By: Robert Avsec, Executive Fire Officer
Last week I posted an article for discussion on several of the LinkedIn Groups that I participate in on-line. In the article, entitled The Fire Officer as a Sprinkler System Advocate, I wrote of the important role that the Company Officer, aka, first-line supervisor, has in promoting the installation of residential fire sprinklers in their communities.
Currently, more than 30 states in the United States have passed legislation that prohibits local governments from enacting residential fire sprinkler system ordinances.
The 2009 IRC [International Residential Code], including the fire sprinkler requirement, has been adopted by California, Pennsylvania, Maryland and South Carolina, with many other states and local jurisdictions planning to consider this requirement when they update their codes.1
One of my colleagues responded to my post with the following comment:
I can get residential sprinklers in every state within 12 months. Since sprinklers are now required by the International Residential Code [2009 Edition], and the builders have successfully blocked implementation, we (the fire service) appear to need motivation to act. I propose that no more fire grants should be given to states or communities who have blocked the implementation of all sprinkler requirements in the IRC. If we’re not willing to take advantage of the technology needed to prevent flashover, then we shouldn’t be subsidized for using old technology. We can’t beat the builders in campaign donations, but we can be a very loud voter bloc to our legislators, but we’re not.—Fire Marshal, Pennsylvania
Interesting proposal, no?
One issue that may ultimately shift the perspective of builders towards residential fire sprinklers is legal liability. Regardless of whether a state or locality chooses to amend fire sprinkler requirements out of the IRC, courts may well hold that it is incumbent upon builders to follow established standards of care for fire safety when they construct a new home. You can Discover More Here if you need the best construction and building services.
With EVERY national code now requiring EVERY new residential property to be equipped with fire sprinklers, that standard of care is clearly established and is now well known to the industry, especially given the high profile of HBA opposition to sprinklers.
Accordingly, whenever a fire involving a post-2010 home is litigated, perhaps by a grieving family or by an insurance company seeking to recoup a payout for fire damage, a decision by a builder to not include sprinklers in a new home will be easily characterized as negligent, with a deliberate indifference towards life and property that yielded a defective home.2
We Can Have a Positive Influence on Our Citizens Regarding RFS
In a 2014 national Harris Poll survey conducted on behalf of the nonprofit Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition
(HFSC), 74% of U.S. homeowners said they would be more likely to buy a home with fire sprinklers than one without. You can also follow these tips on selling your home as it can attract more buyers. Seven in 10 said a sprinklered house has more value and nearly 8 in 10 (78%) said fire sprinklers provide the ultimate protection for residents.
The data from this recent study, which updated the national benchmark study previously commissioned by HFSC, demonstrates several areas of improved awareness of fire sprinkler life-safety benefits. It also underscores the importance of ongoing education and outreach to overcome common myths and misconceptions about home fire sprinklers.
“It’s certainly encouraging to see that 59% of homeowners say fire safety is very important to them and that the majority would rather buy a sprinklered home,” says HFSC President Lorraine Carli. “But we are also reminded of how much awareness work there still is to do. For example, just half the homeowners recognize the increased fire hazards associated with lightweight residential construction to residents and firefighters, and only about a third understand how open design increases the danger of a home fire.”3
So what do you think?
References
1 International Residential Code: Fire Sprinkler Coalition. States Adopting IRC Fire Sprinkler Requirements. http://ircfiresprinkler.org/wordpress/sample-page/states-adopting-irc-fire-sprinkler-requirements/
2 Ibid.
3 Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition. New Study Shows Homeowners Prefer a Home Protected with Fire Sprinklers. http://www.homefiresprinkler.org/index.php/homeowners-prefer-homes-protected-with-fire-sprinkler
Some quick thoughts, Bob.
When educating the public about residential sprinklers, include realtor and banker groups. The former sell homes and the latter grant mortgages, and their only sources of information are homebuilders.
Don’t ignore plumbing-based sprinklers, which go in twice as fast and cost half as much. I discuss them at http://www.fdexcellence.com. Break down the licensing barriers so that plumbers and sprinkler contractors can work together on designs and installations.
Consider retrofitting your home. Flexible PEX pipe makes it much easier to do so.
As an architect and former builder I can give you my take of why builders don’t like them. 1. water damage from a fire suppression system set off is nearly as bad, if not worse than a fire (say small kitchen fire) so insurance companies would payout regardless. 2. the cost of a residential fire suppression system would add approximately $5,000 to the cost of a small new home, sounds like peanuts, but with how homes are selling, its a big deal. 3. home owners do not know where the systems are buried in walls and ceilings, one well placed screw and it’s flood time (I have personally seen this happen in an assisted living facility – which do require them). 4. heat goes out, pipes freeze and break. domestic water is bad enough, add the 1″ or 1 1/2″ pipes full of rusty black stagnate water…. Finally, its companies like Tyco that lobbied the IBC to put them in the code to sell their product, not to promote public safety. ther are better ways to save lives in redidential fire than a fire suppression system.
David: Your take is not backed up by facts. You claim that water damage is just as bad from sprinklers. The documented fact is that fires stopped by residential sprinklers have one tenth the amount of both water and fire damage than those put out by firefighters. FM Global, a major property insurer, conducted the tests. If you wish, I’ll be happy to forward you a copy of the test report.
As for installation costs, the fact is that residential sprinklers can be installed on the cold water plumbing pipe. The systems, called plumbing-based sprinklers, are going in for as little as 50 cents per square foot. Those systems are not 1-1.5 inch pipes filled with stagnant water. They are 1/2-3/4 inch pipes filled with potable water that circulates each time a plumbing fixture is opened.
As for freezing problems, all of the water in a home will freeze, so omitting sprinklers to eliminate such a problem is short-sighted.
And it was not companies like Tyco who pushed for the sprinkler requirements in order to sell their product. It was fire chiefs like me who recognized that we can no longer get to homes in time to save lives, but sprinklers can save them. There IS no better way to save lives in residential fires.