101- Log #FR102 SAF-FUN Final Action: (Entire Document) Recommendation: Globally replace the term emergency plan with the term emergency action plan throughout NFPA 101, Life Safety Code. Statement: The term emergency action plan is consistent with that used by the industry as well as the fire service. The term emergency action plan is also consistent with the document currently being produced by the NFPA High Rise Building Safety Advisory Committee (HRB-SAC), titled Guide for the Development of Emergency Action Plans for High Rise Buildings. Emergency action plans primarily describe the required actions and responsibilities of building occupants, staff and personnel during a fire emergency and other emergencies that may occur in a building. This includes fire drills, evacuation procedures and strategies, and the use and availability of fire protection systems. The technical committee noted a total of 60 occurrences of the term "emergency plan" within 49 provisions of the Code (11 of which have two occurrences each). Each seems appropriate for changing to use the term "emergency action plan." 101- Log #FR104 SAF-FUN Final Action: (xx.1.6 Subsection of Various Chapters) Recommendation: As a variation of the "Global Replace" concept: (1) Replace the entry "(No requirements.)" with the entry "(Reserved.)" in 14.1.6, 15.1.6, 38.1.6, 39.1.6, 40.1.6 and 42.1.6. (2) Replace the entry "(No special requirements.)" with the entry "(Reserved.)" in 26.1.6, 28.1.6, 29.1.6, 30.1.6, 31.1.6, 36.1.6 and 37.1.6. Statement: The entries of "No requirements" and "No special requirements," in various occupancy chapter subsections.1.6 related to Building Construction, mistakenly cause users to believe that if another code or standard referenced by NFPA 101 has construction requirements, such requirements need not be met. That is not the intent. The intent is that the document with the more "specific" requirement be met. See first revision to 4.4.2.3 which is being made to help clarify the issue. 1
101- Log #FR105 SAF-FUN Final Action: (2.3.6 ASTM Publications) Recommendation: 2.3.6 ASTM Publications. ASTM International, P.O. Box C700, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. www.astm.org ASTM C 1629/C 1629M, Standard Classification for Abuse-Resistant Nondecorated Interior Gypsum Panel Products and Fiber-Reinforced Cement Panels, 2006 (2011). ASTM D 1929, Standard Test Method for Determining Ignition Temperatures of Plastic,2011 1996 (2001e1). ASTM D 2859, Standard Test Method for Ignition Characteristics of Finished Textile Floor Covering Materials, 2006 (2011). ASTM D 2898, Standard Test Methods for Accelerated Weathering of Fire-Retardant-Treated Wood for Fire Testing, 2010. ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2012 2010. ASTM E 108, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings, 2011 2010a. ASTM E 119, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2012 2010b. ASTM E 136, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace at 750 Degrees C, 2011 2009b. ASTM E 648, Standard Test Method for Critical Radiant Flux of Floor Covering Systems Using a Radiant Heat Energy Source, 2010 e1. ASTM E 814, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Through-Penetration Fire Stops, 2011a 2010. ASTM E 1352, Standard Test Method for Cigarette Ignition Resistance of Mock-Up Upholstered Furniture Assemblies, 2008a. ASTM E 1353, Standard Test Methods for Cigarette Ignition Resistance of Components of Upholstered Furniture, 2008a(e1). ASTM E 1354, Standard Test Method for Heat and Visible Smoke Release Rates for Materials and Products Using an Oxygen Consumption Calorimeter, 2011b 2009. ASTM E 1537, Standard Test Method for Fire Testing of Upholstered Furniture, 2012 2007. ASTM E 1590, Standard Test Method for Fire Testing of Mattresses, 2012 2007. ASTM E 1591, Standard Guide for Obtaining Data for Deterministic Fire Models, 2007. ASTM E 1966, Standard Test Method for Fire-Resistive Joint Systems, 2007 (2011). ASTM E 2072, Standard Specification for Photoluminescent (Phosphorescent) Safety Markings, 2010. ASTM E 2074, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, Including Positive Pressure Testing of Side-Hinged and Pivoted Swinging Door Assemblies, 2000 e1 (withdrawn 2007), Revised 2004. ASTM E 2307, Standard Test Method for Determining Fire Resistance of Perimeter Fire Barrier Systems Using Intermediate-Scale, Multi-Story Test Apparatus, 2010. ASTM E 2404, Standard Practice for Specimen Preparation and Mounting of Textile, Paper or VinylWall or Ceiling Coverings to Assess Surface Burning Characteristics, 2010 2008. ASTM E 2573, Standard Practice for Specimen Preparation and Mounting of Site-Fabricated Stretch Systems to Assess Surface Burning Characteristics, 2012 2007a. ASTM E 2599, Standard Practice for Specimen Preparation and Mounting of Reflective Insulation Materials and Radiant Barrier Materials for Building Applications to Assess Surface Burning Characteristics, 2011 2009. ASTM E 2652, Standard Test Method for Behavior of Materials in a Tube Furnace with a Cone-shaped Airflow Stabilizer, at 750 Degrees C, 2009a. ASTM F 851, Standard Test Method for Self-Rising Seat Mechanisms, 1987 (2005). ASTM F 1577, Standard Test Methods for Detention Locks for Swinging Doors, 2005. ASTM G 155, Standard Practice for Operating Xenon Arc Light Apparatus for Exposure of Non-Metallic Materials, 2005a. Statement: The changes update the currently referenced ASTM documents to reflect the edition available at the time of the committee's First Draft meeting. References are being added for ASTM E1352 and ASTM E1353 as the documents will appear in other Code provisions. 2
101- Log #FR106 SAF-FUN Final Action: (2.3.7 FMGR Publications) Recommendation: 2.3.7 FMGR Publications. FM Global Research, FM Global, 1301 Atwood Avenue, P.O. Box 7500, Johnston, RI 02919. www.fmglobal.com ANSI/FM 4880, American National Standard for Evaluating Insulated Wall or Wall and Roof/Ceiling Assemblies, Plastic Interior Finish Materials, Plastic Exterior Building Panels, Wall/Ceiling Coating Systems, Interior or Exterior Finish Systems, 2007. FM Approval Standard 6921, Containers for Combustible Waste, 2004. UL 300, Standard for Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Commercial Cooking Equipment, 2005, Revised 2010. Statement: The UL 300 document is incorrectly positioned and is being moved to its correct location among the UL publications by a separate first revision. 101- Log #FR107 SAF-FUN Final Action: (2.3.9 UL Publications) Recommendation: 2.3.9 UL Publications. Underwriters Laboratories Inc., 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062-2096. www.ul.com ANSI/UL 9, Standard for Fire Tests of Window Assemblies, 2009. ANSI/UL 10B, Standard for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, 2008, Revised 2009. ANSI/UL 10C, Standard for Positive Pressure Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, 2009. ANSI/UL 263, Standard for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2007 2011. ANSI/UL 294, Standard for Access Control System Units, 1999, Revised 2010. ANSI/UL 300, Standard for Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Commercial Cooking Equipment, 2005, Revised 2010. UL 300A, Extinguishing System Units for Residential Range Top Cooking Surfaces, 2006. ANSI/UL 305, Standard for Safety Panic Hardware, 1997, Revised 2011. ANSI/UL 555, Standard for Fire Dampers, 2006, Revised 2010 2012. ANSI/UL 555S, Standard for Smoke Dampers, 1999, Revised 2010 2012. ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, 2008, Revised 2010. ANSI/UL 790, Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings, 2004, Revised 2008. ANSI/UL 924, Standard for Emergency Lighting and Power Equipment, 2006, Revised 2009 2011. ANSI/UL 1040, Standard for Fire Test of Insulated Wall Construction, 1996, Revised 2007. ANSI/UL 1315, Standard for Safety for Metal Waste Paper Containers, 2007. ANSI/UL 1479, Standard for Fire Tests of Through-Penetration Firestops, 2003, Revised 2010. ANSI/UL 1715, Standard for Fire Test of Interior Finish Material, 1997, Revised 2008. ANSI/UL 1784, Standard for Air Leakage Tests for Door Assemblies, 2001, Revised 2009. ANSI/UL 1975, Standard for Fire Tests for Foamed Plastics Used for Decorative Purposes, 2006. ANSI/UL 1994, Standard for Luminous Egress Path Marking Systems, 2004, Revised 2010. ANSI/UL 2079, Standard for Tests for Fire Resistance of Building Joint Systems, 2004, Revised 2008. Statement: The changes update the currently referenced UL documents to reflect the edition available at the time of the committee's First Draft meeting. The changes also move into the list the reference to UL 300 that had been misplaced in 2.3.7. 3
101- Log #FR103 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.21.2.1 Gross Floor Area) Recommendation: 3.3.21.2.1* Gross Floor Area. The floor area within the inside perimeter of the outside walls of the building under consideration with no deductions for hallways, stairs, closets, thickness of interior walls, columns, elevator and building services shafts, or other features, but excluding floor openings associated with atriums and communicating spaces. Statement: During the ROP phase of the development of the 2012 edition, a proposal sought to clarify whether the open area of an atrium or communicating space should be included or excluded from the gross floor area calculations. No change resulted due to ambiguity in the text received. The change is now being made for the 2015 edition. 101- Log #FR108 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.21.2.2 Net Floor Area) Recommendation: 3.3.21.2.2 Net Floor Area. The floor area within the inside perimeter of the outside walls, or the outside walls and fire walls of a building, or outside and/or inside walls that bound an occupancy or incidental use area requiring the occupant load to be calculated using net floor area under consideration with deductions for hallways, stairs, closets, thickness of interior walls, columns, or other features. Statement: The current definition only addresses the entire interior of a building but does not address the fact that there are often interior spaces within the overall building that require the use of net floor area for calculating occupant loads, for example, an incidental assembly use such as a conference room or any day care use within the space. 101- Log #FR109 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.31.1 Fire Barrier) Recommendation: 3.3.31.1 * Fire Barrier. A continuous membrane or a membrane with discontinuities created by protected openings with a specified fire protection rating, where such membrane is designed and constructed with a specified fire resistance rating to limit the spread of fire, that also restricts the movement of smoke. Statement: Fire barriers are not tested for the passage of smoke or products of combustion through the fire-rated assembly. The phrase "that also restricts the movement of smoke" is being deleted because it confuses the user into thinking incorrectly that fire barriers are smoke barriers. 101- Log #FR143 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.76 Evacuation) Recommendation: 3.3.76* Evacuation. The withdrawal of occupants from a building. [72: 2013] Statement: The term Evacuation is used in the Code and can benefit from a definition. The NFPA 72 definition is acceptable and has been extracted. 4
101- Log #FR110 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.81 Exit) Recommendation: 3.3.81* Exit. That portion of a means of egress that is separated from all other spaces of the building or structure by construction, location, or equipment as required to provide a protected way of travel to the exit discharge. Statement: Clarification that location (e.g., the front door to the outside from the lobby of an office building) offers the protection, required of an exit, based on its location, such that the protection is comparable to that provided to occupants of an upper floor by a fire-rated stair enclosure. 101- Log #FR111 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.107 Fire-Retardant-Treated Wood) Recommendation: 3.3.107 Fire-Retardant-Treated Wood. A wood product impregnated with chemical by a pressure process or other means during manufacture, treated to exhibit reduced surface-burning characteristics and resist propagation of fire. [703: 2015] which is tested in accordance with ASTM E 84,Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials, or ANSI/UL 723, Standard for Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Burning Materials, has a listed flame spread index of 25 or less, and shows no evidence of significant progressive combustion when the test is continued for an additional 20-minute period; nor does the front progress more than 10.5 ft (3.2 m) beyond the centerline of the burners at any time during the test. Statement: The NFPA Manual of Style does not allow requirements in definitions. The definition will be extracted from NFPA 703. 101- Log #FR113 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.124 Grade Plane) Recommendation: 3.3.124* 3.3.124 Grade Plane. A reference plane upon which vertical measurements of a building are based. representing the average of the finished ground level adjoining the building at all exterior walls. When the finished ground level slopes down from the exterior walls, the grade plane is established by the lowest points within the area between the building and the lot line or, when the lot line is more than 6 ft (1830 mm) from the building, between the building and a point 6 ft (1830 mm) from the building. Statement: The definition of "grade plane" was revised to be generic without requirements. The requirements in the definition were removed to reflect the NFPA Manual of Style. The requirements were moved to a new subsection 4.6.15. The asterisk added to the paragraph number denotes that annex text is being added. 101- Log #FR112 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.156 Joint) Recommendation: 3.3.156 Joint. A linear opening in or between adjacent assemblies that is designed to allow independent movement of the building. Statement: The term Joint is used in NFPA 101. The current definition found in NFPA 5000 is adequate for purposes of NFPA 101 and is being inserted into NFPA 101. As is standard practice, between NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 (two very closely related documents with common technical committees), the definition is not being shown as extracted text. 5
101- Log #FR116 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.221.1 Fire Protection Rating) Recommendation: 3.3.221.1 Fire Protection Rating. The designation indicating the duration of the fire test exposure to which a fire door assembly or fire window assembly was exposed and for which it met all the acceptance criteria as determined in accordance with NFPA 252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies, or NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies, respectively. Statement: The definition was revised for compliance with the NFPA Manual of Style. The portions removed are being placed in advisory annex A.3.3.221.1 Fire Protection Rating. 101- Log #FR145 SAF-FUN Final Action: (3.3.228 Relocation) Recommendation: 3.3.228 Relocation. The movement of occupants to a safer area within the same building. Statement: The term Relocation is used in the Code and can benefit from a definition. The committee chose not to use the preferred definition from NFPA 72 as it did not meet the Code's needs. 101- Log #FR100 SAF-FUN Final Action: (4.4.2.3) Recommendation: 4.4.2.3 Where a requirement of this Code conflicts with another requirement of this Code, the following shall apply: (1)* Where a specific requirement specific requirements contained in Chapters 11 through 43 conflicts with a general requirement differ from general requirements contained in Chapters 1 through 4, and Chapters 6 through 10, the requirement requirements of Chapters 11 through 43 shall govern. (2)* Where a requirement contained in Chapters 1 through 4 and Chapters 6 through 10 conflicts with another requirement contained in Chapters 1 through 4 and Chapters 6 through 10, the more specific requirement shall govern. (3)* Where a requirement contained in Chapters 11 through 43 conflicts with another requirement contained in Chapters 11 through 43, the more specific requirement shall govern. Statement: The revision clarifies how to apply the code when there appear to be conflicts between provisions. Also, related new annex text examples are being added by a separate first revision. 101- Log #FR115 SAF-FUN Final Action: (4.6.15) Recommendation: 4.6.15 Grade Plane. The grade plan shall be established by calculating the average of the finished ground level adjoining the building at all exterior walls. Where the finished ground level slopes down from the exterior walls, the grade plane shall be established by the lowest points within the area between the building and the lot line or, where the lot line is more than 6 ft (1.8 m) from the building, between the building and a point 6 ft (1.8 m) from the building. Statement: The new text was removed from the Chapter 3 definition of Grade Plane, for compliance with the NFPA Manual of Style, and positioned as a new subsection 4.6.15. 6
101- Log #FR117 SAF-FUN Final Action: (4.8.2.1(3)) Recommendation: 4.8.2.1* Emergency plans shall include the following: (1) Procedures for reporting of emergencies (2) Occupant and staff response to emergencies (3)* Evacuation, relocation and shelter-in-place procedures appropriate to the building, its occupancy, emergencies, and hazards (see Section 4.3) (4) Appropriateness of the use of elevators (5) Design and conduct of fire drills (6) Type and coverage of building fire protection systems (7) Other items required by the authority having jurisdiction Statement: Exclusive use of the term evacuation in the context of emergency planning does not accurately represent planning to keep people separated from fire and other comparable hazards. Best practice often involves moving people to safer locations in buildings and keeping them where they are already located. 101- Log #FR130 SAF-FUN Final Action: (4.8.2.3) Recommendation: 4.8.2.3* 4.8.2.3 Emergency plans shall be reviewed and updated as required by the authority having jurisdiction. Statement: The asterisk is added for correlation with the new annex material being created. 101- Log #FR118 SAF-FUN Final Action: (6.1.14.4) Recommendation: 6.1.14.4 Separated Occupancies. (See also 6.1.14.1.2.) Statement: The user needs to be made aware that the provision of 6.1.14.1.2 might preclude using the provisions of 6.1.14.4 for separated occupancies, forcing the user to employ the provisions of 6.1.14.3 for mixed occupancies. 101- Log #FR121 SAF-FUN Final Action: (6.1.14.4.1) Recommendation: 6.1.14.4.1 Where separated occupancies are provided, each part of the building comprising a distinct occupancy, as described in this chapter, shall be completely separated from other occupancies by fire-resistive assemblies, as specified in 6.1.14.4.2, 6.1.14.4.3, Table 6.1.14.4.1(a), and Table 6.1.14.4.1(b), unless separation is provided by approved existing separations or as otherwise permitted by 6.1.14.4.6. Statement: Correlative change to accommodate a new provision, 6.1.14.4.6, related to permitting atrium walls to be part of the separation required for creating separated occupancies on a story-by-story basis. 7
101- Log #FR119 SAF-FUN Final Action: (6.1.14.4.5) Recommendation: 6.1.14.4.5* Each separated portion of the building shall comply with the requirements for the occupancy therein. Statement: The provisions of 6.1.14.4 provide all the information on separated occupancies except how one complies with the Code when using the separated occupancies form of protection. 101- Log #FR122 SAF-FUN Final Action: (6.1.14.4.6) Recommendation: 6.1.14.4.6 Where permitted in Chapters 11 through 43, atrium walls shall be permitted to serve as part of the separation required by 6.1.14.4.1 for creating separated occupancies on a story-by-story basis, provided all of the following are met: (a) The atrium is separated from adjacent areas by walls that are smoke partitions in accordance with Section 8.4. (b) Doors in the smoke partitions required by 6.1.14.4.6(a) are equipped with positive latching hardware. (c) The atrium meets the provisions of 8.6.7 that are applicable to new atriums. Statement: It is common practice to permit the upper floors of an atrium building housing, for example, hotel guest rooms to be considered separated occupancies from the assembly occupancies on the lower floors although the floors are interconnected via the atrium. This practice is not allowed by current Code text. The proposed new 6.1.14.4.6 adds the necessary safeguards to codify the practice. Existing atriums are permitted exemptions not permitted of new atriums. Any atrium used with 6.1.14.4.6 will need to meet the criteria applicable to a new atrium. An atrium meeting the requirements of 8.6.7 for new atriums provides protection of vertical openings comparable to that achieved by fire resistance-rated shaft enclosures. The protected atrium and fire-rated floor/ceiling assemblies work together to permit separated occupancies to be accomplished on a story-by-story basis in the same way that fire-rated floor/ceiling assemblies alone create separated occupancies in a non-atrium building. Note that the provision will be permitted to be employed only where the applicable occupancy chapters permit. For example, in the atrium building described above, both the hotel occupancy chapter and the assembly occupancy chapter would need to permit the use of 6.1.14.4.6. The SAF-FUN technical committee foresees the possibility that some occupancy chapters might permit use of the new provision only with respect to certain other occupancies. For example, the health care occupancy chapter might not permit the provision to be used where the other occupancy is industrial or storage. 8
101- Log #FR123 SAF-FUN Final Action: (43.7.1.2) Recommendation: 43.7.1.2 A change of use that does not involve a change of occupancy classification but that creates a hazardous area shall comply with one of the following: (1) The change of use shall comply with the requirements applicable to the new use in accordance with the applicable occupancy chapter for new construction. (2) For existing health care occupancies protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with 9.7.1.1(1), where a change in use of a room or space not exceeding 250 ft 2 (23.2 m 2 ) results in a room or space that is described by 19.3.2.1.5(7), the requirements for new construction shall not apply, provided that the enclosure meets the requirements of 19.3.2.1.2 through 19.3.2.1.4 and 19.3.2.1.3. Statement: The current language permits a room or space in a sprinkler protected health care occupancy to be converted to a storage room without meeting the requirements for new construction for a 1-hour fire-resistance rated enclosure. Currently, 43.7.1.2(2) requires the room to be separated from other spaces by a smoke partition (per 19.3.2.1.2), doors must be self-closing or automatic-closing (per 19.3.2.1.3), and doors in rated enclosures are permitted to have nonrated, factory-, or field applied protective plates extending not more than 48 in. (1220 mm) above the bottom of the door (per 19.3.2.1.4). The provision of 19.3.2.1.2 permits the room to be separated from other spaces by a non fire-rated smoke partition, therefore the requirements of 19.3.2.1.4 for doors in rated enclosures does not apply. The height of protective plates is not limited on non fire protection rated hazardous area doors. The substantiation for the language entering the code via the 2011 ROP/ROC stated the storage room would be enclosed in smoke resisting walls and doors provided with self of automatic closing hardware, however no mention was made to the height of the protective plate. 101- Log #FR124 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.1.1.5) Recommendation: A.1.1.5 Life safety in buildings includes more than safety from fire. Although fire safety has been the long-standing focus of NFPA 101, its widely known title, Life Safety Code, and its technical requirements respond to a wider range of concerns, including, for example, crowd safety. Code requirements that contribute to the safe movement of people during fire emergencies might also assist in responding to many other hazards that require decisions about where people can be safely located. Statement: The added text clarifies the annex by providing an example where code provisions may help safeguard building occupants threatened by non-fire "comparable" hazards associated with 1.1.5, Considerations Not Related to Fire. 101- Log #FR147 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.1.4.3) Recommendation: However, the equivalency clause in 1.4.3 permits the use of alternative systems, methods, or devices to meet the intent of the prescribed code provisions where approved as being equivalent. Equivalency provides an opportunity for a performance-based design approach. Through the rigor of a performance-based design, it can be demonstrated whether a building design is satisfactory and complies with the implicit or explicit intent of the applicable code requirement. Statement: The statement being deleted is not true. The performance-based approach is specifically provided for, and permitted, by 4.4.1. 9
101- Log #FR148 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.2.1(3)) Recommendation: A.2.1(3) The Committee on Safety to Life recognizes that it is sometimes impractical to continually upgrade existing buildings or installations to comply with all the requirements of the referenced publications included in Chapter 2. Statement: Continual upgrading is impractical, not just sometimes. 101- Log #FR125 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.31.1 Fire Barrier) Recommendation: A.3.3.31.1 Fire Barrier. A fire barrier, such as a wall or floor assembly, might be aligned vertically or horizontally aligned, such as a wall or floor assembly. Although the continuity of a fire barrier will often limit the transfer of smoke. it should not be confused with either a smoke barrier or a smoke partition. Statement: Fire barriers are not tested for the passage of smoke or products of combustion through the assembly. The annex text clarifies the concept. See associated change being made to the definition of Fire Barrier. 101- Log #FR151 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.31.3 Thermal Barrier) Recommendation: A.3.3.31.3 Thermal Barrier. Finish ratings, as published in the UL Fire Resistance Directory, are one way of determining thermal barrier. A test method was developed in order to assess whether a material, product, or assembly constitutes a thermal barrier (see NFPA 275). It requires thermal barriers to meet both a test for fire resistance (temperature transmission test), which limits temperature rise on the unexposed side, and a test for reaction-to-fire (integrity fire test), intended to demonstrate that the material can prevent or delay ignition of the material on the unexposed side. The reaction to fire test is one of the following: NFPA 286, FM 4880, UL 1040, or UL 1715. Statement: The revision adds text that is in NFPA 5000 for correlation. 101- Log #FR144 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.76 Evacuation) Recommendation: A.3.3.76 Evacuation. Evacuation does not include the relocation of occupants within a building. Statement: The annex supports the definition of Evacuation being added to Chapter 3. 10
101- Log #FR126 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.82.2 Limited Care Facility) Recommendation: A.3.3.88.2 Limited Care Facility. Limited care facilities and residential board and care occupancies both provide care to people with physical and mental limitations. However, the goals and programs of the two types of occupancies differ greatly. The requirements in this Code for limited care facilities are based on the assumption that these are medical facilities, that they provide medical care and treatment, and that the patients are not trained to respond to the fire alarm; that is, the patients do not participate in fire drills but, rather, await rescue. (See Section 18.7.) The requirements for residential board and care occupancies are based on the assumption that the residents are provided with personal care and activities that foster continued independence, that the residents are encouraged and taught to overcome their limitations, and that most residents, including all residents in prompt and slow homes, are trained to respond to fire drills to the extent they are able. Residents are required to participate in fire drills. (See Section 32.7.) Persons with Alzheimer's and related illnesses might be located in a nursing home, limited care facility, or board and care facility. For such persons, it is the level of care provided, not the medical diagnosis, that matters for the purposes of determining whether the facility should meet the requirements for limited care. Where personal care is provided but medical or custodial care is not, the limited care definition does not typically apply. It is the intent of this definition that it not apply to persons not receiving medical or custodial care, provided they are able to assist in their own evacuation, regardless of their medical diagnosis. Statement: There has been a great deal of disagreement across the country as to whether facilities serving persons with Alzheimer's and related dementia-type illnesses should be considered limited care or residential board and care. Although prior editions of NFPA 101 relied on evacuation capability to determine this, the current means is the type of care provided. This removes the burden of determining when a resident's evacuation capability has changed from the authority having jurisdiction. For the 2012 edition of the Code, the requirements for large board and care facilities were enhanced to accommodate residents for whom evacuation is difficult but who live in facilities that provide personal care only. The added language, for the 2015 edition, merely clarifies the current intent, which is that the level of care provided be the basis for determining the facility requirements, not the medical diagnosis. 101- Log #FR114 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.124 Grade Plane) Recommendation: A.3.3.124 Grade Plane. See 4.6.15 for provisions for establising the grade plane. Vertical measurements might be used in determining the number of stories or building height. Statement: The new annex supports the revision to the definition of "grade plane" which was made to be generic without requirements. The requirements were moved to a new subsection 4.6.15 and the user needs to be directed there, via this new annex text. 11
101- Log #FR127 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.181.1 Ambulatory Health Care Occupancy) Recommendation: A.3.3.188.1 Ambulatory Health Care Occupancy. It is not the intent that occupants be considered to be incapable of self-preservation just because they are in a wheelchair or use assistive walking devices, such as a cane, a walker, or crutches. Rather, it is the intent to address emergency care centers that receive patients who have been rendered incapable of self-preservation due to the emergency, such as being rendered unconscious as a result of an accident or being unable to move due to sudden illness. It is not the intent that the term anesthesia be limited to general anesthesia. Statement: Dental offices administer nitrous oxide (a dissociative anesthesia) more frequently than general anesthesia to create a "conscious sedation". The effects of nitrous oxide can take as long as 5 minutes to dissipate after the gas is stopped. Side effects such as confusion, sleepiness, hypnosis, forgetfulness, and hallucinations are typical. Although the patient may be conscious during treatment, the sedation created by the administration of nitrous oxide makes that patient "incapable of self-preservation", and assistance from others in a time of emergency happening during treatment may be necessary. 101- Log #FR142 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.3.3.221.1 Fire Protection Rating) Recommendation: A.3.3.221.1 Fire Protection Rating. The acceptance criteria for determining fire protection ratings for fire door assemblies are described in NFPA 252, Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Door Assemblies and those for fire window assemblies are described in NFPA 257, Standard on Fire Test for Window and Glass Block Assemblies. Statement: The text formerly appeared in the Chapter 3 definition of Fire Protection Rating and had the effect of being requirements within a definition. The definition, in Chapter 3, is being revised to remove requirements. 12
101- Log #FR101 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.4.4.2.3) Recommendation: A.4.4.2.3(1) As an example, Table 7.2.2.2.1.1(a) limits a new stair to having a maximum riser height of 7 in. (180 mm) and 12.2.5.6.6 limits a new aisle stair in an assembly occupancy to having a maximum riser height of 8 in. (205 mm), 9 in. (230 mm) or 11 in. (280 mm). The specific provisions of 12.2.5.6.6 are intended to govern the maximum riser height for the new aisle stairs in assembly occupancies, not the general riser height requirement of Table 7.2.2.2.1.1(a). A.4.4.2.3(2) As an example, 7.1.3.2.1 requires an exit stair to be enclosed and separated from the remainder of the building by fire resistance-rated construction of at least one hour and 8.6.5 requires a minimum fire resistance rating of 1/2 hour for the enclosure of an existing floor opening. A existing hole in a floor used for a stair creates a vertical opening subject to the enclosure and protection requirements of 8.6.5. Where such stair is used as an exit stair, it is subject to the requirements of 7.1.3.2.1 for the separation and enclosure of exits. The case of a stair used as an exit stair is more specific than the case of a non-exit stair that creates a vertical opening. The provision of 7.1.3.2.1 governs with respect to the required fire resistance rating of the exit stair enclosure. A.4.4.2.3(3) As an example, the provision of 11.8.2.2 that prohibits elevator lobby door locking in new high-rise buildings is more specific than the provision of 38.2.2.2.3 that permits elevator lobby exit access door-locking arrangements in accordance with 7.2.1.6.3 in new business occupancies. New high-rise business occupancy buildings are a specific subset of the general category of new business occupancy buildings. Extra provisions and limitations are mandated for new high-rise business occupancy buildings that are not mandated for new non high-rise business occupancy buildings. The specific provision of 11.8.2.2 is intended to govern the locking of elevator lobby doors, not the general provision of 38.2.2.2.3. Statement: The annex is added to provide examples to support the revised text of 4.4.2.3 relative to conflicts between requirements. 101- Log #FR146 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.4.5.4) Recommendation: A.4.5.4 Fire alarms alert occupants to initiate emergency procedures, facilitate orderly conduct of fire drills, and might initiate response by emergency services. Statement: Some occupancy chapters within NFPA 101 require fire alarm systems but do not require the alarm system to notify emergency responders. Thus, addition of the word "might" will more appropriately describe the function. 13
101- Log #FR149 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.4.6.12.3) Recommendation: A.4.6.12.3 Examples of such features include automatic sprinklers, fire alarm systems, standpipes, and portable fire extinguishers. The presence of a life safety feature, such as sprinklers or fire alarm devices, creates a reasonable expectation by the public that these safety features are functional. When systems are inoperable or taken out of service but the devices remain, they present a false sense of safety. Also, before taking any life safety features out of service, extreme care needs to be exercised to ensure that the feature is not required, was not originally provided as an alternative or equivalent, or is no longer required due to other new requirements in the current Code. It is not intended that the entire system or protection feature be removed. Instead, components such as sprinklers, initiating devices, notification appliances, standpipe hose, and exit systems should be removed to reduce the likelihood of relying on inoperable systems or features. Conversely, equipment, such as fire or smoke dampers, that is not obvious to the public should be able to be taken out of service if no longer required by this Code. Where a door that is not required to be fire protection-rated is equipped with a fire protection listing label, it is not the intent of 4.6.12.3 to require such door to be self- or automatic-closing due merely to the presence of the label. Statement: Some AHJs have been reported to rule that the presence of a listing label creates a public expectation of a certain level of fire performance of the door. Many builders use labeled doors where the opening is not required to be provided with a fire protection-rated door assembly. This is especially true of 20 minute fire-rated doors. The annex text is added to clarify the issue. 14
101- Log #FR128 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.4.8.2.1(3)) Recommendation: Insert 101_FR128 Tbl A.4.8.2.1(3) Revision Text (and at end of lengthy annex, make the following changes) For further guidance, see the following publications: (1) SFPE Engineering Guide to Human Behavior in Fire, which provides information on occupant characteristics, response to fire cues, decision making in fire situations, and methods for predicting evacuation times. (2) (1) NFPA Fire Protection Handbook, 19th edition, Section 2, Chapter 2, which provides good methodology for managing exposures and determining the method of evacuation (3) (2) NFPA Fire Protection Handbook, 19th edition, Section 13, which provides further commentary on methods of evacuation for different occupancies (4) (3) SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, Section 3, Chapter Chapters 11-13, which provides provide an overview of some of the research on methods of evacuation, and methods for predicting evacuation times Statement: The Committee is making two types of changes by this First Revision (FR). Although the changes are not related, they are contained in a single FR as letter balloting can be split no finer than any numbered paragraph. That paragraph is A.4.8.2.1(3). The first changes are to Table A.4.8.2.1(3) and are made to help support the use of terms in the existing annex text. The term "shelter in place" is more descriptive of what is addressed. The second set of changes apply to the referenced documents that appear at the end of the lengthy annex text. The SFPE Engineering Guide to Human Behavior in Fire describes all of the factors that contribute to the evacuations decisions that people might make and the time that it would take for them to evacuate once they decide to do so. As such, it should be included in this list of referenced publications. There are actually three chapters in the SFPE Handbook that are relevant to evacuation plans, so item (3) is proposed to be revised to reference the two that are not presently included. 15
Table A.4.8.2.1(3) Occupant Evacuation Strategies Managed Sequence Unmanaged Sequence Shelter in place No Evacuation Relocation or Partial Evacuation No-movement Remain in place Shelter-in-place upon direction Managed or controlled partial evacuation No-movement Remain in place Shelter-in-place per prior instruction Unmanaged movement or uncontrolled partial evacuation In-building relocation on same floor In-building relocation to different floors Occupants of some floors leave building Total Evacuation Managed or controlled total evacuation Unmanaged or uncontrolled total evacuation 101/FR128fm_FR94/A14
101- Log #FR129 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.4.8.2.3) Recommendation: A.4.8.2.3 Emergency action plans are a critical component of assuring life safety in buildings. Life safety is the result of an interaction of technical and social systems within the building and in the community. Gathering information to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of emergency action plans is important for verifying system performance and as a basis for improvement. Such reports should be retained by building management and used to inform the process for revision of the building emergency action plan. Following any drill or actual emergency or reported emergency occurring in the building, an after action report should be prepared by the building owner or designated representative to document the function of the building's life safety hardware, procedures, and occupant emergency organization. For ordinary drills and reported emergencies, areas of success and areas for improvement should be identified. For actual emergencies in the building, where there is major occupant movement, damage, or casualties, additional information should be collected. This includes questions concerning the event, as well as performance of life safety systems. It also identifies improvements in areas such as training, maintenance, interaction with local emergency response organizations, or occupant management. The reports from these significant events should be shared with the local emergency response organization. Statement: Currently, the Code does not contain adequate guidance on after action reporting. As the proposed language states, emergency action plans are a critical component for assuring life safety in buildings. A lot of time, effort, and coordination is required to put together an emergency action plan that is specific to the building. Emergency action plans vary from building to building and address the specific characteristics and hazards of that particular building. Thus, it is important to have means in place to review these plans after emergencies and ensure they are working effectively and are updated where necessary. 101- Log #FR131 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.1.1) Recommendation: The performance option of this Code establishes acceptable levels of risk to occupants of buildings and structures as addressed in Section 1.1. While the performance option of this Code does contain goals, objectives, and performance criteria necessary to provide an acceptable level of risk to occupants, it does not describe how to meet the goals, objectives, and performance criteria. Design and engineering are needed to develop solutions that meet the provisions of Chapter 5. The SFPE Engineering Guide to Performance-Based Fire Protection Analysis and Design of Buildings provides a framework for these assessments. Other useful references include the Australian Fire Engineering Guidelines and the British Standard Firesafety Engineering in Buildings. Statement: Update reference to current edition (the title was shortened in the second edition.) 101- Log #FR132 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.1.6) Recommendation: A.5.1.6 For guidance on reviewing performance-based designs, see the SFPE Enforcer s Code Official's Guide to Performance-Based Design Review. Additional guidance on reviewing designs in which fire risk assessment is used can be found in NFPA 551, Guide for the Evaluation of Fire Risk Assessments. Statement: Provide the correct title. This is an editorial change. 16
101- Log #FR133 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.2.2) Recommendation: Method 1. The design team can set detailed performance criteria that ensure that occupants are not incapacitated by fire effects. The SFPE Engineering Guide to Performance-Based Fire Protection Analysis and Design of Buildings describes a process of establishing tenability limits. The guide references D. A. Purser, Assessment of Hazards to Occupants from Smoke, Toxic Gasses, and Heat Toxicity Assessment of Combustion Products, Chapter 2/6, SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, which describes a fractional effective dose (FED) calculation approach, which is also contained in NFPA 269, Standard Test Method for Developing Toxic Potency Data for Use in Fire Hazard Modeling. FED addresses the effects of carbon monoxide, hydrogen cyanide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen bromide, and anoxia. It is possible to use the test data, combined with laboratory experience, to estimate the FED value that leads to the survival of virtually all people. This value is about 0.8. Statement: Update references to the current edition. 101- Log #FR134 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.5) Recommendation: Once the set of design fire scenarios is established, both those specified by 5.5.3.1 through 5.5.3.8 and those that are developed as required by 5.5.2, they need to be quantified into a format that can be used for the evaluation of proposed designs. The SFPE Engineering Guide to Performance-Based Fire Protection Analysis and Design of Buildings outlines a process and identifies tools and references that can be used at each step of this process. Statement: Update reference to the current edition. 17
101- Log #FR135 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.6) Recommendation: The SFPE Engineering Guide to Performance-Based Fire Protection Analysis and Design of Buildings outlines a process for evaluating whether trial designs meet the performance criteria during the design fire scenarios. Additional information on reviewing the evaluation of a performance-based design can be found in the SFPE Enforcer s Code Official's Guide to Performance-Based Design Review.... Verification and Validation. Models undergo limited validation. Most can be considered demonstrated only for the experimental results they were based on or the limited set of scenarios to which the model developers compared the model s output, or a combination of both. Models should undergo verification and validation to ensure that they are appropriate for their intended use. "Verification" is a check of the math used in the models. "Validation" is a check of the physics used in the model. The SFPE Guidelines for Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application provides a process for verifying and validating models. The Society of Fire Protection Engineers has a task group that independently evaluates computer models. In January 1998, they finished their first evaluation and had chosen a second model for evaluation. Until more models can be independently evaluated, the model user has to rely on the available documentation and previous experience for guidance regarding the appropriate use of a given model. Statement: The changes update reference to the current edition and provide correct title of the document. Modern methods for evaluating fire models recognize that there are two aspects of model evaluation: verification and validation. Verification ensures that the model is working as designed; that the equations are being properly solved. It essentially is a check of the mathematics. Validation is a check of the physics are the equations an appropriate description of the fire scenario? The revised text would make reference to the SFPE Guidelines for Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application, which were written as a method to provide confidence to model users and AHJs that models are being used appropriately. The text regarding SFPE's computer model evaluation task group was deleted because the task group was disbanded. 101- Log #FR136 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.6.3.3) Recommendation: A.5.6.3.3 Procedures used to develop required input data need to preserve the intended conservatism of all scenarios and assumptions. Conservatism is only one means to address the uncertainty inherent in calculations and does not eliminate the need to consider safety factors, sensitivity analysis, and other methods of dealing with uncertainty. The SFPE Engineering Guide to Performance-Based Fire Protection Analysis and Design of Buildings SFPE Guidelines for Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application outlines a process for identifying and treating uncertainty and other inaccuracies introduced through the use of fire models. Statement: The SFPE Guidelines for Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application provide much more comprehensive methods for treating uncertainty and other sources of inaccuracy associated with the use of fire models. 18
101- Log #FR137 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.6.4) Recommendation: A.5.6.4 An assessment method translates input data, which might include test specifications, parameters, or variables for modeling, or other data, into output data, which are measured against the performance criteria. Computer fire models should be evaluated to ensure that they are appropriate for their intended use for their predictive capability in accordance with the SFPE Guidelines for Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application ASTM E 1355, Standard Guide for Evaluating the Predictive Capability of Deterministic Fire Models. Statement: The process described in ASTM E-1355 has only been used a small number of times, and many of the evaluations took a person-year or more to conduct. Indeed, SFPE's application of this process to DETACT-QS, which is one of the simplest fire models in existence, took thousands for person-hours to complete. Clearly, this methodology is impractical for individual project use. The SFPE Guidelines for Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application were written specifically for individual uses of fire models. The Engineering Guide to Substantiating a Fire Model for a Given Application provides a framework for determining and documenting the suitability of a fire model for use in a specific application. The framework in the guide is applicable to all types of fire models, ranging from algebraic calculations to zone or lumped parameter models to CFD or field models. The guide addresses: Definition of the problem that is intended to be solved using modeling Selection of a candidate model Model verification and validation Uncertainty analysis 101- Log #FR138 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.5.8.1) Recommendation: The SFPE Engineering Guide to Performance-Based Fire Protection Analysis and Design of Buildings describes the documentation that should be provided for a performance-based design. Statement: Update reference to current edition. 101- Log #FR120 SAF-FUN Final Action: (A.6.1.14.4.5) Recommendation: A.6.1.14.4.5 Where the Code text states that the provision has applicability to the building, rather than just to the occupancy, the provision applies to the entire building, regardless of whether the separated occupancies form of protection is used. For example, the provision of 18.3.5.1 requires that the entire building housing a health care occupancy be sprinklered. Contrast that with the requirement of 20.3.4.1 which requires an ambulatory health care facility, and not the entire building, to be provided with a fire alarm system. Statement: Clarification on the use of the provisions for separated occupancies. 19