BY SEAN DeCRANE
Recently, many members of the fire service have made a concerted effort to increase their participation in the building and fire code processes. This past September, at the International Code Council’s Final Action Hearings, we saw the positive results of this increased participation.
Two of the goals of this increased participation are to secure a safer living and workplace for the civilian population and to create a safer work environment for fellow firefighters. Let’s face it: Our stations are a staging area. The built community serves as our work environment. We need to exert our influence to secure the safety of this work environment.
SEPTEMBER MEETING
In September, hundreds of fire and building officials and construction industry representatives gathered in Minneapolis to debate the merits of hundreds of code change proposals to the building, fire, plumbing, and residential codes. The code cycle is a multiple-step system; the initial Code Action Hearings were held in February. That is the session at which committees determined the fate of the code change proposals. Traditionally, industry has played a large role in these committees, and safety is not always the deciding factor in the committee’s actions. If a committee rejects a proposal, it can be modified and brought back under the Final Action Hearings; it requires a two-thirds majority to overturn the committee. There were a number of issues on which the fire service had a majority but could not muster the two-thirds majority required to reverse the committee action. Keep in mind that only fire and building officials can vote at the Final Action Hearings, so every vote is important. I will review a number of the most important changes approved that directly impact the fire service.
NIST RECOMMENDATION RESULTS
Following the tragedy of the World Trade Center (WTC) collapse in 2001, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) commissioned a study on the collapse. This investigation generated a number of code proposals for improving the safety of buildings through the application of the building and fire codes. The following are a few of these code proposals that were adopted because of the support of the fire service.
Overall Building Safety
- High-Rise Sprinkler Redundancy in High-Rise Buildings:The fire service and a number of industries supported this proposal, whose goal is to provide a redundancy to the risers in a high-rise building should a riser supplying the sprinklers on the upper floors be compromised.
- Stairwell Remoteness: One of the findings in the NIST study was that the central means of egress were compromised by a single event, the airplane’s hitting the respective towers. This proposal requires that the means of egress be separated so that a means of egress would be maintained if one should be compromised.
- Photoluminescent Exit Path Markings: After the 1993 WTC bombing, the New York/New Jersey Port Authority installed photoluminescent markings in the stairwells. Many survivors credited these markings with helping them to evacuate the towers. This requirement will now apply to all buildings 75 feet and taller.
- Hardening of the Stairwells and Hoistways: This code change will require more robust protection for stairwells and elevator hoistways, to provide a safer means of egress and also help to maintain the stairwells firefighters use to stage interior operations.
- Increased Bonding of Fireproofing: One of the theories concerning the collapse of the towers is that the planes’ impact caused the fireproofing on the towers’ steel structural members to separate from the steel, thereby exposing the steel to the extreme temperatures of the fuel-induced fires and further leading to the collapse of these structural members. Fireproofing will have to meet a more stringent adherence standard.
- Extra Stairwell in High-Rises:The fire service overwhelmingly supported the proposal in the previous cycle, and there was an effort to repeal this requirement in this cycle. The requirement calls for an additional stairwell to be constructed in buildings 420 feet and taller. This will allow for a more rapid evacuation in these structures. It also provides a means of staging interior operations without eliminating a means of egress for occupants.
- Occupant Egress Elevator: Although a controversial issue, this was also based on the NIST study, which identified the need for rapid occupant evacuation. These elevators specifically designated for occupant egress will expedite evacuation and decrease the impact on the stairwell firefighters use. The fire service also addressed the concerns of industry and the costs involved: A provision was added to eliminate the need for the extra stairwell if an occupant elevator is installed.
Impacting the Fire Service
- Furniture Store Sprinklers: It was interesting when the furniture industry itself proposed to lower the sprinkler threshold from 12,000 square feet for mercantile occupancies that are used primarily for the display and sale of upholstered furniture. The fire service did not believe this went far enough, however, and modified the proposal to require that all furniture stores (Group M occupancies) selling upholstered furniture, primarily or not, be sprinklered regardless of size.
- Story Reduction in Nonprotected Construction: After a number of years, the Balanced Fire Protection Study Group, with fire service representation, proposed reducing the stories permitted in mercantile, business, and storage occupancies in structures with nonprotected construction. Somehow, the reduction in residential occupancies, where people live and sleep, failed to gain the two-thirds majority to overturn the committee’s action.
- Travel Distance in Factory and Storage Occupancies: In the current code, factory or storage occupancies can have a travel distance of 400 feet if they have installed roof vents. This means our members may be required to travel 400 feet in and out from any point in that structure. This is quite a distance in extreme conditions when wearing full personal protective equipment. With the support of the fire service, this travel distance trade-off was eliminated.
- Carbon Monoxide Detectors:The fire service impacted citizen safety when it overwhelmingly supported the requirement of carbon monoxide detectors in newly constructed homes.
- Radio Operability:For many years, the fire service has experienced problems with communications, specifically our radio communications inside structures. The 9/11 report brought this issue to the forefront. A number of individuals and industries addressed it. It became an example of across-the-aisle cooperation. Fire service representatives insisted this issue be addressed in this cycle. This code stipulates that all buildings, existing and newly constructed, will be required to install a booster system to ensure fire department radios operate in all areas of the structure. In my opinion, this is a huge victory for the members of the fire service. This requirement will impact firefighter and occupant safety, since we will be able to communicate on the emergency scene.
Additional Issues
The fire service supported a number of smaller issues that will increase the safety of citizens and firefighters. These proposals concerned restricting the use of polyethylene dumpsters and laundry carts, factory occupancy drills, buildings being constructed under high-voltage lines, increased fire command center size, eliminating furniture in fire service elevator lobbies, test standards for interior finishes, smoke exhaust removal in high-rise buildings, institutional occupancy sprinkler requirements, and many more.
Residential Sprinklers
This drew a record number of voters to the Final Action Hearings. With a 73-percent majority, the fire service led the charge and passed the requirement for sprinklers in one- and two-family dwellings. This will not only reduce the number of civilians lives lost and injuries sustained, but I believe it will have a significant impact on firefighter safety. Residential sprinklers are not designed to prevent the ignition of fires, nor are they designed to extinguish fires. Residential sprinklers are designed to give occupants time to evacuate; this translates into time for the fire service to initiate interior operations and search and rescue operations before structural compromise. With a simple raise of their hands, the voting fire service members saved more firefighter lives than any rapid intervention team.
LESSONS LEARNED
One of the lessons the fire service needs to take from this Final Action Hearing is the importance of participation. As mentioned, there was a record participation of the fire service in this Final Action Hearingmost of it in anticipation of the residential sprinkler vote. The proposal heard right after the residential sprinkler issue was the proposed requirement to protect lightweight construction in one- and two-family construction. There has been an increase in the use of lightweight construction products and in firefighter injuries and deaths per incident. Many fire tests conducted recently have shown that lightweight construction products tend to collapse earlier in a fire. After the sprinkler vote, more than 500 votes walked out of the room. The proposal failed to get the two-thirds majority by 50 votes. By understanding the agendas, we could have ensured that this type of construction was protected. As a follow-up, the evening before the sprinkler vote, the fire service was trying to restore the corridor ratings traded off in previous cycles. We had a number of firefighters in town, but they were not aware of the voting schedule.
An additional lesson learned is that victories are short-lived in this arena. This was demonstrated by the code proposals we supported during the Final Action Hearings in Rochester, New York. The very next cycle, we spent time and effort to retain these safety features because industry was attempting to remove them. I believe we will face the same situation next cycle. We need more members of the fire service to get involved in the code process to ensure that we protect the safety features in the buildings being constructed and maintained.
CALL TO ACTION
As this current code cycle has demonstrated, the fire service, when motivated, can make a positive impact in the built environment. How do we sustain this effort? We continue to remain involved. The deadline to submit code change proposals for the next cycle is March 24, 2009. The initial Code Action Hearing is scheduled for October 2009.
One of the goals of Vision 20/20: The National Fire Loss Prevention Agenda is to increase the fire service’s participation. We will continue this effort, but we need your involvement. If you are interested in improving the built environment and ensuring that civilian and firefighter safety are considered in the code change discussions, you need to be involved. We cannot expect others to ensure our safety; we are the only individuals responsible for protecting firefighters.
SEAN DeCRANEis an 18-year veteran of the Cleveland (OH) Fire Department, where he is a battalion chief in the suppression division, and an adjunct instructor at the Cleveland Fire Academy. He has represented the International Association of Fire Fighters in the International Code Council’s code process for the previous two cycles and serves on the Vision 20/20 National Fire Loss Prevention Agenda’s Steering Committee. DeCrane also served on the ICC Fire Code Committee in the previous cycle and on the ICC Balanced Fire Protection Study Group. He is an Ohio-certified fire life safety inspector.
