The First Facility Management Blog

The International Code Council (ICC) has approved 23 building and fire code changes based on recommendations from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The recommendations were part of NIST’s investigation of the collapses of the World Trade Center (WTC) in New York on 9/11.

With the changes implemented, future buildings (especially tall structures) should be increasingly resistant to fire, more easily evacuated in emergencies, and safer overall, states the October 1, 2008 release from NIST. The changes, adopted at the ICC hearings held Sept. 15 to 21, 2008, in Minneapolis, MN, will be incorporated into the 2009 edition of the ICC’s I-Codes (specifically the International Building Code, or IBC, and the International Fire Code, or IFC), a model code used as the basis for building and fire regulations promulgated and enforced by U.S. state and local jurisdictions. Those jurisdictions have the option of incorporating some or all of the code’s provisions but generally adopt most provisions.

“We applaud this historic action by the ICC—and the tremendous effort by NIST and its WTC investigation team that led to it,” said Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez. “The lessons learned from the tragic events of 9/11 have yielded stronger building and fire codes for a new generation of safer, more robust buildings across the nation.”

The new codes address areas such as:

• Increasing structural resistance to building collapse from fire and other incidents
• Requiring a third exit stairway for tall buildings
• Increasing the width of all stairways by 50% in new high-rises
• Strengthening criteria for the bonding, proper installation and inspection of sprayed fire-resistive materials (commonly known as “fireproofing”)
• Improving the reliability of active fire protection systems (i.e., automatic sprinklers)
• Requiring a new class of robust elevators for access by emergency responders in lieu of an additional stairway
• Making exit path markings more prevalent and more visible
• Ensuring effective coverage throughout a building for emergency responder radio communications.

Not Approved, But To Be Reconsidered
There were nine building and fire code change proposals consistent with the NIST WTC investigation recommendations that were not approved for the 2009 edition of the I-Codes but will be considered for resubmission at a later date after being amended. These are:

• Requiring buildings more than 420 feet high to be designed to survive a building contents fire to burnout without more than local failure of the structural frame.
• Requiring structures not to suffer a collapse disproportionate to a local initiating failure caused by an accident or incident.
• Requiring a risk assessment and acceptable mitigation of risks for buildings more than 420 feet high with an occupant load greater than 5,000; for buildings with an occupant load greater than 10,000; and for buildings determined to be at higher than normal risk.
• Requiring use of a new standard for conducting wind tunnel testing.
• Requiring installation of stairway communication and monitoring system at every fifth floor of each exit stairway. Also requiring, in buildings more than 75 feet high, a video surveillance system in each exit stairway, elevator lobby, elevator hoistway and elevator machine room to enhance situational awareness of emergency responders.
• Requiring fire safety and evacuation plans for all occupancies and buildings where required by the International Fire Code (the International Building Code is more widely adopted across the country than the IFC; this would ensure all situations are covered).
• Requiring detailed schematic building plans, including an approved Building Information Card, to be located in fire command centers to show the type of construction, stairway access and pressurization, fuel oil tank and hazardous materials locations, standpipe availability and locations, in addition to typical floor plan and details of the building core, means of egress, elevator locations, fire protection systems, firefighting equipment and fire department access.
• Limiting the length of horizontal transfer corridors used to connect a stairwell to 50 feet or less in buildings more than 75 feet high.
• Allowing the option to design buildings more than 420 feet high using the ICC Performance Code, instead of the high-rise provisions of the International Building Code. This change will allow the performance-based NIST WTC recommendations to be considered in a holistic manner.

A chart tracking the progress toward implementing all of the NIST WTC recommendations can be found at http://wtc.nist.gov.

With crisis management in the forefront, facility professionals are tapping as many resources as they can to address this vital issue. Two important tools for fms can be found here:

• Read the January TFM feature by Victoria Hardy on Emergency Measures in a Post 9/11 World.
• Register for Disaster Recovery Beyond Emergency Response, an interactive keynote session during the TFM Show in April.

Security Expert Felix P. Nater shares his brand of workplace violence prevention integrated into a desktop crisis simulation. Nater says, “This is a good exercise for evaluating the collective capabilities of your functional departments to collaborate in a crisis and measure your vulnerabilities.”

To request a copy of this exercise, e-mail Nater at nater@naterassociates.com. To see how Nater’s company can assist with Self-Paced Online Learning, click this link. To see his video, click this link.

Shortly after 11 p.m., on Thursday, February 20, 2003, a fire at The Station Nightclub in West Warwick, RI, left 100 dead and many more injured. This fire, which occurred five years ago, was one of the deadliest nightclub fires in the history of the United States.

“Inadequate fire protection features were a major contributing factor to the significant number of deaths and injuries,” said Chris Jelenewicz, engineering program manager with the Bethesda, MD-Based Society of Fire Protection Engineers. “Additionally, exiting from the nightclub was hampered by over crowding at the building’s main entrance.”

The Station Nightclub was a one-story, wood frame building that regularly hosted live band performances. The fire started on-stage while a rock band was playing.

Fire investigators determined the fire started when pyrotechnics used during the band’s performance ignited polyurethane foam that lined parts of the nightclub’s walls and ceilings. After ignition, the fire spread quickly along the ceiling and throughout the building. Within seconds, deadly thick black smoke filled the nightclub, and flames were observed breaking trough the roof in less than five minutes after the fire started.

Over 440 people occupied the building at the time of the fire. Very shortly, after the start of the fire, the main front doorway became clogged with occupants trying to exit the building.

In addition, the building was not equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler system. An investigation following the blaze by the National Institute for Standards and Technology revealed that this tragedy would have been adverted if a fire sprinkler system was installed in the building at the time of the fire.

This combination of a fast moving fire that was caused by the polyurethane insulation coupled with the inability of the exits to handle the occupants were the major contributors to the 100 fire deaths. Many of the dead had either been burned to death or died of smoke inhalation, though some were trampled in the rush to escape.

“Because the fire and smoke spread so quickly through the building and the building was not equipped with a fire suppression system, the building occupants just didn’t have enough time to get out alive,” said Jelenewicz.

As a result of this fire, many building requirements were enhanced to make nightclubs safer from fire. Some of these requirements included provisions for automatic fire sprinklers in new and existing nightclubs and a requirement to have crowd managers present to assist with emergency building evacuations.

The Station Nightclub fire investigation was performed using cutting-edge engineering tools. After the station nightclub fire, fire protection engineers used computer fire models along with full-scale fire tests to analyze how the fire spread through the building. Additionally, the analysis predicted the impact of the fire if fire sprinklers were installed in the building.

“The Station Nightclub Fire reminds us of the threat that is posed by fire and the importance of designing buildings that that keep people safe from fire,” said Jelenewicz.

To read more about facility management responsibilities and disaster planning, read Victoria Hardy’s TFM article, “Emergency Measures In A Post 9/11 World.” And to attend an interactive keynote roundtable on this topic, register for “Facility Managers And Critical Operations: Disaster Recovery Beyond Emergency Response,” scheduled for 4/23/08 at the TFM Show in Chicago.

Last Friday (2/8/08), an act of violence at the Baton Rouge campus of Louisiana Technical College left two innocent women dead in a classroom. The shooter then turned the gun on herself and brought an abrupt end to the tragic incident. If there is a fortunate side to this story, it’s that the event was contained to one classroom and only involved three students, ages 21, 23, and 26. There was no known motive, and since the situation concluded so quickly, there was very little police could do.

While the details of yesterday’s campus shooting at Northern Illinois University (NIU) in Dekalb, IL, are still unclear, the death toll is currently at seven, again, including the gunman, now identified as Steve Kazmierczak, 27, a former NIU graduate student. Fifteen additional students were injured, and seven are in critical condition.

Security across college campuses is a frequent point of examination, in the aftermath of the brutal Virginia Tech massacre. Quick response from campus security may have had an impact on the number of fatalities at NIU; the University revamped its emergency policy shortly after the April 2007 tragedy in Blacksburg, VA.

From CNN.com:

At 3:03 p.m. CT, university police responded, and four minutes later, the campus was ordered into “a lockdown situation,” said Police Chief Donald Grady.

At 3:20, an all-campus alert went out via the school Web site, e-mail, voice mail, the campus crisis hotline, the news media and alarm systems, he said.

“The message basically was: There’s a gunman on campus, stay where you are; make yourself as safe as possible,” he said.

Student Rosie Moroni said she was outside Cole Hall near the King Commons when she heard shots coming from the classroom.

The shots were followed by “a lot of people screaming,” then people ran out the doors yelling, “He’s got a gun, call 911,” she recalled.

By 4 p.m., DeKalb police had swept the area “and determined there was only one gunman” and that he was dead.

Security around campus was increased in December when police found threats scrawled on a campus bathroom wall that included racial slurs and references to last April’s Virginia Tech shootings. Learn about other recent school shootings »

Peters said no evidence points to a link between the December incident and Thursday’s shooting.

The university revised its emergency procedures after the Virginia Tech massacre, Peters said.

“I believe that paid off,” he said. “That’s really a sad thing to say, that you have to learn from an event like that, but we knew how we wanted to communicate and we sort of had some messages prearranged, and we got out there fairly quickly.”

He said the shooting could force further changes.

“Universities for decades, for hundreds of years, have been open institutions — the most open institutions,” he said. “And events like this and Virginia Tech and others are forcing us to reconsider how we do things. I think that is unfortunate but necessary.”

Have you changed your emergency policies in response to any single event like Virginia Tech or 9/11? If not, why not?

To read more about facility management responsibilities and disaster planning, read Victoria Hardy’s TFM article, “Emergency Measures In A Post 9/11 World.” And to attend an interactive keynote roundtable on this topic, register for “Facility Managers And Critical Operations: Disaster Recovery Beyond Emergency Response,” scheduled for 4/23/08 at the TFM Show in Chicago.

Cyclic Loading Testing and International Field Performance Demonstrate Reliable Operation of BlazeMaster® Pipe & Fittings in Seismic Zones

A fire sprinkler system offers little or no benefit if it doesn’t remain intact when an earthquake strikes. This harsh reality has been the basis for a number of states adopting new provisions of the International Building Code to address the installation of fire sprinklers in seismic zones.

Now, a new report confirms what field results had previously proven – that a fire sprinkler system made of CPVC is more likely to perform reliably during and after an earthquake than a steel system. It was Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. (WJE), a nationally renowned engineering, architectural and materials testing company that conducted the test and reported the results. With more than 50 years in the business, 400+ professionals and 19 offices nationwide, Chicago-based WJE is a recognized leader in both product testing and specification.

Proven Results in the Lab
WJE specifically tested the performance of BlazeMaster® CPVC pipe and fittings and compared it to the performance of steel pipe (1″ in diameter) using cyclic loading. Steel schedule 40 fire sprinkler piping was tested separately following the same procedure.

The test setup consisted of suspending the piping from dimensional lumber connected to steel framing, which was anchored to the structural lab floor. Pipe support hangers were spaced 6 ft. for each pipe. The test configuration consisted of installing 1-in. diameter BlazeMaster CPVC pipe in a Z-shape with two 90-degree connections to the test framing. Steel pipe 1-in. in diameter was assembled independently in the same design configuration.

The hangers on one side of the framing were positioned and connected to the wood members such that this section of the piping was allowed to slide during loading. The pipe was filled with water and pressurized to 175 psi before the start of each test. Displacement of the pipe was controlled using a hydraulic actuator. A load cell was in-line with the actuator and pipe to measure the force required to move the pipe.

Both types of pipe were displaced a maximum of +3 in., or a total displacement of 6 in, during which time the connections were monitored for water leakage. The actuator moved at a frequency of 0.04 Hz (or approximately two cycles every 50 seconds) for a period of nearly 20 minutes.

After 50 cycles, the BlazeMaster CPVC system remained uncompromised. Failure did not occur at the elbow connections or along the pipe length. And, the pressure remained at 175 psi throughout the test.

In contrast, the steel pipe failed at a 90-degree elbow after approximately 33 cycles of +3 in. of displacement. The failure not only created a loss in pressure but also caused water to spray out of the joint connection. Upon careful analysis, it was determined that a fatigue failure had occurred at the elbow threaded connection.

Proven Results in the Field
Although this was the first time that a BlazeMaster CPVC fire sprinkler system had officially undergone cyclic testing by a third-party organization, it was not the first time that the system had actually been put to the test Back in 1986, BlazeMaster CPVC was already proving that it could endure significant seismic activity without any type of service interruption.

It was October 10, 1986 at 11:00 AM when San Salvador (El Salvador) suffered a devastating earthquake lasting seven seconds that measured 7.5 on the Richter Scale. This magnitude qualified it as a “major” earthquake, according to the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC). Based on observations documented since 1990, there are roughly 17 such “major” earthquakes that occur across the globe in one year. Unfortunately for the U.S. embassy located there, the earthquake’s epicenter was in close proximity.

Overall damage was sizable. There were thousands of casualties. At least 200 buildings in San Salvadaor were destroyed or severely damaged, including many of the buildings on the U.S. embassy complex. The five-story chancery was one of the hardest hit and had to be immediately abandoned. The force of the tremor was so severe that a number of one and one-quarter inch thick steel reinforcement bars embedded in the building’s concrete support columns were bent into the shape of a pretzel.

Despite all the damage, the recently retrofitted BlazeMaster CPVC fire sprinkler did not fail. Post-earthquake assessment determined that the entire system substantially stayed on-line without any leaks and would have suppressed any fire in the complex caused by the earthquake. Not only did this mean continued safety for the workers, but it also turned out to be a reliable source of drinking water. Due to the complete failure of the municipal water supply, the sprinkler water supply became a readily available and convenient source of water for domestic use.

As a result, the U.S. Department of State Embassy Buildings reported that the non-metallic BlazeMaster CPVC sprinkler pipe had performed “admirably” during this major earthquake, especially considering that the main building had suffered severe damage and all other HVAC and plumbing systems were totally destroyed.

Changing Codes
Through the years, building codes have become increasingly more demanding with regard to the installation of fire sprinkler systems in seismic zones. This is partially due to the fact that the 1990s saw a pronounced increase in both the frequency and intensity of earthquakes compared to earlier decades.

The NEIC, in fact, estimates that there are literally several million earthquakes that occur in the world each year (although many go undetected because they hit remote areas or they have a small magnitude). In the U.S. alone, thousands of earthquakes are documented each year.

In response, the 2007 edition of NFPA 13 was changed significantly with regard to earthquake protection. NFPA 13 has included provisions for the protection of sprinkler systems against earthquakes since 1947, a time when many building codes didn’t even address the subject.

But the greatest code changes have occurred over the past 20 years due to funding provided from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The objective is to maintain the ability of the sprinkler system to manage post-earthquake fire hazards and prevent significant water damage that can occur from sprinkler-system ruptures in an otherwise undamaged building.

The more significant changes to the 2007 edition include the need for four-way bracing on piping within six feet of both sides of the seismic separation assemblies; limitations on the maximum load per lateral brace; new spacing requirements between the last lateral brace and the end of a pipe being braced; restraint of branch lines; and the need for additional hangers.

These new changes bring the NFPA 13 standard fully in line with the latest thinking of the earthquake experts. In fact, the 2007 edition of NFPA 13 was unanimously approved as “deemed to comply” with the seismic requirements of ASCE/SEI7 without exception at the IBC Structural Committee Hearings in Orlando in the fall of 2006.

Unfortunately, many of these changes have occurred so quickly and recently that it’s difficult for engineers and AHJs to stay abreast of the most current criteria. That makes tests such as the one conducted by WJE much more important, although the real test is how the system performs in the real world, such as the scenario in San Salvador back in 1986.
Not only has the BlazeMaster CPVC fire sprinkler system proven itself worthy in both the lab and the field, but it also meets all of the criteria set forth by the 2007 edition of NFPA 13.

Most businesses aren’t. Given Dean’s demonstration of the destructive power of hurricanes, that reality is chilling.

Despite the lessons we should have learned from Hurricanes Katrina and Andrew, and from such disasters as Greensburg and 9/11, a national study of small business owners revealed that fully 84% of them are unconcerned about any type of disaster hitting them in the next 12 months. Nearly one third of all businesses and two thirds of all small businesses remain totally unprepared for any kind of disaster—yet, as we’ve seen, disasters are inevitable.

Now that we’re in the heart of hurricane season, is it too late to do anything about this?

“No,” says Dr. Jeanne Hurlbert of Optinet Resources. “One of the main lessons we learned from Katrina is the power of strong social networks. People whose networks were better equipped fared so much better—physically and emotionally—than those who didn’t. And businesses whose employees fared better were the businesses that were able to survive.”

“The bottom line is that there are simple things a business can do to prepare,” says Hurlbert. “We take an integrated approach, helping entities develop plans to protect the business and its infrastructure and help each company’s most valuable asset: its employees.”

Dr. Hurlbert, PhD, co-founder of Optinet Resources, teaches seminars on the why, when, who, and how of powerful networks. She has been interviewed by NPR, Wall Street Journal, NY Times, Health, Smart Money, The Christian Science Monitor, and has appeared on ABC News Now, the History Channel, and Business Talk This Morning.

For further information or interviews, contact Jeanne Hurlbert at (225) 485-7909.

September is National Hurricane Preparedness Month. Just this past week, the oceans have been increasing their storm activities, with Flossie winding down in the Pacific and Erin and Dean ramping up in the Atlantic.

Are certain industries more vulnerable to costly contingency efforts than others? Yes, they are, but knowing this in advance will help lessen the pain during the aftermath of a disaster and during rebuilding efforts. Knowing what a disaster can do before it strikes will make your business stronger and more viable. Planning for this is also a great asset to the future business growth. After all, if your company is located in an area that could suffer a serious setback or risk its business livelihood altogether, start planning now.

One particular area that has unique needs in the event of a disaster is the healthcare industry. There are many scenarios to consider in the healthcare setting according to William McGuire, president of the New York, NY-based Global Security Associates (GSA), LLC.

In any major disaster, hospitals and other healthcare related facilities become a point of focus as human nature is to migrate to a location where care and attention is provided. “There is a sudden surge in demand and influx of people who can strain the facility, rendering it incapable of providing critical services during emergencies. This inability to assist people can result in tensions and ultimately impact the safety and well-being of personnel,” explains Victor Anderes, vice president of special operations for GSA.

The utility industry is equally impacted. With a loss of basic utility services, persons in need will seek to take matters into their own hands and become aggressive in demanding services in order to restore their living conditions. Consequently, water and electricity providers should be prepared to deal with this. Even gas stations become key focus points as the need to operate generators, vehicles and other equipment becomes more crucial in the absence of electricity and gas.

While businesses typically have a plan for everyday operations, part of their contingency plans include using their own local in-house or sub-contracted security personnel to provide protection. If a major disaster strikes, these personnel from the local community are impacted on a personal level, and their priority is to take care of their families and homes. This results in businesses being unprotected due to lack of personnel being available. It is therefore prudent that contingency plans include bringing in security personnel from remote, unaffected locations.

The preparation for—and response to—a disaster can determine the future of a company or organization. The failure of an organization due to its inability to respond to an undesired event can have dire consequences for the company and ultimately the livelihood of its employees and the local community. Preparation is crucial and provides peace of mind in addition to future stability. To determine the extent of preparation required, the company leadership need only ask themselves the question: “How many days will my company survive if we are unable to conduct business?”

For more information on GSA and its services, call (516) 414-0487.

Many facility professionals know there’s more to business resiliency than just disaster recovery. Even companies that believe they have an adequate disaster recovery plan in place often sustain crippling damage because they have not incorporated both proactive and reactive strategies for all three major threat areas: business driven, data driven, and event driven threats.

Facility managers can now gauge their readiness for the unknown with the IBM Business Continuity Self Assessment tool. Using the Business Continuity Self-Assessment Tool is a good initial step toward becoming a more resilient business.

Once fms complete the self-assessment, they will be able to view a personalized graph that identifies potential gaps within the business, data, and event threat areas. Fms will be provided with additional information and will also have the option of obtaining relevant white papers and insights.

To try the IBM Business Continuity Self Assessment Tool, click this link.