# PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS



## FM William Burns (Jan 15, 2010)

Pennsylvania and New Hampshire join California in the adoption of 2009 IRC with residential sprinkler requirements:

http://nfpa.typepad.com/firesprinklerin ... ement.html

http://nfpa.typepad.com/firesprinklerin ... ments.html


----------



## jar546 (Jan 16, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

Townhouses are now required as of Jan 1 to have sprinklers.

Single and Two Family homes will follow in 2011.

The Pennsylvania legislators have about a year to meddle (mettle?) in the codes further like they already have on several other issues.


----------



## RJJ (Jan 18, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

won't this be fun!


----------



## bgingras (Jan 30, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

I think we are up in MA as well, time will tell what the BBRS here has to say, but I hear it will be.


----------



## jpranch (Jan 31, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

I would assume (assuming always gets me in trouble) that HUD housing, i.e, single and double wide trailers will be exempt???


----------



## incognito (Jan 31, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

jpranch.

I think you assume wrong. I do not believe the 2009 IRC exempts much of anything. Trailers, double wides and manufactured homes all need them in states that adopt the IRC. Can you imagine the outcry if the dwellings built with kindling were exempted


----------



## jpranch (Feb 1, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

Understood, bit I was wondering if a jurisdiction did not adopt IRC Appendix-E what impact that would have?


----------



## RJJ (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

In PA we don't have a choice!


----------



## conarb (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS



			
				Incognito said:
			
		

> I do not believe the 2009 IRC exempts much of anything. Trailers, double wides and manufactured homes all need them in states that adopt the IRC.


My understanding is that Federal law supersedes state law, anything approved with a HUD plaque is exempt from state law and hence sprinklers. I think the only thing you can permit and inspect on a HUD approved structure is the foundation under the structure because it's not approved by HUD.  This may be a huge feather in the quiver of the manufactured housing industry, they may move way upscale since they are sprinkler exempt.


----------



## jpranch (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

Even if you adopted Appendix-E you can ONLY apply it to manufactured home on a private lot. I.e, Appendix-E dose not apply to trailer parks with rented lots.

SECTION AE101

SCOPE

AE101.1 General. These provisions shall be applicable only

to a manufactured home used as a single dwelling unit installed

on privately owned (nonrental) lots and shall apply to the following:


----------



## conarb (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS



			
				JP said:
			
		

> AE101.1 General. These provisions shall be applicable onlyto a manufactured home used as a single dwelling unit installed
> 
> on privately owned (nonrental) lots and shall apply to the following:


I doubt that would survive constitutional challenge, Federal law usurps state law, the Federal government has approved and placed their seal on those units, you have no business challenging that approval by applying state law.  California passed a medical marijuana law a few years ago, the Feds came in and busted them anyway, Federal law supersedes state law. Now if there is no HUD sticker that you can find, go ahead and mandate state law.


----------



## jpranch (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

conarb, Agreed, but it will only apply until we succeed from the union!


----------



## Gene Boecker (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

And, Philly news has already done a news story on a residential sprinkler success:

http://cbs3.com/video/?id=95964@kyw.dayport.com


----------



## incognito (Feb 2, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS

Doesn't HUD require manufactured hopes to meet the IRC? For some reason I thought HUD adopted the IRC as a minimum standard several years ago.


----------



## Oldman (Feb 3, 2010)

Re: PA  and NH TO ADOPT IRC WITH RFS



			
				incognito said:
			
		

> Doesn't HUD require manufactured hopes to meet the IRC? For some reason I thought HUD adopted the IRC as a minimum standard several years ago.


No, Title 24: Housing and Urban Development Part 3280—Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards are not based on the 2006 IRC.

Here some examples of differences

*3280.103 © Ventilation*

Each bathroom and separate toilet compartment are required a mechanical ventilation system capable of exhausting 50 cfm to the outside of the home

A separate toilet compartment can have 1 - 1/2 sq ft open-able glazed instead of mechanical ventilation.

*R303.3* Allows bathroom and toilet room to be served by mechanical or glazed opening ventilation

*3280.105 Exits*

Two remote exit doors

Single wide : not less than 12' center to center

Double wide: not less than 20' center to center

One exit door within 35' of each bedroom door

Clear opening

Swinging door 28" x 74"

Sliding door 28" x 72"

*IRC requires only one exit door *

Below is the link to Title 24

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2008/ ... 3280.4.htm


----------

