Standard for CT/PET-Scan, Tomotherapy Rooms?

7/19/2019

What is the fire protection standard for CT-Scan, PET/CT, tomotherapy, etc. rooms?

NFPA 13 notes only that occupancies shall have automatic fire sprinkler system or an approved alternative.

I have seen double standards in installed systems in one hospital project I worked in wherein the hospital AHJ proposed wet sprinkler system on one occasion while clean agent fire suppression system was used on another.

My concern is that an unconscious patient left inside the gantry by staff in panic can die if the clean agent fire suppression system discharges in the treatment room. Whereas, on another hand, millions worth CT, PET/CT, tomotherapy machines can be seriously damaged beyond repair if the wet sprinkler system works to put out fire inside the room.

It sometimes seems like a choice between protecting patients which is the core business of healthcare facilities or protecting costly property from damage. Is there an absolute standard to put a period to my query? Thanks.

Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

9 Comments

adam Hicks

7/19/2019 10:41:14 am

Jorge Diaz

7/19/2019 10:50:49 am

Although you are right in all your assumptions, my experience in hospitals gave me more insight.

First, we are dealing in a fine line between money and safety; it is not a choice between them but a balancing act.

It all boils down to spending money and insurance; all the rooms you mention does not require any special system (as opposed of MRI with the non-ferrous requirement); in my case, 4 different healthcare groups have different approaches; some wanted minimum code having only water while only one wanted clean gas and preaction. In all cases, the minimum code was to have sprinklers as main or backup.

All hospitals have the mission of protecting patients and have specific safety protocols, it does not stop something you described, but what is missing in that concept is, any fire protection system chosen will be to protect the integrity of the structure or the equipment; indirectly “saving lives”, while the direct line of saving lives will be the Fire Alarm system; once activated, not only people in the room will know, but a team will take action. So, the part of your concern, is already addressed.

As for the system to be used, it is ultimately decided by client, we can only advise them regarding all options they have and remind them to evaluate equipment losses, down-time on false alarms, AHJ minimum requirements and always request them to verify with their insurance or underwriter company; so they can take an educated decision.

pjd

7/19/2019 11:05:18 am

In Tennessee, any facility that bills to medicare or tenncare falls under the jurisdiction of the State Health Department. They assign a State Fire Marshal to these jobs.This includes hospitals, remote offices, dialysis clinics, etc. Check with the AHJ. They are likely to be on the I-codes. In that case, a clean agent system does not eliminate the requirement for water-based fire protection if the building is being considered "fully-sprinklered" per IFC NFPA 13. They may have their own adoption. The workaround if the client desires an added degree of protection for the equipment is a double-interlock preaction in conjunction with the clean agent system.

Rusty Scott

7/19/2019 12:46:08 pm

These methods are what I have been taught, sorry I don't have any code direction or standard to look at in advance. But this is what I've seen used. Also large hospitals have standards of design they expect to see so you may can research other hospitals published standards.

MRI - Pre-action with nonferrous piping and heads
CT - Pre-action with ferrous piping and heads
Xray - wet with ferrous piping and heads

I've seen double & single interlock used for the pre-action pending size and cost of equipment. Keep in mind most hospitals have private mode fire alarm signaling which places responsibility on the nurses, staff, and doctors to evacuate patients. What I'm saying is

I'm not sure what tomotherapy equipment is and how it functions but if I were to guess off the top of my head I would play it safe and treat like the MRI mentioned above.

Also lives are worth more than machines but I understand the dilemma you're facing.

Nimal Tissa Wijetunga

7/23/2019 09:19:18 pm

Consider property protection and Business Resilience without trade offs between Active and Passive Fire Protection, which gives much better life safety than codes and standards envisage and obviously the property protection.

Fernando Infante

4/26/2021 09:03:14 pm

One additional question, if possible? Have you guys ran into issues where the AHJ sites you because X Ray equipment moving head can potentially end up right in the location below one of the sprinkler heads in the room (just 3-4" below the head)? I have two rooms with Sprinkler Head at each end of the table, and AHCA Surveyor is citing us.

Nick Gassek

5/17/2024 08:26:11 am

Would CT rooms be considered light hazard or ordinary hazard? there seems to be a bit of gray area in the book.

5/18/2024 01:57:38 am

I would consider as Ordinary Hazard 2 for the sprinkler protection.

Colleen Mulligan

2/20/2025 11:17:57 am

I've also run into issues in hospitals where they wanted pre-action for MRI, but the detection for the pre-action system would cause issues with the actual MRI equipment. We had to install conventional detectors in the space and provide IMs outside the space to make them "addressable."

Standard for CT/PET-Scan, Tomotherapy Rooms?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES