Insights Category: Technical Information

The 9th Edition of 780 CMR, Massachusetts State Building Code, based on the 2015 IBC, includes several code changes relative to means of egress through elevator lobbies. Under previous editions of the code, egressing through intervening spaces were typically restricted to adjoining rooms or areas that were accessory to one another, were not a Group H occupancy, and provided a discernable path of egress to an exit. For example, a conference room would be permitted to egress through an open office area to reach the required exit access corridor. Means of egress through elevator lobbies was not directly addressed.

The 9th Edition of 780 CMR Section 1016.2(1) now includes language specifically permitting occupants to pass through enclosed elevator lobbies along their means of exit access. Additionally, fire-resistance rated corridors (most commonly seen in Residential Occupancies) are traditionally required to be continuous from the point of entry to an exit and, in most cases, may not be interrupted by intervening rooms. The 9th Edition has added Exception 2 to Section 1020.6 which now allows enclosed elevator lobbies to intervene fire rated corridors without being construed as an intervening room. Note that the fire rating of the corridor, including openings protective requirements, must still be maintained through the elevator lobby.

In addition, the 2015 IBC includes language in Section 1016.2(1) that addresses means of egress through an enclosed elevator lobby. The code prohibits the only means of egress from a room or space to be through an enclosed elevator lobby required by Section 3006. Where access to two means of egress is required, at least one path cannot be through the lobby. Perhaps the most apparent design impact is on residential buildings with a central elevator/stair core where it is commonplace to have rooms adjacent to the elevator shafts (see image at left). This arrangement is not permitted under the 9th Edition as the rooms have their sole means of egress path through the elevator lobby.

What is NFPA 285?

NFPA 285 is a standard test method published by the National Fire Protection Association for evaluating the fire propagation characteristics of exterior non-load bearing wall assemblies with combustible components. The test method was established recognizing that such walls contain combustible components and evaluates how readily and quickly the exterior wall promotes fire spread.

As part of the 9th Edition of 780 CMR, MA State Building Code, the 2012 Edition of NFPA 285 is adopted.

Note that NFPA 285 is an assembly test, and not a component test. This means that the entire exterior wall assembly must be evaluated for compliance, not single materials or components located within an assembly.

When is compliance with NFPA 285 required?

Compliance with the requirements of NFPA 285 is required for an exterior wall assembly under the following conditions. Note that MA amends several of these sections, so using the MA Amendments in conjunction with the base IBC is necessary for projects located within the Commonwealth.

  • Air/Vapor Barriers – Exterior walls in buildings with Type I, II, III, or IV construction more than 40 feet in height that contain a combustible water-resistive barrier are required to comply with NFPA 285. Exceptions to this requirement:
    • Walls in which the water-resistive barrier is the only combustible component, and the exterior wall has a covering of brick, concrete, stone, terra cotta, stucco, or steel per 780 CMR Table 1405.2; or
    • Walls in which the water-resistive barrier is the only combustible component and the water-resistive barrier meets certain material properties including peak heat release rate, total heat release, flame spread index and smoke-developed index.
  • MCM Panels – Metal Composite Materials (MCM) in exterior walls in buildings with Type I, II, III, or IV construction are required to comply with NFPA 285. Various exceptions are provided, including:
    • Installations up to 40 feet in height, where the fire-separation distance exceeds 5 feet, or the area of MCM is less than 10% of the wall surface;
    • Installations up to 50 feet in height, where the MCM has a limited self-ignition temperature, and is limited in the total installed area; or
    • Installations up to 75 feet in height (or beyond if fully sprinkler protected) based on the building occupancy, fire separation distance, area limitation of MCM, and material properties (i.e. self-ignition temperature) of the MCM.
  • HPLs – High-Pressure Laminates (HPL) in exterior walls in buildings with Type I, II, III, or IV construction are required to comply with NPFA 285. Various exceptions are provided, including:
    • Installations up to 40 feet in height, where the fire-separation distance exceeds 5 feet, or the area of MCM is less than 10% Of the wall surface; or
    • Installations up to 50 feet in height, where the MCM has a limited self-ignition temperature, and is limited in the total installed area
  • Mechanical Equipment Screens – Compliance with NFPA 285 is an option for compliance for combustible mechanical equipment screens
  • Foam Plastic Insulation – Foam plastic insulation in exterior walls in buildings with Type I, II, III, or IV construction are required to comply with NFPA 285. Exceptions include:
    • Special approval based on large-scale tests such as NFPA 286, FM 4880, UL 1040, or UL 1715.
    • Wall assemblies where the insulation is covered on each face by 1-inch thick masonry, concrete, terracotta, stucco, or 0.5-inch thick Type X gypsum board. In most cases, there must be no airspace between the insulation and the exterior wall covering;
    • Low-rise buildings that are sprinklered in accordance with NFPA 13 where a fire flow analysis has been performed without sprinkler decrease allowance that shows adequate water is available.

Questions on NFPA 285 scoping language and options for compliance? Feel free to reach out to us to find out more.

The recent adoption of the 9th edition of Massachusetts Building Code, which is an amended version of the 2015 IBC, brings with it the addition and clarification of a commonly used construction practice regarding membrane penetrations in horizontal assemblies. The recently adopted code includes a new exception to Section 714.4.2 which states that the “ceiling membrane of both 1- and 2-hour fire-resistance-rated horizontal assemblies is permitted to be interrupted with the double wood top plate of a wall assembly that is sheathed with Type X gypsum wallboard”, provided that penetrations are adequately sealed and the ceiling membrane is tight to the top plates.

This assembly is a common occurrence in construction, but the design was not previously addressed in the code. In conventional framing, membrane penetrations are created where the top wall plates intersect the floor joists. This is now clarified and permitted in the code, but specifies that the wall is required to have two wood top plates and sheathed with Type X gypsum board. The assembly specified in the code is shown at left.

[Image from: Significant Changes to the International Building Code, 2015 Edition (ICC)]

Clarification of Gender Neutral Toilets: MA Plumbing Code

As part of the new Massachusetts Plumbing Code amendments issued in January 2017, “gender neutral” toilet rooms have replaced “unisex” toilet rooms.

Where 248 CMR 10.00 requires 2 or more toilet fixtures designated by gender, the use of gender neutral toilet rooms is permitted under one of two conditions (248 CMR 10.10(18)(r)):

(1) All gender designated toilet fixtures are replaced with an equal number of single use gender neutral toilets (such that there are no gender designated fixtures); or

(2) Where 4 or more toilet fixtures are required for males and females combined per 248 CMR, gender neutral toilets are permitted to replace required gender-designated fixtures in increments of two.

Figure 1 shows an example of how to apply these conditions where 248 CMR 10.00 requires 10 female toilets and 8 male toilets. The third approach shown in Figure 1 is not compliant as the gender neutral toilet room is required to satisfy minimum fixture counts, however is not provided in increments of two as required.

Figure 2 illustrates that a single gender neutral toilet room is permitted to be used for accessibility or other purposes provided that it is in addition to (i.e. not code required) the number of required gender-designated toilet fixtures.

Have additional questions? Give us a call to discuss the application on your project.

When is a permanent approved means of access required for mechanical equipment and appliances installed on roofs or elevated structures?

In accordance with Section 306.5 of the International Mechanical Code (IMC), access must be provided to the roof by permanent means (access hatch or permanent ladder) if the roof is greater than 16 feet above grade. The 16 foot measurement is from grade to the roof level and not to the height of the RTU from grade as shown in the following excerpt from the IMC Code and Commentary. In the case of mechanical equipment and appliances installed on a penthouse roof, the 16 foot measurement is from the building’s roof level to the penthouse roof level. As such, the technician may be required to bring equipment to the roof to provide access to all portions of the mechanical equipment and appliances in order to perform service.

It should be noted that such access may not require climbing over obstructions greater than 30-inches high or walking on roofs having a slope greater than four units vertical in 12 units horizontal (33-percent slope). Additionally, where access involves climbing over parapet walls, the height shall be measured to the top of the parapet wall.

With massive flames sweeping through two project sites under construction this Summer, the fire safety of construction sites has grabbed headlines throughout the greater Boston area. Fires destroyed two similar large wood framed residential developments at varying degrees of completion. The Ashmont in Dorchester, MA was weeks before opening, while the Cooper St. project in Waltham was still being framed. Code Red Consultants has been heavily involved in the education, training, and implementation of construction fire safety plans since the Massachusetts Comprehensive Fire Code adopted NFPA 241, Safeguarding Construction, Alteration, and Demo Operations in January of 2015. Through our industry involvement, Code Red Consultants is being viewed as thought leader when it comes to developing project specific construction fire safety plans, as Peter Harrod, P.E. was quoted in two recent Boston Globe articles.

For access to the articles, click below:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/07/27/waltham/TXhiVR5XiR4Jeg0N1x5vlL/story.html

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/08/12/lessons-not-learned/a3ZhFnxYRjVCVmYGBfznjP/story.html.

The International Building Code (IBC) first adopted a requirement for the special inspection of firestopping and fire resistance joint assemblies in certain buildings with the 2012 Edition. Since its adoption, we have performed third party fire stop and fire resistant joint inspections on over 1 Million square feet of space on accordance with ASTM E 2393 and ASTM E 2174. Below are some of the frequently asked questions we hear when serving in this capacity.

Jurisdictions such as Rhode Island and Connecticut have already adopted this requirement and it will be applicable in Massachusetts when the 9th Edition of the Building Code is adopted January 1, 2018.

Where does the requirement apply?

The new requirement will apply to high-rise buildings and to buildings assigned a risk category of III or IV per Section 1604.5 of the IBC. This table includes occupancies such as large assembly with occupant loads in excess of 300, educational occupancies with occupant loads over 250, most hospitals, jails/prisons, buildings with Group H, High Hazard Occupancies, and facilities housing emergency responders, among others. The requirement applies to any joint (i.e. head of wall intersection with floor construction), through penetration or membrane penetration of fire resistance rated walls, floors, and ceilings as specified on the project construction documents.

Where is firestopping required?

  • Through Penetrations: Breaches in both sides of a floor, floor-ceiling or wall assembly to accommodate an item passing through the breaches.
  • Membrane Penetrations: Breaches in one side of a floor ceiling, roof-ceiling or wall assembly to accommodate an item installed into or passing through the breach.
  • Joints and Perimeter Barriers: Openings in or between adjacent assemblies that is created due to building tolerances, or is designed to allow independent movement of the building in any plane caused by thermal, seismic, wind or any other loading (i.e. head of wall assemblies, curtain wall/slab edge joints

What test standards govern approved firestop systems?

The table below outlines the required test standard particular to each firestopping application:

Each of these test standards outline fire test methods effective in determining the performance of firestop systems subject to fire exposure governed by a standard time-temperature test and hose stream test. The time-temperature curve utilized mirrors that utilized for determining the hourly rating for walls and floors (ASTM E119).

How do I know if I am installing the right firestopping prior to inspection?

The code calls for the use of listed firestopping assemblies. It’s easy to get these confused with listed firestop products. A firestopping product is just one of the components in a listed firestopping assembly. The wall or floor assembly being penetration, penetrating item itself, annular space around the penetration, the manner in which the penetrating item is configured through the opening, etc.. are all part of the listed firestop assembly. For an arrangement to be considered a listed firestop assembly, it is required to be installed in the same manner in which it was tested. This information is readily available from the firestopping product manufacturer’s or from approved testing laboratories such as Underwriters Laboratories (UL).

What is the difference between a “F Rating” and “T Rating”?

F-Rating, or Flame Rating, is the period of time in hours the tested assembly remains in place without allowing the passage of fire during exposure or water during the hose stream test following exposure. T-Rating, or Temperature Rating, indicates the time in hours it took for the temperature on the unexposed side of the assembly to reach 325°F above ambient.

In order to obtain a T Rating, an F Rating must be obtained prior. Exposed penetrations through floors and fire resistance rated joints require a T Rating whereas membrane and through wall penetrations are only required to obtain an F rating.

Do membrane penetrations by electrical boxes need to be firestopped?

Membrane penetrations by electrical boxes may not require a firestopping assembly if they (1) have been tested for use in a fire resistance rated assembly and are installed per their listing or (2) they meet all of the following conditions (IBC 2012 714.3.1):

  • The electrical box area does not exceed 16 square inches;
  • The aggregate area of openings through membrane does not exceed 100 square inches in any 100 square feet of wall area;
  • The annular space between the wall membrane and the box does not exceed 1/8”; and
  • If located on opposite sides of the wall, electrical boxes are separated by 24 inches in different stud cavities.

If these conditions are not satisfied, additional insulation, fireblocking, or listed firestop assemblies arranged per Section 714.3.1 need to be added to achieve compliance with the code.

NFPA 3, Recommended Practice for Commissioning and Integrated Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems, and NFPA 4, Standard for Integrated Fire Protection and Life Safety System Testing, are two NFPA documents that everyone should become familiar with. NFPA 3 is a recommended guide intended to address the administrative and procedural concepts of commissioning fire protection systems while NFPA 4 addresses testing the performance of the interconnection between multiple fire protection and life safety systems.

NFPA 3 and 4 are neither adopted nor referenced by 780 CMR, Massachusetts State Building Code; however, the concepts contained within these documents have already been embraced and implemented by many building owners. It’s for good reason too. The fire alarm, fire protection and other life safety systems of today are complicated and often require integration with building automation, audio/visual and security systems, to name a few. Implementing NFPA 3 and 4 allows building owners have confidence that the life safety systems they are purchasing will work beyond the initial acceptance test of the fire department.

With 527 CMR, Massachusetts Comprehensive Fire Safety Code, requiring existing smoke control systems to be tested semi-annually if dedicated, annually if non-dedicated, the need for NFPA 3 and 4 to become adopted standards is more apparent than ever. The documentation associated with existing smoke control systems that were designed and installed in buildings during the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s has left a lot to be desired. In many instances, reverse-engineering these systems becomes necessary as their entire design is often limited to 2 or 3 notes on a fire alarm drawing. Had these NFPA documents existed 20-30 years ago, many of the recurring issues that we encounter when recommissioning existing smoke control systems would not exist.

Though many people have heard of NFPA 3 and 4 but since their inception 5 years ago, very few engineers, owners and/or contractors have been involved with projects where they have been implemented. This underscores the importance of having a well-qualified fire commissioning agent. In the Annex of NFPA 3, Section A.4.2.1.1, it states that the fire commissioning agent should have a minimum of five years of experience in facility construction, inspection, acceptance testing or commissioning as it relates to fire protection and life safety. Finding someone with said experience and starting the commissioning process during design are probably the two most critical aspects to successfully commissioning of life safety systems. While there is certainly a cost associated with commissioning life safety systems, our experience has shown that early involvement with commissioning can pay for itself by avoiding costly last-minute change orders that in some instances can delay occupancy.

A question that is commonly asked on projects is how to classify the occupancy of occupied roof decks. Does the roof deck contribute to the building area? Does the height and area table (IBC Table 503) apply to the outdoor area? Under the 2015 IBC and prior editions, no guidance is given with respect to this issue. Some jurisdictions classify them as occupancies in the building and others do not, which can have a significant impact on the design of the building relating to construction type, fire protection systems, etc. To clear up the confusion, new language is being added in the 2018 IBC that will specifically address occupied roof decks as follows (new text is underlined):

302.1 General. Structures or portions of structures shall be classified with respect to occupancy in one or more of the groups listed in this section. A room or space that is intended to be occupied at different times for different purposes shall comply with all of the requirements that are applicable to each of the purposes for which the room or space will be occupied. Structures with multiple occupancies or uses shall comply with Section 508. Where a structure is proposed for a purpose that is not specifically provided for in this code, such structure shall be classified in the group that the occupancy most nearly resembles, according to the fire safety and relative hazard involved. Yards, patios, courts, occupied roofs and similar outdoor areas accessible to and usable by the building occupants shall be classified in the group that the occupancy most nearly resembles, according to the fire safety and relative hazard involved.

503.1.4 Occupied roofs. A roof level or portion thereof shall be permitted to be used as an occupied roof provided the occupancy of the roof is an occupancy that is permitted by Table 504.4 for the story immediately below the roof. The area of the occupied roofs shall not be included in the building area as regulated by Section 506.

Exceptions:

  1. The occupancy located on an occupied roof shall not be limited to the occupancies allowed on the story immediately below the roof where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and occupant notification in accordance with Section 907.5 is provided in the area of the occupied roof.
  2. Assembly occupancies shall be permitted on roofs of open parking garages of Type I or Type II construction, in accordance with the exception to Section 903.2.1.6.

Elements or structures enclosing the occupied roof areas shall not extend more than 48 inches above the surface of the occupied roof.

Exception: Penthouses constructed in accordance with Section 1510.2 and towers, domes, spires, and cupolas constructed in accordance with Section 1510.5

With this new change, the occupied roof will be classified as an occupancy in the building, and may or may not be limited in height based on the fire protection features provided. One important caveat associated with this code change is the height limitation on elements or structures enclosing the roof deck. The code proposal states that this was added due the concern that having walls or screens surrounding a roof deck could lead to firefighting challenges. Given that many of the new roof decks we have seen in the Northeast are well above the height a ladder truck can reach, we anticipate this limitation to be a common topic of conversation with the local fire departments.

Want to learn more about this code change and how it may impact/help your projects? Contact us at info@crcfire.com for more information.

The International Building Code (IBC) first adopted a requirement for the special inspection of firestopping and fire resistance joint assemblies in certain buildings with the 2012 Edition. Since its adoption, we have performed third party fire stop and fire resistant joint inspections on over 1 Million square feet of space in accordance with ASTM E 2393 and ASTM E 2174. Below are some of the frequently asked questions we hear when serving in this capacity.

Want to know more about where its required? See our previous post here.

Where is firestopping required?

  • Through Penetrations: Breaches in both sides of a floor, floor-ceiling or wall assembly to accommodate an item passing through the breaches.
  • Membrane Penetrations: Breaches in one side of a floor ceiling, roof-ceiling or wall assembly to accommodate an item installed into or passing through the breach.
  • Joints and Perimeter Barriers: Openings in or between adjacent assemblies that is created due to building tolerances, or is designed to allow independent movement of the building in any plane caused by thermal, seismic, wind or any other loading (i.e. head of wall assemblies, curtain wall/slab edge joints).

What test standards govern approved firestop systems?

The table below outlines the required test standard particular to each firestopping application:

Each of these test standards outline fire test methods effective in determining the performance of firestop systems subject to fire exposure governed by a standard time-temperature test and hose stream test. The time-temperature curve utilized mirrors that utilized for determining the hourly rating for walls and floors (ASTM E119).

Can’t I use this red caulk on all my penetrations?

The code calls for the use of listed firestopping assemblies. It’s easy to get these confused with listed firestop products. A firestopping product is just one of the components in a listed firestopping assembly. The wall or floor assembly being penetration, penetrating item itself, annular space around the penetration, the manner in which the penetrating item is configured through the opening, etc.. are all part of the listed firestop assembly. For an arrangement to be considered a listed firestop assembly, it is required to be installed in the same manner in which it was tested. This information is readily available from the firestopping product manufacturer’s or from approved testing laboratories such as Underwriters Laboratories (UL).

What is the difference between a “F Rating” and “T Rating”?

  • F-Rating, or Flame Rating, is the period of time in hours the tested assembly remains in place without allowing the passage of fire during exposure or water during the hose stream test following exposure. T-Rating, or Temperature Rating, indicates the time in hours it took for the temperature on the unexposed side of the assembly to reach 325°F above ambient.
  • In order to obtain a T Rating, an F Rating must be obtained prior. Exposed penetrations through floors and fire resistance rated joints require a T Rating whereas membrane and through wall penetrations are only required to obtain an F rating.

Do membrane penetrations by electrical boxes need to be firestopped?

Membrane penetrations by electrical boxes may not require a firestopping assembly if they (1) have been tested for use in a fire resistance rated assembly and are installed per their listing or (2) they meet all of the following conditions (IBC 2012 714.3.1):

  • The electrical box area does not exceed 16 square inches;
  • The aggregate area of openings through membrane does not exceed 100 square inches in any 100 square feet of wall area;
  • The annular space between the wall membrane and the box does not exceed 1/8”; and
  • If located on opposite sides of the wall, electrical boxes are separated by 24 inches in different stud cavities.

If these conditions are not satisfied, additional insulation, fireblocking, or listed firestop assemblies arranged per Section 714.3.1 need to be added to achieve compliance with the code.

In need of help on firestopping inspections or details? Please do not hesitate to give us a call.