ruary 2008



IRC-RB77







RB6407/08
R313 (New), Appendix P, Chapter 43 (New)

Proponent: Ronny J. Coleman, Retired California State Fire Marshal, representing IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition

1. Add new section as follows:

SECTION R313
FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS

R313.1 General. Effective January 1, 2011, an approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in new one-
and two-family dwellings and townhouses in accordance with NFPA 13D.

(Renumber subsequent sections)

2. Delete IRC Appendix P without substitution:

APPENDIX P
FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM

The provisions contained in this appendix are not mandatory unless specifically referenced in the adopting ordinance.

AP101 Fire sprinklers. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in new one- and two-family
dwellings and townhouses in accordance with Section 903.3.1 of the International Building Code.

3. Add standard to Chapter 43 as follows:

NFPA
13D-07
Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One- and Two-family Dwellings and Manufactured Homes

Reason: This proposal is submitted as part of a package of three proposals that were developed in cooperation with the International Association of
Fire Chiefs with input from code officials, home builders, fire chiefs and other interested parties. During last years code development cycle, many
ICC members stated that the preferred way to advance fire sprinklers into new home construction is through a comprehensive approach that
involves:
1.
A schedule for implementation,
2.
Reasonable and appropriate design and construction incentives, and
3. A simple, prescriptive methodology for designing systems.
In response, representatives of the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition (IRCFSC) and the International Association of Fire Chiefs have developed and
submitted three proposals for this code cycle, one addressing each topic.
This proposal addresses the first issue, a schedule for implementation. It requires new homes constructed after January 1, 2011 to have fire
sprinklers. The delayed implementation date provides a time buffer that will allow for development of infrastructure, such as trained installers and
inspectors, prior to the residential sprinkler requirement becoming effective. While the approach of delaying a code requirement may be unfamiliar
to some, it is entirely appropriate, and it is already used by the IRC in Chapter 38, as follows:

E3802.12 Arc-fault protection of bedroom outlets. All branch circuits that supply 120-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere outlets installed
in bedrooms shall be protected by a combination type or branch/feeder type arc-fault circuit interrupter installed to provide protection of the
entire branch circuit. Effective January 1, 2008, such arc-fault circuit interrupter devices shall be combination type. (emphasis added).

It is common knowledge that fires in one- and two-family dwellings are the root of Americas fire problem, and a substantial majority of ICC
members who voted at last years final action hearing, 56%, agreed that residential sprinklers are the right solution. To truly address Americas fire
problem, ICC members know that we must, at some point, begin to mainstream fire sprinklers into new home construction, and this proposal
provides a rational way to make the transition by fixing a future date for the requirement to become effective.
During last years debate, the IRCFSC provided detailed responses that addressed all of the concerns cited in testimony as a basis for
opposing residential sprinklers. These concerns, which included the use of wells to supply sprinklers, freezing, leakage and cost, among others,
were addressed in our public comment to proposal RB114-06/07 and in testimony offered at the final action hearing in Rochester. They were also
addressed in a Web cast aired by the IRCFSC in May 2007, copies of which are now available on a free DVD that can be ordered at
www.IRCFireSprinkler.org.

As a result of this outreach effort, opposition to sprinklers based on myths and misinformation has largely dissipated, and the debate has
largely become focused on two issues; First, whether the requirement for fire sprinklers in dwellings should be determined at a local level, and
second, whether the residential fire problem is limited to older homes. The remainder of this reason statement focuses on these two issues. IRC-RB78
ICC PUBLIC HEARING ::: February 2008
1. Should the requirement for fire sprinklers in dwellings be a local issue? Several speakers in Rochester who spoke in opposition to RB114
conveyed an opinion that requirements for fire sprinklers in dwellings should be decided at the local level. The question is why? By including
Appendix P, the IRC has already acknowledged fire sprinklers as a basic safety feature that should be included in new homes. There is no premise
for the IRC to promote residential fire safety on community-by-community basis. The IRC, as a model code, should promote safety and regulatory
consistency among all jurisdictions, as opposed to creating a local shopping list of safety requirements.

No other ICC code treats sprinkler requirements or residential fire safety as a local choice to be made at the time of code adoption. The IBC
establishes a baseline that ALL residential occupancies must be protected by fire sprinklers, including one- and two-family dwellings and
townhouses. Some argue that its appropriate for IBC to be more restrictive than the IRC because use of the IBC is only mandatory for dwellings
exceeding three stories in height, but that argument disregards one very important fact; most residential fire deaths occur in one- and two-story
homes. To have an impact on fire deaths in one- and two-story homes, we need a fire sprinkler requirement in the IRC.

A newly published study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) entitled Benefit-Cost Analysis of Residential Fire
Sprinkler Systems, reports that, out of almost 2,000 fire incidents in homes equipped with fire sprinklers during the 4-year period 2002 to 2005,
there were no fire-related fatalities. This statistic clearly demonstrates the potential for sprinklers to save thousands of lives that would otherwise be
lost in residential fires. With the knowledge that residential fire sprinklers are a proven, life-saving technology, it is clear that the IRC should
establish a model that sprinklers are a minimum safety feature that should be included in all new homes.

2. Is the residential fire problem limited to older homes?
According to a recent HUD study, the median age of homes in the U.S. is 32 years. With this in mind, it makes perfect sense that more fires and fire
deaths occur in older homes, simply because there are many more of them. However, the residential fire problem is certainly not limited to older
homes, and it is has not been correlated with home age.

To evaluate the relationship between the age of a home and fire risk, it is necessary break the concept of fire risk into its two components, the
probability of a fire event occurring and the associated consequence once the event occurs. The probability of a fire event occurring equates to the
risk of fire ignition. With respect to the age of a home, only those ignition sources that are permanently affixed to a home, such as central heating
systems or electrical distribution systems, might be directly correlated to home age, but to date, there are no known studies demonstrating increased
fire risk as these systems age. Such a study would be difficult to perform because heating and electrical systems are often replaced when a home is
remodeled, breaking any correlation that might otherwise exist between the age of a home and the age of fixed systems installed therein.
Nevertheless, because most fire deaths are associated with ignition scenarios related to human behavior, which are independent of home age, it is
clear that home age has little to do with the probability of a fire event.

With respect to consequences associated with a fire event, assuming that an ignition has occurred, it is again difficult to establish any
correlation with home age, except to the extent that the probability of safe evacuation is increased based on the possible presence of working smoke
alarms and/or escape windows. On the contrary, some design and construction methods commonly used in new homes actually reduce fire safety.
These include the use of lightweight trusses (now used in more than 60% of new homes according to the Wood Truss Council of America), which
are known to become unstable and collapse more quickly in fire situations than conventional construction; and open floor plans, which reduce
compartmentation and allow a fire to quickly spread throughout a home.

The truth is that fire growth in a home is largely dependent on contents, not the structure itself, and contents are independent of home age.
Although smoke alarms and escape windows associated with newer homes are beneficial in some fire incidents, statistics show that the value of
these features is declining over time, as fire deaths in homes that have working smoke alarms are becoming increasingly common. The most recent
data (for the period 2000 to 2004), shows that 34% of fire deaths occurred in homes that had WORKING smoke alarms. This is up from 24% in the
previous period, and as smoke alarms age, we can only assume that their reliability will continue to decline unless they are periodically replaced,
which seems to be wishful thinking when one con