# IFC and IBC 906.1(6) Special-hazard



## rnapier (Dec 31, 2012)

IFC and IBC 906.1(6) Special-hazard this section seems overly broad and undefined and I was hoping that some of you out there could help me better understand what would be considered a special-hazard not already covered in Table 906.1.


----------



## cda (Dec 31, 2012)

Which edition


----------



## rnapier (Dec 31, 2012)

cda said:
			
		

> Which edition


Sorry I should have stated 2009


----------



## cda (Dec 31, 2012)

Well never understood why buildings with sprinkler systems did not need fire extinguishers ???

Commentary just says " required in areas where fire hazards may exist based on the space""

To me catch all, since code cannot anticipate what a room may be used for, and would allow code official to require a fire extinguisher


----------



## rnapier (Dec 31, 2012)

Thanks I don't have the commentary but it still seems overly broad. I am the kind of inspector that likes it spelled out so I can cut down on the arguments.


----------



## cda (Dec 31, 2012)

rnapier said:
			
		

> Thanks I don't have the commentary but it still seems overly broad. I am the kind of inspector that likes it spelled out so I can cut down on the arguments.


That can be both good and bad

I like the because I said so clauses


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 31, 2012)

> To me catch all, since code cannot anticipate what a room may be used for, and would allow code official to require a fire extinguisher


This section is from the fire code and I agree it is a catch all that the fire inspector can use when doing fire inspections on a case by case basis. The use in a room may change which may result in a higher hazard.


----------

