Guide to Promoting Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems: Fire Codes and Fire Sprinklers

Enter your email to download the full Guide.

Fire sprinkler systems are governed by specific codes and standards to ensure proper installation and functionality. Key codes include NFPA 13 for standard installations, NFPA 13R for residential and IFC (International Fire Code) for general building requirements.

When asked to rank the best ways to promote greater use of automatic fire sprinkler systems, fire sprinkler advocates gave fire codes the two highest scores out of 10 common strategies aimed at increasing their use. “Convincing code writers to require sprinkler systems for specific occupancies” (7.3 out of 10). The second highest (7.0) was “Encouraging fire authorities to promote fire sprinklers,” which also could come to fruition through regulatory code changes.

In this blog post, we’re going to dive into the topic of fire codes—specifically what is a code and what role do fire sprinklers play? This blog post covers highlights of chapter four, “Fire Codes and Fire Sprinklers,” of the IFSA Guide to Promoting Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems: A Road Map for Advocacy.

Government Obligation to Provide Protection from Fire

Fire safety is both a personal and collective responsibility. In workplaces, commercial properties and multi-family residences, the person in operational control is typically accountable for fire safety. However, when safety risks are present, governments are expected to intervene to protect the public.

This intervention falls under the government’s police power, a broad authority to ensure public safety, health and welfare. Police power allows governments to take actions, such as demolishing unsafe structures, mandating vaccinations, regulating public transportation, or prohibiting hazardous practices like the use of consumer fireworks or wooden buildings in cities when it comes to fire protection.

However, for government intervention to be justified, it must serve the public interest, be reasonably necessary and not place undue burdens on individuals. Judicial oversight helps ensure that such powers are not misused or applied in ways that unjustly interfere with lawful activities.

A Brief History of Building and Fire Codes

The earliest known governmental regulation of building safety was part of the Law Code of Hammurabi, the 6th king of Babylon, issued in 1754 BC. The Code contained 282 rules establishing standards for commercial interactions and setting fines and punishments to meet the requirements of justice. It was discovered in 1901, carved onto a massive finger-shaped stone pillar.

In 871, Alfred the Great of England instituted fire prevention measures, including the covering of cooking fires at night, and in 1189 the mayor of London proposed party walls of stone to mitigate fire spread. The idea of requiring the use of noncombustible materials to prevent fire spread made its way to the United States. The earliest American cities like New York and Boston required that dwellings be constructed of brick or stone with roofs of slate or tile to restrict the spread of fire.

In 1896, the National Board of Fire Underwriters (NBFU) developed its first model building law and unsuccessfully lobbied to have it adopted by the State of New York. The effort led to the 1905 publication of an NBFU Building Code, considered to be the first “model building code,” a full collection of technical requirements for building construction specifically written in a manner intended to be adopted into law by a government. This NBFU model code was later published under the name National Building Code and was updated periodically until 1967.

This code pioneered the development of fundamental code principles like building height and area requirements, means of egress, fire resistive construction, shaft enclosure, parapets, fire walls and doors, firestopping, and suppression systems.

The 1905 NBFU model code contained requirements for sprinkler systems in portions of buildings, including the below-grade areas of mercantile and manufacturing occupancies. In the United States, large cities like New York and Chicago could afford to write and update their own building codes. Smaller cities and states decided to band together in regional groups to write and regularly update additional model building codes as alternatives to the insurance industry’s

NBFU National Building Code. These included:

• 1927 – The Uniform Building Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO)
• 1947 – The Standard Building Code, published by the Southern Building Code Congress (SBCCI)
• 1950 – The Basic Building Code, published by the Building Officials and Code Administrators International (BOCA)

While widely adopted regionally, deviations in the requirements between them and the way they were adopted at the state or local level often created conflicts that hindered progress in construction means, methods and materials from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

ICC and NFPA Codes

To resolve these issues, the three code organizations formed the Council of American Building Officials (CABO) in 1972 and ultimately merged in 1994 to create the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC now develops a unified set of model codes, including the International Building Code (IBC), International Fire Code (IFC), and other specialty codes for areas like plumbing, mechanical systems, and energy.

The ICC is not the only author of adoptable model codes. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) also publishes a model fire code (NFPA 1), a model building code (NFPA 5000), and a “Life Safety Code” (NFPA 101) that are all widely referenced, adopted and enforced in the United States and around the world.

A common feature within most building codes is a system of occupancy classifications, which is the basis of risk assessment. These classifications acknowledge that the level of risk from fire correlates to how the building or structure is being used, both in terms of the people occupying the structure and the contents of the building. Requirements for minimum levels of inherent fire safety include fire resistance, required means of egress, combustibility of allowable finish materials, alarm and fire sprinkler systems, and other aspects of protection depend on the occupancy classification in conjunction with the area and height of the building.

One of the advantages of a building regulatory system based on periodic adoption of model codes is that the model codes are updated on a regular schedule, generally every few years. This allows for the codes to address new techniques and new technologies. It also allows for public input, including that of advocacy groups.

The United States may have the most extensive history of code advocacy from a group focused on fire sprinklers. The National Fire Sprinkler Association (NFSA), which traces its founding to 1905, made a policy decision back in the 1960s to promote greater use of fire sprinklers through building codes.

As opposed to simply requesting expanded fire sprinkler mandates within the codes, the sprinkler advocates often worked toward creation of incentives or “trade-offs” that would offset the additional cost of installing sprinklers by reducing costs in other areas of construction, which is addressed in greater detail below. This approach often meets less resistance from developers and politicians committed to not increasing the cost of construction.

The recognition of fire sprinkler systems as key life safety features has increased substantially through the decades since model building codes were first published and adopted in North America. As in North America, code improvements in other parts of the world also tend to follow fire tragedies. However, advocacy organizations can bring about code improvements even without tragic fires. Although the European Fire Sprinkler Network (EFSN) did not exist until 2002, it was able to report by 2006 that many European countries were beginning to recognize the need for sprinkler systems in high-rise buildings.

Active vs. Passive Protection

One reason that fire protection requirements are generally included in the building code is that the fire resistance of building materials has traditionally played a large role in the determination of acceptable level of fire risk for various occupancies.

Passive fire protection relies on the inherent fire resistance of building components like fire-rated doors, windows, walls and floor/ceiling assemblies. These are tested using standardized time-temperature procedures to determine how long they can withstand fire without failure. Because these elements are built into the structure and don’t require activation, they are considered “passive.” Historically, buildings with such features were labeled “fireproof,” but the preferred term today is “fire-resistive,” acknowledging that a building’s contents, not just its structure, pose significant fire risk.

“Active” fire protection systems are the opposite and include automatic sprinklers, fire alarms and smoke control systems, which actively respond to fire conditions. Among these, sprinkler systems are uniquely effective because they can actively control or extinguish fires, reducing the threat to life and property. This is especially important for individuals who may not be able to evacuate during a fire.

Proven Effectiveness

Proponents of a passive approach to fire safety often question the reliability of active systems, particularly fire sprinkler systems. But passive systems have failure rates as well, as documented in field surveys and fire loss experience that have revealed breaches of fire-resistive barriers, inadequate firestopping, fire doors and dampers that fail to close, and other deficiencies. Yet, there are few studies of reliability of passive systems that can be readily compared to the historically excellent performance of automatic fire sprinkler systems.

When the NFSA began advocating for increased recognition of automatic sprinkler systems in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s, the NFSA demonstrated the effectiveness of sprinkler protection in controlling and extinguishing from two primary sources.

For the purpose of these early statistics, “Satisfactory” performance indicated that the fire sprinkler systems adequately suppressed and controlled the fire. Conversely, “Unsatisfactory” performance included not only poor suppression performance of an operating sprinkler system, but also fires when the water supply had been shut off or was otherwise inadequate at the time of the fire, which accounted for approximately one-third of all “unsatisfactory” incidents.

More detailed incident data collection has subsequently been compiled through the use of the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) administered by the U.S. Fire Administration starting in the mid-1970s.

4 Ways to Ensure Effectiveness

Here are four ways to ensure the effectiveness of automatic fire sprinkler systems:

1. System Design and Installation Standards – traditionally, building and fire codes regulate where fire sprinkler systems must be installed, while referenced standards govern how they must be installed. These standards are crucial to ensuring sprinkler system effectiveness, covering technical details like sprinkler spacing, obstruction clearance, water pressure, flow rates, testing and documentation. While codes sometimes allow for partial sprinkler protection for specific hazards, most requirements favor fully sprinklered buildings.
2. Certification of Sprinkler Products – a crucial item in fire suppression system reliability is product quality, which is best assured through product standards and certification programs. This would include, but may not be limited to, sprinklers, valves, pipe, fittings and supports. Government regulators should specify which product standards are to be used and which approval laboratories, foreign or domestic, are acceptable in verifying compliance with these standards.
3. Certification Programs for System Technicians – certification programs for individuals engaged in the design, layout and detailing of fire sprinkler systems help ensure that the individuals preparing design and installation plans are properly qualified.
4. Requirements for Inspection and Testing – sprinkler systems must be periodically inspected, tested and maintained to ensure their proper performance over time. Fire pumps and other mechanical components require regular exercise to assure their full functionality. Above all, valves controlling water supplies must be maintained in the open and ready position, which can be best assured through electronic supervision with proper alarms communicating to constantly manned supervising stations.

Fire Sprinkler Incentives in Building Codes

“Creating economic incentives in building codes for sprinkler systems” was rated the third most effective strategy to increase the use of sprinklers with a score of 6.9. It has been traditionally accomplished by means of what are often referred to as “sprinkler trade-offs.” This refers to permitting design alternatives within building codes that give design professionals options that allow reductions in other fire protection measures if fire sprinklers are installed throughout the building, because of their ability to provide an equivalent or superior level of protection. These incentives have also been referred to as “fire sprinkler design alternatives” and in some cases, “sprinkler trade-ups” depending on local terminology.

The most commonly adopted sprinkler trade-off or incentive is a permitted increase in the height and/or area of a building or fire compartment for that occupancy where the building is sprinklered in accordance with the prevailing national standard.

To read the complete content of chapter four—including more about studies of system effectiveness, system design and installation standards, certifications, and two case studies about fire sprinkler incentives, download the full guide.

Watch for the next blog post in this series about the Guide to Promoting Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems: A Road Map for Advocacy. It highlights contents of chapter five, “Pursuing Regulatory Changes in a Code Environment.”