Fire Protection Engineering

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

41 CFR Part 101-6

Fire Protection Engineering

AGENCY: Public Buildings Service (PBS), GSA.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The General Services Administration is proposing a regulation

to further define the term equivalent level of safety. The Federal Fire

Safety Act of 1992 amended the Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974

to require sprinklers or an equivalent level of safety, in certain

types of Federal Employee office buildings, Federal employee housing

units, and Federally assisted housing units. This regulation

establishes certain criteria which alternative approaches must satisfy

to be judged equivalent. These criteria have been selected to provide

the level of life safety prescribed in the Act.

DATES: To assure consideration, comments must be received at the

address, as provided below, no later than 5 p.m. on June 20, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Mail comments to the following address: General Services

Administration, Safety and Environmental Management Division (PMS),

Federal Fire Safety Act Comments, 18th & F Streets, NW., Washington, DC

20405.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald G. Bathurst, (202) 501-1271.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Requirements of the Act

The Fire Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-

522) was signed into law by the President on October 26, 1992. Section

106, Fire Safety Systems in Federally Assisted Buildings, of Title I--

United States Fire Administration, is commonly referred to as the

Federal Fire Safety Act of 1992. This section amends the Fire

Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) to require

sprinklers or an equivalent level of safety, in certain types of

Federal Employee office buildings, Federal employee housing units, and

Federally assisted housing units. The Act's applicability and

requirements are very complex. They are summarized as follows:

In Federal employee office buildings with more than 25 Federal

employees that are newly constructed, purchased, renovated, or leased

(with the Government occupying 35,000 sq. ft. or more and some portion

on or above the sixth floor):

Buildings with 6 or more stories must have sprinklers

(or an equivalent level of safety) throughout.

All other buildings must have sprinklers (or an

equivalent level of safety) in hazardous areas.

In Federal employee housing:

New or rebuilt multifamily housing must have sprinklers

(or an equivalent level of safety) throughout, and hard wired smoke

detectors.

All other housing requires hard wired smoke detectors

on tenant change or no later than October 26, 1995.

In Federally assisted housing:

New multifamily housing, 4 or more stories above ground

level, must have sprinklers and hard wired smoke detectors.

New multifamily housing in New York City, 4 or more

stories above ground level, must have sprinklers (or an equivalent

level of safety) and hard wired smoke detectors.

Rebuilt multifamily property, 4 or more stories above

ground level, must comply with the chapter on existing apartment

buildings in National Fire Protection Association Standard 101, Life

Safety Code.

All other housing must have hard wired or battery

operated smoke detectors.

The requirements of the Act apply to all Federal agencies and all

Federally owned and leased buildings in the United States, except those

of the Postal Service and those under the control of the Resolution

Trust Corporation.

In addition, there are a number of definitions associated with the

Act. The major definitions are summarized below:

Federal Employee Office Building means any building,

owned or leased by the Federal Government, that can be expected to

house at least 25 Federal employees in the course of their

employment.

Renovated means the repairing or reconstructing of 50

percent or more of the current value of a Federal employee office

building, not including the land on which the Federal employee

office building is located.

Rebuilding means the repairing or reconstructing of

portions of a multifamily property where the cost of the alterations

is 70 percent or more of the replacement cost of the completed

multifamily property, not including the land on which the Federal

employee office building is located.

Multifamily property means a residential building

consisting of more than 2 residential units under one roof housing

Federal employees or their dependents or a residential building

consisting of more than 4 residential units under one roof housing

other persons.

Housing assistance means assistance provided by the

Federal Government to be used in connection with the provision of

housing, that is provided in the form of a grant, contract, loan,

loan guarantee, cooperative agreement, interest subsidy, insurance,

or direct appropriation; and does not include assistance provided by

the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; the Federal Emergency Management

Agency; the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under the

single family mortgage insurance programs under the National Housing

Act or the homeownership assistance program under section 235 of

such Act; the National Homeownserhsip Trust; the Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation under the affordable housing program under

section 40 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act; or the Resolution

Trust Corporation under the affordable housing program under section

21A(c) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act.

Hazardous areas means those areas in a building

referred to as hazardous areas in National Fire Protection

Association Standard 101, known as the Life Safety Code,

or any successor standard thereto.

Smoke detectors means single or multiple station, self-

contained alarm devices designed to respond to the presence of

visible or invisible particles of combustion, installed in

accordance with the National Fire Protection Association Standard 74

or any successor standard thereto.

Automatic sprinkler system means an electronically

supervised, integrated system of piping to which sprinklers are

attached in a systematic pattern, and which, when activated by heat

from a fire:

(a) will protect human lives by discharging water over the fire

area, in accordance with National Fire Protection Association

Standard 13, 13D, or 13R, whichever is appropriate for the type of

building and occupancy being protected, or any successor standard

thereto; and

(b) includes an alarm signaling system with appropriate warning

signals (to the extent such alarm systems and warning signals are

required by Federal, State, or local laws or regulations) installed

in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association Standard

72, or any successor standard thereto.

A critical issue regarding implementation of the Act involves the

definition and determination of an equivalent level of safety. The Act

defines the term as an alternative design or system (which may include

automatic sprinkler systems), based upon fire protection engineering

analysis, which achieves a level of safety equal to or greater than

that provided by automatic sprinkler systems. The definition of an

automatic sprinkler system is unique to the Act. In addition to

describing the physical characteristics of an automatic sprinkler

system, the definition sets a performance objective for the system.

Automatic sprinkler systems installed in compliance with the Act must

protect human lives. Sprinkler systems are generally not designed with

this specific objective in mind.

The General Services Administration must issue regulations to

further define the term equivalent level of safety. The Act specifies

that, to the extent practicable, these regulations be based upon

nationally recognized codes. This document provides the further

definition required by the Act. A general level of safety provided by

sprinklers is established, and a framework for evaluating alternative

methodologies for achieving this level is presented.

II. Objectives of the Legislation

Despite the widespread availability of affordable means of

preventing fire losses, the United States continues to have one of the

highest per capita fire death rates in the industrialized world. Fire

is the fourth largest accidental killer in the United States, claiming

at least 5,500 lives annually and injuring an additional 30,000

individuals. The fire vulnerability of office buildings and residential

housing units can be reduced through strong fire safety measures. It is

essential for the protection of life and property that effective

technology be employed in detecting, containing and suppressing fires.

When properly installed and maintained, automatic sprinklers and smoke

detectors provide effective safeguards against loss of life and

property from fire. According to the National Fire Protection

Association, there is no record of a multiple death fire (involving the

loss of three of more people) in a building with a fully operational

sprinkler system. The Federal Government, in addition to increasing the

protection provided its own employees and individuals living in

federally subsidized housing, can set an example in the area of fire

safety and, by its own actions, encourage the private sector to use

technology that has been proven to save lives.

The Federal Fire Safety Act of 1992 was created to serve as a model

for local jurisdictions where the Congress believed not enough was

being done to promote and provide for the fire safety of citizens. The

evidence for the Congressional concern is clear. According to National

Fire Protection Association data, there are about 30,000 fire

departments in the country, yet according to the National Fire

Sprinkler Association, only 7 states and 34 local jurisdictions have

sprinkler requirements that affect existing buildings. These ordinances

have exclusions, applying to only specific occupancies. Most of them

exclude residential occupancies, the occupancy where most fire deaths

occur. The Federal government chose to lead by example without imposing

requirements on the states and local communities.

Throughout hearings on the Act, many groups testified that

sprinklers were not the only system component necessary for fire safety

in buildings. In addition, Congress did not want the legislation to

inhibit the development of new technology. They recognized the need to

have legislation that proactively addressed protection of life from

fire. Therefore, the law does not simply mandate the installation of

sprinklers. Congress specified certain life safety objectives to be

achieved by the sprinkler systems. In addition, an equivalency clause

was provided to allow for the use of alternatives which satisfied the

identified life safety objectives.

III. Development of an Equivalent Level of Safety Concept

A. General Issues

The General Services Administration, in cooperation with the United

States Fire Administration, the National Institute of Standards and

Technology, and the Department of Defense, is required to issue

regulations further defining the term equivalent level of safety. In

developing the regulations, GSA has held meetings with a working group

composed of representatives from the agencies named in the legislation

and other affected Federal agencies. The Department of Veterans

Affairs, the Social Security Administration, the Department of Housing

and Urban Development, and the U.S. Coast Guard were invited to

participate because the Act's potential impact on their office space or

housing.

Use of automatic sprinklers may be the best approach to providing

life safety. Sprinklers respond automatically to fire, limit fire size,

and are also able to sound the alert. In addition to enhancing life

safety, sprinklers provide property protection and limit potential

business interruption. Sprinklers can significantly reduce the hazard

which firefighters must face in combating a fire. The cost

effectiveness of sprinklers for new construction cannot be overstated.

Sprinkler protection can be added with minimal impact on overall

project cost while significantly improving the level of fire safety. In

recognition of the many benefits and relatively low cost of sprinkler

protection, the General Services Administration has instituted a policy

of providing sprinklers in new construction.

The issue of providing sprinkler protection in existing buildings

is not as clear cut. Typically, the cost of providing protection is

higher in existing buildings. It may not be possible to provide

complete sprinkler protection due to existing physical conditions or

competing requirements (e.g., historic preservation laws). The decision

to provide sprinkler protection must be part of an integrated fire

protection strategy. Existing building systems and applicable

requirements must be considered in developing the strategy. Most model

codes provide an equivalency concept which allows for use of

alternative approaches or systems. This concept is provided in

recognition of the fact that compliance with one prescribed solution

may not be the best alternative in every case.

These alternative systems, methods, or devices achieve a reasonable

level of protection and meet the intent of the specific code

requirement. Alternative methods for limiting fire effects which might

be considered include using fire-rated enclosing barriers, low flame

spread interior finish materials, low heat release rate furnishings,

and low ignition propensity materials. In evaluating alternatives,

consideration needs to be given to the reliability of the proposed

approach the life of a structure. Enforcement and maintenance practices

will vary significantly depending on the use (office, residence, store,

factory, etc.).

B. Working Group Discussions

On July 14, 1993, the working group met with representatives from

both the public and private sectors. The interests of trade

associations, State Fire Marshals, fire chiefs, consulting engineering

firms, building owners, academia, and research were presented at the

meeting. Based on this meeting, the working group identified a number

of issues important for consideration in developing the regulations.

From these issues, the working group identified four central

concerns. Should the regulation address equivalency to sprinklers or to

the level of safety provided by sprinklers? The group agreed that

sprinklers provide a unique combination of fire detection and

suppression, and that no current system could be considered equivalent.

However, sprinklers provide a level of safety, especially life safety,

which can be provided through the use of other systems in various

combinations. Such other system combinations may include sprinklers.

Should the regulation describe a method of analysis to determine

equivalency or the result needed to be equivalent? GSA had originally

drafted a proposed analysis method. This raised more questions than it

answered. The group agreed that the regulation should address the

endpoint, or a performance objective which must be satisfied to be

equivalent. Are there significant differences between office and

housing occupancies which need to be considered? Reaction time is the

significant difference between these two occupancy groups. Reaction

time must be emphasized in any analysis of equivalency in housing. An

occupant's ability to react to a fire and evacuate from the area

exposed to fire effects can be influenced by a number of factors

including physical ability, mental status, age, and training. Should

the regulation have a height threshold, specifically should it not

apply to high rise buildings? This question was the most difficult for

the group to deal with and a consensus was never reached. The group was

divided between two opposing points of view. One portion of the group

believed that the fire safety problems inherent in high rise buildings

could only be addressed through complete sprinkler protection. The Act

was intended to require sprinklers in high rise buildings. Therefore,

the regulation should place a maximum height limit on the applicability

of the equivalent level of safety provision. The opposing view held

that no height threshold was necessary. Any analysis, required as part

of the equivalent level of safety regulation, should address the fire

safety issues associated with protection of high rise buildings. In

high rise buildings, automatic detection and suppression are vital

components of a fire protection strategy. Fire protection strategies

developed for high rise buildings under the provision would include

some level of sprinkler protection.

The legislation gives the General Services Administration the

responsibility to develop the regulation defining an equivalent level

of safety. GSA believes that the law is clear requiring high rise (6 or

more stories) Federal Employee Office Buildings to have sprinklers, or

an equivalent level of safety. The Congressional intent for an

equivalency option was recently reinforced by the passage of an

amendment to the original legislation providing an equivalency option

in Federally assisted housing in New York City. Finally, the model

codes support the use of equivalency concepts especially in existing

buildings. For these reasons, GSA believes the regulation should not

have specific thresholds. Comments on this subject are requested; any

comments should include supporting rationale.

C. Equivalent Level of Safety Analysis

The working group identified and discussed a number of critical

factors in developing a life safety equivalency analysis. Rate of fire

growth is controlled by the type and location of combustible items, the

layout of the compartment, the materials used in construction of the

space, openings and ventilation, and suppression capability. Detection

time, occupant notification, occupant reaction time, occupant mobility,

and means of egress are important considerations in evaluating egress

time. Finally, the life safety equivalency analysis must be conducted

by a person familiar with fire dynamics, building construction, hazard

assessment, and human behavior. As a minimum, this person should have a

bachelor of science degree in engineering.

In order to evaluate whether or not a life safety equivalency has

been achieved, the building systems must be defined, reasonable worst

case scenarios developed, maximum probable loss estimated, time

required for the space to become hazardous calculated, and time

required for egress determined. The proposed regulation establishes a

general measure of building fire safety performance. Building

environmental conditions are specified to ensure the life safety of

building occupants outside the room of fire origin. The specified

environmental conditions should be applicable whether or not the

evaluation is conducted for the entire building or for just the

hazardous areas. In the latter case, the room of origin would be the

hazardous area while any room could be a room of origin in the entire

building scenario.

A functioning sprinkler system should activate prior to the onset

of flashover. Flashover is a phenomena that occurs in many building

fires. In the initial (preflashover) stages, fire development is

controlled by the amount, type, and location of combustible materials

in the area and the speed with which it spreads. As the fire develops,

however, the hot smoke and fire gases accumulate at the ceiling,

heating all of the un-ignited materials in the room. The hot ceiling

gases radiate energy onto the burning fuel causing it to burn faster.

As the fire grows, the available air cannot support the combustion of

all of the fuel that is produced. The unburned fuel collects in the

smoke layer; the smoke normally blackens at this time. When this

combination of events reaches a temperature of about 550 to 600 deg.C

(1000 to 1100 deg.F), the radiant heat from the hot gas layer will

quickly ignite all of the exposed combustible material. Frequently any

combustible gases accumulated in the smoke layer will find air and burn

out at this time. When this rapid ignition of combustible material or

gases occurs, the fire often violently erupts from the room of origin

spouting flame, hot fuel laden gases, and toxic smoke into adjacent

spaces. This transition is called flashover, and a fire that has

undergone this transition is called a flashed over fire.

Sprinklers would provide the level of life safety prescribed in the

Act by controlling the spread of fire and its effects beyond the room

of origin. Alternative methods which provide equivalent levels of life

safety must prevent the spread of the fire and its affects beyond the

room of fire origin. A typical room fire will not pose a hazard to the

rest of the building until flashover. Smoldering fires can have

significant life safety impact beyond the room of origin. However, a

typical sprinkler system would not activate in response to a smoldering

fire. Therefore, the sprinkler system would have little or no impact on

life safety in the smoldering fire.

To achieve the level of safety prescribed in the Act, the office

building or housing unit must be designed, constructed, and maintained

to prevent flashover in the room of fire origin, limit fire size to no

more than 1 megawatt (50 Btu/sec), or prevent flames from leaving the

room of origin. For the purposes of this regulation, flashover is

intended to describe a fire in which the upper layer temperature in a

room reaches approximately 600 deg.C (1100 deg.F) and the heat flux

at floor level exceeds 20 kW/m2 (1.8 Btu/ft2/sec). As with

the prevent flashover criteria, the limitation on maximum heat release

rate and the requirement to keep flames within the room of fire origin

are designed to limit the size of the fire. A 1 megawatt fire is

approximately equivalent to a single burning easy chair or two burning

1.8m (6 ft) tall Christmas trees. In a 3.6m (12 ft) by 4.6m (15 ft)

gypsum board lined room with a 1.4m (4 ft) wide open doorway, a fire

growing proportionally with time will produce an upper gas temperature

of 425 to 480 deg.C (800 to 900 deg.F) in 300 seconds. The fire heat

release rate at 300 seconds would be approximately 1 megawatt assuming

a medium growth rate t-squared fire as referenced in Appendix B of the

National Fire Protection Association Standard 72, National Fire Alarm

Code. This fire is about the largest that can occur in such a room

without a substantial likelihood of flames discharging out the room

doorway.

For the reasons mentioned previously, the life safety impact of a

smoldering fire is not addressed in this regulation. In addition, this

regulation does not attempt to provide guidance in determining

acceptable levels of protection against property loss or business

interruption. Finally, this regulation does not attempt to address the

issue of firefighter safety. Thorough prefire planning, required by the

Act, will allow firefighters to determine whether or not to enter a

burning building; building occupants do not have a similar choice.

D. Summary

As required by the Federal Fire Safety Act of 1992, this regulation

is intended to provide a further definition of the term equivalent

level of safety. The regulation establishes certain criteria which

alternative approaches must satisfy to be judged equivalent. These

criteria have been selected to provide the level of life safety

prescribed in the legislation. The impact of the legislation

requirements and these criteria on property protection, business

interruption potential, and firefighter safety has not been assessed.

The requirements of the Act and these regulations apply to all

Federal agencies and all Federally owned and leased buildings in the

United States, except those of the Postal Service and those under the

control of the Resolution Trust Corporation. The Head of the agency

responsible for physical improvements in a facility must judge the

acceptability of any equivalency analysis. This regulation provides

guidance in conducting an analysis and judging its acceptability.

The General Services Administration (GSA) has determined that this

rule is a significant regulatory action for the purposes of Executive

Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 101-6

Civil rights, Government property management, Grant programs,

Intergovernmental relations, Surplus Government property, Relocation

assistance, Real property acquisition, Fire safety, Fire protection.

Accordingly, it is proposed to amend 41 CFR 101-6 as follows:

PART 101-6--MISCELLANEOUS REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 101-6 continues to read

as follows:

Authority: Sec. 205(c), 63 Stat. 390; 40 U.S.C. 486(c).

Subpart 101-6.6--Fire Protection Engineering

2. Subpart 101-6.6 is added to read as follows:

Sec.

101-6.600 Scope of subpart.

101-6.601 Background.

101-6.602 Application.

101-6.603 Definitions.

101-6.604 Requirements.

101-6.605 Responsibility.

Sec. 101-6.600 Scope of subpart.

This subpart provides the regulations of the General Services

Administration (GSA) under title I of the Fire Administration

Authorization Act of 1992 concerning definition and determination of

equivalent level of safety.

Sec. 101-6.601 Background.

(a) The Fire Authorization Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-522) was

signed into law by the President on October 26, 1992. Section 106, Fire

Safety Systems in Federally Assisted Buildings, of Title I--United

States Fire Administration, is commonly referred to as the Federal Fire

Safety Act of 1992. This section amends the Fire Prevention and Control

Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) to require sprinklers or an

equivalent level of safety, in certain types of Federal Employee office

buildings, Federal employee housing units, and Federally assisted

housing units.

(b) The definition of an automatic sprinkler system is unique to

the Act. In addition to describing the physical characteristic of an

automatic sprinkler system, the definition sets a performance objective

for the system. Automatic sprinkler systems installed in compliance

with the Act must protect human lives. A functioning sprinkler system

should activate prior to the onset of flashover. Sprinklers would

provide the level of life safety prescribed in the Act by controlling

the spread of fire and its effects beyond the room of origin.

(c) This regulation establishes a general measure of building fire

safety performance. To achieve the level of life safety proscribed in

the Act, the structure under consideration must be designed,

constructed, and maintained to minimize the impact of fire. Building

environmental conditions are specified in this regulation to ensure the

life safety of building occupants outside the room of fire origin. They

should be applicable independent of whether or not the evaluation is

being conducted for the entire building or for just the hazardous

areas. In the latter case, the room of origin would be the hazardous

area while any room could be a room of origin in the entire building

scenario.

(d) The equivalent level of safety regulation does not address

property protection, business interruption potential, or firefighter

safety. Thorough prefire planning will allow firefighters to choose

whether or not to enter a burning building; building occupants do not

have a similar option.

Sec. 101-6.602 Application.

The requirements of the Act and these regulations apply to all

Federal agencies and all Federally owned and leased buildings in the

United States, except those of the Postal Service and those under the

control of the Resolution Trust Corporation.

Sec. 101-6.603 Definitions.

(a) Qualified fire protection engineer is defined as an individual

with a knowledge and understanding of fire dynamics meeting one of the

following criteria:

(1) An engineer having a Bachelor of Science or Master of Science

degree in Fire Protection Engineering from an accredited university

engineering program, plus a minimum of two (2) years work experience in

fire protection engineering,

(2) A professional engineer (P.E.) registered in Fire Protection

Engineering, or

(3) A professional engineer (P.E.) registered in a related

engineering discipline and holding Member grade status in the

international Society of Fire Protection Engineers.

(b) Flashover means fire conditions in a room where the upper gas

layer temperature reaches 600 deg.C (1100 deg.F) and the heat flux at

floor level exceeds 20 kWm\2\ (1.8 Btu/ft\2\/sec.).

(c) Reasonable worst case fire scenario means a combination of an

ignition source, fuel items, and a building location likely to produce

a fire which would have a significant adverse impact on the building

and its occupants.

Sec. 101-6.604 Requirements.

(a) The equivalent level of life safety evaluation is to be

performed by a qualified fire protection engineer. The engineer

conducting the analysis must have a thorough understanding of the

principles of physics and chemistry governing fire growth, spread, and

suppression. The analysis should include a narrative discussion of the

features of the building structure, function, operation support systems

and occupant activities which impact fire protection and lifesafety.

Each analysis should describe potential reasonable worst case fire

scenarios and their impact on the building occupants and structure.

Specific issues which must be addressed include rate of fire growth,

type and location of fuel lines, space layout, building construction,

openings and ventilation, suppression capability, detection time,

occupant notification, occupant reaction time, occupant mobility, and

means of egress.

(b) To be acceptable, the analysis must indicate that the

combination of features used to achieve equivalency will prevent

flashover in the room of fire origin, limit fire size to no more than 1

megawatt (950 Btu/sec), or prevent flames from leaving the room of

origin. A 1 megawatt fire is approximately equivalent to a burning easy

chair or two burning 1.8 m (6 ft) tall Christmas trees. Analytical and

empirical tools, including fire models and grading schedules such as

the Fire Safety Evaluation System, should be used to support the life

safety equivalency evaluation. If fire modeling is used as part of an

analysis, an assessment of the predicative capabilities of the fire

models must be included. This assessment should be conducted in

accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials Standard

Guide for Evaluating the Predictive Capability of Fire Models (ASTM E

1355).

Sec. 101-6.605 Responsibility.

The Head of the agency responsible for physical improvements in the

facility or providing Federal assistance or a designated representative

will determine the acceptability of each equivalent level of safety

analysis. The determination of acceptability must include a review of

the fire protection engineer's qualifications, the appropriateness of

the fire scenarios for the facility, and the reasonableness of the

assumed maximum probable loss.

Dated: March 30, 1994.

Kenneth R. Kimbrough,

Commissioner, Public Buildings Service.

[FR Doc. 94-12617 Filed 5-23-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-23-M