Thanks Craig, I did end up finding it. This is a non-combustible attic with limited access, and due to the construction, it wouldn't be possible to use the space for storage.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 8:57 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > There are provisions for omission of sprinklers in specific areas. > Electrical rooms are one example I run into quite often. BUT, in order to > omit the sprinklers, other construction and operational measures must be > followed as listed in both NFPA 13 and the Building/Fire Codes. If those > other requirements are met, even though that room may be unsprinklered, the > intent of "throughout" is still met. > > There have been other cases where a substation of fire protection and > prevention/control measures are required in lieu of sprinklers for a > portion of a building. The omission of sprinklers in the one portion did > not render the building non-compliant with NFPA 8.1.1. > > If you have a unique condition it is best to seek opinion and acceptance > of the AHJ and/or Owners' Underwriter/Risk Consultant. > > > > 8.1.1* The requirements for spacing, location, and position of sprinklers > shall be based on the following principles: > (1) Sprinklers shall be installed throughout the premises. > > A.8.1.1 This standard contemplates full sprinkler protection for all areas > including walk-in > coolers, freezers, bank vaults, and similar areas. Other NFPA standards > that mandate sprinkler > installation might not require sprinklers in certain areas. Based upon > experience and testing, > sprinklers have been found to be effective and necessary at heights in > excess of 50 ft > (15.2 m). For a building to meet the intended level of protection afforded > by NFPA 13, sprinklers > must not be omitted from such high ceiling spaces. The requirements of > this standard > should be used insofar as they are applicable. The authority having > jurisdiction should be consulted > in each case. A building is considered sprinklered throughout when > protected in accordance > with the requirements of this standard. > > > Craig L. Prahl > Fire Protection Group Lead > CH2MHILL > Lockwood Greene > 1500 International Drive > Spartanburg, SC 29303 > Direct - 864.599.4102 > Fax - 864.599.8439 > CH2MHILL Extension 74102 > [email protected] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jamie Seidl > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:34 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: fully sprinklered definition > > I seem to remember that there was a paragraph in NFPA 13 that a building > is considered fully sprinklered even when areas remain sprinklered where > allowable by this standard. Did I just dream this? I can not find it this > morning. > Thanks, > Jamie > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > -- \ \ (o> -- If life were easy... \ \_/ /) It'd be called your mom... \_/_) _|_ _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
