|
In California (and other states), are diesel fire pumps subject to emissions requirements, or are they exempt?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
4 Comments
I have always assumed that we only design for one fire in a building at a given time, and in a campus-style site with a single water supply, a fire in one building only.
Is that written anywhere, or just the agreed-upon practice? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Do I need a separate 6" fire line to a building sprinkler system, and a second water line for all other uses?
This is for an NFPA 13 system. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe The IBC section 403.3.3 requires an automatic on-site secondary water supply for high-rise buildings in seismic zone C or greater.
Does NFPA have a similar requirement for on-site water storage in a seismic zone? All I can find are the bracing requirements in NFPA 13, but I am not seeing anything in NFPA 101 or NFPA 5000. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Our project is a school campus with nine buildings.
The Civil Engineer has designed the underground so that three buildings are controlled from a single PIV and an FDC. Additionally, they want butterfly valves on each fire sprinkler riser. Does shutting off three buildings become an issue, and is this within the NFPA 13 parameters to dictate this one way or another? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Where can I find guidance for fire flow for an outdoor lumberyard?
The IBC, Appendix B and C are for Buildings. It specifically says: "This appendix does not apply to structures other than buildings." Is there anything in the FM data sheets, or elsewhere? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are on the AHJ side, and Middle Housing requirements are on their way to increase density and reduce the cost of housing in our area. This will allow existing single-family residences to subdivide their lots, which may have up to four additional dwelling units on a parcel.
In anticipation of this, we are exploring options for residential fire sprinkler requirements beyond our already existing code for these small, ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit) type structures of 1,000 sqft maximum. We would like to maximize the possibilities of this by making the process as easy and inexpensive as possible. One avenue we are interested in is allowing for P2904 flow through sprinkler systems (Section P2904 of the IRC, prescriptive standard for one- and two-family dwellings) that can be installed by a plumber. We are open to omitting the fire plan review process and possibly even a bucket test, but still inspect for head placement, tenting, etc. What are your thoughts? Has anyone looked at this with any degree of success? We would love to hear any feedback you could provide. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a building that's Type III-B construction.
Does a recessed building entry's ceiling need to also be 2-hour fire resistance rated, and non-combustible? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe For cycle tracks within a road tunnel, what requirements exist for the bicycle tracks within the tunnels? I have not been able to find any fire or life safety requirements for cycle tracks within road tunnels (exit separation, fire suppression, detection, and emergency communication system requirements) in any codes or standards. Any suggestions on where I could go to or any research papers that I could refer? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe  I am trying to understand the criteria for designing window sprinklers for a tall glass space.
The application is a very large façade greater than 300 feet (91 m) long and 45 feet (14 m) high. The vertical mullions are 14'-9" center to center (4.5 m). What is the definition of a story, and how does it apply as stated in NFPA 13 8.7.8.1 "A single line of sprinklers is permitted to protect a maximum of two stories of wall area or two levels of vertically aligned windows where architectural features are sufficiently flush to allow rundown?" This height seems like it would be well above a two-story height, but what would that be reasonably defined as? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am preparing an assessment for adding a fire protection sprinkler system to an approximately 9,000 sqft existing single-story building that is a state half-way house for juveniles after being released from detention. Fewer than 16 occupants excluding staff.
The architect has deemed it Group R-3 occupancy (although I wonder if Group R-4 Condition 1 is more appropriate.) IFC 903.3.1.2 permits NFPA 13R throughout Group R, and this meets the three stated conditions for this section. Section 903.1.3 allows NFPA 13D in some applications; the list is separated by semicolons and includes R-3 and R-4 condition 1. However, more square feet of this facility is dedicated to non-residential purposes (meeting rooms, classrooms, kitchen, etc.). This seems counter to the scope of NFPA 13D. Even the IFC commentary mentions the use of 13D, but for one- and two-family dwellings. And I'd prefer an FDC and more than a 10-minute water duration. I'm a sprinkler guy, and not a building code expert. My gut says NFPA 13R is most appropriate (and I will ask the building code official), but what nuance am I missing here? Budget-wise NFPA 13D is way more favorable, but it just doesn't seem right. I'd like to know if both NFPA 13D & NFPA 13R are acceptable options for this type of building. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 2001, Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems now require an egress time study to show that the design limits exposure to halocarbon agents is no longer than 5 minutes, like FK-5-1-12 (NOVEC 1230), HFC-227ea (FM 200).
This comes from 2018 Edition Section 1.5.14, 2020 Edition Section 4.3.4, and 2022 Edition Section 4.3.4. Exposure time for inert gas agents will depend on the oxygen levels within the space or room. Concentration below 43 percent shall be permitted where exposure is no longer than 5 minutes. Concentration between 43 and 52 percent shall be permitted where exposure is no longer than 3 minutes. The annex of NFPA 2001 tells us to review the NFPA Handbook and the SFPE Handbook for more information. Is anyone doing these calculations, and if so, what exit flow, movement speed, and reaction time would you consider appropriate for spaces using these systems? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Section 9.2.2 in NFPA 14 allows protection for a standpipe that is not in a stairway to be "the piping is enclosed in fire-rated construction with a rating equal to that of the enclosed fire-rated exit stairway." In the Gypsum Association Manual WP 3910 for a chase wall with staggered studs has a rating of 2 hours. Does such a 2-hour rated chase meet the intent of NFPA 14 when the standpipe is not in the stair? Thank you for your feedback! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe  We're looking at "refuge areas" per 2024 IBC (not to be confused with "areas of refuge" in NFPA 101) within smoke compartments to satisfy the requirements for smoke barriers in Group I-1, Condition 2 in the IBC. Can the "refuge area" be calculated to include portions of the floor/smoke compartment that are open to the exterior of the building? For example, an occupant load of 80 persons receiving care on the fifth floor of a Group I-1, Condition 2 occupancy would require a minimum of two (2) smoke compartments to be provided (420.6). Each smoke compartment must be provided with a refuge area sized to accommodate 15 sqft/care recipient plus 6 sqft/other occupant and "areas or spaces permitted to be included in the calculation of the refuge area are corridors, lounge or dining areas and other low-hazard areas" (420.6.1). If each side of the smoke compartment is provided with an exterior lounge/amenity area, may this be used as the "refuge area" to meet the minimum required square footage?  Before people say, "Ask the AHJ," I am him; he is me.
I have an applicant who has combined plots of land with a mid-rise and some detached townhouses. A shared fire line supplies the two structures, but only the mid-rise FACP monitors the supply tamper. The townhouse FACP will not know if the water is off (except for the tampers at the risers within the townhouse). The buildings are owned by the same ownership. They are arguing they are technically meeting IBC 2015 903.4 "Valves controlling the water supply for automatic sprinkler systems, pumps, tanks, water levels, and temperatures, critical air pressures, and waterflow switches on all sprinkler systems shall be electrically supervised by a listed fire alarm control unit." It is being monitored, but the fire marshal and I are of the opinion this doesn't provide monitoring for the townhouse and does not meet the intent of the code. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether a shared line can be monitored by only one building that it serves? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe My company is hiring a contractor to install our central station headend equipment (servers and software).
I would like to include the testing requirements in the statement of work. I looked through NFPA 72-19 Chapters 14 and 26, as well as other chapters and codes. I do not see the requirements for central station headend testing. I think the subscribers will need to ping the central station with the date, emergency code, building, etc. Does code require a minimum amount of information the subscribers must send to the Central Station? If so, could you tell me the required subscriber information that needs to be sent to the central station or provide the location in code for the information to be sent to the central station from the subscribers? I don't see any requirements or criteria for testing, and I want to be sure we're conducting this appropriately. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe My company just completed design/build construction of a canopy structure over a courtyard between two restaurant buildings located on the east & west sides. We assigned an Occupancy Classification of A-5. The structure is all steel, other than the roof construction is comprised of the following layers: 22 gauge steel B deck, 7/16 inch OSB, 24 gauge metal standing seam. The standing seam contractor asked for a solid substrate, instead of metal to metal (Standing Seam attached to the B Deck. We agreed to add the OSB. We examined the 2018 IBC and assessed that we could use the OSB. Our assessment concluded that the entire structure could be built with wood framing without sprinklers (A-5, no enclosures, height 37ft, 6,090 sf, Type V(A) Construction). The AHJ shut us down and told us we needed to remove the OSB (combustible material). What we didn't know was that the City and developer executed a Covenant Agreement that stipulated the Canopy was an A-3 Assembly occupancy. This was arranged because the developer didn't want the exterior restaurant walls to be fire-rated because of the ease of movement from the restaurant to the courtyard. As a result, the OSB needs to be changed to fire-retardant-treated plywood. Was the original classification of A-5 occupancy (which could have been wood) canopy assembly an acceptable approach? Picture below, showing the galvanized steel deck. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe  I am designing a wet pipe fire sprinkler system in a one story Group B occupancy (16-ft high). The building is about 90,000 sqft in area. The building will be fully sprinklered with two zone control valve assemblies.
The fire department is asking to add fire hose valve cabinets as the interior remote areas of the building are more than 130 feet from an exterior door, only citing that its required by IBC 2021. Is this correct? I can't find this requirement. Any help is appreciated. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe If a duct detector is installed, and the mechanical unit has a capacity of less than 2,000 CFM, it is required by code for the duct detector to be connected to the fire alarm panel?
Alternatively, removing the detectors can be considered in this situation. Looking for relevant code and standard basis. We're under the 2021 IFC, 2021 IBC, and 2019 NFPA 72. Thank you! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe My jurisdiction (I am the AHJ) has had several buildings built with private hydrants supplying the sprinkler system where the main comes into the building, through the RPZ, feeds the sprinkler system/standpipes, and leaves the building and feeds the hydrant(s).  This has always seemed counterintuitive to me, at best. I feel we are "robbing Peter to pay Paul" and have wondered if this arrangement will adequately supply the sprinkler system when we (FD) pull water from the hydrant and pump it back into the FDC.
Per our state law, private hydrants have to be "protected" with a backflow. Is this configuration code compliant, and if not, what is a solution? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe What specific criteria or code references determine whether a standpipe system is classified as 'separated' rather than 'combined'?
I've seen AHJs state that even though the sprinkler system and the standpipe have separate vertical riser assemblies (control valve, check valve, and supervision), they are fed from the same underground supply (one underground service main) and will still be considered combined. We are working on a project where the AHJ has deemed the building 'partially sprinklered,' requiring the standpipe to be upgraded from 4" to 6" (which would necessitate a pump) but only if it is a combined system. We are looking for clarification or language that supports the distinction between a combined and a separated standpipe system to explore options that may avoid the need for a pump. Additionally, does anyone have thoughts on how we might be able to keep the standpipe at 4" or explore alternative approaches to avoid the pump requirement? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Subject: Two story convenience opening separation from corridors. NFPA 101 (2021 edition) Section 8.6.9.1 permits convenience openings for two adjacent stories. But, these convenience openings shall be separated from corridors (requirement #3) and further states that separation should be by a smoke partition (requirement #5). How do you define a corridor versus an open floor area or lobby per NFPA 101, since no definitions are given within the code? Jurisdiction is required to follow NFPA 1 and NFPA 101. For example, a building has a large assembly space on the second floor. All doors from the assembly space lead to a ~40'-0" wide circulation space (+200'-0" long in the other direction). To reach the building exit stair, occupants from the assembly room must traverse the 40'-0" wide circulation space. Within this circulation space is a ~20'-0" x 40'-0" vertical opening that connects the 1st and 2nd floor. Should this circulation space be considered a corridor, and should the vertical opening be prohibited from being classified as a convenience opening without a smoke partition separating from the corridor? Or is the 2nd floor space to be considered an open floor area, with exits immediately accessible in different directions (NFPA 101 7.5.1.1.1) and not consider it a corridor? The width of the circulation space seems too wide to be defined as a corridor but NFPA only provides minimum width requirements for corridors, and no maximum width for a space to be considered a corridor as far as I can determine. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe  Is there anything in the code that specifically talks about EV (Electric Vehicle) charging stations?
Anything that might say "If you are adding EV Stations in a garage the sprinkler system must be checked, upgraded or analyzed?" Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I'm working on an interesting scenario in which the client would like one main line into the building for fire and to tee off that line inside the building, with one line going to a giant indoor tank that holds 350,000 gallons.
It would be filled just one time per year. Assume 1,000 gpm for 6 hours that one time per year. First - do you all see this as a possibility right off the bat? We were talking about putting motorized valves wired back to FACP that shut off if the fire protection activates flow as a potential solution if it could work. Initially I asked about a water tank for that until I learned it was 350,000 gallons. Second - is it even possible to calculate out in that scenario? One thing I love about FPE is the unique, always challenging scenarios that come up regularly. I'm looking forward to figuring out how we're going to handle this facility. Thanks in advance for any input. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are a large metropolitan area with multiple universities that have been operating for decades with high levels of hazardous materials. They want to have separated control areas, but their building construction does not meet current requirements.
On one side we can only enforce the code that these were built to, which was BOCA or even no building code at the time, but on the other hand, there is a reason why control areas came about in the first place. As they cannot easily upgrade the structure to meet 2-hr requirements, I am planning on just using equivalent level of safety through sprinkler protection and other factors, but was wondering if anyone had experience doing enforcement like this? Is NFPA 45 enforceable here? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe |
ALL-ACCESS
SUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop June '25 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
July 2025
PE PREP SERIES |
RSS Feed
