[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 24, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12617]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: May 24, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
