CODES & STANDARDS

IT'S BEEN A WHILE

2011-10-25T11:25:00.002-07:00

I will be updating this blog weekly with info on court cases, code changes and other related building and life safety code info.

Please leave you questions and I will answer them.

CODE OFFICIAL ON TRIAL FOR HISI LIFE

2011-10-25T11:25:00.001-07:00

The 9th Judicial District Attorney's Office has filed a series of responses to defense motions that negligent-homicide charges should be dropped against two men implicated in the carbon-monoxide poisoning deaths of a family of four.

The responses are the latest volley in the cases of retired city of Aspen building inspector Erik Peptone and subcontractor Marlin Brown, who were both indicted in July 2010 by a Pitkin County grand jury on four separate negligent homicide charges. Peptone, 69, of Basalt, is scheduled to stand jury trial Dec. 12 in Pitkin County District Court, two weeks after the trial begins for co-defendant Brown, 58, of Glenwood Springs.

Over the last month, the prosecution and defense have ramped up their cases. Several motions to dismiss by the defense are pending before District Judge James Boyd. On Wednesday, prosecutors filed responses to two of the motions to dismiss.

One motion filed by Peptone’s attorney Abraham Hutt, of Denver, claims the three-year statute of limitations has expired on the negligent homicide charges. Peptone inspected the home where the family died in the summer of 2005 and signed off on the home's snowmelt system, including a Munchkin boiler that leaked the noxious gas. Prosecutors say the death occurred Nov. 29, 2008, and “at that time ... the statute of limitations began to run in the present matter,” a motion filed Wednesday says. The motion also says that because the grand jury indictment came down July 23, 2010 — less than two years after the fatalities — that was “well within the statute of limitations.”

Likewise, Brown has a pending motion to dismiss the charges against him. The motion, filed by defense attorney Colleen Scissors of Grand Junction, argues that Brown, who installed the boiler, should be absolved of any criminal liability because Peptone and another inspector, Brian Pawl, inspected it at a later date. The prosecution, however, disagreed, arguing in a motion filed Wednesday that that is a matter for a jury to decide.

Today the District Attorney's Office is expected to file a response to a “friend of a court” brief introduced to the case Monday by the attorney's offices for Pitkin County and the city of Aspen, as well as the International Code Council and the Colorado Municipal League. That brief argues for dismissal of the case, on the basis that the county's implementation of a building code is voluntary and shields Peptone from any civil or criminal liability. The brief also contends that the criminal case against Peptone could dramatically affect how building departments do business and “the pace of construction work would slow to a crawl.”

“First, and most obviously, making the building department a bottleneck that prevents construction projects from moving forward will damage a community's economy and erode public support for the program,” the brief says. “Secondly, such a bottleneck will increase the likelihood that owners and builders will simply disregard permit requirements altogether, further increasing that already prevalent problem of bandit construction and the likelihood of slipshod practices.”

The “friends of the court brief” is a supplement to a motion filed Aug. 26 by Hutt to throw out the charges against Peptone. That motion contends that his indictment was unconstitutional, partly because the statute that he was charged with violating — criminally negligent homicide — contains vague language and did not give him fair warning that he could be prosecuted “for any alleged omission or failure” to carry out his job as a building inspector.

Hutt, like the “friends of the court brief,” also contends that Peptone, during his course as a building inspector for the government, is shielded from criminal prosecution because he was adhering to a Pitkin County ordinance. That ordinance, the 2004 adoption of three building codes — the 2003 International Building Code, the 2003 International Mechanical Code, and the 2003 International Residential Code — protects Pitkin County inspectors from any civil liability. And if they're protected from civil liability, Hutt argues, they should be shielded from criminal prosecution, too.

The charges are in connection to the fatalities of Caroline Lofgren, 42; her husband, Parker, 39; and their two children, Owen, 10, and Sophie, 8. The home, four miles east of Aspen, did not have a carbon monoxide detector at the time of their deaths.

Link to the Amicus Brief filed by the ICC

http://www.iccsafe.org/AboutICC/Documents/Amicus_Brief_Filed_09262011.pdf

PENNSYLVANIA NIXES FIRE SPRINKLERS

2011-04-26T10:21:00.000-07:00

Governor Tom Corbett has signed his first bill as Pennsylvania's governor -- repealing a requirement that fire sprinkler systems be installed in all new one- and two-family homes.
A crowd of the bill's supporters packed a midafternoon news conference Monday. Corbett posed for pictures with many of them after signing the legislation.
The bill was approved by margins of nearly 2-1 in the state House and Senate earlier this month.
Proponents say sprinklers save lives by extinguishing fires before firefighters can get to the scene. Opponents, led by the Pennsylvania Builders Association, say it would drive up housing prices unnecessarily.
The Republican governor calls the bill a matter of common sense. He says builders will still be required to offer homebuyers the option of installing a sprinkler system.

STUPID...STUPID...STUPID.... Put the lives of Pennsylvanians at risk..

JAPAN'S CODES HELPED REDUCE DESTRUCTION

2011-03-13T10:37:00.000-07:00

No country may be better prepared for a major earthquake than Japan. Seismic standards for construction are among the strictest in the world. From a young age, Japanese learn to dive under desks to protect themselves in a quake. The nation has a state-of-the-art tsunami warning system. That preparation undoubtedly saved many lives.

Every year, Japan marks "Disaster Prevention Day," marked to commemorate the Great
Kanto Earthquake of 1923, which killed more than 100,000 people in and around Tokyo.
That disaster, along with the 1995 quake in Kobe, which killed more than 6,000, are
drilled into memory. The preparations have become part of the culture. Most schools and offices keep helmetsand first aid kits handy. Disaster training begins early and can include sessions inearthquake simulators.

The foresight paid off. High-rise buildings could be seen swaying like trees in a blustery wind, the intended result of engineering that allowed them to flex in a quake. Huge rubber shock absorbers, walls that slide and Teflon foundation pads that isolate buildings from the ground all help keep the buildings standing.

Some good lessons we should learn from in the U.S.

FREE HOME FIRE SPRINKLERS

2011-03-04T05:45:00.000-08:00

I have always maintained that the installation of home fire sprinklers is “free”when all the benefits are considered. The biggest benefit, although never mentioned, is that we need fewer fire fighters. At $50k per year, it takes $800k to
pay a company of fire fighters annually-that pays for a lot of homes being
sprinklered and it doesn't even consider the benefits fire fighters receive.
Sprinklers don't need retirement benefits and are impervious to both heat and
smoke. When a sprinkler is injured, you just throw it in the brass recycling bucket
and replace it-no health care costs.
Also, when there is a fire, sprinklers are on
the scene immediately. None of this 5 minute response time.

WHAT'S NEW FOR 2011

2011-02-09T13:18:00.000-08:00

It's been awhile since I contact you. Here is what is planned so far.

"PRINCIPLES OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE - 2006 to 2009" my one-day seminar will be held in New Jersey and Michigan in April 2011. More info on that later.

We see an upswing in code consulting. Municipal budgets have been cut and so have plan examiners. Many cities are now sending us the plans for review and passing our fees onto the permit applicant.

Builders cannot afford "code violation chnage orders", so many have contacted us to look at their plans before they go to the city of review.

More later as the year progresses.

FREE 2009 ENERGY CODE DOWNLOAD

2010-09-26T16:10:00.000-07:00

Free digital copies of the International Code Council’s 2009 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) are now available thanks to funding provided by the U.S. Department of Energy. The funding is part of DOE’s initiative to meet nationwide energy-efficiency goals through its Building Technologies Program and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The download of the IECC is available at www.iccsafe.org/FreeIECC.

NEW STATEWIDE CODE ADOPTIONS

2010-09-25T10:52:00.001-07:00

NEW JERSEY
The 2009 IBC, IRC, IEEC, IMC, IFGC and National Standard Plumbing Code adopted September 7, 2010.

NEW YORK STATE -
the 2010 Building, Existing Building, Mechanical, Residential and Energy Clodes I(based on the 2009 I-Codes) effective December 28, 2010.

WEST VIRGINIA -
2008 National Electrical Code (NEC), 2009 Life Safety Code (NFPA No. 101) and Fire Prevention Code (NFPA No. 1) effective July 1, 2010.

FREE PLAN REVIEW FORMS

2010-08-10T12:33:00.000-07:00

Want a FREE copy of the 2009 International Building Code Plan Review Record? It's 16-pages in a checlist format to ensure that your cover all the minimum code requirements in design and plan review.

Also available - - 2009 IRC and both forms for the 2006 IBC and IRC.

Just send a self-addressed stamp envelope (10" X 12" minimum) with $1.21 affixed to:

KELLY P. REYNOLDS & ASSOCIATES INC.
P.O. BOX 5518
GOODYEAR AZ 85338-0609

Supply Is Limited!

PROBLEMS WITH NFPA 13-R & 13-D FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS

2010-07-26T12:29:00.000-07:00

A BULLETIN ISSUED by the NFPA calls for anti-freeze to be removed from all residential sprinkler systems. The problem is when an incorrect mixture of anti-freeze solutions is used, the discharging fire sprinkler can feed the fire. An incident involved a grease fire in a kitchen when the fire sprinkler discharged and the high concentration anti-freeze solution made contact with the fire. There was one fatality and one serious burn injury. The problem is that if the solution
concentration is above 50%, then the risk of it contributing to the fire is increased. NFPA will issue a formal correction procedure before winter. Until then, it is recommended that you drain all anti-freeze from your residential system.

ONE SOLUTION IS to bury the exposed plastic piping in insulation to protect it from freezing. Another method is the installation of UL-listed heat tracing system that is listed for “fire sprinkler piping”. Sprinkler piping must be kept to a minimum of 40 deg, F. to prevent freezing.

“THE NEVER ENDING BATTLE”

2010-03-04T09:47:00.000-08:00

HOME FIRE SPRINKLERS AND THE NEW CODE

IN THE 2009 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, all new
one-and-two family dwellings must have a NFPA No. 13-R fire sprinkler
system installed effective January 1, 2011. January 2011? And why that
date? Why not when the code is adopted in 2009? Well, here are some of the
facts...
At the ICC Code Change Conference in 2008, the fire service packed the hearings with voting members. They did a better job at it than the home builders had in previous years. The home builders hope to mount a state-by-state campaign to defeat the January 2011 sprinkler requirement.

Smoke detectors: - - 30% don’t work due to lack of maintenance and life cycle. Fire deaths: 25% in homes that have smoke detectors.

Residential fire sprinklers operate within the first moments of a fire. Not only does this save lives, but also reduces property damage. Without fire sprinklers, you have fireman with 250 gal./min. hoses flooding your house and all your personal belongings. Which method would you prefer?

The residential sprinkler code does not require sprinklers in attic or small closets. The are no fire department connections or standpipes required. The system does not have to connected to a central alarm service (Although I would highly recommend that the fire sprinklers and smoke detectors be connected to an off-site alarm service. Quick response = less fire and water damage).

In rural areas, water volume and pressure can be a problem. Plumbing tests have shown that if you have enough water pressure to flush the toilet, then you have probably enough to operate a few sprinkler heads. (All the heads don’t discharge all at once!)

The costs will be between $1.75 to $3.00 sq. ft. during construction. In some states local plumbers are allowed to install. The sprinkler industry is really fighting that concept.

With fire sprinklers, the release of greenhouse has (CO2) are reduced by 99% beacuse of smoke released from an actual fire.

The amount of water usage is reduced by 50%.

The amount of fire damage to the room is less than 3%, compared to 100% loss in an
unprotected room.

In time these systems will become as common place in new construction as smoke detectors and GFI protection.

With local governments cutting fire department budgets and giving some firefighters their “pink slips”, response times will be greater as will fire losses and lives lost. Built-in fire sprinklers for new homes will be a God Send in reducing those losses.

HOW TO BE A SUCCESSFUL CODE CONSULTANT

2010-01-17T17:30:00.000-08:00

I AM CELEBRATING 30 years in the code consulting business on November
18, 2009. We have reviewed 1000’S of plans, had 1000’S attend our seminars
and have over 90+M newsletters in circulation. But this story isn’t just about
me, but about some everyday business tips I picked up along the way that you
can use.

WHEN I LEFT BOCA, International as a staff engineer in November 1979, I
heard the usual.. “you’ll be back; you won’t make it on your own”. As the years went by, many of those same people came looking for a job with my firm.

The client isn’t always right, but they are always the client. No one ever won an argument with a client!

Keep your promises. Have projects completed on time, and if you cannot, then notify the client.

If you are too busy to help a client, then you are too busy doing the wrong thing.

Always return phone calls, the same day if possible. I have terminated some staff
members for not returning client calls.

Try answering the phone yourself. It really impresses the client and gives the idea that you are approachable and hands-on.

To avoid interruptions, just tell the client nicely that the less interruptions you have from them, the quicker you can finish their project.

Write your reports like they will be read in court. In many cases they will. The client may be in a hurry, but if it ever goes to trial, you have all the time to answer the judge and a jury. Check spelling and proper use of words. ( Ex: There is no such thing as a “hot water heater”. Why would you heat hot
water? It’s a water heater.)

Know when to walk away. Some clients bring projects that just aren’t in your field of expertise, are not safe or have questionable intents.

Don’t get greedy! Stick to your ethics. There is enough work out there for all of us.

We have not raised our plan review fees since 2002 and the newsletter has remained $75 a year since 1981. Remember, it takes years to building a good reputation and just a few bad decisions to ruin it.

Give back to the community. Some firms just take and take and don’t give anything back. We support the local ICC Chapters with gratis training, the Salvation Army, Pacific Garden Mission, Mooseheart and the Boy Scouts of America with generous donations.

I AM NO business guru, but these practices and principles have worked for me for 30 years. Call me anytime (1-800-950-2633) if you want to discuss your business. I am more than glad to share my experience and learn from yours.

Kelly P. Reynolds
President

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT...

2009-08-27T16:24:00.000-07:00

'With hurricanes, tornados, fires out of control, mud slides, flooding, severe thunderstorms tearing up the country from one end to another, and with the threat of bird flu, swine flu and terrorist attacks, are we sure this is a good time to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?'

U L MOBILE ON THE GO

2009-05-29T10:51:00.001-07:00

Announcing ULConnect.com: An instant connection to UL Certification Information and
Regulatory Services Support — Anywhere you go!

At the touch of a button on your touch screen smart phone (such as an Apple iphone or
Blackberry Storm) you can now carry with you and access UL certification information,
direct email and phone contacts—plus a mobile copy of the Pocket Guide to Inspections.

From your smart phone browser go to www.ulconnect.com and get connected now.

INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE ERRATA

2009-05-11T12:37:00.000-07:00

Errata Central has been updated to include:

2009 International Fire Code

Click link below for information.

http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/errata/2009/IFC/

ERRATA CHANGES TO THE 2009 IBC & IECC

2009-05-05T14:37:00.000-07:00

Errata Central has been updated to include:

2009 International Building Code
http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/errata/2009/IBC/

2009 International Energy Conservation Code
http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/codes/errata/2009/IECC/

KEY CHANGES TO THE 2009 I-CODES - PART II

2008-12-24T08:13:00.000-08:00

IN OUR OCTOBER 2008 edition of CODES & STANDARDS, I gave you some
highlights on the changes to the 2009 International Building Code. Here are the
some of the changes to the other I-Codes.
2009 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE
Fire sprinklers in all new townhouses and in 2011 in all new one/two family homes.
Reduction in fire rating for town house fire separation walls from two-hours to one-hour with fire sprinklers.

New plumbing provisions for affordable multi-purpose plumbing system to accommodate fire sprinkler requirement.

ICC 600 replaces SSTD 10 for construction in high winds regions.
New standard for storm shelters based upon ICC/NSSA Standard, ICC 500-2008.

2009 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE

Retroactively, all existing I-2 Use Groups must have fire sprinklers installed.
Emergency responder radio coverage is required inside of buildings (Result of WTC
recommendations).

Requirements for liquid oxygen in a home health care setting.

New section has requirements for marina fire protection.

Fire alarm systems now correlated with NFPA No. 72.

Retroactively, all new and existing high-rise buildings will require photoluminscent exit pathway
markings inside building stairways.

2009 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE

Emphasis on energy savings in higher R values in different regions.

More restrictive window and door U-Factor and SHGG values in warm climate zones.

2009 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE

Outdoor ventilation requirements of Chapter 4 revised to reflect ASHRAE in order to improve the indoor air quality.

Maximum clothes dryer ducts from 25 ft. to 35 ft. for more flexibility in location of dryers.

Locking access caps on outdoor refrigerant system to prevent tampering and access from person using the product for inhaling to get s “buzz”.

2009 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE

Occupant loads will be required to split male/female before plumbing fixture rations are applied.

Field installed shower liners to be leak tested for water tightness.

Public toilet must have directional signage indicating the route to the facilities. (Kind of like Exit Signs for bathrooms!)

Frost proof yard hydrants with below grade valves prohibited unless upstream backflow
protection provided. Hydrants must have permanent signage that reads “Do Not Drink”.

Water heaters must have 30-in. on control and equipment access sides. Unrelated equipment cannot block water heater access for repairs.

Sinks for cleaning utensils, dishes, pots, pans and services must directly connect to sanitary drainage by an air gap or air break.

2009 INTERNATIONAL FUEL GAS CODE

Bonding systems added for CSST piping systems to prevent damage from lightning induced electrical energy.

Special vent requirements for any space in which unvented infrared heaters are installed.
All vents that penetrate exterior walls to be permanently sealed around the penetration to prevent combustion products from entering the building.

A specific connector configuration will be required for special installations of radiant tube heaters “flexible” gas connector appliances.

THE 2009 I-CODES WILL BE AVAILABLE IN MARCH 2009.

Extinguishing the Myths of Fires, Sprinklers and Glass

2008-12-08T10:02:00.000-08:00

Fire sprinklers in a glazing publication? The topic may seem unrelated to the glass industry, yet in reality, what you know about sprinklers may significantly impact the way you glaze a building for fire safety and protect you from liability issues. There are essentially two ways to provide fire protection in a building: active systems and passive systems. Active systems, such as sprinklers or fire extinguishers, rely on components or people to move into "operation mode" when a fire starts. Passive systems are made up of components such as fire-rated glass that offer a degree of fire protection with no activation required.

Currently, there is a great deal of debate as to how active and passive systems should interact. Is one method preferable to another? Should they be used together or separately?It is well documented that sprinklers, when working properly, can provide life- and property- saving benefits during a fire. And systems that incorporate both sprinklers and fire-rated glazing materials have tested positively.However, some fire sprinkler manufacturers are now suggesting that fire-rated glazing is unnecessary if a sprinkler system is in place. Their theory is that if a fire starts, the sprinklers will activate and bathe the glass surface with water. This will keep the glazing system in place, where it will continue to offer fire protection. Consequently, they have begun recommending the use of tempered and heat-strengthened glazing materials in conjunction with their sprinklers.Is this practice safe? Closer examination will show that it may be based on dangerous and unrealistic assumptions.Fire-Rated Glass and Fire ProtectionFire protection is a critical issue in the United States. In 1996, a fire was reported every 15 seconds, a fire injury every 20 minutes and a fire-related death every 2 hours, according to the National Fire Prevention Agency (NFPA). Financial losses caused by fires reach nearly $9 billion each year.A long-established principle for fire protection in buildings is "compartmentation," the use of physical barriers (such as fire walls and fire-rated glass) to limit the spread of fire and smoke. According to the NFPA 1994 Life Safety Code Handbook (section 6-1.1.1), "lack of compartmentation and rapid fire development have been primary factors in numerous multiple-fatality fires." Building codes attempt to achieve compartmentation by requiring the use of products that meet specific test criteria, such as fire-rated doors, walls and glazing materials. These products are tested at independent laboratories, and if appropriate, receive a listing for a designated period of time.Specific test criteria have been established for fire-rated glazing materials. Fire-rated glass is installed in a door or window frame system and mounted in a test furnace.

Fire near the surface of the glass creates temperatures of nearly 1,000 and 1,638 degrees Fahrenheit at 5 and 45 minutes, respectively (as a reference, standard tempered glass cannot withstand continuous temperatures in excess of 500 degrees Fahrenheit). This test is designed to simulate a real fire. For a successful test, fire and smoke are not permitted on the side of the glass away from the fire.Glazing tested for more than a 20-minute rating undergoes a fire hose stream test. The water impact from the fire hose tests the structural integrity of the heated glazing, frames and door components as well as the ability of the assembly to withstand thermal shock without collapsing. Thermal shock can occur in a fire when water from sprinklers, fire extinguishers or fire hoses impacts the assembly. The glazed assembly must be able to withstand the fire hose stream test without creating openings for passage of fire and smoke. If the glazing and other materials in the assembly pass the fire and hose stream tests, they can be relied on to achieve the desired compartmentation.Sprinklers & Non-Fire-Rated GlassBut what about non fire-rated glass?

If sprinklers are installed nearby, isn’t that adequate fire protection?The answer may be a resounding "no." True, some tests indicate that non-fire-rated glass will remain intact if a fire does not originate near the surface of the glass, if the sprinklers and supporting systems are operational and function early in the fire, and if they completely and continuously bathe the surface of the glass.However, other tests indicate that fires occurring near the surface of the glass cause heat stress in the glass, which may then break and fall from the framing system even if the sprinkler operates properly. Since it is nearly impossible to predict where a fire will begin, it is unrealistic and even dangerous to assume that it will occur far from the glass surface.The "Hospital for Sick Children" test in Toronto supports the above findings ("Fire Resistant Wall Assemblies with Glazing," SFPE Bulletin, July 1987). A fire test facility was developed at Canada’s National Fire Laboratory to determine the fire resistance of non-fire-rated window assemblies protected by automatic sprinklers. The source of heat was a propane burner located across the room from the glazing (approximately 7 feet from the glass surface). Sprinklers were carefully positioned to ensure uniform water coverage. In eight tests conducted with sprinklers on the fire-exposed side of the glass, the sprinkler activation time averaged only 32 seconds. When using tempered glass, the glass "remained intact for the duration of all tests in which sprinklers were located inside the burn room."These tests indicate that sprinklers activated early by a large fire occurring away from the glass surface, before stress builds up in the glass, may allow the glazing assembly to stay in place for the duration of the 2-hour test.The results of these tests are limited, however, because some test conditions were modified and the fires were never initiated near the glass surface.

In short, the tests did not simulate a "real world" fire situation. For example, the water flow rate from the sprinklers was adjusted if dry spots formed on the fire-exposed face of the glass. In real life, such dry spots on the surface of hot glass cause heat stress and can be a principal cause of glass fracture.For a sprinkler and glass assembly to operate successfully, it is vital that the sprinklers activate early, covering the glass completely and continuously. The dry spots in the test indicate that the glass surface was not completely covered with water. Adjusting the sprinkler water flow to cover these spots may artificially prolong the endurance of the glass. In a real fire, no one would be available to "adjust" the water flow.Furthermore, and critically important, the heat source was located several feet away from the glazed assembly-- the most ideal situation for the glazing to survive. In real life, fires can and do ignite near the surface of the glass.Another factor to examine is the sprinkler activation time. The test used special "quick response" sprinklers that responded two to three times faster than standard sprinklers. The sprinklers also activated early due to artificially high temperatures in the room, thus cooling the glass faster than normal. In addition, the sprinklers were located on the side of the glass exposed to the fire.The authors of "Fire Resistant Wall Assemblies with Glazing" point out some of these test limitations. They note that "the location and response time of the sprinkler must be such that activation will occur before the glazing reaches critical temperature levels....Should sprinkler activation be delayed so that the temperature of tempered glass is in the range of 250 C. (approximately 482 F.), glass failure could possibly occur."In 1995, Factory Mutual Research Corp. observed tests to determine whether a non-fire-rated window assembly and sprinkler "system" could provide protection equivalent to that of a fire-rated assembly. Using specially designed sprinklers, researchers found that tempered or heat- strengthened glass systems survived if the fire started far away from the glazing (approximately 8 feet) and if the sprinklers activated very early.However, in subsequent tests in which the heat source was placed adjacent to a non-fire-rated glass system, the glass failed in less than 5 minutes.

As a result, Factory Mutual declined to offer a passing grade to the system for use in general fire-rated locations.Tests were conducted at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in 1986 to specifically examine how well non-fire-rated (tempered) glass and sprinklers would perform when the fire source was close to the glass surface. Two fires (250 kW and 40 kW) were used. In the test using the large fire, the sprinklers activated early and the glazing remained intact. But both tests using the smaller fire resulted in glass fracturing and falling from the test assemblies in less than 4 minutes. In other words, the glass failed before the sprinklers even activated.What the LLNL tests seem to indicate is that tempered glass may perform adequately when exposed to relatively large fires that cause the room temperature to rise fast enough to fuse (activate) sprinklers before high stresses can be generated in the glass.

However, when a fire is concentrated in an area near the glass surface and is not large enough to activate sprinklers early, sufficient stresses can be generated to shatter the glass. Who can rely on fires always being large enough to activate sprinklers before the glass is thermally stressed?Similar tests were conducted at Underwriters Laboratories (UL) when a sprinkler manufacturer wanted to test its specially designed sprinklers with a non-fire-rated glazing "system." When the heat source was placed close to the glass, the glass failed in three of the four tests. In two of those tests, the sprinklers activated first, but the glass could not withstand the "thermal shock" of water hitting the hot surface. The test report states that in all three tests, "...large pieces of glass fell to the floor" after an average of only 4 minutes. UL did not give the manufacturer a listing for the sprinkler and glass wall system.In support of a sprinkler and non-fire-rated glazing system, some suggest that fire could be kept away from the surface of the glass by using a 36-inch-high pony wall (Canadian Construction Materials Centre Evaluation Report, CCMC 12752-R, June 24, 1996). In this report, the CCMC reviewed UL test results regarding the Central Sprinkler’s Model WS Sprinkler System. It concluded that this particular sprinkler model complies with CCMC’s Technical Guide for Sprinkler-Protected Glazing Systems, Masterformat 15335, dated April 12, 1994, if used in accordance with the limitations and conditions stated in the report.The pony wall indeed has limitations. First, it does not prevent flammable objects such as desks, file drawers, coat racks, etc., from being placed near the glass. Second, the window "sill" created by the pony wall is an attractive location for storage of flammable materials such as books and papers. Some sprinkler installation instructions state that "all combustible materials shall be kept 2" (50.8mm) from the face of the glass." After occupants move into a building, not only is it difficult to enforce this provision, but it is also unrealistic to think they will not place flammable objects near the windows.

How do curtains, blinds or other window coverings affect the performance of sprinklers? When these materials are placed between the glass and sprinkler, the water is unable to cool the glass, thus causing the glass to fail early on. Recognizing this fact, one manufacturer states in its literature: "Blinds or curtains must not be between sprinkler and glass." But that is not practical.Sprinkler heads can be located up to 12 inches away from the windows they are trying to shade or cover, while blinds and curtains in offices, schools, hospitals and other commercial facilities are generally located very near the surface of the glass. And who is to ensure that subsequent building tenants will be aware of this critical warning? Again, this is unrealistic and unenforceable.Sprinkler LimitationsAnother concern with a "sprinklers only" approach to fire protection is that protection depends on the system operating. If the sprinklers don’t operate, fire protection literally goes out the window. Fire-rated glazing, on the other hand, is a passive system that provides protection without requiring any other system or activity.Sprinklers are generally reliable, but they are not infallible. Last summer, a headline in the August 13, 1997, edition of USA Today read: "Widely Used Fire-Sprinkler Often Fails."

After a particular brand of sprinkler failed to operate properly during some fires, UL conducted further tests. In those ongoing tests, the newspaper reported that this particular sprinkler model had a 31 percent failure rate. This reminds us that while sprinklers usually are reliable sources of fire protection, they can and do fail. Therefore, it is not a good idea to rely solely on the proper operation of sprinklers with a non-fire-rated system.Confusion also exists concerning how sprinklers are listed. Some manufacturers imply in their literature that if a sprinkler head has a laboratory listing when tested by itself, it will also provide adequate fire protection when combined with a non-fire-rated glazing system. Tests seem to prove that this is not always the case.Safe SolutionThere is no question that sprinklers offer a valuable line of defense in fire situations. Sprinklers operating early in a fire have proven to reduce damage from fire and smoke, and they can reduce the amount of heat transfer through the glass by as much as 90 percent.

However, combining sprinklers with non-fire-rated glazing provides questionable fire protection at best. Too many conditions must operate perfectly for this system to work consistently-and an actual fire acts differently than one under laboratory conditions. Also, fires originating near the surface of the glass can cause the glass to collapse within minutes even if the sprinklers work perfectly.If a client requests that you supply tempered or heat-strengthened glass in lieu of fire-rated glazing because sprinklers are being used, remember that you could be held liable. Be sure to ask these important questions: * What carries the listing-the sprinkler and glass "system," or only the sprinkler head? * Can the risk of a fire close to the glass surface be eliminated? * If the sprinklers fail, will the glazing offer any type of fire protection? * Can the glass withstand thermal shock if the sprinklers come on after a fire starts?When it comes to fire protection and life safety, too much is at stake to leave things to chance. The best way to provide fire protection is to use sprinklers in conjunction with listed fire-rated glazing materials that have passed the fire hose stream test.

CHANGES IN THE 2009 I-CODES

2008-09-26T11:25:00.000-07:00

AT THE ANNUAL ICC Conference in September 2008 in Minneapolis, MN, the following are changes that were approved and you will see in the 2009 International Building Code and International Residential Code.

Fire sprinklers will be required in all new townhouses and in 2011 in all new one/two family homes.

Carbon monoxide detectors will be required in new homes with fuel-fired equipment or an attached garage.

Swimming pools requirements will reference a new entrapment standard designed to be consistent with the Virginia Graeme Baker Federal Pool and Spa Safety Act.

An additional (third) stairway will be required in all buildings more than 420 ft. in height unless an elevator than can operate during a fire event is usable by occupants. These emergency elevators can be used for evacuation.

Schools (use Group E) fire sprinkler threshold has been reduced to 12,000 sq. ft. (was 24,000 sq. ft.)

Egress capacity for fire sprinklers will be eliminated. It will remain the same for sprinklered and unsprinklered buildings.

ONE-STOP PLAN REVIEW SERVICE

2008-06-17T20:07:00.000-07:00

Want to ensure that your plans pass plan review the first time? Try our personalized Plan Review Service.

All reviews done in 10 working days

Code sections specified
All Codes: ICC, NFPA, NEC
Unlimited telephone consulting throught project

For more info, go to our website http://www.kellypreynolds.com/

NIGHTCLUB OCCUPANCY LOADS

2007-11-06T07:35:00.000-08:00

Concerns for overcrowding of assembly spaces have resulted in lowering the maximum permitted occupant load. This does not eliminate the option for using 5 sq. ft. (0.5 m2) as the occupant load for small standing room areas in assembly spaces (Table 1004.1.1). For example, when determining the occupant load for a nightclub, 15 sq. ft. (1.4 m2) per occupant could be used to determine the occupant load in the general seating area, while 5 sq. ft. (0.5 m2) per person could be used to determine the occupant load for the dance floor and waiting area. The change for the maximum allowable would limit the design of the space to a maximum occupant load calculated by using 7 sq. ft. (0.7 m2) per person for the entire space.Section 1004.7– In areas with fixed seating, if portions do not have fixed seats, the occupant load must include both the number of fixed seats and the number of people who might occupy the portions that do not have fixed seats.

Shattering the myth of wired glass

2007-04-27T07:47:00.000-07:00

David Copperfield, considered by many as the “master of illusion”, performs mind-boggling feats, leaving the audience fascinated and whispering, “How did he do that?”The wired glass industry's “illusion of safety” is not the least bit entertaining and carries dangers that even Harry Houdini couldn't escape.

Parents, victims, educators and doctors are left asking, “Why do they do that?” Many building and fire officials are mistaken about the impact resistance of wired glass and believe it to be a safety product, in part because the wires give the appearance of increased safety. The common misperception is that the embedded wires reinforce impact strength, when they do just the opposite. The wires actually weaken the glass and substantially reduce its impact resistance, so wired glass is in fact only half as strong as ordinary annealed glass. Wired glass is more dangerous than regular glass when it breaks because the exposed wires are razor sharp and catch a victim's body part in the opening, and increase the severity of the injury. Children and young adults are seriously and permanently injured every year as a result of the dangerous use of wired glass vision panels in areas where impact safety glazing is required. Wired glass is commonly used in hospitals, schools and colleges as an approved fire-protection glazing for fire doors and windows installed in corridors, stairwells, gymnasium walls and other fire-rated areas where accidental human impact is likely. Although wired glass meets fire test criteria for fire-rated vision panels, it is not classified as a safety glazing material by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) under the federal safety glazing standards established in 1977, 16 CFR 1201. However, because of a 25-year-old federal exemption, foreign wired glass manufacturers label and sell their products as safety glazing in the U.S. — but under a lower ANSI (American National Standards Institute) Z97.1 voluntary standard. CPSC rejected the ANSI Z97.1 standard as inadequate to protect anyone except children under five.
U.S. safety glazing regulations and building codes In 1977, CPSC established a federal safety glazing standard designed to reduce the risk of serious injuries caused by accidental impact with architectural glazing materials. The standard was intended to apply to all glazing materials, and preempt local building codes. When CPSC first published its standard, foreign wired glass manufacturers recognized their products couldn't meet the new higher performance requirements, and lobbied the CPSC to exempt wired glass in fire doors. CPSC conceded to a temporary 2½-year exemption for wired glass in fire assemblies to allow the industry time to develop technology to make glazing meeting both fire and impact safety. Japanese wired glass manufacturers weren't satisfied with a temporary exemption, and took CPSC to court, challenging the expiration date as arbitrary. CPSC was forced to abandon its efforts 20 years ago to regulate a dangerous consumer product under its federal authority, which left it to the building codes to adopt and enforce impact safety requirements for wired glass in fire assemblies. The wired glass industry thereafter prevailed upon model building codes to adopt the lower voluntary standard, ANSI Z97.1, for wired glass in fire assemblies as an exception to the CPSC safety glazing requirements applied to all other glazing materials. Foreign wired glass manufacturers and their various U.S. distributors and affiliated businesses have actively participated in the ANSI Z97.1 review process for over two decades. The ANSI Z97.1 committee has voted the past 20 years to perpetuate a lower performance standard that allows wired glass manufacturers to classify and label fire-rated wired glass as safety glazing, despite undisputed facts proving it's anything but safe. The lack of accurate, publicly available information about wired glass, such as comparative impact strength and injury data, preserves the public misconception that wired glass is a labeled safety glazing product equivalent to other labeled safety glazing materials tested to the higher CPSC standard.
The public's perceptionFew code officials and industry professionals are aware the lower ANSI Z97.1 impact test was rejected by CPSC as inadequate for safety. Nor do they know the differences between the ANSI Z97.1 100-foot-pound impact test level; the higher CPSC Category I, 150 foot-pound test; and the highest Category II, 400 foot-pound impact level that protects adults from injury on full body impact. Fire-rated wired glass is the only glazing material excused from CPSC safety requirements. All other glazing materials, including non-wired fire glazing products approved for use in fire assemblies, must meet the higher CPSC standard. As a result, wired glass manufacturers actively market their products as meeting U.S. code safety standards for use in hazardous impact areas, despite the evidence it causes debilitating injuries. When the injury record shows that children and young adults are at risk of injuries resulting in amputation, permanent nerve and muscle damage, paralysis, severe atrophy, and restricted hand and arm mobility, to the degree that a high school boy can't button his pants or pick up a milk carton, it is clear current building codes and CPSC regulations are inadequate, and changes are needed to protect public safety. Fire safety requirements no longer justify an exception to allow fire-rated wired glass under a lower impact standard, when several alternative fire-protection glazing products are available that meet both fire code and CPSC impact safety standards. Model code actions are long overdue A. Elkin, chairman of the National Commission on Product Safety, testified: “When your intelligence tells you that something will create an injury and that it seems conceptually clear that injury will occur, it is primitive to wait until a number of people have lost their lives, or sacrificed their limbs, before we attempt to prevent those accidents.” Today, CPSC, ANSI and model building code actions to address the public safety risk posed by wired glass are long overdue, and ripe for action at federal, state and local levels. CPSC knew when it proposed the federal standard 25 years ago that wired glass is dangerous, but backed away from its responsibility to regulate this product under pressure by foreign manufacturers demanding exemption, and left it to building codes and private industry to sort out. The International Code Council has recently taken steps to address the dangers of wired glass, and code development committees have recommended code changes to eliminate the ANSI Z97.1 exception for wired glass, and require compliance with the CPSC standard. CPSC needs to step up to its duty to protect the public from hazardous products that it abandoned 20 years ago, and terminate the exemption that it originally intended to end in 1980.
Article by Greg Abel, published with permission ofGreg Abel is chair of Advocates For Safe Glass, a nonprofit group founded by parents of children severely injured by wired glass products used in public buildings. For more information, visit www.safeglass.org
Last review: April, 2007

U. L. DATABASE AVAILABLE

2006-11-28T10:22:00.000-08:00

Underwriters Laboratories Inc. is pleased to introduce a new online tool for regulatory authorities.The "Category Code/Model Code Database" is a powerful search engine that links Code sections to UL product categories.To view this new database, visit:http://www.ul.com/regulators/codelinkSimply enter a Code section from the International Building Code (IBC), International Mechanical Code (IMC), International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) or the National Electrical Code® (NEC®), and get the corresponding UL product category and Listing informationThe database also provides hyperlinks to the UL Guide Information and other specific information pertaining to each UL Category Code.For more information, contact Bob Eugene in Seattle by phone at +1-360-593-2152; or by e-mail at Robert.Eugene@us.ul.com.

CALL ME WITH YOUR CODE QUESTIONS

2005-10-23T00:07:00.000-07:00

Got a code question? Call me at 1-800-950-2633 for an accurate and swift answer to your code questions.

Or, Fax it to: 1-866-814-2633

Kelly P. Reynolds
Code Consultant
Phoenix - Chicago - Boston