2012 IFC 604.5 - Emergency Lighting Eq

[AegisFPE]

2012 introduces a new section 604.5 and a new undefined term "Emergency Lighting Equipment." What is Emergency Lighting Equipment?

Stookey's Significant Changes book has a picture of means of egress illumination equipment. But what about exit sign illumination!?

The reason for the code change cites a "gap" in maintenance provisions for means of egress illumination power equipment installed per 1006.3. However, Section 605.4 never references Section 1006.

So, then does 605.4 also apply to Section 1011 and/or 1030.4 for exit signs?

An ICC representative's opinion is that because exit signs are in 604.2, that 604.5 applies. I'm not seeing that one.

I see 4 reasonable options:

• 1. Means of Egress Illumination is accomplished by Emergency Lighting Equipment, therefore 604.5 is applicable to devices installed per 1006 or 1104.5 (2009 IFC 4604.5).
  
• 2. Exit signs are already specifically addressed in 1030.4, 604.5 does not apply per 102.10.
  
• 3. External Exit Sign Illumination is accomplished by Emergency Lighting Equipment, and therefore 604.5 applies as it prescribes more specific requirements than 1030.4, and therefore is applicable per 102.10.
  
• 4. The components within an internally illuminated exit sign (except self-luminous signs) constitute Emergency Lighting Equipment, and therefore 604.5 applies as it prescribes more specific requirements than 1030.4, and therefore is applicable per 102.10.

What say you?

 

[cda]

well guess emergency lighting equipment comes in many forms from the wall packs, to flourescents with buit in batteries, to a building on emergency generator, have also seen some type of battery system with inverter.

"""The emergency power system shall provide power for a duration of not less than 90 minutes and shall consist of storage batteries, unit equipment or an on-site generator. The installation of the emergency power system shall be in accordance with Section 604."""

so it would be nice if what ever means is provided that it is maintained and tested, not sure where the disconnect is?

1030 seems to cover more the actual exit as in doors, walls, etc.

1006.3 just requires it

I thought that emergency lighting had to be maintained in prior codes??????

 

[Builder Bob]

I think this is a generic try to address all possible power systems used to provide emergency illumination. The generic wording leaves the specifics out of the code so that another 3000 code sections are not used to address the what ifs and wherefores.

i.e. diesel, gas, water, wind, photoelectric, battery - lead/zinc, Ni-Ca, VRLA, etc., etc.

(JMHO)

 

[AegisFPE]

1030 is general MOE for existing buildings; 1030.4 specifically addresses exit signs be maintained per 1011. There is no requirement for means of egress illumination in 1030.

The proponent of the code change identified that NFPA 111 (referenced in 604.1) exempts unit equipment (e.g. self-contained wall packs) from its maintenance provisions. 604.1 does state, "Existing installations shall be maintained in accordance with their original approval." But this was a far cry from specifying annual 90-minute testing. If the test is to verify performance of every device in accordance with 1006.3.1, good luck!

Gen-sets per NFPA 110 already have maintenance requirements. Does this mean that once a year we need to run the electric fire pump(s), smoke control system, and whatever else to make sure the generator still carries the emergency lighting for 90 minutes? I don't think so. I do agree that the language is MUCH broader than the reason given with the code change by the proponent.

I think there should be an exception to the 90-minute test if the battery pack has not reached the expiration date applied by the manufacturer.

This still does not answer which devices are subject to the regular inspection and record keeping.

 

[globe trekker]

From Section 605.1 in the 2006 IPMC:

SECTION 605 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

605.1 Installation.

All electrical equipment, wiring and appliances shall be properly installed and

maintained in a safe and approved manner.

Doesn't the IPMC cover this requirement?

 

[cda]

1030 is general MOE for existing buildings; 1030.4 specifically addresses exit signs be maintained per 1011. There is no requirement for means of egress illumination in 1030.The proponent of the code change identified that NFPA 111 (referenced in 604.1) exempts unit equipment (e.g. self-contained wall packs) from its maintenance provisions. 604.1 does state, "Existing installations shall be maintained in accordance with their original approval." But this was a far cry from specifying annual 90-minute testing. If the test is to verify performance of every device in accordance with 1006.3.1, good luck!

Gen-sets per NFPA 110 already have maintenance requirements. Does this mean that once a year we need to run the electric fire pump(s), smoke control system, and whatever else to make sure the generator still carries the emergency lighting for 90 minutes? I don't think so. I do agree that the language is MUCH broader than the reason given with the code change by the proponent.

I think there should be an exception to the 90-minute test if the battery pack has not reached the expiration date applied by the manufacturer.

This still does not answer which devices are subject to the regular inspection and record keeping.

well would you not want to see if the emergency lights work??? once in awhile??

 

[AegisFPE]

Some jurisdictions have not adopted the IPMC. IFC Section 1030 is general MOE for existing buildings; 1030.4 specifically addresses exit signs be maintained per 1011. There is no requirement for means of egress illumination in 1030; and the provisions for exit signs do not include record keeping.

The proponent of the code change identified that NFPA 111 (referenced in 604.1) exempts unit equipment (e.g. self-contained wall packs) from its maintenance provisions. 604.1 does state, "Existing installations shall be maintained in accordance with their original approval." But this was a far cry from specifying annual 90-minute testing. If the test is to verify performance of every device in accordance with 1006.3.1, good luck!

Gen-sets per NFPA 110 already have maintenance requirements. Does this mean that once a year we need to run the electric fire pump(s), smoke control system, and whatever else to make sure the generator still carries the emergency lighting for 90 minutes? I don't think so. I do agree that the language is MUCH broader than the reason given with the code change by the proponent.

I think there should be an exception to the 90-minute test if the battery has not reached an expiration date applied by the manufacturer.

This still does not answer which devices are subject to the regular inspection and record keeping.

 

[fireguy]

Oregon Fire Code 2010, 1006.3 rquires back-up power for 90 minutes.

The small sub C and smaller batteries may have an expiration date on the battery, I just have not seen one. Newer LED exit lights may have a label telling us to replace the batteries at 10 year intervals. Or the label may have fallen of.

Larger batteries such as the 6V4AH do not have expiration dates stamped on the batteries. There is a manufactures date code stamped in the battery case. But the only requirement to replace those battery types is in NFPA 72-2010 for fire alarm systems. No requirement to replace emergency batteries on a dated basis for lights.