nfpa technical committee on fire protection features nfpa ...€¦ · nfpa technical committee on...

NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Protection Features NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 FIRST DRAFT MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday-Wednesday, May 22-23, 2012 Indianapolis Convention Center – Room 128

Indianapolis, IN

1. Call to Order. Call meeting to order by Chair John Devlin at 1:00 p.m. Eastern on May

22, 2012 at the Indianapolis Convention Center, Indianapolis, IN.

2. Introduction of Committee Members and Guests. For a current committee roster, see page 02.

3. Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes. Approve the October 6, 2010 meeting minutes

see page 06.

4. Review of new NFPA Codes and Standards Development Process, see page 13.

5. NFPA 101 First Draft (formerly ROP) Preparation. For Public Input Review, see page 28.

6. NFPA 5000 First Draft (formerly ROP) Preparation. For Public Input Review, see page 58.

7. NFPA 101/NFPA 5000 Chapter Comparison and Recommendations for First

Revisions, see page 76.

8. Other Business. Shafts, see page 115 Opening Protectives Special Hazard Sprinkler Protection, see page 116 Quantification of smoke barrier leakage Use of terms “smoke barrier”, “smoke partition” and similar phrases

9. Future Meetings.

10. Adjournment.

of 119

Address List No PhoneFire Protection Features SAF-FIR

Safety to Life

Kristin Bigda05/04/2012

SAF-FIR

John F. Devlin

ChairAon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation6305 Ivy Lane, Suite 220�Greenbelt, MD 20770Alternate: Rick Glenn

I 7/1/1993SAF-FIR

Kristin Bigda

Secretary (Staff-Nonvoting)National Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

6/29/2007

SAF-FIR

John F. Bender

PrincipalUL LLC8 Pleasant Wind CourtAberdeen, MD 21001Alternate: Howard Hopper

RT 1/1/1986SAF-FIR

Gregory J. Cahanin

PrincipalCahanin Fire & Code Consulting2522 M.L. King Street NorthSt. Petersburg, FL 33704Louisiana State Firemen's Association

U 1/1/1995

SAF-FIR

Joseph A. Castellano

PrincipalThe RJA Group, Inc.Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc.484 Sinclair AvenueAtlanta, GA 30307Alternate: Ronald B. Melucci

SE 1/15/2004SAF-FIR

Nicholas A. Dawe

PrincipalCobb County Fire Marshal’s Office1595 County Services ParkwayMarietta, GA 30008

E 10/20/2010

SAF-FIR

Helen DiPietro

PrincipalNorth Carolina Department of InsuranceOffice of State Fire MarshalMail Service Center 1202Raleigh, NC 27699-1202

E 03/05/2012SAF-FIR

Jeffry T. Dudley

PrincipalNational Aeronautics & Space Administration503 Glenbrook CircleRockledge, FL 32955

U 10/20/2010

SAF-FIR

Sam W. Francis

PrincipalAmerican Wood Council1 Dutton Farm LaneWest Grove, PA 19390American Forest & Paper Association

M 7/1/1996SAF-FIR

Michael O. Gencarelli

PrincipalUS Department of the NavyNAVFAC HQ: Medical Facilities Design Office (MDFO)1322 Patterson Avenue, Suite 1000Washington, DC 20374

E 8/9/2011

SAF-FIR

Ralph D. Gerdes

PrincipalRalph Gerdes Consultants, LLC5510 South East Street, Suite EIndianapolis, IN 46227Alternate: David Cook

SE 1/1/1986SAF-FIR

Jack A. Gump

PrincipalBabcock & Wilcox Y-12, LLC260 Hill Top DriveLenoir City, TN 37772-5286

U 10/10/1997

SAF-FIR

Wayne D. Holmes

PrincipalHSB Professional Loss Control508 Parkview DriveBurlington, NC 27215

I 10/1/1996SAF-FIR

Gene L. Hortz

PrincipalThe Dow Chemical Company3100 State RoadCroydon, PA 19021

U 3/1/2011

1 of 119


Safety to Life


SAF-FIR

Jonathan Humble

PrincipalAmerican Iron and Steel Institute45 South Main Street, Suite 312West Hartford, CT 06107-2402Alternate: Farid Alfawakhiri

M 7/1/1996SAF-FIR

Waymon Jackson

PrincipalUniversity of Texas at Austin1 University Station, Stop C2600PO Box 7729Austin, TX 78713Alternate: Karl L. Shrader

U 10/20/2010

SAF-FIR

Adam C. Jones

PrincipalBuechel Fire Protection District4101 Bardstown RoadLouisville, KY 40218

E 10/18/2011SAF-FIR

Marshall A. Klein

PrincipalMarshall A. Klein & Associates, Inc.6815 Autumn View DriveEldersburg, MD 21784-6304Alternate: David M. Hammerman

SE 1/1/1981

SAF-FIR

William E. Koffel

PrincipalKoffel Associates, Inc.8815 Centre Park Drive, Suite 200Columbia, MD 21045Glazing Industry Code Committee

M 1/1/1986SAF-FIR

David A. Lewis

PrincipalCode Consultants, Inc.2043 Woodland Parkway, Suite 300St. Louis, MO 63146-4235Alternate: Kevin D. Morin

SE 10/10/1998

SAF-FIR

Vickie J. Lovell

PrincipalInterCode Incorporated777 East Atlantic Avenue, Suite 301Delray Beach, FL 33483Air Movement & Control AssociationAlternate: Timothy J. Orris

M 10/6/2000SAF-FIR

William J. McHugh, Jr.

PrincipalFirestop Contractors International Association4415 W. Harrison Street #436Hillside, IL 60162Firestop Contractors International Association

IM 9/30/2004

SAF-FIR

Jon W. Pasqualone

PrincipalMartin County Board of County Commissioners2401 SE Monterey RoadStuart, FL 34996Florida Fire Marshals & Inspectors AssociationAlternate: Richard C. Butcher

E 7/16/2003SAF-FIR

Brian T. Rhodes

PrincipalHughes Associates, Inc.3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817Baltimore, MD 21227-1652Alternate: Eric R. Rosenbaum

SE 3/4/2008

SAF-FIR

Kurt A. Roeper

PrincipalASSA ABLOY110 Sargent DriveNew Haven, CT 06511Steel Door InstituteAlternate: Thomas R. Janicak

M 4/5/2001SAF-FIR

Stephen V. Skalko

PrincipalPortland Cement Association128 Summerfield DriveMacon, GA 31210

M 10/27/2009

2 of 119


Safety to Life


SAF-FIR

Andrew F. Weisfield

PrincipalMichael Baker Jr. Corporation100 Airside DriveMoon Township, PA 15108

SE 10/20/2010SAF-FIR

Kenneth Wood

PrincipalOffice of the Illinois State Fire Marshal100 West Randolph St., Suite 4-600Chicago, IL 60601Alternate: Catherine L. Stashak

E 1/1/1990

SAF-FIR

Farid Alfawakhiri

AlternateAmerican Iron and Steel Institute380 Cottonwood LaneNaperville, IL 60540Principal: Jonathan Humble

M 7/23/2008SAF-FIR

Richard C. Butcher

AlternateTarpon Springs Fire Rescue444 Huey Avenue SouthTarpon Springs, FL 34689Florida Fire Marshals & Inspectors AssociationPrincipal: Jon W. Pasqualone

E 4/14/2005

SAF-FIR

David Cook

AlternateRalph Gerdes Consultants, LLC5510 South East Street, Suite EIndianapolis, IN 46227Principal: Ralph D. Gerdes

SE 10/1/1995SAF-FIR

Rick Glenn

AlternateAon Fire Protection Engineering Corporation1000 Milwaukee Avenue, 5th FloorGlenview, IL 60025-2423Principal: John F. Devlin

I 7/26/2007

SAF-FIR

David M. Hammerman

AlternateMarshall A. Klein and Associates, Inc.3950 Chaffey RoadRandallstown, MD 21133Principal: Marshall A. Klein

SE 4/5/2001SAF-FIR

Howard Hopper

AlternateUL LLC455 East Trimble RoadSan Jose, CA 95131-1230Principal: John F. Bender

RT 3/2/2010

SAF-FIR

Thomas R. Janicak

AlternateCeco Door Products801 Mark LaneHampshire, IL 60140Steel Door InstitutePrincipal: Kurt A. Roeper

M 1/10/2002SAF-FIR

Ronald B. Melucci

AlternateThe RJA Group, Inc.1661 Worcester Road, Suite 501Framingham, MA 01701Principal: Joseph A. Castellano

SE 3/4/2008

SAF-FIR

Kevin D. Morin

AlternateCode Consultants, Inc.215 West 40th Street, Floor 15New York, NY 10018Principal: David A. Lewis

SE 3/4/2009SAF-FIR

Timothy J. Orris

AlternateAMCA International, Inc.30 West University DriveArlington Heights, IL 60004-1893Air Movement & Control AssociationPrincipal: Vickie J. Lovell

M 7/29/2005

3 of 119


Safety to Life


SAF-FIR

Eric R. Rosenbaum

AlternateHughes Associates, Inc.3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817Baltimore, MD 21227-1652Principal: Brian T. Rhodes

SE 4/17/1998SAF-FIR

Karl L. Shrader

AlternateUniversity of Texas at Austin1 University Station, Stop C2600PO Box 7729Austin, TX 78713Principal: Waymon Jackson

U 10/18/2011

SAF-FIR

Catherine L. Stashak

AlternateOffice of the Illinois State Fire MarshalDivision of Technical ServicesJames R. Thompson Center100 West Randolph Street, #4-600Chicago, IL 60601Office of the Illinois State Fire MarshalPrincipal: Kenneth Wood

E 11/2/2006SAF-FIR

Michael Earl Dillon

Nonvoting MemberDillon Consulting Engineers, Inc.671 Quincy AvenueLong Beach, CA 90814-1818TC on Air Conditioning

SE 10/1/1993

SAF-FIR

Steven Orlowski

Nonvoting MemberNational Association of Home Builders1201 15th Street, NWWashington, DC 20005-2800Alternate: Lawrence Brown

U 10/18/2011SAF-FIR

Lawrence Brown

Alt. to Nonvoting MemberNational Association of Home Builders1201 15th Street, NWWashington, DC 20005-2800Principal: Steven Orlowski

U 10/18/2011

SAF-FIR

Kristin Bigda

Staff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

6/29/2007

4 of 119

ROC MEETING MINUTES Building Construction – Life Safety Technical Committee on

Fire Protection Features Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Hotel Monteleone New Orleans, LA

1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Chair Eric Rosenbaum at 8:00

a.m. on Wednesday, October 6, 2010, at the Hotel Monteleone, New Orleans, LA.

2. Introduction of Attendees. The following committee members were in attendance:

NAME REPRESENTING Eric Rosenbaum, Chair Hughes Associates, Inc. Gregory J. Cahanin, Principal Cahanin Fire & Code Consulting Rep. Louisiana State Firemen’s Association Sam W. Francis, Principal American Wood Council Rick Glenn Aon/Fire Protection Engineering (Alternate to J. Devlin) Thomas Janicak Steel Door Institute (Alternate to K. Roeper) Ignatius Kapalczynski, Principal Connecticut Department of Public Safety William E. Koffel, Principal Koffel Associates, Inc. Rep. glazing Industry Code Committee David E. Lewis, Principal Code Consultants, Inc. Vickie J. Lovell, Principal Inter Code Incorporated Rep. Air Movement & Control Association/3M William J. McHugh, Jr. Principal Firestop Contractors International Association Kurt A. Roeper, Principal Ingersoll-Rand Security Technologies Rep. Steel Door Institute Andrew M. Schneider, Principal Maryland State Fire Marshal’s Office Rep. International Fire Marshals Association Catherine L. Stashak Office of the Illinois State Fire Marshal (Alternate to K. Wood) Kristin Collette, Staff Liaison NFPA

of 119

GUESTS NAME REPRESENTING Ralph Dorio ISO Robert Eugene Underwriters Laboratories John Valiulis Hilti, Inc. Thom Zaremna Roetzel Andress

The following committee members were not in attendance: NAME REPRESENTING John Bender, Principal Underwriters Laboratories Joseph A. Castellano, Principal The RJA Group, Inc. Ralph D. Gerdes, Principal Ralph Gerdes Consultants, LLC Jack Gump, Principal Babcock & Wilcox Y-12, LLC Wayne D. Holmes, Principal HSB Professional Loss Control Jonathan Humble, Principal American Iron and Steel Institute Marshall A. Klein, Principal Marshall A. Klein & Associates, Inc. Jon W. Pasqualone, Principal Martin County Board of County Commissioners – Rep. Florida Fire Marshals and Inspectors Association Stephen Skalko, Principal Portland Cement Association

3. Approval of Minutes. Minutes of the September 24-25, 2009 meeting were approved with no modifications.

4. TC Meeting Presentation. Ms. Collette presented the TC Meeting PowerPoint that was included in the agenda. In addition, she discussed the new Document Information Pages on NFPA’s website as well as how to access the committee’s meeting information on the new pages. It is to be noted that all meeting information (notices, agendas, and minutes) will be located on the “Next Edition” tab of these pages going forward. The committee can access the pages at www.nfpa.org/101 or www.nfpa.org/5000 .

5. NFPA 101 ROC Preparation. All public comments were addressed.

Committee comments were developed as needed. See ROC letter ballot package.

6. NFPA 5000 ROC Preparation. All public comments were addressed. Committee comments were developed as needed. See ROC letter ballot package.

7. Other Business. Ms. Collette presented the committee with details on the new

structural fire resistance testing facility to be completed at NIST in 2012. The goal for the facility is to provide a resource to the structural fire engineering community to enhance the understanding of complex structures in fire and the validation of performance based fire engineering methods. The Fire Protection Research Foundation, through NIST, is seeking input for future project and research needs from the research, engineering, manufacturing, and standards development communities in the U.S. and worldwide. Anyone with ideas please e-mail them to [email protected] and Ms. Collette will forward them to the Foundation. See minutes attachment (A) for additional information.

of 119

8. Future Meetings. The next meeting of the BLD/SAF-FIR committee will be the

Annual 2014 ROP meeting to be held in the fall of 2012.

9. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned by Chair Rosenbaum at 5:30 pm. Attachments

of 119

MINUTES

ATTACHMENT A

of 119

Structural Fire Resistance Research Needs

In 2012, NIST’s Building and Fire Research Laboratory (BFRL) will complete construction of a new

structural fire resistance testing facility with unique capability to test structural elements, systems, and

their connections . A description of the capabilities of the facility is attached.

The goal for the facility is to provide a resource to the structural fire engineering community to enhance

the understanding of complex structures in fire and the validation of performance based fire

engineering methods. BFRL has asked the Fire Protection Research Foundation (the Foundation) to

assist in developing a prioritized research agenda for work in the new facility. We are seeking input

from the research, engineering, manufacturing, and standards development communities in the U.S.

and worldwide through an email request, through a review of the recent literature and through selected

meetings with key groups. This data will be compiled into a strawman research needs assessment which

will be reviewed through a workshop to be held in April of 2011. A list of those invited to participate in

development of the research agenda is attached.

We would like your input on the following questions, with as much specific detail as possible to guide

the agenda.

In order to augment/extend current worldwide research with the unique capabilities of the facility, are

there specific examples of research studies that could complete our understanding of a particular aspect

of structural fire performance (materials, systems)? Please be specific with respect to the type of

construction material (e.g.wood, steel, concrete, composites, other), and the structural

component/system of interest (e.g. beam‐column connections).

Based on the current state of the art in the modeling of the performance of structures in fire, what are

the priorities for model validation which the unique capabilities of the facility can address?

Based on current fire engineering design challenges, what are the priorities to enhance the

understanding of selected structural systems performance in fire (for example, composite connections)

?

From the perspective of structural fire engineering design standards, are there gaps in these standards

which could be addressed by specific research projects at the facility?

Please provide your response no later than October 15th of this year. Responses will be compiled and

form part of the basis for the strawman research needs assessment. You will be invited to participate in

the workshop in April of next year, once its details have been confirmed. All participants will receive a

copy of the final document which we hope will provide BFRL with strong guidance from the community

to best utilize this national resource.

of 119

Structural Fire Safety: Importance and Research Needs

Since the turn of the last century, high-rise building construction has undergone significant changes. In 1900, the tallest building in New York City was 30 stories. Today, many buildings exceed this height. Further, buildings taller than about 10 stories exceed the reach of a ladder truck and therefore fires in the upper floors cannot be fought externally. Floor areas have increased, with floor areas of 20,000 square feet common. Similarly, floor spans have also increased, with spans of 50 feet not uncommon in modern construction. The materials of construction and their burning characteristics have changed over time.

Yet, the E119 test method used to develop fire ratings for structural components and assemblies has changed little since it was introduced in 1917. While the fire performance of buildings is quite good, in extreme cases such as that of World Trade Center 7, uncontrolled fires can lead to partial or total collapse of an entire building. The measurement science to predict structural performance to failure under uncontrolled fire conditions is lacking.

NIST recognized the need to address structural fire resistance of engineered buildings in 2001. The events of 9/11 placed greater importance on understanding how modern engineered buildings perform under uncontrolled fire conditions and underscored the need for performance-based standards and codes for the fire resistance design and retrofit of structures. NIST is currently performing research to develop the technical basis for performance-based standards and codes.

NIST’s research has three principal components that relate directly to solving this measurement science problem. The first is the development of a performance-based methodology to evaluate the fire behavior of buildings, considering fire in the building design process. NIST is currently working to develop analytical tools to predict structural fire performance for typical and complex building designs. This effort will also include establishing specific performance objectives and metrics. The second aspect of this research is to identify design variables such as building layout, openings, materials of construction, passive fire protection, and the amount of distribution of combustibles that are critical to predicting structural performance in fire. The final component is the application of a risk and reliability-based approach to the prediction and specification of fire scenarios, fire loads, reduction of structural resistance and structural response.

Essential to the development of performance-based methods, is the capability to experimentally validate the predictive models being developed. To meet this need, NIST is proceeding with construction of the National Structural Fire Resistance Laboratory. The NSFRL will be built as an addition to the existing Large Fire Laboratory on NIST’s Gaithersburg, Maryland Campus. It will include a 60’ x 90’ strong floor and a 60’ long by 30’ tall reaction wall. A 45’ x 50’ hood will capture the exhaust products from fires. The facility will have a capacity for testing

of 119

structures up to two stories tall, and two bays by three bays in plan. The facility has been designed to accommodate fires up to 20 MW in size.

The NSFRL will provide the capability to develop an experimental database on performance of large-scale structural connections, components, subassemblies, and systems under realistic fire and loading, to validate physics-based models to predict fire resistance performance of structures, and support the development performance-based standards for fire resistance.

In addition to the test area, the facility will include a large assembly area and pit for conditioning of concrete test articles. The new facility includes an additional emission control system to extend the fire capacity to 20 MW.

Construction of the facility is scheduled to begin later this summer and is scheduled to take 18 months. We anticipate that it will take another year to prepare the facility to begin conducting experiments. NIST expects to operate the facility under a model that will allow researchers from outside NIST to utilize excess capacity for their research. The NSFRL will provide a unique and valuable resource for structural fire research and supporting the development of performance-based standards and codes for structural fire resistance.

of 119

5/16/2012

1

NFPA First Draft Meetings

Welcome!

May 22-23, 2012

NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000Technical Committee on Fire Protection Features

(BLD/SAF-FIR)

5/16/2012

Indianapolis, IN


At this and all NFPA committee meetings we are concerned with your safety. If the fire alarm sounds,concerned with your safety. If the fire alarm sounds, please proceed to an exit.

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

2


Members, please verify/update your contact informationinformation

Use of tape recorders or other means capable of reproducing verbatim transcriptions of this or any NFPA meeting is not permitted

5/16/2012


Guests All guests are required to sign in and identify All guests are required to sign in and identify

their affiliations. Participation is limited to those individuals who

have previously requested of the chair time to address the committee on a particular subject or individuals who wish to speak to Public Input they have submitted

5/16/2012

they have submitted.Guest chairs are located around the room as a

courtesy.

of 119

5/16/2012

3


Members categorized in ANY interest category who have been retained to represent thewho have been retained to represent the interests of ANOTHER interest category (with respect to a specific issue or issues that are to be addressed by a TC/CC) shall declare those interests to the committee and refrain from voting on any Public Input Comment or other

5/16/2012

voting on any Public Input, Comment, or other matter relating to those issues.

NFPA First Draft MeetingsNew Process

General ProceduresFollow Robert’s Rules of Order.

Discussion requires a motion.

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

4

Motions for Ending Debate Previous Question or “Call the Question”


Call the Question Not in order when another has the floor

Requires a second

This motion is not debatable and DOES NOT automatically stop debate

A 2/3 affirmative vote will immediately close debate and

5/16/2012

return to the original motion on the floor. Less then 2/3 will allow debate to continue.


Committee member actions:

Member addresses the chair.

Receives recognition from the chair.

Introduces the motion.

Another member seconds the motion.

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

5

Committee chair actions:


States the motion.

Calls for discussion.

Ensures all issues have been heard.

Takes the vote.

5/16/2012

Announces the result of the vote.


Technical Committee on Fire Protection Features Enforcers 6 Members: 22% Enforcers, 6 Members: 22%

Insurance, 2 Members: 7%

Installer/Maintainer, 1 Members: 4%

Labor, 0 Members: 0%

Manufacturers, 6 Members: 22%

Research & Testing, 1 Member: 4%

S i l E t 6 M b 22%

5/16/2012

Special Experts, 6 Members: 22%

Users, 5 Member: 19%

Total – 27 voting members

of 119

5/16/2012

6


Timeline Public Input Stage (First Draft):

Fi t D ft M ti 5/22 23/2012 First Draft Meeting: __5/22-23/2012___ Posting of First Draft for Balloting Date: __no later than 10/12/2012___ Posting of First Draft for Public Comment: _2/22/2013____

Comment Stage (Second Draft): Public Comment Closing Date: _5/3/2013____ Second Draft Meeting Period: June 2013_____ Posting of Second Draft for Balloting Date: _no later than 8/23/2013____ Posting of Second Draft for NITMAM: _1/3/2014____

Tech Session Preparation: NITMAM Closing Date: 2/7/2014

5/16/2012

g _ ____ NITMAM /CAM Posting Date: _4/4/2014____ NFPA Annual Meeting: __6/9-12/2014___

Standards Council Issuance: Issuance of Consent Documents: with __2015___edition date Issuance of Documents with CAM: _8/14/2014___ with __2015___edition date

NFPA First Draft MeetingsNew Process – What’s New?

Changes in Terms:

New Term Old Term

Input Stage ROP Stage

Public Input Proposal

First Draft Meeting ROP Meeting

Committee Input“Trial Balloon”

(or later, FR that fails ballot)

Committee Statement (CS) Committee Statement

5/16/2012

Committee Statement (CS) Committee Statement

First Revision (FR)Committee Proposal or Accepted

Public Proposal

First Draft Report ROP

First Draft ROP Draft

of 119

5/16/2012

7

NFPA First Draft MeetingsNew Process – What’s New?

Changes in Terms:

New Term Old Term

Comment Stage ROC Stage

Public Comment Public Comment

Second Draft Meeting ROC Meeting

Committee CommentComment that Failed Ballot

(Second Revision that failed ballot)

5/16/2012

( )

Second RevisionCommittee Comment or Accepted

Public Comment

Second Draft Report ROC

Second Draft ROC Draft

Flowchart

See page 4 for flowchart overview

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

8

NFPA First Draft MeetingsNew Process

NEW Committee Actions and Motions:

Resolve Public Input

Create a First Revision

Create a Committee Input (Trial Balloon)

5/16/2012

First DraftNew Process

• Resolve a Public Input (No Change to Text):

Committee does not want to incorporate the Public Input as a revision.

Committee develops a Committee Statement (CS) to respond (resolve) a Public Input.

Committee must clearly indicate reasons for not ti th d ti i CS

5/16/2012

accepting the recommendation in CS.

Does not get balloted

of 119

5/16/2012

9


• Create a First Revision (FR) Committee wants to make a change to a current

section.

Committee develops a Committee Statement (CS) substantiating the change.

If the revision is associated with one or more P bli I t ( ) th C itt d l CS t

5/16/2012

Public Input (s), the Committee develops a CS to respond to each PI.

Each FR gets balloted


• Create a Committee Input (Trial B ll )Balloon) Committee wants to receive Public Comment on a

topic, but not ready to incorporate it into the draft

Need to have a Committee Statement

Does not get balloted

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

10


Committee Statements (Substantiation):

All P bli I t t h C ittAll Public Input must have a Committee Statement

Must include a valid technical reason

No vague references to “intent”

Explain how the submitter’s substantiation

5/16/2012

Explain how the submitter’s substantiation is inadequate


Committee Statements (Substantiation):

Sh ld f th Fi t R i i if itShould reference the First Revision if it addresses the intent of the Submitter’s Public Input

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

11


Formal voting Voting during meeting is used to establish

a sense of agreement (simple majority)

Secured by letter ballot (2/3 agreement)

Only the results of the formal ballot determine the official position of the

5/16/2012

determine the official position of the committee on the First Draft


Ballots are on the First Revisions (FR) ONLY Public Input and Committee Input not balloted Public Input and Committee Input not balloted Reference materials are available:

First Draft, PI, CI, CS, etc

Ballot form allows you to vote: Affirmative on all FR Affirmative on all FR with exceptions specifically noted

Ballot form provides a column for affirmative

5/16/2012

Ballot form provides a column for affirmative with comment Note: This box only needs to be checked if there is an

accompanying comment.

Reject or abstain requires a reason.

of 119

5/16/2012

12


Initial ballot Initial ballotCirculation of negatives and commentsMembers may change votes during

circulation First Revision that fails letter ballot

5/16/2012

becomes Committee Input (CI) – just like the trial balloon version of CI – so as to solicit Public Comment


Balloting

Ballots will be an online formatBallots will be an online format

Alternates are strongly encouraged to return ballots

5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

13


No New Material after the Public Input Stage

What constitutes new material is to some extent a judgment call

5/16/2012

TC Struggles with an Issue

Code Fund Lends a Hand

Research Project Carried Outwith an Issue

• TC needs data on a new technology or emerging issue

• Two opposing views on an issue with no real data

a Hand

• TC rep and/or staff liaison submits a Code Fund Request

• Requests are reviewed by a Panel and chosen based

Carried Out

• Funding for project is provided by the Code Fund and/or industry sponsors

• Project is completed real data

• Data presented is not trusted by committee

chosen based on need / feasibility

completed and data is available to TC

www.nfpa.org/codefund5/16/2012

of 119

5/16/2012

14

Legal

Antitrust: the single most important provision-Federal law prohibits contracts combinationsFederal law prohibits contracts, combinations, or conspiracies which unreasonably restrain trade or commerce. Section 1 of the Sherman Act

Patent: Disclosures of essential patent claims should be made by the patent holder, but others may also notify NFPA if they believe that a

5/16/2012

y y yproposed or existing NFPA standard includes an essential patent claim.

Legal

Activities Disapproved by the CourtsP ki ti Packing meetings

Hiding commercial interest throwing the committees out of balance

No final decision-making authority to unbalanced Task Groups; include all interested parties.

5/16/2012

Hiding scientific or technical information from committees

of 119

5/16/2012

15

Doc Info Pages

Document Information Next Edition Technical Committee

• Document scope• Current/Previous

Edition information• Issued TIAs, FIs and

Errata• Archived revision

information• Standard Council

Decisions

• Meetings and Ballots• ROP/ROC or First

Draft Report and Second Draft Report

• NITMAM and Standard Council Decisions

• Submission of Public Input/Comment

f

• Committee name, responsibility and scope

• Staff liaison• Committee list

• Private committee contact information

• Current committee documents in PDF f

5/16/2012

• Articles and Reports• Read only document

• Private TC info• Ballot circulations,

informational ballots and other committee info

format• Committees seeking

members and committee online application


Thank you for participating!Thank you for participating!

Any questions?

5/16/2012

of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #329 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Sharon S. Gilyeat, Koffel Associates, Inc.

Throughout the document change:"rubbish chute" to "waste chute""laundry chute" to "linen chute"

Change will make wording consistent with NFPA 82 and allow for their definiations to support this codeas well.

1Printed on 5/16/2012

of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Tony Crimi, A.C. Consulting Solutions, Inc. / Rep. International Firestop Council

Add text to read as follows:he fire resistance rating of an element or assembly determined by tests conducted in accordance with NFPA

251 or other approved test methods shall not be permitted to rely on automatic fire suppression systems unlessevaluated as an equivalency in accordance with Section 1.4 or as part of a performance-based option in accordancewith Chapter 5.

Problem: There is the potential for misuse of long established fire-resistance test Standards relied uponin the Code to determine performance of elements and assemblies tested as systems in conjunction with dedicatedactive suppression systems. NFPA 251, UL 263, and ASTM E119 do not make provision for testing of these types ofcombined active and passive fire protection systems.In the 2012 revision cycle, Public comment 101-89 on Proposal 101-165, dealing with this same topic, was initiallyaccepted by the Technical Committee during its meeting, but failed to achieve the required 2/3 affirmative vote by 1single vote, receiving 15 of a required 15.18 Affirmative Votes (65.2%). I submitted a NITMAM on behalf of theInternational Firestop Council The NFPA membership voted with an overwhelming majority to accept the code changeproposed. However, the subsequent committee vote failed to reach the needed 2/3 majority needed to uphold themembership action, again by a single vote.Technical backgroundIt is predominantly with fire-resistance ratings that some manufacturers have begun to submit test reports to AuthoritiesHaving Jurisdiction claiming to have “fire-resistance ratings” that are derived from modified standard tests using a flow ofcooling water during the fire test. It now becomes important to clarify that the code-required fire resistance rating is infact a property that is meant to represent the inherent resistance to fire of an assembly, independent of any active fireprotection. In countless instances, the code already incorporates the effect of a fire suppression system by reducing thefire-resistance rating requirements, and by reducing other required safety features as well through a process many referto as “trade-offs”.Currently, the most common case example is that of sprinklered glazing. Standards ASTM E119, NFPA 251, and UL263 make no provisions for running a fire resistance test using any extraneous means to achieve fire resistance ratings. As such, given that the referenced test standards essentially provide the definitation of what is a “fire resistance rating”,it is not possible to assign a fire resistance rating to any assembly where the test has been modified in some way tochange the basic conditions of the test. By way of comparison, ICC-ES has recently agreed to WITHDRAW AC385,titled “Acceptance Crieria for Special purpose Sprinkler Heads Used wih Fixed Glazed Assemblies to Provide a Fireresistance-rated Wall Assembly (AC385)” which dealt with sprinklered glazing, for the same reasons outlined below. Both on the floor at the June 2011 NFPA Association Technical Meeting, at ICC, and ICC-ES, this proposal to make itclear that a “fire resistance rating” cannot be claimed when modifying the code-approved test, was accepted by anoverwhelming majority. I will also point out that this proposal was NOT opposed by a single person on the floor,including representatives of the Sprinkler Association. However, the Committee on Fire Protection Features hasnarrowly missed accepting this revision in NFPA 101, although they did support this provision being included in NFPA5000-09. This proposal was again, less than ONE vote short of having this situation corrected in NFPA 101. First, let me confirm that both the analogous code provision in IBC 2012 and the NFPA NITMAM do not restrict anyonefrom submitting arguments on a case-by-case basis via Alternative protection methods, or by evaluation as aperformance-based option. Thus, the only impact of this code change is to prevent anyone from incorrectly andmisleadingly claiming a “fire resistance rating” in accordance with ASTM E119, UL 263, or NFPA 251. This proposaldoes not “modify” these test standards as suggested by one of the negative voters. In fact, it prevents the proliferationof a misconception that these systems are being tested in accordance with these standards, rather than only inaccordance with the “time-temperature” curves in these standards. To quote directly from the Scope of thenow-withdrawn AC 385, article 1.2, which stated in part: “Because the sprinkler heads are used to limit the rate of heattransfer through the glazing, the ASTM E 119 test method and test assembly are modified to take into account thesprinkler heads and their discharge.”To summarize, there are a number of compelling reasons to support the NFPA membership:1. This change prevents a misuse of established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon in the Code to determineperformance of elements and assemblies, wherein the established consensus test method are modified outside thescope of the test standard to include a flow of cooling water during the fire exposure portion of the test. 2. It has long been a basic tenet that the design of every building or structure intended for human occupancy be


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101constructed such that reliance for safety to life does not depend solely on any single safeguard. Additional safeguardsare provided for life safety in case any single safeguard is ineffective due to inappropriate human actions or systemfailure.3. The resulting cooling-enhanced fire rating then provides a result that would be incompatible with the principle ofrequired fire resistance ratings specified throughout the Codes. The various fire resistance ratings mandated throughoutdozens of articles in the Code have been established based on an assumption of the type of construction that wouldpass the standardized tests without the aid of water cooling during fire exposure. For example, a relatively thin andun-insulated metal panel wall with suitable water cooling could potentially be arranged to pass a 1-hour standardizedfire-resistance test, and possibly even longer duration fire-resistance tests. However, where the Code specifies theneed for a 1-hour assembly, the intent in the development of that code provision would have clearly been to have anassembly that could survive a fire without being breached and without losing any load-bearing capabilities all by itself,without relying on an external water source for continued cooling. If sprinkler protection was also required for such anoccupancy, then the overall intent of the Code is to have these two systems act independently, but in concert with eachother. 4. The language proposed for 8.1.3 here is similar to the language that was in NFPA 5000-09. The Appendix note isnew. Acceptance of this proposal corrects a potential technical that does exist, as evidenced in the comments of somenegative voters. The proposed language responded to committee concerns expressed in previous cycles in that itwould require a specific approval by the Authority Having Jurisdiction using either the equivalency orperformance-based options permitted by the Code. It clearly does not eliminate those options, but rather, encouragestheir proper use. The rationale for removing this language from NFPA 5000-12 in ROP Code Proposal 5000-92 recentlywas that it "Conflicted with NFPA 101". However, it is clear, that the Membership at the Floor of NFPA, (just as the IBCmembership did) support this approach. 5. No fewer than 5 of the Negative voters cited the fact that Proposal 5000-92 removed this provision from NFPA 5000.As indicated above, this was not done for technical reasons, but rather, for consistency. Those 5 negative votes couldhave therefore been resolved just as readily by leaving the provision in NFPA 5000, and adopting it into NFPA 101,which would have made the vote to accept the code change proposal into NFPA 101 almost unanimous. This languagehas never failed to achieve less than 52% affirmative votes even through the Fire Protection Features Committee.6. Lastly, one of the most compelling reasons for overturning the Technical Committee and supporting the Membershipis provided in the Affirmative with Comment provided by Catherine Stashak. Her comment as an AHJ was as follows:“AHJ’s are presented with this scenario frequently. Designers feel that because the atrium language permits sprinklerprotection in lieu of the 1-hour separation requirements, that this means it is acceptable in other areas of buildings. Thislanguage is a positive change in the existing language that will provide guidance and testing information that will helpthe AHJ to make correct decisions. This proposal is only clarifying to the code user the intent of the code. Not everyonehas the same fire protection experience or knowledge level as the members of the Technical Committee do. Annexlanguage is supposed to be explanatory and provide guidance, history and experience. The proposed language willhelp the AHJ to make correct decisions and will improve the code. It is appropriate for the code to notify the designerthat the burden of technical substantiation of equivalent performance belongs to the proponent of the alternative and notupon the enforcer to prove that it is not equivalent.”


of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Catherine L. Stashak, Office of the Illinois State Fire Marshal

Add a new section to read:8.1.3* The fire resistance rating of an element or assembly determined by tests conducted in accordance with NFPA


Problem: There is the potential for misuse of long established fire-resistance test Standards reliedupon in the Code to determine performance of elements and assemblies tested as systems in conjunction withdedicated active suppression systems. This change prevents a misuse of established fire-resistance test Standardsrelied upon in the Code to determine performance of elements and assemblies, wherein the established consensus testmethod are modified outside the scope of the test standard to include a flow of cooling water during the fire exposureportion of the test. Substantiation: The history of this particular Proposal is lengthy. Public comment 101-89 on Proposal101-165 was initially accepted by the Technical Committee during its meeting, but failed to achieve the required 2/3affirmative vote by 1 single vote, receiving 15 of a required 15.18 Affirmative Votes (65.2%). It was also overwhelminglyapproved by the membership at the annual meeting in June 2011. AHJ’s are presented with this scenario frequently,designers feel that because the atrium language permits sprinkler protection in lieu of the 1-hour separationrequirements, that this means that it is acceptable in other areas of buildings. This language is a positive change in theexisting language that will provide guidance and testing information that will help the AHJ to make the correct decision.This proposal is only clarifying to the code user the intent of the code language. Technical justification for this proposalis not needed because nothing is being changed technically. The proposed code language is not preventing a futurewall assembly from being developed/tested that would include an automatic fire extinguishing system as part of its“fire-rating” as permitted in Section 1.4 or Chapter 5. There is absolutely no conflict with Section 1.4 or Chapter 5presented by this language. This language is not preventing any existing listing that may include reliance on anautomatic fire extinguishing system from being used. All this language is doing is making sure the AHJ or the code userunderstands the intent of the code language. Not everyone has the same fire protection experience or knowledge levelas the members of the technical committee do. Annex language is supposed to be explanatory and provide guidance,history and experience. The proposed language will help the AHJ to make the correct decision and will improve thecode. It is predominantly with fire-resistance ratings that some manufacturers have begun to submit test reports toAuthorities Having Jurisdiction claiming to have “fire-resistance ratings” that are derived from modified standard testsusing a flow of cooling water during the fire test. It now becomes important to clarify that the code-required fireresistance rating is in fact a property that is meant to represent the inherent resistance to fire of an assembly,independent of any active fire protection. In countless instances, the code already incorporates the effect of a firesuppression system by reducing the fire-resistance rating requirements, and often by reducing other required safetyfeatures as well.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #77 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Bill Galloway, Southern Regional Fire Code Development Committee

Delete Fire compartments shall be formed by fire barriers complying with 8.3.1.2.The code requirement immediately preceding states: Fire compartments shall be formed with

fire barriers that comply with Section 8.3. (Section 8.3 includes 8.3.1.2)


of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Joshua Elvove, U.S. General Services Administration

Revise text as follows:(4) Door assemblies shall be inspected in accordance with 7.2.1.15. NFPA 105,

.7.2.1.15 is the wrong reference for inspecting smoke leakage-rated assemblies as 7.2.1.15 pertains to

inspection of (egress) door openings. The correct reference is NFPA 105.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #392 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Lennon Peake, Koffel Associates, Inc.

Add new text to read:In existing installations, steel door frames are permitted without a legible label where approved by the AHJ.

The proposed revision slightly modifies and moves the language from the annex into the body of thecode. The health care industry has been adversely affected by regulators not accepting the language in the annex notedue to it not being in the body of the Code. Relabeling of a fire door frame can be costly and provides little benefit assteel door frames well set into a wall routinely receive a label during inspection from a testing lab provided there are noholes in the frame. Furthermore, NFPA 5000 Section 15.5.2.2.5 on buildng rehabilitation requires door frames to beprovidedwith a label OR be constructed of steel.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #474 SAF-FIR


Add a new section to read:Fire-rated door assemblies shall be inspected and tested in accordance with NFPA 80, Standard for Fire

Doors and Other Opening Protectives.The inspection and testing interval for fire-rated and nonrated door assemblies shall be permitted to exceed

12 months under a written performance-based program in accordance with 5.2.2 of NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doorsand Other Opening Protectives.

Currently, there's no requirement for inspecting and testing fire doors, other than what's currentlystated in 7.2.1.15.2 and 7.2.15.3. However, inspection and testing fire doors does not belong in the means of egresschapter, since not all fire doors may be within a means of egress. Hence, I have submitted a separate public input toremove language from 7.2.1.15.2 and 7.2.1.15.3 and am submitting this public input to relocate all text pertaining to firedoors here. Note: I have no heartburn if you should decide to remove 8.3.3.13.1 (existing 7.2.15.3) in its entirety, sincethis option is already permitted through the reference to NFPA 80 in 8.3.3.13. I have also submitted another public inputunder 8.2.2.4(4) for testing requirements for smoke leakage doors.


of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Robert J. Davidson, Davidson Code Concepts, LLC1. Replace Table 8.3.4.2 in 101-98 (Log #228) in the A2011 ROC with the following:

***INSERT TABLE 8.3.4.2 HERE***

Table 8.3.4.2, as accepted in Comment 101-98 is not complete. Sections of NFPA 101,, permit the use of ½ hour elevator hoistways. Without an entry for this condition in the table, it becomes confusing

and difficult to apply or enforce. The addition of a line to address ½ hour elevator hoistways would complete the table toensure that all requirements for fire resistance-rated assemblies, as required by another section of the Code, areaddressed in the new Table 8.3.4.2.

Table 8.3.4.2 was revised and expanded during the ROP and ROC stages of the Annual 2011revision cycle to incorporate not only the required fire protection ratings for opening protectives, but also to include therequirements for glazing ratings for both fire protection glazing and fire resistance glazing, glazing markings, andpermitted glazing sizes. The new table incorporates glazing requirements that were formerly located in the body of theCode. During the ROP, actions taken in Proposal 101-174a removed the row in the current Table 8.3.4.2 for elevatorhoistways and incorporated elevator hoistways into the row for vertical shafts. This was done because there was noneed for a separate row for elevator hoistways, which are a form of vertical shaft. It is also noted by Proposal 101-174athat the current elevator hoistway row is missing entries for ½-hour hoistways. By adding them as part of the verticalshafts row, it now provides values for ½ hour elevator hoistways, which are permitted under certain existing conditions.During the ROC, the extensive revisions and additions to the table, as noted above, were completed. The revised table,as accepted in Comment 101-98, omitted this concept of ½ hour elevator hoistways, thus having no row in the table touse when evaluating opening protectives in a ½ hour existing elevator hoistway. The concept as proposed in 101-174awould not work for the new Table 8.3.4.2, because as the requirements for glazing size and marking differ. A new rowfor ½ hour elevator hoistways is needed to complete the table and provide the information necessary for openingprotectives in ½ hour elevator hoistways. A footnote for the metric conversions is also added for compliance withNFPA Manual of Style.


of 119

Table 8.3.4.2 Minimum Fire Protection Ratings for Opening Protectives in Fire Resistance–Rated Assemblies and Fire Rated Glazing Markings

Component Walls and Partitions

(hr)

Fire Door Assemblies

(hr)

Door Vision Panel

Maximum Size (in.2)a

Fire Rated Glazing Marking

Door Vision Panel

Minimum Side Light/ Transom

Assembly Rating (hr)

Fire Rated Glazing Marking Side Light/Transom

Panel Fire Window Assembliesb,c

Fire Protection

Fire Resistance

Fire Protection

Fire Resistance

(hr) Fire Rated Glazing Marking Window

Elevator hoistways

2 1 ½ 155 in.2 d D-H-90 or D-H-W-90 NP 2 NP D-H-W-120 NP W-120

1 1 155 in.2 d D-H-60 or D-H-W-60 NP 1 NP D-H-W-60 NP W-60

½ 1/3 85 in.2 e D-20 or D-W-20

1/3 1/3 D-H-20 D-W-20 NP W-30

Elevator lobby (per 7.2.13.4)

1 1 100 in.2 b ≤100 in.2,

D-H-T-60 or D-H-W-60a

NP 1 NP D-H-W-60 NP W-60

>100 in.2, D-H-W-60a

Vertical shafts (including stairways, exits, and

refuse chutes

2 1 ½ Maximum size tested

D-H-90 or D-H-W-90 NP 2 NP D-H-W-120 NP W-120

1 1 Maximum size tested


Replacement panels in existing

vertical shafts

½ 1/3 Maximum size tested

D-20 or D-W-20

1/3 1/3 D-H-20 D-W-20 NP W-30

Fire barriers 3 3 100 in.2 b <=100 in.2, D-H-180 or

D-H-W-180h NP 3 NP D-H-W-180 NP W-180

>100 in.2, D-H-W-180h



of 119

Component Walls and Partitions

(hr)

Fire Door Assemblies

(hr)

Door Vision Panel

Maximum Size (in.2)a

Fire Rated Glazing Marking

Door Vision Panel

Minimum Side Light/ Transom

Assembly Rating (hr)

Fire Rated Glazing Marking Side Light/Transom

Panel Fire Window Assembliesb,c

Fire Protection

Fire Resistance

Fire Protection

Fire Resistance

(hr) Fire Rated Glazing Marking Window

1 3/4 Maximum size testedf

D-H-45 or D-H-W-45

3/4f 3/4

f D-H-45 D-H-W-45 3/4 OH-45 or W-60


D-20 or D-W-20

1/3 1/3 D-H-20 D-W-20 1/3 OH-20 or W-30

Horizontal exits



Horizontal exits

served by bridges between

buildings

2 3/4 Maximum size testedf

D-H-45 or D-H-W-45

3/4f 3/4

f D-H-45 D-H-W-45 3/4 OH-45 or W-120

Exit access corridorsg

1 1/3 Maximum size tested

D-20 or D-W-20

3/4 3/4 D- H-45 D-H-W-20 3/4 OH-45 or W-60


D-20 or D-W-20

1/3 1/3 D- H-20 D-H-W-20 1/3 OH-20 or W-30

Smoke barriersa 1 1/3 Maximum size tested

D-20 or D-W-20

3/4 3/4 D- H-45 D-H-W-20 3/4 OH-45 or W-60

Smoke partitionsg,h ½ 1/3 Maximum

size tested D-20 or D-W-20

1/3 1/3 D- H-20 D-H-W-20 1/3 OH-20 or W-30

NP: Not permitted. a. Note: 1 inch2 = .00064516 m2. b. Fire resistance rated glazing tested to NFPA 251 shall be permitted in the maximum size tested (see 8.3.3.7). c. Fire rated glazing in exterior windows shall be marked in accordance with Table 8.3.3.12 d. See ASME A17.1, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, for additional information. e. See ASME A17.3, Safety Code for Existing Elevators and Escalators, for additional information. f. Maximum area of individual exposed lights shall be 1296 in2 (0.84 m2 ) with no dimension exceeding 54 in. (1.37 m) unless otherwise tested. [80:Table 4.4.5 Note b and 80:4.4.5.1]. g. Fire doors are not required to have a hose stream test per NFPA 252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; ASTM E 2074, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, Including Positive Pressure Testing of Side-Hinged and Pivoted Swinging Door Assemblies; ANSI/UL 10B, Standard for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; or ANSI/UL 10C, Standard for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies. h. For residential board and care, see 32.2.3.1 and 33.2.3.1.

of 119



Revise text to read as follows:Penetrations in fire resistance–rated horizontal assemblies shall be required to have a T rating of

at least 1 hour, but not less than the fire resistance rating of the horizontal assembly, and shall not be required for eitherof the following:

(1) A T rating is not required for floor penetrations contained within the cavity of a wall assembly.(2) A T rating is not required for penetrations through floors or floor assemblies where the penetration is not in direct

contact with combustible material.Penetrations in fire-rated horizontal assemblies shall have a minimum 1-hour T rating, but not less than the fireresistance rating of the horizontal assembly. Rated penetrations shall not be required for either of the following:

(1) Floor penetrations contained within the cavity of a wall assembly(2) Penetrations through floors or floor assemblies where the penetration is not in direct contact with combustible

materialTo clarify that 8.3.5.1.4 identifies requirements and exceptions to the "T rating" of

penetrations, not to the "F rating".The language in 8.3.5.1.4 needs to be clarified to identify that it is the T-rating that is being exempted

by items (1) and (2) rather than the "Rated penetrations" which could be confused to include the F-rating which isaddressed in 8.3.5.1.3. This is largely an editorial change, but is a needed correction.The language proposed here is identical to that currently in NFPA 5000-12, and as such provides consistency.


of 119



Add text to read as follows:(4) Membrane penetrations for boxes or enclosures other than electrical boxes shall be permitted provided such

penetrating items and the annular space between the wall membrane and the box, are protected by an approvedmembrane penetration firestop system installed as tested in accordance with ASTM E 814 or UL 1479, with a minimumpositive pressure differential of 0.01 inch (2.49 Pa) of water, and shall have an F and T rating of not less than therequired fire-resistance rating of the wall penetrated and be installed in accordance with their listing.

Purpose: To add a new allowance which expands upon the ability to install utility boxes such aselectrical panels, dryer exhaust boxes, washing machine hose connection boxes and manual fire alarm pull boxes in fireresistance rated assemblies when properly protected. There are many types of utility boxes installed in fire resistancerated walls, where the membrane penetrations need to be protected. The addition of this new requirement will bothpermit these general utility boxes to be used and provide some assurance that any box or cabinet penetrations will notcompromise the fire resistance rating of the wall.NFPA 101 currently permits both metallic and nonmetallic electrical boxes to be installed, under specified conditions, infire resistance rated assemblies. This Section already permits membrane penetrations by listed electrical boxes of anymaterial, provided such boxes have been tested for use in fire-resistance-rated assemblies and are installed inaccordance with the instructions included in the listing. These membrane penetrations in fire resistance rated walls arepermitted when evaluated for such installations and provided with the appropriate fire-resistance testing. However,there still exists a need to introduce requirements to cover a variety of other types of general utility boxes such as fire orpolice alarm boxes, manual fire alarm boxes, switch boxes, valve boxes, special purpose boxes, electrical panels,washer and dryer boxes, and hose cabinets. This Code change proposals would create a direct parallel between therequirements for electrical outlet boxes and these utility boxes. The protection systems are to be tested for use infire-resistance-rated assemblies and installed in accordance with the instructions included in the listings. However,because these utility boxes can exceed 100 square inches aggregate area, both an F and T rating should be required inorder to be directly equivalent to the fire resistance rating of the assemblies penetrated. Given that these are membranepenetrations, there is a greater likelihood that someone could unknowingly place or store combustible materials,potentially even furniture and bedding, directly in contact with the un-penetrated membrane on the opposite side of thewall. This could significantly increase threat of fire spread.The information provided for each Classification would include the model numbers for the products, a description of therated assemblies, the spacing limitations for the boxes and the installation details.


of 119



Add new text to read as follows:(4) Membrane penetrations by electrical boxes of any size or type, which have been listed as part of a wall opening

protective material system for use in fire-resistance-rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with theinstructions included in the listing.

To add a new allowance which expands upon the ability to install utility boxes such aselectrical panels, dryer exhaust boxes, washing machine hose connection boxes and manual fire alarm pull boxes in fireresistance rated assemblies when properly protected. There are many types of utility boxes installed in fire resistancerated walls, where the membrane penetrations need to be protected. The addition of this new requirement will bothpermit these general utility boxes to be used and provide some assurance that any box or cabinet penetrations will notcompromise the fire resistance rating of the wall.

NFPA 101 currently permits both metallic and nonmetallic electrical boxes to be installed, underspecified conditions, in fire resistance rated assemblies. This Section already permits membrane penetrations by listedelectrical boxes of any material, provided such boxes have been tested for use in fire-resistance-rated assemblies andare installed in accordance with the instructions included in the listing. These membrane penetrations in fire resistancerated walls are permitted when evaluated for such installations and provided with the appropriate fire-resistance testing.However, there still exists a need to introduce requirements to cover a variety of other types of general utility boxes suchas fire or police alarm boxes, manual fire alarm boxes, switch boxes, valve boxes, special purpose boxes, electricalpanels, washer and dryer boxes, and hose cabinets. This Code change proposals would create a direct parallelbetween the requirements for electrical outlet boxes and these utility boxes. The protection systems are to be tested foruse in fire-resistance-rated assemblies and installed in accordance with the instructions included in the listings.However, because these utility boxes can exceed 100 square inches aggregate area, both an F and T rating should berequired in order to be directly equivalent to the fire resistance rating of the assemblies penetrated. Given that these aremembrane penetrations, there is a greater likelihood that someone could unknowingly place or store combustiblematerials, potentially even furniture and bedding, directly in contact with the un-penetrated membrane on the oppositeside of the wall. This could significantly increase threat of fire spread.The information provided for each Classification would include the model numbers for the products, a description of therated assemblies, the spacing limitations for the boxes and the installation details.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #61 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Doug Hohbein, Northcentral Regional Fire Code Development Committee

Add a new section to read: 8.4.3.6 Miscellaneous openings, such as mail slots and pass-throughwindows shall be permitted to be installed in vision panels or doors without special protection, provided that both of thefollowing criteria are met:

(1) The aggregate area of openings per room does not exceed 80 in.2 (0.05 m2).(2) The openings are installed at or below half the distance from the floor to the room ceiling.

There are currently no provisions for pass-through openings for smoke partitions. Many educationaloccupancies utilize such openings which are not permitted under the current smoke partition requirements.


of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc.

Revise to read:Doors in smoke barriers shall close the opening, leaving only the minimum clearance necessary for proper

operation, and shall be without louvers or grilles. The For other than previously approved existing doors, the clearanceunder the bottom of a new door of the doors shall be a maximum of 3⁄4in. (19 mm).

During the last cycle Proposal 101-177a properly deleted the word "undercut" from the first sentenceand added a maximum clearance for new doors in smoke barriers. However, no criteria was given for the clearanceunderneath an existing door. As such, the criteria of "minimum clearance necessary for proper operation" could beinterpretted to apply to the clearance underneath an existing door. In many instances that would be more restrictivethan the 3/4 inch criteria for new construction. The proposed verbiage establishes 3/4 inches as the appropriateclearance unless an existing, previously approved clearance exists.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #435 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Masoud Sabounchi, Advanced Consulting Engineers, Inc.

Add new text to read:(7) Where installation of a smoke damper is not required by NFPA 90A.

NFPA 101 Section 8.5.5.4.1 requires installation of HVAC system including smoke dampers to be inaccordance with NFPA 90A. However NFPA 90A allows elimination of smoke dampers as noted in Section 5.3.5 whereNFPA 101 Section 8.5.5.3 does not. The proposed addition of item 7 would coordinate the smoke damper requirementsbetween NFPA 101 and NFPA 90A. For example, section 5.3.5.1.2 of NFPA 90A has a provision which allowselimination of smoke dampers (see below) which is not in NFPA 101.

NFPA 101 8.5.5.4.1 Air-conditioning, heating, ventilating ductwork, and related equipment, including smoke dampersand combination fire and smoke dampers, shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 90A, Standard for the Installationof Air- Conditioning and Ventilating Systems, and NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other OpeningProtectives.

NFPA 90A 5.3.5.1.2 Smoke dampers shall not be required to be located within a prescribed distance of a smokebarrier where isolation smoke dampers complying with 4.3.9.2 are used in air handling equipment.


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate

electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a wall, floor, or floor/ceiling assemblyconstructed as a smoke barrier, or through the ceiling membrane of the roof/ceiling of a smoke barrier assembly, shallbe protected by a system or material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke. In new construction, smoke barriersshall comply with 8.5.6.5.

Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, the penetrations shall be protected in accordancewith the requirements of 8.3.5 to limit the spread of fire for a time period equal to the fire resistance rating of theassembly and 8.5.6 to restrict the transfer of smoke, unless the requirements of 8.5.6.4 or 8.5.6.5 are met.

Problem: Currently, the Code requirements for smoke barriers lacks guidance on quantitativeperformance requirements for the maximum total leakage that is acceptable. In the absence of a comprehensiveapproach to quantifying Smoke Barriers performance, the Life Safety Code already recognizes that there are instancesin Chapters 11 through 43 where leakage rated doors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying aperformance level that is realistic and achievable for joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage throughpenetrations in smoke barriers. In response to the Committee reasons during the previous cycle, the proposal has beenmodified to only require leakage rated penetration for new construction. In these cases, this proposal would allow 5cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as one option, and would also allow an alternative requirement for thecumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in a given area of smoke barrier. This approach is also used inother Building Codes.NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for individual components, such as doors in corridors and smoke barriers, tobe tested in accordance with a nationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of airleakage rates through door assemblies under prescribed conditions. The existing language in section 8.5.6 of NFPA101 is intended to be a means of providing some minimal level of performance for the through penetrations. The currentlanguage has the potential to be manipulated to make the requirement ineffective because of the lack of specific criteria.To better specify the limits for smoke leakage of through penetrations in Smoke Barriers it is reasonable to require atotal smoke barrier performance level per 100 ft2 (for example) in addition to dealing with individual items. By doingthat, it would be possible to be more flexible with the individual penetrations, but more comprehensive on the smokebarrier leakage performance. This proposed Code change is intended to clarify and improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakagethrough penetrations in smoke barriers. This proposal would allow 5 cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as oneoption, and would also allow an alternative requirement for the cumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in agiven area of smoke barrier. For smoke and draft control doors, the LSC contains limits requires the addition of 3.0 cfm/sq ft for each door within the100 sq ft area (measured at 0.1 in of water column), since that is the limit for smoke and draft control doors in UL 1784and NFPA 105. The proposed 5 cfm/ft2 value for leakage through penetrations is based upon this criteria. It isessentially identical to the leakage rating of smoke and draft control doors in smoke barriers, since 3 cfm/ft2 measured at0.1 in of water column is equivalent to 5.2 cfm/ft2 at 0.3 inches of water.The 50 cfm suggested here is based on two approaches:1. A very simplistic approach of a theoretical maximum of 10 through penetrations @ max allowed 5 cfm/ft2 in 100ft2 of wall or floor area. 2. The LSC permits 1 sq ft of leakage area per 1000 sq feet of wall space. Based on some fundamentalassumptions about anticipated pressure differentials during fires, the cumulative value of 50 cfm per 100 ft2 proposedalso represents approximately 50% of that permitted leakage. Consequently, if installing a through-penetration firestop system that has an L-Rating of more than 5.0 cfm/ft2 , such asmight be the case for a cable tray where additional leakage can occur between the individual cables in a bundle, thenthe overall installation can still be compliant with the Code either by spacing out the penetrations sufficiently to maintainthe average leakage of 50 cfm/100ft2 or ensure that other through-penetrations within the same 100 ft2 control area haveleakage rates that are low enough to compensate for one or more penetrations with higher L-Ratings. Consequently, ifthe L-rating of a particular system being used is less than the maximum of 5 cfm/ft2, then more through-penetrationscould be installed in the same 100 ft2 of wall area. Alternatively, an individual through-penetration could be greater than


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 1015 cfm/ft2 if the total for the 100 ft2 of wall or floor area does not exceed the 50 cfm cumulative value.The addition of the UL 1479 Air Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized UL Standard for the quantitativemeasurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing penetrations under prescribed conditions. This wouldfollow the same approach currently taken in NFPA 101 for other elements within smoke barriers, and would beconsistent with the current smoke barrier requirements in other US Model Building Codes.NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 1479 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing through-penetrations underprescribed conditions. The conditions of acceptance in ANSI/UL 1479 provides criteria for an assembly rating and anoptional L rating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft ofopening (CFM/sq ft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400F air temperature at an air pressuredifferential of 0.30 in. W.C. The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, indetermining the suitability of through-penetrations firestop systems for the protection of service openings in floors, wallsand smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement of smoke across those assemblies. The UL and IntertekDirectories identify these ratings as “L” ratings, and contains literally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that havealready been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is no additional effort or knowledge required to install thesesystems over that needed to install the basic through-penetrations firestop systems for fire-resistance. Just as with UL1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at 400°F, (representing hot and coldsmoke).


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #207a SAF-FIR


Add text to read as follows:Penetrations in shall be protected by an approved

installed and tested in accordance with the requirements of UL 1479 for air leakage. The of the systemmeasured at 0.30 inch (7.47 Pa) of water in both the ambient temperature and elevated temperature tests, shall notexceed:

1. 5.0 cfm per square foot (0.025m3 / s m2) of penetration opening for each ; or2. A total cumulative leakage of 50 cfm (0.024m3/s) for any 100 square feet (9.3 m2) of wall area, or floor area.

Problem: Currently, the Code requirements for smoke barriers lacks guidance on quantitativeperformance requirements for the maximum total leakage that is acceptable. In the absence of a comprehensiveapproach to quantifying Smoke Barriers performance, the Life Safety Code already recognizes that there are instancesin Chapters 11 through 43 where leakage rated doors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying aperformance level that is realistic and achievable for joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage throughpenetrations in smoke barriers. In response to the Committee reasons during the previous cycle, the proposal has beenmodified to only require leakage rated penetration for new construction. In these cases, this proposal would allow 5cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as one option, and would also allow an alternative requirement for thecumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in a given area of smoke barrier. This approach is also used inother Building Codes.NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for individual components, such as doors in corridors and smoke barriers, tobe tested in accordance with a nationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of airleakage rates through door assemblies under prescribed conditions. The existing language in section 8.5.6 of NFPA101 is intended to be a means of providing some minimal level of performance for the through penetrations. The currentlanguage has the potential to be manipulated to make the requirement ineffective because of the lack of specific criteria.To better specify the limits for smoke leakage of through penetrations in Smoke Barriers it is reasonable to require atotal smoke barrier performance level per 100 ft2 (for example) in addition to dealing with individual items. By doingthat, it would be possible to be more flexible with the individual penetrations, but more comprehensive on the smokebarrier leakage performance. This proposed Code change is intended to clarify and improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakagethrough penetrations in smoke barriers. This proposal would allow 5 cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as oneoption, and would also allow an alternative requirement for the cumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in agiven area of smoke barrier. For smoke and draft control doors, the LSC contains limits requires the addition of 3.0 cfm/sq ft for each door within the100 sq ft area (measured at 0.1 in of water column), since that is the limit for smoke and draft control doors in UL 1784and NFPA 105. The proposed 5 cfm/ft2 value for leakage through penetrations is based upon this criteria. It isessentially identical to the leakage rating of smoke and draft control doors in smoke barriers, since 3 cfm/ft2 measured at0.1 in of water column is equivalent to 5.2 cfm/ft2 at 0.3 inches of water.The 50 cfm suggested here is based on two approaches:1. A very simplistic approach of a theoretical maximum of 10 through penetrations @ max allowed 5 cfm/ft2 in 100ft2 of wall or floor area. 2. The LSC permits 1 sq ft of leakage area per 1000 sq feet of wall space. Based on some fundamentalassumptions about anticipated pressure differentials during fires, the cumulative value of 50 cfm per 100 ft2 proposedalso represents approximately 50% of that permitted leakage. Consequently, if installing a through-penetration firestop system that has an L-Rating of more than 5.0 cfm/ft2 , such asmight be the case for a cable tray where additional leakage can occur between the individual cables in a bundle, thenthe overall installation can still be compliant with the Code either by spacing out the penetrations sufficiently to maintainthe average leakage of 50 cfm/100ft2 or ensure that other through-penetrations within the same 100 ft2 control area haveleakage rates that are low enough to compensate for one or more penetrations with higher L-Ratings. Consequently, ifthe L-rating of a particular system being used is less than the maximum of 5 cfm/ft2, then more through-penetrationscould be installed in the same 100 ft2 of wall area. Alternatively, an individual through-penetration could be greater than5 cfm/ft2 if the total for the 100 ft2 of wall or floor area does not exceed the 50 cfm cumulative value.The addition of the UL 1479 Air Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized UL Standard for the quantitative


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing penetrations under prescribed conditions. This wouldfollow the same approach currently taken in NFPA 101 for other elements within smoke barriers, and would beconsistent with the current smoke barrier requirements in other US Model Building Codes.NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 1479 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing through-penetrations underprescribed conditions. The conditions of acceptance in ANSI/UL 1479 provides criteria for an assembly rating and anoptional L rating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft ofopening (CFM/sq ft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400F air temperature at an air pressuredifferential of 0.30 in. W.C. The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, indetermining the suitability of through-penetrations firestop systems for the protection of service openings in floors, wallsand smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement of smoke across those assemblies. The UL and IntertekDirectories identify these ratings as “L” ratings, and contains literally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that havealready been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is no additional effort or knowledge required to install thesesystems over that needed to install the basic through-penetrations firestop systems for fire-resistance. Just as with UL1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at 400°F, (representing hot and coldsmoke).


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:Joints made within, between, or at the perimeter of smoke barriers shall be protected with a joint system that is

capable of limiting the transfer of smoke tested in accordance with the requirements of UL 2079 for air leakage. The Lrating of the joint system shall not exceed 5 cfm per linear foot (0.00775 m3/s m) of joint at 0.30 inch (7.47 Pa) of waterfor both the ambient temperature and elevated temperature tests.

Joints made within or between smoke barriers shall be protected with a smoke-tight joint system that is capableof limiting the transfer of smoke.

Smoke barriers that are also constructed as fire barriers shall be protected with a joint system that is designedand tested to resist the spread of fire for a time period equal to the required fire resistance rating of the assembly andrestrict the transfer of smoke in accordance with 8.5.7.2.

Problem: Currently, the Code lacks guidance on quantitative performance requirements for themaximum total leakage that is acceptable for smoke barriers. In the absence of a comprehensive approach toquantifying Smoke Barriers performance, the Life Safety Code already recognizes that there are instances in Chapters11 through 43 where leakage rated doors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying a performancelevel that is realistic and achievable for joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.This proposal applies to leakage rating of Joints in new construction, or where otherwise required by Chapters 11through 43. Sentence of 8.5.7.1 states that the provisions of 8.5.7 shall not apply to approved existing materials andmethods of construction used to protect existing joints in smoke barriers, unless otherwise required by Chapters 11through 43.Consequently, this proposal does differentiate between new and existing construction by refering to the occupancyChapters to trigger the Joint leakage and Joint treatment requirements for existing buildings. In this way, therequirements could apply to either new or existing buildings, depending upon the decision of the Committee’s in theindividual occupancy chapters. Existing approved methods can continue to be used as installed.NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 2079 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing joints under prescribedconditions. The condition of acceptance in ANSI/UL 2079 provides criteria for an assembly rating and an optional Lrating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft of opening (CFM/sqft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400F air temperature at an air pressure differential of 0.30 in. W.C.The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, in determining the suitability of jointsystems for the protection of openings in floors, walls and smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement ofsmoke in accordance with the Code requirements. The UL Directory identifies these ratings as “L” ratings, and containsliterally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that have already been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is noadditional effort or knowledge required to install these systems over that needed to install the basic joint systems forfire-resistance. Just as with UL 1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at400°F, (representing hot and cold smoke). The air leakage tests contained in UL 2079 are based on the air leakage testfor doors and can provide the user with a numerical value for smoke through penetrations and joints in smoke barriers.The specific leakage criteria proposed here is identical to that contained in the International Building Code for Joints inSmoke Barriers.This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage of joints insmoke barriers. This requirement already exists in other US Building Codes.


of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Joseph H. Versteeg, Versteeg Associates

Revise text to read as follows:8.6.6 Communicating Space. Unless prohibited by Chapters 11 through 43, unenclosed floor openings forming a

communicating space between floor levels shall be permitted, provided that the following conditions are met:(1) Remains unchanged(2) The lowest or next to lowest story within the communicating space is a street floorRenumber (3) - (8) to (2) - (7)

There is no technical substantiation for limiting the communicating space to the lower three floors of thebuilding. When considering the egress arrangement and other safeguards contained within this section, occupants onthe floor levels having the communicating space are afforded no less safety if the space is located on upper stories ofthe building versus the lowest three.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #246 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Scott J. Harrison, Marioff Inc.

Revise text to read as follows:(a) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler or water mist system in accordance with

Section 9.7, a smoke barrier in accordance with Section 8.5 shall be permitted to serve as the separation required by8.6.6(4).

(5)The communicating space has ordinary hazard contents protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler orwater mist system in accordance with Section 9.7 or has only low hazard contents.

Water Mist systems have been approved and installed in many sprinkler applications globally for over15 years. They have been listed by national and internationally recognized testing laboratories such as: (OrdinaryHazard Group 1), (Light Hazard Occupancies, Computer Rooms, Subfloors, Special Hazard Machinery & spaces),

(Light Hazard Occupancies, Combustion Turbines, Machinery Spaces), (Light Hazard,Ord Haz Grp I,II parking garages & III selected occupancies, Cable Tunnels), (Light Hazard, Ord Haz Grp I,Combustion Turbines) and other agencies. These listings and installations have demonstrated equivalent fire protectionto the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ). The addition of the proposed text will provide the AHJ a clear option to acceptwater mist systems as equivalent to an approved automatic sprinkler system where the application is listed or approved,thereby allowing construction alternatives without having to prove equivalency or be considered an alternativeextinguishing system.


of 119



Delete the following text:Where permitted by Chapters 11 through 43, unenclosed vertical openings created by convenience stairways

shall be permitted as follows:(1) The convenience stair openings shall not serve as required means of egress.(2) The building shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance

with Section 9.7.(3) The convenience stair openings shall be protected in accordance with the method detailed for the protection of

vertical openings in NFPA13, .Problem This new provision for convenience stairs permits unenclosed vertical openings created by

convenience stairs to potentially be installed in any occupancy, with no limitation on the maximum number ofinterconnected floors. It is not appropriate to extend the protection measures previously permitted for escalators to allconvenience openings.This provision was added into the 2012 Life Safety Code based on a proposal from the Detention and Care technicalCommittee. The item was information balloted to the BLD-FIR after their meeting had occurred, so it never had thebenefit of full discussion by that committee. The new breach of vertical compartmentation that is allowed by this articleis in conflict with the fundamental requirements expressed in section 4.5. This introduces an unjustified level of risk tobuilding occupants. This section relies exclusively on a single safeguard for protection of building occupants.One of the fundamental requirements of the Life Safety Code is that the design of buildings cannot rely solely on anyone means of safeguarding occupants. This section relies exclusively on sprinkler performance. If sprinklers were tofail to operate, or fail to control a fire, this large multi-story hole in several floors could allow massive vertical spread offire and products of combustion. As we are all aware, sprinklers are an invaluable life safety and property protectiontechnology. However, even the March 2012 edition of NFPA’s Report on US Experience with Sprinklers states that the“…combined performance of operating effectiveness of sprinklers is 88% of reported fires where sprinklers were presentin the fire area and fire was large enough to activate the sprinklers.” This further helps to justify the over-arching NFPA101 philosophy that safety to life shall not depend on a single safeguard. Any permitted vertical opening should includeconsideration of what would happen if one protection measure failed.This new provision for convenience stairs is a major technical change to the philosophy of NFPA 101 in protection ofvertical openings. It is not appropriate to extend the protection measures previously permitted for escalators to nowpermit other multi-story convenience openings. As stated in the substantiation provided on Log 101-190 and Log101-191b in the previous (2012 edition) cycle, Escalators represent a unique condition. The closely-spaced sprinklerform of protection has historically been permitted for escalators because it might be dangerous to enclose an escalatorwith walls and doors as an escalator will continue to run and deposit people at a floor even if the door on that floorbecomes inoperative. Users of convenience stairs are not mechanically moved and deposited at a floor, so it is notnecessary to make a special allowance removing the stairway enclosure needed for fire safety for such conveniencestairs.The solution historically provided for escalators to be protected in accordance with the method detailed for the protectionof vertical openings in NFPA13, , has been provided out of thisnecessity. Having this arrangement for escalator openings may not provide the same level of risk reduction and samelevel of smoke and fire containment as an enclosed stair shaft would, but it is a reasonable accommodation forunavoidable conditions, given that escalators are a building feature that will need to be accommodated. This sub-optimalbut necessary solution should not be expanded without justification. In the 2012 edition of NFPA 101, Chapters 12 and13 have already permitted the use of these new unlimited vertical openings for convenience stairs on the basis of theirinclusion in 8.6.9.2. These Chapters address multiple new and existing assembly occupancies, including dance hallsand drinking establishments. The ability to utilize this provision is not restricted to any occupancy types. It is highlydebatable if allowing these multi-story “convenience openings” for the first time ever is a reasonable relaxation of firesafety requirements, or if it potentially sacrifices the safety of occupants for some architectural freedom that was neverneeded or allocated before.Article 4.5.1 of the Code requires that “The design of every building or structure intended for human occupancy shall besuch that reliance for safety to life does not depend solely on any single safeguard. An additional safeguard(s) shall beprovided for life safety in case any single safeguard is ineffective due to inappropriate human actions or system failure.”Further, 4.5.6 under the fundamental requirements for Vertical Openings states “Every vertical opening between the


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101floors of a building shall be suitably enclosed or protected, as necessary, to afford reasonable safety to occupants whileusing the means of egress and to prevent the spread of fire, smoke, or fumes through vertical openings from floor tofloor before occupants have entered exits.” Sprinklers installed in accordance with the method detailed for theprotection of vertical openings in NFPA13 should not be assumed as achieving this level of performance, becausesprinklers will not prevent the development or spread of smoke or fumes through these multiple floors. This isparticularly true in shielded fire scenarios. Of course, in the scenario where sprinklers fail to control a fire, which NFPAstatistics indicate could be a 12% probability, then smoke and products of combustion would definitely not be minimizednor prevented from migrating to other floors, thus endangering egress on those upper floors.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #247 SAF-FIR


Revise text to read as follows:(2)The building shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler or water mist system in

accordance with Section 9.7.Water Mist systems have been approved and installed in many sprinkler applications globally for over

15 years. They have been listed by national and internationally recognized testing laboratories such as: (OrdinaryHazard Group 1), (Light Hazard Occupancies, Computer Rooms, Subfloors, Special Hazard Machinery & spaces),


_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #447 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Jeffrey M. Hugo, National Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc.

Add a new section to read:Draftstops protecting vertical openings that are defined in the requirements of NFPA 13 are curtain style

descending from the ceiling surface or plane.Designers are using 18 inch deep channels (cut vertically ascending from the ceiling surface) in

attempt to comply with NFPA 13 8.15.4.2 (2). These channels are clearly not the intent of either the building code orNFPA 13 as a channel does not prevent smoke, heat and the by-products of combustion from entering into the verticalopening. A channel does a poor or non-existent job of collecting or banking heat near the closely spaced sprinklers thatprotect the vertical opening.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #78 SAF-FIR


Add new text to read:(4) Such openings shall not connect more than three contiguous stories.(5) Such openings shall be separated from exit access corridors.

As currently written the code may permit an opening of unlimited area to connect an unlimited numberof stories, creating an opening similar to an atrium while circumventing the requirements of 8.6.7 including separationfrom adjacent spaces and smoke protection.


of 119



Revise 8.6.9.7(2) as follows:(a) Such openings shall not connect more than three contiguous stories.(b) Such openings shall be separated from exit access corridors.

As currently written the code may permit an opening of unlimited area to connect an unlimited numberof stories, creating an opening similar to an atrium while circumventing the requirements of 8.6.7 including separationfrom adjacent spaces and smoke protection.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #248 SAF-FIR


Revise text to read as follows:(2)* In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler or water mist system in accordance with

Section 9.7, escalator and moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected in accordance with the methoddetailed in NFPA 13, , or in accordance with a method approved by theauthority having jurisdiction.

(3) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler or water mist system in accordance withSection 9.7, escalator and moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected by rolling steel shutters appropriatefor the fire resistance rating of the vertical opening and complying with all of the following:

Water Mist systems have been approved and installed in many sprinkler applications globally for over15 years. They have been listed by national and internationally recognized testing laboratories such as: (OrdinaryHazard Group 1), (Light Hazard Occupancies, Computer Rooms, Subfloors, Special Hazard Machinery & spaces),


_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #80 SAF-FIR


Add new text as follows:Open egress stairs at the mezzanine level shall provide egress through the open space in which the

mezzanine is located or shall provide exit egress directly to the exterior at the mezzanine level. Required exit stairsfrom a mezzanine level shall comply with 7.7.2.

Designers often design stairs from a mezzanine to egress through an enclosed space beneath themezzanine, occupants of the mezzanine will not be as aware of a fire event within the enclosed space as they will be atthe open area the mezzanine is located within.


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:(1) Where the space is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler or water mist system in accordance

with Section 9.7.Water Mist systems have been approved and installed in many sprinkler applications globally for over

15 years. They have been listed by national and internationally recognized testing laboratories such as: (OrdinaryHazard Group 1), (Light Hazard Occupancies, Computer Rooms, Subfloors, Special Hazard Machinery & spaces),


_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #301 SAF-FIR


Revise text to read as follows:8.7.1.1* Protection from any area having a degree of hazard greater than that normal to the general occupancy of thebuilding or structure shall be provided by one of the following means:(1) Enclosing the area with a fire barrier without windows that has a 1-hour fire resistance rating in accordance withSection 8.3(2) Protecting the area or assembly with automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with Section 9.7(3) Applying both 8.7.1.1(1) and (2) where the hazard is severe or where otherwise specified by Chapters 11 through 43

When the code requires or when a designer chooses to use an alternative method to protect, forexample, glazing with fire sprinklers, this change would permit the glazing to be protected by Section 9.7.1.2.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #448 SAF-FIR


Revise to read:(2) Protecting the area or assembly with automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with Section 9.7

When the code requires or when a designer chooses to use an alternative method to protect, forexample, glazing with fire sprinklers, this change would permit the glazing to be protected by Section 9.7.1.2.


of 119



Add a new section to read:8.7.3.3* Alcohol-Based Hand-Rub Dispensers. Where permitted by Chapters 11 through 43, alcohol-based hand-rubdispensers shall be permitted provided they meet all of the following criteria:

(1) The maximum individual dispenser fluid capacity shall be as follows:

(a) 0.32 gal (1.2 L) for dispensers in rooms, corridors, and areas open to corridors

(b) 0.53 gal (2.0 L) for dispensers in rooms or suites of rooms

(2) Where aerosol containers are used, the maximum capacity of the aerosol dispenser shall be 18 oz. (0.51 kg) andshall be limited to Level 1 aerosols as defined in NFPA 30B,

(3) Dispensers shall be separated from each other by horizontal spacing of not less than 48 in. (1220 mm).

(4) Not more than an aggregate 10 gal (37.8 L) of alcohol-based hand-rub solution or 1135 oz (32.2 kg) of Level 1aerosols, or a combination of liquids and Level 1 aerosols not to exceed, in total, the equivalent of 10 gal (37.8 L) or1135 oz (32.2 kg,) shall be in use outside of a storage cabinet in a single smoke compartment, or fire compartment orstory whichever is less in area. One dispenser complying with 8.7.3.3 (1) per room and located in that room shall not beincluded in the aggregated quantity

(5) Storage of quantities greater than 5 gal (18.9 L) in a single smoke compartment or fire compartment or story,whichever is less in area, shall meet the requirements of NFPA 30, .

(6) Dispensers shall not be installed in the following locations:

(a) Above an ignition source for a horizontal distance of 1 in. (25 mm) to each side of the ignition source

(b) To the side of an ignition source within a 1 in. (25 mm) horizontal distance from the ignition source

(c) Beneath an ignition source within a 1 in. (25 mm) vertical distance from the ignition source

(7) Dispensers installed directly over carpeted floors shall be permitted only in sprinklered areas of the building.

(8) The alcohol-based hand-rub solution shall not exceed 95 percent alcohol content by volume.

(9) Operation of the dispenser shall comply with the following criteria:

(a) The dispenser shall not release its contents except when the dispenser is activated, either manually or automaticallyby touch-free activation.

(b) Any activation of the dispenser shall only occur when an object is placed within 4 in. (100 mm) of the sensing device.

(c) An object placed within the activation zone and left in place shall not cause more than one activation.

(d) The dispenser shall not dispense more solution than the amount required for hand hygiene consistent with labelinstructions

(e) The dispenser shall be designed, constructed and operated in a manner that ensures accidental or maliciousactivation of the dispensing device are minimized.


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101(f) The dispenser shall be tested in accordance with the manufacturer’s care and use instructions each time a new refillis installed.

The proposed language was accepted by the Technical Committee to be included in the 2012 Editionof the Code (see Proposal 101-193a and Comment 101-122). However, since the occupancy chapter committees hadnot reviewed and acted upon this change and since it is a "where permitted by", including the language in the 2012Edition would have been a problem. As such, based upon an Certified Amending Motion, the language was deletedduring Association Action. Several occupancy chapters already address the issue but this should be addressed by all ofthe occupancy chapters.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #475 SAF-FIR


Add new sections to read:

Doors that are required to be self or automatic closing shall comply with all of the following:(1) Door assemblies shall be inspected annually.(2) Doors shall be operated to confirm full closure.(3) Parts found to be damaged or inoperative shall be replaced.(4) Door openings and the surrounding areas shall be kept clear of anything that could obstruct or interfere with the

free operation of the door.(5) Blocking or wedging of doors in the open position shall be prohibited.(6) Self-closing and automatic closing devices shall be kept in working condition at all times.

Doors covered by this section include smoke barrier doors, doors in smoke partitions and doors servinghazardous area. Section 7.2.1.15 addresses inspection and testing of means of egress doors.

There doesn't appear to be any requirements in NFPA 101 addressing inspection and testing for doorsthat are required to be equipped with self- or automatic-closing devices, such as smoke barrier, smoke partition orhazardous area doors, other than what’s required by 8.2.2.4(4) for smoke leakage rated doors. Hence, the need for anew section on inspection and testing door openings. The requirements listed in 8.8.1(1) through (6) come from NFPA105, section 5.2. Note: I did not extract requirements from that section that I don't feel are necessary (e.g.,recordkeeping, given the arduous burden this would place on building owners to maintain for so many doors). Inspectionand testing requirements for these doors belong in chapter 8, as opposed to 7.2.1.15, since Chapter 8 containsrequirements for smoke barrier, smoke partition and hazardous area doors, while 7.2.1.15 is only supposed to pertain todoors within means of egress which may or may not have requirements for self- or automatic closing devices (7.2.1.15really looks to ensure exit doors aren’t blocked and door hardware such as panic, delayed egress, and access controlhardware operate properly). The annex note is meant to clarify this. Also note that if this public input is accepted, then itmay be better to delete 8.2.2.4(4) in its entirety than to accept another public input I submitted to revise the referencesince the action taken here would already meet the intent of that public input.


of 119



Add text to read as follows:NFPA 251, ANSI/UL 263, and ASTM E119 are nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance of

building elements and assemblies. Assemblies tested in accordance with these fire-resistance test standards providepassive fire protection. The test procedures set forth in these Standards make no provision for testing automatic firesuppression systems or water sprays in conjunction with structural members or assemblies tested in vertical orhorizontal fire resistance furnaces. Such evaluations can only be done via the Alternative protection methodsprocedures in Section 1.4, or by evaluation as a performance-based option in Chapter 5.

Problem: There is the potential for misuse of long established fire-resistance test Standards relied uponin the Code to determine performance of elements and assemblies tested as systems in conjunction with dedicatedactive suppression systems. NFPA 251, UL 263, and ASTM E119 do not make provision for testing of these types ofcombined active and passive fire protection systems.In the 2012 revision cycle, Public comment 101-89 on Proposal 101-165, dealing with this same topic, was initiallyaccepted by the Technical Committee during its meeting, but failed to achieve the required 2/3 affirmative vote by 1single vote, receiving 15 of a required 15.18 Affirmative Votes (65.2%). I submitted a NITMAM on behalf of theInternational Firestop Council The NFPA membership voted with an overwhelming majority to accept the code changeproposed. However, the subsequent committee vote failed to reach the needed 2/3 majority needed to uphold themembership action, again by a single vote.Technical backgroundIt is predominantly with fire-resistance ratings that some manufacturers have begun to submit test reports to AuthoritiesHaving Jurisdiction claiming to have “fire-resistance ratings” that are derived from modified standard tests using a flow ofcooling water during the fire test. It now becomes important to clarify that the code-required fire resistance rating is infact a property that is meant to represent the inherent resistance to fire of an assembly, independent of any active fireprotection. In countless instances, the code already incorporates the effect of a fire suppression system by reducing thefire-resistance rating requirements, and by reducing other required safety features as well through a process many referto as “trade-offs”.Currently, the most common case example is that of sprinklered glazing. Standards ASTM E119, NFPA 251, and UL263 make no provisions for running a fire resistance test using any extraneous means to achieve fire resistance ratings. As such, given that the referenced test standards essentially provide the definitation of what is a “fire resistance rating”,it is not possible to assign a fire resistance rating to any assembly where the test has been modified in some way tochange the basic conditions of the test. By way of comparison, ICC-ES has recently agreed to WITHDRAW AC385,titled “Acceptance Crieria for Special purpose Sprinkler Heads Used wih Fixed Glazed Assemblies to Provide a Fireresistance-rated Wall Assembly (AC385)” which dealt with sprinklered glazing, for the same reasons outlined below. Both on the floor at the June 2011 NFPA Association Technical Meeting, at ICC, and ICC-ES, this proposal to make itclear that a “fire resistance rating” cannot be claimed when modifying the code-approved test, was accepted by anoverwhelming majority. I will also point out that this proposal was NOT opposed by a single person on the floor,including representatives of the Sprinkler Association. However, the Committee on Fire Protection Features hasnarrowly missed accepting this revision in NFPA 101, although they did support this provision being included in NFPA5000-09. This proposal was again, less than ONE vote short of having this situation corrected in NFPA 101. First, let me confirm that both the analogous code provision in IBC 2012 and the NFPA NITMAM do not restrict anyonefrom submitting arguments on a case-by-case basis via Alternative protection methods, or by evaluation as aperformance-based option. Thus, the only impact of this code change is to prevent anyone from incorrectly andmisleadingly claiming a “fire resistance rating” in accordance with ASTM E119, UL 263, or NFPA 251. This proposaldoes not “modify” these test standards as suggested by one of the negative voters. In fact, it prevents the proliferationof a misconception that these systems are being tested in accordance with these standards, rather than only inaccordance with the “time-temperature” curves in these standards. To quote directly from the Scope of thenow-withdrawn AC 385, article 1.2, which stated in part: “Because the sprinkler heads are used to limit the rate of heattransfer through the glazing, the ASTM E 119 test method and test assembly are modified to take into account thesprinkler heads and their discharge.”To summarize, there are a number of compelling reasons to support the NFPA membership:1. This change prevents a misuse of established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon in the Code to determineperformance of elements and assemblies, wherein the established consensus test method are modified outside the


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101scope of the test standard to include a flow of cooling water during the fire exposure portion of the test.2. It has long been a basic tenet that the design of every building or structure intended for human occupancy beconstructed such that reliance for safety to life does not depend solely on any single safeguard. Additional safeguardsare provided for life safety in case any single safeguard is ineffective due to inappropriate human actions or systemfailure.3. The resulting cooling-enhanced fire rating then provides a result that would be incompatible with the principle ofrequired fire resistance ratings specified throughout the Codes. The various fire resistance ratings mandated throughoutdozens of articles in the Code have been established based on an assumption of the type of construction that wouldpass the standardized tests without the aid of water cooling during fire exposure. For example, a relatively thin andun-insulated metal panel wall with suitable water cooling could potentially be arranged to pass a 1-hour standardizedfire-resistance test, and possibly even longer duration fire-resistance tests. However, where the Code specifies theneed for a 1-hour assembly, the intent in the development of that code provision would have clearly been to have anassembly that could survive a fire without being breached and without losing any load-bearing capabilities all by itself,without relying on an external water source for continued cooling. If sprinkler protection was also required for such anoccupancy, then the overall intent of the Code is to have these two systems act independently, but in concert with eachother. 4. The language proposed for 8.1.3 here is similar to the language that was in NFPA 5000-09. The Appendix note isnew. Acceptance of this proposal corrects a potential technical that does exist, as evidenced in the comments of somenegative voters. The proposed language responded to committee concerns expressed in previous cycles in that itwould require a specific approval by the Authority Having Jurisdiction using either the equivalency orperformance-based options permitted by the Code. It clearly does not eliminate those options, but rather, encouragestheir proper use. The rationale for removing this language from NFPA 5000-12 in ROP Code Proposal 5000-92 recentlywas that it "Conflicted with NFPA 101". However, it is clear, that the Membership at the Floor of NFPA, (just as the IBCmembership did) support this approach. 5. No fewer than 5 of the Negative voters cited the fact that Proposal 5000-92 removed this provision from NFPA 5000.As indicated above, this was not done for technical reasons, but rather, for consistency. Those 5 negative votes couldhave therefore been resolved just as readily by leaving the provision in NFPA 5000, and adopting it into NFPA 101,which would have made the vote to accept the code change proposal into NFPA 101 almost unanimous. This languagehas never failed to achieve less than 52% affirmative votes even through the Fire Protection Features Committee.6. Lastly, one of the most compelling reasons for overturning the Technical Committee and supporting the Membershipis provided in the Affirmative with Comment provided by Catherine Stashak. Her comment as an AHJ was as follows:“AHJ’s are presented with this scenario frequently. Designers feel that because the atrium language permits sprinklerprotection in lieu of the 1-hour separation requirements, that this means it is acceptable in other areas of buildings. Thislanguage is a positive change in the existing language that will provide guidance and testing information that will helpthe AHJ to make correct decisions. This proposal is only clarifying to the code user the intent of the code. Not everyonehas the same fire protection experience or knowledge level as the members of the Technical Committee do. Annexlanguage is supposed to be explanatory and provide guidance, history and experience. The proposed language willhelp the AHJ to make correct decisions and will improve the code. It is appropriate for the code to notify the designerthat the burden of technical substantiation of equivalent performance belongs to the proponent of the alternative and notupon the enforcer to prove that it is not equivalent.”


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 101_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #200a SAF-FIR


Add a new section to read:A.8.1.3 NFPA 251, ANSI/UL 263, and ASTM E119 are nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance of




of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________John A. Rickard, Katus, LLC

Revise to read:ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, and ANSI/UL

263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, are considered nationally recognized methods ofdetermining fire resistance and have been found to yield equivalent test methods. Where materials or assemblies havebeen tested in accordance with these standards, fire resistance-rated construction may consist of either testedassemblies or tested materials, such as finishes, coatings, opening protectives and firestop systems and devices,including fire dampers, that combine to provide an equivalent level of protection.

Some users of NFPA 101 have interpreted this to require the entire fire or smoke resistive assembly tobe tested in accordance with these standards as an assembly. This revision to this Annex note clarifies that it is not theintent to require the entire assembly to be tested as such, but that combining fire resistive materials in a prescriptionmanner is allowed.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #370 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc. / Rep. Glazing Industry Code Committee (GICC)

Add new text to read:

This is a companion change to the proposed new paragraph to be located after 8.2.3.1.2.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #503 SAF-FIR


Add a new section to read:

Although protection of interior walls is addressed, nowhere does NFPA 101 state whether exteriorwalls must be protected on one or both sides. This section merely clarifies that requirements regarding fire from theexterior may be located in other codes, such as NFPA 220 or NFPA 5000, but that NFPA 101 only requires protectionfrom fire originating in the interior of the building.


of 119



Revise to read:ASTM E 2174, Standard Practice for On-Site Inspection of Installed Fire Stops, provides guidance for the

inspection of through-penetration fire stop systems tested in accordance with ASTM E 814, Standard Test Method forFire Tests of Through-Penetration Fire Stops, and ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Fire Tests of Through-PenetrationFirestops. Certain penetrations, such as combustion vents and exhaust vents that are continuous so as not to allow fireto penetrate the fire barrier through the duct, are not considered by this section to be openings that require additionalmeans of protection such as fire and smoke dampers. Requirements for such protection may be addressed in othercodes and standards, such as NFPA 90A and NFPA 96.

The inclusion of combustion vents and exhaust vents in the list of fire barrier penetrations has been asource of some confusion to users of NFPA 101. This revision to this Annex note is intended to clarify that theprotectives required by this section do not include dampers and that those requirements, if any, may be found in otherNFPA documents.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #373 SAF-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________William E. Koffel, Koffel Associates, Inc. / Rep. Firestop Contractors International Association (FCIA)

Add a new section to read:Where the configuration of a joint is such that a listed system is determined to be non-existent and

reconfiguration of the penetrations or fire resistance rated assembly is determined to be impractical or impossible,alternative methods for maintaining the integrity of the required fire–resistance rating of the assembly should bepermitted to be established using an engineering analysis based on a comparison of listed systems prepared by amanufacturer’s technical representative of the systems specified or prepared by the laboratory that conducted theoriginal test.On-site inspection of firestopping is important in maintaining the integrity of any vertical or horizontal firebarrier. Two standard practice documents were developed with the ASTM process to allow inspections ofthrough-penetration firestops, joints, and perimeter fire barrier systems. ASTM E 2393,

, provides guidance for the inspection offire-resistive joints and perimeter fire barrier joint systems tested in accordance with the requirements of ASTM E 1966,

, or with ANSI/UL 2079,. ASTM E 2393 contains a standardized report format, which would lead to greater consistency

for inspections.It is not possible to test all possible joint configurations. However, today Engineering Judgments are

being used even when listed systems are available or with proper design, a listed system could be used. Therefore, oneof the reasons for the proposed Annex note is to discourage the prolific use of engineering judgments. Secondly, theproposed language requires that the person who prepares the analysis must be the manufacturer's technicalrepresentative who is familiar with the test. Since engineering judgments are to be based upon a test of a similarassembly, one should be familiar with the test in order to render an opinion as to whether the modifications willadversely impact the performance of the system. As an alternative, the laboratory who conducted the test may preparethe engineering judgment.


of 119



Revise to read:Areas requiring special hazard protection include, but are not limited to, areas such as those used for

storage of combustibles or flammables, areas housing heat-producing appliances, assemblies with or without windows,or areas used for maintenance purposes.

This annex note would further explain that Section 9.7.1.2 could be used to protect assemblies with orwithout windows.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________101- Log #372 SAF-FIR


Add a new section to read:AHRD Annex Note

The total quantities of flammable liquids in any area should comply with the provisions of other recognized codes,including NFPA 1, , and NFPA 30, . In addition, specialconsideration should be given to the following:

(1) Obstructions created by the installation of hand-rub solution dispensers

(2) Location of dispensers with regard to adjacent combustible materials and potential sources of ignition, especiallywhere dispensers are mounted on walls of combustible construction

(3) Requirements for other fire protection features, including complete automatic sprinkler protection, to be installedthroughout the compartment

(4) Amount and location of the flammable solutions, both in use and in storage, particularly with respect to potential forleakage or failure of the dispenser

This is a companion to the Public Input to add a section in 8.7 to address alcohol-based hand-rubdispensers. As with the text proposed to the body of the Code, this language was actually accepted by the Committeelast cycle but removed as the result of a successful CAM.


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 5000_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #166 BLD-FIR


Add a new section to read:8.2.1.3 * T he fire resistance rating of an element or assembly determined by tests conducted in accordance with

NFPA 251 or other approved test methods shall not be permitted to rely on automatic fire suppression systems unlessevaluated as an equivalency in accordance with Section 1.5 or as part of a performance-based option in accordancewith Chapter 5.

Problem: There is the potential for misuse of long established fire-resistance test Standards relied uponin the Code to determine performance of elements and assemblies tested as systems in conjunction with dedicatedactive suppression systems. This change prevents a misuse of established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon inthe Code to determine performance of elements and assemblies, wherein the established consensus test method aremodified outside the scope of the test standard to include a flow of cooling water during the fire exposure portion of thetest. Substantiation: The history of this particular Proposal is lengthy. Public comment 101-89 on Proposal 101-165 wasinitially accepted by the Technical Committee during its meeting, but failed to achieve the required 2/3 affirmative voteby 1 single vote, receiving 15 of a required 15.18 Affirmative Votes (65.2%). It was also overwhelmingly approved by themembership at the annual meeting in June 2011. AHJ’s are presented with this scenario frequently, designers feel thatbecause the atrium language permits sprinkler protection in lieu of the 1-hour separation requirements, that this meansthat it is acceptable in other areas of buildings. This language is a positive change in the existing language that willprovide guidance and testing information that will help the AHJ to make the correct decision. This proposal is onlyclarifying to the code user the intent of the code language. Technical justification for this proposal is not needed becausenothing is being changed technically. The proposed code language is not preventing a future wall assembly from beingdeveloped/tested that would include an automatic fire extinguishing system as part of its “fire-rating” as permitted inSection 1.4 or Chapter 5. There is absolutely no conflict with Section 1.4 or Chapter 5 presented by this language. Thislanguage is not preventing any existing listing that may include reliance on an automatic fire extinguishing system frombeing used. All this language is doing is making sure the AHJ or the code user understands the intent of the codelanguage. Not everyone has the same fire protection experience or knowledge level as the members of the technicalcommittee do. Annex language is supposed to be explanatory and provide guidance, history and experience. Theproposed language will help the AHJ to make the correct decision and will improve the code. It is predominantly withfire-resistance ratings that some manufacturers have begun to submit test reports to Authorities Having Jurisdictionclaiming to have “fire-resistance ratings” that are derived from modified standard tests using a flow of cooling waterduring the fire test. It now becomes important to clarify that the code-required fire resistance rating is in fact a propertythat is meant to represent the inherent resistance to fire of an assembly, independent of any active fire protection. Incountless instances, the code already incorporates the effect of a fire suppression system by reducing thefire-resistance rating requirements, and often by reducing other required safety features as well.


of 119



Add new text to read as follows:The fire resistance rating of an element or assembly determined by tests conducted in accordance with NFPA


There is the potential for misuse of long established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon in theCode to determine performance of elements and assemblies tested as systems in conjunction with dedicated activesuppression systems. NFPA 251, UL 263, and ASTM E119 do not make provision for testing of these types ofcombined active and passive fire protection systems.

In the 2012 revision cycle, Public comment 101-89 on Proposal 101-165, dealing with this same topic, was initiallyaccepted by the Technical Committee during its meeting, but failed to achieve the required 2/3 affirmative vote by 1single vote, receiving 15 of a required 15.18 Affirmative Votes (65.2%). I submitted a NITMAM on behalf of theInternational Firestop Council The NFPA membership voted with an overwhelming majority to accept the code changeproposed. However, the subsequent committee vote failed to reach the needed 2/3 majority needed to uphold themembership action, again by a single vote.

Technical backgroundIt is predominantly with fire-resistance ratings that some manufacturers have begun to submit test reports to Authorities

Having Jurisdiction claiming to have “fire-resistance ratings” that are derived from modified standard tests using a flow ofcooling water during the fire test. It now becomes important to clarify that the code-required fire resistance rating is infact a property that is meant to represent the inherent resistance to fire of an assembly, independent of any active fireprotection. In countless instances, the code already incorporates the effect of a fire suppression system by reducing thefire-resistance rating requirements, and by reducing other required safety features as well through a process many referto as “trade-offs”.

Currently, the most common case example is that of sprinklered glazing. Standards ASTM E119, NFPA 251, and UL263 make no provisions for running a fire resistance test using any extraneous means to achieve fire resistance ratings. As such, given that the referenced test standards essentially provide the definitation of what is a “fire resistance rating”,it is not possible to assign a fire resistance rating to any assembly where the test has been modified in some way tochange the basic conditions of the test. By way of comparison, ICC-ES has recently agreed to WITHDRAW AC385,titled “Acceptance Criteria for Special Purpose Sprinkler Heads Used with Fixed Glazed Assemblies to Provide a Fireresistance-rated Wall Assembly (AC385)” which dealt with sprinklered glazing, for the same reasons outlined below. Both on the floor at the June 2011 NFPA Association Technical Meeting, at ICC, and ICC-ES, this proposal to make itclear that a “fire resistance rating” cannot be claimed when modifying the code-approved test, was accepted by anoverwhelming majority. I will also point out that this proposal was NOT opposed by a single person on the floor,including representatives of the Sprinkler Association. However, the Committee on Fire Protection Features hasnarrowly missed accepting this revision in NFPA 101, although they did support this provision being included in NFPA5000-09. This proposal was again, less than ONE vote short of having this situation corrected in NFPA 101. First, let me confirm that this proposal does not restrict anyone from submitting arguments on a case-by-case basis viaAlternative protection methods, or by evaluation as a performance-based option. Thus, the only impact of this codechange is to prevent anyone from incorrectly and misleadingly claiming a “fire resistance rating” in accordance withASTM E119, UL 263, or NFPA 251. This proposal does not “modify” these test standards as suggested by one of thenegative voters. In fact, it prevents the proliferation of a misconception that these systems are being tested inaccordance with these standards, rather than only in accordance with the “time-temperature” curves in these standards.To quote directly from the Scope of the now-withdrawn AC 385, article 1.2, which stated in part: “Because the sprinklerheads are used to limit the rate of heat transfer through the glazing, the ASTM E 119 test method and test assembly aremodified to take into account the sprinkler heads and their discharge.” To summarize, there are a number of compelling reasons to support the NFPA membership: 1. This change prevents a misuse of established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon in the Code to determineperformance of elements and assemblies, wherein the established consensus test method are modified outside thescope of the test standard to include a flow of cooling water during the fire exposure portion of the test. 2. It has long been a basic tenet that the design of every building or structure intended for human occupancy beconstructed such that reliance for safety to life does not depend solely on any single safeguard. Additional safeguards


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 5000are provided for life safety in case any single safeguard is ineffective due to inappropriate human actions or systemfailure.

3. The resulting cooling-enhanced fire rating then provides a result that would be incompatible with the principle ofrequired fire resistance ratings specified throughout the Codes. The various fire resistance ratings mandated throughoutdozens of articles in the Code have been established based on an assumption of the type of construction that wouldpass the standardized tests without the aid of water cooling during fire exposure. For example, a relatively thin andun-insulated metal panel wall with suitable water cooling could potentially be arranged to pass a 1-hour standardizedfire-resistance test, and possibly even longer duration fire-resistance tests. However, where the Code specifies theneed for a 1-hour assembly, the intent in the development of that code provision would have clearly been to have anassembly that could survive a fire without being breached and without losing any load-bearing capabilities all by itself,without relying on an external water source for continued cooling. If sprinkler protection was also required for such anoccupancy, then the overall intent of the Code is to have these two systems act independently, but in concert with eachother. 4. The language proposed here is similar to the language that was in NFPA 5000-09. The Appendix note is new.The proposed language responded to committee concerns expressed in previous cycles in that it would require aspecific approval by the Authority Having Jurisdiction using either the equivalency or performance-based optionspermitted by the Code. It clearly does not eliminate those options, but rather, encourages their proper use. Therationale for removing this language from NFPA 5000-12 in ROP Code Proposal 5000-92 recently was that it "Conflictedwith NFPA 101". However, it is clear, that the Membership at the Floor of NFPA, (just as the IBC membership did)support this approach.

5. No fewer than 5 of the Negative voters cited the fact that Proposal 5000-92 removed this provision from NFPA5000. As indicated above, this was not done for technical reasons, but rather, for consistency. Those 5 negative votescould have therefore been resolved just as readily by leaving the provision in NFPA 5000, and adopting it into NFPA101, which would have made the vote to accept the code change proposal into NFPA 101 almost unanimous. It isinteresting to note that this concept has never failed to achieve less than 52% affirmative votes even through the FireProtection Features Committee. 6. Lastly, one of the most compelling reasons for overturning the Technical Committee and supporting theMembership is provided in the Affirmative with Comment provided by Catherine Stashak. Her comment as an AHJ wasas follows: “AHJ’s are presented with this scenario frequently. Designers feel that because the atrium language permitssprinkler protection in lieu of the 1-hour separation requirements, that this means it is acceptable in other areas ofbuildings. This language is a positive change in the existing language that will provide guidance and testing informationthat will help the AHJ to make correct decisions. This proposal is only clarifying to the code user the intent of the code.Not everyone has the same fire protection experience or knowledge level as the members of the Technical Committeedo. Annex language is supposed to be explanatory and provide guidance, history and experience. The proposedlanguage will help the AHJ to make correct decisions and will improve the code. It is appropriate for the code to notifythe designer that the burden of technical substantiation of equivalent performance belongs to the proponent of thealternative and not upon the enforcer to prove that it is not equivalent.”


of 119


_______________________________________________________________________________________________Robert J. Davidson, Davidson Code Concepts, LLC

Revise to read:8.7.9 Use of Wired Glass. Glazing Materials.8.7.9.1 Wired glass that is 1⁄4 in. (6.3 mm) thick and labeled for fire protection purposes shall be permitted to be used

in approved opening protectives, with the maximum sizes in accordance with their listing.8.7.9.2 Other glazing

Glazing materials that have been tested and labeled to indicate the type of opening to be protected for fire protectionpurposes shall be permitted to be used in approved opening protectives in accordance with their listing and with themaximum sizes tested.

Calling out one type of product, (wired glass), for use is a proprietary endorsement and one that is notnecessary. Glazing materials for use in fire-resistance rated assemblies must be listed and labeled for such use and theproduct lines involve different types of materials, wired glass being just one example. The proposed change deletes thedirect endorsement of wired glass and leaves the generic language providing for the use of tested and label fire ratedglazing materials.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #139 BLD-FIR


Add New text to read as follows:(4) Membrane penetrations for boxes or enclosures other than electrical boxes shall be permitted provided such

penetrating items and the annular space between the wall membrane and the box, are protected by an approvedmembrane penetration firestop system installed as tested in accordance with ASTM E 814 or UL 1479, with a minimumpositive pressure differential of 0.01 inch (2.49 Pa) of water, and shall have an F and T rating of not less than therequired fire-resistance rating of the wall penetrated and be installed in accordance with their listing.

To add a new allowance which expands upon the ability to install utility boxes such as electricalpanels, dryer exhaust boxes, washing machine hose connection boxes and manual fire alarm pull boxes in fireresistance rated assemblies when properly protected. There are many types of utility boxes installed in fire resistancerated walls, where the membrane penetrations need to be protected. The addition of this new requirement will bothpermit these general utility boxes to be used and provide some assurance that any box or cabinet penetrations will notcompromise the fire resistance rating of the wall.

NFPA 5000 currently permits both metallic and nonmetallic electrical boxes to be installed, under specified conditions,in fire resistance rated assemblies. This Section already permits membrane penetrations by listed electrical boxes ofany material, provided such boxes have been tested for use in fire-resistance-rated assemblies and are installed inaccordance with the instructions included in the listing. These membrane penetrations in fire resistance rated walls arepermitted when evaluated for such installations and provided with the appropriate fire-resistance testing. However,there still exists a need to introduce requirements to cover a variety of other types of general utility boxes such as fire orpolice alarm boxes, manual fire alarm boxes, switch boxes, valve boxes, special purpose boxes, electrical panels,washer and dryer boxes, and hose cabinets. This Code change proposals would create a direct parallel between therequirements for electrical outlet boxes and these utility boxes. The protection systems are to be tested for use infire-resistance-rated assemblies and installed in accordance with the instructions included in the listings. However,because these utility boxes can exceed 100 square inches aggregate area, both an F and T rating should be required inorder to be directly equivalent to the fire resistance rating of the assemblies penetrated. Given that these are membranepenetrations, there is a greater likelihood that someone could unknowingly place or store combustible materials,potentially even furniture and bedding, directly in contact with the un-penetrated membrane on the opposite side of thewall. This could significantly increase threat of fire spread.

The information provided for each Classification would include the model numbers for the products, a description of therated assemblies, the spacing limitations for the boxes and the installation details.


of 119



Add new text to read as follows:(4) Membrane penetrations by electrical boxes of any size or type, which have been listed as part of a wall opening

protective material system for use in fire-resistance-rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with theinstructions included in the listing.

To add a new allowance which expands upon the ability to install utility boxes such as electricalpanels, dryer exhaust boxes, washing machine hose connection boxes and manual fire alarm pull boxes in fireresistance rated assemblies when properly protected. There are many types of utility boxes installed in fire resistancerated walls, where the membrane penetrations need to be protected. The addition of this new requirement will bothpermit these general utility boxes to be used and provide some assurance that any box or cabinet penetrations will notcompromise the fire resistance rating of the wall.

NFPA 5000 currently permits both metallic and nonmetallic electrical boxes to be installed, under specified conditions,in fire resistance rated assemblies. This Section already permits membrane penetrations by listed electrical boxes ofany material, provided such boxes have been tested for use in fire-resistance-rated assemblies and are installed inaccordance with the instructions included in the listing. These membrane penetrations in fire resistance rated walls arepermitted when evaluated for such installations and provided with the appropriate fire-resistance testing. However,there still exists a need to introduce requirements to cover a variety of other types of general utility boxes such as fire orpolice alarm boxes, manual fire alarm boxes, switch boxes, valve boxes, special purpose boxes, electrical panels,washer and dryer boxes, and hose cabinets. This Code change proposals would create a direct parallel between therequirements for electrical outlet boxes and these utility boxes. The protection systems are to be tested for use infire-resistance-rated assemblies and installed in accordance with the instructions included in the listings. However,because these utility boxes can exceed 100 square inches aggregate area, both an F and T rating should be required inorder to be directly equivalent to the fire resistance rating of the assemblies penetrated. Given that these are membranepenetrations, there is a greater likelihood that someone could unknowingly place or store combustible materials,potentially even furniture and bedding, directly in contact with the un-penetrated membrane on the opposite side of thewall. This could significantly increase threat of fire spread.

The information provided for each Classification would include the model numbers for the products, a description of therated assemblies, the spacing limitations for the boxes and the installation details.


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate

electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a wall, floor, or floor/ceiling assemblyconstructed as a smoke barrier, or through the ceiling membrane of the roof/ceiling of a smoke barrier assembly, shallbe protected by a system or material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke. In new construction, smoke barriersshall comply with 8.11.5.5.

Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, the penetrations shall be protected in accordancewith the requirements of 8.8 Section 8.3.5 to limit the spread of fire for a time period equal to the fire resistance rating ofthe assembly as required by and 8. 11 5 . 5. 6 to restrict the transfer of smoke, unless the requirements of 8 .5.6.4 or8.11.5.5 are met.

Where the penetrating item uses a sleeve to penetrate the smoke barrier, the sleeve shall be securely set inthe smoke barrier, and the space between the item and the sleeve shall be filled with a material capable of restrictingthe transfer of smoke. comply with 8.11.5.5.

Currently, the Code requirements for smoke barriers lacks guidance on quantitative performancerequirements for the maximum total leakage that is acceptable. In the absence of a comprehensive approach toquantifying Smoke Barriers performance, The Code already recognizes that there are instances where leakage rateddoors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying a performance level that is realistic and achievablefor joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.

This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage throughpenetrations in smoke barriers. In response to the Committee reasons during the previous cycle, the proposal has beenmodified to only require leakage rated penetration for new construction. In these cases, this proposal would allow 5cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as one option, and would also allow an alternative requirement for thecumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in a given area of smoke barrier. This approach is also used inother Building Codes.

NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for individual components, such as doors in corridors and smoke barriers, tobe tested in accordance with a nationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of airleakage rates through door assemblies under prescribed conditions. The existing language in section 8.5.6 of NFPA101 is intended to be a means of providing some minimal level of performance for the through penetrations. The currentlanguage has the potential to be manipulated to make the requirement ineffective because of the lack of specific criteria.To better specify the limits for smoke leakage of through penetrations in Smoke Barriers it is reasonable to require atotal smoke barrier performance level per 100 ft2 (for example) in addition to dealing with individual items. By doing that,it would be possible to be more flexible with the individual penetrations, but more comprehensive on the smoke barrierleakage performance.

This proposed Code change is intended to clarify and improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakagethrough penetrations in smoke barriers. This proposal would allow 5 cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as oneoption, and would also allow an alternative requirement for the cumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in agiven area of smoke barrier.

For smoke and draft control doors, the LSC contains limits requires the addition of 3.0 cfm/sq ft for each door within the100 sq ft area (measured at 0.1 in of water column), since that is the limit for smoke and draft control doors in UL 1784and NFPA 105. The proposed 5 cfm/ft2 value for leakage through penetrations is based upon this criteria. It isessentially identical to the leakage rating of smoke and draft control doors in smoke barriers, since 3 cfm/ft2 measured at0.1 in of water column is equivalent to 5.2 cfm/ft2 at 0.3 inches of water.

The 50 cfm suggested here is based on two approaches:1. A very simplistic approach of a theoretical maximum of 10 through penetrations @ max allowed 5 cfm/ft2 in 100 ft2 of

wall or floor area. 2. The LSC permits 1 sq ft of leakage area per 1000 sq feet of wall space. Based on some fundamental assumptions

about anticipated pressure differentials during fires, the cumulative value of 50 cfm per 100 ft2 proposed also representsapproximately 50% of that permitted leakage.

Consequently, if installing a through-penetration firestop system that has an L-Rating of more than 5.0 cfm/ft2 , such asmight be the case for a cable tray where additional leakage can occur between the individual cables in a bundle, thenthe overall installation can still be compliant with the Code either by spacing out the penetrations sufficiently to maintain


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 5000the average leakage of 50 cfm/100 ft2 or ensure that other through-penetrations within the same 100 ft2 control areahave leakage rates that are low enough to compensate for one or more penetrations with higher L-Ratings.Consequently, if the L-rating of a particular system being used is less than the maximum of 5 cfm/ft2, then morethrough-penetrations could be installed in the same 100 ft2 of wall area. Alternatively, an individual through-penetrationcould be greater than 5 cfm/ft2 if the total for the 100 ft2 of wall or floor area does not exceed the 50 cfm cumulativevalue.

The addition of the UL 1479 Air Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized UL Standard for the quantitativemeasurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing penetrations under prescribed conditions. This wouldfollow the same approach currently taken in NFPA 101 for other elements within smoke barriers, and would beconsistent with the current smoke barrier requirements in other US Model Building Codes.

NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 1479 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing through-penetrations underprescribed conditions. The conditions of acceptance in ANSI/UL 1479 provides criteria for an assembly rating and anoptional L rating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft ofopening (CFM/sq ft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400F air temperature at an air pressuredifferential of 0.30 in. W.C. The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, indetermining the suitability of through-penetrations firestop systems for the protection of service openings in floors, wallsand smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement of smoke across those assemblies. The UL and IntertekDirectories identify these ratings as “L” ratings, and contains literally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that havealready been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is no additional effort or knowledge required to install thesesystems over that needed to install the basic through-penetrations firestop systems for fire-resistance. Just as with UL1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at 400°F, (representing hot and coldsmoke).


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 5000_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #134a BLD-FIR


Add new text to read as follows:Penetrations in smoke barriers shall be protected by an approved through penetration firestop system

installed and tested in accordance with the requirements of UL 1479 for air leakage. The L rating of the systemmeasured at 0.30 inch (7.47 Pa) of water in both the ambient temperature and elevated temperature tests, shall notexceed:

1. 5.0 cfm per square foot (0.025m3 / s · m2) of penetration opening for each through-penetration firestop system; or2. A total cumulative leakage of 50 cfm (0.024m3/s) for any 100 square feet (9.3 m2) of wall area, or floor area.

Currently, the Code requirements for smoke barriers lacks guidance on quantitative performancerequirements for the maximum total leakage that is acceptable. In the absence of a comprehensive approach toquantifying Smoke Barriers performance, The Code already recognizes that there are instances where leakage rateddoors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying a performance level that is realistic and achievablefor joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.

This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage throughpenetrations in smoke barriers. In response to the Committee reasons during the previous cycle, the proposal has beenmodified to only require leakage rated penetration for new construction. In these cases, this proposal would allow 5cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as one option, and would also allow an alternative requirement for thecumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in a given area of smoke barrier. This approach is also used inother Building Codes.

NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for individual components, such as doors in corridors and smoke barriers, tobe tested in accordance with a nationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of airleakage rates through door assemblies under prescribed conditions. The existing language in section 8.5.6 of NFPA101 is intended to be a means of providing some minimal level of performance for the through penetrations. The currentlanguage has the potential to be manipulated to make the requirement ineffective because of the lack of specific criteria.To better specify the limits for smoke leakage of through penetrations in Smoke Barriers it is reasonable to require atotal smoke barrier performance level per 100 ft2 (for example) in addition to dealing with individual items. By doing that,it would be possible to be more flexible with the individual penetrations, but more comprehensive on the smoke barrierleakage performance.

This proposed Code change is intended to clarify and improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakagethrough penetrations in smoke barriers. This proposal would allow 5 cfm/ft2 for individual through penetrations as oneoption, and would also allow an alternative requirement for the cumulative total leakage of all through-penetrations in agiven area of smoke barrier.

For smoke and draft control doors, the LSC contains limits requires the addition of 3.0 cfm/sq ft for each door within the100 sq ft area (measured at 0.1 in of water column), since that is the limit for smoke and draft control doors in UL 1784and NFPA 105. The proposed 5 cfm/ft2 value for leakage through penetrations is based upon this criteria. It isessentially identical to the leakage rating of smoke and draft control doors in smoke barriers, since 3 cfm/ft2 measured at0.1 in of water column is equivalent to 5.2 cfm/ft2 at 0.3 inches of water.

The 50 cfm suggested here is based on two approaches:1. A very simplistic approach of a theoretical maximum of 10 through penetrations @ max allowed 5 cfm/ft2 in 100 ft2 of

wall or floor area. 2. The LSC permits 1 sq ft of leakage area per 1000 sq feet of wall space. Based on some fundamental assumptions

about anticipated pressure differentials during fires, the cumulative value of 50 cfm per 100 ft2 proposed also representsapproximately 50% of that permitted leakage.

Consequently, if installing a through-penetration firestop system that has an L-Rating of more than 5.0 cfm/ft2 , such asmight be the case for a cable tray where additional leakage can occur between the individual cables in a bundle, thenthe overall installation can still be compliant with the Code either by spacing out the penetrations sufficiently to maintainthe average leakage of 50 cfm/100 ft2 or ensure that other through-penetrations within the same 100 ft2 control areahave leakage rates that are low enough to compensate for one or more penetrations with higher L-Ratings.Consequently, if the L-rating of a particular system being used is less than the maximum of 5 cfm/ft2, then morethrough-penetrations could be installed in the same 100 ft2 of wall area. Alternatively, an individual through-penetrationcould be greater than 5 cfm/ft2 if the total for the 100 ft2 of wall or floor area does not exceed the 50 cfm cumulativevalue.


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 5000The addition of the UL 1479 Air Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized UL Standard for the quantitative

measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing penetrations under prescribed conditions. This wouldfollow the same approach currently taken in NFPA 101 for other elements within smoke barriers, and would beconsistent with the current smoke barrier requirements in other US Model Building Codes.

NFPA 101 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 1479 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing through-penetrations underprescribed conditions. The conditions of acceptance in ANSI/UL 1479 provides criteria for an assembly rating and anoptional L rating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft ofopening (CFM/sq ft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400F air temperature at an air pressuredifferential of 0.30 in. W.C. The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, indetermining the suitability of through-penetrations firestop systems for the protection of service openings in floors, wallsand smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement of smoke across those assemblies. The UL and IntertekDirectories identify these ratings as “L” ratings, and contains literally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that havealready been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is no additional effort or knowledge required to install thesesystems over that needed to install the basic through-penetrations firestop systems for fire-resistance. Just as with UL1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at 400°F, (representing hot and coldsmoke).


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:

Joints made withinor , between, or at the perimeter of smoke barriers shall be protected with a listed joint system or amaterial that is capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.tested in accordance with the requirements of UL 2079 for airleakage. The L rating of thejoint system shall not exceed 5 cfm per linear foot (0.00775 m3/s m) of joint at 0.30 inch (7.47Pa).

Joints made within or between smoke barriers shall be protected with a smoke-tight joint system that iscapable of limiting the transfer of smoke in accordance with 8.11.7.2.

Smoke barriers that are also constructed as fire barriers shall be protected with a joint system that is designedand tested to resist the spread of fire for a time period equal to the required fire resistance rating of the assembly andrestrict the transfer of smoke in accordance with 8.11.7.2.

Currently, the Code lacks guidance on quantitative performance requirements for the maximum totalleakage that is acceptable for smoke barriers. In the absence of a comprehensive approach to quantifying SmokeBarriers performance, the Life Safety Code already recognizes that there are instances in Chapters 11 through 43where leakage rated doors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying a performance level that isrealistic and achievable for joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.

This proposal applies to leakage rating of Joints in new construction, or where otherwise required by the Code. NFPA5000 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 2079 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing joints under prescribedconditions. The condition of acceptance in ANSI/UL 2079 provides criteria for an assembly rating and an optional Lrating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft of opening (CFM/sqft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400°F air temperature at an air pressure differential of 0.30 in.W.C. The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, in determining the suitability of jointsystems for the protection of openings in floors, walls and smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement ofsmoke in accordance with the Code requirements. The UL Directory identifies these ratings as “L” ratings, and containsliterally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that have already been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is noadditional effort or knowledge required to install these systems over that needed to install the basic joint systems forfire-resistance. Just as with UL 1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at400°F, (representing hot and cold smoke). The air leakage tests contained in UL 2079 are based on the air leakage testfor doors and can provide the user with a numerical value for smoke through penetrations and joints in smoke barriers.The specific leakage criteria proposed here is identical to that contained in the International Building Code for Joints inSmoke Barriers.

This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage of joints insmoke barriers. This requirement already exists in other US Building Codes.


of 119



Add new text to read as follows:Testing of the joint system in a smoke barrier that also serves as fire barrier shall be representative of the

actual installation suitable for the required engineering demand without compromising the fire resistance rating of theassembly or the structural integrity of the assembly.

Currently, the Code lacks guidance on quantitative performance requirements for the maximum totalleakage that is acceptable for smoke barriers. In the absence of a comprehensive approach to quantifying SmokeBarriers performance, the Life Safety Code already recognizes that there are instances in Chapters 11 through 43where leakage rated doors and dampers are required. What is still lacking is identifying a performance level that isrealistic and achievable for joints and penetrations in Smoke Barriers.

This proposal applies to leakage rating of Joints in new construction, or where otherwise required by the Code. NFPA5000 currently includes requirements for doors in corridors and smoke barriers to be tested in accordance with anationally recognized UL Standard (UL 1784) for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rated through doorassemblies under prescribed conditions. The addition of UL 2079 Leakage rating will provide a nationally recognized ULStandard for the quantitative measurement of air leakage rates through a barrier containing joints under prescribedconditions. The condition of acceptance in ANSI/UL 2079 provides criteria for an assembly rating and an optional Lrating. The L rating criteria determines the amount of air leakage, in cubic ft per minute per square ft of opening (CFM/sqft), through the penetration system at ambient and/or 400°F air temperature at an air pressure differential of 0.30 in.W.C. The L ratings are intended to assist Authorities Having Jurisdiction, and others, in determining the suitability of jointsystems for the protection of openings in floors, walls and smoke barriers for the purpose of restricting the movement ofsmoke in accordance with the Code requirements. The UL Directory identifies these ratings as “L” ratings, and containsliterally hundreds of penetration and joint designs that have already been tested and assigned an “L” rating. There is noadditional effort or knowledge required to install these systems over that needed to install the basic joint systems forfire-resistance. Just as with UL 1784, both of these standards measure air leakage at room temperature as well at400°F, (representing hot and cold smoke). The air leakage tests contained in UL 2079 are based on the air leakage testfor doors and can provide the user with a numerical value for smoke through penetrations and joints in smoke barriers.The specific leakage criteria proposed here is identical to that contained in the International Building Code for Joints inSmoke Barriers.

This proposed Code change is intended to improve the Code regarding the requirements for smoke leakage of joints insmoke barriers. This requirement already exists in other US Building Codes.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #215 BLD-FIR

_______________________________________________________________________________________________Joseph H. Versteeg, Versteeg Associates

Delete the following text:(2) The lowest or next to lowest story within the communicating space is a street floor.

There is no technical substantiation for limiting the communicating space to the lower three floors of thebuilding. When considering the egress arrangement and other safeguards contained within this section, occupants onthe floor levels having the communicating space are afforded no less safety if the space is located on upper stories ofthe building versus the lowest three.


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:(a) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, or NFPA13R, or an approved automatic water mist system in accordance with NFPA 750, a smoke barrier in accordance withSection 8.11 shall be permitted to serve as the separation required by 8.12.2(4).· (5)The communicating space has ordinary hazard contents protected throughout by an approved automaticsprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, or NFPA 13R or an approved automatic water mist system in accordancewith NFPA 750 or has only low hazard contents.

Water Mist systems have been approved and installed in many sprinkler applications globally for over15 years. They have been listed by national and internationally recognized testing laboratories such as: (OrdinaryHazard Group 1), (Light Hazard occupancies, Computer Rooms, Subfloors, Special Hazard Machinery & spaces),

(Light Hazard Occupancies, Combustion Turbines, Machinery Spaces), (Light Hazard,Ord Haz Grp I, II parking garages & III selected occupancies, Cable Tunnels), (Light Hazard, Ord Haz Grp I,Combustion Turbines) and other agencies. These listings and installations have demonstrated equivalent fire protectionto the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ). The addition of the proposed text will provide the AHJ a clear option to acceptwater mist systems as an equivalent system to an approved automatic sprinkler system thereby allowing constructionalternatives without having to prove equivalency or be considered an alternative extinguishing system

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #188 BLD-FIR


Revise text to read as follows:(4) The entire building is protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordancewith NFPA 13, or NFPA 13R or an approved, supervised automatic water mist system in accordance with NFPA 750and 55.3.2.(a) Upon actuation of the required automatic sprinkler or water mist system within the atrium or areas open to the atrium


(Light Hazard Occupancies, Combustion Turbines, Machinery Spaces), (Light Hazard,Ord Haz Grp I,II parking garages & III selected occupancies, Cable Tunnels), (Light Hazard, Ord Haz Grp I,Combustion Turbines) and other agencies. These listings and installations have demonstrated equivalent fire protectionto the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ). The addition of the proposed text will provide the AHJ a clear option to acceptwater mist systems as an equivalent system to an approved automatic sprinkler system thereby allowing constructionalternatives without having to prove equivalency or be considered an alternative extinguishing system.


of 119



Delete text as follows:Where permitted by Chapters 15 through 31, and 33 through 34, unenclosed vertical openings created by

convenience stairways shall be permitted as follows:(1) The convenience stair openings shall not serve as required means of egress.(2) The building shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance

with Section 55.3.(3) The convenience stair openings shall be protected in accordance with the method detailed for the protection of

vertical openings in NFPA13, .This new provision for convenience stairs permits unenclosed vertical openings created by

convenience stairs to potentially be installed in any occupancy, with no limitation on the maximum number ofinterconnected floors. It is not justifiable to extend the protection measures previously permitted for escalators to allconvenience openings.

This provision was added into the 2012 Life Safety Code and NFPA 5000 based on a proposal from the Detention andCare technical Committee. The item was information balloted to the BLD-FIR after their meeting had occurred. Thisarticle is in conflict with the fundamental requirements expressed in section 4.5 and introduces an unjustified level of riskto building occupants. This section relies exclusively on a single safeguard for protection of building occupants.

One of the fundamental requirements of the Life Safety Code is that the design of buildings cannot rely solely on anyone means of safeguarding occupants. This section relies exclusively on sprinkler performance. As we are all aware,sprinklers are an invaluable life safety and property protection technology. However, even the March 2012 edition ofNFPA’s Report on US Experience with Sprinklers states that the combined performance of operating effectiveness ofsprinklers is 88% of reported fires where sprinklers were present in the fire area and fire was large enough to activatethe sprinklers.

This new provision for convenience stairs is a major technical change to the philosophy of NFPA 5000 in protection ofvertical openings. It is not appropriate to extend the protection measures previously permitted for escalators to allconvenience openings. Escalators represent a unique condition. The closely-spaced sprinkler form of protection hashistorically been permitted for escalators because it might be dangerous to enclose an escalator with walls and doors asan escalator will continue to run and deposit people at a floor even if the door on that floor becomes inoperative. Usersof convenience stairs are not mechanically moved and deposited at a floor, so it is not necessary to make a specialallowance for such convenience stairs.

The solution historically provided for escalators to be protected in accordance with the method detailed for theprotection of vertical openings in NFPA13, , has been provided out ofthis necessity. It should not be expanded without justification. The ability to utilize this provision is not restricted to anyoccupancy types.

Article 4.5.1 of the Code requires that “The design of every building or structure intended for human occupancy shallbe such that reliance for safety to life does not depend solely on any single safeguard. An additional safeguard(s) shallbe provided for life safety in case any single safeguard is ineffective due to inappropriate human actions or systemfailure.” Further, 4.5.6 under the fundamental requirements for Vertical Openings states “Every vertical openingbetween the floors of a building shall be suitably enclosed or protected, as necessary, to afford reasonable safety tooccupants while using the means of egress and to prevent the spread of fire, smoke, or fumes through vertical openingsfrom floor to floor before occupants have entered exits.” Sprinklers installed in accordance with the method detailed forthe protection of vertical openings in NFPA 13 will not prevent the spread of fire, smoke, or fumes through verticalopenings before occupants have entered exits because sprinklers will not prevent the development or spread of smokeor fumes through these multiple floors. This is particularly true in shielded fire scenarios.

This proposal will not in any way inhibit the ability to use the solution historically provided for escalators to be protectedin accordance with the method detailed for the protection of escalator openings in NFPA 13.


of 119



Revise text to read as follows:(2)* In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, or NFPA13R or approved automatic water mist system in accordance with NFPA 750, convenience stairways connecting morethan two stories, and escalators or moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected in accordance with themethod detailed in NFPA 13 or in accordance with a method approved by the authority having jurisdiction.



_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #190 BLD-FIR


Revise text to read as follows: In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13, or

NFPA 13R or a an approved automatic water mist system, escalators or moving walk openings shall be permitted to beprotected by rolling steel shutters appropriate for the fire resistance rating of the vertical opening protected, and thefollowing criteria shall be met:




of 119



Revise text to read as follows:(1) The requirements shall not apply where the concealed space is protected throughout by an approved automaticsprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 or an approved water mist system in accordance with NFPA 750.



_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #192 BLD-FIR


Revise text to read as follows:(1)This requirement shall not apply to mercantile occupancy general storage areas and stockrooms protected byautomatic sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13 or automatic water mist sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 750.




of 119



Add a new section to read:A.8.2.1.3 NFPA 251, ANSI/UL 263, and ASTM E119 are nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance

of building elements and assemblies. Assemblies tested in accordance with these fire-resistance test standards providepassive fire protection. The test procedures set forth in these Standards make no provision for testing automatic firesuppression systems or water sprays in conjunction with structural members or assemblies tested in vertical orhorizontal fire resistance furnaces. Such evaluations can only be done via the Alternative protection methodsprocedures in Section 1.5, or by evaluation as a performance-based option in Chapter 5.



of 119



Add new text to read as follows:NFPA 251, ANSI/UL 263, and ASTM E119 are nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance of


There is the potential for misuse of long established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon in theCode to determine performance of elements and assemblies tested as systems in conjunction with dedicated activesuppression systems. NFPA 251, UL 263, and ASTM E119 do not make provision for testing of these types ofcombined active and passive fire protection systems.

In the 2012 revision cycle, Public comment 101-89 on Proposal 101-165, dealing with this same topic, was initiallyaccepted by the Technical Committee during its meeting, but failed to achieve the required 2/3 affirmative vote by 1single vote, receiving 15 of a required 15.18 Affirmative Votes (65.2%). I submitted a NITMAM on behalf of theInternational Firestop Council The NFPA membership voted with an overwhelming majority to accept the code changeproposed. However, the subsequent committee vote failed to reach the needed 2/3 majority needed to uphold themembership action, again by a single vote.

Technical backgroundIt is predominantly with fire-resistance ratings that some manufacturers have begun to submit test reports to Authorities

Having Jurisdiction claiming to have “fire-resistance ratings” that are derived from modified standard tests using a flow ofcooling water during the fire test. It now becomes important to clarify that the code-required fire resistance rating is infact a property that is meant to represent the inherent resistance to fire of an assembly, independent of any active fireprotection. In countless instances, the code already incorporates the effect of a fire suppression system by reducing thefire-resistance rating requirements, and by reducing other required safety features as well through a process many referto as “trade-offs”.

Currently, the most common case example is that of sprinklered glazing. Standards ASTM E119, NFPA 251, and UL263 make no provisions for running a fire resistance test using any extraneous means to achieve fire resistance ratings. As such, given that the referenced test standards essentially provide the definitation of what is a “fire resistance rating”,it is not possible to assign a fire resistance rating to any assembly where the test has been modified in some way tochange the basic conditions of the test. By way of comparison, ICC-ES has recently agreed to WITHDRAW AC385,titled “Acceptance Criteria for Special Purpose Sprinkler Heads Used wiih Fixed Glazed Assemblies to Provide a Fireresistance-rated Wall Assembly (AC385)” which dealt with sprinklered glazing, for the same reasons outlined below. Both on the floor at the June 2011 NFPA Association Technical Meeting, at ICC, and ICC-ES, this proposal to make itclear that a “fire resistance rating” cannot be claimed when modifying the code-approved test, was accepted by anoverwhelming majority. I will also point out that this proposal was NOT opposed by a single person on the floor,including representatives of the Sprinkler Association. However, the Committee on Fire Protection Features hasnarrowly missed accepting this revision in NFPA 101, although they did support this provision being included in NFPA5000-09. This proposal was again, less than ONE vote short of having this situation corrected in NFPA 101. First, let me confirm that this proposal does not restrict anyone from submitting arguments on a case-by-case basis viaAlternative protection methods, or by evaluation as a performance-based option. Thus, the only impact of this codechange is to prevent anyone from incorrectly and misleadingly claiming a “fire resistance rating” in accordance withASTM E119, UL 263, or NFPA 251. This proposal does not “modify” these test standards as suggested by one of thenegative voters. In fact, it prevents the proliferation of a misconception that these systems are being tested inaccordance with these standards, rather than only in accordance with the “time-temperature” curves in these standards.To quote directly from the Scope of the now-withdrawn AC 385, article 1.2, which stated in part: “Because the sprinklerheads are used to limit the rate of heat transfer through the glazing, the ASTM E 119 test method and test assembly aremodified to take into account the sprinkler heads and their discharge.” To summarize, there are a number of compelling reasons to support the NFPA membership: 1. This change prevents a misuse of established fire-resistance test Standards relied upon in the Code to determineperformance of elements and assemblies, wherein the established consensus test method are modified outside thescope of the test standard to include a flow of cooling water during the fire exposure portion of the test.


of 119

Report on Proposals – June 2014 NFPA 5000 2. It has long been a basic tenet that the design of every building or structure intended for human occupancy beconstructed such that reliance for safety to life does not depend solely on any single safeguard. Additional safeguardsare provided for life safety in case any single safeguard is ineffective due to inappropriate human actions or systemfailure.

3. The resulting cooling-enhanced fire rating then provides a result that would be incompatible with the principle ofrequired fire resistance ratings specified throughout the Codes. The various fire resistance ratings mandated throughoutdozens of articles in the Code have been established based on an assumption of the type of construction that wouldpass the standardized tests without the aid of water cooling during fire exposure. For example, a relatively thin andun-insulated metal panel wall with suitable water cooling could potentially be arranged to pass a 1-hour standardizedfire-resistance test, and possibly even longer duration fire-resistance tests. However, where the Code specifies theneed for a 1-hour assembly, the intent in the development of that code provision would have clearly been to have anassembly that could survive a fire without being breached and without losing any load-bearing capabilities all by itself,without relying on an external water source for continued cooling. If sprinkler protection was also required for such anoccupancy, then the overall intent of the Code is to have these two systems act independently, but in concert with eachother. 4. The language proposed here is similar to the language that was in NFPA 5000-09. The Appendix note is new.The proposed language responded to committee concerns expressed in previous cycles in that it would require aspecific approval by the Authority Having Jurisdiction using either the equivalency or performance-based optionspermitted by the Code. It clearly does not eliminate those options, but rather, encourages their proper use. Therationale for removing this language from NFPA 5000-12 in ROP Code Proposal 5000-92 recently was that it "Conflictedwith NFPA 101". However, it is clear, that the Membership at the Floor of NFPA, (just as the IBC membership did)support this approach.

5. No fewer than 5 of the Negative voters cited the fact that Proposal 5000-92 removed this provision from NFPA5000. As indicated above, this was not done for technical reasons, but rather, for consistency. Those 5 negative votescould have therefore been resolved just as readily by leaving the provision in NFPA 5000, and adopting it into NFPA101, which would have made the vote to accept the code change proposal into NFPA 101 almost unanimous. It isinteresting to note that this concept has never failed to achieve less than 52% affirmative votes even through the FireProtection Features Committee. 6. Lastly, one of the most compelling reasons for overturning the Technical Committee and supporting theMembership is provided in the Affirmative with Comment provided by Catherine Stashak. Her comment as an AHJ wasas follows: “AHJ’s are presented with this scenario frequently. Designers feel that because the atrium language permitssprinkler protection in lieu of the 1-hour separation requirements, that this means it is acceptable in other areas ofbuildings. This language is a positive change in the existing language that will provide guidance and testing informationthat will help the AHJ to make correct decisions. This proposal is only clarifying to the code user the intent of the code.Not everyone has the same fire protection experience or knowledge level as the members of the Technical Committeedo. Annex language is supposed to be explanatory and provide guidance, history and experience. The proposedlanguage will help the AHJ to make correct decisions and will improve the code. It is appropriate for the code to notifythe designer that the burden of technical substantiation of equivalent performance belongs to the proponent of thealternative and not upon the enforcer to prove that it is not equivalent.”

_______________________________________________________________________________________________5000- Log #264 BLD-FIR


Add a new section to read:Draftstops defined in the requirements of NFPA 13 are curtain style descending from the ceiling surface

or ceiling plane.Designers are using 18 inch deep channels (cut vertically ascending from the ceiling surface) in

attempt to comply with NFPA 13 8.15.4.2 (2). These channels are clearly not the intent of either the building code orNFPA 13 as this channel does not prevent smoke, heat and the by-products of combustion from entering into thevertical opening. A channel does a poor job of collecting or banking heat near the closely spaced sprinklers that protectthe vertical opening.


of 119

NFPA 101 NFPA 5000 Recommended Changes/Notes 8.1 General. 8.1.1 Application. The features of fire protection set forth in this chapter shall apply to both new construction and existing buildings.

8.1.2 Automatic Sprinkler Systems. Where another provision of this chapter requires an automatic sprinkler system, the automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in accordance with the subparts of 9.7.1.1, as permitted by the applicable occupancy chapter.

8.2 Construction and Compartmentation. 8.2.1 Construction. 8.2.1.1 Buildings or structures occupied or used in accordance with the individual occupancy chapters, Chapters 11 through 43, shall meet the minimum construction requirements of those chapters.

Not needed in 5000 – Chapter 7 covers building construction

8.2.1.2* NFPA 220, Standard on Types of Building Construction, shall be used to determine the requirements for the construction classification. A.8.2.1.2 Table A.8.2.1.2 is from NFPA5000, Building Construction and Safety Code, and is reproduced in this annex for the convenience of users of this Code.


8.2.1.3 Where the building or facility includes additions or connected structures of different construction types, the rating and classification of the structure shall be based on one of the following: (1) Separate buildings, if a 2-hour or greater vertically aligned fire barrier wall in accordance with NFPA 221, Standard for High Challenge FireWalls, FireWalls, and Fire BarrierWalls, exists between the portions of the building (2) Separate buildings, if provided with previously approved separations (3) Least fire-resistive construction type of the connected portions, if separation as specified in 8.2.1.3(1) or (2) is not Provided


8.1 General. 8.1.1 This chapter shall apply to fire protection features intended to restrict or resist the spread of fire and smoke beyond the compartment of fire origin.

8.2.2 General. 8.2.2.1 Where required by other chapters of this Code, every building shall be divided into compartments to limit the spread of fire and restrict the movement of smoke.

8.1.2 Where required by other chapters of this Code, every building shall be divided into compartments to limit the spread of fire and restrict or resist the movement of smoke.

8.2.2.2 Fire compartments shall be formed with fire barriers that comply

8.1.2.1* Fire compartments shall be formed with fire barrier walls that

of 119

with Section 8.3. comply with Section 8.4 or horizontal assemblies that comply with Section 8.6, or a combination of both.

8.1.2.2 Smoke compartments shall be formed with smoke barriers that comply with Section 8.11.

Recommendation: Add text to 101 as follows: 8.2.2.3 Smoke compartments shall be formed with smoke barriers that comply with Section 8.5.

8.2.2.3 Fire compartments shall be formed by fire barriers complying with 8.3.1.2.

Recommendation: Delete section in 101 (repeat of 8.2.2.2)

8.2.2.4 Where door assemblies are required elsewhere in this Code to be smoke leakage–rated in accordance with 8.2.2.4, door assemblies shall comply with all of the following: (1) They shall be tested in accordance with ANSI/UL 1784, Standard for Air Leakage Tests for Door Assemblies. (2) The maximum air leakage rate of the door assembly shall be 3.0 ft3/min/ft2

(0.9 m3/min/m2) of door opening at 0.10 in. water column (25 N/m2) for both the ambient and elevated temperature tests. (3) Door assemblies shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives. (4) Door assemblies shall be inspected in accordance with 7.2.1.15.

8.2.3 Fire Resistance–Rated Construction. 8.2.3.1* The fire resistance of structural elements and building assemblies shall be determined in accordance with test procedures set forth in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials; other approved test methods; or analytical methods approved by the authority having jurisdiction. A.8.2.3.1 ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, and ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, are considered nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance and have been found to yield equivalent test methods.

8.2* Fire Resistance–Rated Construction. A.8.2 NFPA 251, Standard Methods of Tests of Fire Resistance of Building Construction and Materials, ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, and ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, are considered nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance ratings and have been found to yield equivalent test results. 8.2.1 General. 8.2.1.1 The fire resistance ratings of structural elements and building assemblies shall be determined in accordance with the prescriptive requirements of 8.2.2 based on the test procedures set forth in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or other approved test methods or analytical methods in accordance with 8.2.3. End-jointed lumber used in such an assembly shall have the designation “Heat Resistant

Recommendation: Move annex note from 8.2 of 5000 to 8.2.1.1 of 5000 as follows: 8.2* Fire Resistance–Rated Construction. A.8.2 NFPA 251, Standard Methods of Tests of Fire Resistance of Building Construction and Materials, ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, and ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, are considered nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance ratings and have been found to yield equivalent test results. 8.2.1 General. 8.2.1.1* The fire resistance ratings of structural elements and building assemblies shall be determined in accordance with the prescriptive requirements of 8.2.2 based on the test procedures set forth in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction

of 119

Adhesive” or “HRA” included in its grade mark.

and Materials, or other approved test methods or analytical methods in accordance with 8.2.3. End-jointed lumber used in such an assembly shall have the designation “Heat Resistant Adhesive” or “HRA” included in its grade mark. A.8.2 ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, and ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, are considered nationally recognized methods of determining fire resistance ratings and have been found to yield equivalent test results.

8.2.3.1.1 Materials used to construct fire resistance–rated elements and assemblies shall be limited to those permitted in this Code.

8.2.1.2 Materials used to construct fire resistance–rated elements and assemblies shall be limited to those permitted in this Code.

8.2.3.1.2 In new construction, end-jointed lumber used in an assembly required to have a fire resistance rating shall have the designation “Heat Resistant Adhesive” or “HRA” included in its grade mark.

Recommendation: Move portion of 8.2 of 5000 to new 8.2.1.3 as follows: 8.2.1.1* The fire resistance ratings of structural elements and building assemblies shall be determined in accordance with the prescriptive requirements of 8.2.2 based on the test procedures set forth in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or other approved test methods or analytical methods in accordance with 8.2.3. End-jointed lumber used in such an assembly shall have the designation “Heat Resistant Adhesive” or “HRA” included in its grade mark. 8.2.1.3 End-jointed lumber used in such an assembly required to have a fire resistance rating shall have the designation “Heat Resistant Adhesive” or “HRA” included in its grade mark.

8.2.3.2 Fire resistance–rated floor and roof assemblies shall be classified as restrained or unrestrained in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials; or other approved test methods. The construction shall be considered restrained only where a registered design professional has furnished the authority

8.2.1.3 Fire resistance–rated floor and roof assemblies shall be classified as restrained or unrestrained in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials.

Recommendation: Revise 8.2.1.3 of 5000 as follows:8.2.1.3 Fire resistance–rated floor and roof assemblies shall be classified as restrained or unrestrained in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. or other approved test methods. The construction

of 119

having jurisdiction with satisfactory documentation verifying that the construction is restrained. The classification of fire resistance–rated floor and roof construction shall be identified on the plans as restrained or unrestrained.

shall be considered restrained only where a registered design professional has furnished the authority having jurisdiction with satisfactory documentation verifying that the construction is restrained. The classification of fire resistance–rated floor and roof construction shall be identified on the plans as restrained or unrestrained.

8.2.3.3 Structural elements that support fire barriers shall be permitted to have only the fire resistance rating required for the construction classification of the building, provided that both of the following criteria are met: (1) Such structural elements support nonbearing wall or partition assemblies that have a required 1-hour fire resistance rating or less. (2) Such structural elements do not serve as exit enclosures or protection for vertical openings.

Recommendation: Add new section to 5000 as follows: 8.2.1.x Structural elements that support fire barriers shall be permitted to have only the fire resistance rating required for the construction classification of the building, provided that both of the following criteria are met: (1) Such structural elements support nonbearing wall or partition assemblies that have a required 1-hour fire resistance rating or less. (2) Such structural elements do not serve as exit enclosures or protection for vertical openings.

8.2.3.4 The requirement of 8.2.3.3 shall not apply to health care occupancy structural elements supporting floor assemblies in accordance with the provisions of 18.1.6 and 19.1.6.

Recommendation: Add new section to 5000 as follows: 8.2.1.x The requirement of 8.2.1.x shall not apply to health care occupancy structural elements supporting floor assemblies in accordance with the provisions of 19.1.6.

8.2.2 Prescriptive Requirements . . . . . 8.2.2.4.5 Horizontal Separation

Not needed in 101, remain in 5000 only.

8.2.4 Analytical Methods. 8.2.4.1 Analytical methods utilized to determine the fire resistance of building assemblies shall comply with 8.2.4.2 or 8.2.4.3.

8.2.3 Analytical Methods. 8.2.3.1 General. Analytical methods utilized to determine the fire resistance rating of building assemblies shall comply with 8.2.3.2 or 8.2.3.3.

Revise 101 as follows: 8.2.4.1 Analytical methods utilized to determine the fire resistance rating of building assemblies shall comply with 8.2.4.2 or 8.2.4.3.

8.2.4.2* Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of structural elements or assemblies, they shall be permitted to be performed in accordance with ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection. Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies, the provisions of ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies, shall be permitted to be

8.2.3.2 Calculations. 8.2.3.2.1* Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of structural elements or assemblies, they shall be permitted to be performed in accordance with ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection. A.8.2.3.2.1 The intent of this provision is to permit the provisions of either ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection, or ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance

Revise 101 as follows: 8.2.4.2* Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of structural elements or assemblies, they shall be permitted to be performed in accordance with ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection. Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies, the provisions of ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance

of 119

used. A.8.2.4.2 The intent of this provision is to allow the provisions of either ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection, or ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Assemblies, for the calculation for fire resistance of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies.

of Concrete and Masonry, to be used for the calculation of fire resistance of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies. 8.2.3.2.2 Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies, the provisions of ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Code Requirements for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies, shall be permitted to be used.

of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies, shall be permitted to be used. 8.3.4.3 Where calculations are used to establish the fire resistance rating of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies, the provisions of ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Code Requirements for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies, shall be permitted to be used. A.8.2.4.2 The intent of this provision is to allow the provisions of either ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection, or ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Assemblies Code Requirements for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies, for the calculation for fire resistance of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies.

Revise 5000 as follows: A.8.2.3.2.1 The intent of this provision is to permit the provisions of either ASCE/SFPE 29, Standard Calculation Methods for Structural Fire Protection, or ACI 216.1/TMS 0216.1, Standard Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Code Requirements for Determining Fire Resistance of Concrete and Masonry Construction Assemblies, to be used for the calculation of fire resistance of concrete or masonry elements or assemblies

8.2.4.3 Except for the methods specified in 8.2.4.2, analytical methods used to calculate the fire resistance of building assemblies or structural elements shall be approved. Where an approved analytical method is utilized to establish the fire resistance rating of a structural element or building assembly, the calculations shall be based upon the fire exposure and acceptance criteria specified in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials.

8.2.3.3 Methods. 8.2.3.3.1 Except for the method specified in 8.2.3.2, analytical methods used to calculate the fire resistance rating of building assemblies or structural elements shall be approved. 8.2.3.3.2 Where an approved analytical method is utilized to establish the fire resistance rating of a structural element or building assembly, the calculations shall be based on the fire exposure and acceptance criteria specified in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials.

Revise 101 as follows: 8.2.4.3 Except for the methods specified in 8.2.4.2, analytical methods used to calculate the fire resistance of building assemblies or structural elements shall be approved. Where an approved analytical method is utilized to establish the fire resistance rating of a structural element or building assembly, the calculations shall be based upon the fire exposure and acceptance criteria specified in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. 8.2.4.4 Where an approved analytical method is utilized to establish the fire resistance rating of a structural element

of 119

or building assembly, the calculations shall be based upon the fire exposure and acceptance criteria specified in ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials.

8.3 High Challenge FireWalls and FireWalls. . . . . . . 8.4.5.2 Opening Protectives

Extracted material from 221 – most not within scope of 101. **Will need to update 5000 with work of 221 committee including adding extracts,

8.3 Fire Barriers. 8.3.1 General. 8.3.1.1 Fire barriers used to provide enclosure, subdivision, or protection under this Code shall be classified in accordance with one of the following fire resistance ratings: (1) 3-hour fire resistance rating (2) 2-hour fire resistance rating (3) 1-hour fire resistance rating (4)*1⁄2-hour fire resistance rating A.8.3.1.1(4) Walls in good condition with lath and plaster, or gypsum board of not less than 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) on each side, can be considered as providing a minimum 1⁄2-hour fire resistance rating. Additional information on archaic material assemblies can be found in Appendix I of NFPA 914, Code for Fire Protection of Historic Structures.

This section is nowhere in 5000 – do we need to add it somewhere?

8.3.1.2* Fire barriers shall comply with one of the following: (1) The fire barriers are continuous from outside wall to outside wall or from one fire barrier to another, or a combination thereof, including continuity through all concealed spaces, such as those found above a ceiling, including interstitial spaces. (2) The fire barriers are continuous from outside wall to outside wall or from one fire barrier to another, and from the floor to the bottom of the interstitial space, provided that the construction assembly forming the bottom of the interstitial space has a fire resistance rating not less than that of the fire barrier. A.8.3.1.2 To ensure that a fire barrier is continuous, it isnecessary to seal completely all openings where the fire barrierabuts other fire barriers, the exterior walls, the floorbelow, and the floor or ceiling above. In 8.3.1.2(2), the fireresistance rating of the bottom of the interstitial space is provided by that

Continuity requirements are extracted from 221 in 5000.

of 119

membrane alone. Ceilings of rated floor/ ceiling and roof/ceiling assemblies do not necessarily provide the required fire resistance. 8.3.1.3 Walls used as fire barriers shall comply with Chapter 7 of NFPA 221, Standard for High Challenge Fire Walls, Fire Walls, and Fire Barrier Walls. The NFPA 221 limitation on percentage width of openings shall not apply.

8.3.2 Walls. 8.3.2.1 The fire-resistive materials, assemblies, and systems used shall be limited to those permitted in this Code and this chapter.

8.3.2.1.1* Fire resistance–rated glazing tested in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, shall be permitted. A.8.3.2.1.1 Fire resistance–rated glazing complying with 8.3.2, where not installed in a door, is considered a wall, not an opening protective.

8.3.2.1.2 New fire resistance–rated glazing shall bear the identifier “W-XXX” where “XXX” is the fire resistance rating in minutes. Such identification shall be permanently affixed.

8.3.2.2 The construction materials and details for fire resistive assemblies and systems for walls described shall comply with all other provisions of this Code, except as modified herein

8.3.2.3 Interior walls and partitions of nonsymmetrical construction shall be evaluated from both directions and assigned a fire resistance rating based on the shorter duration obtained in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. When the wall is tested with the least fire-resistive side exposed to the furnace, the wall shall not be required to be subjected to tests from the opposite side.

8.4.6 Penetrations. 8.4.6.1 Penetrations in fire walls shall comply with Section 8.8. 8.4.6.2 Fire dampers for ducts or air-transfer openings used as opening protectives shall comply with 8.8.8.

8.4.7 Joints. Joints in fire walls shall comply with Section 8.9.

of 119

8.5 Exterior Walls—General. Exterior walls shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Chapters 7 and 37.

8.6 Horizontal Assemblies. . . . . 8.6.5 Continuity

Not within scope of 101.

8.3.3 Fire Doors and Windows. 8.3.3.1 Openings required to have a fire protection rating by Table 8.3.4.2 shall be protected by approved, listed, labeled fire door assemblies and fire window assemblies and their accompanying hardware, including all frames, closing devices, anchorage, and sills in accordance with the requirements of NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, except as otherwise specified in this Code.

8.7 Opening Protectives. 8.7.1 Fire Doors and Fire Windows. Where required doors and windows serve as opening protectives, they shall comply with the requirements of NFPA80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives. 8.7.2 Minimum Fire Protection Rating. Opening protectives shall have a minimum fire protection rating as specified in Table 8.7.2.

WILL ADDRESS OPENING PROTECTIVES AT MEETING

8.3.3.1.1 Fire resistance–rated glazing tested in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, shall be permitted in fire door assemblies and fire window assemblies where tested and installed in accordance with their listings.

8.2.2.4.2.1* Fire resistance–rated glazing tested in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, shall be permitted in fire door assemblies and fire window assemblies where tested and installed in accordance with their listings.

8.3.3.1.2 New fire resistance–rated glazing shall be marked in accordance with Table 8.3.3.12 and Table 8.3.4.2. Such marking shall be permanently affixed.

8.2.2.4.2.2 Fire resistance–rated glazing shall be marked in accordance with Table 8.7.2 and Table 8.7.14. 8.2.2.4.2.3 The identification described in 8.2.2.4.2.2 shall be permanently affixed

8.3.3.2* Fire protection ratings for products required to comply with 8.3.3 shall be as determined and reported by a nationally recognized testing agency in accordance with NFPA 252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; ANSI/UL 10B, Standard for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; ANSI/UL 10C, Standard for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies; or ANSI/UL 9, Standard for Fire Tests of Window Assemblies. A.8.3.3.2 Some door assemblies have been tested to meet the conditions of acceptance ofASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests

of 119

of Building Construction and Materials. Where such assemblies are used, the provisions of 8.3.2 should be applied instead of those of 8.3.3.2. 8.3.3.2.1 Fire protection–rated glazing shall be evaluated under positive pressure in accordance with NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies.

8.3.3.2.2 All products required to comply with 8.3.3.2 shall bear an approved label.

8.3.3.2.3* Labels on fire door assemblies shall be maintained in a legible condition. A.8.3.3.2.3 In existing installations, it is important to be able to determine the fire protection rating of the fire door. However, steel door frames that are well set in the wall might be judged as acceptable even if the frame label is not legible.

8.3.3.3 Unless otherwise specified, fire doors shall be selfclosing or automatic-closing in accordance with 7.2.1.8.

8.3.3.4 Floor fire door assemblies shall be tested in accordance with NFPA 288, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Floor Fire Door Assemblies Installed Horizontally in Fire Resistance–Rated Floor Systems, and shall achieve a fire resistance rating not less than the assembly being penetrated. Floor fire door assemblies shall be listed and labeled.

8.3.3.5 Fire protection–rated glazing shall be permitted in fire barriers having a required fire resistance rating of 1 hour or less and shall be of an approved type with the appropriate fire protection rating for the location in which the barriers are installed.

8.3.3.6* Glazing in fire window assemblies, other than in existing fire window installations of wired glass and other fire-rated glazing material, shall be of a design that has been tested to meet the conditions of acceptance of NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies, or ANSI/UL 9, Standard for Fire Tests of Window Assemblies. Fire protection– rated glazing in fire door assemblies, other than in existing fire-rated door assemblies, shall be of a design that has been tested to meet the conditions of acceptance of NFPA252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; ANSI/UL 10B, Standard for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies; or ANSI/UL 10C, Standard for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies.

of 119

A.8.3.3.6 Some window assemblies have been tested to meet the conditions of acceptance of ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and 8.3.3.7 Fire resistance–rated glazing complying with 8.3.2.1.1 shall be permitted in fire doors and fire window assemblies in accordance with their listings.

8.3.3.8 Glazing materials that have been tested, listed, and labeled to indicate the type of opening to be protected for fire protection purposes shall be permitted to be used in approved opening protectives in accordance with Table 8.3.4.2 and in sizes in accordance with NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives.

8.3.3.9 Existing installations of wired glass of 1⁄4 in. (6.3 mm) thickness and labeled for fire protection purposes shall be permitted to be used in approved opening protectives, provided that the maximum size specified by the listing is not exceeded.

8.3.3.10 Nonsymmetrical fire protection–rated glazing systems shall be tested with each face exposed to the furnace, and the assigned fire protection rating shall be that of the shortest duration obtained from the two tests conducted in compliance with NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies, or ANSI/UL 9, Standard for Fire Tests ofWindow Assemblies.

8.3.3.11 The total combined area of glazing in fire-rated window assemblies and fire-rated door assemblies used in fire barriers shall not exceed 25 percent of the area of the fire barrier that is common with any room, unless the installation meets one of the following criteria: (1) The installation is an existing fire window installation of wired glass and other fire-rated glazing materials in approved frames. (2) The fire protection–rated glazing material is installed in approved existing frames.

8.3.3.12 New fire protection-rated glazing shall be marked in accordance with Table 8.3.3.12 and Table 8.3.4.2, and such marking shall be permanently affixed.

8.3.4 Opening Protectives. 8.3.4.1 Every opening in a fire barrier shall be protected to limit the spread of

of 119

fire and restrict the movement of smoke from one side of the fire barrier to the other. 8.3.4.2* The fire protection rating for opening protectives in fire barriers, fire-rated smoke barriers, and fire-rated smoke partitions shall be in accordance with Table 8.3.4.2, except as otherwise permitted in 8.3.4.3 or 8.3.4.4. A.8.3.4.2 Longer ratings might be required where opening protectives are provided for property protection as well as life safety. NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, should be consulted for standard practice in the selection and installation of fire door assemblies and fire window assemblies. Table 8.3.4.2. A vision panel in a fire door is not a fire window, and, thus, it is not the intent of the“NP” notations in the “Fire Window Assemblies” column of Table 8.3.4.2 to prohibit vision panels in fire doors.

8.3.4.2.1 Fire-rated glazing assemblies marked as complying with hose stream requirements (H) shall be permitted in applications that do not require compliance with hose stream requirements. Fire-rated glazing assemblies marked as complying with temperature rise requirements (T) shall be permitted in applications that do not require compliance with temperature rise requirements. Fire-rated glazing assemblies marked with ratings that exceed the ratings required by this Code (XXX) shall be permitted.

8.3.4.3 Existing fire door assemblies having a minimum 3⁄4-hour fire protection rating shall be permitted to continue to be used in vertical openings and in exit enclosures in lieu of the minimum1-hour fire protection rating required by Table 8.3.4.2.

8.3.4.4 Where a 20-minute fire protection–rated door is required in existing buildings, an existing 13⁄4 in. (44 mm) solidbonded wood-core door, an existing steel-clad (tin-clad) wood door, or an existing solid-core steel door with positive latch and closer shall be permitted, unless otherwise specified by Chapters 11 through 43.

8.3.5 Penetrations. The provisions of 8.3.5 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect through-penetrations and membrane penetrations in fire walls, fire barrier walls, and fire resistance–rated horizontal assemblies. The provisions of 8.3.5 shall not apply to approved

of 119

existing materials and methods of construction used to protect existing through-penetrations and existing membrane penetrations in fire walls, fire barrier walls, or fire resistance– rated horizontal assemblies, unless otherwise required by Chapters 11 through 43. 8.3.5.1* Firestop Systems and Devices Required. Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, combustion vents and exhaust vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a wall, floor, or floor/ceiling assembly constructed as a fire barrier shall be protected by a firestop system or device. The firestop system or device shall be tested in accordance with ASTM E 814, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Through Penetration Fire Stops, or ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Fire Tests of Through-Penetration Firestops, at a minimum positive pressure differential of 0.01 in. water column (2.5 N/m2) between the exposed and the unexposed surface of the test assembly. A.8.3.5.1 ASTM E 2174, Standard Practice for On-Site Inspection of Installed Fire Stops, provides guidance for the inspection of through-penetration fire stop systems tested in accordance with ASTM E 814, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Through- Penetration Fire Stops, and ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Fire Tests of Through-Penetration Firestops.

8.3.5.1.1 The requirements of 8.3.5.1 shall not apply where otherwise permitted by any one of the following: (1) Where penetrations are tested and installed as part of an assembly tested and rated in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials (2) Where penetrations through floors are enclosed in a shaft enclosure designed as a fire barrier (3) Where concrete, grout, or mortar has been used to fill the annular spaces around cast-iron, copper, or steel piping that penetrates one or more concrete or masonry fire resistance–rated assemblies and both of the following criteria are also met: (a) The nominal diameter of each penetrating item shall not exceed 6 in.

of 119

(150 mm), and the opening size shall not exceed 1 ft2 (0.09 m2). (b) The thickness of the concrete, grout, or mortar shall be the full thickness of the assembly. (4) Where firestopping materials are used with the following penetrating items, the penetration is limited to one floor, and the firestopping material is capable of preventing the passage of flame and hot gases sufficient to ignite cotton waste when subjected to the time–temperature fire conditions of NFPA 251 under a minimum positive pressure differential of 0.01 in. water column (2.5 Pa) at the location of the penetration for the time period equivalent to the required fire resistance rating of the assembly penetrated: (a) Steel, ferrous, or copper cables (b) Cable or wire with steel jackets (c) Cast-iron, steel, or copper pipes (d) Steel conduit or tubing 8.3.5.1.2 The maximum nominal diameter of the penetrating item, as indicated in 8.3.5.1.1(4)(a) through (d), shall not be greater than 4 in. (100 mm) and shall not exceed an aggregate 100 in.2 (64,520 mm2) opening in any 100 ft2 (9.3 m2) of floor or wall area.

8.3.5.1.3 Firestop systems and devices shall have a minimum 1-hour F rating, but not less than the required fire resistance rating of the fire barrier penetrated.

8.3.5.1.4 Penetrations in fire-rated horizontal assemblies shall have a minimum 1-hour T rating, but not less than the fire resistance rating of the horizontal assembly. Rated penetrations shall not be required for either of the following: (1) Floor penetrations contained within the cavity of a wall assembly (2) Penetrations through floors or floor assemblies where the penetration is not in direct contact with combustible Material

8.3.5.2 Sleeves. Where the penetrating item uses a sleeve to penetrate the wall or floor, the sleeve shall be securely set in the wall or floor, and the space between the item and the sleeve shall be filled with a material that complies with 8.3.5.1.

8.3.5.3 Insulation and Coverings. Insulation and coverings for penetrating items shall not pass through the wall or floor unless the insulation or covering has been tested as part of the firestop system or device.

of 119

8.3.5.4 Transmission of Vibrations. Where designs take transmission of vibrations into consideration, any vibration isolation shall meet one of the following conditions: (1) It shall be provided on either side of the wall or floor.

(2) It shall be designed for the specific purpose.

8.3.5.5 Transitions. 8.3.5.5.1 Where piping penetrates a fire resistance–rated wall or floor assembly, combustible piping shall not connect to noncombustible piping within 36 in. (915 mm) of the firestop system or device without demonstration that the transition will not reduce the fire resistance rating, except in the case of previously approved installations.

8.3.5.5.2 Unshielded couplings shall not be used to connect noncombustible piping to combustible piping unless it can be demonstrated that the transition complies with the fireresistive requirements of 8.3.5.1.

8.3.5.6 Membrane Penetrations. 8.3.5.6.1 Membrane penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, combustion vents and exhaust vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a membrane of a wall, floor, or floor/ceiling assembly constructed as a fire barrier shall be protected by a firestop system or device and shall comply with 8.3.5.1 through 8.3.5.5.2.

8.3.5.6.2 The firestop system or device shall be tested in accordance with ASTM E 814, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Through Penetration Fire Stops, or ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Fire Tests of Through-Penetration Firestops, at a minimum positive pressure differential of 0.01 in. water column (2.5 N/m2) between the exposed and the unexposed surface of the test assembly, unless one of the following applies: (1) Membrane penetrations of ceilings that are not an integral part of a fire resistance–rated floor/ceiling or roof/ ceiling assembly shall be permitted. (2) Membrane penetrations of steel, ferrous, or copper conduits, and pipes, tubes, or combustion vents or exhaust vents, shall be permitted where the annular space is protected with an approved material and the aggregate area of the openings does not exceed 0.7 ft2(0.06 m2) in any 100 ft2 (9.3 m2) of ceiling area.

of 119

(3) Electrical outlet boxes and fittings shall be permitted, provided that such devices are listed for use in fire resistance–rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with their listing. (4) The annular space created by the membrane penetration of a fire sprinkler shall be permitted, provided that the space is covered by a metal escutcheon plate. 8.3.5.6.3 Where walls or partitions are required to have a minimum 1-hour fire resistance rating, recessed fixtures shall be installed in the wall or partition in such a manner that the required fire resistance is not reduced, unless one of the following is met: (1) Any steel electrical box not exceeding 0.1 ft2 (0.01m2) shall be permitted where the aggregate area of the openings provided for the boxes does not exceed 0.7 ft2 (0.06 m2) in any 100 ft2

(9.3 m2) of wall area, and, where outlet boxes are installed on opposite sides of the wall, the boxes shall be separated by one of the following: (a) Horizontal distance of not less than 24 in. (610 mm) (b) Horizontal distance of not less than the depth of the wall cavity, where the wall cavity is filled with cellulose loose-fill, rock wool, or slag wool insulation (c)*Solid fireblocking A.8.3.5.6.3(1)(c) Criteria associated with fireblocking can be found in 8.14.2 of NFPA 5000, Building Construction and Safety Code. (d) Other listed materials and methods (2) Membrane penetrations for any listed electrical outlet box made of any material shall be permitted, provided that such boxes have been tested for use in fire resistance–rated assemblies and are installed in accordance with the instructions included in the listing. (3) The annular space created by the membrane penetration of a fire sprinkler shall be permitted, provided that the space is covered by a metal escutcheon plate.

8.3.5.7 Openings for Air-Handling Ductwork. Openings in fire barriers for air-handling ductwork or air movement shall be protected in accordance with 9.2.1.

8.3.6 Joints. 8.3.6.1 The provisions of 8.3.6 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect joints in between and at the perimeter of fire barriers or, where fire barriers meet

of 119

other fire barriers, the floor or roof deck above, or the outside walls. The provisions of 8.3.6 shall not apply to approved existing materials and methods of construction used to protect existing joints in fire barriers, unless otherwise required by Chapters 11 through 43. 8.3.6.2 Joints made within or at the perimeter of fire barriers shall be protected with a joint system that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.3.6.3 Joints made within or between fire barriers shall be protected with a smoke-tight joint system that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.3.6.4 Testing of the joint system in a fire barrier shall be representative of the actual installation suitable for the required engineering demand without compromising the fire resistance rating of the assembly or the structural integrity of the assembly.

8.3.6.5* Joints made within or between fire resistance–rated assemblies shall be protected with a joint system that is designed and tested to prevent the spread of fire for a time period equal to that of the assembly in which the joint is located. Such materials, systems, or devices shall be tested as part of the assembly in accordance with the requirements of ASTM E 1966, Standard Test Method for Fire-Resistive Joint Systems, or ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems. A.8.3.6.5 On-site inspection of firestopping is important in maintaining the integrity of any vertical or horizontal fire barrier. Two standard practice documents were developed with the ASTM process to allow inspections of through-penetration firestops, joints, and perimeter fire barrier systems. ASTM E 2393, Standard Practice for On-Site Inspection of Installed Fire Resistive Joint Systems and Perimeter Fire Barriers, provides guidance for the inspection of fire-resistive joints and perimeter fire barrier joint systems tested in accordance with the requirements of ASTM E 1966, Standard Test Method for Fire-Resistive Joint Systems, or with ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems. ASTM E 2393 contains a standardized report format, which would lead to greater consistency for inspections.

8.3.6.6 All joint systems shall be tested at their maximum joint width in accordance with the requirements of

of 119

ASTM E 1966, Standard Test Method for Fire-Resistive Joint Systems, or ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems, under a minimum positive pressure differential of 0.01 in. water column (2.5 N/m2) for a time period equal to that of the assembly. All test specimens shall comply with the minimum height or length required by the standard. Wall assemblies shall be subjected to a hose stream test in accordance with ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, or ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. 8.3.6.7* Exterior Curtain Walls and Perimeter Joints. A.8.3.6.7 The provisions of 8.3.6.7 are intended to restrict the interior vertical passage of flame and hot gases from one floor to another at the location where the floor intersects the exterior wall assembly. The requirements of 8.3.6.7 mandate sealing the opening between a floor and an exterior wall assembly to provide the same fire performance as that required for the floor. ASTM E 2307, Standard Test Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Perimeter Fire Barrier Systems Using Intermediate-Scale, Multi-Story Test Apparatus, is a test method for evaluating the performance of perimeter fire barrier systems. Some laboratories have tested and listed perimeter fire barrier systems essentially in accordance with the ASTM method. The ASTM test method evaluates the performance of perimeter fire barrier systems in terms of heat transfer and fire spread inside a building through the floor/exterior wall intersection. The current test method does not assess the ability of perimeter fire barrier systems to prevent the spread of fire from story to story via the exterior. However, some laboratories have included additional temperature measurement criteria in their evaluation of the exterior wall, and also evaluate vision glass breakage, as additional pass/fail criteria in an attempt to at least partially address this leapfrog effect. 8.3.6.7.1 Voids created between the fire resistance–rated floor assembly and the exterior curtain wall shall be protected with a perimeter joint system that is designed and tested in accordance with ASTM E 2307, Standard Test Method for Fire Resistance of Perimeter Fire

of 119

Barriers Using Intermediate-Scale, Multistory Apparatus. 8.3.6.7.2 The perimeter joint system shall have an F rating equal to the fire resistance rating of the floor assembly.

8.4 Smoke Partitions. 8.4.1* General. Where required elsewhere in this Code, smoke partitions shall be provided to limit the transfer of smoke. A.8.4.1 Although a smoke partition is intended to limit the free movement of smoke, it is not intended to provide an area that would be free of smoke.

8.10 Smoke Partitions. 8.10.1* General. Where required elsewhere in this Code, smoke partitions shall be provided to limit the transfer of smoke. A.8.10.1 Although a smoke partition is intended to limit the free movement of smoke, it is not intended to provide an area that would be free of smoke.

8.4.2 Continuity. Smoke partitions shall comply with the following: (1) They shall extend from the floor to the underside of the floor or roof deck above, through any concealed spaces, such as those above suspended ceilings, and through interstitial structural and mechanical spaces. (2)*They shall be permitted to extend from the floor to the underside of a monolithic or suspended ceiling system where all of the following conditions are met: (a) The ceiling system forms a continuous membrane. (b) A smoke-tight joint is provided between the top of the smoke partition and the bottom of the suspended ceiling. (c) The space above the ceiling is not used as a plenum. A.8.4.2(2) An architectural, exposed, suspended-grid acoustical tile ceiling with penetrations for sprinklers, ducted HVAC supply and return-air diffusers, speakers, and recessed light fixtures is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke. (3) Smoke partitions enclosing hazardous areas shall be permitted to terminate at the underside of a monolithic or suspended ceiling system where all of the following conditions are met: (a) The ceiling system forms a continuous membrane. (b) A smoke-tight joint is provided between the top of the smoke partition and the bottom of the suspended ceiling. (c) Where the space above the ceiling is used as a plenum, return grilles from the hazardous area into the plenums are not permitted.

8.10.2 Requirements. Smoke partitions shall comply with one of the following: (1) Smoke partitions shall extend from the floor to the underside of the floor or roof deck above, through any concealed spaces, such as those above suspended ceilings, and through interstitial structural and mechanical spaces. (2)*Smoke partitions shall be permitted to terminate at the underside of a monolithic or suspended ceiling system where all of the following conditions are met: (a) The ceiling system forms a continuous membrane. (b) A smoke-tight joint is provided between the top of the smoke partition and the bottom of the suspended ceiling. (c) The space above the ceiling is not used as a plenum. A.8.10.2(2) An architectural, exposed, suspended-grid acoustical tile ceiling with penetrations for sprinklers, ducted HVAC supply and return air diffusers, speakers, and recessed light fixtures is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke. (3) Smoke partitions serving hazardous areas shall be permitted to terminate at the underside of a monolithic or suspended ceiling system where all of the following conditions are met: (a) The ceiling system forms a continuous membrane. (b) A smoke-tight joint is provided between the tip of the smoke partition and the bottom of the suspended ceiling. (c) The space above the ceiling is not used as a plenum, or, if it is, there is no return grille from the hazardous area into the plenums.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.10.2 Requirements Continuity. Smoke partitions shall comply with one of the following…

8.4.3 Opening Protectives. 8.4.3.1 Doors in smoke partitions shall comply with 8.4.3.2 through 8.4.3.5.

8.10.3 Opening Protectives. 8.10.3.1 Doors in smoke partitions shall comply with 8.10.3.2 through 8.10.3.5.

8.4.3.2 Doors shall comply with the provisions of 7.2.1.

8.10.3.2 Doors shall comply with the provisions of 11.2.1.

of 119

8.4.3.3 Doors shall not include louvers. 8.10.3.3 Doors shall not include louvers. 8.4.3.4* Door clearances shall be in accordance with NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives. A.8.4.3.4 Gasketing of doors should not be necessary, as the clearances in NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, effectively achieve resistance to the passage of smoke if the door is relatively tight-fitting.

8.10.3.4* Door clearances shall be in accordance with NFPA 80. A.8.10.3.4 Gasketing of doors should not be necessary, as the clearances in NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, effectively achieve resistance to the passage of smoke if the door is relatively tight-fitting.

8.4.3.5 Doors shall be self-closing or automatic-closing in accordance with 7.2.1.8.

8.10.3.5 Doors shall be self-closing or automatic-closing in accordance with 11.2.1.8.

8.10.3.6 Where a fire protection rating is specified for a smoke partition elsewhere in this Code, openings shall be protected as follows: (1) Door opening protectives shall have a fire protection rating of not less than 20 minutes where tested in accordance with NFPA 252 without hose stream test, unless otherwise specified by Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34. (2) Fire windows shall comply with Section 8.7. (3) Glazing used in sidelights and transoms adjacent to 20-minute doors in 1⁄2-hour fire resistance–rated smoke partitions shall be tested in accordance with 8.7.6 and shall attain a minimum 20-minute fire protection rating, including hose stream.

Do smoke partitions ever require a fire resistance rating in 101? If so, recommendation is to add 5000 language to 101.

8.4.4 Penetrations. The provisions of 8.4.4 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect through-penetrations and membrane penetrations of smoke partitions.

8.10.4 Penetrations. 8.10.4.1 The provisions of 8.10.4 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect through-penetrations and membrane penetrations of smoke partitions.

8.4.4.1 Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a smoke partition shall be protected by a system or material that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.10.4.2 Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a smoke partition shall be protected by a system or material that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.4.4.2 Where designs take transmission of vibrations into consideration, any vibration isolation shall meet one of the following conditions: (1) It shall be provided on either side of the smoke partition. (2) It shall be designed for the specific purpose.

8.10.4.3 Where designs take transmissions of vibration into consideration, any vibration isolation shall meet one of the following conditions: (1) It shall be made on either side of the smoke partitions. (2) It shall be designed for the specific purpose.

8.4.5 Joints. 8.4.5.1 The provisions of 8.4.5 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect joints in between and

of 119

at the perimeter of smoke partitions or, where smoke partitions meet other smoke partitions, the floor or roof deck above, or the outside walls. The provisions of 8.4.5 shall not apply to approved existing materials and methods of construction used to protect existing joints in smoke partitions, unless otherwise required by Chapters 11 through 43. 8.4.5.2 Joints made within or at the perimeter of smoke partitions shall be protected with a joint system that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.4.6 Air-Transfer Openings. 8.4.6.1 General. The provisions of 8.4.6 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect airtransfer openings in smoke partitions.

8.4.6.2* Smoke Dampers. Air-transfer openings in smoke partitions shall be provided with approved smoke dampers designed and tested in accordance with the requirements of ANSI/UL 555S, Standard for Smoke Dampers, to limit the transfer of smoke. A.8.4.6.2 An air-transfer opening, as defined in NFPA 90A, Standard for the Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems, is an opening designed to allow the movement of environmental air between two contiguous spaces.

8.4.6.3 Smoke Damper Ratings. Smoke damper leakage ratings shall be not less than Class II. Elevated temperature ratings shall be not less than 250°F (140°C).

8.4.6.4 Smoke Detectors. Dampers in air-transfer openings shall close upon detection of smoke by approved smoke detectors installed in accordance with NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm

and Signaling Code.

8.5 Smoke Barriers. 8.5.1* General. Where required by Chapters 11 through 43, smoke barriers shall be provided to subdivide building spaces for the purpose of restricting the movement of smoke. A.8.5.1 Wherever smoke barriers and doors therein require a degree of fire resistance, as specified by requirements in the various occupancy chapters (Chapters 12 through 42), the construction should be a fire barrier that has been specified to limit the spread of fire and restrict the movement of smoke.

8.11 Smoke Barriers. 8.11.1* General. Where required by Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34, smoke barriers shall be provided to subdivide building spaces for the purpose of restricting the movement of smoke. A.8.11.1 Although a smoke barrier is intended to restrict the movement of smoke, it might not result in tenability throughout the adjacent smoke compartment. The adjacent smoke compartment should be safer than the area on the fire side, thus allowing

of 119

Although a smoke barrier is intended to restrict the movement of smoke, it might not result in tenability throughout the adjacent smoke compartment. The adjacent smoke compartment should be safer than the area on the fire side, thus allowing building occupants to move to that area. Eventually, evacuation from the adjacent smoke compartment might be required.

building occupants to move to that area. Eventually, evacuation from the adjacent smoke compartment might be required. Wherever smoke barriers and doors therein require a degree of fire protection, as specified by requirements in the various occupancy chapters (Chapters 16 through 30), the construction should be a fire barrier that has been specified to limit the spread of fire and restrict the movement of smoke.

8.5.2* Continuity. A.8.5.2 To ensure that a smoke barrier is continuous, it is necessary to seal completely all openings where the smoke barrier abuts other smoke barriers, fire barriers, exterior walls, the floor below, and the floor or ceiling above. It is not the intent to prohibit a smoke barrier from stopping at a fire barrier if the fire barrier meets the requirements of a smoke barrier (i.e., the fire barrier is a combination smoke barrier/fire barrier). 8.5.2.1 Smoke barriers required by this Code shall be continuous from an outside wall to an outside wall, from a floor to a floor, or from a smoke barrier to a smoke barrier, or by use of a combination thereof.

8.11.2* Continuity. A.8.11.2 To ensure that a smoke barrier is continuous, it is necessary to seal completely all openings where the smoke barrier abuts other smoke barriers, fire barriers, exterior walls, the floor below, and the floor or ceiling above. It is not the intent to prohibit a smoke barrier from stopping at a fire barrier if the fire barrier meets the requirements of a smoke barrier (that is, the fire barrier is a combination smoke barrier/fire barrier). 8.11.2.1 Smoke barriers required by this Code shall be continuous from an outside wall to an outside wall, from a floor to a floor, or from a smoke barrier to a smoke barrier, or a combination thereof.

8.5.2.2 Smoke barriers shall be continuous through all concealed spaces, such as those found above a ceiling, including interstitial spaces.

8.11.2.2 Smoke barriers required by this Code shall be continuous through all concealed spaces, such as those found above a ceiling, including interstitial spaces.

Recommendation: Revise 101 as follows: 8.5.2.2 Smoke barriers required by this Code shall be continuous through all concealed spaces, such as those found above a ceiling, including interstitial spaces.

8.5.2.3 A smoke barrier required for an occupied space below an interstitial space shall not be required to extend through the interstitial space, provided that the construction assembly forming the bottom of the interstitial space provides resistance to the passage of smoke equal to that provided by the smoke barrier.

8.11.2.3 A smoke barrier required for an occupied space below an interstitial space shall not be required to extend through the interstitial space, provided that the construction assembly forming the bottom of the interstitial space provides resistance to the passage of smoke equal to that provided by the smoke barrier.

8.5.3 Fire Barrier Used as Smoke Barrier. A fire barrier shall be permitted to be used as a smoke barrier, provided that it meets the requirements of Section 8.5.

8.11.3 Fire Barrier Used as Smoke Barrier. A fire barrier shall be permitted to be used as a smoke barrier, provided that it meets the requirements of Section 8.11.

8.5.4 Opening Protectives. 8.5.4.1* Doors in smoke barriers shall close the opening, leaving only the minimum clearance necessary for proper operation, and shall be without louvers or grilles. The clearance under the bottom of a new door shall be a maximum of 3⁄4 in. (19 mm). A.8.5.4.1 For additional information on the installation of smoke control door

8.11.4 Opening Protectives. 8.11.4.1 Where required by Chapters 15 through 34, doors in smoke barriers shall be installed in accordance with NFPA105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives.

of 119

assemblies, see NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives. 8.5.4.2 Where required by Chapters 11 through 43, doors in smoke barriers that are required to be smoke leakage–rated shall comply with the requirements of 8.2.2.4.

8.11.4.2 Where a fire protection rating is specified for a smoke barrier elsewhere in this Code, openings shall be protected as follows: (1) Door opening protectives shall have a fire protection rating of not less than 20 minutes where tested in accordance with NFPA 252 without the hose stream test, unless otherwise specified by Chapters 15 through 34. (2) Fire window assemblies shall comply with 8.7.10. (3) Glazing used in sidelights and transoms adjacent to 20-minute doors in 1-hour fire resistance–rated smoke barriers shall be tested in accordance with 8.7.6 and shall attain a minimum 45-minute fire protection rating, including hose stream.

8.5.4.3 Latching hardware shall be required on doors in smoke barriers, unless specifically exempted by Chapters 11 through 43.

8.11.4.3 Latching hardware shall be required on doors in smoke barriers unless specifically exempted in Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34.

8.5.4.4* Doors in smoke barriers shall be self-closing or automatic-closing in accordance with 7.2.1.8 and shall comply with the provisions of 7.2.1. A.8.5.4.4 Where, because of operational necessity, it is desired to have smoke barrier doors that are usually open, such doors should be provided with hold-open devices that are activated to close the doors by means of the operation of smoke detectors and other alarm functions.

8.11.4.4* Doors in smoke barriers, shall be self-closing or automatic-closing in accordance with 11.2.1.8 and shall comply with the provisions of 11.2.1. A.8.11.4.4 Where, because of operational necessity, it is desired to have smoke barrier doors that are usually open, such doors should be provided with hold-open devices that are activated to close the doors by means of the operation of smoke detectors and other alarm functions.

8.5.4.5 Fire window assemblies shall comply with 8.3.3.

8.11.4.5* Doors in smoke barriers shall close the opening, leaving only the minimum clearance necessary for proper operation, and shall be without louvers or grills. The clearance under the bottom of the door shall be a maximum 3⁄4 in (19 mm).

8.5.5 Ducts and Air-Transfer Openings. 8.5.5.1 General. The provisions of 8.5.5 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect ducts and air-transfer openings in smoke barriers.

8.11.6 Ducts and Air-Transfer Openings. 8.11.6.1 General. The provisions of 8.11.6 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect ducts and air-transfer openings in smoke barriers.

8.5.5.2 Smoke Dampers. Where a smoke barrier is penetrated by a duct or air-transfer opening, a

8.11.6.2 Smoke Barriers. 8.11.6.2.1 Where a smoke barrier is penetrated by a duct or air-transfer

Recommendation: Revise 101 as follows:

of 119

smoke damper designed and tested in accordance with the requirements of ANSI/UL 555S, Standard for Smoke Dampers, shall be installed. Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, a combination fire/smoke damper designed and tested in accordance with the requirements ofANSI/UL 555, Standard for Fire Dampers, andANSI/UL 555S, Standard for Smoke Dampers, shall be installed.

opening, a smoke damper designed and tested in accordance with the requirements of UL 555S shall be installed. 8.11.6.2.2 Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, a combination fire/smoke damper designed and tested in accordance with the requirements of UL 555 and UL 555S shall be installed.

8.5.5.2 Smoke Dampers. 8.5.5.2.1 Where a smoke barrier is penetrated by a duct or air-transfer opening, a smoke damper designed and tested in accordance with the requirements of ANSI/UL 555S, Standard for Smoke Dampers, shall be installed. 8.5.5.2.2 Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, a combination fire/smoke damper designed and tested in accordance with the requirements ofANSI/UL 555, Standard for Fire Dampers, andANSI/UL 555S, Standard for Smoke Dampers, shall be installed.

Recommendation: Revise 101 as follows: 8.11.6.2 Smoke Barriers Dampers.

8.5.5.3 Smoke Damper Exemptions. Smoke dampers shall not be required under any of the following conditions: (1) Where specifically exempted by provisions in Chapters 11 through 43 (2) Where ducts or air-transfer openings are part of an engineered smoke control system (3) Where the air in ducts continues to move and the airhandling system installed is arranged to prevent recirculation of exhaust or return air under fire emergency conditions (4) Where the air inlet or outlet openings in ducts are limited to a single smoke compartment (5) Where ducts penetrate floors that serve as smoke barriers (6) Where ducts penetrate smoke barriers forming a communicating space separation in accordance with 8.6.6(4)(a).

8.11.6.3 Smoke Damper Exceptions. Smoke dampers shall not be required under any of the following conditions: (1) Where specifically exempted by provisions in Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34 (2) Where ducts or air-transfer openings are part of an engineered smoke control system and the smoke damper will interfere with the operation of a smoke control system (3) Where the air in ducts continues to move and the airhandling system installed is arranged to prevent recirculation of exhaust or return air under fire emergency conditions (4) Where the air inlet or outlet openings in ducts are limited to a single smoke compartment (5) Where ducts penetrate floors that serve as smoke barriers (6) Where ducts penetrate smoke barriers forming a communicating space separation in accordance with 8.12.2(4)(a)

Recommendation: Revise 101 as follows: (2) Where ducts or air-transfer openings are part of an engineered smoke control system and the smoke damper will interfere with the operation of a smoke control sytem.

8.5.5.4 Installation, Testing, and Maintenance. 8.5.5.4.1 Air-conditioning, heating, ventilating ductwork, and related equipment, including smoke dampers and combination fire and smoke dampers, shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 90A, Standard for the Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems, and NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives.

8.11.6.4 Installation. 8.11.6.4.1 Air-conditioning, heating, ventilating ductwork, and related equipment, including smoke dampers and combination fire and smoke dampers, shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 90A, NFPA 90B, or NFPA 105 as specified in Chapter 50, where applicable.

Recommendation: Make 101 and 5000 consistent (need committee weigh‐in)

8.5.5.4.2 Smoke dampers and combination fire and smoke dampers required by this Code shall be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance

Recommendation: Add text to 5000 as follows: 8.11.6.4.2 Smoke dampers and combination fire and smoke dampers

of 119

with NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives.

required by this Code shall be inspected, tested, and maintained in accordance with NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives.

8.5.5.4.3 The equipment specified in 8.5.5.4.1 shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of 8.5.5, the manufacturer’s installation instructions, and the equipment listing.

8.11.6.4.2 The equipment specified in 8.11.6.4.1 shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of 8.11.6.4, the manufacturer’s installation instructions, its listing, and the mechanical code as specified in Chapter 50.

8.5.5.5 Access and Identification. Access to the dampers shall be provided for inspection, testing, and maintenance. The access openings shall not reduce the fire resistance rating of the fire barrier assembly.

8.11.6.5 Access and Identification. 8.11.6.5.1 Access. Fire and smoke dampers shall be provided with an approved means of access, as follows: (1) The means of access shall be large enough to allow inspection and maintenance of the damper and its operating parts. (2) The access shall not affect the integrity of fire resistance–rated assemblies. (3) The access openings shall not reduce the fire resistance rating of the assembly. (4) Access doors in ducts shall be tight-fitting and suitable for the required duct construction. (5) Access and maintenance shall comply with the requirements of the mechanical code.

Recommendation: Revise 101 to read as follows: 8.5.5.5 Access and Identification. Access to the dampers shall be provided for inspection, testing, and maintenance. The access openings shall not reduce the fire resistance rating of the fire barrier assembly. 8.5.5.5.1 Access. Smoke and combination fire and smoke dampers shall be provided with an approved means of access, as follows: (1) The means of access shall be large enough to allow inspection and maintenance of the damper and its operating parts. (2) The access shall not affect the integrity of fire resistance–rated assemblies. (3) The access openings shall not reduce the fire resistance rating of the assembly. (4) Access doors in ducts shall be tight-fitting and suitable for the required duct construction. 8.5.5.5.2 (Do we want to add identification to 101?)

8.5.5.6 Smoke Damper Ratings. Smoke damper leakage ratings shall be not less than Class II. Elevated temperature ratings shall be not less than 250°F (140°C).

8.11.6.6 Smoke Damper Ratings. 8.11.6.6.1 Smoke damper leakage ratings shall be not less than Class II. 8.11.6.6.2 Elevated temperature ratings shall be not less than 250°F (140°C).

8.5.5.7 Smoke Detectors. 8.5.5.7.1 Required smoke dampers in ducts penetrating smoke barriers shall close upon detection of smoke by approved smoke detectors in accordance with NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code, unless one of the following conditions exists: (1) The ducts penetrate smoke barriers above the smoke barrier doors, and the door release detector actuates the damper. (2) Approved smoke detector installations are located within the ducts in existing installations.

8.11.6.7 Smoke Detectors. 8.11.6.7.1 Required smoke dampers in ducts penetrating smoke barriers shall close upon detection of smoke by means of approved smoke detectors in accordance with NFPA 72, unless ducts penetrate smoke barriers above the smoke barrier doors and the door release detector actuates the damper.

of 119

8.5.5.7.2 Where a duct is provided on one side of the smoke barrier, the smoke detectors on the duct side shall be in accordance with 8.5.5.7.1.

8.11.6.7.3 Where a duct is provided on one side of the smoke barrier, the smoke detectors on the duct side shall be in accordance with 8.11.6.7.1.

8.5.5.7.3 Required smoke dampers in air-transfer openings shall close upon detection of smoke by approved smoke detectors in accordance with NFPA72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code.

8.11.6.7.2 Required smoke dampers in air-transfer openings shall close upon detection of smoke by means of approved smoke detectors in accordance with NFPA 72.

8.5.6 Penetrations. 8.5.6.1 The provisions of 8.5.6 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect through-penetrations and membrane penetrations of smoke barriers.

8.11.5 Penetrations. 8.11.5.1 The provisions of 8.11.5 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect through-penetrations and membrane penetrations of smoke barriers.

8.5.6.2 Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a wall, floor, or floor/ceiling assembly constructed as a smoke barrier, or through the ceiling membrane of the roof/ceiling of a smoke barrier assembly, shall be protected by a system or material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

8.11.5.2 Penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, vents, wires, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems that pass through a wall, floor, or floor/ceiling assembly constructed as a smoke barrier, or through the ceiling membrane of a roof/ceiling of a smoke barrier, shall be protected by a listed system or a material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

8.5.6.3 Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, the penetrations shall be protected in accordance with the requirements of 8.3.5 to limit the spread of fire for a time period equal to the fire resistance rating of the assembly and 8.5.6 to restrict the transfer of smoke, unless the requirements of 8.5.6.4 are met.

8.11.5.3 Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, the penetrations shall be protected in accordance with the requirements of Section 8.8 to limit the spread of fire for a time period equal to the fire resistance rating of the assembly, as required by 8.11.5, to restrict the transfer of smoke.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.11.5.3 Where a smoke barrier is also constructed as a fire barrier, the penetrations shall be protected in accordance with the requirements of Section 8.8 to limit the spread of fire for a time period equal to the fire resistance rating of the assembly, as required by 8.11.5, to restrict the transfer of smoke, unless the requirements of 8.11.5.4 are met.

8.5.6.4 Where sprinklers penetrate a single membrane of a fire resistance–rated assembly in buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, noncombustible escutcheon plates shall be permitted, provided that the space around each sprinkler penetration does not exceed 1⁄2

in. (13 mm), measured between the edge of the membrane and the sprinkler.

8.11.5.4 Where sprinklers penetrate a single membrane of a fire resistancerated assembly in buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, noncombustible escutcheon plates shall be permitted, provided that the space around each sprinkler penetration does not exceed 1⁄2 in. (13 mm), measured between the edge of the membrane and the sprinkler.

8.5.6.5 Where the penetrating item uses a sleeve to penetrate the smoke barrier, the sleeve shall be securely set in the smoke barrier, and the space between the item and the sleeve shall be filled with a material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

8.11.5.5 Where the penetration item uses a sleeve to penetrate the smoke barrier, the sleeve shall be securely set in the smoke barrier, and the space between the item and the sleeve shall be filled with a listed system or a material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

Recommendation: Revise 101 as follows: 8.5.6.5 Where the penetrating item uses a sleeve to penetrate the smoke barrier, the sleeve shall be securely set in the smoke barrier, and the space between the item and the sleeve shall be filled with a listed system or a material capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

of 119

8.5.6.6 Where designs take transmission of vibrations into consideration, any vibration isolation shall meet one of the following conditions: (1) It shall be provided on either side of the smoke barrier. (2) It shall be designed for the specific purpose.

8.11.5.6 Where designs take transmission of vibrations into consideration, any vibration isolation shall meet one of the following conditions: (1) It shall be made on either side of the fire barrier. (2) It shall be designed for the specific purpose.

8.5.7 Joints. 8.5.7.1 The provisions of 8.5.7 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect joints in between and at the perimeter of smoke barriers or, where smoke barriers meet other smoke barriers, the floor or roof deck above, or the outside walls. The provisions of 8.5.7 shall not apply to approved existing materials and methods of construction used to protect existing joints in smoke barriers, unless otherwise required by Chapters 11 through 43.

8.11.7 Joints. 8.11.7.1 The provisions of 8.11.7 shall govern the materials and methods of construction used to protect joints in between and at the perimeter of smoke barriers where smoke barriers meet other smoke barriers, the floor or roof deck above, or the outside walls.

8.5.7.2 Joints made within or at the perimeter of smoke barriers shall be protected with a joint system that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.11.7.2 Joints made within or at the perimeter of smoke barriers shall be protected with a listed joint system or a material that is capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

8.5.7.3 Joints made within or between smoke barriers shall be protected with a smoke-tight joint system that is capable of limiting the transfer of smoke.

8.11.7.3 Joints made within or between smoke barriers shall be protected with a listed joint system or a material that is capable of restricting the transfer of smoke.

8.5.7.4 Smoke barriers that are also constructed as fire barriers shall be protected with a joint system that is designed and tested to resist the spread of fire for a time period equal to the required fire resistance rating of the assembly and restrict the transfer of smoke.

8.11.7.4 Smoke barriers that are constructed as fire barriers shall be protected with a listed joint system that is designed and tested to resist the spread of fire for a time period equal to the required fire resistance rating of the assembly in accordance with Section 8.9 and to restrict the transfer of smoke.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.11.7.4 Smoke barriers that are constructed as fire barriers shall be protected with a listed joint system that is designed and tested to resist the spread of fire for a time period equal to the required fire resistance rating of the assembly in accordance with Section 8.9 and to restrict the transfer of smoke.

8.5.7.5 Testing of the joint system in a smoke barrier that also serves as fire barrier shall be representative of the actual installation suitable for the required engineering demand without compromising the fire resistance rating of the assembly or the structural integrity of the assembly.

Recommendation: Add language to 5000 as follows: 8.5.7.5 Testing of the joint system in a smoke barrier that also serves as fire barrier shall be representative of the actual installation suitable for the required engineering demand without compromising the fire resistance rating of the assembly or the structural integrity of the assembly. (Note: similar language in 5000, 8.9.2.2.1, OK?)

8.6 Vertical Openings. 8.6.1 Floor Smoke Barriers. Every floor that separates stories in a building shall meet the following criteria: (1) It shall be constructed as a smoke

8.12.1 General. 8.12.1.1 Every floor that separates stories in a building shall be constructed as a smoke barrier and shall meet one of the following:

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.12.1.1 Every floor that separates stories in a building shall be constructed

of 119

barrier in accordance with Section 8.5. (2) It shall be permitted to have openings as described by 8.6.6, 8.6.7, 8.6.8, 8.6.9, or Chapters 11 through 43.

(1) Openings shall restrict the passage of smoke as specified by 8.11.4. (2) The requirement of 8.12.1.1(1) shall not apply where otherwise specified by 8.12.2, 8.12.3, 8.12.4, 8.12.5 or Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34.

as a smoke barrier and shall meet one of the following: shall meet the following criteria: (1) Openings shall restrict the passage of smoke as specified by 8.11.4. (1) It shall be constructed as a smoke barrier in accordance with Section 8.11. (2) The requirement of 8.12.1.1(1) shall not apply where otherwise specified It shall be permitted to have openings as described by 8.12.2, 8.12.3, 8.12.4, 8.12.5 or Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34.

8.6.2* Continuity. Openings through floors shall be enclosed with fire barrier walls, shall be continuous from floor to floor, or floor to roof, and shall be protected as appropriate for the fire resistance rating of the barrier. A.8.6.2 Openings might include items such as stairways; hoistways for elevators, dumbwaiters, and inclined and vertical conveyors; shaftways used for light, ventilation, or building services; or expansion joints and seismic joints used to allow structural movements.

8.12.1.2* Openings through floors shall be enclosed with fire barrier walls, shall be continuous from floor to floor or floor to roof, and shall be protected as appropriate for the fire resistance rating of the barrier. A.8.12.1.2 Openings might include items such as stairways, hoistways for elevators, dumbwaiters, and inclined and vertical conveyors; and shaftways used for light, ventilation, or building services.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: A.8.12.1.2 Openings might include items such as stairways, hoistways for elevators, dumbwaiters, and inclined and vertical conveyors; and shaftways used for light, ventilation, or building services. A.8.12.1.2 Openings might include items such as stairways; hoistways for elevators, dumbwaiters, and inclined and vertical conveyors; shaftways used for light, ventilation, or building services; or expansion joints and seismic joints used to allow structural movements.

8.6.3 Continuity Exemptions. The requirements of 8.6.2 shall not apply where otherwise permitted by any of the following: (1) Where penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, combustion vents and exhaust vents, wires, neumatic tube conveyors, and similar items to accommodate electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and communications systems are protected in accordance with 8.3.5.1 and 8.5.6 (2) Where specified by 8.6.6, 8.6.7, 8.6.8, 8.6.9.1, 8.6.9.2, 8.6.9.3, or Chapters 11 through 43 (3) Where escalators and moving walks are protected in accordance with 8.6.9.6 or 8.6.9.7 (4) Where expansion or seismic joints are designed to prevent the penetration of fire and are shown to have a fire resistance rating of not less than that required for the floor when tested in accordance with ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems (5) Where existing mail chutes meet one of the following criteria: (a) The cross-sectional area does not exceed 0.1 ft2 (0.01 m2). (b) The building is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler

8.12.1.3 The requirements of 8.12.1.2 shall not apply where otherwise specified by any of the following: (1) Enclosure shall not be required where otherwise specified by 8.12.2, 8.12.3, 8.12.4, 8.12.5, or Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34. (2)*Enclosure shall not be required for expansion or seismic joints designed to prevent the penetration of fire and shown to have a fire resistance rating of not less than the required fire resistance rating of the floor when tested in accordance with ANSI/UL 2079. (3) Enclosure shall not be required for penetrations for cables, cable trays, conduits, pipes, tubes, combustion vents and exhaust vents, wires, or pneumatic tube conveyors protected in accordance with 8.8.7 and 8.11.5.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.12.1.3 The requirements of 8.12.1.2 shall not apply where otherwise specified by any of the following: (4) Where escalators and moving walks are protected in accordance with 8.12.6.2

of 119

system in accordance with Section 9.7. 8.6.4 Shafts. Shafts that do not extend to the bottom or the top of the building or structure shall comply with either 8.6.4.1, 8.6.4.2, or 8.6.4.3.

8.12.1.4 Shafts that do not extend to the bottom or the top of the building or structure shall comply with either 8.12.1.4.1, 8.12.1.4.2, or 8.12.1.4.3.

8.6.4.1 Shafts shall be enclosed at the lowest or highest level of the shaft, respectively, with construction in accordance with 8.6.5.

8.12.1.4.1 Shafts shall be enclosed at the lowest or highest level of the shaft, respectively, with construction in accordance with 8.12.1.5 and Section 8.7.

8.6.4.2 Shafts shall be permitted to terminate in a room or space having a use related to the purpose of the shaft, provided that the room or space is separated from the remainder of the building by construction having a fire resistance rating and opening protectives in accordance with 8.6.5 and 8.3.4.

8.12.1.4.2 Shafts shall be permitted to terminate in a room or space having a use related to the purpose of the shaft, provided that the room or space is separated from the remainder of the building by construction having a fire resistance rating and opening protectives in accordance with 8.12.1.5 and Section 8.7.

8.6.4.3 Shafts that do not extend to the bottom or top of the building or structure shall be permitted to be protected by approved fire dampers installed in accordance with their listing at the lowest or highest floor level, as applicable, within the shaft enclosure.

8.12.1.4.3 Shafts that do not extend to the bottom or top of the building or structure shall be permitted to be protected by approved fire dampers installed in accordance with their listing at the lowest or highest floor level, as applicable, within the shaft enclosure.

8.6.5* Required Fire Resistance Rating. The minimum fire resistance rating for the enclosure of floor openings shall be as follows (see 7.1.3.2.1 for enclosure of exits): (1) Enclosures connecting four or more stories in new construction— 2-hour fire barriers (2) Other enclosures in new construction—1-hour fire barriers (3) Existing enclosures in existing buildings — 1⁄2-hour fire barriers (4) Enclosures for lodging and rooming houses — as specified in Chapter 26 (5) Enclosures for new hotels — as specified in Chapter 28 (6) Enclosures for new apartment buildings—as specified in Chapter 30 A.8.6.5 The application of the 2-hour rule in buildings not divided into stories is permitted to be based on the number of levels of platforms or walkways served by the stairs.

8.12.1.5* The fire resistance rating for the enclosure of floor openings shall be not less than as follows: (1) Enclosures connecting four stories or more shall be 2-hour fire barriers. (2) Enclosures connecting three stories or less shall be 1-hour fire barriers, but not less than the required fire resistance rating of the floor penetrated, and shall not be required to exceed 2 hours. (3) Enclosures shall be as specified in Chapter 23 for lodging and rooming houses, in Chapter 24 for hotels, and in Chapter 25 for apartment buildings. (4) Enclosures for exits shall be in accordance with 11.1.3.2. A.8.12.1.5 The application of the 2-hour rule in buildings not divided into stories is permitted to be based on the number of levels of platforms or walkways served by the stairs.

8.6.6 Communicating Space. Unless prohibited by Chapters 11 through 43, unenclosed floor openings forming a communicating space between floor levels shall be permitted, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) The communicating space does not connect more than three contiguous stories. (2) The lowest or next-to-lowest story within the communicating space is a street floor.

8.12.2 Communicating Space. Unless prohibited by Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34, unenclosed floor openings forming a communicating space between floor levels shall be permitted, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) The communicating space does not connect more than three contiguous stories. (2) The lowest or next to lowest story within the communicating space is a

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: (4) The communicating space is separated from the remainder of the building by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fire resistance rating, unless one of the following is met: (a) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA13 or NFPA 13R Section 55.3, a smoke barrier in

of 119

(3) The entire floor area of the communicating space is open and unobstructed, such that a fire in any part of the space will be readily obvious to the occupants of the space prior to the time it becomes an occupant hazard. (4) The communicating space is separated from the remainder of the building by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fire resistance rating, unless one of the following is met: (a) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7, a smoke barrier in accordance with Section 8.5 shall be permitted to serve as the separation required by 8.6.6(4). (b) The requirement of 8.6.6(4) shall not apply to fully sprinklered residential housing units of detention and correctional occupancies in accordance with 22.3.1(2) and 23.3.1.1(2). (5) The communicating space has ordinary hazard contents protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7 or has only low hazard contents. (See 6.2.2.) (6) Egress capacity is sufficient to allow all the occupants of all levels within the communicating space to simultaneously egress the communicating space by considering it as a single floor area in determining the required egress capacity. (7)*Each occupant within the communicating space has access to not less than one exit without having to traverse another story within the communicating space. A.8.6.6(7) Given that a mezzanine meeting the maximum one-third area criterion of 8.6.10.2.1 is not considered a story, it is permitted, therefore, to have 100 percent of its exit access within the communicating area run back through the story below. (8) Each occupant not in the communicating space has access to not less than one exit without having to enter the communicating space.

street floor. (3) The entire floor area of the communicating space is open and unobstructed, such that a fire in any part of the space will be readily obvious to the occupants of the space prior to the time it becomes an occupant hazard. (4) The communicating space is separated from the remainder of the building by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fire resistance rating, unless one of the following is met: (a) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA13 or NFPA 13R, a smoke barrier in accordance with Section 8.11 shall be permitted to serve as the separation required by 8.12.2(4). (b) The requirement of 8.12.2(4) shall not apply to fully sprinklered residential housing units of detention and correctional occupancies in accordance with 21.3.1(2). (5) The communicating space has ordinary hazard contents protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA13 or NFPA13R or has only low hazard contents. (See Chapter 6.) (6) Egress capacity is sufficient to provide for all the occupants of all levels within the communicating space to simultaneously egress the communicating space by considering it as single floor area in determining the required egress capacity. (7)*Each occupant within the communicating space has access to not less than one exit without having to traverse another story within the communicating space. A.8.12.2(7) Given that a mezzanine meeting the maximum one-third area criterion of Section 8.13 is not considered a story, it is therefore permitted to have 100 percent of its exit access within the communicating area run back through the story below. (8) Each occupant not in the communicating space has access to not less than one exit without having to enter the communicating space.

accordance with Section 8.11 shall be permitted to serve as the separation required by 8.12.2(4). (5) The communicating space has ordinary hazard contents protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA13 or NFPA13R Section 55.3 or has only low hazard contents. (See Chapter 6.)

8.6.7* Atriums. Unless prohibited by Chapters 11 through 43, an atrium shall be permitted, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) The atrium is separated from the adjacent spaces by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fire resistance rating, with opening protectives for corridor walls, unless one of the following is met: (a) The requirement of 8.6.7(1) shall not

8.12.3* Atrium. Unless prohibited by Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34, an atrium shall be permitted, provided that the following conditions are met: (1) The atrium is separated from the adjacent spaces by fire barriers with not less than a 1-hour fire resistance rating with opening protectives for corridor walls, unless one of the following

Recommendation: Revise text in 101 as follows: 8.6.7* Atriums. Unless prohibited by Chapters 11 through 43, an atrium shall be permitted, provided that all of the following conditions are met:

Revise text in 5000 as follows: 8.12.3* Atrium. Unless prohibited by

of 119

apply to existing, previously approved atriums. (b) Any number of levels of the building shall be permitted to open directly to the atrium without enclosure, based on the results of the engineering analysis required in 8.6.7(5). (c)*Glass walls and inoperable windows shall be permitted in lieu of the fire barriers where all the following are met: i. Automatic sprinklers are spaced along both sides of the glass wall and the inoperable windows at intervals not to exceed 6 ft (1830 mm). ii. The automatic sprinklers specified in 8.6.7(1)(c)(i) are located at a distance from the glass wall not to exceed 12 in. (305 mm) and arranged so that the entire surface of the glass is wet upon operation of the sprinklers. iii. The glass wall is of tempered, wired, or laminated glass held in place by a gasket system that allows the glass framing system to deflect without breaking (loading) the glass before the sprinklers operate. iv. The automatic sprinklers required by 8.6.7(1)(c)(i) are not required on the atrium side of the glass wall and the inoperable window where there is no walkway or other floor area on the atrium side above the main floor level. v. Doors in the glass walls are of glass or other material that resists the passage of smoke. vi. Doors in the glass walls are self-closing or automatic-closing upon detection of smoke. vii. The glass is continuous vertically, without horizontal mullions, window treatments, or other obstructions that would interfere with the wetting of the entire glass surface. A.8.6.7(1)(c) The intent of the requirement for closely spaced sprinklers is to wet the atrium glass wall to ensure that the surface of the glass is wet upon operation of the sprinklers, with a maximum spacing of sprinklers of 6 ft (1830 mm) on centers. Provided that it can be shown that the glass can be wet by the sprinklers using a given discharge rate, and that the 6 ft (1830 mm) spacing is not exceeded, the intent of the requirement is met. It is important that the entire glass area surface is wet. Due consideration should be given to the height of the glass panels and any horizontal members that might interfere with sprinkler wetting action.. (2) Access to exits is permitted to be within the atrium, and exit discharge in

criteria is met: (a) Any number of levels of the building shall be permitted to open directly to the atrium without enclosure based on the results of the engineering analysis required in 8.12.3(5). (b)*Glass walls and inoperable windows shall be permitted in lieu of the fire barriers where all of the following criteria are met: i. Automatic sprinklers supplied are spaced along both sides of the glass wall, and the inoperable windows at intervals not to exceed 6 ft (1830 mm). ii. The automatic sprinklers specified in 8.12.3(1)(b)(i) are located at a distance from the glass wall not to exceed 12 in. (305 mm) and arranged so that the entire surface of the glass is wet upon operation of the sprinklers. iii. The glass wall is of tempered, wired, or laminated glass held in place by a gasket system that allows the glass framing system to deflect without breaking (loading) the glass before the sprinklers operate. iv. The automatic sprinklers specified in 8.12.3(1)(b)(i) are not required on the atrium side of the glass wall and the inoperable window where there is no walkway or other floor area on the atrium side above the main floor level. v. Doors in the glass walls are of glass or other material that resists the passage of smoke. vi. Doors in the glass walls are self-closing or automatic-closing upon detection of smoke. vii. The glass is continuous vertically, without horizontal mullions, window treatments, or other obstructions that would interfere with the wetting of the entire glass surface. A.8.12.3(1)(b) The intent of the requirement for closely spaced sprinklers is to wet the atrium glass wall to ensure that the surface of the glass is wet upon operation of the sprinklers, with a maximum spacing of sprinklers of 6 ft (1830 mm) on centers. Provided that it can be shown that the glass can be wet by the sprinklers using a given discharge rate and that the 6 ft (1830 mm) spacing is not exceeded, the intent of the requirement is met. It is important that the entire glass area surface is wet. Due consideration should be given to the height of the glass panels and any horizontal members that might interfere with sprinkler wetting action. (2) Access to exits is permitted to be within the atrium, and exit discharge in

Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34, an atrium shall be permitted, provided that all of the following conditions are met:

of 119

accordance with 7.7.2 is permitted to be within the atrium. (3) The occupancy within the atrium meets the specifications for classification as low or ordinary hazard contents. (See 6.2.2.) (4) The entire building is protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7. (5)*For other than existing, previously approved atriums, an engineering analysis is performed that demonstrates that the building is designed to keep the smoke layer interface above the highest unprotected opening to adjoining spaces, or 6 ft (1830 mm) above the highest floor level of exit access open to the atrium, for a period equal to 1.5 times the calculated egress time or 20 minutes, whichever is greater. A.8.6.7(5) See NFPA92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems. The engineering analysis should include the following elements: (1) Fire dynamics, including the following: (a) Fire size and location (b) Materials likely to be burning (c) Fire plume geometry (d) Fire plume or smoke layer impact on means of egress (e) Tenability conditions during the period of occupant egress (2) Response and performance of building systems, including passive barriers, automatic detection and extinguishing, and smoke control (3) Response time required for building occupants to reach building exits, including any time required to exit through the atrium as permitted by 8.6.7(2) (6)*In other than existing, previously approved atriums, where an engineered smoke control system is installed to meet the requirements of 8.6.7(5), the system is independently activated by each of the following: (a) Required automatic sprinkler system (b) Manual controls that are readily accessible to the fire Department A.8.6.7(6) Activation of the ventilation system by manual fire alarms, extinguishing systems, and detection systems can cause unwanted operation of the system, and it is suggested that consideration be given to zoning of the activation functions so the ventilation system operates only when actually needed. A.8.6.7 Where atriums are used, there is

accordance with 11.7.2 is permitted to be within the atrium. (3) The occupancy within the space meets the specifications for classification as low or ordinary hazard contents. (See Chapter 6.) (4) The entire building is protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R and 55.3.2. (5)*An engineering analysis is performed that demonstrates that the building is designed to keep the smoke layer interface above the highest unprotected opening to adjoining spaces, or 6 ft (1830 mm) above the highest floor level of exit access open to the atrium, for a period equal to 11⁄2 times the calculated egress time or 20 minutes, whichever is greater. A.8.12.3(5) See NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems. The engineering analysis should include the following elements: (1) Fire dynamics, including fire size and location; materials likely to be burning; fire plume geometry; fire plume or smoke layer impact on means of egress; and tenability conditions during the period of occupant egress (2) Response and performance of building systems, including passive barriers, automatic detection and extinguishing, and smoke control (3) Response time required for building occupants to reach building exits, including any time required to exit through the atrium as permitted by 8.12.3(2) (6)*An engineered smoke control system is installed to meet the requirements of 8.12.3(5) and is independently activated by each of the following: (a) Upon actuation of the required automatic sprinkler system within the atrium or areas open to the atrium (b) Manual controls that are readily accessible to the fire department A.8.12.3(6) Activation of the ventilation system by manual fire alarms, extinguishing systems, and detection systems can cause unwanted operation of the system, and it is recommended that consideration be given to zoning of the activation functions so the ventilation system operates only when actually needed. A.8.12.3 Where atriums are used, there is an added degree of safety to occupants because of the large volume of space into which smoke can be dissipated.

(4) The entire building is protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R and 55.3.2 Section 55.3.

Need Committee Weigh‐in: Do we change 101 or 5000 for (6). Recommendation: A.8.12.3 Where atriums are used, there is an added degree of safety to occupants

of 119

an added degree of safety to occupants because of the large volume of space into which smoke can be dissipated. However, there is a need to ensure that dangerous concentrations of smoke are promptly removed from the atrium, and the exhaust system needs careful design. For information about systems that can be used to provide smoke protection in these spaces, see the following: (1) NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems (2) Principles of Smoke Management

However, there is a need to ensure that dangerous concentrations of smoke are promptly removed from the atrium, and the exhaust system needs careful design. For information about systems that can be used to provide smoke protection in these spaces, see the following: (1) NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems (2) Design of Smoke Management Systems by J.H. Klote and J.A. Milke

because of the large volume of space into which smoke can be dissipated. However, there is a need to ensure that dangerous concentrations of smoke are promptly removed from the atrium, and the exhaust system needs careful design. For information about systems that can be used to provide smoke protection in these spaces, see the following: (1) NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems (2) Design of Smoke Management Systems by J.H. Klote and J.A. Milke (2) Principles of Smoke Management

8.6.8 Two-Story Openings with Partial Enclosure. A vertical opening serving as other than an exit enclosure, connecting only two adjacent stories and piercing only one floor, shall be permitted to be open to one of the two stories.

8.12.4 Two-Story Openings with Partial Enclosure A vertical opening serving as other than an exit enclosure, connecting only two adjacent stories, and piercing only one floor shall be permitted to be open to one of the two stories.

8.6.9 Convenience Openings. 8.6.9.1 Where permitted by Chapters 11 through 43, unenclosed vertical openings not concealed within the building construction shall be permitted as follows: (1) Such openings shall connect not more than two adjacent stories (one floor pierced only). (2) Such openings shall be separated from unprotected vertical openings serving other floors by a barrier complying with 8.6.5. (3) Such openings shall be separated from corridors. (4)*In other than approved, existing convenience openings, such openings shall be separated from other fire or smoke compartments on the same floor. A.8.6.9.1(4) The intent of this requirement is to prohibit a communication of two compartments on the same floor via two convenience openings. This is represented in Figure A.8.6.9.1(4). (5) In new construction, the convenience

8.12.5 Convenience Openings. 8.12.5.1 Where permitted by Chapters 15 through 31, and 33 through 34, unenclosed vertical openings not concealed within the building construction shall be permitted as follows: (1) Such openings shall connect not more than two adjacent stories (one floor pierced only). (2) Such openings shall be separated from unprotected vertical openings serving other floors by a barrier complying with 8.6.5. (3) Such openings shall be separated from corridors. (4)*Such openings shall be separated from other fire or smoke compartments on the same floor. A.8.12.5.1(4) The intent of this requirement is to prohibit a communication of two compartments on the same floor via two convenience openings. This is represented in Figure A.8.12.5.1(4). (5) In new construction, the convenience

Recommendation: (5) In new construction, the convenience Such openings shall be separated from the corridor referenced in 8.12.5.1(3) by a smoke partition, unless Chapters 15 through 31, and 33 through 34 require the corridor to have a fire resistance rating.

of 119

opening shall be separated from the corridor referenced in 8.6.9.1(3) by a smoke partition, unless Chapters 11 through 43 require the corridor to have a fire resistance rating. (6)*Such openings shall not serve as a required means of egress. A.8.6.9.1(6) This requirement prohibits means of egress down or up the convenience opening. It does not prohibit means of escape from running down or up the convenience opening within residential dwelling units.

opening shall be separated from the corridor referenced in 8.12.5.1(3) by a smoke partition, unless Chapters 15 through 31, and 33 through 34 require the corridor to have a fire resistance rating. (6)*Such openings shall not serve as a required means of egress. A.8.12.5.1(6) This requirement prohibits means of egress down or up the convenience opening. It does not prohibit means of escape from running down or up the convenience opening within residential dwelling units.

8.6.9.2 Where permitted by Chapters 11 through 43, unenclosed vertical openings created by convenience stairways shall be permitted as follows: (1) The convenience stair openings shall not serve as required means of egress. (2) The building shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7. (3) The convenience stair openings shall be protected in accordance with the method detailed for the protection of vertical openings in NFPA13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems.

8.12.5.2 Where permitted by Chapters 15 through 31, and 33 through 34, unenclosed vertical openings created by convenience stairways shall be permitted as follows: (1) The convenience stair openings shall not serve as required means of egress. (2) The building shall be protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 55.3. (3) The convenience stair openings shall be protected in accordance with the method detailed for the protection of vertical openings in NFPA13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems.

8.6.9.3 Convenience stairs shall be permitted to be unenclosed in large open areas such as atriums and shopping malls.

8.12.5.3 Convenience stairs shall be permitted to be unenclosed in large open areas such as atriums and shopping malls.

8.6.9.4 For other than existing hoistways in existing buildings, elevator cars located within a building shall be enclosed as follows: (1) Where there are three or fewer elevator cars in the building, they shall be permitted to be located within the same hoistway enclosure. (2) Where there are four elevator cars in the building, they shall be divided in such a manner that not less than two separate hoistway enclosures are provided. (3) Where there are more than four elevator cars in the building, the number of elevator cars located within a single hoistway enclosure shall not exceed four.

8.12.6.4 The number of elevator cars permitted in a hoistway shall be in accordance with Section 54.6.

8.6.9.5 Service openings for conveyors, elevators, and dumbwaiters, where required to be open on more than one story at the same time for purposes of operation, shall be provided with closing devices in accordance with 7.2.1.8.

8.12.6 Service Openings. 8.12.6.1 Service openings for conveyors, where required to be open on more than one story at the same time for purposes of operation, shall be provided with closing devices in accordance with 11.2.1.8.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.12.6.1 Service openings for conveyors, elevators, and dumbwaiters, where required to be open on more than one story at the same time for purposes of operation, shall be provided with closing devices in accordance with 11.2.1.8.

of 119

8.6.9.6 Any escalators and moving walks serving as a required exit in existing buildings shall be enclosed in the same manner as exit stairways. (See 7.1.3.2.)

8.6.9.7 Any escalators and moving walks not constituting an exit shall have their floor openings enclosed or protected as required for other vertical openings, unless otherwise permitted by one of the following: (1) The requirement of 8.6.9.7 shall not apply to escalators in large open areas, such as atriums and enclosed shopping malls. (2)*In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7, escalator and moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected in accordance with the method detailed in NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, or in accordance with a method approved by the authority having jurisdiction. A.8.6.9.7(2) The intent is to place a limitation on the size of the opening to which the protection applies. The total floor opening should not exceed twice the projected area of the escalator or moving walk at the floor. Also, the arrangement of the opening is not intended to circumvent the requirements of 8.6.7. As with any opening through a floor, the openings around the outer perimeter of the escalators should be considered as vertical openings. (3) In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7, escalator and moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected by rolling steel shutters appropriate for the fire resistance rating of the vertical opening and complying with all of the following: (a) The shutters shall close automatically and independently of each other upon smoke detection and sprinkler operation. (b) A manual means of operating and testing the operation of the shutters shall be provided. (c) The shutters shall be operated not less than once a week to ensure that they remain in proper operating condition. (d) The shutters shall operate at a speed not to exceed 30 ft/min (0.15 m/s) and shall be equipped with a sensitive leading edge. (e) The leading edge shall arrest the progress of a moving shutter and cause it to retract a distance of approximately 6 in. (150 mm) upon the application of a

8.12.6.2 Any convenience stairways connecting more than two stories, escalators, and moving walks not constituting an exit, or serving as a required means of egress, shall have their floor openings enclosed or protected as required for other vertical openings, unless permitted by the following: (1) The requirement of 8.12.6.2 shall not apply to escalators in large, open areas such as atriums and enclosed shopping malls. (2)*In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R, convenience stairways connecting more than two stories, and escalators or moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected in accordance with the method detailed in NFPA 13 or in accordance with a method approved by the authority having jurisdiction. (3) Escalators shall be permitted to be protected in accordance with 8.12.6.3. A.8.12.6.2(2) The intent of the exception is to place a limitation on the size of the opening to which the protection applies. The total floor opening should not exceed twice the projected area of the escalator or moving walk at the floor. Also, the arrangement of the opening is not intended to circumvent the requirements of 8.12.3. As with any opening through a floor, the openings around the outer perimeter of the escalators should be considered as vertical openings. 8.12.6.3 In buildings protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13 or NFPA13R, escalators or moving walk openings shall be permitted to be protected by rolling steel shutters appropriate for the fire resistance rating of the vertical opening protected, and the following criteria shall be met: (1) The shutters shall close automatically and independently of each other upon smoke detection and sprinkler operation. (2) There shall be a manual means of operating and testing the operation of the shutter. (3) The shutters shall be operated not less than once a week to ensure that they remain in proper operating condition. (4) The shutters shall operate at a speed not to exceed 30 ft/min (0.15 m/s) and

Recommendation: Need committee weigh‐in. Combine sections in 5000? Split sections in 101? Add convenience stairs to 101?

of 119

force not exceeding 20 lbf (90 N) applied to the surface of the leading edge. (f) The shutter, following the retraction specified in 8.6.9.7(3)(e), shall continue to close. (g) The operating mechanism for the rolling shutter shall be provided with standby power complying with the provisions of NFPA 70, National Electrical Code.

shall be equipped with a sensitive leading edge. (5) The leading edge shall arrest the progress of a moving shutter and cause it to retract a distance of approximately 6 in. (150 mm) upon the application of a force not exceeding 20 lbf (90 N) applied to the surface of the leading edge. (6) The shutter, following the retraction specified in 8.12.6.3(5), shall continue to close. (7) The operating mechanism for the rolling shutter shall be provided with standby power complying with the provisions of Chapter 52.

8.13 Mezzanine. 8.13.1 General. 8.13.1.1 A mezzanine shall not be included as a story for the purpose of determining the allowable number of stories in a building.

Recommendation: Add text to 101: 8.6.10.1 A mezzanine shall not be included as a story for the purpose of determining the allowable number of stories in a building.

8.6.10 Mezzanines. 8.6.10.1 General. Multilevel residential housing areas in detention and correctional occupancies in accordance with Chapters 22 and 23 shall be exempt from the provisions of 8.6.10.2 and 8.6.10.3.

8.13.1.2 Multilevel residential housing areas in detention and correctional occupancies in accordance with Chapter 21 shall be exempt from the provisions of 8.13.2 and 8.13.3.

8.6.10.2 Area Limitations. 8.6.10.2.1 The aggregate area of mezzanines located within a room, other than those located in special-purpose industrial occupancies, shall not exceed one-third the open area of the room in which the mezzanines are located. Enclosed space shall not be included in a determination of the size of the room in which the mezzanine is located.

8.13.2 Area Limitations. 8.13.2.1 The aggregate area of mezzanines within a room, other than those located in special-purpose industrial occupancies, shall not exceed one-third the open area of the room in which the mezzanines are located. 8.13.2.2 Enclosed space shall not be included in a determination of the size of the room in which the mezzanine is located.

8.6.10.2.2 No limit on the number of mezzanines in a room shall be required.

8.13.2.3 There shall be no limit on the number of mezzanines in a room.

8.6.10.2.3 For purposes of determining the allowable mezzanine area, the aggregate area of the mezzanines shall not be included in the area of the room.

8.13.2.4 For purposes of determining the allowable mezzanine area, the area of the mezzanines shall not be included in the area of the room.

8.6.10.3 Openness. The openness of mezzanines shall be in accordance with 8.6.10.3.1 or 8.6.10.3.2.

8.6.10.3.1 All portions of a mezzanine, other than walls not more than 42 in. (1065 mm) high, columns, and posts, shall be open to and unobstructed from the room in which the mezzanine is located, unless the occupant load of the aggregate area of the enclosed space does not exceed 10.

8.13.3 Openness. 8.13.3.1 All portions of a mezzanine, other than walls not more than 42 in. (1065mm)high, columns, and posts, shall be open to and unobstructed from the room in which the mezzanine is located, unless the occupant load of the aggregate area of the enclosed space does not exceed 10.

8.6.10.3.2 A mezzanine having two or more means of egress shall not be required to open into the room in which

8.13.3.2 A mezzanine having two or more means of egress shall not be required to open into the room in which

of 119

it is located if not less than one of the means of egress provides direct access from the enclosed area to an exit at the mezzanine level.

it is located if not less than one of the means of egress provides direct access from the enclosed area to an exit at the mezzanine level.

8.6.11 Concealed Spaces and Draftstops. 8.6.11.1 Any concealed combustible space in which building materials having a flame spread index greater than Class A are exposed shall be draftstopped as follows: (1) Every exterior and interior wall and partition shall be firestopped at each floor level, at the top story ceiling level, and at the level of support for roofs. (2) Every unoccupied attic space shall be subdivided by draftstops into areas not to exceed 3000 ft2 (280 m2). (3) Any concealed space between the ceiling and the floor or roof above shall be draftstopped for the full depth of the space along the line of support for the floor or roof structural members and, if necessary, at other locations to form areas not to exceed 1000 ft2 (93 m2) for any space between the ceiling and floor, and 3000 ft2 (280 m2 ) for any space between the ceiling and roof.

8.14 Concealed Spaces. 8.14.1 Draft Stops. 8.14.1.1 Any concealed combustible space in which building materials having a flame spread index greater than Class A are exposed shall be draftstopped as follows: (1) Every unoccupied attic space shall be subdivided by draftstops into areas not to exceed 3000 ft2 (280 m2). (2) Any concealed space between the ceiling and the floor or roof above shall be draftstopped for the full depth of the space along the line of support for the floor or roof structural members and, if necessary, at other locations to form areas not to exceed 1000 ft2 (93 m2) for any space between the ceiling and floor and 3000 ft2 (280 m2) for any space between the ceiling and roof.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.14.1.1 Any concealed combustible space in which building materials having a flame spread index greater than Class A are exposed shall be draftstopped as follows: (1) Every exterior and interior wall and partition shall be firestopped at each floor level, at the top story ceiling level, and at the level of support for roofs.

8.6.11.2 The requirements of 8.6.11.1 shall not apply where any of the following conditions are met: (1) Where the space is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7 (2)*Where concealed spaces serve as plenums (3) Where the installation is an existing installation

8.14.1.2 The requirements of 8.14.1.1 shall not apply if either of the following conditions is met: (1) The requirements shall not apply where the concealed space is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13. (2) The requirements shall not apply to concealed spaces serving as plenums.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.14.1.2 The requirements of 8.14.1.1 shall not apply if either of the following conditions is met where any of the following conditions are met: (1) The requirements shall not apply where the concealed space is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13. Where the space is protected throughout by an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 55.3 (2)* The requirements shall not apply to concealed spaces serving as plenums. Where concealed spaces serve as plenums A.8.14.1.2(2) See NFPA 90A, Standard for the Installation of Air- Conditioning and Ventilating Systems.

8.6.11.3 Draftstopping materials shall be not less than 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) thick gypsum board, 15⁄32 in. (12 mm) thick plywood, or other approved materials that are adequately supported.

8.14.1.3 Draftstopping materials shall be not less than 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) gypsum board, 15⁄32 in. (12 mm) wood structural panel, or other approved materials adequately supported.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.14.1.3 Draftstopping materials shall be not less than 1⁄2 in. (13 mm) gypsum board, 15⁄32 in. (12 mm) wood structural panel, or other approved materials that are adequately supported. (Note: is plywood the same as wood structural panel?)

8.6.11.4 The integrity of all draftstops shall be maintained.

8.14.1.4 The integrity of all draftstops shall be maintained.

of 119

8.6.11.5 In existing buildings, firestopping and draftstopping shall be provided as required by Chapters 11 through 43.

8.14.2 Fireblocks. . . . .

Not needed in 101.

8.7 Special Hazard Protection. 8.7.1 General. 8.7.1.1* Protection from any area having a degree of hazard greater than that normal to the general occupancy of the building or structure shall be provided by one of the following means: (1) Enclosing the area with a fire barrier without windows that has a 1-hour fire resistance rating in accordance with Section 8.3 (2) Protecting the area with automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with Section 9.7 (3) Applying both 8.7.1.1(1) and (2) where the hazard is severe or where otherwise specified by Chapters 11 through 43 A.8.7.1.1 Areas requiring special hazard protection include, but are not limited to, areas such as those used for storage of combustibles or flammables, areas housing heat-producing appliances, or areas used for maintenance purposes.

8.15 Special Hazard Protection. 8.15.1* Protection from any area having a degree of hazard greater than that normal to the general occupancy of the building or structure shall be provided by one of the following means: (1) Enclosure of the area with a fire barrier without windows that has a 1-hour fire resistance rating in accordance with Section 8.4 (2) Protection of the area with automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with Chapter 55 (3) Application of both 8.15.1(1) and (2) where the hazard is severe or where otherwise specified by Chapters 15 through 31 and 33 through 34. A.8.15.1 Areas requiring special hazard protection include, but are not limited to, areas such as those used for storage of combustibles or flammables, areas housing heat-producing appliances, or areas used for maintenance purposes.

8.7.1.2 In new construction, where protection is provided with automatic extinguishing systems without fire-resistive separation, the space protected shall be enclosed with smoke partitions in accordance with Section 8.4, unless otherwise permitted by one of the following conditions: (1) Where mercantile occupancy general storage areas and stockrooms are protected by automatic sprinklers in accordance with Section 9.7 (2) Where hazardous areas in industrial occupancies are protected by automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with 40.3.2 (3) Where hazardous areas in detention and correctional occupancies are protected by automatic sprinklers in accordance with 22.3.2

8.15.2 Where protection is provided with automatic extinguishing systems without fire resistance–rated separation, the space protected shall be enclosed with smoke partitions in accordance with Section 8.10, unless otherwise permitted by one of the following: (1) This requirement shall not apply to mercantile occupancy general storage areas and stockrooms protected by automatic sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13. (2) This requirement shall not apply to hazardous areas in industrial occupancies protected by automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with 29.3.2. (3) This requirement shall not apply to hazardous areas in detention and correctional occupancies protected by automatic extinguishing systems in accordance with 21.3.2.

Recommendation: Revise 5000 as follows: 8.15.2 Where protection is provided with automatic extinguishing systems without fire resistance–rated separation, the space protected shall be enclosed with smoke partitions in accordance with Section 8.10, unless otherwise permitted by one of the following: (1) This requirement shall not apply to mercantile occupancy general storage areas and stockrooms protected by automatic sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13 55.3.

8.7.1.3 Doors in barriers required to have a fire resistance rating shall have a minimum 3⁄4-hour fire protection rating and shall be self-closing or automatic-closing in accordance with 7.2.1.8.

8.15.3 Doors in barriers required to have a fire resistance rating shall have a 3⁄4-hour fire protection rating and shall be self-closing or automatic-closing in accordance with 11.2.1.8.

of 119

8.7.2* Explosion Protection. Where hazardous processes or storage is of such a character as to introduce an explosion potential, an explosion venting system or an explosion suppression system specifically designed for the hazard involved shall be provided. A.8.7.2 For details, see NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting.

Recommendation: Add section to 5000 as follows: 8.7.2* Explosion Protection. Where hazardous processes or storage is of such a character as to introduce an explosion potential, an explosion venting system or an explosion suppression system specifically designed for the hazard involved shall be provided. A.8.7.2 For details, see NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting.

8.7.3 Flammable Liquids and Gases. 8.7.3.1 The storage and handling of flammable liquids or gases shall be in accordance with the following applicable standards: (1) NFPA 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code (2) NFPA 54, National Fuel Gas Code (3) NFPA 58, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code

8.7.3.2* No storage or handling of flammable liquids or gases shall be permitted in any location where such storage would jeopardize egress from the structure, unless otherwise permitted by 8.7.3.1. A.8.7.3.2 NFPA58, Liquefied Petroleum Gas Code, permits portable butane-fueled appliances in restaurants and in attended commercial food catering operations where fueled by not in excess of two 10 oz (0.28 kg) LP-Gas capacity, nonrefillable butane containers having a water capacity not in excess of 1.08 lb (0.4 kg) per container. Containers are required to be directly connected to the appliance, and manifolding of containers is not permitted. Storage of cylinders is also limited to 24 containers, with an additional 24 permitted where protected by a 2-hour fire resistance– rated barrier.

8.7.4 Laboratories. 8.7.4.1 Laboratories that use chemicals shall comply with NFPA 45, Standard on Fire Protection for Laboratories Using Chemicals, unless otherwise modified by other provisions of this Code.

8.7.4.2 Laboratories in health care occupancies and medical and dental offices shall comply with NFPA 99, Health Care Facilities Code.

8.7.5* Hyperbaric Facilities. All

of 119

occupancies containing hyperbaric facilities shall comply with NFPA 99, Health Care Facilities Code, Chapter 20, unless otherwise modified by other provisions of this Code. A.8.7.5 While the scope of NFPA99, Health Care Facilities Code, is limited to health care occupancies, it is the intent that this requirement be applied to hyperbaric facilities used in all occupancies.

of 119

NFPA 101‐2012 8.6.4 Shafts

8.6.4 Shafts. Shafts that do not extend to from the bottom or to the top of the building or structure shall comply with either 8.6.4.1, 8.6.4.2, or 8.6.4.3, as modified by 8.6.4.4 or 8.6.4.5.

8.6.4.1 Shafts that do not extend to the top of the building or structure shall be enclosed at the lowest or highest level of the shaft, respectively, with construction in accordance with 8.6.5.

8.6.4.2 Shafts that do not extend to the bottom of the building or structure shall be enclosed at the lowest level of the shaft with construction in accordance with 8.6.5.

8.6.4.3 Shafts that do not extend to the bottom and to the top of the building or structure shall be enclosed at the lowest and highest level of the shaft with construction in accordance with 8.6.5.

8.6.4.4 8.6.4.2 Shafts In lieu of any enclosure required at lowest or highest level of a shaft by 8.6.4.1 through 8.6.4.3, shafts shall be permitted to terminate in a room or space having a use related to the purpose of the shaft, provided that the room or space is separated from the remainder of the building by construction having a fire resistance rating and opening protectives in accordance with 8.6.5 and 8.3.4.

8.6.4.5 8.6.4.3 Any enclosure required at lowest or highest level of a shaft by 8.6.4.1 through 8.6.4.3 Shafts that do not extend to the bottom or top of the building or structure shall be permitted to be protected by approved fire dampers installed in accordance with their listing at the lowest or highest floor level, as applicable, within the shaft enclosure.

of 119

From: Cote, Ron Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 1:45 PM Subject: Sprinklers supplied by domestic water - NFPA 101-2006 XXX, there’s nothing wrong with disagreement. And I appreciate that XXX staff copies NFPA staff when they interpret a NFPA code. I’m not going to convince you of intent, so I won’t try. But I want to document for the file that the term “isolated” in the phrase “isolated hazardous area” was added so that the 6-sprinkler-off-the-domestic-supply can be repeated over and over again for different hazardous areas in the same building (as the code does not anticipate multiple fire origins). Without the word “isolated,” the AHJ might have thought that the exemption for hazardous area sprinklers supplied by domestic water could be used only once in a building. Given the above explanation, the word “isolated” can be divorced from the words “hazardous area.” We’re left with the words “hazardous area” which Code users know is synonymous with “special hazard” addressed in Section 8.7. For example see NFPA 101-2006 18.3.2.1, 19.3.2.1, 28.3.2.2.1, 29.3.2.2., 30.3.2.1, 31.3.2.1, 32.3.3.2.1, 33.3.3.2.2, 36.3.2.1, 37.3.2.1, 38.3.2.1, 39.3.2.1 and 40.3.2.4 – where all 13 paragraphs use the term “hazardous area” and mandatorily reference the protection requirements of Section 8.7 Special Hazard Protection. I’ll add the subject to the agenda for the next revision cycle (the one that will produce the 2015 edition of NFPA 101). It will be sent both to SAF-FIR which has responsibility for Section 8.7 and to SAF-BSF which has responsibility for Section 9.7. Ron Coté, P.E. Principal Life Safety Engineer NFPA - Quincy, MA USA Important Notice: This correspondence is not a Formal Interpretation issued pursuant to NFPA Regulations. Any opinion expressed is the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the official position of the NFPA or its Technical Committees. In addition, this correspondence is neither intended, nor should it be relied upon, to provide professional consultation or services. Attend NFPA Fire & Life Safety Conference this December in Orlando.

of 119

From: XXX Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 11:50 AM To: Cote, Ron Ron: I must respectfully disagree with your interpretation of section 9.7.1.2 of the Life Safety Code. I recognize that you have a great deal more experience than I do in interpreting the Life Safety Code, and what you say may actually be the intent of this section (although in my 24 years of being on the committee or subcommittee responsible for this section, I’ve never heard it discussed this way). But the way that section 9.7.1.2 is used every day in the field is quite different than what you have described. There is no linkage between sections 9.7.1.2 and 8.7 in the Code. In fact, they use different terms. Section 9.7.1.2 says that you can use up to 6 sprinklers off of the domestic line to protect “isolated hazardous areas” while section 8.7 talks about protecting “special hazards”. Lacking any formal reference, different terminology implies different subjects. The term “special hazards” is not defined (to the best of my knowledge). The term “isolated hazardous areas” is also not specifically defined in the Life Safety Code, but the term “hazardous area” is defined in section 3.3.19.4 as any area of a structure that poses a degree of hazard greater than the normal situation for the building. When a “hazardous area” exists, the Code has the right to ask for extra protection (like sprinklers) and section 9.7.1.2 has always been used to say that if the number of sprinklers is 6 or less, you could supply these sprinklers from the domestic water supply rather than run a full sprinkler system into the space. There is nothing in the Code that actually says that a hazardous area has to be a “Special Hazard in Accordance with Section 8.7” in order to use 9.7.1.2. If the Code requires glass to be wetted by sprinkler spray in some application, this could meet the definition of a “hazardous area” under section 3.3.19.4 because all glass is not required to be protected, so there is something about this glass that is more hazardous than normal. As such, section 9.7.1.2 could be used to supply the sprinklers wetting this glass as long as no more than 6 sprinklers were used. I think that it would be good for the whole committee to discuss this and clarify it for the next cycle of the standard. It might be a good idea to put this topic on the agenda for our next meeting (probably in 2013?). XXX

From: Cote, Ron Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 7:38 AM To: XXX Subject: RE: FW: Ask a sprinkler question - Code Corner

of 119

XXX, thank you for copying me with your response to XXX. I do not agree that NFPA 101 9.7.1.2 can be used to protect glass windows via sprinklers fed from domestic water. The provision of 9.7.1.2 is offered for use only in the protection of isolated hazardous areas. That means it works in conjunction with the provisions Section 8.7 Special Hazard Protection. Section 8.7 recognizes two forms of protection: (1) enclosure via 1-hr fire barriers and (2) area/room protection via automatic sprinklers. The concept of protecting glass with sprinkler protection is not discussed. Therefore, the use of domestic water to supply not more than six sprinklers relates only to hazardous area/room sprinklering. Ron Coté, P.E. Principal Life Safety Engineer NFPA - Quincy, MA USA Important Notice: This correspondence is not a Formal Interpretation issued pursuant to NFPA Regulations. Any opinion expressed is the personal opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the official position of the NFPA or its Technical Committees. In addition, this correspondence is neither intended, nor should it be relied upon, to provide professional consultation or services. Attend NFPA Fire & Life Safety Conference this December in Orlando.

From: XXX Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 9:38 AM Subject: Re: FW: Ask a sprinkler question - Code Corner XXX This email is in response to your request for an informal interpretation sent via XXX. You asked if six sprinklers being used to provide fire rating for glass panels could be attached to a domestic water supply. The answer to your question is yes, but the requirements are different depending on whether you are following NFPA 101 or the IBC. NFPA 101, 2009 Edition, Section 9.7.1.2 allows up to six sprinklers to be attached to the domestic line provided they can provide a 0.15 density and there is an automatic shutoff to the domestic system. 2009 IBC Section 903.3.5.1.1 says that fewer than 20 sprinklers can be fed off of the domestic line provided that the water supply is strong enough to supply the sprinklers and the domestic water supply or there is an automatic shutoff to the domestic system and the water supply is strong enough to supply the sprinklers. I hope I have addressed all of your concerns. If you have any more questions or require anymore clarification please do not hesitate to contact me. It should be noted that this is my opinion as a member of NFPA and that it has not been processed as a Formal Interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Rules Governing Committee Projects, so it should not be considered, nor relied upon, as the official position of the NFPA or its committees.

of 119

cc Ron Cote - NFPA Staff Liaison

-----Original Message----- From: XXX

Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:39 AM:

Subject: FW: Ask a sprinkler question - Code Corner Please provide an informal interpretation to the technical question asked below. You can send the response directly to the XXX employee requesting the interpretation, with a copy to me. Thank you. -----Original Message----- Question: i was asked by an engineer if NFPA 101 7.7.1.2 would apply to a small window sysyem used to provide a fire rating of the glass panels. The system would require 6 heads (one for each pane of glass. would it be acceptable to tie in to a domestic line in the area(provided it is large enough) or will they need to run the supply all the way back to the 4" water entry.

of 119