/exit needs to accommodate at least two-thirds of the occupant load (12.2.3.6 & 13.2.3.6). (The two-thirds criterion was added to the Code following the 2003 fire that killed 100 concertgoers at The Station nightclub in Rhode Island.) AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND FIRE ALARMS New assembly occupancies are required to be protected by automatic sprinklers where the occupant load exceeds 300. In addition, any new nightclub-like assembly occupancy must be provided with sprinklers if the occupant load is 50 or greater. For existing nightclub-like assembly occupancies, sprinklers are required if the occupant load is greater than 100. Otherwise, sprinklers are required for existing exhibition facilities that are more than 15,000 ft2 in area. Fire alarm systems are required in both new and existing assembly occupancies with an occupant load exceeding 300, and in theaters with more than one audience-viewing room. The alarm system is required to alert personnel at a constantly attended receiving station for the purpose of initiating an emergency response. Alternatively, the system is permitted to automatically provide voice notification to the occupants. There are some exceptions to and variations of the sprinkler and fire alarm requirements for assembly occupancies; see 12.3.4, 12.3.5, 13.3.4, and 13.3.5 for all the details. CROWD MANAGERS ALL assembly occupancies must be provided with at least one trained crowd manager to facilitate an orderly response to an emergency (12.7.6 & 13.7.6). (There is an exception for assembly occupancies used for religious worship with an occupant load of not more than 500.) Additional crowd managers must be provided where the occupant load exceeds 250 at a ratio of one crowd manager for every 250 occupants. Guidance on the required crowd manager training is provided in Annex A of the Code (A.12.7.6.2 and A.13.7.6.2). Crowd managers are an integral component of the life safety package prescribed by the Code for an assembly occupancy and should not be overlooked. Organizations such as the International Association of Venue Managers offer online training for trained crowd managers and crowd manager supervisors; go to http://www.iaamtraining.com for details. SOME FINAL THOUGHTS (BUT BY NO MEANS THE CONCLUSION) The life safety criteria for assembly occupancies prescribed by NFPA 101 that I've described here is only the tip of the iceberg. The Code has much more: interior finish regulations; vertical opening protection; emergency lighting; construction limits; seating arrangements; I could go on for days! (In fact, I frequently do when I instruct NFPA's three-day Life Safety Code Essentials seminar.) But hopefully this brief review helps you gain an understanding of some of the basics. It's still early in the Oakland fire investigation, but I won't be surprised if some, if not all of the items described here were missing. Let me know what challenges you encounter related to assembly occupancies. If we can keep the discussions going, and continue to raise awareness, maybe we can help to prevent future tragedies like the one we witnessed in Oakland last week. Check out my earlier blog post about the unsettling 13-year trend of large loss-of-life assembly occupancy fires. I hope you'll return next week for another edition of #101Wednesdays. Until then, stay safe. Did you know NFPA 101 is available to review online for free? Head over to www.nfpa.org/101 and click on “Free access to the 2015 edition of NFPA 101.” Page 15
I've learned a lot about Christmas trees since working with NFPA 1, Fire Code. How much can there be to learn about a Christmas tree? Homes have them, businesses have them, place of worship have them, schools may have them, restaurants have them. I hate to be a Grinch, but Christmas trees can be a pretty severe fire hazard when not properly attended to or when not fire tested appropriately. There are provisions in place to make sure buildings and residences that wish to enjoy Christmas trees can do so while staying safe. Check out this video. In this case, a room with a dried out Christmas tree may achieve flashover conditions in under a minute. This shows that Christmas trees have the potential to greatly contribute to the overall fuel load of a compartment. When it comes to a family escaping their home, seconds can count. One minute just isn't enough. Natural Christmas trees, by their nature, are initially fire retardant. The problem arises when they have been cut and packaged without access to water for extended periods of time. The fire danger of Christmas trees and similar vegetation increases when the bottom end of the tree is not freshly cut and immediately placed in water when purchased. Other concerns include the length of time Christmas trees are on display (retail stores often set up outdoor displays of trees before Thanksgiving.) The species of tree and the rate of moisture loss are important factors in determining the extent of moisture loss. Of the various types of evergreen trees available, the Noble fir retains its moisture longer than other species. The best preventive measures include using a freshly harvested tree, cutting the butt or bottom end immediately before placing it in water, and checking the water level frequently to ensure that the tree water container is filled. The person responsible for the display should check the tree periodically. When needles shed easily, the tree should be removed or replaced, since trees dry from the inside out. These days, artificial Christmas trees come in all shapes and sizes. They even come pre-lit (who wants to spend the time stringing the lights? Not me!) UL has published a fantastic white paper about the reducing the fire risk of pre-lit trees. This publication addresses the research that led to the development of performance testing criteria for pre-lit artificial trees. It is a valuable resource for consumers and code officials when evaluating the safety of artificial trees. NFPA 1 addresses Christmas trees in Section 10.13: Artificial vegetation and artificial Christmas trees must be labeled or otherwise identified or certified by the manufacturer as being fire retardant. Allowances for Christmas trees are specified by occupancy and found in Table 10.13.1.1. Note: Christmas trees are prohibited or limited in their placement in occupancies that pose special problems due to the capabilities of occupants, occupant or management control, or the number of occupants. Some exceptions permit live, balled trees, if maintained, and trees in locations where automatic sprinkler systems are installed. Artificial vegetation and artificial Christmas trees must be labeled or otherwise identified or certified by the manufacturer as being fire retardant. The fire retardance is demonstrated by each individual decorative vegetation item, including any decorative lighting, in an approved manner. Christmas trees can not obstruct corridors, exit ways, or other means of egress. Only listed electrical lights and wiring can be used on natural or artificial Christmas trees. Do not locate open flames such as from candles, lanterns, and heaters on or near Christmas trees. Where a natural cut tree is permitted, the bottom end of the trunk must be cut off with a straight fresh cut at least 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) above the end prior to placing the tree in a stand to allow the tree to absorb water. The tree is to be placed in a suitable stand with water and the water level must be maintained above the fresh cut and checked at least once daily. The tree shall be removed from the building immediately upon evidence of dryness. In addition to the Code requirements, NFPA also provides a resource page dedicated to Christmas tree and decoration fires. Have you had any trouble enforcing provisions for Christmas trees? How does your facility ensure Christmas trees are maintained? Stay safe, and happy holidays!
Phew, I made it. It's still Friday so this post is in just in time! I've been fortunate enough to have spent most of the past two days attending the launch of NFPA's new training program: Hands-on 2-Day Training for Facilities Managers – Essentials for Life Safety and Fire Protection. The training incorporates information and hands on activities for Facility Managers related to NFPA 101, NFPA 80, NFPA 72, NFPA 25, NFPA 3, NFPA 4, and NFPA 96. It was a great program and a great experience being able to attend the first event! One of the portions of the program that I was most looking forward to was the education and training on NFPA 25, Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems, as this is a document that I have little background on, but is so relevant to many other NFPA codes and standards. NFPA 25 establishes the minimum requirements for the periodic inspection, testing, and maintenance of water-based fire protection systems and the actions to undertake when changes in occupancy, use, process, materials, hazard, or water supply that potentially impact the performance of the water-based system are planned or identified. I learned that the inspections required by NFPA 25 are intended to focus on general wear and tear of the system. Design evaluations are outside of the scope of an NFPA 25 inspection. They are not intended to reveal installation flaws or code compliance violations, rather to assess the operating condition of the system. NFPA 25 is referenced a number of times throughout NFPA 1, Fire Code, and is an important reference for AHJs just as it is Facility Manager. Chapter 13 of the Code addresses fire protection systems, including requirements for standpipe systems, automatic sprinklers, fire pumps, water supply, portable fire extinguishers, and fire alarms. For each of the water-based systems addressed by Chapter 13 a reference to NFPA 25 is provided. In addition, some sections from NFPA 25 are directly extracted into Chapter 13 to provide additional guidance to the code official. Examples of Code references to NFPA 25 are as follows: 13.2.3.3 A standpipe system installed in accordance with this Code shall be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with NFPA 25, Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems. 13.3.3.2 A sprinkler system installed in accordance with this Code shall be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with NFPA 25. 13.5.3.1 Backflow prevention devices shall be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 25, Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems. NFPA 25 is a staple for Facility Managers, code officials, and contractors. NFPA offers a variety of resources on this document including Handbooks, online training, classroom training and additional NFPA 25 specific hands-on training. Happy Friday!
With the flip of the calendar to November, the time of year has arrived (at least in New England) where we need to inevitably turn on the heat. Fall and winter bring their own set of fire safety challenges and users and code officials must be aware of safe practices to help ensure fires caused by heating devices are kept to a minimum. One of the most common hazards during this time is the use of space heaters. NFPA 1, Fire Code, provides requirements to regulate the use of these devices: 11.5.3 Portable Electric Heater. 11.5.3.1 The AHJ shall be permitted to prohibit use of portable electric heaters in occupancies or situations where such use or operation would present an undue danger to life or property. 11.5.3.2 Portable electric heaters shall be designed and located so that they cannot be easily overturned. 11.5.3.3 All portable electric heaters shall be listed. During cold weather, portable electric space heaters are used in many locations, including under desks in offices. Although placing a heater under a desk or table lessens the chance of the heater being easily overturned, the heater also can easily be forgotten. A heater that is left on for an extended time can overheat combustible materials that might also be stored under the desk or table. Managers of facilities that allow the use of electric space heaters should be instructed to remind employees to shut them off at the end of the day and keep combustible material away from the heater. In addition, because of the amount of electric current drawn by space heaters, electric heaters should be used only where they can be plugged directly into appropriate receptacles or extension cords of adequate current capacity. (See 11.1.5 for requirements addressing extension cords.) The AHJ is permitted to prohibit the use of space heaters where an undue danger to life or property exists. The AHJ can use past inspection findings, such as portable heaters that were left turned on and unattended, fire incidents, and other reasons to prohibit the use of such heaters. For additional information on space heater safety, check out NFPA's Safety Tip Sheet. You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
The outdoor storage of forest products (lumber) involves many arrangements of storage, from retail lumber outlets to the large cold decks found at wood processing facilities. Storage also involves a wide range of products, from wood chips and plywood to large tree logs for logging operations. If any of these types of storage goes unchecked, a fire could mean large product losses for the company and vast amounts of resources expended by the responding fire department. Therefore, the requirements in Chapter 31 of NFPA 1, Fire Code, for the outdoor storage of forest products are aimed at minimizing the likelihood of fire, controlling a fire if one occurs, and ensuring rapid fire department access to the site should a fire occur. The fire department, AHJs, and users should be familiar with the site and pre-plan for fire incidents involving various scenarios. In addition to the general provisions in Section 31.3.2 which are applicable, Section 31.3.3 provides requirements specific to the outdoor storage of lumber products at retail and wholesale storage yards. This includes lumber yards open to the public (think a local Lowe's, Home Depot, ProBuild) or and those that are private and offer wholesale services. One of the most important requirements for lumber yards is to provide a positive fire prevention program. The fire hazard potential inherent in lumber storage operations with large quantities of combustible materials shall be addressed with this program under the direct supervision of upper level management. The program will include: Selection, design, and arrangement of storage yard areas and materials-handling equipment based upon proven fire prevention and protection principles Means for early fire detection, transmission of alarm, and fire extinguishment Fire department access roads to separate large stacks and provide access for effective fire-fighting operations Separation of yard storage from yard buildings and other exposing properties Effective fire prevention maintenance program, including regular yard inspections by trained personnel The arrangement of the lumber stacks is also a critical for the safety of these facilities. The lumber stacks, if not arranged properly, can inhibit fire department access, can increase the speed of fire spread throughout the stacks or to adjacent structures or can cause early collapse during a fire. Some additional requirements for lumber stacks and open yard storage are as follows: Lumber stacks must be on stable ground. Stacking shall be stable and in an orderly and regular manner. A collapse of storage stacks could obstruct access roads or contribute to fire spread. The height of stacks cannot exceed 20 ft. Storage stacks taller than 20 ft (6 m) can significantly impede handheld hose stream operations by fire suppression personnel. Fire department access roads must be spaced so that a grid system of not more than 50 ft × 150 ft (15 m × 46m) is produced. Storage stacks wider than 50 ft × 150 ft (15 m × 46 m) can also significantly impede handheld hose stream operations by fire suppression personnel. The stack limits must be marked by boundary posts or painted boundary limits that indicate stacking limits. Open yard stacking shall be located with not less than 15 ft (4.6 m) clear space to buildings and to adjacent property lines. Automatic sprinkler protection in accordance with NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, should be considered for all buildings that might constitute an exposure to outside lumber storage. The 2018 edition of NFPA 1 will include a new section for protection requirements for the outdoor storage of wood pallets and pallets listed as equivalent to wood as these facilities also create a number of challenges for the fire department suppression efforts and fire department access, and with the presence of tens of thousands of combustible pallets, can be the location for a devastating and costly fire should the proper precautions not be put in place. Page 16
The Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) is the ultimate enforcing body and has full responsibility of determining if the Code is being applied correctly. The Code is administered and enforce by the AHJ designated by the governing authority. NFPA 1 might be enforced by different agencies in different jurisdictions. Depending on how the Code is adopted, enforcement responsibilities might be divided between state and local agencies or between different agencies at either the state or local level. If the enforcement responsibility is divided, each agency must be aware of the specific portions of NFPA 1 for which it has enforcement responsibility and must understand the source from which it obtains its authority to enforce those portions. Chapter 1 of NFPA 1 addresses the administrative and enforcement requirements of the Code. It covers the scope, purpose, and application of the Code. The authority and enforcement power given to the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) are also covered. Included in the responsibilities of the AHJ are to determine violations of the Code and serve notice of the violations as well as determine the required penalty. So what happens when a facility violates the applicable requirements from NFPA 1? Whenever the Authority Having Jurisdiction determines violations of this Code, a written notice must be issued to confirm the violations. Any order or notice of violation issued is required to be served upon the owner, operator, occupant, registered agent, or other person responsible for the condition or violation by one of the following means: (1) Personal service (2) Mail to last known address of the owner, operator, or registered agent The mutilation, destruction, or removal of a posted order or violation notice without authorization by the AHJ is considered a separate violation of this Code and punishable by the penalties established by the AHJ. Any person who fails to comply with the provisions of this Code, fails to carry out an order made as stated in the Code, or violates any condition attached to a permit, approval, or certificate is subject to the penalties established by the AHJ. Per NFPA 1, 2015 edition, where the AHJ establishes a separate penalty schedule, violations of this Code are subject to a $250.00 penalty. **New for the 2018 edition of NFPA 1 violations of this Code will be subject to a $100.00 penalty per day for each violation.** Failure to comply with the time limits of an order or notice of violation issued by the AHJ will result in each day that the violation continues being regarded as a separate offense and will be subject to a separate penalty.
Here's an article I wrote this summer, which speaks to the two fires that occurred at senior living facilities in California this week: Older adults are more vulnerable to fires compared to the general population; at age 65, people are twice as likely to be killed or injured by fire. That's why it's important for older adults to carefully consider their living environments, and to make sure they're adequately protected from fire and related risks. While it's often assumed that any residence for people ages 55 and older will include the fire and life safety provisions needed to maximize their safety, that's not necessarily the case. Depending on how a senior living residence is categorized, it may or may not include the fire safety measures, designs and features that other senior living occupancies such as an assisted living facility incorporate. Anyone either currently living in or considering a move into a residence that is advertised as senior housing or otherwise caters to older adults needs to be aware of what safety measures are — or are not — in place, so they can make an informed decision about where they live. The National Fire Protection Association developed NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, which serves as the most widely used source for strategies to protect people from fire and related hazards based on building construction and occupancy features. While NFPA 101 must be used by facilities that fall under certain federal guidelines, buildings identified simply as senior housing have no obligation to follow NFPA 101 unless the code is adopted at the state or local level. Buildings that fall under the federal criteria include assisted living facilities, long-term care and nursing home facilities. Although individual states can and do adopt NFPA 101 for other types of occupancies, Nevada is not among them. In a section of NFPA 101 called "Residential Board and Care," stringent requirements for assisted living facilities include the installation Of smoke alarm systems and fire sprinkler systems, as well as building construction features that ensure adequate means of egress in the event of a fire or other emergency. The building managers of assisted living facilities are also required to establish emergency evacuation plans and procedures for residents which are supervised by 24 hour on-site staff. Meanwhile, the residents themselves must be evaluated by qualified staff to determine whether or not they're capable of living in an assisted living facility. However, occupancies referred to as "senior housing" or "senior apartments" oftentimes are simply apartment buildings whose only requirement is that residents are 55 years of age or older. They offer no fire safety provisions specific to the needs of older adults, and the occupancy owners and managers of these residences are not required to follow NFPA 101 unless state or local adoption of the code is in place. This puts older adults living in those residencies at increased fire risk. Firefighters don't always have the ability to get multiple people, particularly those who are disabled or use medical equipment at home. This challenge is multiplied if the senior housing occupancy consists of multiple stories. Fortunately, there are many steps people living in senior residences can take on their own to reduce their risk of fire. One should talk with the building manager to learn what, if any, fire protection systems are installed in the building, and to find out about emergency evacuation plans that may be in place. Buildings with multiple stories that are protected with automatic sprinkler systems will be inherently safer than buildings that have no similar protection. Regardless of what features your building does or doesn't have, NFPA's Emergency Evacuation Planning Guide for People with Disabilities is a valuable resource that can be used for any specific situation. The Guide, addressing the main evacuation elements needed for the disabled community, can be easily applied to older adult communities and is available online for free. If a building manager doesn't have a plan in place, providing him or her with the guide will give them the information, guidance and resources needed to implement one. For more information on fire safety, visit www.nfpa.org. For information specifically on fire safety for at-risk populations, visit www.nfpa.org/disability. This article was originally published in the July issue of Health Care Quarterly/Las Vegas.
Whether we are ready or not, fall is here in full force. A common fixture in the fall is the haunted house. Large or small, permanent or temporary, professional or amateur, haunted houses are popping up everywhere. Unfortunately, haunted houses can cause nightmares for more than just those that attend. Without the proper knowledge and understanding of the codes that apply, haunted houses can be a safety nightmare as well. Per NFPA 1, Fire Code, a haunted house is considered a special amusement building. By definition, a special amusement building is "a building that is temporary, permanent, or mobile and contains a device or system that conveys passengers or provides a walkway along, around, or over a course in any direction as a form of amusement arranged so that the egress path is not readily apparent due to visual or audio distractions or an intentionally confounded egress path, or is not readily available due to the mode of conveyance through the building or structure." A special amusement building is an assembly occupancy regardless of occupant load. Haunted houses use special effects, scenery, props, and audio and visual distractions that may cause egress paths to become not obvious. In haunted houses in particular, the presence of combustible materials and special scenery can also contribute to the fuel load should a fire occur. Because of this, the Code requirements are purposely strict to in hopes of avoiding a disastrous fire event. Code provisions for special amusement buildings are found in Section 20.1.4 of NFPA 1. The Code requirements for haunted houses are summarized below: Haunted houses must apply the provisions for assembly occupancies in addition to the provisions of Section 20.1.4. Automatic sprinklers are required for all haunted houses. If the haunted house is considered moveable or portable, an approved temporary means is permitted to be used for water supply. Smoke detection is required throughout the haunted house where the nature it operates in reduced lighting and the actuation of any smoke detection device must sound an alarm at a constantly attended location on the premises. Actuation of sprinklers or any suppression systems, smoke detection system (having a cross zoning capability) must provide an increase in illumination of the means of egress and termination of other confusing visuals or sounds. Exit marking and floor proximity exit signs are required. Where designs are such that the egress path is not apparent, additional directional exit marking is required. Interior wall and ceiling finish materials must be Class A throughout. Per Section 10.8.1, emergency action plans are required. Other requirements, not specific just to haunted houses or special amusement buildings may also apply: Permits (see Section 1.12) Seasonal buildings (see Section 10.12) Special outdoor events, fairs and carnivals (see Section 10.14) As we move into the Hallween and haunted house season, its easy to get caught up in the fun and overlook the safety issues that may arise. Through the provisions in NFPA 1, which can assist code officials and fire departments enforce safe haunted houses, and NFPA's halloween resources for consumers, everyone can stay safe this season. You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Section 18.5 of NFPA 1 provides requirements for fire hydrants, including location, distribution, minimum number, clearance, marking, and testing and maintenance. Section 18.5 was revised in its entirety for the 2015 edition of the Code. Previous editions provided a performance-based requirement that the number and type of fire hydrants and connections to other approved water supplies be capable of delivering the required fire flow and be provided at approved locations. The former Annex E was deleted for the 2015 edition of the Code; in its place, Section 18.5 was revised by the addition of prescriptive, mandatory requirements for fire hydrant location and distribution based on the required fire flow determined in accordance with Section 18.4. To determine the minimum number of fire hydrants for fire flow, the following provisions should be followed: The aggregate fire flow capacity of all fire hydrants within 1000 ft (305 m) of the building cannot be less than the required fire flow. Table 18.5.4.3 provides the maximum fire flow capacity for which a fire hydrant can be credited. Example: Determine the number of required fire hydrants for a proposed, new manufacturing building with a fire area of 50,000 ft2 (4650 m2) and a construction classification of Type II(000) (noncombustible and unprotected). The building will be protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system with standard response sprinklers. Sample Solution: Test results indicate the theoretical available fire flow is 3500 gpm. Based on the procedures as outlined in Section 18.4, the required fire flow is approximately 1200 gpm. A designer chooses to locate one fire hydrant on the existing public water mains at a distance of 350 ft (107 m) from the building, which meets the maximum 400 ft (122 m) distance criterion of 18.5.3(1). Using Table 18.5.4.3, it is determined that a hydrant located 400 ft (122 m) from the building can be credited with not more than 1000 gpm (3785 L/min). Because this is less than the required fire flow of 1200 gpm (4500 L/min), one additional hydrant is required within 1000 ft (305 m) of the building. (Or the designer could choose to extend a private fire service main onto the property and locate a hydrant at a distance of not more than 250 ft (76 m) from the building.) In accordance with Table 18.5.4.3, such a hydrant would be permitted to be credited with up to 1500 gpm (5678 L/min), which exceeds the required fire flow of 1200 gpm (4500 L/min). If the designer chooses to add a second hydrant on the public main, they should be spaced so the distance between them does not exceed 500 ft (152 m) in accordance with 18.5.3. The AHJ should require an additional flow test following the installation of the new hydrant or hydrants to verify they are capable of delivering the required fire flow. A little over two weeks until the NFPA 1 Second Draft meeting, next week I will talk about issues the committee will be addressing in Milwaukee on October 3-4 (check out the agenda at www.nfpa.org/1next) You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
It's back to school time. Time for teachers to prepare their classrooms for the upcoming school year and welcome students back to classes. Where does the summer go? Soon artwork will cover the walls, student projects will be on display, and lockers will be overflowing with books and supplies. Educational occupancies, defined in NFPA 1, Fire Code, as "an occupancy used for educational purposes through the twelfth grade by six or more persons for 4 or more hours per day or more than 12 hours per week" include preschools, elementary schools, high schools, and the like. These facilities are inspected frequently and kept under a close watch by code officials. The day to day activities of a school can be greatly impacted by a document such as the Fire Code. One area that educational occupancies must play close attention to is furnishings, decorations, and interior finish. NFPA 1 provides the following requirements with respect to these materials: Draperies, curtains, and other similar loosely hanging furnishings and decorations have to meet specific performance criteria from NFPA 701, Standard Methods of Fire Tests for Flame Propagation of Textiles and Films. Clothing and other personal supplies cannot be stored in the corridors unless the corridor is sprinklered, has a smoke detection system, or where the supplies are stored in metal lockers that do not interfere with the egress width. Clothing hung on hooks along corridor walls or on racks in school lobbies greatly increases the combustible load and will generally allow flame to spread quickly. Artwork and teaching materials can be attached to the walls but cannot exceed 20% of the wall area in a non-sprinklered building and cannot exceed 50% of the wall area if the building is fully sprinklered. Because the combustibility of the artwork cannot be effectively controlled, the quantity, in terms of the percentage of wall area covered, is regulated to avoid creating a continuous combustible surface that will spread flame across the room. It may be advantageous not only to limit the quantity of artwork displayed but also to avoid placing such materials near a room's exit access doors. (Requirements noted above are extracted into NFPA 1 from NFPA 101, Life Safety Code) Enjoy the last official weekend of summer, and stay safe. I look forward to discussing more seasonal Fire Code issues in the coming weeks. And, check out these past Fire Code Friday posts for guidance on how to stay safe and help others stay safe this Labor Day weekend! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA. Page 17
What is a tiny house? While the definition varies depending on who you talk to, typically it is considered any house under 400 sq ft. You could fit 6.5 tiny houses inside the average American home (which is around 2,600 sq ft). The tiny house movement is quickly spreading across America. For some buried in student debt, it is viewed as the only way to achieve the American Dream of owning your own home and for others, it is about getting rid of the excess and living more simply. Whatever the reason is, are they safe? Some tiny homes have foundations or are built off-site and tied down to a foundation. Since these sit on a foundation, these have to meet local building code requirements. Safety concerns are related to the large number of tiny homes being built on wheels. You'll see these referred to as THOWs (Tiny Houses on Wheels). These are presenting a problem for AHJs. Local building codes are not enforceable because they aren't built on foundations. Although you might think they should be considered RVs, they are not. The RV standards make it very clear that RVs are only meant for temporary living, not permanent. These tiny houses seem to have created a large problem in the codes and standards world. Many in the tiny house movement like that they are living "outside the law". People build their own tiny homes with their needs in minds. This allows for arguably the most efficient use of space. But, they are technically illegal. While I'm not sure I'm ready to trade in my "large space" for a tiny home, I see the potential. Many have suggested using them to house the homeless or as women's shelters. I've even heard of military families using them. Before we consider using them for such great causes, we need to know they are safe. Some of the major concerns with THOWs: Required number of means of escape Use of ladder in the means of escape Size of windows if they are provided as a means of escape Requirements for smoke alarms and sprinkler systems Lack of foundations Minimum room sizes Plumbing requirements (many THOW owners want to use composting toilets which are largely illegal) Are you ready to trade your "large home" in for a THOW? Have you seen these in your communities? This seems to be a movement that isn't going anywhere. What safety concerns have you heard regarding these tiny spaces? Picture Credit: The Move | A Tiny House on the Prairies
Yesterday, NFPA's Nicole Comeau wrote a fantastic post about assembly occupancies, the dangers of crowds and the importance of enforcing fire and life safety codes at these venues. Thanks, Nicole! Let's talk about the Code requirements behind this concept of occupant load. NFPA 1, Fire Code, is a valuable resource for fire marshals and AHJs when determining occupant load and the egress capacity of a space. The direction provided by the fire Code helps prevent overcrowding and potential insufficient egress capacity. So, how exactly does a building determine its "occupant load" and why is it so important that these requirements are adhered to? It is a basic concept of the Code that the means of egress system be sized to accommodate all people occupying a building. Sizing is accomplished by matching the occupant load of a floor with the calculated egress capacity of the egress components serving the floor. Capacity = The number of people the egress system can accommodate safely during an emergency. Occupant Load = The total number of persons that might occupy a building or portion thereof at any one time. Per NFPA 1: 14.8.1.1.1 The total capacity of the means of egress for any story, balcony, tier, or other occupied space shall be sufficient for the occupant load thereof. [101: 7.3.1.1.1] Therefore, Egress Capacity ≥ Occupant Load The number of people or occupant load for which the means of egress system must provide egress capacity is calculated per the requirements set forth in NFPA 1 or otherwise determined. The occupant load is to reflect the maximum number of people anticipated to occupy the building rooms or spaces at any given time and under all probable situations. The occupant load is the maximum of either the calculated value OR the maximum probably number of people expected in the space. Egress capacity is calculated based upon the available width of egress components (doors, stairs, corridors, walkways, etc.) Further requirements in Chapter 14 of NFPA 1 provide the details for calculating egress capacity of the space. When the occupant load of a building or area exceeds what is was designed for, the egress capacity cannot accommodate the occupants safely and efficiently. Queuing, bottle-necking, slow egress are all a results of improperly designed egress systems. When all is said and done, it is critical that overcrowding be prevented and prohibited and that the fundamental concept of egress be upheld: Egress Capacity ≥ Occupant Load You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
A few weeks ago I wrote about the specifications of constructing fire department access roads, which included dimensional details from NFPA 1, Fire Code, Section 18.2.3.4 such as width, vertical clearance, surface, turning radius, grade and dead ends. To provide effective manual fire suppression operations, the fire department must be able to gain reasonable access to a building. Approved fire department access roads must be provided for every facility, building, or portion or a building that is newly constructed or relocated. Fire department access roads consist of roadways, fire lanes, parking lot lanes, or some combination of those. (Note: The Code does not require the modification of previously approved access to existing buildings to meet the current Code requirements and some modifications may be permitted for specific structures, See 18.2.3.1.3) Just yesterday, a coworker referred to me a story in the news that highlights the importance of fire department access. On Monday night, a home in a San Antonio gated neighborhood caught fire after it was struck by lightning. The story reports that neighbors said the siren-operated sensor (SOS), at the gate was not working and delayed the response time of firefighters and it was reported that some residents said they had to open the gate by hand. The gate had been inspected at the end of last year and was reported to be functioning properly. Does NFPA 1 address gated neighborhoods? In fact, it does. Section 18.2.2.2, titled 'Access to Gated Subdivisions or Developments', states that the AHJ shall have the authority to require fire department access be provided to gated subdivisions or developments through the use of an approved device or system. Source: NFPA 1 Handbook, 2015 edition. Access to gated communities or other developments must comply with the same requirements for buildings or areas that utilize an access box where access to a structure or area is difficult because of security.. Access gates might use card access readers, siren-operated devices, infrared receivers, or other approved devices rather than keys, but it is critical that the means of access is approved by the local AHJ. Source: NFPA 1 Handbook, 2015 edition. Fire department access is essential to providing immediate and effective manual fire suppression operations. Obstructions, inoperable devices, and improperly constructed access roads can mean a longer time for the fire department to reach a fire, protect property, and save lives. Have you seen obstructions to fire department access? Share your stories and photos!
One of the more common code violations with regards to electrical safety provisions in NFPA 1, Fire Code, relates to power strips (referred to as power taps in the Code.) Just this week I was sitting in a conference room at an NFPA Technical Committee meeting and multiple committee members lost power to their computers at the same time. Upon further investigation, we found that the power strips were plugged into one another (daisy-chained) to provide a series of power strips to serve computers around the room. One power strip was accidentally powered off, so multiple strips were affected, a code violation many overlook. For compliance, each power strip should have been plugged into a permanently installed outlet. Section 11.1 of NFPA 1 provides provisions for basic electrical safety. Topics addressed in this section include relocatable power taps, mutiplug adapters, extension cords, and the building disconnect. The approval of new electrical installations or approval of modifications to an existing electrical system is a function typically performed by an electrical inspector or other building code enforcement official using the requirements of NFPA 70®, National Electrical Code®. However, in many cases, prior to a building or other facility being constructed or occupied, fire marshals or fire inspectors perform periodic inspections to ensure that the safety systems and features of the premises are in place, are in proper working order, and have not been compromised or adversely modified. Here the requirements of NFPA 1 can provide basic guidance to fire inspectors to assist with identifying proper and safe installations. With regards to relocatable power taps (power strips), Section 11.1.4 of NFPA 1 states the following: 11.1.4 Relocatable Power Taps. 11.1.4.1 Relocatable power taps shall be of the polarized or grounded type with overcurrent protection and shall be listed. 11.1.4.2 The relocatable power taps shall be directly connected to a permanently installed receptacle. 11.1.4.3 Relocatable power tap cords shall not extend through walls, ceilings, or floors; under doors or floor coverings; or be subject to environmental or physical damage. Power strips are commonly used for computers, printers, and other electronics at workstations, offices, and dormitories, where additional electrical power receptacles are needed. During inspections, power taps that are plugged into other power taps (daisy-chained) should be removed, because such arrangement is prohibited. Relocatable power taps are for temporary use and should not take the place of permanently installed receptacles. In addition, power strips should not be connected to extension cords to extend their reach. Ideally, where extension cords are used for other than temporary purposes, additional permanent receptacles should be installed to accommodate the power strips. Understanding basic electrical safety practices can be instrumental in preventing fires in residences, hotels, dormitories and offices, among other locations. For additional information, check out NFPA's resources on electrical safety! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
Today I am packing my bags for a week of committee meetings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Next week, the Safety to Life and Building Code occupancy Technical Committees will be holding their Second Draft meetings. Eight different committees will meet to develop the Second Draft of NFPA 101, Life Safety Code and NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code. Just a few weeks back, the committees for the core chapters met at the same location. Did you know that NFPA 1, Fire Code extracts from NFPA 101 more than any other document? NFPA 1 extracts from more than 50 NFPA codes and standards, but approximately 100 pages of the 650(ish) page Fire Code are directly from NFPA 101. The Code includes provisions from NFPA 101 that address occupancy classification, building services, features of fire protection, means of egress, special structures, and occupancy specific provisions for fire protection systems, interior finish, furnishings and decorations, drills, and operating features. Do you know how to recognize if a provision in the Code is "extracted" from another document? A requirement extracted from another standard will contain a reference to the code/standard number and section in brackets at the end of the requirement in NFPA 1. The edition of the document being extracted can be found in Chapter 2 of NFPA 1. When a provision is extracted into an NFPA code, such as NFPA 1, it cannot be modified. So, while my time next week will be spent with Technical Committees developing provisions for the 2018 editions of NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000, the work of those committees will directly impact the 2018 edition of NFPA 1 as well. Some of the technical issues that will be up for discussion next week that may find their way into NFPA 1 are as follows: occupant load factors for business occupanciesdoor locking for unwanted entry open and enclosed mall structures risk analyses for mass notification systems carbon monoxide alarms grab bars for bathtubs and showers You can follow the work of the NFPA 1, NFPA 101, and NFPA 5000 Technical Committees by visiting their document information pages (www.nfpa.org/##). Off to Fort Lauderdale! Have a great week! You can follow me on Twitter for more updates and fire safety news @KristinB_NFPA.
A recent summit hosted by the Missouri Fire Sprinkler Coalition introduced attendees to something of an anomaly--a builder who fully supports home fire sprinklers. Admitting that some of his peers and local homebuilding associations take a different stance, Randy Propst, owner of Loran Construction, has seen the realities of fire sprinkler installation in new homes. He recently spoke with NFPA about his experience with this safety feature and why he's perplexed by the opposition's anti-sprinkler stance. NFPA: Why have you started sprinklering your new homes? I started building homes through a program by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The program gives specific cities a certain amount of money to do with it as they please, as long as it improves affordable housing. In Springfield, Missouri, they've created a “bank” for this money. I borrow money to build these affordable homes. In turn, I have to keep my rent within HUD's levels. Four years ago, we linked up with company Arc of the Ozarks [an organization supporting individuals with disabilities]. The company would rent a home from us for the people they serve and their caregivers. As we started working with them, we realized we're missing something here. These homes need to be universally designed, which means they can accommodate people with various limitations. Concurrently, we got on a savings, energy, and safety kick. From a safety factor, we know we needed to start including fire sprinklers. The last four or five homes have been sprinklered. We'll probably build another five or six this year, all sprinklered. Sprinklers will now be a standard part of our package. We have also tinkered with the idea of building spec homes, and if we do, they will all be sprinklered. I want the competitive advantage. [The insignificant cost of sprinklering a home] won't make or break a home sale, but tell me who else is offering this safety feature. Read the rest of Propst's interview by visiting NFPA's Fire Sprinkler Initiative blog. Page 18
A recent summit hosted by the Missouri Fire Sprinkler Coalition introduced attendees to something of an anomaly--a builder who fully supports home fire sprinklers. Admitting that some of his peers and local homebuilding associations take a different stance, Randy Propst, owner of Loran Construction, has seen the realities of fire sprinkler installation in new homes. He recently spoke with NFPA about his experience with this safety feature and why he's perplexed by the opposition's anti-sprinkler stance. NFPA: Why have you started sprinklering your new homes? I started building homes through a program by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The program gives specific cities a certain amount of money to do with it as they please, as long as it improves affordable housing. In Springfield, Missouri, they've created a “bank” for this money. I borrow money to build these affordable homes. In turn, I have to keep my rent within HUD's levels. Four years ago, we linked up with company Arc of the Ozarks [an organization supporting individuals with disabilities]. The company would rent a home from us for the people they serve and their caregivers. As we started working with them, we realized we're missing something here. These homes need to be universally designed, which means they can accommodate people with various limitations. Concurrently, we got on a savings, energy, and safety kick. From a safety factor, we know we needed to start including fire sprinklers. The last four or five homes have been sprinklered. We'll probably build another five or six this year, all sprinklered. Sprinklers will now be a standard part of our package. We have also tinkered with the idea of building spec homes, and if we do, they will all be sprinklered. I want the competitive advantage. [The insignificant cost of sprinklering a home] won't make or break a home sale, but tell me who else is offering this safety feature. What have your installation costs been? When building homes, the city assigns a project manager. He picked the wrong specification to follow. We were following NFPA 13R, Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Low-Rise Residential Occupancies. [NFPA 13D, Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One- and Two Family Dwellings and Manufactured Homes, not NFPA 13R, is suited for single-family-home installation.] The sprinklers were costing us more than they needed to. [Matt Klaus, NFPA's principal fire protection engineer and Missouri summit presenter] was a fountain of information. He gave me a clearer picture of how to install sprinklers that I didn't have before. We were putting in backflow valves and overdoing other things. I now can install sprinklers in a new home for about $1,200 or less. They'll cost me about a $1 per square foot. Prior to these installations, what were your thoughts on home fire sprinklers?Honestly, I hadn't thought about them. I'm friends with other builders. There's one in particular who was opposed to them. Why? His only argument is that it's a conspiracy that the sprinkler manufacturers are trying to force installation just to add another layer of cost to my home. But if it's in the [model building] code, everyone has the same layer of cost. How does it put you at a competitive disadvantage? It's such an insignificant cost factor. How do we get more builders to agree with your line of thinking?If I decide to build spec homes, what's eventually going to happen is I'm going to put sprinklers in there. I'm going to do things that make this home sellable. Builders are like anybody else. They copy. What was their recipe for success? Maybe we should follow suit if his homes are selling. Granite countertops aren't required in home, but how many people have them in there because everybody else does? Do you have more peace of mind knowing your tenants are living in sprinklered homes?The last unit I built was [compliant with the American With Disabilities Act regulations]. Three guys in wheelchairs are living there with a caregiver. I see how quickly fire can happen. How am I going to feel if three guys in wheelchairs die in my house from a fire? Or a little kid? And all I had to do is spend a little extra. Interview conducted, edited, and condensed by Fred Durso, Jr., communications manager for NFPA's Fire Sprinkler Initiative.
Having just recently visited the Trump Tower in New York City, the headlines of “Fire Controlled in the Chicago Trump Tower” caught my attention. Perusing just the lower floors of the Tower in New York provided a sense of the size and magnitude of these tremendous buildings and what it would take to respond to a fire on an upper floor. And though evacuation plans and emergency systems may be in place, in the event of a fire, nothing “trumps” fire sprinklers when it comes to protecting lives and property. The recent press release by the Northern Illinois Fire Sprinkler Advisory Board points out the glaring difference in outcomes of fires that have recently occurred in Chicago high rise buildings that had sprinklers and those that did not. And while many cities, like Chicago, are trying to catch up to national model codes, in some cases it may not be fast enough. As customers, buyers, and tenants, we must take the responsibility to protect ourselves through education. It is vital to know the facts about fire sprinklers and also to investigate if they are installed in the places where we choose to live and stay. Whether it's a long term residence or an overnight stay in a hotel, we have the power to choose the level of life-safety protection that we are willing to accept. Take a moment to read and share the educational resources that NFPA provides on high rise safety, fire sprinklers, and hotel/motel safety!
Schoolchildren across the nation are not only reading their favorite books all this month during National Reading Month, they're dressing up based on the characters and themes from the stories. A little boy in San Antonio, Texas, offers inspiration for children reading stories with a fire safety theme, like The Case of the Missing Smoke Alarms, or Sparky's Birthday Surprise on the Sparky School House website. When three-year-old Noah Keck's parents asked him last year what he wanted to dress up as for Halloween he said he wanted to be a smoke alarm. His father, Chad Keck, was not surprised. “Noah has leukemia and spent a lot of time in the hospital when he was originally diagnosed and was also stuck at home and started noticing things that others might not pay attention to.” He says Noah was initially afraid of the smoke alarms, but he and his wife, Zahra, assured Noah that the alarms were there to protect him. Chad says these days, nearly everywhere they go, Noah–who is now four years old–points out the smoke alarms and asks if they have fresh batteries. Whenever they pass the neighborhood fire station, Noah loves to check on the trucks. They are either “sleeping” or out “helping” someone because of a fire. Noah's costume was made by his grandmother. “He did go trick-or-treating on our street and the reactions were overwhelming,” said Chad. “Nearly everyone wanted to take a picture of Noah and his costume. Many said it was the best costume they'd ever seen.” Chad says Noah is doing well. He's been on daily treatment for his illness since his first birthday, spending months in the hospital and since then has had almost daily clinic visits. If all goes well, his treatment will be tapered off later this year. His parents say he has been an inspiration to many other children at the clinic. He is also a little fire safety ambassador who found a creative way to spread the message about the importance of having working smoke alarms, whether for Halloween, National Reading Month, Fire Prevention Week, or any other time of the year.
I came across a great little article today in the Eastwood & Kimberley Advertiser (out of England) called "Make sure you guard against fire this Valentine's Day." It caught my eye because of its focus on kitchen fire safety in the month of February. So, okay, maybe we don't celebrate Pancake Day or National Chip Week here in the States this month, but we do celebrate Valentine's Day which beckons plenty of bakers and would-be home chefs to take a stab at putting together creative and tasteful dishes for the ones they love. According to the article, the Brits love their fish and chips so it stands to reason that during National Chip Week (February 16 - 22 for those who want to partake), the risk of a cooking fire accident increases because of the many hot, oily pans used. Well, the same can be said for those of us doing a bit of frying here in our own homes. Let's face it, cooking with hot oil can be dangerous any time, anywhere, if you don't follow a few important rules: Always stay in the kitchen when frying on the stovetop. Keep an eye on what you fry. If you see wisps of smoke or the oil smells, immediately turn off the burner and/or carefully remove the pan from the burner. Smoke is a danger sign that the oil is too hot. Heat the oil slowly to the temperature you need for frying or sautéing. Add food gently to the pot or pan so the oil does not splatter. Always cook with a lid beside your pan. If you have a fire, slide the lid over the pan and turn off the burner. Do not remove the cover because the fire could start again. Let the pan cool for a long time. So no matter what kitchen you find yourself in this month, and especially on Valentine's Day, if you plan on creating a meal that includes hot oil, please play it safe and focus on the task at hand (ahem, cooking!). Save the gifts and kisses for after the dishes are done! Happy Valentine's Day everyone! For more information about cooking fire safety, check out NFPA's Cooking Fire Safety Central webpage today. Page 19
No matter where you look these days, the use of slow cookers and crockpots are on the rise. From stews to soups and even desserts, there's nothing better than applying that “set it and forget it” mentality when it comes to preparing meals for families on the go. But did you know that while slow cookers are generally safe, we still need to be mindful of the dangers they pose. According to NFPA, slow cookers were involved in an estimated average of 150 reported home structure fires per year from 2007 - 2011, resulting in an average of 10 civilian injuries and $2 million in direct property damage annually. In terms of accidents, it ranks up there with other smaller household appliances you may not ever think of like your coffee maker or teapot, food warmer and hotplates, and kettles. While the chance of an accident happening while using a slow cooker or crockpot is somewhat low, our fire safety experts here at NFPA suggest some great tips to consider whenever you're using some of these smaller appliances: Inspect plugs and cords to make sure they are not frayed or broken (replace if necessary), which will help keep electrical fires at bay Keep the crockpot and slow cooker (or other small appliance) away from the edge of the counter so hands and elbows don't push it off the edge causing burns or scalds from the hot liquid and food inside Follow instructions for recipes carefully using the right amount of liquid and heat when preparing your meal to prevent overheating So the next time you find yourself using your slow cooker (and if you're like most of us here in New England these days, you're probably using it regularly to ward off the cold!) follow these simple tips above to keep yourself and your family safe. Learn more about kitchen fire safety on NFPA's Cooking Fire Safety Central webpage. Interested to learn about this and other cooking equipment fires? NFPA's Home Structure Fires by Equipment Involved in Ignition report can be found in our research/reports section of the website.
When we discuss the problems with modern methods of construction, mainly lightweight/engineered wood components, we usually think about the site-built homes. In a Fire Engineering article Chief Kevin Gallagher of the Acushnet (MA) Fire & EMS Department considers the problems of modular homes, which are factory-built and then towed in sections to be installed at a permanent location, and range from “simple capes to multibox McMansions.” The chief recounts a fire in a two-story, prefabricated/modular residence in 2008 and says; “Despite our department's best efforts, the structure was a complete loss…we never had a chance to save it. Fox Boston covered the fire incident in a previous report. He tells us that research to learn about the methods of construction used by the modular industry has been the subject of several other Fire Engineering articles. He says very serious concerns were discovered; mainly:”large void spaces between levels of habitation, the use of flammable adhesives as the sole means of attaching gypsum to wood ceiling joists, and the presence of holes used to assist in lifting modular boxes onto the foundation, which can create an easy pathway for fire spread.” He adds; “Our goal has been two-fold. First, we identify the flaws with the construction methods used. Second, we fight for change through the code development process. Third, we spread the word to any and all fire service members of these hazards and the tactical changes the hazards require.” The problem was documented in a Fox Boston report. Chief Gallagher concludes; “Do we have a problem? My answer, since the moment I pulled up on a fire in a modular structure, is an emphatic YES! My sense is that those firefighters who have dealt with fires in these types of buildings would agree.” He says he will “dig deeper, share valuable information and, hopefully, provide you with an awareness and appreciation for the hazards within modular construction” in the following months. Although Chief Gallagher does not talk about fire sprinklers as a way to offset the problem in this particular issue, it should be a major consideration for home fire sprinkler advocates. Get a free copy of the dangers of lightweight construction presentation.
Well, my confined space blog may have slowed down a bit in the past couple months due to other ongoing work, but unfortunately the confined space fatalities have not slowed down... In April, seven workers were killed in a tank that was undergoing maintenance and cleaning at a plant in Mexico City operated by Corona beermaker, Grupo Modelo. It is believed that four victims were maintenance contractors and three victims were other Modelo employees. There are few details available on the incident. It is speculated that the deaths were due to “unspecified toxins” and that the three Modelo employees had entered the tank in an effort to rescue the other four contract employees. Mexican authorities are reportedly investigating the incident. Confined spaces are or should be clearly recognized in the beer industry. The large numbers of tanks that are entered for maintenance and cleaning, combined with hazardous atmospheres including carbon dioxide produced during fermentation, inert atmospheres, and ammonia from refrigeration systems creates significant confined space entries and hazards. These incidents do not just happen in foreign countries, and wine makers are also not off the hook when it comes to confined spaces. A confined space death occurred just two years earlier at Napa California at Ancien wines when a worker was overcome by nitrogen and argon gases inside a tank. Workers entering into tanks in the beer and wine industries should be intimately familiar with confined space entry procedures. Even if contractors were always used to perform confined space entry work, it is unclear why Modelo employees would have entered the tank if they had been trained to recognize the confined space hazard. The Modelo company has been in operation since 1925 and is the maker of the number 1 imported beer in the United States. This confined space incident has the largest loss of life in one entry that I am aware of. While it is not uncommon to lose 2-3 workers, this incident claimed the lives of 7 workers. Confined space entry hazards continue to claim lives despite improved recognition of the hazards and despite regulations and guidelines available to prevent such incidents. The National Fire Protection Association is developing a Best Practices document for confined space entry. This document will address gaps in existing standards and will be more prescriptive in describing things like how to test the atmosphere in and around confined spaces prior to entry. The NFPA document is looking to go beyond the minimum standards and to provide those looking to develop a “gold star” confined space entry program with the information they need to do so. Please email me at for further information and/or leave a comment below for discussion. I look forward to hearing from you!
Labels on fire doors, fire door frames, or other components of a fire door assembly, are the identifying mark that the door or component has been tested to the required first test standards and has passed the criteria required by those test standards. Labels prove to inspectors, AHJs, building owners, or anyone else observing the fire door assembly that it (as tested) will protect the opening as it did when tested. NFPA 80, 2013 edition, contains the following language regarding labeled products: 4.2.1* Listed items shall be identified by a label. 4.2.2 Labels shall be applied in locations that are readily visible and convenient for identification by the AHJ after installation of the assembly. Associated annex language to Section 4.2.1 sheds some light on the intent of the labeling provisions in NFPA 80: A.4.2.1 Labels can be permitted to be of metal, paper, or plastics or can be permitted to be stamped or diecast into the item. Labels should not be removed, defaced, or made illegible while the door is in service. If the label on an existing fire door has been removed or is no longer legible, it is acceptable to verify the rating of the fire door through other means acceptable to the AHJ such as an inspection or certification service that provides acceptable documentation. One of the most frequently asked questions that I received regarding labels is whether or not they can be painted. Paint most often will render the label illegible, thus it is not recommended that labels be painted. Proper training and education should be provided to those in buildings who may be doing repair or maintenance work to doors to ensure they are aware of the risks associated with painting fire door labels. Labels are required in a number of applications on all types fire door assemblies. Where NFPA 80 mandates a label be present, it should meet the requirements of Chapter 4 as noted above.
As the name implies, NFPA 80 provides requirements for more than just fire doors. The installation, inspection, testing, and maintenance of other opening protectives such as fire windows, glass block assemblies, fabric fire safety curtains and fire dampers are also included within the scope of NFPA 80. Three editions ago (2007), the requirements for the installation, inspection, testing, and maintenance of fire dampers were moved from NFPA 90A to NFPA 80. One of the questions I get asked most often is with regards to the inspection and test frequency of fire dampers. Like all opening protectives, continued maintenance and inspection is critical and will help ensure that the doors, windows, shutters, dampers, etc. will operate properly under fire conditions. First, an operational test must be completed after the installation of the fire damper is complete. Then, each fire damper must be tested and inspected one year after the installation. After that one year mark, fire dampers must then be tested and inspected every four years except for hospitals which have a six year frequency. This begs a follow up question: why the difference in the testing and inspection frequency between hospitals and other types of building uses? Most users expect provisions related to hospitals to be more restrictive than for other types of buildings. The healthcare industry presented the technical committee with significant evidence that a four-year inspection frequency for fire dampers in hospitals, in these buildings, is a hindrance. Hospitals are unique in that they have many building systems critical to the life safety and health of their occupants (patients). Personnel accessing fire dampers every four years would entail the risk of interfering with or potentially damaging the many systems (HVAC, medical gas systems, sprinkler piping, electrical systems) that are located near the fire dampers and above ceilings. The six-year frequency allows for a reasonable but safe length of time between inspections and also ensures the integrity of the hospital operations. Additional details regarding the inspection criteria and documentation can be found in Chapter 19 of NFPA 80.
Each Friday I am going to post a quick paragraph or two responding to some of the most frequently asked questions on NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, 2013 edition. Hopefully I can help answer some of your questions! First question: Can I put signs on my fire doors? Yes, you can! However, NFPA 80, does provide some specific details regarding the sign and how you attach it to the fire door itself. Section 4.1.4 of NFPA 80 contains the provisions for signage. Additionally, signs may be installed on the surface of fire doors in accordance with the manufacturer's publised listing. There are two very important conditions regarding signage on fire doors. First, the signs are for informational purposes only and must not exceed 5% of the area of the face of the fire door that they are attached to. Secondly, the signs can only be attached to the fire door with an adhesive. Attaching a sign by using means such as nails or screws are not permitted as they can, and most likely will, void the label on the fire door and affect its performance under fire conditions. With regards to where on the door the sign can be located, keep in mind two additional provisions: signs cannot be installed on glazing material in fire doors. signs cannot be installed anywhere on the fire door that may impair or interfere with the proper operation of the door. Page 20
SEPTEMBER 26, 2022
SEPTEMBER 23, 2022
SEPTEMBER 21, 2022
SEPTEMBER 20, 2022
SEPTEMBER 19, 2022
SEPTEMBER 16, 2022
|
What is the only method to determine absolutely whether a building has a standpipe system?
Pos Terkait
Copyright © 2024 ketajaman Inc.
