To all, Remember that the building code defines that building area is "The area included within surrounding exterior walls (or exterior walls and fire walls) exclusive of vent shafts and courts. Areas of the building not provided with surrounding walls shall be included in the building area if such areas are included within the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above. building is considered as being within the a vertical projection of a plane from the eve to the ground."
Building Code officials have used this definition of "Area, Building" to require sprinkler protection in areas not contemplated by NFPA 13 or 13R such as open outside breezeways under the roof projection. Have a fire safe day. Jim Davidson Davidson Associates Fire Protection * Medical Gas * Code Consulting 302-994-9500 Fax:302-234-1781 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Blackwell Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 11:46 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13R Question Agreed. Thanks for the "heads-up" on the proposed changes. The NFPA standards cannot be applied in a vacuum without considering their context in the applicable building codes and anything else that can modify the legal landscape [such as laws, regulations, ordinances, etc.]. SC is an ICC state and IBC Section 903 [which addresses automatic sprinkler systems] adds additional exceptions where sprinklers are not required, adds more stringent [electrical] valve supervision requirements, adds more stringent requirements for NFPA 13R systems in Type V construction, etc. I will look at the proposals in the ROP but as we all know we have to wait and see what actually makes it into the code. [I have been hopeful about previous proposals in the past such as one that would have clarified the protection of the so-called "breezeways" commonly found in apartment complexes and the exemption in the (then current) 2007 edition NFPA 13R 6.9.5 which included the phrase "open and attached". Unfortunately, the (majority) committee opinion didn't align with our previous policy regarding them so we ended up withdrawing our interpretation policy memorandum in light of the additional appendix and commentary regarding "open".] Respectfully, David W. S. Blackwell, II, PE, CFPE Engineer III Office of State Fire Marshal SC Department of Labor, Licensing, & Regulation, 141 Monticello Trail, Columbia, SC 29203 Telephone: 803.896.9800 [Office] 803.896.9833 [Direct] Fax: 803.896.9806 [Office] Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.scfiremarshal.llronline.com/ Please note that you can sign up to receive automatic information on SC Division of Fire and Life Safety current events, policies, laws and procedures by visiting our Web site at: http://www.scfiremarshal.llronline.com/ -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 10:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: NFPA 13R Question Concur with the below BUT (and its a big one), 13R is going through a big evolution on this issue. As Steve stated, whether or not to protect different PORTIONS of a building is a code decision. NFPA 13 and 13R historically have disagreed with this position but they are learning that they are not at the helm for this decision. Read the ROP and watch for the ROC after the Sept meetings. Roland Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives Dallas, TX http://www.firesprinkler.org On Aug 1, 2011, at 6:54 AM, David Blackwell wrote: > The 2010 edition of NFPA's Automatic Sprinkler Systems for > Residential Occupancies Handbook contains a lot of good commentary > on this subject in its treatment of NFPA 13R 7.2 [Design Criteria - > Outside Dwelling Unit]. If you don't have access to this, at least > note the appendix material in A.7.2 which makes it clear that NFPA > 13 is only partially referenced and is only for the specific > criteria listed in 7.2 and its subsections and does not bring in any > other rules from NFPA 13. > > It is very important to know whether the building is classified by > the Architect [and Building Official] as Residential Occupancy or > Mixed Occupancy because 2010 NFPA 13R 7.2.4.1 states clearly that > "For a mixed occupancy, [...], the BUILDING shall comply with NFPA > 13." This ties in with the appendix material in A1.1 regarding > scope which also addresses mixed occupancy. > > Note also there is a separate section specifically on garages in > 7.3; however, 7.3.2 will most likely send you back to 7.2. > > I'm sorry if the references aren't addressing the 2002 edition - we > haven't had the 2002 as a minimum standard in many years [since > January 26, 2007]. > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
