# NFPA 101-Life Safety System  for existing high-rises



## Truck3capt (Feb 27, 2018)

Our jurisdiction has been working to try to get all of our existing buildings that qualify as high-rise structures into compliance with the state minimum fire code.  (NFPA 101-2000)  So they've been asked to sprinkler the building  or provide an engineered life safety system analysis of the structure in accordance with the special provisions language in NFPA 101 for existing high rise buildings ( 39.4.2 in this instance, existing B use)

 We've adopted the 2012 I-Codes in our jurisdiction so the decision was made to allow the  3412 Compliance Alternatives section  in the 2012 IBC to "score" the building and comply with the alternative engineered life safety system analysis portion.  One of the evaluations submitted claimed points for a functioning standpipe. Our office requested current ITM documentation.  The electric fire pump supplying the system failed and was so old  parts were unavailable to repair it. It's being replaced. 

The existing pump room doesn't appear to be compliant with all of the requirements of NFPA 20-2010 which would be the appropriate referenced standard for the 2012 IBC. 

 If the pump is replaced does  the rest of the pump room have to be in compliance with the  requirements of NFPA 20 in order for the building owner to claim the 6 points for the standpipe system?


----------



## cda (Feb 27, 2018)

Don't deal with high rises or 3412, But seem like if there was nothing going on,

The pump would have to be replaced.

To me that should not require upgrade of the room??

I think the city should have just stuck to requiring a sprinkler system.


----------



## Truck3capt (Feb 28, 2018)

We would prefer the sprinkler system  obviously.  Unfortunately the only language I can cite is from the 2000 NFPA 101 for existing high rises if we want to try to retroactively address sprinklers in these structures..  That language gives them a choice to provide the life safety system analysis or a sprinkler system.  I can't require it retroactively any other way.  This should have been addressed in 2002 when the state adopted NFPA 101-2000 as their minimum fire code.  For many reasons that you can probably imagine,  it wasn't.  Some of the buildings will have to be sprinklered because they simply won't score well enough.  Below is from the Existing Business Occupanceis portion of NFPA 101:

SECTION 39.4 SPECIAL PROVISIONS
39.4.1 Windowless or Underground Buildings. (See Section 11.7.)
39.4.2 High-Rise Buildings.
39.4.2.1 All high-rise business occupancy buildings shall be provided with a reasonable degree of safety from fire. Such degree of safety* shall be accomplished by the installation of a complete, approved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 9.7 or an engineered life safety system.*  An engineered life safety system shall be developed by a registered professional engineer who is experienced in fire and life safety systems design. The system shall be approved by the authority having jurisdiction and might include any or all  of the following systems:
(1) Partial automatic sprinkler protection
(2) Smoke detection alarms
(3) Smoke control
(4) Compartmentation
(5) Other approved systems
39.4.2.2* A limited but reasonable time shall be permitted for
compliance with any part of 39.4.2.1, commensurate with the
magnitude of expenditure and the disruption of services.


----------

