Residential Fire Sprinklers .com

Protecting Your Home & Family

By Jason Flanagan – Baltimore Examiner

Firefighters from throughout the metropolitan region converged in Anne Arundel to support legislation requiring sprinklers installed in houses there, a bill home builders have openly opposed.

“We are urging Anne Arundel to be the ninth county to join the growing numbers,” said John Bender, of the Aberdeen Fire Department, who joined members of fire departments from Carroll, Montgomery and Prince George’s counties, where local governments have sprinkler ordinances.

“The City of Aberdeen has had a sprinkler ordinance in place since 2006, and it has saved lives.”

The Anne Arundel bill is simple: All new houses must adhere to new building standards that require sprinklers systems to be installed, even in houses that run on well water.

The county eventually will have to mandate sprinklers when the code changes become official in 2010.

Council Chairwoman Cathy Vitale, R-Severna Park, was surprised by the fire officials’ outpouring of support for the bill she sponsored at the recent council meeting.

“I didn’t ask to have any support except the state fire marshal, but to have firefighters from out of the county in support of the legislation, I was taken aback,” said Vitale, whose husband works for the county fire department.

“I have not seen such statewide support for a piece of our legislation.”

But home builders say sprinklers are unnecessary if proper smoke detectors are installed and could be costly if not properly maintained.

“It’s tough to speak against firefighters, and that’s not what this is about,” said Eric DeVito, president of the Anne Arundel Home Builders Association. “[Home builders are] going to pay a cost that customers do not want to pay.”

But the Anne Arundel Fire Department disagrees.

“Even functioning smoke alarms have been found to be insufficient in waking occupants of homes,” county Fire Chief John Ray said. “We need a more potent weapon to combat this ever-present threat to our community.”

And firefighters from across the region agree, saying their jurisdictions haven’t seen a fatality in a house with sprinklers.

“Carroll County has had [a sprinkler ordinance] since May 2006, and we find it to be a good one,” said Doug Alexander, of the Mount Airy Fire Department.

“There are ways to make sprinklers cost-effective.”

To read the full article click here.

By David Slade – The Post and Courier

Months after the General Assembly approved new incentives for installing fire sprinkler systems, they remain unavailable because not one municipality or county has adopted the tax breaks.

The incentives were meant to encourage people to install sprinkler systems in homes and businesses where they are not required by building codes, but declining government revenues have thrown cold water on the likelihood of the tax breaks becoming widely available.

“I don’t know of anybody who’s done it, and I don’t know if anybody will,” said Robert Croom, assistant director of the South Carolina Association of Counties. “At this point, it’s a money thing.”

“You’ve got state aid being cut, counties are furloughing people, and this would be one more thing.”

The push to encourage sprinkler systems followed two 2007 fires: the Sofa Super Store fire in Charleston in which nine firefighters died, and the house fire in Ocean Isle Beach, N.C., that killed seven South Carolina college students.

A study of the Sofa Super Store fire commissioned by the city of Charleston concluded, among other findings, that the fire would have been quickly controlled with only minor damage had there been a sprinkler system.

It’s up to local governments that collect property taxes to adopt the incentives, which allow people who install sprinkler systems to recoup half their cost.

There would be a 25 percent tax credit against state income taxes and a 25 percent credit against local property taxes, but only if a local ordinance were adopted.

“Municipalities have the opportunity now,” said State Fire Marshal John Reich. “I hope they do the right thing and make the right choices.”

Efforts to mandate the installation of sprinkler systems in commercial buildings, first proposed in 2004 after six people died in a fire at a Greenville Comfort Inn, have been repeatedly rejected by state lawmakers.

Charleston officials this year sought legislation that would allow cities to go beyond state building codes in requiring new sprinkler systems, but that effort also failed.

Instead, lawmakers adopted the tax incentives, and without dissent overrode a veto of the measure by Gov. Mark Sanford.

According to the state Municipal Association, only the city of Greer has taken up a sprinkler incentive ordinance, and that ordinance was tabled.

“In my heart, I had hoped that Charleston would be the first to adopt this,” Reich said.

Charleston Mayor Joe Riley said he expects the city will adopt incentives in 2009, but he would have preferred that the state allow the city to adopt tougher building codes.

“Our request to the General Assembly was to give the cities the authority to require (sprinklers),” Riley said. “What we have is an unfunded mandate.”

The way the tax incentives are structured, any municipality that adopts the plan would essentially be agreeing to pay a quarter of the cost of each sprinkler system installed in a building where a system would not be required, through a property tax credit.

The state would pay another quarter of the cost, through income tax credits.

The legislation was authored by Republican House and Senate leaders from the Charleston area.

Sen. Glenn McConnell, who sponsored the Senate version of the plan, said he was disappointed to learn no municipality or county has adopted the incentives.

“That’s disappointing news,” he said. “I had hoped there would be some forward motion on that.”

Rep. Bobby Harrell, who sponsored the House version, said that because no one has adopted the incentives, the Legislature must take another look at them.

“It’s important that we cause more buildings to have the safety features that save lives,” Harrell said.

The Municipal Association has prepared a model ordinance for municipalities that may be considering adopting the incentives. It has been available for about two weeks.

“I think they don’t have a real big political push (to adopt the incentives), from what I hear from council members and mayors,” said Ed Schafer, legislative counsel for the association.

The same legislation that created the incentives also prohibits water systems from charging fees to connect new sprinkler systems that exceed the system’s actual costs. Regardless of the fate of the tax incentives, that part of the measure will reduce the cost of new systems in many areas.

To read the full article click here.

With the nation’s model building codes now requiring fire sprinkler systems in all new homes, representatives of 28 national and international organizations concerned with residential fire safety just held a National Residential Fire Sprinkler Summit to discuss opportunities for cooperative advocacy at the state and local level. The summit, facilitated by Chief Ronny Coleman, President of the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition and former California State Fire Marshal, identified inter-organizational communication and sharing of resources as top priorities.

“It’s clear that requiring fire sprinklers in new homes is good public policy, and it’s very encouraging to see such a high level of collaboration among advocacy groups to promote this cause,” said Chief Coleman. “Having all of these groups represented at the Summit meeting was a clear demonstration that we are ready, willing and able to work together as allies to support jurisdictions in their code adoption efforts.”

The IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition is building a network of state-level chapters to enhance communications among state and local fire safety advocates and national and international organizations, which will also facilitate the sharing and coordination of resources.

“There is no doubt that we’ll see some well-organized and well-funded opposition from home builder groups as we advocate adoption of the 2009 International Residential Code’s sprinkler requirement. Nevertheless, we’re prepared to assist local officials in making the case that requiring fire sprinklers in new homes is the best approach to achieving a sustainable reduction in residential fire losses,” said Jeffrey Shapiro, PE, Executive Director of the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition. “The nation’s fire safety advocates are committed to seeing this through.”

About IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition: Founded in 2007, the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition has grown to include more than 100 regional, national and international public safety organizations, including associations representing 44 states, all of which support the mission of promoting residential fire sprinkler systems as a standard feature in new home construction. The Coalition was formed to educate public policymakers on the value of residential sprinkler systems and to support related legislation. More information can be found at www.IRCFireSprinkler.org.

It has been said by some that “if you’re going to speak for residential fire sprinklers in single family homes, it’s imperative that you live in a sprinklered house.” I wish to respond to this claim in order to encourage all supporters of residential fire sprinklers to speak out regardless of the current level of fire protection in their home.

I recently purchased a home which did not have fire sprinklers installed. I have not (yet) installed fire sprinklers in my home; but, I support the passing of residential fire sprinklers in the IRC.

The IRC will only require fire sprinkler installation in NEW single family dwellings (SFDs). It is much more cost effective to install fire sprinklers in new construction when all of the walls are open and all areas of the home are easily accessible. The monetary cost difference for retrofitting a house with sprinklers is sometimes more than double the cost to install them when the house is being constructed.

Take my case for example. The long-term plan for my house is to install fire sprinklers. However, when I do, it is going to be a painful project. There are areas where I am going to have to pull out drywall and (because I have a two-story house) tear up the floor in some areas as well. After all the floor repairs, drywall dust cleanup and painting is done, I will have fire sprinklers in my house. I could see how this would deter your everyday household from retrofitting fire sprinklers into their home.

It is for this reason that the new IRC residential fire sprinkler code requirement IS so important. If the fire sprinklers had been installed when my house was being constructed, then their much lower cost would have been lumped into my 30 year loan. Now, the installation will cost more and would be on a separate loan.

Based on this, I think I am still credible for wanting and supporting residential fire sprinkler requirements to pass even though I do not have them in my existing home. My support of the new requirement is so that future homeowners will not have to wrestle with the retrofit decision versus simply having them installed with the original construction.

Justin Reid is a Project Engineer at RLH Fire Protection out of their Van Nuys, CA office providing fire protection contracting services in California, Nevada and Hawaii. Justin is a registered Professional Engineer in Fire Protection in the State of California. Prior to working at RLH, Justin worked for three years as a consultant at Schirmer Engineering Corporation in their Los Angeles office where he provided building code analysis, performance based design, smoke control third party testing/design and a wide range of other services to numerous clients. Justin graduated from the University of Maryland College Park with a Bachelor of Science degree in Fire Protection Engineering in 2004. While in school, Justin completed an internship at the Schirmer Engineering Washington DC office, worked on Capitol Hill in the Office of Compliance and worked at the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms Fire Research Laboratory in Beltsville, MD. Justin is the current President of the Southern California Chapter of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers, is a national SFPE Member, NFPA Member and member of the Salamander Fire Protection Engineering Honor Society, Beta Chapter.

UPDATE: ICC Appeals Board Denies NAHB Claim Regarding IRC Residential Sprinkler Requirement

See the article “ICC Appeals Board Denies NAHB Claim“

The opposition to residential fire sprinkler requirements continues as the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) filed a request to appeal on October 30, 2008 with the International Code Council (ICC). The appeal targets the recent passing of RB64-07/08 to the International Residential Code (IRC) which requires residential fire sprinklers to be installed in one and two family homes and town homes effective January 1, 2011.

RB64-07/08, with public comment 2, passed overwhelming on September 21, 2008 with 73% percent approval from close to two thousand voting members at the final action hearings in Minneapolis. The NAHB appeal contends that the ICC failed to provide a balance of interest in voting.

Specifically, the appeal claims that:

- the ICC did not prevent a single interest group, specifically the fire service, from unfairly dominating the voting at the final action hearings.

- the ICC’s governmental consensus process was manipulated and subverted to advance the interests of a single stakeholder.

- the ICC must take immediate and strong action to eliminate the growing influence of third-part funding to secure votes at the ICC final action hearings.

To view a copy of the appeal click on the following NAHB Appeal to ICC Regarding RB64 and RB66

The appeal is currently planned to be conducted in Chicago with conference call capabilities. Parties involved will be notified of the specific details of the appeals hearing at least twenty days prior.

Further, the appeals board is taking written views from interested parties on the request for appeal. You are encouraged to provide your views on this matter by filing a written comment with Michael Pfeiffer, ICC Deputy Senior Vice President of Technical Affairs.

To view the ICC Appeal Policy click on the following ICC Appeal Policy

Many supporters of residential fire sprinkler requirements find it ironic that such claims are coming from the NAHB organization with a long history of representing their members special interests and using their collective strength to influence the code development process.

The ICC develops its codes using the governmental consensus process. Voting members for the building codes are typical building officials and fire officials from government jurisdictions across the country. Non-governmental representatives are allowed to be members of the ICC, but may not vote on code changes. Further, each voting governmental member must physically be present at the final action hearings to cast their vote. In the case of RB64-07/08, the authorized ICC voting members from the fire service exercised their right to vote by traveling to the hearings and officially showing their support for residential fire sprinkler requirements.

Financial assistance for travel expenses of voting members was offered by both proponents and opponents of RB64-07/08. Such travel assistance does not change the view of the voting members, rather it simply helps to remove the travel barrier that hinders some voting governmental members from casting their vote.

The NAHB claims that the vote was manipulated by the fire service, but supporters argue that the fire service has simply exercised their right to vote and participate in the governmental consensus process. The NAHB obviously is not pleased with the outcome of the vote, but their claims that the fire service has “unfairly” dominated the voting process may be going too far in pushing their agenda. Since when is winning a majority of the vote considered “unfairly” dominating? Isn’t that the objective of both sides of any issue being voted on?

By Andy Johns – Chattanooga Times Free Press

In the middle of a housing slump, the last thing Tina Rice wants to do is tack on a few thousand dollars to the price of home construction.

Which is why she’s against a move requiring fire sprinkler systems to be installed in all new homes, a move that some builders say could add between about $4,000 to $10,000, depending on the size of a house.

“To me it’s like you’re almost getting rid of your first-time home buyer,” said Ms. Rice, the Bradley County building inspector. “The way I look at it, you’re pricing people out of buying a home.”

Ms. Rice spoke out against the fire-sprinkler portion of the 2009 International Residential Code in September while attending the International Code Council’s Final Action Hearings in Minnesota. But the council went ahead and voted in favor of sprinklers, so all one- and two-family residences and townhomes built after Jan. 1, 2011 in areas where the code is adopted must have sprinkler systems, according to an code council spokesman.

Under Tennessee law, however, it could be years before any new homes in the state must have fire sprinkler systems, according to Ms. Rice.

And once the code is adopted, local governments have the option to amend it to exclude certain portions or simply fail to enforce all the rules, according to Michael Colopy, spokesman for International Code Council.

“In other words, this is a model code,” he said. “By itself it doesn’t have the force of law.”

State law requires counties with building inspectors to operate under a code that’s no more than six years older than the code adopted by the state. Since Tennessee only recently adopted the 2006 code, it could be years before the state adopts the newest code.

Hamilton County would probably follow the cue of the state, according to Pat Payne, director of building inspection for the county. Hamilton, which now uses the 2003 code, would do what it needed to remain in compliance with the state, he said.

Proponents of the sprinkler systems say they save lives, which is worth the small cost of installation.

“It’s two Big Macs a month on a 30-year mortgage,” said Wayne Waggoner, executive director of the Tennessee Fire Sprinkler Contractors Association.

The U.S. Fire Administration estimates home sprinkler systems would cost around $1 to $1.50 per square foot in new construction, which Mr. Waggoner said was true on his own house. The sprinkler system in his 3,800-square-foot house cost $3,900, he said.

At that cost, the system is well worth the expense, Mr. Waggoner said, citing the dangers fire pose to property, residents and fire officials.

To read the full article click here.