FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS
BY JAMES E. ART, P.E.
IF YOU`RE GOING TO DO IT, DO IT RIGHT
“Good to the last drop” should not be the motto of an elevator company or a fire protection contractor, even if a system is not required! Occasionally, an enforcing agency receives the question: Since an existing or proposed fire system is not required by minimum codes, why don`t we just install it in a slipshod manner, or just fail to maintain it? Isn`t something better than nothing?
This isn`t a new question and shows the person has not analyzed what these systems are supposed to do. Consider: If people see a fire alarm pull station, they expect it to work. If there is a fire extinguisher, it should be serviced and ready. If a fire protection system is in place, it should be in service, maintained, and designed to do its intended job.
Why do some fire protection enforcers even question this? No other trade would even consider a substandard system. Whether a system is required to meet minimum standards should have no bearing on its design or maintenance. For example, the electrical code specifies a minimum number of electrical outlets. If a building owner or tenant wants to install more outlets (and most do), no one would consider installing these “extra” features in a substandard manner, using smaller wiring or improper grounding. The electrical inspector would laugh at the claim that this outlet will be used for a clock, never a toaster.
An “extra” bathroom cannot be installed with less than the proper pipe or be connected to the storm drain. If someone has an “extra” exit door, it has to open properly.
Just because a code does not require a house to have a den, it does not mean one can be built with a substandard foundation.
Whether required or not, any fire protection system still has to be able to perform its intended function, and do it safely. Fire systems are different from other systems. They provide a feeling of safety. But since fire systems do not have to do much until there is an emergency, at the moment it is needed, there is no room for compromise. It can mean life or death. These systems are not like a poorly designed heating system or a sloppy HVAC system that generates daily complaints that bring the building maintenance engineers back, even to a new building, to make the system work right. These situations are just nuisances.
A fire system must be able to stand by, perhaps for years, and then suddenly function reliably–sound the alarm or control the fire. If the system does not work or the design is not adequate, the designer who compromised cannot just go back and adjust it. The whole building can be lost and–more importantly–the people in it may be injured, maimed, or killed.
If you`re going to do it, do it right!
How Low Can You Go?
“This fire protection system is not required by the code, so why not install it with a few compromises?” Perhaps those who subscribe to this policy don`t realize how minimal the codes really are.
In some respects, the Uniform Building Code® (UBC) is more restrictive than other model codes, yet it still sets very mild standards: Most people choose to exceed the minimum standards for construction features (other than fire protection) because the requirements are so low. For example, the UBC specifies minimum sizes for bedrooms and living areas. I would bet most readers would not like to settle for a bedroom that “meets the minimum code” size of only 70 square feet; and it does have to be all of seven feet high! Surprisingly, gypsum wallboard, with its good fire-resistant properties, is not required. Each bedroom is required to have a small window, with a minimum clear openable width of just 20 inches and a height of 24 inches. So, you can see these are not very high standards. They are truly minimal.
More than 80 percent of the people in California live in areas that now require more and better fire sprinkler systems than are required by these minimum codes.
The various code-making bodies have also addressed the issues of design and maintenance of fire protection systems. Here are the positions of the two codes most used in the western United States.
First, the 1994 Uniform Fire Code® (UFC) is the companion document to the UBC. It has the force of law in most western jurisdictions. Section 1001.5.1 (which was revised for the new edition) states:
Sprinkler systems, fire hydrant systems, standpipe systems, fire alarm systems, portable fire extinguishers, … and other fire protective or extinguishing systems or appliances shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times and shall be replaced or repaired where defective.
Note that the UFC does not make any exceptions for systems or devices that may not be required to meet minimum codes. The section continues:
Fire-protection or extinguishing systems coverage, spacing, and specifications and fire alarm systems shall be maintained in accordance with … recognized standards at all times. Such systems shall be extended, altered, or augmented as necessary to maintain and continue protection whenever any building so equipped is altered, remodeled, or added to. Additions, repairs, alterations, and servicing shall be in accordance with approved standards.
Second, the National Fire Protection Association Life Safety Code (NFPA 101) now addresses the question. Section 31-1.3.1 requires fire systems and features be “permanently maintained.” It further states:
31-1.3.2: Existing life safety features such as, but not limited to, automatic sprinklers, fire alarm systems, standpipes, and horizontal exits, if not required by the Code, shall be either maintained or removed.
An interesting explanation is in the Appendix:
A-31-1.3.2: The presence of a life safety feature, such as sprinklers or fire alarm devices, creates a reasonable expectation by the public that these safety features are functional. When systems are inoperable or taken out of service, but the devices remain present, they present a false sense of safety. Also, before taking any life safety features out of service, extreme care needs to be exercised to ensure that the feature is not required, was not originally provided as an alternative or equivalency, or is no longer required due to other requirements in the current Code. It is not intended that the entire system or protection feature be removed. Instead, components such as sprinklers, notification appliances, standpipe hose, and exit systems should be removed to reduce the likelihood of relying on inoperable systems or features. Alternatively, signage could be provided to indicate that a system is no longer operable.
Nothing prohibits adding more or better systems than those required. But it is clear that both of these nationally recognized code-making groups expect that if systems are installed, they should at least meet the minimum levels of performance and must be maintained operable. n
JAMES E. ART, P.E., is a registered fire protection engineer from Livermore, California, with more than 20 years of experience. He does expert witness, code consulting, and fire protection work.
