# Locks only for security purposes



## Rick18071 (Aug 21, 2018)

There is an exception for door hardware in ICC/ANSI !117.1-2009 for locks only for security purposes. When is a lock not only for security purposes? I thought the whole idea of a lock is for security.


----------



## cda (Aug 21, 2018)

*404.2.6 Door Hardware.*
Handles, pulls, latches, locks, and other operable parts on accessible doors shall have a shape that is easy to grasp with one hand and does not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist to operate. Operable parts of such hardware shall be 34 inches (865 mm) minimum and 48 inches (1220 mm) maximum above the floor. Where sliding doors are in the fully open position, operating hardware shall be exposed and usable from both sides.

EXCEPTION: Locks used only for security purposes and not used for normal operation shall not be required to comply with Section 404.2.6.




Night lock?

Personal office door extra lock?


----------



## RLGA (Aug 21, 2018)

Privacy


----------



## JBI (Aug 21, 2018)

A safety chain or similar device that is not part of the 'normal operation' of the door.


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 21, 2018)

Safety chain exception for hotel room doors?


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 21, 2018)

RLGA said:


> Privacy





ADAguy said:


> Safety chain exception for hotel room doors?



Night lock?

Personal office door extra lock?[/QUOTE]

How can you have privacy without security?
Safety chains is for security so you can crack the door without someone you don't want getting in
Why wouldn't a night lock be for security?
An extra lock is for extra security.

I just want to know when a lock is not for security and needs to comply with 404.2.6


----------



## RLGA (Aug 21, 2018)

IBC Section 201.4 states that terms not defined shall have their ordinarily accepted meanings. This is usually accomplished by resorting to a dictionary.

The definition of _security _is the state of being secure. _Secure _means free from danger, loss, or risk. If the lock is installed for the contents or people within to be free from danger, loss, or risk, then it is there for security purposes. If the lock is installed so other people don't walk in on you when you want to be alone (e.g. private restroom), then it is not for security, but for privacy.


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 21, 2018)

YourDictionary definition and usage example. Copyright © 2018 by LoveToKnow Corp



noun

_pl._ -·ties
the state of being or feeling secure; freedom from fear, anxiety, danger, doubt, etc.; state or sense of safety or certainty
something that gives or assures safety, tranquillity, certainty, etc.; protection; safeguard

protection or defense against attack, interference, espionage, etc.: funds for national _security_
protection or defense against escape: a maximum-_security_ prison
procedures to provide such protection or defense

an organization or department whose task is protection or safety, esp. a private police force hired to patrol or guard a building, park, or other area: if you see an intruder, call _security_

something given as a pledge of repayment, fulfillment of a promise, etc.; guarantee
a person who agrees to make good the failure of another to pay, perform a duty, etc.; surety

any evidence of debt or ownership; esp., a stock certificate or bond: _usually used in pl._

If you want privacy you need to feel secure, free from anxiety,


When my wife uses a single use rest room at a truck stop she wants the security, so no one robs or rapes her, she told me she doesn't care if someone sees her. Some people can use the lock for security and some for privacy and some for both.


----------



## RLGA (Aug 21, 2018)

Rick18071 said:


> YourDictionary definition and usage example. Copyright © 2018 by LoveToKnow Corp
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I sometimes sleep in my office, but that doesn't make it a sleeping unit. Just because someone may use something for another purpose beyond what the code may state, doesn't mean that the code requirements for that other use wil apply.


----------



## JBI (Aug 21, 2018)

No need to ask Noah Webster, the language of the exception makes clear the intent...

"EXCEPTION: Locks used only for security purposes *and not used for normal operation* shall not be required to comply with Section 404.2.6."

A 'night latch' is not used for 'normal operation' but rather to provide an extra layer of security for those inside the room or space. The lever or knob is for 'normal operation' to go in and out of the room. 
No one 'needs' to use the night latch, every one 'needs' to use the lever or knob.


----------



## RLGA (Aug 21, 2018)

JBI said:


> No need to ask Noah Webster, the language of the exception makes clear the intent...
> 
> "EXCEPTION: Locks used only for security purposes *and not used for normal operation* shall not be required to comply with Section 404.2.6."
> 
> ...


That makes sense. Thank you.


----------



## cda (Aug 21, 2018)

If it has to do with door hardware 

“””””””Someone “””””has wrote about it

The 2009 edition of ICC A117.1 exempts locks used only for security purposes that are not used for normal operation;  this exemption is also included in the IBC and could potentially be applied to retrofit security devices. But this exception does not exist in the 2010 ADA standards, so these standards would not allow classroom barricade devices to be mounted at the floor or at the top of the door—above or below the allowable range. The mounting-height exception applicable to locks used only for security purposes has been removed from Section 404.2.6 of ICC A117.1-2017.  However, Section 404.1 still exempts doors designed to be operated only by security personnel from several requirements – including the required mounting height.



https://idighardware.com/2018/05/decoded-upcoming-accessibility-changes/


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 22, 2018)

cda said:


> If it has to do with door hardware
> 
> “””””””Someone “””””has wrote about it
> 
> ...



I do not inspect to the civil rights laws like ADA and don't give a s*** what it says. I'm only allowed to enforce the state law for accessibility (IBC). But I would never assume this exception that says "security purpose" that it meant used for security personnel only. How would you know if a building has security personnel or if they clam everyone that uses the building is part of the security personal?

I know a restroom, toilet stall or entrance door lock would be considered "normally used" and is required to be accessible, but if there is a lock somewhere else like on a office room door in a building how would you know if it is normally used or if the intent is to use it just for privacy, security or both?

On office doors that have a key lock on the outside and a unlocking device in the door handle on the inside I normally tell them 
that the inside unlocking device needs to be a push button, not something that requires tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of wrist to unlock like a regular bedroom door lock. I do this very often and they then they need to buy different door latches and get a lot of complaining because it is a final inspection and the contractor all ready left..But I am not not sure if I have the authority to require this because it is part of the same lock that they might be using for security once in a while.


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 22, 2018)

Is not the PA code, like all other states, required by Federal law to include provisions for access that are no less than the minimums in 2010 ADASAD?


----------



## steveray (Aug 23, 2018)

Stupid code language.....Why wouldn't differently abled people be entitled to a night latch like everyone else? I would buy it for flush bolts and things like that where allowed and don't get used all that much, but not on a night latch that is there because "everyone uses those every night"...


----------



## jar546 (Aug 23, 2018)

JBI said:


> No need to ask Noah Webster, the language of the exception makes clear the intent...
> 
> "EXCEPTION: Locks used only for security purposes *and not used for normal operation* shall not be required to comply with Section 404.2.6."
> 
> ...



I agree.  I am in the JBI camp on this one.


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 23, 2018)

jar, isn't what you quoted an ANSI exception and not an ADASAD exception? If so it would be "less than" the ADASAD requirement, no?


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 23, 2018)

*309.4 Operation.* Operable parts shall be operable with one hand and shall not require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist.

under ADA any lock with a key is non-compliant

2010 ada standards
https://www.ada.gov/regs2010/2010ADAStandards/2010ADAstandards.htm#c4

*404 Doors, Doorways, and Gates
404.1 General.* Doors, doorways, and gates that are part of an accessible route shall comply with 404.

*EXCEPTION: *Doors, doorways, and gates designed to be operated only by security personnel shall not be required to comply with 404.2.7, 404.2.8, 404.2.9, 404.3.2 and 404.3.4 through 404.3.7.

*Advisory 404.1 General Exception.* Security personnel must have sole control of doors that are eligible for the Exception at 404.1. It would not be acceptable for security personnel to operate the doors for people with disabilities while allowing others to have independent access.


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 24, 2018)

404.1 "Nice" , thank you


----------

