Public Safety, Fire Marshal

Rule R710-9

Rules Pursuant to the Utah Fire Prevention Law

Notice of 120-Day (Emergency) Rule

DAR File No.: 34238
Filed: 11/15/2010 12:13:23 PM

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

The Utah Fire Prevention Board met on 11/09/2010 in a regularly scheduled Board meeting and agreed by unanimous vote to modify a 120-Day (Emergency) Rule filing (DAR No. 34128) that went into effect on 10/01/2010. The Board directed that the new 120-Day Emergency Rule have an allowance of 20 antifreeze sprinkler heads in dwelling or residence portion of occupancies rather than the current total prohibition of all antifreeze systems in new dwellings and residences. The Board, after research from staff and input from a number of sprinkler companies concluded that the allowance of 20 antifreeze sprinkler heads would lessen the possibility of the antifreeze igniting and causing serious injuries. The Board concluded that since the allowance of 20 loop segments had been used from the 1940s to 1991 with no problems, there would be the ability to continue some use of antifreeze loops in dwellings but not remain unlimited in size as is now allowed. An amendment to the current rule will also be filed.

Summary of the rule or change:

The summary of the rule amendments are as follow: 1) in Subsection R710-9-1(1.4), the Board proposes to adopt as an incorporated reference the 2009 International Fire Code as adopted and amended by the Utah State Legislature; 2) in Subsection R710-9-2(2.4), the Board proposes to adopt the definition of Dwelling Unit to assist in defining what a dwelling consists of; 3) in Subsections R710-9-10(10.1) through (10.3), the Board proposes to allow up to 20 antifreeze fire sprinkler heads in the dwelling unit portion of systems built under NFPA 13, NFPA 13 R, and NFPA 13D, and allow the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) the ability to increase the number of heads, and allow the AHJ the ability to increase the percentages of antifreeze in the system for temperature needs; and 4) in Subsection R710-9-10(10.4), the Board proposes to require that existing antifreeze sprinkler systems that are drained be refilled with certain percentages of antifreeze, except that the AHJ can increase the percentages for temperature concerns. (DAR NOTES: This 120-day (emergency) rule supersedes the 120-day emergency rule under DAR No. 34128 published in the October 15, 2010, Bulletin that was effective 10/01/2010. A corresponding proposed amendment is under DAR No. 34242 in this issue, December 1, 2010, of the Bulletin.)

Emergency rule reason and justification:

Regular rulemaking procedures would cause an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare.

Justification: There have been two cases of ignition of the antifreeze used in the fire sprinkler system when a fire occurred and the sprinkler head fused. Both fires caused injury and death to the occupants. The latest fire occurred in Herriman, Utah, badly burning a mother and small son. The occurrence is small and rare but under certain specific conditions, you can have spraying fire when the fire sprinkler fuses with antifreeze. The fire ignites the alcohol in the antifreeze and creates methane which burns the occupants. The length of the fire is quite short before the continued spray extinguishes the fire, but damage to human skin and other key elements such as lungs is disastrous.

State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

• Subsection 53-7-106(5)
• Section 53-7-204

This rule or change incorporates by reference the following material:

• Adds International Fire Code, published by International Code Council, 03/01/2009

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

There would be no aggregate anticipated cost or savings to the state budget because these amendments do not affect the activities of the state.

local governments:

There would be no aggregate anticipated cost or savings to local government because these amendments do not affect the activities of local government.

small businesses:

There would be an aggregate anticipated cost to small businesses of approximately $50 per fire sprinkler head to install fire sprinkler systems in dwellings and residences. The 25% increase per head would be to redesign the fire sprinkler system so that the usage of antifreeze is greatly reduced or a dry or preaction system would be installed. A total aggregate amount of increase for an average home would be approximately $1,000.

persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:

There would be an aggregate anticipated cost to persons other than small businesses of approximately $50 per fire sprinkler head to install fire sprinkler systems in residences. The 25% increase per head would be to redesign the fire sprinkler system so that the usage of antifreeze is restricted to 20 heads or a dry or preaction system would be installed in the areas of the residence where it would freeze. A total aggregate amount of increase for an average home would be approximately $1,000 on a fire sprinkler system that usually would have approximately 20 heads.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

The compliance cost for affected persons would be an approximate $50 increase per fire sprinkler head to redesign the automatic fire sprinkler system that would limit the usage of antifreeze to 20 heads and prevent freezing of the lines which would increase the cost to install an automatic fire sprinkler system about 25% more than it currently costs.

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

There would be an approximate increase of 25% in the installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in the State of Utah. The continued use of large unlimited antifreeze systems in automatic fire sprinkler systems has now proven to be a life threatening hazard to the occupants of the dwelling. Under specific conditions, when the automatic fire sprinkler system opens, the fire can ignite the antifreeze and cause a spraying type fire for a very short period of time. Even with the 25% increase in installation costs, and now limiting the antifreeze heads to 20, this amendment needs to be enacted to prevent the burning injuries or death caused in this very rare situation.

D. Lance Davenport, Commissioner

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

Public Safety
Fire Marshal
5272 S COLLEGE DR
MURRAY, UT 84123-2611

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

• Brent Halladay at the above address, by phone at 801-284-6352, by FAX at 801-284-6351, or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]

This rule is effective on:

11/15/2010

Authorized by:

Ron Morris, Utah State Fire Marshal

R710. Public Safety, Fire Marshal.

R710-9. Rules Pursuant to the Utah Fire Prevention Law.

R710-9-1. Title, Authority, and Adoption of Codes.

1.1 These rules shall be known as the "Rules Pursuant to the Utah Fire Prevention Law", and may be cited as such, and will be hereafter referred to as "these rules".

1.2 These rules are promulgated in accordance with Title 53, Chapter 7, Section 204, Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended.

1.3 These rules are adopted by the Utah Fire Prevention Board to provide minimum rules for safeguarding life and property from the hazards of fire and explosion, for board meeting conduct, procedures to amend incorporated references, establishing board subcommittees, enforcement of the rules of the State Fire Marshal, and deputizing Special Deputy State Fire Marshals.

1.4 There is further adopted as part of these rules the following codes which are incorporated by reference:

1.4.1 International Fire Code (IFC), 2009 edition, excluding appendices, as published by the International Code Council, Inc. (ICC), and as enacted and amended by the Utah State Legislature in Sections 102 and 201 of the State Fire Code Adoption Act, except as amended by provisions listed in R710-9-10, et seq.

1.5 Copies of the above code are on file in the Division of Administrative Rules and the Office of the State Fire Marshal.

 

R710-9-2. Definitions.

2.1 "Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ)" means the State Fire Marshal, his authorized deputies, or the local fire enforcement authority.

2.2 "Board" means Utah Fire Prevention Board.

2.3 "Committee" means the Firefighter Support Restricted Account Advisory Committee.

2.4 "Dwelling Unit" means one or more rooms arranged for the use of one or more individuals living together, as in a single housekeeping unit normally having cooking, living, sanitary, and sleeping facilities. For purposes of this standard, dwelling unit includes hotel rooms, dormitory rooms, apartments, condominiums, sleeping rooms in nursing homes, and similar living units.

2.[4]5 "Division" means State Fire Marshal.

2.[5]6 "IFC" means International Fire Code.

2.[6]7 "LFA" means Local Fire Authority.

2.[7]8 "Restricted Account" means Firefighter Support Restricted Account.

2.[8]9 "SFM" means State Fire Marshal or authorized deputy.

2.[9]10 "Sub-Committee" means Fire Prevention Board Budget Sub-Committee or Amendment Sub-Committee.

2.[10]11 "UCA" means Utah Code Annotated, 1953.

 

R710-9-10. Amendments and Additions.

The following amendments and additions are hereby adopted by the Board for application statewide:

10.1 IFC, Chapter 9, Section 903.3.1.1 is amended by adding the following subsection: 903.3.1.1.2 Antifreeze Limitations. The use of antifreeze in automatic sprinkler systems in new construction in the dwelling unit portion of an occupancy, installed in accordance with NFPA 13, is allowed up to 20 heads. The number of sprinkler heads can be expanded as allowed by the AHJ. The mixture of the antifreeze shall be limited to a maximum concentration of 40% propylene glycol or 50% glycerin. The AHJ can allow the concentration of antifreeze to be increased due to temperature concerns.

10.2 IFC, Chapter 9, Section 903.3.1.2 is amended by adding the following subsection: 903.3.1.2.2 Antifreeze Limitations. The use of antifreeze in automatic sprinkler systems in new construction in the dwelling unit portion of an occupancy, installed in accordance with NFPA 13R, is allowed up to 20 heads. The number of sprinkler heads can be expanded as allowed by the AHJ. The mixture of the antifreeze shall be limited to a maximum concentration of 40% propylene glycol or 50% glycerin. The AHJ can allow the concentration of antifreeze to be increased due to temperature concerns.

10.3 IFC, Chapter 9, Section 903.3.1.3 is amended by adding the following subsection: 903.3.1.3.1 Antifreeze Limitations. The use of antifreeze in automatic sprinkler systems in new construction installed in accordance with NFPA 13D, is allowed up to 20 heads. The number of sprinkler heads can be expanded as allowed by the AHJ. The mixture of the antifreeze shall be limited to a maximum concentration of 40% propylene glycol or 50% glycerin. The AHJ can allow the concentration of antifreeze to be increased due to temperature concerns.

10.4 IFC, Chapter 9, Section 903.5 is amended to add the following subsection: 903.5.1 Antifreeze Replacement. Whenever the automatic sprinkler system protecting residences and dwelling units of mixed occupancies that use antifreeze is drained, the replacement antifreeze shall be properly mixed and tested, but shall not exceed a maximum concentration of 40% propylene glycol or a maximum concentration of 50% glycerin. The AHJ can allow the concentration of antifreeze to be increased due to temperature concerns.

 

R710-9-[10]11. Repeal of Conflicting Board Actions.

All former Board actions, or parts thereof, conflicting or inconsistent with the provisions of this Board action or of the codes hereby adopted, are hereby repealed.

 

R710-9-[11]12. Validity.

The Utah Fire Prevention Board hereby declares that should any section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Board action, or of the codes hereby adopted, be declared invalid, it is the intent of the Utah Fire Prevention Board that it would have passed all other portions of this action, independent of the elimination of any portion as may be declared invalid.

 

R710-9-[12]13. Adjudicative Proceedings.

[12]13.1 All adjudicative proceedings performed by the agency shall proceed informally as set forth herein and as authorized by UCA, Sections 63G-4-202 and 63G-4-203.

[12]13.2 If a city, county, or fire protection district refuses to establish a method of appeal regarding a portion of the IFC, the appealing party may petition the Board to act as the board of appeals.

[12]13.3 A person may request a hearing on a decision made by the SFM, his authorized deputies, or the LFA, by filing an appeal to the Board within 20 days after receiving final decision.

[12]13.4 All adjudicative proceedings, other than criminal prosecution, taken by the SFM, his authorized deputies, or the LFA, to enforce the Utah Fire Prevention and Safety Act and these rules, shall commence in accordance with UCA, Section 63G-4-201.

[12]13.5 The Board shall act as the hearing authority, and shall convene as an appeals board after timely notice to all parties involved.

[12]13.6 The Board shall direct the SFM to issue a signed order to the parties involved giving the decision of the Board within a reasonable time of the hearing pursuant to UCA, Section 63G-4-203.

[12]13.7 Reconsideration of the Board's decision may be requested in writing within 20 days of the date of the decision pursuant to UCA, Section 63G-4-302.

[12]13.8 Judicial review of all final Board actions resulting from informal adjudicative proceedings is available pursuant to UCA, Section 63G-4-402.

 

KEY: fire prevention, law

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: November 15, 2010

Notice of Continuation: June 8, 2007

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: 53-7-204