For the past two years, NFPA LiNK® has provided professionals with an interactive digital alternative to hardcopy codebooks, offering access to NFPA® codes and standards on the user’s favorite device. On May 15, NFPA LiNK will be adding 25 additional codes and standards within the organization’s vast scope of publications, including the latest edition of NFPA 70E®, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace®. For those unfamiliar with NFPA 70E, this standard establishes requirements for safe work practices to protect personnel by reducing exposure to major electrical hazards. NFPA 70E helps companies and employees avoid workplace injuries and fatalities due to shock, electrocution, arc flash, and arc blast, and assists in complying with OSHA regulations. Along with the National Electrical Code® and NFPA 70B, Standard for Electrical Equipment Maintenance, NFPA 70E aids professionals across the globe in maintaining electrical safety. In addition to the 2024 edition of NFPA 70E, new editions of 24 other NFPA documents will publish in NFPA LiNK on the 15th, including: ·       NFPA 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code ·       NFPA 96, Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations ·       NFPA 90A, Standard for the Installation of Air-Conditioning and Ventilating Systems ·       NFPA 556, Guide on Methods for Evaluating Fire Hazard to Occupants of Passenger Road Vehicles ·       NFPA 820, Standard for Fire Protection in Wastewater Treatment and Collection Facilities With staffing shortages plaguing the industry and valuable time at all-time low, all workers in the electrical, fire, and life safety space need to be able to readily access the most up-to-date codes and standards. No longer can individuals rely on a single team member to carry a codebook holding valuable notes in its margins and earmarks on commonly cited pages. It’s more important than ever for stakeholders to collaborate, share resources, and plan accordingly while in the design and build process. Innovative resources like NFPA LiNK are at the heart of enabling this productive way of work, offering: ·       Notetaking features for individuals to add personal notes and collaborate with others, share code sections, and work across teams ·       Interactive Change Indicators that make it easier to identify and understand changes and deletions made from edition to edition ·       Bookmarks to save custom collections for quick and easy reference ·       Navigation tools that enable users to bookmark text and quickly locate information ·       NFPA DiRECT®, a situational navigation tool to help professionals identify codes related to the unique projects they encounter Interested in learning more? NFPA recently debuted a supplementary NFPA LiNK YouTube channel, complementing the platform by providing users with tutorials and quick-start video guides for optimizing NFPA LiNK, as well as content discussing industry-specific codes, classifications, and requirements for electrical, fire, and life safety. For more information about NFPA LiNK, or to sign up for a free trial, visit nfpa.org/LiNK.

At least 39 migrants being held in a detention center in Ciudad Juárez, a city located just south of El Paso, Texas, on the United States–Mexico border, died Monday evening after a massive fire tore through the facility. In the aftermath of the event, which was one of the deadliest fires in recent history in Mexico, fire safety experts from NFPA® are detailing the measures detention and correction facilities can take to prevent future tragedies like this from occurring.   “What happened in the Ciudad Juárez migrant station is an event that should not have happened and should not happen again,” said Jaime Gutierrez, the international development director for Latin America at NFPA.     Although widely used codes and standards such as NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code® (available in Spanish), provide guidance on keeping individuals being held in detention or correctional facilities safe from fire, devastatingly destructive and deadly fires in such occupancies have been known to occur globally. Just six months ago, for instance, a fire in an Iran prison killed eight people and left dozens more injured.   “We have to do a better job at looking at the guidance that is already out there from organizations such as NFPA in keeping these facilities safe,” said Gutierrez, who lives in Mexico City.     FREE EGRESS VS CONFINEMENT     In most buildings in the modern, developed world, free egress is required by codes like NFPA 101. This is the idea that occupants inside an office, restaurant, or other building will be able to flow out of it freely in the event of a fire or other emergency. (This wasn’t always the norm, and some of the most notorious fires throughout history, such as Boston’s Cocoanut Grove fire in 1942 or the Triangle Waist Company fire in New York City in 1911, involved exit doors that were locked or otherwise blocked.)   One notable exception to this concept, however, is for detention and correctional facilities, where occupants may be locked inside cells or other holding areas. Because of these unique circumstances, safety in detention and correctional facilities can be more difficult to achieve, but experts say it’s important not to overlook it.    “It is crucial that there is a balance between security and life safety when designing and operating detention and correctional facilities,” said NFPA engineer Shawn Mahoney.   Chapters 22 and 23 of the Life Safety Code outline requirements for both new and existing detention and correctional facilities. In these chapters, the limitation on free egress in such facilities is acknowledged, and safety measures to counteract that limitation are described.   “Because the safety of all occupants in detention and correctional facilities cannot be adequately ensured solely by dependence on evacuation of the building,” the code states, “their protection from fire shall be provided by appropriate arrangement of facilities; adequate, trained staff; and development of operating, security, and maintenance procedures.” These procedures, the code continues, should consider structural design elements such as compartmentation, planning and practicing evacuation scenarios, and fire detection, notification, and suppression.   In all cases, NFPA 101 requires that staff members of detention facilities be able to release detainees to let them evacuate during emergencies. For new facilities, the code requires automatic sprinkler systems when free egress isn’t provided.    It remains unclear which, if any, of the safety measures outlined in NFPA 101 were in place at the facility that burned in Ciudad Juárez Monday. In a video allegedly captured of the blaze, which has been widely circulated in the media and online, smoke and flames can be seen building at a frightening pace inside a cell while a man dressed in what appears to be a uniform walks by quickly. In a PBS News Hour article published two days after the incident, witnesses alleged guards at the facility failed to release male detainees after the fire broke out, and Mexican authorities have said they are investigating eight employees for potential criminal charges.   Authorities say the fire started after some detainees lit mattresses inside their cell on fire to protest recent upticks in immigration delays and deportations. The facility, which abuts a highway running along the Rio Grande, just 500 feet from the U.S. border, often houses migrants from South and Central America who have been detained trying to make their way into the U.S. At the time of Monday’s fire, 68 men were being held in the section of the facility that ended up burning.   The incident capped a period of rising tensions in the city, as the migrant population there has swelled to over 12,000 in recent weeks. “This tragedy is a crime against humanity,” a 55-year-old Venezuelan migrant who’s been living on the streets of Ciudad Juárez with his two daughters told the New York Times. “The place where these people died has no dignity at all. It is a prison.”   While fires in detention and correctional facilities occur worldwide, Latin America in particular has a history of catastrophic fires in these facilities. The deadliest prison fire ever occurred in Comayagua, Honduras, in 2012, claiming 361 lives. An NFPA Journal article published seven months after that blaze calculated the likelihood of dying in a prison fire in Latin America at more than 200 times higher than in the U.S. “Many of the worst fires in Latin American prisons are the result of overcrowding and lack of adequate levels of fire safety,” the article said. “Curtains and other combustible materials surrounding prison beds are common in Latin American jails, as are electrical appliances and the resulting overloaded electrical outlets.”   The best way to prevent these fires, experts say, is through the use of codes and standards like NFPA 101. RELATED TRAINING  NFPA 101 Focus on Residential and Detention and Correctional Occupancies (2018) Online Training   “It’s important that construction professionals, building owners, and fire departments to be trained on NFPA 101 and that inspections are conducted to hold high-risk properties accountable,” said Gutierrez. “There are dozens of other migrant centers throughout Mexico, so it’s urgent to take measures in all of these facilities to prevent another tragic event like the one that occurred.”

Fire, smoke, and combination fire/smoke dampers are crucial pieces of equipment used to reduce the spread of fire and smoke throughout a building. For an overview of the basics on fire and smoke dampers refer to this newly developed fact sheet. As with all fire protection and life safety equipment, fire and smoke dampers must be properly inspected, tested, and maintained to ensure that they will operate when needed. This blog will break down the requirements for the inspection, testing, and maintenance (ITM) requirements of fire dampers, smoke dampers, and combination fire/smoke dampers. Although the ITM requirements for each seem similar, there are some variations in the inspection and testing requirements. Fire Dampers Chapter 19 of NFPA 80, Standard for Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives, provides the ITM requirements for fire dampers. Operational Test An operational test is performed (typically by the installation personnel) right after the damper is installed to confirm the following: ·      Damper fully closes. ·      There are no obstructions to the operation of the damper. ·      There is full and unobstructed access to the damper. ·      For dynamic dampers, the velocity in the duct is within the velocity rating of the damper. ·      All indicating devices are working and report correctly. ·      The fusible link (if equipped) is the correct temperature classification and rating. Acceptance Testing An acceptance test is a test of the damper that is completed by a qualified person after the damper is installed, an operational test is completed, and the entire heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system is complete. The acceptance test is performed to confirm the following prior to placing the entire system in service: ·      The damper is not damaged or missing any parts. ·      If actuated, dampers close fully upon disconnection of electrical power or air pressure. ·      If actuated, dampers fully reopen when electrical power or air pressure is reapplied. ·      If non-actuated, the damper closes upon removal of the fusible link and is manually reset to the full-open position. Testing must be done under maximum airflow after HVAC system balancing, unless acceptance testing is being peformed for dampers with fusible links. In that case, it is permitted to turn the fan in the system off. Periodic Testing Fire dampers need to be inspected and tested 1 year after the initial acceptance test and then every 4 years, unless the dampers are installed in a hospital, in which case they can be inspected and tested every 6 years. During the periodic inspection of an actuated fire damper, the following needs to be completed: ·      Confirm that the damper is in the full-open or full-closed position as required by the system design. ·      Visually confirm the damper moved to the full-closed or full-open position when commanded. ·      Visually confirm that the damper returns to the original operating position as required by the system design. During the periodic inspection of a non-actuated fire damper, the following needs to be completed: ·      Confirm the fusible link is not painted. ·      Confirm the damper fully closes when the fusible link is removed or activated with the damper in the full-open position. ·      Where equipped, confirm that the damper latches in the full-closed position. ·      Confirm that the damper is returned to the full-open and operational position with fusible link installed. Smoke Dampers   Chapter 7 of NFPA 105, Standard for Smoke Door Assemblies and Other Opening Protectives, provides the inspection, testing, and maintenance requirements for smoke dampers, which are outlined below. Smoke dampers that are part of a smoke control system need to be inspected and tested in accordance with NFPA 92, Standard for Smoke Control Systems. Operational Test An operational test is performed after the damper is installed and after the building’s heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system has been fully balanced to confirm the following: ·      Damper fully closes under both the normal HVAC airflow and non-airflow conditions. ·      There are no obstructions to the operation of the damper. ·      There is full and unobstructed access to the damper. ·      All indicating devices are working and report correctly. Acceptance Testing An acceptance test is a test of the damper that is completed by a qualified person after the damper is installed, an operational test is completed, and the entire HVAC system is complete to confirm the following prior to placing the entire system in service: ·      The damper is not damaged or missing any parts. ·      Dampers close fully upon disconnection of electrical power or air pressure. ·      Dampers fully reopen when electrical power or air pressure is reapplied. Testing must be done under maximum airflow after HVAC system balancing. Periodic Testing Smoke dampers need to be inspected and tested 1 year after the initial acceptance test and then every 4 years, unless the dampers are installed in a hospital, in which case they can be inspected and tested every 6 years. During the periodic inspection, the following needs to be completed: ·      Confirm that the damper is in the full-open or full-closed position as required by the system design. ·      Visually confirm the damper moved to the full-closed or full-open position when commanded. ·      Visually confirm that the damper returns to the original operating position as required by the system design. Combination Fire/Smoke Dampers Combination Fire/Smoke Dampers need to meet the requirements for both fire dampers and smoke dampers when it comes to ITM. Documentation All inspections and tests of fire, smoke, and combination fire/smoke dampers need to be documented and maintained for at least three test cycles. These documents need to include the following: ·      Location of the damper ·      Date(s) of inspection ·      Name of the inspector ·      Deficiencies discovered, if any ·      Indication of when and how deficiencies were corrected, if applicable Maintenance Proper maintenance of fire, smoke, and fire/smoke dampers is crucial to ensure that they remain operational. If a damper is found to not be operational, repairs need to be completed without delay and a periodic test must be completed after the repair is completed to ensure the damper’s operation. All exposed moving parts of the damper need to be lubricated as required by the manufacturer and any reports of an abrupt change in airflow or noise from a duct system needs to be investigated to ensure that it is not related to the damper operation. Summary Proper inspection, testing, and maintenance of fire, smoke, and fire/smoke dampers ensure they are installed and operating properly in the event of an emergency. For more information about the basics of fire, smoke, and combination fire/smoke dampers, check out this fact sheet.

An area of refuge is one way to satisfy the accessible means of egress requirements. One of the most common questions when it comes to areas of refuge besides “What is an area of refuge?” is “Do the exit stairs need to be oversized?” Like so many other code questions the answer is “It depends.” It is going to depend on what is serving as your area of refuge. Before diving into some key requirements for an area of refuge and identifying what triggers the need to increase the size of the exit stair, for those wondering what area of refuge means and when one might be required, check out my previous blog, “Accessible Means of Egress and the Life Safety Code.” Regardless of what is considered the area of refuge, there are a few things that all areas of refuge have in common. The first is that they must comply with the general means of egress requirements found in Section 7.1 of the 2021 edition of NFPA 101®, Life Safety Code®. This section outlines a number of requirements including things like minimum headroom heights, levelness of walking surfaces, and the reliability of the means of egress. Additionally, two-way communication systems are required in areas of refuge. The exact location of the systems will depend on what is being used as an area of refuge. The system itself, though, needs to allow for communication between the elevator landing and either the fire command center or a central control point that has been approved by the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ). Directions outlining how to use it, how to request help using the system, and written identification of the location all need to be posted next to the two-way communication system. One key component of determining what can be considered an area of refuge is whether or not the building is protected throughout with an automatic, supervised sprinkler system. Area of Refuge in a Building Protected Throughout by Sprinklers If the building is equipped with sprinklers, then an entire story in the building can be considered an area of refuge provided certain criteria are met. The first is that each elevator landing needs to have a two-way communication system. It also must be equipped with both audible and visible signals. The story must have at least two accessible rooms or spaces that are separated from each other by smoke-resisting partitions. It is important to note that some occupancies, such as new and existing business, exempt the minimum two accessible rooms provision. This means that in those occupancies, only one room or space needs to be accessible. If an occupancy exempts the two accessible room provision, it will typically appear in the XX.2.2.12 paragraph of the occupancy chapter. Area of Refuge in a Building Not Protected Throughout by Sprinklers An area of refuge in a building not protected throughout with sprinklers must meet the specific requirements of 7.2.12.2 and 7.2.12.3. While I can’t cover every single requirement outlined in those particular sections, I will highlight key aspects. The first deals with accessibility. The area of refuge must be situated in such a way that an occupant has access to a public way, by using either an exit or an elevator, without having to go back through building spaces that he or she already passed through. Additionally, the area of refuge must be accessible via an accessible means of egress. This means that travel to the area of refuge cannot involve stairs. An occupant needs to be able to reach the area of refuge by traveling over either level floor or ramps. This also requires careful consideration of available clear widths, particularly through doors. Typically, an accessible route requires 32 inches (810 mm) of clear width through a door. In some existing buildings, door openings may only be 28 inches (710 mm). The narrower door opening can be challenging for occupants using wheelchairs to navigate and may not be considered an accessible route. If the area of refuge relies on the use of stairs to reach the public way, then the clear width of landings and stairs must be at least 48 inches (1220 mm). The clear-width measurement is taken between the handrails and must be maintained at all points below handrail height. There are two exceptions to the 48-inch (1220-mm) minimum width. The first is where the area of refuge is separated from the remainder of the story by a horizontal exit. The second is for existing stairs and landings. For existing landings and stairs, a minimum clear width of 37 inches (940 mm) must be provided at and below handrail height. If the area of refuge relies on the use of an elevator to reach the public way, then the elevator must be approved for firefighters’ emergency operations. Additionally, the power supply must be protected against interruption from a fire in the building that originates outside the area of refuge. Lastly, the shaft housing the elevator must be a smokeproof enclosure. There are two exceptions to the smokeproof enclosure requirement. The first is for areas of refuge that are larger than 1000 ft2 (93m2) and that are created by a horizontal exit. The second exception is for elevators in towers. A tower is a structure that meets a very specific definition and is not occupied by the general public. There is a separate set of criteria for elevators in towers. Regardless of whether an occupant will reach the public way via exit stairs or an elevator, a two-way communications system must be provided. Any doors providing access to the area of refuge must have a sign. The area of refuge sign must read “AREA OF REFUGE,” display the international symbol of accessibility, have a nonglare finish, and have letters that contrast with the background. Further specifics for the sign are outlined in ICC A117.1, Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities. The sign(s) must be illuminated. Tactile signage is also required at each location. Additional signs are required wherever necessary to clearly indicate the direction of travel to an area refuge and at every exit not providing an accessible means of egress. The image below is an example of an area of refuge sign; however, tactile signage would also be required. Another key aspect of an area of refuge is the presence of wheelchair spaces. Each area of refuge needs to have one wheelchair space that measures 30 inches x 48 inches (760 mm x 1220 mm) for every 200 occupants the area of refuge serves. The wheelchair spaces are not permitted to infringe on the required width of the means of egress for the occupant load served and must never reduce the width to less than 36 inches (915 mm). Each wheelchair space must be accessible without having to pass through more than one adjacent wheelchair space. This is where our original question of “Do the exit stairs need to be oversized?” will be answered. The one scenario where you may need to increase the size of your stair is when the building is not sprinklered and you are using the exit stair as an area of refuge. If that particular area of refuge serves 350 people, then two wheelchair spaces would be required. The image below shows what this could look like. The oversized stair comes into play because the means of egress needs to maintain the required width for the occupant load or at a minimum of 36 inches (915 mm). This would include the stair landing. If an area of refuge is less than 1000 ft2 (93 m2), then it needs to be proven that tenable conditions can be maintained within the area of refuge for at least 15 minutes when the separation creating the area of refuge is exposed to the worst-case fire scenario for that occupancy. Tenable conditions can be proven through either calculation or testing. The last aspect of an area of refuge we will cover for a non-sprinklered building is separation. Each area of refuge must be separated from the remainder of the story by a minimum 1-hour fire resistance rated fire barrier. There are two exceptions to this. The first is that when a higher rating is required elsewhere within NFPA 101. The second is if the barrier is an existing barrier with at least a 30-minute fire resistance rating. An example of where a higher rating would be required is if the exit stair enclosure is serving as the area of refuge and the enclosure requires a 2-hour fire resistance rating based on the number of stories it serves. The barriers and all openings in them must minimize air leakage and resist the passage of smoke. Door assemblies in these barriers must have at least a 20-minute fire protection rating. A greater rating is required where other portions of NFPA 101 require a higher rating. The doors must be either self-closing or automatic closing. All new fire door assemblies serving an area of refuge must be smoke leakage rated. Ducts are permitted unless other provisions of NFPA 101 prohibit them. If ducts penetrate the barrier, smoke-actuated dampers or some other approved means of resisting the transfer of smoke into the area of refuge must be provided. Summary There are a number of different configurations for an area of refuge. The presence of or absence of automatic sprinklers will be a driving factor in what can be considered an area of refuge. Regardless of what is considered an area of refuge, it is important to remember that it is just one way to provide an accessible means of egress.

We’re all used to seeing doorbell camera social media posts, but I wasn’t prepared for the dramatic security recording I watched this past winter. Nothing illustrates how fast a house fire can become deadly than video shot in real time. And this footage captured every minute of a tragic fire in Millers Falls, Massachusetts. Across the street, a home security camera with a clear view of the front of the burning home left a memorable record of its fast destruction.   According to the Turners Falls Fire Department, the fire started in a room on the first floor at the front corner of the house. From the video, flames can be seen in the window, but even as they grow, passing drivers don’t appear to notice. In less than three minutes, the video shows the fire spread to another room and outside the home, catching the moment flashover occurs. At that point you can hear the windows break and the crackling sound of the growing fire on the camera’s audio. Several occupants were able to escape. Sadly, one person and two family pets did not survive this fire.   The owner of the security camera posted the footage on YouTube and allowed local media to use it to report the story. The Massachusetts Fire Sprinkler Coalition saw the coverage and recognized that the recording provided an important opportunity to use as an educational tool. They remembered that the Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition had created an educational video a couple years back that showed interior security footage of a fire in an occupied room in a home. That video has received more than 2 million YouTube views to date.   The Coalition approached HFSC and together they produced a short video that pairs the Millers Falls security footage with HFSC’s interior video of an actual living room fire, with and without an installed home fire sprinkler. This dramatic new resource will help viewers understand how destructive home fires truly are and the lifesaving difference when a home is protected with fire sprinklers. We encourage you to share this video (below) as part of your outreach activities in your community.       HFSC focuses its educational efforts on installing fire sprinklers at the time of construction. The Millers Falls fire was in an older home and it’s not realistic to expect older existing homes to be retrofit with fire sprinklers. But the fire footage is a real-life example of how fast and dangerous home fires actually are, and why fire sprinklers are required in today’s codes. This video is proof of why every new construction home should be protected.   For more information about home fire sprinklers and to get free resources to share, visit the HFSC website.

Each year, the Fire Protection Research Foundation hosts the SUPDET® (short for Suppression and Detection) Conference to bring together industry experts to collaborate in panel discussions and participate in engaging education sessions on the latest research techniques and applications used for fire suppression, detection, signaling, and other emerging technologies. At the conclusion of the conference, attendees vote on the “Best Paper” (presentation) for each category of suppression and detection. The Fire Protection Research Foundation is proud to announce the 2022 SUPDET winners of the William M. Carey Award (suppression) and the Ronald K. Mengel Award (detection). The William M. Carey Award for the best presentation in the suppression category goes to Jeremy Souza of Code Red Consultants for his presentation “Going Fluorine Free – Converting a Legacy AFFF System to Fluorine-Free Foam.” The Ronald K. Mengel Award for the best presentation in the detection category is being awarded to two individuals, as there was a tie in votes: Arjen Kraaijeveld of HVL for his presentation “Reliable Fire Detection Systems for Residents with Drug and Psychiatric Disorders” and Travis Montembeault of Peerless Pump Company for his presentation “Smart fire protection systems improve overall reliability and decision making.” These winners will be presented with the awards at the 2023 SUPDET Conference, which will be September 12–14 in Northbrook, Illinois. Save the date! The awards’ namesakes It is with grateful appreciation of William Carey and Ronald Mengel that the Fire Protection Research Foundation presents these two awards each year. William Carey was a leading authority on fire safety. He spent 34 years as a professional engineer at Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. Throughout his career, Carey was a project engineer, giving presentations on fire safety products and investigating products to determine if they met UL standards. He also volunteered at several industry-related associations, including the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), and served on many NFPA technical committees. Later in his career, Carey was a senior staff engineer involved in working at UL’s large-scale fire testing facility, where he specialized in testing fire safety products, including sprinkler systems and portable fire extinguishers. He died unexpectedly at the early age of 56. He had an extraordinary knowledge and experience in his area of expertise and contributed to a better understanding of fire for engineers. Ronald Mengel had a long-distinguished career in the fire detection and alarm industry. He served in the US Navy and worked for General Electric and later Honeywell’s System Sensor Division. Mengel was a valued member of the fire protection community and volunteered for several industry-related associations including the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), Automatic Fire Alarm Association (AFAA), National Electrical Manufacturing Association (NEMA) and the Foundation’s Fire Detection and Alarm Research Council. Congratulations Jeremy, Arjen, and Travis on your well-deserved awards. We look forward to seeing you in the fall! Please save the date, and check out our call for papers for 2023!