LGreene
Registered User
I was checking out the Means of Egress proposals and I noticed this one:
E76 – 12
1008.1.9.7(New) [iFC 1008.1.9.7(New)]
Proponent: Bryan M Romney, Building Official, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, representing self
Add new text as follows:
1008.1.9.7 (IFC 1008.1.9.7) Security locking arrangements. Approved special security egress locking systems shall be permitted on Group A occupancies including, but not limited to, museums, art galleries, special collections libraries and courtrooms; and Group B or M occupancies; for doors in the means of egress serving rooms or spaces where security needs of persons or building contents required such locking. Special egress locks shall be permitted in these occupancies where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or an approved automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907, provided that the doors are installed and operate in accordance with all of the following:
1. The doors unlock upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or automatic fire detection system.
2. The doors unlock upon loss of power controlling the lock or lock mechanism.
3. The door locks shall have the capability of being unlocked by a signal from an approved location that is constantly attended when the building is occupied.
4. Doors equipped with a security locking arrangement are monitored by either direct line of sight or remote monitoring from the constantly attended station.
5. A building occupant shall not be required to pass through more than one door equipped with a special security egress locking system before entering an exit.
6. The procedures for the operation of the special security egress locking system shall be described and approved as part of the emergency planning and preparedness required by Chapter 4 of the International Fire Code.
7. All security staff or persons identified in the procedures for Item 6 shall have the keys, codes, or other means necessary to operate the locking devices.
8. Emergency lighting shall be provided at the door.
(Renumber subsequent sections)
Reason: Chapter 10 does not provide a method for special locking or controlled egress except for Group I-1 and I-3 Occupancies. Other occupancy groups have needs for special locking arrangements either for securing persons or building contents. Examples include courtrooms where people poising a flight risk need special secure egress considerations. Research labs and animal housing facilities frequently require controlled egress systems such as card of biometric ingress and egress control systems. Libraries with rare book collections, art galleries, museums or mercantile occupancies where building contents area at risk of being stolen have needs for special security egress locking systems. This code addition would permit the code official to approve special locking arrangements in other occupancy groups where a demonstrated need exists. The procedure by which the special locking arrangement functions is to be reviewed and approved by the code official as outlined in Item 6. This item would allow the code official to approve special security egress locking systems under prescriptive requirement of Chapter 10 without having to approve an alternate design or method outlined in Section 104.11. This code addition represents a significantly more defensible code provisions than the more interpretive alternative design route. This code addition allows an already existing code provisions for controlled egress doors in Group I-2 occupancies to be allowed for other occupancy groups where a demonstrated need exists. No new or unproven code protocol is created in this code addition, only an existing, proven, and verified provision is being extended to other occupancy groups which for years have had critically security needs not allowed by the code.
Cost Impact: No initial construction cost impact. The IFC may require ongoing inspections of the Chapter 4 emergency planning
and preparedness protocol compliance.
This proposal would allow locks on certain Assembly occupancies along with B & M, which only unlock on fire alarm, power failure, and a signal from an attendant monitoring the location. These are not delayed egress locks, or access controlled egress doors with motion sensors, etc. I'm curious about your thoughts on this proposal. I'll be listening to the hearings tomorrow when this is discussed.
E76 – 12
1008.1.9.7(New) [iFC 1008.1.9.7(New)]
Proponent: Bryan M Romney, Building Official, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, representing self
Add new text as follows:
1008.1.9.7 (IFC 1008.1.9.7) Security locking arrangements. Approved special security egress locking systems shall be permitted on Group A occupancies including, but not limited to, museums, art galleries, special collections libraries and courtrooms; and Group B or M occupancies; for doors in the means of egress serving rooms or spaces where security needs of persons or building contents required such locking. Special egress locks shall be permitted in these occupancies where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or an approved automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907, provided that the doors are installed and operate in accordance with all of the following:
1. The doors unlock upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or automatic fire detection system.
2. The doors unlock upon loss of power controlling the lock or lock mechanism.
3. The door locks shall have the capability of being unlocked by a signal from an approved location that is constantly attended when the building is occupied.
4. Doors equipped with a security locking arrangement are monitored by either direct line of sight or remote monitoring from the constantly attended station.
5. A building occupant shall not be required to pass through more than one door equipped with a special security egress locking system before entering an exit.
6. The procedures for the operation of the special security egress locking system shall be described and approved as part of the emergency planning and preparedness required by Chapter 4 of the International Fire Code.
7. All security staff or persons identified in the procedures for Item 6 shall have the keys, codes, or other means necessary to operate the locking devices.
8. Emergency lighting shall be provided at the door.
(Renumber subsequent sections)
Reason: Chapter 10 does not provide a method for special locking or controlled egress except for Group I-1 and I-3 Occupancies. Other occupancy groups have needs for special locking arrangements either for securing persons or building contents. Examples include courtrooms where people poising a flight risk need special secure egress considerations. Research labs and animal housing facilities frequently require controlled egress systems such as card of biometric ingress and egress control systems. Libraries with rare book collections, art galleries, museums or mercantile occupancies where building contents area at risk of being stolen have needs for special security egress locking systems. This code addition would permit the code official to approve special locking arrangements in other occupancy groups where a demonstrated need exists. The procedure by which the special locking arrangement functions is to be reviewed and approved by the code official as outlined in Item 6. This item would allow the code official to approve special security egress locking systems under prescriptive requirement of Chapter 10 without having to approve an alternate design or method outlined in Section 104.11. This code addition represents a significantly more defensible code provisions than the more interpretive alternative design route. This code addition allows an already existing code provisions for controlled egress doors in Group I-2 occupancies to be allowed for other occupancy groups where a demonstrated need exists. No new or unproven code protocol is created in this code addition, only an existing, proven, and verified provision is being extended to other occupancy groups which for years have had critically security needs not allowed by the code.
Cost Impact: No initial construction cost impact. The IFC may require ongoing inspections of the Chapter 4 emergency planning
and preparedness protocol compliance.
This proposal would allow locks on certain Assembly occupancies along with B & M, which only unlock on fire alarm, power failure, and a signal from an attendant monitoring the location. These are not delayed egress locks, or access controlled egress doors with motion sensors, etc. I'm curious about your thoughts on this proposal. I'll be listening to the hearings tomorrow when this is discussed.
Last edited by a moderator:
