Residential Fire Sprinklers .com

Protecting Your Home & Family

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 ERIN COX - HometownAnnapolis.com

In the wake of a deadly fire last week, Council Chairman Cathy Vitale has revived her plan to mandate a sprinkler system for every new home.

Ms. Vitale, R-Severna Park, introduced a bill Monday night that would expand the county’s sprinkler requirement to include all new single-family homes and duplexes, a move to protect both homeowners and firefighters, as well as the properties.

“When you look at the most recent death in Anne Arundel County related to a dwelling fire, it’s disheartening to hear that it could have been avoided if the home had sprinklers, which could have contained the fire in one room,” said Ms. Vitale, whose husband is a career firefighter with the county. “Sprinklers save lives. It is the simplest of messages.”

A 42-year-old man died Oct. 13 in an accidental home fire on Mace Road in the Bay Ridge area, the fourth fire-related death in Anne Arundel this year. The house did not have working smoke detectors or a sprinkler system, officials said.

Fire officials have been pressing the council for four years to make such a move. Home builders have traditionally opposed across-the-board sprinkler rules for cost reasons.

Ms. Vitale drafted similar legislation a year ago, calling for sprinklers in every new house, adding them to the list of buildings that already require them to pass building inspection. Sprinkler are already required for townhomes, commercial buildings and apartment complexes.

The bill was never introduced. Ms. Vitale said it was held up by the administration’s concerns about the bill’s technical requirements. County Executive John R. Leopold said this morning he has concerns about technical elements in the current legislation but still supports it.

“I would hope to work through those issues because the central public safety policy is sound,” Mr. Leopold said, adding. “There can be no greater priority than public safety.”

As Fire Safety Awareness Month rolled around again this month, Ms. Vitale had new arguments to bolster her bill this year. The International Code Council, which writes building safety codes widely used as a template for local jurisdictions, incorporated mandatory sprinklers into residential building codes last month.

Anne Arundel’s volunteer firefighters have been lobbying for four years for the county to incorporate sprinklers into the building code, said Craig Harman, president of the Anne Arundel County Volunteer Firefighters Association. He said he and seven other volunteers traveled to a September meeting of the International Code Council and helped pass the mandatory sprinkler bill.

To read the full article click here.

NOTICE: The full content for this post is hosted outside of Residential Fire Sprinklers .com. This site is not responsible for the content, privacy policies or other practices of the destination site.

The Residential Fire Sprinklers Code has passed!

See the article “ICC Approves Residential Fire Sprinklers in the International Residential Code“

---

With the International Code Council (ICC) hearings in progress at the Minneapolis Convention Center, September 14-23, 2008, the Wall Street Journal featured the article Mandating Fire Sprinklers for the Home. This timely article puts residential fire sprinklers in the national spotlight as a critical vote approaches.

Starting on the evening of September 20, 2008, members of the ICC will vote on the proposed amendment to the International Residential Code (IRC) that, if passed, will require the installation of residential fire sprinkler systems in all one and two family houses and townhouses.

Over the last several years the support for residential fire sprinklers has been gaining momentum as hundreds of cities and counties adopt local ordinances requiring their use. The Residential Fire Safety Institute, a nonprofit that promotes fire safety, says it has a record of 400 counties and cities that have passed ordinances requiring sprinklers. Eight years ago, that number was only 200, says Roy Marshall, the organization’s director. He adds that “most of the movement has happened in the last two or three years.”

While local ordinance adoption has been a huge step forward for the fire protection community, adopting of residential fire sprinkler requirements in the IRC takes home fire protection to an entirely new level. The IRC is the model code governing residential construction in 46 states plus the District of Columbia. Once residential fire sprinkler requirements are included in the IRC it will be a challenging uphill battle for opponents to get the requirement removed at the city or county level.

The push for amending the IRC is headed by the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition, which has the backing of more than 100 national, state and local organizations including the IAFC, IAFF, NVFC and the National Association of State Fire Marshals.

We are at a pivotal point in home fire protection. Considering the high number of home deaths and injuries currently experienced in the United States, this code change has the power to alter the future of public safety.

“If the sprinkler resolution passes so that the IRC requires residential fire sprinklers in all new homes, in the next few years we will see a transformation in the fire sprinkler industry like no other to date”, says Ryan J. Smith, President of Fire Smarts, LLC. “Home fire deaths and injuries will start to decline and the fire sprinkler industry will experience a rapid growth in demand that will be a welcomed challenge to it’s already limited supply of skilled labor.”

The supporters of residential fire sprinkler requirements have good reason to be optimistic. The last time this proposal was voted on it missed a 2/3 majority vote by only less than 100 votes. This time, thanks to the unifying effort of the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition, attendance from voting members of the ICC that support the proposal should be at an all-time high.

Thousands of individuals wait anxiously for this weekend when the final vote for the 2009 edition of the International Residential Code takes place…hopefully confirming once and for all that residential fire sprinklers are essential life safety devices for all homes.

It may be of interest to you that on the Internet you can view a webcast of the hearing from the comfort of your home. While there is little entertainment value here, you do have an opportunity to watch the course of home fire protection forever change.

View live webcast of ICC Final Action Hearings

By Michael Tucker - Belgrade News

In the smoldering debate over fire-protection regulations in Gallatin County, three plywood structures resembling dog houses were set ablaze Friday in an effort to illustrate the benefits of fire retardant as opposed to sprinkler systems.

The sprinkler debate has been ongoing for at least a year now, and up to bat next on the agenda is Falcon Hollow, a new proposed subdivision located off Gooch Hill Road west of Bozeman.

The developer opted to require sprinklers once fire flows were deemed inadequate, but now developers want a new option - lumber treated with fire retardant, according to county documents. Developers said a new well and future plans for a holding tank coupled with the proximity of the Rae fire department, should be enough to throw out the sprinkler requirement.

County Commissioner Steve White, along with construction and fire-service interests, took part in a demonstration Friday designed to illustrate the effectiveness of spray-on retardants

Three plywood dog houses were stuffed with paper and lit on fire. One house was not treated and two homes were coated with two different fire retardants.

The untreated structure was engulfed in flames while the treated homes were largely unaffected, save for some scorching and smoke damage.

But that’s where the issue is being played out.

Based on statistics, firefighters have said smoke is the main killer in structure fires - not the actual flames.

While fire retardants can be effective tools, they don’t address the entire issue, Big Sky Fire Chief Jason Revinsky said. While every fire is different, statistics indicate most blazes start from the contents of the house - the bed, the couch or kitchen cabinets ignited by the toaster.

And even though all of the dog houses in Friday’s demonstration didn’t go up in flames, they all had one common feature - the paper that started the fire, Revinsky said.

“The newspaper acts as the contents in the home, and every house had the same amount of smoke from the newspaper,” he said. “This is what kills people in a structure. The majority of the time, it’s smoke.”

But fire retardants can slow down the progression of a fire, enabling firefighters to keep a handle on the situation, said Greg Heath of Dependable Paint and Drywall, a local company that sells fire retardants and which hosted the demonstration.

“The goal is to keep fire from getting out of hand,” he said. “We aren’t going to put the mattress out.”

To read the full article click here.

NOTICE: The full content for this post is hosted outside of Residential Fire Sprinklers .com. This site is not responsible for the content, privacy policies or other practices of the destination site.

eNews Park Forest

The Village Board recently passed an amendment to the Fire Prevention Code lowering the square footage requirement for sprinkler protection in new commercial structures and mandates residential sprinklers in new single-family homes.

The measure lowers the square footage requirement from 5,000 square feet to zero for commercial structures.

According to Fire Chief Robert Wilcox, residential sprinklers are a simple solution to lessen the possibility of deaths in the event of fire, “A public policy decision like this can potentially save the lives of residents and firefighters alike,” Wilcox told members of the Village Board.

Fire Sprinklers react to temperatures in each room and respond when heated to their designed temperature setting, Wilcox said. He noted that in most residential fire scenarios, a single fire sprinkler will control a developing fire.

Chief Wilcox said the cost for the added security feature to a home can be nominal. Studies have shown that the in­stallation of a fire sprinkler is roughly one-percent of the construction cost of a new home.

Sprinklers also provide enhanced safety of firefighters. According to the National Fire Protection Association, no firefighter has lost their lives in sprinklered buildings since 1983 - except in occurrences of explosion or flash fire.

To read the full article click here.

NOTICE: The full content for this post is hosted outside of Residential Fire Sprinklers .com. This site is not responsible for the content, privacy policies or other practices of the destination site.

By Tom Hester - Newark Star-Ledger

The Corzine administration has until Sept. 17 to decide if the new state fire code should require that sprinklers be installed in about 470 high-rise residential and office buildings statewide.

The proposed mandate for buildings over seven stories tall that were built before 1988 is favored by fire safety officials welcome but building owners contend it would be too expensive and drive rents up.

The issue has been debated off and on before the state Fire Safety Commission for two decades, according to fire officials.

This time, before taking a position for the administration, state Community Affairs Commissioner Joseph Doria retained a consultant to determine the potential cost to building and condo owners and tenants. The consultant, Cambridge Construction Management of Somerville, estimated the cost of installing sprinklers at a little over $16 per square foot of floor space.

“We are currently reviewing this information before we make any determination on this issue,” said Chris Donnelly, Community Affairs spokesman.

The Fire Safety Commission has approved the sprinkler installation mandate but Doria and Gov. Jon Corzine have the final say. Since 1988 the fire code has required all new high-rise buildings to have sprinklers in rooms and hallways.

“This is fairly simple, we are in favor of this,” said Arthur Londensky, South Brunswick fire protection code official, president of the New Jersey Fire Prevention and Protection Association and a Fire Safety Commission member. “It would not only protect those in the buildings but first responders.”

Londensky noted that after a fatal Seton Hall dormitory fire, the state moved quickly to require sprinklers in dorms statewide. “This is the next logical step to take,” he said, but if the new rules are not adopted by Sept. 17 “we will have to start all over again.”

He said he believes proponents would be open to seeing the sprinkler mandate phased in to allow the work to be done when condos, apartments and offices are vacant.

Nicholas Kikis, director or regulatory affairs and research for the Trenton-based New Jersey Apartment Association, argues current state fire code requirements calling have made high-rises safe and retrofitting the buildings with sprinklers would create a financial hardship for owners or tenants. He said the Apartment Association estimates it would cost $15,000 to $30,000 per apartment depending on the construction of the building.

To read the full article click here.

NOTICE: The full content for this post is hosted outside of Residential Fire Sprinklers .com. This site is not responsible for the content, privacy policies or other practices of the destination site.

By MARGARET GIBBONS - The Phoenix

NORRISTOWN — The Montgomery County commissioners want tougher fire protection measures incorporated into municipal building and fire codes in the wake of last week’s catastrophic blaze that destroyed two of the four occupied apartment buildings in The Riverwalk at Millennium complex in Conshohocken.

County Commissioners’ Chairman James R. Matthews Thursday said he has learned that Conshohocken’s codes did call for fire protection measures such as sprinklers in attics of wooden construction, but that the developer, O’Neill Properties Group, received a variance from the borough eliminating that requirement.

Matthews said he also has learned that other municipalities do not even have those requirements in their codes.

Matthews emphasized that the county has no control over building and fire codes put out by the state and adopted, sometimes with revisions, by municipalities. But, he added, the commissioners can use their position to rally support on both the state and local levels for tougher codes.

Since last week’s blaze, Matthews said he finds it “really unnerving” to look up at the common roofs of assisted living facilities, nursing home facilities, apartment houses and even business centers in the county.

He said he cannot help but wonder what would have happened at one of these facilities if a comparable fire, which became a “blazing inferno spreading from one end of the roof to the other” within eight to 10 minutes, broke out in the early morning hours and “involving a bunch of people without agility.”

“To hear from specialists that these code variances are tolerated in Pennsylvania where you end up with these fire traps, basically,” said Matthews.

“We have tens of thousands of people living under roofs with no sprinklers, no fire walls,” he said.

“I would think that if you are going to tolerate these wooden trusses, which also are known as ‘firemen killers,’ you should certainly have hand-in-hand a requirement for sprinklers in these common areas,” said Matthews.

Developer Brian O’Neill earlier this week defended the construction of his buildings.

“Buildings are designed to get people out safely and that is what happened here,” said O’Neill, emphasizing no lives were lost in the eight-alarm rush-hour fire that drew on the efforts of some 300 firefighters from more than 100 fire companies to bring the blaze under control.

Borough Council President Sandra Caterbone also earlier this week said: “every code that needed to be followed was followed.”

The fire, which was ruled an accident, started when smoldering sparks or molten metal, generated by an acetylene torch, ignited the five-story wooden frame-out of an apartment building under construction. The radiant heat generated by that blaze caused the roofs on the two nearby occupied apartment buildings to catch fire, burning from the top down.

None of the commissioners disputed claims that O’Neill built the complex in accordance with the requirements placed on him by the borough.

Commissioner Joseph M. Hoeffel III echoed Matthews’s comments.

With the millions of federal, state and county dollars spent on public safety, the county has to take a leadership role in pointing out problems in that area, said Hoeffel.

Noting that there is a growing trend to use cheaper wood frames and wooden trusts in the construction of large residential facilities, Hoeffel said that last week’s fire should serve as a “wake-up call that government has got to be stronger in the steps we take to keep people safe in such buildings.”

“Fully sprinkled buildings with fire walls to the roof seem to be a minimum requirement, not something that is optional,” said Hoeffel, recommending that the county planning commission develop model fire protection codes that can be adopted by municipalities.

“As good as we are at organizing, as good as we are at response, as professional as our fire companies are, are we giving them an added burden, are we exposing our elderly, are we exposing our citizens to dire straits if we don’t look at something in terms of code improvement or spurring the debate,” Matthews asked county Public Safety Director Tom Sullivan.

“I have long been an advocate of fully sprinklering buildings,” Sullivan responded. “These buildings are constructed with lightweight wooden trusses and when one truss fails, they all usually fail and that occurs with some frequency across the country and firefighters do die in those buildings.”

“Fully sprinklered buildings are safe buildings,” said Sullivan.

To read the full article click here.

View more articles about the Conshohocken Apartment Fire

NOTICE: The full content for this post is hosted outside of Residential Fire Sprinklers .com. This site is not responsible for the content, privacy policies or other practices of the destination site.

By John Ford - Neosho Daily News

A state legislative committee is at odds over the phrasing of part of a new law enacted to improve fire safety at nursing homes and other long-term care facilities in Missouri.

The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, a legislative panel made up of six Republicans and four Democrats that reviews new laws, recently rejected safety standards at Missouri group homes.

The measure would require long term care facilities to install smoke detectors throughout the facility by the end of the year, and would later require the installation of sprinkler systems, fire alarms in smaller facilities and smoke stop partitions. It was originally sponsored by state Rep. Kevin Wilson, R-Neosho, in response to the November 2006 fire at the Anderson Guest House that claimed the lives of 11 people, and was signed into law last summer by Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt..

“They (JCAR) are not gutting the bill,” said Wilson. “They rejected the initial rules. What they were concerned about is the definition of ‘throughout the facility’ as far as smoke detectors. That’s the crux of the matter. The state fire marshal’s office says ‘throughout the facility’ means smoke detectors in every room.”

However, Wilson said, the nursing home industry says federal standards on smoke detector placement should apply. According to Randy Cole, the state fire marshal, this means smoke detectors would be placed on 30-foot centers, or about 21 feet apart.

Cole said state statutes clearly mandate that long-term care facilities be equipped with a complete fire alarm system including, but not limited to, interconnected smoke detectors throughout the facility, automatic transmission to the fire department, dispatching agency or central monitoring company, manual pull stations at each required exit and attendant’s station, heat detectors and audible and visual alarm indicators.

“Their (JCAR’s) definition is obviously different from what we felt this section requires,” Cole said. “That section states a complete fire alarm throughout the facility. Our take is that facilities must have smoke detectors in every room, even though the facility has sprinkler systems.”

Cole said smoke detectors, even battery operated ones commonly available at hardware and department stores, are the first line of defense in detecting fires. This is because sprinkler systems are heat activated at temperatures ranging from 135 to 165 degrees Fahrenheit, based on their rating.

“Obviously, a smoke detector gives earlier detection as to fire,” he said. “Federal standards as outlined by the Center for Medicaid Services commonly require at least a battery operated smoke detector in every room. The direction JCAR is taking is requiring for such detectors in hallways and considering 30-foot centers, or one every 21 feet since a smoke detector has the capacity to operate in a 21-foot radius.”

Under the new law, smoke detectors will have to be in place in all long-term care facilities by the end of the year. This could cause a dilemma, Wilson said.

“The Department of Health and Senior Services will have to ask the Secretary of State office for emergency rules, as smoke detectors have to be in place by the end of the year,” Wilson said.

“The state fire marshal’s office, obviously, felt like there needed to be smoke detectors in every room. I’m very hopeful that they will come to some kind of consensus by the end of the year.

“It was disheartening when I first heard they had rejected the order, as I understood there was some disagreement between Health and Senior Services and the state fire marshal’s office. But the bill itself, they can’t change the law.”

To read the full article click here.

NOTICE: The full content for this post is hosted outside of Residential Fire Sprinklers .com. This site is not responsible for the content, privacy policies or other practices of the destination site.