This document created by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation – Building Codes and Standards Office – 850-487-1824	

1

IBC - EGRESS - FIRE TAC

W

A

R

N

I

N

G

Copyright Notice: This document has been reproduced solely for considering proposed changes to the Florida Building Code with the permission of the International Code Council, Inc., is the copyrighted property of the International Code Council, Inc., all rights reserved, and may not be further reproduced or distributed.
W	A	R	N	I	N	G

BACK

Code Change No: E1-15

Original Proposal

Section(s):	406.4.1, 1003.2, 1003.3.1, 1003.3.2, 1003.3.3, 1003.4, 1012.5.2, 1208.2; (IFC[BE] 1003.2,
1003.3.1, 1003.3.2, 1003.3.3, 1003.4, 1012.5.2)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

Clear height. The clear height of each floor level in vehicle and pedestrian traffic areas shall be not less than 7 feet (2134 mm). Vehicle The parking spaces, access aisles and pedestrian areas accommodating vehicle route serving van-accessible parking shall comply with Section 1106.5.

1003.2 Ceiling height. The means of egress shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet 6 inches (2286 mm) above the finished floor.

Exceptions:

Sloped ceilings in accordance with Section 1208.2.
Ceilings of dwelling units and sleeping units within residential occupancies in accordance with Section 1208.2.
Allowable projections in accordance with Section 1003.3.
Stair headroom in accordance with Section 1011.3.
Door height in accordance with Section 1010.1.1.
Ramp headroom in accordance with Section 1012.5.2.
The clear height of floor levels in vehicular and pedestrian traffic areas of public and private parking garages in accordance with Section 406.4.1.
Areas above and below mezzanine floors in accordance with Section 505.2.

1003.3 Protruding objects. Protruding objects on circulation paths circulation paths shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1003.3.1 through 1003.3.4.

1003.3.1 Headroom. Protruding objects are permitted to extend below the minimum ceiling height required by Section 1003.2 where a minimum headroom of 80 inches (2032 mm) is provided over
any walking surface circulation paths, including walks, corridors, aisles and passageways. Not more than 50 percent of the ceiling area of a means of egress shall be reduced in height by protruding objects.

Exception: Door closers and stops shall not reduce headroom to less than 78 inches (1981 mm).

A barrier shall be provided where the vertical clearance above a circulation path is less than 80 inches (2032 mm) high above the finished floor. The leading edge of such a barrier shall be located 27 inches (686 mm) maximum above the finished floor.

1003.3.2 Post-mounted objects. A free standing object mounted on a post or pylon shall not overhang that post or pylon more than 4 inches (102 mm) where the lowest point of the leading edge is more than 27 inches (686 mm) and less than 80 inches (2032 mm) above the walking surface finished floor. Where a sign or other obstruction is mounted between posts or pylons and the clear distance between the posts or pylons is greater than 12 inches (305 mm), the lowest edge of such sign or obstruction shall be 27 inches (686 mm) maximum or 80 inches (2032 mm) minimum above the finished floor or ground.

Exception: These requirements shall not apply to sloping portions of handrails between the top and bottom riser of stairs and above the ramp run.
1003.3.3 Horizontal projections. Objects with leading edges more than 27 inches (685 mm) and not more than 80 inches (2030 mm) above the finished floor shall not project horizontally more than 4 inches (102 mm) into the circulation pathcirculation path.

2

Exception: Handrails are permitted to protrude 41/ 2 inches (114 mm) from the wall or guard.

1003.4 Floor Slip-resistant surface. Walking surfaces Circulation paths of the means of egress means of egress shall have a slip-resistant surface and be securely attached.

1012.5.2 Headroom. The minimum headroom in all parts of the means of egress ramp shall be not less than 80 inches (2032 mm) above the finished floor of the ramp run and any intermediate landings. The minimum clearance shall be maintained for the full width of the ramp and landing.

1208.2 Minimum ceiling heights. Occupiable spaces, habitable spaces and corridors shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet 6 inches (2286 mm) above the finished floor. Bathrooms, toilet rooms, kitchens, storage rooms and laundry rooms shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet (2134 mm) above the finished floor.

Exceptions:

In one- and two-family dwellings, beams or girders spaced not less than 4 feet (1219 mm) on center shall be permitted to project not more than 6 inches (152 mm) below the required ceiling height.
If any room in a building has a sloped ceiling, the prescribed ceiling height for the room is required in one-half the area thereof. Any portion of the room measuring less than 5 feet (1524 mm) from the finished floor to the ceiling shall not be included in any computation of the minimum area thereof.
The height of mezzanines and spaces below mezzanines shall be in accordance with Section 505.1.
Corridors contained within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit in a Group R occupancy shall have a ceiling height of not less than 7 feet (2134 mm) above the finished floor.
5.
Reason: The intent of this proposal is consistency in language and coordination with E10-12 for where headroom clearances are important/relevant and to what they are measured. This language would be consistent with Section 505.2, 1103.3 and 1106.5. The new text is coordinated with A117.1, and lets the parking lot designer know where additional headroom clearance is required.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled IBC Coordination with the New ADAAG. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is a clarification and coordination of current requirements; therefore, there is no impact on the cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1003.3.2 Post-mounted objects. A free-standing object mounted on a post or pylon shall not overhang that post or pylon more than 4 inches (102 mm) where the lowest point of the leading edge is more than 27 inches (686 mm) and less than 80 inches (2032 mm) above the finished floor. Where a sign or other obstruction is mounted between posts or pylons and the clear distance between the posts or pylons is greater than 12 inches (305 mm), the lowest edge of such sign or obstruction shall be 27 inches (686 mm) maximum or 80 inches (2032 mm) minimum above the finished floor or ground.

Exception: These requirements shall not apply to sloping portions of handrails between the top and bottom riser of stairs and above the ramp run.

Committee Reason: Section 1003.3.3.2 was modified to keep the phrase “or ground” so that this section can be used for exterior signs that are on circulation paths.
The proposal will improve consistency in language throughout the code. The changes will improve coordination with the referenced accessibility standard, ICC A117.1..

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E1-15	AM

BACK

Code Change No: E5-15 Part II

Original Proposal

Section(s):	Chapter 3, 301, 301.1, 302, 302.1, 302.2 (New)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

THIS IS A 2 PART CODE CHANGE. PART I WAS HEARD BY THE IBC-MEANS OF EGRESS COMMITTEE. PART II WAS HEARD BY THE IBC-GENERAL COMMITTEE.
Revise as follows:

.
SECTION 301 GENERALSCOPE

301.1 Scope. General. The provisions of this chapter shall control the classification of all buildings and structures as to use occupancy and use. Different classifications of occupancy and use represent varying levels of hazard and risk to building occupants.

SECTION 302
OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION AND USE DESIGNATION

Occupancy classification. General. Structures or portions of structures shall be classified with respect to occupancy in one or more of the groups listed in this section. Occupancy classification is the formal designation of the primary purpose of the building, structure or portion thereof. Structures shall be classified into one or more of the occupancy groups listed in this section based on the nature of the hazards and risks to building occupants generally associated with the intended purpose of the building or structure. An area, A room or space that is intended to be occupied at different times for different purposes shall comply with all of the applicable requirements that are applicable to each of the purposes for which the room or space will be occupied associated with such potential multi-purpose. Structures with containing multiple occupancy groups occupancies or uses shall comply with Section 508. Where a structure is proposed for a purpose that is not specifically provided for in this code listed in this
section such structure shall be classified in the group that the occupancy most nearly resembles, according to based on the fire safety and relative hazard involved.

Assembly (see Section 303): Groups A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4 and A-5.
Business (see Section 304): Group B.
Educational (see Section 305): Group E.
Factory and Industrial (see Section 306): Groups F-1 and F-2.
High Hazard (see Section 307): Groups H-1, H-2, H-3, H-4 and H-5.
Institutional (see Section 308): Groups I-1, I-2, I-3 and I-4.
Mercantile (see Section 309): Group M.
Residential (see Section 310): Groups R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4.
Storage (see Section 311): Groups S-1 and S-2.
Utility and Miscellaneous (see Section 312): Group U.

Add new text as follows:

Use designation. Occupancy groups contain subordinate uses having similar hazards and risks to building occupants. Uses include, but are not limited to, those functional designations listed within the occupancy group descriptions in this section. Certain uses require specific limitations and controls in

accordance with the provisions of Chapter 4 and elsewhere in this code.

Reason: This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments.
Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx. Properly classifying the purpose of a given building or structure is the very important first step in the design or analysis process. The reason for this is that the various designations account for the inherent hazards and risks typically associated with the intended purpose. Based on those hazards and risks, appropriate limitations and controls are assigned to the building or structure. The International Building Code uses several specific terms to identify the purpose of the building or structure. Those are: occupancy classification, use and function. Occupancy classification and use are often confused and function is misunderstood.
The purpose of this code change is to simply formalize these terms and explain their relationship. This will assist code practitioners in properly establishing applicable code requirements and improve uniformity and continuity in the identification of appropriate provisions. Some of the current confusion is owed to the fact that the legacy codes used these terms, however, in different ways. For instance, BOCA used "use group" as the major designation with "occupancy" being the subordinate term. On the other hand, ICBO used "occupancy/division" as the major designation with "use" as the secondary term. The IBC was created using provisions from each of the legacy codes and the terms are often seen out of technical context.
This proposal will inform users of the IBC system of building classification and assist all concerned in the proper communication of applicable code requirements.

Cost Impact:

Part II: Will not increase the cost of construction
Provisions simply provide clarification of current requirements.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

301.1 General. The provisions of this chapter shall control the classification of all buildings and structures as to occupancy and use. Different classifications of occupancy and use represent varying levels of hazard and risk to building occupants and adjacent properties.

CHAPTER 4
SPECIAL DETAILED REQUIREMENTS BASED ON USE OCCUPANCY AND OCCUPANCY USE

401.1 Detailed use occupancy and occupancy use requirements. In addition to the occupancy and construction requirements in this code, the provisions of this chapter apply to the special uses occupancies and occupancies uses described herein.

Committee Reason: The committee approved 2 modifications. First the proposal was modified to make sure that the property surrounding each subject building is considered in conjunction with the activity in the building. The second amendment was to extend the clarification of the changes proposed for Chapter 3 into Chapter 4 where special provisions based on use and occupancy are located. Overall the committee found this proposal to be a good clarification between the terms of 'use' and 'occupancy'. Too often they are treated to be the same when they are really distinct terms. The proposal clarifies the difference.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E5-15 Part II	AM

Code Change No: E6-15

Original Proposal

BACK

Section(s):	1004.1.1.1, 1026.4; (IFC[BE] 1004.1.1.1, 1026.4)

Proponent: Gregory Keith, Professional heuristic Development, representing The Boeing Company (grkeith@mac.com)
Revise as follows:

1004.1.1.1 Intervening spaces or accessory areas. Where occupants egress from one or more rooms, areas or spaces through others, the design occupant load shall be the combined occupant load of interconnected accessory or intervening spaces. Design of egress path capacity shall be based on the cumulative portion of occupant loads of all rooms, areas or spaces to that point along the path of egress travel. The anticipated occupant load from adjacent rooms, areas or spaces shall be based on either the capacity of the means of egress components providing access to the space under consideration, or the design occupant load of the adjacent space, whichever is less.

1026.4 Refuge area. The refuge area of a horizontal exit shall be a space occupied by the same tenant or a public area and each such refuge area shall be adequate to accommodate the original occupant load of the refuge area plus the occupant load anticipated from the adjoining compartment. The anticipated occupant load from the adjoining compartment shall be based on the capacity of
the horizontal exit doors entering the refuge area, or the design occupant load of the adjoining compartment, whichever is less.

100467177

Reason: Cumulative occupant load provisions were clarified in the 2015 IBC. This proposal is intended to provide further clarification. Section 1004.1.1.1 states, "Design of egress path capacity shall be based on the cumulative portion of occupant loads of all rooms, areas or spaces to that point along the path of egress travel." If a room, area or space having multiple exits or exit access doorways has one exit access doorway leading through an adjoining or intervening room providing an egress path to an exit, the question arises as to what portion of the occupant load of the original space is included in the cumulative occupant load? Some may simply divide the occupant load of the space by the number of exits or exit access doorways to determine the contribution.
Based on the distribution of the required capacity within the space under consideration, that may or may not be an appropriate number. This proposal clarifies that the anticipated occupant load to be included in the cumulative occupant load calculation is based on the actual capacity of the means of egress components providing access to the intervening room, area or space. This calculation technique is currently used in Section 1026.4 to determine the size of refuge areas serving horizontal exits. It was recognized that when determining the cumulative occupant load based on the capacity of egress doors, the resultant occupant load may actually exceed the design occupant load of the adjoining space. A single egress door can serve up to 160 occupants. If the design occupant load of the adjoining space was less than 160, the cumulative occupant loads based on capacity would be overly restrictive. Therefore, a design occupant load condition has been developed and has been added to both Sections 1004.1.1.1 and 1026.4 for purposes of practicality and uniformity. This method is an objective and consistent way of establishing contributing occupant loads from adjacent areas. Approval of this proposal would lead to more uniform interpretations and application of this fundamental IBC means of egress provision.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is intended to provide clarification of current IBC provisions.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1004.1.1.1 Intervening spaces or accessory areas. Where occupants egress from one or more rooms, areas or spaces through others, the design occupant load shall be the combined occupant load of interconnected accessory intervening spaces. Design of egress path capacity shall be based on the cumulative portion of occupant loads of all rooms, areas or spaces to that point along the path of egress travel. The anticipated occupant load from adjacent rooms, areas or spaces shall be based on either the capacity of

the means of egress components providing access to the space under consideration, or the design occupant load of the adjacent space, whichever is less.

Committee Reason: The modification basically disapproves added sentence to Section 1004.1.1.1. The proposed language would force the total occupant load to one exit rather than divided between the exits. A safety factor is already in the capacity calculations. There is no need to effectively double the occupant load for the floor.
The approval is for the added language to Section 1026.4. This needs to be coordinated with the approved language in Section E123-15. The proposed language clarifies requirement for when the actual occupant load is less than the capacity of the exit. This reflects actual conditions.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E6-15	AM

Code Change No: E7-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1004, 1004.1.3 (New); (IFC[BE] 1004, 1004.1.3 (New))

Proponent: David Collins, representing The American Institute of Architects (dcollins@preview- group.com)
Revise as follows:

SECTION 1004 OCCUPANT LOAD

1004.1 Design occupant load. No change to text.

1004.1.1 1004.2 Cumulative occupant loads. No change to text.

1004.1.1.1 1004.2.1 Intervening spaces or accessory areas. No change to text.

1004.1.1.2 1004.2.2 Adjacent levels for mezzanines. No change to text.

1004.1.1.3 1004.2.3 Adjacent stories. No change to text.

Add new text as follows:

1004.3 Multiple Function Occupant Load. Where functions with both gross and net, or different occupant load factors of gross or net are on the same floor they shall be included in the calculation of the design occupant load using the area of each function calculated independently.

Revise as follows:

1004.6 1004.4 Multiple occupancies. No change to text.

1004.1.2 1004.5 Areas without fixed seating. The number of occupants shall be computed at the rate of one occupant per unit of area as prescribed in Table 1004.1.2 1004.5. For areas without fixed seating, the occupant load shall be not less than that number determined by dividing the floor area under consideration by the occupant load factor assigned to the function of the space as set forth in
Table 1004.1.2 1004.5. Where an intended function is not listed in Table 1004.1.2 1004.5, the building official shall establish a function based on a listed function that most nearly resembles the intended function.

Exception: Where approved by the building official, the actual number of occupants for whom each occupied space, floor or building is designed, although less than those determined by calculation, shall be permitted to be used in the determination of the design occupant load.

TABLE 1004.1.2 1004.5
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCES PER OCCUPANT
(No change to table or footnotes)

1004.2 1004.5.1 Increased occupant load. The occupant load permitted in any building, or portion thereof, is permitted to be increased from that number established for the occupancies in Table 1004.1.2 1004.5, provided that all other requirements of the code are met based on such modified number and the occupant load does not exceed one occupant per 7 square feet (0.65 m2) of occupiable floor space. Where required by the building official, an approved aisle, seating or fixed equipment diagram

substantiating any increase in occupant load shall be submitted. Where required by the building official, such diagram shall be posted.

1004.4 1004.6 Fixed seating. For areas having fixed seats and aisles, the occupant load shall be determined by the number of fixed seats installed therein. The occupant load for areas in which fixed seating is not installed, such as waiting spaces, shall be determined in accordance with Section 1004.1.2 1004.5 and added to the number of fixed seats.
The occupant load of wheelchair spaces and the associated companion seat shall be based on one occupant for each wheelchair space and one occupant for the associated companion seat provided in accordance with Section 1108.2.3.
For areas having fixed seating without dividing arms, the occupant load shall be not less than the number of seats based on one person for each 18 inches (457 mm) of seating length.
The occupant load of seating booths shall be based on one person for each 24 inches (610 mm) of booth seat length measured at the backrest of the seating booth.

1004.51004.7 Outdoor areas. No change to text.

1004.31004.8 Posting of occupant load. No change to text.

Reason: The purpose for adding Section 1004.3, Multiple function occupancy load: The current table for determining the occupant load for a space or a building uses the term function. Since many of the activities noted in the table are not occupant specific that logic appears to be correct. However, there are differing ways to determine what the occupant load is based on the measurement by net or gross area. Both terms are defined in the code, and both are exclusive of each other (they don't overlap). However, within most buildings there are more than one function and quite often more than one occupancy. The application of Table 1004.1.2 does not provide guidance as to how to determine which load factor to use.
One very common area of confusion is often found in office buildings. The table indicates that for "business areas" that 100 sf. of gross area would provide the basis for the occupant load. Gross floor area is by definition the entire building floor.  So, a 10,000 sf. floor for business would have 100 occupants. However, within a typical office there are other functions as well, such assembly. The code specifically anticipates this in Chapter 3 and notes that assembly space within an office, with an occupant load of less than 50 is allowed to be classified as a B occupancy, thus eliminating a "mixed-use" condition. Assembly occupant loads are measured either by fixed seats or by net area. That leaves the assembly function in the business occupancy with no direction as to what is intended by the code for calculation of its occupant load.
The question that is constantly raised bby code users is what number should be used and what areas are they applied to? If the 100 sf. per person anticipates all the functional activities within a business function (stairs, hallways, restrooms, etc., etc.), then does it or doesn't it include the assembly functions? If it does, then the occupant load is simple to calculate. If it doesn't, then how do you determine what area to ascribe to the assembly space? Do you then subtract that area from the business space?
Using the simplest example of a 10,000 sf. office floor, with a 600 sf. conference room with no chairs, the occupant load could either be calculated by the gross number (100) based on the simultaneous use concept. Or should the net area for the assembly function could be deleted from the gross area. Assuming tables and chairs in the conference room, the occupant load for the space for that function would be 40, and the remaining office occupant load would be 94. The occupant load for design of the means of egress from the floor would then be 134.
The reason for reorganization: The current organization for this section is random. With this reorganization of Section 1004, Section 1004.2 through 1004.4 would be how spaces worked together, and Section 1004.5 through 1004.7 would be the specifics for calculating the occupant load of each space. This will also set up this section so that where specific spaces need unique criteria (e.g. the conference room proposal also submitted for consideration) there is a logical place to locate those sections. The final section, Section 1004.8, is for when that occupant load needs to be posted.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
There should be little impact as this is simply clarifying how to determine the occupant load for a floor with varying functions.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1004.3 Multiple Function Occupant Load. Where an area under consideration contains multiple functions having both gross and net. or different occupant load factors, of gross or net are on the same floor they shall be included in the calculation of the design occupant load using the for such area shall be based on the floor area of each function calculated independently.

Committee Reason: The modification to Section 1004.3 simplifies the suggested language for the new section 1004.3, and supports and clarifies the main issue for the change.
The main change clarifies application of the occupant load when facilities include both gross and net areas.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E7-15	AM

Code Change No: E9-15

BACK

Original Proposal

Section(s):	Table 1004.1.2, 1004.6 (New); (IFC[BE] Table 1004.1.2, 1004.6 (New))

Proponent: Dave Frable, representing US General Services Administration
Revise as follows:

TABLE 1004.1.2
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCES PER OCCUPANT
FUNCTION OF SPACE	OCCUPANT LOAD FACTORa	
Business area
Concentrated business use areas	100150 gross See Section 1004.6	
(Portions of table not shown remain unchanged)

For SI: 1 square foot = 0.0929 m2, 1 foot = 304.8 mm.
Floor area in square feet per occupant.

Add new text as follows:

1004.6 Concentrated business use areas The occupant load factor for concentrated business use shall be applied to telephone call centers, trading floors, electronic data processing centers and
similar business use areas with a higher density of occupants than would normally be expected in a typical business occupancy environment. The occupant load for concentrated business use areas shall be the actual occupant load, where approved by the code official, but not less than one occupant per 100 square foot gross of occupiable floor space.

Reason: The intent of this code change proposal is to revise the current maximum floor area allowance per occupant in Table 1004.1.2 for business occupancies from 100 ft2/occupant (gross) to 150 ft2/occupant (gross) for determining the means of egress requirements in business areas and to create a new occupant load sub-category for concentrated use areas in business occupancies having a higher density of occupants than would normally be expected in a typical business occupancy environment. Our rationale is based on several past research studies that have concluded that the 100 ft2/occupant (gross) occupant load factor for business occupancies is very conservative which has led to requiring Group B occupancies and office buildings in general to have additional egress capacity and a greater number of exits to accommodate an "over-estimated" building population. We believe the increase from 100 ft2/occupant (gross) to 150 ft2/occupant (gross) for business occupancies is still a conservative figure; yet reasonable, based on recent changes in office building design as well as changes in the North American workplace and work style trends; such as work station configurations, flexible work schedules, telecommuting, work at home, etc.
The existing occupant load factor of 100 ft2/occupant (gross) for business occupancies first appeared in the 3rd edition of the Building Exits Code that was published in 1934. The occupant load factor of 100 ft2/occupant (gross) was specified for office, factory, and workrooms. All occupant load factors were based on the gross floor area of the building, such that no deduction was permitted for corridors, closets, restrooms, or other subdivisions. To our knowledge there is no formal record indicating the basis of the occupant load factors included in the 1934 Buildings Exits Code. However, it seems likely that the results from a National Bureau of Standards (NBS) [now referred to as National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)] study published in 1935 were the most likely basis of the occupant load factors adopted into the 1934 Code. However, since the initial NBS study in 1935, several other studies have been conducted to determine the occupant load factors for various occupancies. One common similarity of each of the studies was that all of the subsequent studies have concluded that the 100 ft2/occupant (gross) occupant load factor for business occupancies is conservative. Studies conducted between 1966 and 1992 have indicated that occupant load factors in business occupancies ranged from 150 ft2/occupant (gross) to 278 ft2/occupant (gross). In addition, a 1995 study of 23 Federal sector and private sector office buildings also indicated a mean occupant load factor of 248 ft2/occupant for all office buildings.Lastly, a recent project to study the appropriateness of the 100 ft2/occupant load factor for business occupancies has been undertaken by the NFPA Fire Protection Research Foundation. The study was conducted by WPI undergrad students. The recommendations of this study have indicated that it is reasonable to increase the occupant load factor to 150 ft2/occupant in business occupancies and to create a new occupant load sub-category for concentrated use areas in business occupancies.
Based on the points stated above and the occupant load factor ranges cited in recent studies, I believe it would be reasonable to increase the occupant load factor of 100 ft2/occupant (gross) in Table 1004.1.2 for determining the means of egress requirements

in Business areas to 150 ft2/occupant (gross) and to create a new occupant load sub-category for concentrated use areas in business occupancies having a range between 50 ft2-100 ft2/occupant depending on the work environment configuration.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Overall, the proposal seeks to lessen the occupant load, thus reducing the required means of egress capacity, and the number of plumbing fixtures required for business use occupancies. However, the cost of construction may increase where occupant load factors for concentrated business use are applied to telephone call centers, trading floors, electronic data processing centers and similar business use areas with a higher density of occupants by increasing the means of egress capacity as well as the number of plumbing fixtures to address these specific conditions.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1004.6 Concentrated business use areas. The occupant load factor for concentrated business use shall be applied to telephone call centers, trading floors, electronic data processing centers and similar business use areas with a higher density of occupants than would normally be expected in a typical business occupancy environment. The Where approved by the code
official, the occupant load for concentrated business use areas shall be the actual occupant load, where approved by the code official, but not less than one occupant per 100 50 square foot gross of occupiable floor space.

Committee Reason: The modification from 100 sq.ft. per occupant to 50 sq.ft. per occupant as a maximum for concentrated business areas is appropriate. The documentation shows that a worst case scenario of 50 sq.ft. per person occurred in these high density spaces.
The supporting date substantiates an increase for the typical office spaces. There were concerns raised about areas where high costs of space would result in a higher density in an office as well as maintain the occupant load during the life of a building as different tenants change.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E9-15	AM

Original Proposal

Section: 1004.3; (IFC[BE] 1004.3)

Proponent: William Freer, representing New York State Office of Fire Prevention and Control (wfreer@dhses.ny.gov)

Revise as follows:

1004.3 Posting of occupant load. Every room or space that is an assembly occupancy shall have
the occupant load of the room or space posted in a conspicuous place, near the main exit or exit access doorway from the room or space, for the intended configurations. Posted signs shall be of an approved legible permanent design and shall be maintained by the owner or the owner's authorized agent.

Reason: Many assembly occupancies have become multi-purpose. In many cases these rooms or spaces have been posted for the maximum occupant load as if the space was wide open and being used for standing room only. In these cases the posting would allow for too many persons. Section 1029.5 of the Fire Code states that it is prohibited to overcrowd a building or portion thereof, but without the appropriate occupancy load being posted it would be impossible to enforce this section as intended.
Many jurisdictions have started to require multiple postings for rooms having multiple configurations. Unfortunately that is not currently in the code and may become confusing. By adding for the 'intended configuration' in the code it would confirm that the code enforcement official could require that correct signage was posted.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The code change proposal will not increase the cost of construction is does not alter requirements, it just simply provides clarity for application of the code by the fire code official.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This language is needed for signs in spaces with multiple configurations. This help fire officials determine the maximum occupant load for the space.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E13-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1004.5; (IFC[BE] 1004.5)

Proponent: Timothy Pate, representing Colorado Chapter Code Change Committee, representing City and County of Broomfield (tpate@broomfield.org)

Revise as follows:

1004.5 Outdoor areas. Yards, patios, occupied roofs, courts and similar outdoor areas accessible to and usable by the building occupants shall be provided with means of egress as required by this chapter.
The occupant load of such outdoor areas shall be assigned by the building official in accordance with the anticipated use. Where outdoor areas are to be used by persons in addition to the occupants of the building, and the path of egress travel from the outdoor areas passes through the building, means of egress requirements for the building shall be based on the sum of the occupant loads of the building plus the outdoor areas.

Exceptions:

Outdoor areas used exclusively for service of the building need only have one means of egress.
Both outdoor areas associated with Group R-3 and individual dwelling units of Group R-2.

Reason: This proposal will add the language "occupied roofs" to this section which will allow the code user to understand that occupied roofs which are open to the sky will also need to meet means of egress requirements. There was this same language added to the 2012 IBC Section 1021.1 which is now section 1006.3 in the 2015 IBC This added language will also clarify that you would need to assign an occupant load based on the anticipated use and design exit system per that occupant load. There has been considerable confusion among building officials and designers on this issue and this should help tie this section to the language in section 1006.3.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is only to help clarify the existing code requirements

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Including roofs in outdoor areas would be consistent with Section 1006.3 when determining number of exits. Occupied roofs should be handled the same as other outdoor areas for determining occupant load.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E14-15	AS

sp
Code Change No: E16-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s):	1006.2.1, 1006.3; (IFC[BE] 1006.2.1, 1006.3)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1006.2.1 Egress based on occupant load and common path of egress travel distance. Two exits or exit access doorways from any space shall be provided where the
design occupant load or the common path of egress travel distance exceeds the values listed in Table 1006.2.1. The portion of the occupant load from adjacent rooms, areas or spaces shall be based on the capacity of the means of egress components providing access to the space under consideration.

Exceptions:

The number of exits from foyers, lobbies, vestibules or similar spaces need not be based on cumulative occupant loads for areas discharging through such spaces, but the capacity of the exits from such spaces shall be based on applicable cumulative occupant loads.
In Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies, one means of egress is permitted within and from individual dwelling units with a maximum occupant load of 20 where the dwelling unit is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and the common path of egress travel does not exceed 125 feet (38 100 mm).
Care suites in Group I-2 occupancies complying with Section 407.4.

1006.3 Egress from stories or occupied roofs. The means of egress system serving any story or occupied roof shall be provided with the number of exits or access to exits based on the
aggregate occupant load served in accordance with this section. The path of egress travel to an exit shall not pass through more than one adjacent story. Where stairways serve more than one story,
only the occupant load of each story considered individually shall be used in calculating the required number of exits or access to exits serving that story.

Exception: Where the only access to required exits from a mezzanines is through and adjacent story, the entire occupant load of such mezzanines shall be added to the load of the adjacent story.

Reason: This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments.
Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx. Cumulative occupant load provisions were clarified in the 2015 IBC. There were several proposals initially submitted to address these provisions. For the final action hearings, proponents agreed to support one proposal: E15-12. E15 addressed the concerns by modifying Section 1004.1, Cumulative occupant loads.
This proposal is intended to enhance the functionality of these requirements by placing them in context with the applicable means of egress design requirements. For example, Section 1004.1.1.1 states, "Design of egress path capacity shall be based on the cumulative portion of the occupant loads of all rooms, areas or spaces to that point along the path of egress travel." This proposal places the same requirement at Section 1006.2.1 in the context of using capacity to determine the required number of exits or access to exits.
A new Exception 1 to Section 1006.2.1 has been added. This language was contained in proposal E16-12 and was lost in the consolidation. Nevertheless, it is a logical concern. Literally interpreted, a building with an occupant load of 4,000 and having four required exits with one of those exits having a foyer, lobby, vestibule or similar space would require four exits from such space based on the cumulative occupant load of 1,000. The number of exits from such space would be based on the occupant load of the space; however, the capacity of that exit(s) would be based on the cumulative occupant load served.

Perhaps the most important feature of the 2015 code change was that it clarified that cumulative occupant loads are not considered when calculating the required number of exits or access to exits serving an adjacent story. An exception clarifies that occupant loads from isolated mezzanines will be considered in determining the number of required exits from the adjacent story.
Some seasoned practitioners consult a specific code provision without reviewing the applicable general requirements when researching a given design condition. If for instance, a design professional or plans examiner is verifying the procedure for the determination of the required number of exits or access to exits, he or she will likely consult Section1006 although many other general provisions potentially apply to the situation, to include Section 1004. This proposal is intended to be user friendly in that it restates important cumulative occupant load provisions in technical context without providing a generic cross-reference.
Approval of this proposal will improve the consistency in the determination and application of fundamental IBC means of egress provisions.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
None. Provisions simply provide clarification of current requirements.

Staff note: Section 1006.3 has a published errata. The proposal includes the errata as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1006.2.1 Egress based on occupant load and common path of egress travel distance. Two exits or exit access doorways from any space shall be provided where the design occupant load or the common path of egress travel distance exceeds the values listed in Table 1006.2.1. The portion of the cumulative occupant load from adjacent rooms, areas or spaces shall be based on the capacity of the means of egress components providing access to the space under consideration.determined in accordance with Section 1004.1.1.1.

Exceptions:

The number of exits from foyers, lobbies, vestibules or similar spaces need not be based on cumulative occupant loads for areas discharging through such spaces, but the capacity of the exits from such spaces shall be based on applicable cumulative occupant loads.
In Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies, one means of egress is permitted within and from individual dwelling units with a maximum occupant load of 20 where the dwelling unit is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and the common path of egress travel does not exceed 125 feet (38 100 mm).
Care suites in Group I-2 occupancies complying with Section 407.4.

1006.3 Egress from stories or occupied roofs. The means of egress system serving any story or occupied roof shall be provided with the number of exits or access to exits based on the aggregate occupant load served in accordance with this section. The path of egress travel to an exit shall not pass through more than one adjacent story. Where stairways serve more than one story, only the occupant load of each story considered individually shall be used in calculating the required number of exits or access to exits serving that story.

Exception: Where the only access to required exits from a mezzanines is through an adjacent story, the entire occupant load of such mezzanines shall be added to the load of the adjacent story.

Committee Reason: The modification to reference the cumulative occupant load requirements in Section 1004.1.1.1 instead of copying the language here will reduce the chance of conflicts over time. The calculated occupant load versus the capacity of the element is consistent with the actual use of the element. The modification also deletes the proposed exception to Section 1006.3 because this is already addressed in Section 1004.1.1.1.
The new exception for Section 1006.2.1 clarifies that small passage spaces are not the same as rooms adding together. The added language in Section 1006.3 is consistent with the occupant load calculations for stories in Section 1004.1.1.3.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E16-15	AM

Code Change No: E17-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1006.2.1, TABLE 1006.2.1; (IFC[BE] 1006.2.1, TABLE 1006.2.1)

Proponent: Lee Kranz, City of Bellevue, Washington, representing Washington Association of Building Officials Technical Code Development Committee

Revise as follows:

1006.2.1 Egress based on occupant load and common path of egress travel distance. Two exits or exit access doorways from any space shall be provided where the
design occupant load or the common path of egress travel distance exceeds the values listed in Table 1006.2.1.

Exceptions Exception:

1. In Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies, one means of egress is permitted within and from individual dwelling units with a maximum occupant load of 20 where the dwelling unit is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and the common path of egress travel does not exceed 125 feet (38 100 mm).
1. Care suites in Group I-2 occupancies complying with Section 407.4.

TABLE 1006.2.1
SPACES WITH ONE EXIT OR EXIT ACCESS DOORWAY

OCCUPANCY	

MAXIMUM OCCUPANT LOAD OF SPACE	MAXIMUM COMMON PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL DISTANCE (feet)	
		Without Sprinkler System (feet)	
With Sprinkler System (feet)	
		Occupant Load		
		OL ≤ 30	OL 30		
Ac , E, M	49	75	75	75a	
B	49	100	75	100a	
F	49	75	75	100a	
H-1, H-2, H-3	3	NP	NP	25b	
H-4, H-5	10	NP	NP	75b	
I-1, I-2d , I-4	10	NP	NP	75a	
I-3	10	NP	NP	100a	
R-1	10	NP	NP	75a	
R-2	10 20	NP	NP	125a	
R-3e	1020	NP	NP	125a	
R-4e	1020	75	75	125a	
Sf	29	100	75	100a	
U	49	100	75	75a	
For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm.

NP   =	Not Permitted
Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2. See Section 903 for occupancies where automatic sprinkler systems are permitted in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2.
Group H occupancies equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.2.5.
For a room or space used for assembly purposes having fixed seating, see Section 1029.8.
For the travel distance limitations in Group I-2, see Section 407.4.
The length of common path of egress travel distance shall only apply in a Group R-3 occupancy located in a mixed occupancy building or within a Group R-3 or R-4 congregate living facility.
The length of common path of egress travel distance in a Group S-2 open parking garage shall be not more than 100 feet.

Reason: Exception #1 of Section 1006.2.1 is essentially an exception to the maximum occupant load limits of 10 in Table 1006.2.1 for R-2 and R-3. Increasing the maximum occupant load from 10 to 20 in the table for R-2, R-3 and R-4 and deleting exception #1 is appropriate since all Group R occupancies require sprinkler protection per Section 903.2.8 (NFPA 13 and NFPA 13-R system) and the 125' common path limit in the exception is consistent with the table so the exception is no longer needed.
The occupant load limit for R-4 in the table is also proposed to be modified from 10 to 20. Section 310.6 limits R-4 occupancies to 16 residents but does not include "staff" so it is likely that the occupant load will be 17 or more.
The change in footnote e is intended to clarify the intent and make it easier to understand.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This code change eliminates a redundant provision and will not affect the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposal moves the exception for Group R-2, R-3 and R-4 into the table, where it is easier to find. In addition, this improves flexibility for Group R-2, R-3 and R-4 units in a mixed use building.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E17-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1006.2.2.2; (IFC[BE] 1006.2.2.2)

Proponent: Jeffrey Shapiro, International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration, representing International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration (jeff.shapiro@intlcodeconsultants.com)

Revise as follows:

1006.2.2.2 Refrigeration machinery rooms. Machinery rooms larger than 1,000 square feet (93 m2) shall have not less than two exits or exit access doorways. Where two exit access doorways are required, one such doorway is permitted to be served by a fixed ladder or an alternating tread device. Exit access doorways shall be separated by a horizontal distance equal to one-half the maximum horizontal dimension of the room.

All portions of machinery rooms shall be within 150 feet (45 720 mm) of an exit or exit access doorway.
An increase in exit access travel distance is permitted in accordance with Section 1017.1.

Doors Exit and exit access doorways shall swing in the direction of egress travel, regardless of the occupant load served. Doors Exit and exit access doorways shall be tight fitting and self-closing.

Reason: The proposed revision clarifies of how the code should currently be applied. The intent of this section is limited
to regulating exit and exit access doors, but as currently written, the code incorrectly suggests that any door, even a door to an auxiliary space that doesn't lead to an exit, must swing in the direction of egress.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The code change proposal simply seeks to provide clearer code language and with no intended changes in requirements, therefore cost is not an issue…

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The added text clarifies that only exit access and exit doors, not auxiliary doors, have to swing in the direction of travel.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E22-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1006.2.2.4, Table 1017.2, Table 1020.1; (IFC[BE] 1006.2.2.4, Table 1017.2, Table 1020.1)

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

2

1006.2.2.4 Day care Group I-4 means of egress. Day care Group I-4 facilities, rooms or spaces where care is provided for more than 10 children that are 21/ years of age or less, shall have access to not less than two exits or exit access doorways.

TABLE 1017.2 (1017.2)
EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCEa
OCCUPANCY	WITHOUT SPRINKLER SYSTEM
(feet)	WITH SPRINKLER SYSTEM
(feet)	
A, E, F-1, M, R, S-1	200	250b	
I-1	Not Permitted	250b	
B	200	300c	
F-2, S-2, U	300	400c	
H-1	Not Permitted	75d	
H-2	Not Permitted	100d	
H-3	Not Permitted	150d	
H-4	Not Permitted	175d	
H-5	Not Permitted	200c	
I-2, I-3, I-4	Not Permitted	200c	
I-4	150	200c	
For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm.
See the following sections for modifications to exit access travel distance requirements: Section 402.8: For the distance limitation in malls.
Section 404.9: For the distance limitation through an atrium space. Section 407.4: For the distance limitation in Group I-2.
Sections 408.6.1 and 408.8.1: For the distance limitations in Group I-3. Section 411.4: For the distance limitation in special amusement buildings. Section 412.7: For the distance limitations in aircraft manufacturing facilities.
Section 1006.2.2.2: For the distance limitation in refrigeration machinery rooms. Section 1006.2.2.3: For the distance limitation in refrigerated rooms and spaces. Section 1006.3.2: For buildings with one exit.
Section 1017.2.2: For increased distance limitation in Groups F-1 and S-1. Section 1029.7: For increased limitation in assembly seating.
Section 3103.4: For temporary structures. Section 3104.9: For pedestrian walkways.
Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or
903.3.1.2. See Section 903 for occupancies where automatic sprinkler systems are permitted in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2.
Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.
Group H occupancies equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section

903.2.5.1.

TABLE 1020.1 (1020.1) CORRIDOR FIRE-RESISTANCE RATING

OCCUPANCY	OCCUPANT LOAD SERVED BY CORRIDOR	REQUIRED FIRE-RESISTANCE
RATING (hours)	
		Without sprinkler system	With sprinkler systemc	
H-1, H-2, H-3	All	Not Permitted	1	
H-4, H-5	Greater than 30	Not Permitted	1	
A, B, E, F, M, S, U	Greater than 30	1	0	
R	Greater than 10	Not Permitted	0.5	
I-2a, I-4	All	Not Permitted	0	
I-4	All	1	0	
I-1, I-3	All	Not Permitted	1b	
For requirements for occupancies in Group I-2, see Sections 407.2 and 407.3.
For a reduction in the fire-resistance rating for occupancies in Group I-3, see Section 408.8.
Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or
903.3.1.2 where allowed.
Reason: Section 903.2.6 Exception 2 allows for day cares to not be sprinklered and 903.2.6 allows for the building to not be fully sprinklered. This is a historical provision that has no incidence that would indicate that it should not be permitted. Therefore, there needs to be an option other than NP in travel distance and corridor ratings in non-sprinklered buildings for Group I-4 day care facilities. The provisions permitted were in past editions of the code.
IBC 308.6.1 Classification as Group E. A child day care facility that provides care for more than five but not more than 100 children 21/2 years or less of age, where the rooms in which the children are cared for are located on a level of exit discharge serving such rooms and each of these child care rooms has an exit door directly to the exterior, shall be classified as Group E.
IFC 903.2.6 (IBC [F] 903.2.6) Group I. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings with a Group I fire area.

Exceptions:
An automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 shall be permitted in Group I-1 Condition 1 facilities.
An automatic sprinkler system is not required where Group I-4 day care facilities are at the level of exit discharge and where every room where care is provided has not fewer than one exterior exit door.
In buildings where Group I-4 day care is provided on levels other than the level of exit discharge, an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 shall be installed on the entire floor where care is provided, all floors between the level of care and the level of exit discharge, and all floors below the level of exit discharge other than areas classified as an open parking garage.

The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is coordination and correlation of requirements in existing provisions.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposed language correlates provisions for Group I-4 throughout the code.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E23-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E25-15

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1006.3, 1006.3.1; (IFC[BE] 1006.3, 1006.3.1)

Proponent: Gregory Keith, Professional heuristic Development, representing The Boeing Company (grkeith@mac.com); Stephen Thomas (sthomas@coloradocode.net)

Revise as follows:

1006.3 Egress from stories or occupied roofs. The means of egress system serving any story or occupied roof shall be provided with the number of separate and distinct exits or access to exits based on the aggregate occupant load served in accordance with this section. Where an exit access stairway provides access to an exit at another story, a single interior or exterior exit stairway having entrances at each story shall not serve as both required exits for a single story. The path of egress travel to
an exit shall not pass through more than one adjacent story.

1006.3.1 Egress based on occupant load. Each story and occupied roof shall have the minimum number of independent separate and distinct exits, or access to exits, as specified in Table 1006.3.1. A single exit or access to a single exit shall be permitted in accordance with Section 1006.3.2. The required number of exits, or exit access stairways or ramps providing access to exits, from any story or occupied roof shall be maintained until arrival at the exit discharge or a public way.

Reason: Section 1006.3.1 currently references "independent" exits. Independent can be a vague or judgmental term.  The proposed "separate and distinct" language is more specific. Also, that terminology is currently used in the definition of common path of egress travel to identify a point where two exits or access to exits would be required.
Additionally, Section 1006.3 has been modified to include the qualifying requirement of "separate and distinct" as well.
Conceivably, if both the entrance to an interior exit stairway at one story and the entrance to the same interior exit stairway at an adjacent story are both within the prescribed exit access travel distance limitations, it could be interpreted that the required number of exits requirement has been satisfied because the two entrances are "independent." To clarify the intent, a sentence has been added stating that a single interior exit stairway cannot serve as both exits from a given story. The separate and distinct terminology would require that there be a second formal exit available within established exit access travel limitations.
This proposal intends to amplify separate exit requirements. It is also intended to clarify that although required exits from a given story may be located at different building levels, the same interior exit stairway may not serve as satisfying multiple exit requirements. Obviously, if such interior exit stairway was compromised, the opportunity for a true alternate exit would be lost. Approval of this proposal increases occupant safety within the means of egress system.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is intended to clarify current numbers of exits provisions.

Staff note: There is a published errata to Section 1006.3 and 1006.3.1. The errata is incorporated into this proposal as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1006.3 Egress from stories or occupied roofs. The means of egress system serving any story or occupied roof shall be provided with the number of separate and distinct exits or access to exits based on the aggregate occupant load served in accordance with this section. Where an exit access stairway provides access to an exit at another story, a single interior or exterior exit stairway having entrances at each story shall not serve as both required exits for a sing story. The path of egress travel to an exit shall not pass through more than one adjacent story.

Committee Reason: The modification is to delete the new sentence. This new sentence is commentary language and is not needed in code text.

The term ‘separate and distinct’ will clarify that one exit stairway cannot serve as both exits from a floor. Moving down a floor via an exit access stairway does not alleviate the requirement for two exits.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E25-15	AM

Back

Code Change No: E27-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1006.3, 1006.3.1 (New); (IFC[BE] 1006.3, 1006.3.1 (New))

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1006.3 Egress from stories or occupied roofs. The means of egress system serving any story or occupied roof shall be provided with the number of exits or access to exits based on the
aggregate occupant load served in accordance with this section. The path of egress travel to an exit shall not pass through more than one adjacent story.

Add new text as follows:

1006.3.1 Adjacent story. The path of egress travel to an exit shall not pass through more than one adjacent story.

Exception: The path of egress travel to an exit shall be permitted to pass through more than one adjacent story in any of the following:

In Group R-1, R-2 or R-3 occupancies, exit access stairways and ramps connecting four stories or less serving and contained within an individual dwelling unit or sleeping unit or live/work unit.
Exit access stairways serving and contained within a Group R-3 congregate residence or a Group R-4 facility.
Exit access stairways and ramps in open parking garages that serve only the parking garage.
Exit access stairways and ramps serving open-air assembly seating complying with the exit access travel distance requirements of Section 1029.7.
Exit access stairways and ramps between the balcony, gallery or press box and the main assembly floor in occupancies such as theaters, places of religious worship, auditoriums and sports facilities.

Reason: The intent of this proposal is to coordinate Section 1006.3 and the allowance for exit access stairways in Section 1019.3. The 2nd sentence of Section 1006.3 currently says that the required number of exits must be available not more than one story above or below the exit you are on. The first part of this proposal is to put that requirement in its own section, Section 1006.3.1.
Section 1019.3 Exception 1, allows for open exit access stairways for two story buildings. However, there are several situations where the intent was for open exit access stairways to be utilized for more than one story, provided that the travel distance is met – within a 3 or 4 story dwelling, in atriums, in open air seating, and from balconies. It is also the intent to allow for open stairways for multiple stories within open parking garages, per Section 1019.3 and Section 1017.3. Exceptions to new Section 1006.3.1 would clarify where this is permitted.
The exceptions here are direct copies of the exceptions in Section 1019.3. If there are revisions to those exceptions in this cycle, there will be a public comment to revise the language here to be consistent.
Alternatives also discussed where one exception to Section 1006.3.1 with a reference to specific exceptions in the open exit access stairway provisions in Section 1019.3; or removal of the sentence now in Section 1006.3.1.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled Unenclosed Exit Stairs. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website. http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the

BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at:http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx .

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is for clarification, therefore, there will be no additional requirements.

Staff note: There is a published errata to Section 1006.3. The errata is shown in the proposal as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal provides needed correlation with Section 1019.3 for single exit buildings that allow for open stairways to serve as the means of egress for more than one story.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E27-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E29-15

Original Proposal

Section: Table 1006.3.2, 1030.1 (IFC[BE] Table 1006.3.2, 1030.1)

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1006.3.2 Single exits. A single exit or access to a single exit shall be permitted from any story or occupied roof where one of the following conditions exists:

The occupant load, number of dwelling units and common path of egress travel distance does not exceed the values in Table 1006.3.2(1) or 1006.3.2(2).
Rooms, areas and spaces complying with Section 1006.2.1 with exits that discharge directly to the exterior at the level of exit discharge, are permitted to have one exit or access to a single exit.
Parking garages where vehicles are mechanically parked shall be permitted to have one exit or access to a single exit.
Group R-3 and R-4 occupancies shall be permitted to have one exit or access to a single exit.
Individual single-story or multistory dwelling units shall be permitted to have a single exit or access to a single exit from the dwelling unit provided that both of the following criteria are met:
The dwelling unit complies with Section 1006.2.1 as a space with one means of egress.
Either the exit from the dwelling unit discharges directly to the exterior at the level of exit discharge, or the exit access outside the dwelling unit's entrance door provides access to not less than two approved independent exits.

TABLE 1006.3.2
STORIES WITH ONE EXIT OR ACCESS TO ONE EXIT FOR OTHER OCCUPANCIES
STORY	OCCUPANCY	MAXIMUM OCCUPANT LOAD PER STORY	MAXIMUM COMMON PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL DISTANCE (feet)	

First story above or below grade plane	A, Bb , E Fb , M, U	49	75	
	H-2, H-3	3	25	
	H-4, H-5, I, R-
1, R-2a,c , R-4	10	75	
	Sb,d	29	75	
Second story above grade plane	B, F, M, Sd	29	75	
Third story above grade plane and higher	
NP	
NA	
NA	
For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm. NP = Not Permitted.
NA = Not Applicable.
Buildings classified as Group R-2 equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and provided with emergency escape and rescue openings in accordance with Section 1030.
Group B, F and S occupancies in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 shall have a maximum exit access travel distance of 100 feet.

c.	This table is used for R-2 occupancies consisting of sleeping units. For R-2 occupancies consisting of dwelling
units, use Table 1006.3.2(1).	
d.	The length of exit access travel distance in a Group S-2 open parking garage shall be not more than 100 feet	

1030.1 General. In addition to the means of egress required by this chapter, provisions shall be made for emergency escape and rescue openings in Group R-2 occupancies in accordance with Tables
1006.3.2(1) and 1006.3.2(2) and Group R-3 and R-4 occupancies. Basements and sleeping rooms below the fourth story above grade plane shall have at least one exterior emergency escape and rescue opening in accordance with this section. Where basements contain one or more sleeping
rooms, emergency escape and rescue openings shall be required in each sleeping room, but shall not be required in adjoining areas of the basement. Such openings shall open directly into a public way or to
a yard or court that opens to a public way.

Exceptions:

Basements with a ceiling height of less than 80 inches (2032 mm) shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings.
Emergency escape and rescue openings are not required from basements or sleeping rooms that have an exit door or exit access door that opens directly into a public way or to
a yard, court or exterior exit balcony that opens to a public way.
Basements without habitable spaces and having not more than 200 square feet (18.6 m2) in floor area shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings.

Reason: There is a conflict between Section 1006.3.2 Item 4 and Table 1006.3.2(2) due to multiple changes on the same section during the last cycle. Group R-4 are permitted to have multiple stories with one exit in the text, but limited to one story and 10 occupants in the table. Open exit access stairways are permitted in Group R-3 and R-4 in Section 1019.3 Item 3.
This will not negate the requirement for all bedrooms/sleeping units to have emergency escape windows in Section 1030.1.
While Group R-4 should follow Group R-3 provisions, it is proposed to be added here to make sure it is applied.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This provides clarification in the current requirements.

Staff note: There is an errata to Section 1006.3.2 Item 1. This errata in incorporated into the code change as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposal corrects a conflict between the provisions in Section 1006.3.2 Item 4 and Table 1006.3.2(2).

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E29-15	AS

Code Change No: E32-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1008.2.2, 1008.3.5; (IFC[BE] 1008.2.2, 1008.3.5)

Proponent: John Williams, CBO, CBO, Chair, Adhoc Healthcare Committee, representing Adhoc Health Care Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org); Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1008.2.2 Exit discharge. In Group I-2 occupancies where two or more exits are required, on the exterior landings required by Section 1010.6.1, means of egress illumination levels for the exit discharge shall be provided such that failure of any single lighting unit bulb or ballast shall not reduce the illumination level on that landing to less than 1 footcandle (11 lux).

1008.3.5 Illumination level under emergency power. Emergency lighting facilities shall be arranged to provide initial illumination that is not less than an average of 1 footcandle (11 lux) and a minimum at any point of 0.1 footcandle (1 lux) measured along the path of egress at floor level. Illumination levels shall be permitted to decline to 0.6 footcandle (6 lux) average and a minimum at any point of 0.06 footcandle (0.6 lux) at the end of the emergency lighting time duration. A maximum-to-minimum illumination uniformity ratio of 40 to 1 shall not be exceeded. In Group I-2 occupancies, failure of any single lighting unit bulb or ballast shall not reduce the illumination level to less than 0.2 foot-candle (2.2 lux).

Reason: The proposed language would better define what constitutes a failure of a lighting unit.
The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/AHC/Pages/default.aspx.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is a clarification of requirements; therefore there is no change in construction cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Disapproved

Committee Reason: The individual lighting mode of failure is what is important. Terminology that is across all types of fixtures is needed. Perhaps the language in NEC for lighting units would be appropriate.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
John Williams, CBO, representing Adhoc Healthcare Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

1008.2.2 Exit discharge. In Group I-2 occupancies where two or more exits are required, on the exterior landings required by Section 1010.6.1, means of egress illumination levels for the exit discharge shall be provided such that failure of any a single bulb or ballast lamp in a luminaire shall not reduce the illumination level on that landing to less than 1 footcandle (11 lux).

1008.3.5 Illumination level under emergency power. Emergency lighting facilities shall be arranged to provide initial illumination that is not less than an average of 1 footcandle (11 lux) and a minimum at any point of 0.1 footcandle (1 lux) measured along the path of egress at floor level. Illumination levels shall be permitted to decline to 0.6 footcandle (6 lux) average and a minimum at any point of 0.06 footcandle (0.6 lux) at the end of the emergency lighting time duration. A maximum-to-minimum illumination uniformity ratio of 40 to 1 shall not be exceeded. In Group I-2 occupancies, failure of any a single bulb or ballast lamp in a luminaire shall not reduce the illumination level to less than 0.2 foot-candle (2.2 lux).

Commenter's Reason: This public comment is primarily focused upon correcting the terminology that applies to all types of fixtures and aligns with new technologies. This revision coordinates with terminology used by the industry and terminology defined in the National Electrical Code. Luminaire is defined as a complete lighting unit that is comprised of light sources such as lamp(s). In addition, it focuses upon individual lamps versus an entire unit.
The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: Adhoc Healthcare.

Final Action Results

E32-15	AMPC1

Back

Code Change No: E33-15

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1008.2.2, 1008.2.3 (New); (IFC[BE] 1008.2.2, 1008.2.3 (New))

Proponent: Daniel Nichols, New York State Division of Building Standards and Codes, representing New York State Division of Building Standards and Codes (dnichols@dos.state.ny.us)

Revise as follows:

1008.2.2 Exit discharge Group I-2. In Group I-2 occupancies where two or more exits are required, on the exterior landings required by Section 1010.6.1, means of egress illumination levels for the exit discharge shall be provided such that failure of any single lighting unit shall not reduce the illumination level on that landing to less than 1 footcandle (11 lux).

Add new text as follows:

1008.2.3 Exit Discharge. Illumination shall be provided along the path of travel for the exit discharge from each exit to the public way. 

Exceptions: Illumination for the exit discharge is not be required to the public way when the path of the exit discharge meets all of the following requirements:

The path of exit discharge is illuminated from the exit for a travel distance of 50 feet (15 240 mm) minimum or a distance of 1.5 times the total building height, whichever is greater.
A dispersal area shall be provided with all the following: 2.1. The dispersal area is illuminated.
The area is sized to accommodate not less that 5 square feet (0.46 m2) for each person using the exit discharge and wheelchair spaces in accordance with Section 1009.6.3.
The dispersal area shall be located on the same lot and located at the end of the illuminated path of exit discharge.
The area is permanently maintained and identified as an illuminated dipersal area.
The area shall be provided with a safe and unobstructed path of travel from the building.

Reason: The purpose of this code change proposal is to limit the amount of light required for safe exiting from a building. On large parcels and when buildings are constructed on existing private campuses (i.e. business parks, college/university), the need to provide required lighting to the public way can be significant. In such locations, it is appropriate to provide a termination of illumination requirements (both continuous and emergency) at a safe distance from the building requiring egress.
IBC Section 1028.5 already permits the use of a safe dispersal area when access to a public way is cannot be provided. This proposal builds off of the same requirements found in 1028.5 to create a termination point of illumination without the requirement of not having access to a public way. The only two changes to the safe dispersal area is the addition of the wheelchair spaces to the total termination area sizing (matching the size and ratio of spaces from the area of refuge requirements) and the addition of a 150% safety factor to address buildings over 35 feet tall.
With an increased concern about energy usage and light pollution in some communities, having appropriate safeguards within the code that address building occupant safety and ways to minimize required illumination is mutually beneficial.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The allowed reduction in illumination will provide a reduction in cost of construction since illumination requirements will be limited. This applies to both illumination provided under normal power and emergency power.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1008.2.3 Exit Discharge. Illumination shall be provided along the path of travel for the exit discharge from each exit to the public wav.

Exceptions Exception: Illumination for the exit discharge is not be required to the public wav when the Path of the exit discharge meets all of the following requirements:
The path of exit discharge is illuminated from the exit for to a travel distance of 50 feet (15 240 mm) minimum or a distance of 1.5 times the total building height, whichever is greater.safe dispersal area complying with Section 1028.5
A dispersal area shall be provided with all the following: 2.1. The dispersal area is illuminated.
The area is sized to accommodate a level not less that 5 square feet than 1 foot candle (0.46 m2 11lux) for each person using the exit discharge and wheelchair spaces in accordance with Section 1009.6.3.
The dispersal area shall be located on the same lot and located at the end of the illuminated path of exit discharge.
The area is permanently maintained and identified as an illuminated dispersal area.
The area shall be provided with a safe and unobstructed path of travel from the building walking surface.

Committee Reason: The modification references the requirements for a safe dispersal area in Section 1028.5 rather than repeat the requirements. In addition, the modification sets the lighting limit for that dispersal area. The language for 1.5 times the building height did not have any technical justification.
The proposal as modified would provide an appropriate allowance for large campuses that do not have the typical streets around buildings, but may have large open areas. Examples would be office complexes, or college campuses.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E33-15	AM

Back

Code Change No: E34-15

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1009.1; (IFC[BE] 1009.1)

Proponent: Gene Boecker, representing Code Consultants, Inc. (geneb@codeconsultants.com)

Revise as follows:

1009.1 Accessible means of egress required. Accessible means of egress shall comply with this section. Accessible spaces shall be provided with not less than one accessible means of egress. Where more than one means of egress are required by Section 1006.2 or 1006.3 from any accessible space, each accessible portion of the space shall be served by not less than two accessible means of egress.

Exceptions:

1. Accessible means of egress are not required to be provided in existing buildings.
Accessible means of egress in existing buildings shall be provided in compliance with the International Existing Building Code.
One accessible means of egress is required from an accessible mezzanine level in accordance with Section 1009.3, 1009.4 or 1009.5.
In assembly areas with ramped aisles or stepped aisles, one accessible means of egress is permitted where the common path of egress travel is accessible and meets the requirements in Section 1029.8.

Reason: This blanket exception should be removed from the IBC for two reasons. First, with the change to Chapter 34 of the IBC during the last code change cycle, all existing building requirements are now located in the IEBC. Exception 2 to IEBC Section 410.6 and exception 2 to IEBC Section 705.1 already contain this language, so it is simply redundant to be placed in the IBC. Second, the exception has been misused as a reason for eliminating existing accessible means of egress. Buildings which have been constructed since the adoption of the accessible means of egress provisions in the IBC (and some legacy codes) should be required to maintain these accessible means of egress elements and sections within the IEBC support that concept. By making a blanket statement in the IBC that they are simply not required because the building is "existing" can be construed as meaning that the accessible means of egress are no longer needed. This confusion should be removed from the IBC and allow the IEBC to note how this is supposed to be addressed in existing buildings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal changes nothing except where the references are to be found.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1009.1 Accessible means of egress required. Accessible means of egress shall comply with this section. Accessible spaces shall be provided with not less than one accessible means of egress. Where more than one means of egress are required by Section 1006.2 or 1006.3 from any accessible space, each accessible portion of the space shall be served by not less than two accessible means of egress.

Exceptions:

1.	Accessible means of egress in existing buildings shall be provided in compliance with the International Existing Building Code .
12. One accessible means of egress is required from an accessible mezzanine level in accordance with Section 1009.3, 1009.4 or 1009.5.

23. In assembly areas with ramped aisles or stepped aisles, one accessible means of egress is permitted where the common path of egress travel is accessible and meets the requirements in Section 1029.8.

Committee Reason: The modification is to delete the first exception. Accessible means of egress is addressed in the IEBC, therefore a pointer is not needed.
The revised proposal will meet the intent of the original proposal.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E34-15	AM

Back

Code Change No: E39-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1009.3, 1009.4 (IFC[BE] 1009.3, 1009.4)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1009.3 Stairways. In order to be considered part of an accessible means of egress, a stairway between stories shall comply with Section 1109.3.1 through 1009.3.3have a clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) minimum between handrails and shall either incorporate an area of refuge within an enlarged floor-level landing or shall be accessed from an area of refuge complying with Section 1009.6.

1009.3.1 Exit access stairways. Exit access stairways that connect levels in the same story are not permitted as part of an accessible means of egress.

Exceptions Exception: 1. Exit access stairways providing means of egress from mezzanines are permitted as part of an accessible means of egress.

1009.3.2 Stairway width. Stairways shall have a clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) minimum between handrails.

Exceptions:

The clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) between handrails is not required in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
The clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) between handrails is not required for stairways accessed from a refuge area in conjunction with a horizontal exit.

1009.3.3 Area of refuge. Stairways shall either incorporate an area of refuge within an enlarged floor- level landing or shall be accessed from an area of refuge complying with Section 1009.6.

Exceptions:

Areas of refuge are not required at exit access stairways where two-way communication is provided at the elevator landing in accordance with Section 1009.8.
Areas of refuge are not required at stairways in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
Areas of refuge are not required at stairways serving open parking garages.
Areas of refuge are not required for smoke-protected assembly seating areas complying with Section Sections 1029.6.2 and 1029.6.3.
Areas of refuge are not required at stairways in Group R-2 occupancies.
Areas of refuge are not required for stairways accessed from a refuge area in conjunction with a horizontal exit.

1009.4 Elevators. In order to be considered part of an accessible means of egress, an elevator shall comply with Section 1009.4.1 and 1009.4.2.

1009.4.1 Standby power. The elevator shall have the emergency operation and signaling device

requirements of Section 2.27 of ASME A17.1. Standby power shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 27 and Section 3003.

1009.4.2 Area of refuge. The elevator shall be accessed from an area of refuge complying with Section 1009.6.

Exceptions:

Areas of refuge are not required at the elevator in open parking garages.
Areas of refuge are not required in buildings and facilities equipped throughout by an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
Areas of refuge are not required at elevators not required to be located in a shaft in accordance with Section 712.
Areas of refuge are not required at elevators serving smoke protected seating areas complying with Section Sections 1029.6.2 and 1029.6.3.
Areas of refuge are not required for elevators accessed from a refuge area in conjunction with a horizontal exit.

Reason: In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled Unenclosed Exit Stairs. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
The intent of this proposal is for editorial clarification. The current text in Section 1009.3 has exceptions to each of three basic requirements; therefore it is long and can be confusing. (During the 2012 IBC development cycle the CTC Unenclosed Exit committee proposed adding the last sentence to Section 1009.3 and exception 1.) Sections 1009.3 and 1009.4 have been subdivided in order to clarify the requirements and when the exceptions are applicable. The exception for Group R-2 is not relocated. Since all Group R-2 are required to be sprinklered, they can use the sprinkler exception, so it is redundant.
The reference to Section 1029.6.3 was added to clarify that areas of refuge are not needed in assembly seating where the seating is open to the outside air as well as smoke protection assembly seating that is protected mechanically.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is a clarification of provisions. There will be no change in construction requirements.

Staff note: ASME A17.1 is also referred to as CSA B44.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Dividing up the sections and correlation with exceptions to specific items improves clarity and understanding of requirements and allowances.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E39-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E40-15

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1009.7.2; (IFC[BE] 1009.7.2)

Proponent: Lawrence Lincoln, representing Utah Chapter of ICC (larry.lincoln@slcgov.com)

Revise as follows:

1009.7.2 Separation. Exterior walls separating the exterior area of assisted rescue from the interior of the building shall have a minimum fire-resistance rating of 1 hour, rated for exposure to fire from the inside.
The fire-resistance-rated exterior wall construction shall extend horizontally 10 feet (3048 mm) beyond the landing on either side of the landing or equivalent fire-resistance-rated construction is permitted to extend out perpendicular to the exterior wall 4 feet (1220 mm) minimum on the side of the landing.
The fire-resistance-rated construction shall extend vertically from the ground to a point 10 feet (3048 mm) above the floor level of the area for assisted rescue or to the roof line, whichever is lower. Openings within such fire-resistance-rated exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with Section 716.

Exception: Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.

Reason: It seems unreasonable for the IBC to mandate more passive fire protection for a mobility impaired occupant 'that is already located outside of the building' (at the area of assisted rescue) than it does for a mobility impaired occupant that is 'within a building'. IBC section 1009.3 exception #5 allows for the elimination of area of refuges in stairways and IBC section 1009.4 exception #2 allows for the elimination of area of refuges to access elevators when the building is equipped throughout with an automatic fire sprinkler system. On the other hand, a mobility impaired person located at the exterior area of assisted rescue stair landing (already located outside of the building) is afforded the protection of 1-HR fire-resistance rated exterior wall construction and protection of openings as put forth by section 1009.7.2 whether the building is equipped with an automatic sprinkler system or not. This fire sprinkler exception is both logical and reasonable.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The code change proposal would eliminate the cost of the passive fire resistance rated construction materials required for the exterior area of assisted rescue in buildings that are equipped throughout with an NFPA 13 or NFPA 13R fire sprinkler systems.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: There is no requirement for areas of refuge in a sprinklered building on upper floors. Therefore, for consistency, in a sprinklered building on the level of exit discharge there should not be a requirement for a separation from the interior of the building for an exterior area for assisted rescue. The sprinkler system provides adequate protection for a trade off. By being outside and protected a person would be protected from smoke and fumes. Therefore the passive protection of the exterior wall is not needed.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 2:
Adolf Zubia, representing International Association of Fire Chiefs, Fire & Life Safety Section (azubiamia@yahoo.com) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

1009.7.2 Separation. Exterior walls separating the exterior area of assisted rescue from the interior of the building shall have a minimum fire-resistance rating of 1 hour, rated for exposure to fire from the inside. The fire-resistance-rated exterior wall construction shall extend horizontally 10 feet (3048 mm) beyond the landing on either side of the landing or equivalent fire- resistance-rated construction is permitted to extend out perpendicular to the exterior wall 4 feet (1220 mm) minimum on the side of the landing. The fire-resistance-rated construction shall extend vertically from the ground to a point 10 feet (3048 mm) above the floor level of the area for assisted rescue or to the roof line, whichever is lower. Openings within such fire-resistance-rated exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with Section 716.

Exception: Buildings The fire-resistance rating and opening protectives are not required in the exterior wall where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.

Commenter's Reason: This Public Comment intends to clarify the exception.
The exception itself is unclear since it does not indicate whether the 1 hour construction is not required, or whether the exterior area of assisted rescue is not required. This proposal clarifies that the sprinklers in the building eliminate the need to provide the 1- hour separation, by specifically stating that the 1 hour construction is not required, and the protected openings are not required.

Final Action Results

E40-15	AMPC2

Back

Code Change No: E41-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1009.7.2, 1009.7.4 (IFC[BE] 1009.7.2, 1009.7.4)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1009.7.2 Separation. Exterior walls separating the exterior area of assisted rescue from the interior of the building shall have a minimum fire-resistance rating fire-resistance rating of 1 hour, rated for exposure to fire from the inside. The fire-resistance-rated exterior wall construction shall extend horizontally a minimum of 10 feet (3048 mm) beyond the landing on either side of the landing or equivalent fire- resistance-rated construction is permitted to extend out perpendicular to the exterior wall a minimum of 4 feet (1220 mm) minimum on the side of the landing. The fire-resistance-rated fire-resistance-
rated construction shall extend vertically from the ground to a point minimum of 10 feet (3048 mm) above the floor level of the area for assisted rescue or to the roof line, whichever is lower. Openings within
such fire-resistance-ratedfire-resistance-rated exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with Section 716.

1009.7.4 Stairways. Stairways that are part of the means of egress for the exterior area for assisted rescue shall provide a clear minimum width of 48 inches (1220 mm) between handrails.

Exception: The minimum clear width of 48 inches (1220 mm) between handrails is not required at stairways serving buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
Reason: The requirements for the wall separation and stairway width for an exterior area for assisted rescue should be minimum requirements, not absolute dimensions.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled IBC Coordination with the New ADAAG. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is a clarification of current requirements; therefore, there is no impact on the cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: A minimum distance is consistent with the intent. It is not logical, nor was it the original intent to set an absolute value.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E41-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E45-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1009.8; (IFC[BE] 1009.8)

Proponent: John Williams, CBO, CBO, Chair Adhoc Healthcare Committee, representing Adhoc Health Care Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org); Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1009.8 Two-way communication. A two-way communication system complying with Sections 1009.8.1 and 1009.8.2 shall be provided at the landing serving each elevator or bank of elevators on each accessible floor that is one or more stories above or below the level of exit discharge.

Exceptions:

Two-way communication systems are not required at the landing serving each elevator or bank of elevators where the two-way communication system is provided within areas of refuge in accordance with Section 1009.6.5.
Two-way communication systems are not required on floors provided with ramps conforming to the provisions of Section 1012.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landings serving only service elevators that are not designated as part of the accessible means of egress or serve as part of the required accessibleroute into a facility.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landings serving only freight elevators.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landing serving a private residence elevator. 6.	Two-way communication systems are not requiredin Group I-2 facilities.

Reason: It is important to note that this is not the two way communication system typically utilized by the fire department. That system is defined in the IFC and will remain as required.
A two way communication system is part of accessible means of egress and required to allow for persons with disabilities to contact emergency responders. In Group I-2 facilities the strategy for emergencies is defend in place, with trained staff. Most of the patients will be considered persons with disabilities, and their safety will be addressed through the fire and safety evacuation plans with staff assistance. Therefore, the need for the two way communication system is addressed by an alternative means and would not be used in these types of facilities. Since this was not added to the code in 2009, deleting this issue would not be conflict with what is referenced in the 2010 ADA Standard for Accessible Design.
This system could also be confused as being used for medical emergencies or as a general information phone.
The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/AHC/Pages/default.aspx
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The deletion of two way communication system will be a saving in initial construction and maintenance/monitoring of the system.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: In hospitals and nursing homes all staff is trained to first defend in place rather than evacuate. Staff will address patients and visitors in an emergency situation; therefore, a two-way communication system for communication is not needed.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E45-15	AS

Code Change No: E46-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1009.8; (IFC[BE] 1009.8)

Proponent: Robert Davidson, Davidson Code Concepts, LLC, representing Davidson Code Concepts, LLC (rjd@davidsoncodeconcepts.com)

Revise as follows:

1009.8 Two-way communication. A two-way communication system complying with Sections 1009.8.1 and 1009.8.2 shall be provided at the landing serving each elevator or bank of elevators on each accessible floor that is one or more stories above or below the level of exit discharge.

Exceptions:

Two-way communication systems are not required at the landing serving each elevator or bank of elevators where the two-way communication system is provided within areas of refuge in accordance with Section 1009.6.5.
Two-way communication systems are not required on floors provided with ramps conforming to the provisions of Section 1012.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landings serving only service elevators that are not designated as part of the accessible means of egress or serve as part of the required accessible route into a facility.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landings serving only service freight elevators that are not designated as part of the accessible means of egress or serve as part of the required accessible route into a facility.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landings landing serving only freight elevators a private residence elevator.
Two-way communication systems are not required at the landing serving a private residence elevator in Group I-3 facilities.

Reason: It is important to note that this is not the two way communication system typically utilized by the fire department. That system is defined in the IFC and will remain as required.
A two way communication system is part of accessible means of egress and required to allow for persons with disabilities to contact emergency responders. In Group I-3 facilities the strategy for emergencies is defend in place, with trained staff. Therefore, the need for the two way communication system is addressed by an alternative means and would not be used in these types of facilities. There is also a high chance of vandalism in these facilities. Since this was not added to the code in 2009, deleting this issue would not be conflict with what is referenced in the 2010 ADA Standard for Accessible Design.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The deletion of two way communication system will be a saving in initial construction and maintenance/monitoring of the system.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: In jails all staff is trained to first defend in place rather than evacuate. Staff will address patients and visitors in an emergency situation; therefore, a two-way communication system for communication is not needed.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E46-15	AS

Code Change No: E47-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s): 1010.1.1, 1010.1.1.1; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.1, 1010.1.1.1)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.1 Size of doors. The required capacity of each door opening shall be sufficient for the occupant load thereof and shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). Clear openings The clear opening width of doorways with swinging doors shall be measured between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90 degrees (1.57 rad). Where this section requires a minimum
clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm) and a door opening includes two door leaves without a mullion, one leaf shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). In Group I-2, doors serving as means of egress doors where used for the movement of beds shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 411/ 2 inches (1054 mm). The maximum width of a swinging door leaf shall be 48 inches (1219 mm) nominal. Means of egress doors in a Group I-2 occupancy used for the movement of beds shall provide a clear width not less than 411/ 2 inches (1054 mm). The minimum clear height of door openings shall be not less than 80 inches (2032 mm).

Exceptions:

In Group R-2 and R-3 dwelling and sleeping units that are not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit, the minimum and maximum width shall not apply to door openings that are not part of the required means of egress in Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies.
In Group I-3, door openings to resident sleeping units that are not required to be and Accessible units in Group I-3 occupancies shall have a minimum clear opening width of not less than 28 inches (711 mm).
Door openings to storage closets less than 10 square feet (0.93 m2) in area shall not be limited by the minimum clear opening width.
Width of door leaves in revolving doors that comply with Section 1010.1.4.1 shall not be limited.
Door openings within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit shall be not less than have a minimum clear opening height of 78 inches (1981 mm) in height.
In dwelling and sleeping units that are not required to be Accessible, Type A or Type B units, exterior door openings in dwelling units and sleeping units, other than the
required exit door, shall be not less than have a minimum clear opening height of 76 inches (1930 mm) in height.
In other than Group R-1 occupancies In Groups I-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies, in dwelling and sleeping units that are not required to be Accessible, Type A or Type B units, the minimum clear opening widths shall not apply to interior egress doors within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit that is not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit.
Door openings required to be accessible within Type B units intended for user passage shall have a minimum clear opening width of 31.75 inches (806 mm).
Doors to walk-in freezers and coolers less than 1,000 square feet (93 m2) in area shall have a maximum width of 60 inches (1524 mm) nominal.
In Group R-1 dwelling units or sleeping units not required to be Accessible
units, The minimum width shall not apply to doors for non-accessible showers or saunas shower or sauna compartments.

The minimum width shall not apply to the doors for non-accessible toilet seats.

1010.1.1.1 Projections into clear width. There shall not be projections into the required
clear opening width lower than 34 inches (864 mm) above the floor or ground. Projections into the clear opening width between 34 inches (864 mm) and 80 inches (2032 mm) above the floor or ground shall not exceed 4 inches (102 mm).

Exception: Door closers and door stops shall be permitted to be 78 inches (1980 mm) minimum above the floor.

Reason: In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled IBC Coordination with the New ADAAG. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
The intent of a large portion of this change is consistent use of the terminology (e.g., minimum clear opening width/height) throughout this section. There is also the intent of putting the modifier first within the specific requirements (Group I-2, ambulatory care) and the exceptions. The maximum door width sentence is relocated to be after all the minimum door width requirements and to coordinate with the order of requirements in IFC 1104.7.
Exceptions 1, 2, 6 and 7 cannot be used in Accessible, Type A or Type B units; that would conflict with ICC A117.1, ADA and FHA. Also in Exception 7: dwelling units and sleeping units in Group I-2 and I-3 have specific criteria elsewhere in this section, and the ADA does not allow Group R-1 units to use this exception, therefore, the more specific limitation to allow this in Group I-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4.
Exception 8 is revised to be consistent with the language used for Type B dwelling units in ICC A117.1.
Code change E52-12 added exception 10 as part of the coordination with ADA 224.1.2. Questions that has risen are: Is the intent to require 32" clear width shower stall doors in all showers Group I-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 or multi-stall shower rooms? Is the intent to require 32" clear width shower doors in the 2nd bathrooms in Accessible units that are not required to have clearances? Elimination first part of the sentence would not change the allowances for Accessible hotel rooms, and would eliminate the question. Exception 11 is proposed to be added to address a similar question for doors on toilet stalls. The width of 32" is especially a problem with IPC since the stall is only required to be 30" wide.
The ICC Fire Code Action Committee supports this proposal and will be submitting a Group B a correlative language change proposed to IFC Section 1104.7.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is a clarification and coordination of current requirements; therefore, there is no impact on the cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1010.1.1 Size of doors. The required capacity of each door opening shall be sufficient for the occupant load thereof and shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). The clear opening width of doorways with swinging doors shall be measured between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90 degrees (1.57 rad). Where this section requires a minimum clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm) and a door opening includes two door leaves without a mullion, one leaf shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). In Group I-2, doors serving as means of egress doors where used for the movement of beds shall provide a minimum clear opening width of 411/ 2 inches (1054 mm). The maximum width of a swinging door leaf shall be 48 inches (1219 mm) nominal. The minimum clear opening height of door openings doors shall be 80 inches (2032 mm).

Exceptions:

In Group R-2 and R-3 dwelling and sleeping units that are not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit, the minimum and maximum width shall not apply to door openings that are not part of the required means of egress.
In Group I-3, door openings to resident sleeping units that are not required to be an Accessible unit shall have a minimum clear opening width of 28 inches (711 mm).

Door openings to storage closets less than 10 square feet (0.93 m2) in area shall not be limited by the minimum clear opening width.
The width of door leaves in revolving doors that comply with Section 1010.1.4.1 shall not be limited.
Door openings within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit shall have a minimum clear opening height than 78 inches (1981 mm) in height.
In dwelling and sleeping units that are not required to be Accessible, Type A or Type B units, exterior door openings, other than the required exit door, shall have a minimum clear opening height of 76 inches (1930 mm) in height.
Groups I-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies, in dwelling and sleeping units that are not required to be Accessible, Type A or Type B units, the minimum clear opening widths shall not apply to interior egress doors.
Door openings within Type B units intended for user passage shall have a minimum clear opening width of 31.75 inches (806 mm).
Doors to walk-in freezers and coolers less than 1,000 square feet (93 m2) in area shall have a maximum width of 60 inches (1524 mm) nominal.
The minimum clear opening width shall not apply to doors for non-accessible shower or sauna compartments.
The minimum clear opening width shall not apply to the doors for non-accessible toilet seats stalls.

Committee Reason: The modification to the last sentence of Section 1010.1.1 and Exceptions 10 and 11 is for consistency with terminology used in Exception 5. The modification for Exception 11 is to clarify that the door provisions are for stalls.
The proposal is a good clean up and provides consistency in terminology.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E47-15	AM

Code Change No: E49-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s): 1010.1.1 (IFC [BE] 1010.1.1)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.1 Size of doors. The required capacity of each door opening shall be sufficient for the occupant load thereof and shall provide a minimum clear width of 32 inches (813 mm). Clear openings of doorways with swinging doors shall be measured between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90 degrees (1.57 rad). Where this section requires a minimum clear width of 32 inches (813 mm) and a door opening includes two door leaves without a mullion, one leaf shall provide a clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). The maximum width of a swinging door leaf shall be 48 inches (1219 mm)

2

nominal. Means of egress doors in a Group I-2 occupancy used for the movement of beds shall provide a clear width not less than 411/ inches (1054 mm). The height of door openings shall be not less than 80 inches (2032 mm).

Exceptions:

The minimum and maximum width shall not apply to door openings that are not part of the required means of egress in Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies.
Door openings to resident sleeping units in Group I-3 occupancies shall have a clear width of not less than 28 inches (711 mm).
Door openings to storage closets less than 10 square feet (0.93 m2) in area shall not be limited by the minimum width.
The width of door leaves in revolving doors that comply with Section 1010.1.4.1 shall not be limited.
The width of door leaves in revolving bi-parting power-operated doors that comply with Section 1010.1.4.1 1010.1.4.2 shall not be limited.
Door openings within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit shall be not less than 78 inches (1981 mm) in height.
Exterior door openings in dwelling units and sleeping units, other than the required exit door, shall be not less than 76 inches (1930 mm) in height.
In other than Group R-1 occupancies, the minimum widths shall not apply to interior egress doors within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit that is not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit.
Door openings required to be accessible within Type B units shall have a minimum clear width of 31.75 inches (806 mm).
Doors to walk-in freezers and coolers less than 1,000 square feet (93 m2) in area shall have a maximum width of 60 inches (1524 mm).
In Group R-1 dwelling units or sleeping units not required to be Accessible units, the minimum width shall not apply to doors for showers or saunas.

Reason: The proposed revisions are intended to improve clarity and consistency of the language of these sections of the code, and appear to be essentially editorial. The maximum width of power-operated doors which comply with IBC Section 1010.1.4.2 should not be limited as these doors are either fully automatic or power-assisted, and must comply with all the requirements of Section 1010.1.4.2 including the safety requirements incorporated in the BHMA standards referenced in 1010.1.4.2. This revision addresses a potential conflict between the IBC and the relatively few power-operated swinging doors currently being installed which exceed 48" inches in width.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes

both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction Editorial changes only. No technical changes intended.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify proposal as follows:

1010.1.1 Size of doors. The required capacity of each door opening shall be sufficient for the occupant load thereof and shall provide a minimum clear width of 32 inches (813 mm). Clear openings of doorways with swinging doors shall be measured between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90 degrees (1.57 rad). Where this section requires a minimum clear width of 32 inches (813 mm) and a door opening includes two door leaves without a mullion, one leaf shall provide a clear opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). The maximum width of a swinging door leaf shall be 48 inches (1219 mm) nominal. Means of egress doors in a Group I-2 occupancy used for the movement of beds shall provide a clear width not less than 411/ 2 inches (1054 mm). The height of door openings shall be not less than 80 inches (2032 mm).

Exceptions:

The minimum and maximum width shall not apply to door openings that are not part of the required means of egress in Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies.
Door openings to resident sleeping units in Group I-3 occupancies shall have a clear width of not less than 28 inches (711 mm).
Door openings to storage closets less than 10 square feet (0.93 m2) in area shall not be limited by the minimum width.
The width of door leaves in revolving doors that comply with Section 1010.1.4.1 shall not be limited.
The maximum width of door leaves in bi-parting power-operated doors that comply with Section 1010.1.4.2 shall not be limited
Door openings within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit shall be not less than 78 inches (1981 mm) in height.
Exterior door openings in dwelling units and sleeping units, other than the required exit door, shall be not less than 76 inches (1930 mm) in height.
In other than Group R-1 occupancies, the minimum widths shall not apply to interior egress doors within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit that is not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit.
Door openings required to be accessible within Type B units shall have a minimum clear width of 31.75 inches (806 mm).
Doors to walk-in freezers and coolers less than 1,000 square feet (93 m2) in area shall have a maximum width of 60 inches (1524 mm).
In Group R-1 dwelling units or sleeping units not required to be Accessible units, the minimum width shall not apply to doors for showers or saunas.

Committee Reason: The modification to Item 5 is to allow for this proposed language to apply to all types of power doors, not just bi-parting doors. The addition of ‘maximum’ would clarify that power doors still have to provide the 32” clear opening width at a minimum for the means of egress.
Power doors provide a higher level of accessibility and access. The maximum width on power doors is not an issue for means of egress.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E49-15	AM

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.4.1.2; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.4.1.2)

Proponent: John Woestman, Kellen Company, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.4.1.2 Other than egress component. A revolving door used as other than a component of
a means of egress shall comply with Section 1010.1.4.1. The breakout force of a revolving door not used as a component of a means of egress shall not be more than 180 pounds (801 N).

Exception: A breakout force in excess of 180 pounds (801 N) is permitted if the collapsing breakout force is reduced to not more than 130 pounds (578 N) when not less than one of the following conditions is satisfied:

There is a power failure or power is removed to the device holding the door wings in position.
There is an actuation of the automatic sprinkler system where such system is provided.
There is an actuation of a smoke detection system that is installed in accordance with Section 907 to provide coverage in areas within the building that are within 75 feet (22 860 mm) of the revolving doors.
There is an actuation of a manual control switch, in an approved location and clearly identified, that reduces the breakout force to not more than 130 pounds (578 N).

Reason: This proposal fixes an oversight on my part. The requirements for revolving doors were revised / updated for the 2015 IBC, including a definition of "breakout" and the use of that term which took the place of the term "collapsing". I missed this revision during the code development cycle for the 2015 IBC, and ICC staff suggested this was more than an editorial fix. Hence this proposal.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction Editorial fix.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposal would provide consistency in the language related to breakout force for revolving doors.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E53-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 202, 1010.1.4.2; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.4.2), Chapter 35

Proponent: John Woestman, Kellen Company (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Revise as follows:

SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS

LOW-ENERGY POWER-OPERATED DOOR. Swinging, sliding, or folding door which opens automatically upon an action by a pedestrian such as pressing a push plate or waving a hand in front of a sensor. The door closes automatically, and operates with decreased forces and decreased speeds (see "Power-assisted door" and "Power-operated door").

1010.1.4.2 Power-operated doors. Where means of egress doors are operated or assisted by power, the design shall be such that in the event of power failure, the door is capable of being opened manually to permit means of egress travel or closed where necessary to safeguard means of egress. The forces required to open these doors manually shall not exceed those specified in Section 1010.1.3, except that the force to set the door in motion shall not exceed 50 pounds (220 N). The door shall be capable
of swinging open opening from any position to the full width of the opening in which such door is installed when a force is applied to the door on the side from which egress is made. Power-operated swinging doors, power-operated sliding doors and power-operated folding doors shall comply with BHMA A156.10. Power-assisted swinging doors and low-energy power-operated swinging doors shall comply with BHMA A156.19. Low energy power-operated sliding doors and low energy power-operated folding doors shall comply with BHMA A156.38.

Exceptions:

Occupancies in Group I-3.
Horizontal sliding doors complying with Section 1010.1.4.3.
For a biparting door in the emergency breakout mode, a door leaf located within a multiple- leaf opening shall be exempt from the minimum 32-inch (813 mm) single-leaf requirement of Section 1010.1.1, provided a minimum 32-inch (813 mm) clear opening is provided when the two biparting leaves meeting in the center are broken out.

Reference standards type:
Add new standard(s) as follows:

BHMA A156.38-2014 Low Energy Power Operated Sliding and Folding Doors

Reason: The Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA), an ANSI accredited standard development organization, received ANSI approval last year of A156.38-2014 Low Energy Power Operated Sliding and Folding Doors. This new standard has mandatory performance and safety requirements for low energy power operated sliding and folding doors, and "rounds out" this section of the IBC to now include most types of power operated doors. The standards currently referenced in this section are BHMA A156.10 Power Operated Pedestrian Doors (for swinging, sliding, and folding doors) and BHMA A156.19 Standard for Power Assist and Low Energy Operated Doors (for swinging doors).
The proposed deletion of "swinging" in IBC Section 1010.1.4.2 considers the configurations of power-operated doors, as they may be swinging, sliding, or folding.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost implications. Manufacturers of low energy power-operated sliding or folding doors are voluntarily complying with this standard.

Analysis: A review of the standard proposed for inclusion in the code, BHMA A156.38, with regard to the ICC criteria for referenced standards (Section 3.6 of CP#28) will be posted on the ICC website on or before April 2, 2015.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposal would provide consistency in the language related to breakout force for revolving doors.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E54-15	AS

Code Change No: E55-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 709.5, 1010.1.4.2; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.4.2)

Proponent: John Woestman, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Revise as follows:

Openings. Openings in a smoke barrier shall be protected in accordance with Section 716.

Exceptions:

4

In Group I-1 Condition 2, Group I-2 and ambulatory care facilities, where a pair of opposite- swinging doors are installed across a corridor in accordance with Section 709.5.1, the doors shall not be required to be protected in accordance with Section 716. The doors shall be close fitting within operational tolerances, and shall not have a center mullion or undercuts in excess of 3 / inch (19.1 mm), louvers or grilles. The doors shall have head and jamb stops, and astragals or rabbets at meeting edges. Where permitted by the door manufacturer's listing, positive-latching devices are not required.
In Group I-1 Condition 2, Group I-2 and ambulatory care facilities, special purpose horizontal sliding, accordion or folding doors installed in accordance with Section 1010.1.4.3 and protected in accordance with Section 716.

1010.1.4.2 Power-operated doors. Where means of egress doors are operated or assisted by power, the design shall be such that in the event of power failure, the door is capable of being opened manually to permit means of egress travel or closed where necessary to safeguard means of egress. The forces required to open these doors manually shall not exceed those specified in Section 1010.1.3, except that the force to set the door in motion shall not exceed 50 pounds (220 N). The door shall be capable of swinging open from any position to the full width of the opening in which such door is installed when a force is applied to the door on the side from which egress is made. Power-operated swinging doors, power-operated sliding doors and power-operated folding doors shall comply with BHMA A156.10.
Power-assisted swinging doors and low-energy power-operated swinging doors shall comply with BHMA A156.19.

Exceptions:

Occupancies in Group I-3.
Horizontal Special purpose horizontal sliding, accordion or folding doors complying with Section 1010.1.4.3.
For a biparting door in the emergency breakout mode, a door leaf located within a multiple- leaf opening shall be exempt from the minimum 32-inch (813 mm) single-leaf requirement of Section 1010.1.1, provided a minimum 32-inch (813 mm) clear opening is provided when the two biparting leaves meeting in the center are broken out.

Reason: This proposal updates references to IBC 1010.1.4.3. Special purpose horizontal sliding, accordion or folding doors as the name of this section and related text were revised for the 2015 IBC and IFC. Most of the references to 1010.1.4.3 were updated for the 2015 IBC and IFC. These were not.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction No technical changes.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal coordinates with changes to Section 1010.1.4.3 last cycle. The additional words clarifies the special applications for these types of doors.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E55-15	AS

Code Change No: E57-15 Part I

Original Proposal

Section(s):	202 (New), 1010.1.4.4 (New), 1010.1.4.4.1 (New); (IFC[BE] 1010.1.4.4 (New),
1010.1.4.4.1 (New))

Proponent: John Woestman, Kellen Company, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

THIS IS A 2 PART CODE CHANGE. PART I WAS HEARD BY THE IBC-MEANS OF EGRESS COMMITTEE. PART II WAS HEARD BY THE IEBC COMMITTEE.

Revise as follows:

Add new definition as follows:

SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS

CREDENTIAL. A tangible object, knowledge, or human physical characteristic required for locking and unlocking. A key to operate a lock cylinder; a magnetic card to swipe in a magnetic card reader; knowledge of a specific code for keypad operations; and a fingerprint for a fingerprint scanner; are examples of credentials, and their potential uses.

Add new text as follows:

1010.1.4.4 Group E classrooms. In Group E occupancies, classroom doors shall be lockable from within the classroom without opening the classroom door. All the following conditions shall apply:

The classroom door shall be unlockable and openable from within the classroom and shall comply with Section 1010.1.9.
The classroom door shall be unlockable and openable from outside the classroom by the use of a key or other credential.

1010.1.4.4.1 Remote operation of locks. Remote operation of locks complying with Section 1010.1.4.4 shall be permitted.

Part I: Many jurisdictions have taken measures to address the high priority concern of safety of occupants in K-12 classrooms in the event of a threatening situation. While well-intended and likely to have a degree of positive impact, these actions create disparate requirements from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and some actions may inadvertently compromise certain aspects of life safety while attempting to address others.
This proposal for the IBC provides requirements which balance the challenges of providing protection for students and teachers in the classroom with that of free and immediate egress at all times without use of keys, tools, or special knowledge.
In addition to the security concerns, classroom doors are required to meet accessibility requirements which include door operating hardware configuration and location, door hardware operational forces, and a smooth surface of the bottom 10" of the push side of the door.
Door locksets with "classroom security function" are readily available today at the same cost as traditionally-used "classroom function" door locksets. The most common configuration of a classroom security function lockset is the ability to lock the door from inside the classroom with a key preventing entry to the classroom; and for egress, the door may be unlatched and opened from inside the classroom without a key by rotating the lever handle. On the outside of the classroom, consistent with tradition, the door may be locked with a key, and unlocked and opened with a key.
This code change proposal will require all Group E classroom doors to be lockable from the inside of the classroom preventing entry to the classroom, without the need to open the door. This proposal does not prescribe specifically how the door is to be lockable from inside the classroom.

Additional requirements are the door is to be unlockable and readily openable inside the classroom without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort, as required in IBC Section 1010.1.9. Subsections of 1010.1.9 include requirements for hardware height (between 34 and 48 inches above the floor), and for hardware configuration (for doors required to be accessible, which would be almost all classroom doors, the door operating hardware shall not require tight grasping, tight pinching or twisting of the wrist to operate). An additional requirement of this proposal is the classroom door is to be unlockable and openable from outside the classroom by a key or other lock credential.

Cost Impact:
Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact. Door locksets with the classroom security function are the same cost as traditionally specified door hardware locksets (with the classroom function).

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Disapproved

Committee Reason: Criteria for Group E classrooms to lock down safely is needed. Types of devices that are blocking devices that do not allow for unlocking from the outside are currently being used and are a safety hazard. However, the committee strongly felt that this should be an option, not a requirement. There should be correlation with the signage requirement in Section 1010.1.9.3.
The definitions in the IBC and IEBC should match – change 'and' to 'or' in the last sentence.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
Edward Kulik, representing ICC Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

CREDENTIAL. A tangible object, knowledge, or human physical characteristic required for locking and unlocking. A key to operate a lock cylinder; a magnetic card to swipe in a magnetic card reader; knowledge of a specific code for keypad operations; and a fingerprint for a fingerprint scanner; are examples of credentials, and their potential uses.

1010.1.4.4 Group E classrooms. Locking arrangements in educational occupancies. In Group E and Group B educational occupancies, egress doors from classrooms, offices and other occupied rooms shall be permitted to be provided with locking arrangements designed to keep intruders from entering the room where all of the following conditions are met: In Group E occupancies, classroom doors shall be lockable from within the classroom without opening the classroom door. All of the following conditions shall apply: 

The classroom door shall be unlockable and openable from within the classroom and shall comply with Section 1010.1.9.
The classroom door shall be unlockable and openable from outside the classroom by the use of a key or other credential.
The door shall be capable of being unlocked from outside the room with a key or other approved means.
The door shall be openable from within the room in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.
Modifications shall not be made to listed panic hardware, fire door hardware or door closers.

1010.1.4.4.1 Remote operation of locks. Remote operation of locks complying with Section 1010.1.4.4 shall be permitted.

Commenter's Reason: This public comment addresses the committee comments as follows.
"Criteria for Group E classrooms to lock down safely is needed. Types of devices that are blocking devices that do not allow for unlocking from the outside are currently being used and are a safety hazard." Comment – We agree and this public comment addresses these concerns.
"However, the committee strongly felt that this should be an option, not a requirement." The original proposal mandated that locks had to be provided on all classroom doors, period. This decision should be the responsibility of the school administration in consultation with local security, law enforcement and emergency responders. This public comment does not mandate that locks be provided on classrooms, but describes the safety features they should have if provided for intruder protection.
"There should be correlation with the signage requirement in Section 1010.1.9.3." Addressed – A requirement was added that the door must be openable from within the room in accordance with Section 1010.1.9. the public comment does not allow locking arrangements to impede the egress aspects of the door, e.g. no double deadbolts.
"The definitions in the IBC and IEBC should match – change 'and' to 'or' in the last sentence." Accomplished, did not add a definition of "Credential" with the public comment, and the last sentence was not included in the public comment.

This public comment addresses a real danger facing schools today, addresses all of the concerns raised by the committee, and is consistent with the provisions in our EB 23-15 public comment.

Final Action Results

E57-15 Part I	AMPC1

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.9.3 (New); (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.3 (New))

Proponent: John Woestman, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Add new text as follows:

1010.1.9.3 Monitored or recorded egress. Where electrical systems which monitor or record egress activity are incorporated, the locking system shall comply with Sections 1010.1.9.6, 1010.1.9.7, 1010.1.9.8, 1010.1.9.9 or 1010.1.9.10 or shall be readily openable from the egress side without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort.

Reason: Monitored egress is where an active device requiring credentials is used to monitor who is egressing. The active device could be a card reader, keypad, iris scan, finger scan, etc. A monitored egress device could be utilized on any of the four "special locking arrangements" of Sections 1010.1.9.6, 1010.1.9.7, 1010.1.9.8, or 1010.1.9.9 provided the functions of that specific locking arrangement are retained and maintained. Examples: a keypad could be installed next to an electromagnetically locked egress door; a card reader could be installed next to a delayed egress door; or a keypad installed in the approach area of a sensor release door. The special locking arrangement would need to fully comply with its requirements.
The BHMA members, while conducting a final review of the Building Code Action Committee (BCAC) proposal on the same topic realized the proposed language without the "or shall be readily openable . . . ." phrase could be interpreted as requiring one of the special locking arrangements of 1010.1.9.7, 1010.1.9.8, or 1010.1.9 if a monitored egress system is installed. This added phrase helps to clarify a monitored egress system may also be installed where doors are readily openable, as required in 1010.1.9. We apologize for not catching this nuance in adequate time to offer this suggestion to the BCAC during one of the BCAC meetings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact unless the building owner chooses to install a system to monitor or record egress.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The new language clarifies that monitoring egress systems are permitted as long as egress in emergencies is addressed.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E61-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section(s): 1010.1.9.3; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.3)

Proponent: John Woestman, Kellen Company, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.3 Locks and latches. Locks and latches shall be permitted to prevent operation of doors where any of the following exist:

Places of detention or restraint.
In buildings in occupancy Group A having an occupant load of 300 or less, Groups B, F, M and S, and in places of religious worship, the main door or doors are permitted to be equipped with key- operated locking devices from the egress side provided:
The locking device is readily distinguishable as locked.
A readily visible durable sign is posted on the egress side on or adjacent to the door stating: THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHEN THIS SPACE IS OCCUPIED. The sign shall be in letters 1 inch (25 mm) high on a contrasting background.
The use of the key-operated locking device is revokable by the building official for due cause.
Where egress doors are used in pairs, approved automatic flush bolts shall be permitted to be used, provided that the door leaf having the automatic flush bolts does not have a doorknob or surface-mounted hardware.
Doors from individual dwelling or sleeping units of Group R occupancies having an occupant load of 10 or less are permitted to be equipped with a night latch, dead bolt or security chain, provided such devices are openable from the inside without the use of a key or tool.
Fire doors after the minimum elevated temperature has disabled the unlatching mechanism in accordance with listed fire door test procedures.
Doors serving roofs not intended to be occupied shall be permitted to be locked preventing entry to the building from the roof provided that when accessing the roof from the building the locks do not automatically lock preventing re-entry into the building from the roof.

Reason: Questions are being asked of BHMA members as to what is allowed and / or required for locking of doors to roofs not intended to be occupied. This proposal attempts to address these questions.
The intent of this proposal is to allow doors to roofs not intended to be occupied to be locked preventing access into the building from the roof, especially for security reasons. However, in an effort to prevent locking out an authorized person who goes to the roof from inside the building, this proposal includes a requirement for the door to not automatically lock behind this person.
This proposal does not address locking of doors preventing access to the roof. Also, egress from occupied roofs is addressed in Section 1006.3.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No costs unless doors providing access to the roof are desired to be locked. If these doors are to be locked, this proposal provides guidance for selecting locking hardware.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify proposal as follows:

1010.1.9.3 Locks and latches. Locks and latches shall be permitted to prevent operation of doors where any of the following exist:
Places of detention or restraint.
In buildings in occupancy Group A having an occupant load of 300 or less, Groups B, F, M and S, and in places of religious worship, the main door or doors are permitted to be equipped with key-operated locking devices from the egress side provided:
The locking device is readily distinguishable as locked.
A readily visible durable sign is posted on the egress side on or adjacent to the door stating:
THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHEN THIS SPACE IS OCCUPIED. The sign shall be in letters 1 inch (25 mm) high on a contrasting background.
The use of the key-operated locking device is revocable by the building official for due cause.
Where egress doors are used in pairs, approved automatic flush bolts shall be permitted to be used, provided that the door leaf having the automatic flush bolts does not have a doorknob or surface-mounted hardware.
Doors from individual dwelling or sleeping units of Group R occupancies having an occupant load of 10 or less are permitted to be equipped with a night latch, dead bolt or security chain, provided such devices are openable from the inside without the use of a key or tool.
Fire doors after the minimum elevated temperature has disabled the unlatching mechanism in accordance with listed fire door test procedures.
Doors serving roofs not intended to be occupied shall be permitted to be locked preventing entry to the building from the roof provided that when accessing the roof from the building the locks do not automatically lock preventing re-entry into the building from the roof.

Committee Reason: The modification is to delete the last portion of Item 6 to address security concerns in urban areas where access to a roof may be via the roof of an adjacent building.
This new language in Item 6 addresses a concern that was not specifically addressed in the code before. Getting back into the building should not be an issue because access to the roof is limited to maintenance personnel who should have keys.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E62-15	AM

Code Change No: E64-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s):	1010.1.9.5.1 (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.5.1)

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Delete without substitution:

1010.1.9.5.1 (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.5.1) Closet and bathroom doors in Group R-4 occupancies. In Group R-4 occupancies, closet doors that latch in the closed position shall be openable from inside the closet, and bathroom doors that latch in the closed position shall be capable of being unlocked from the ingress side.

Reason: This is proposed to be deleted because it is an inconsistent requirement. If there is a concern that a person receiving custodial care might lock themselves in a bathroom or closet, this should be required in Group I-1, not just Group R-4. Also, this should not be a overall minimum code requirement, but more an option for a facility to provide where needed. Literally this would applied to storage closets that are not used by residents and closets that you would not walk into at all.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This is eliminating a requirement for locks.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approve as Submitted

Committee Reason: While this might be a valid concern in some facilities for safety, the current provisions should not be applicable to just Group R-4. Free egress from occupied spaces is already required by the code. The current language could be read to apply to all closets, including reach-in closets.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
John	Woestman,	Kellen,	representing	Builders	Hardware	Manufacturers	Association (jwoestman@kellencompany.com) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

1010.1.9.5.1 Closet and bathroom doors in Group R-4 occupancies. In Group R-4 occupancies, closetCloset doors that latch in the closed position shall be openable from inside the closet, and bathroom doors that latch in the closed position shall be capable of being unlocked from the ingress side.

Commenter's Reason: This public comment retains portions of the text proposed by the original proposal to be deleted. Closets with a door that latches are commonly large enough for a person to get inside, especially a child. To reduce the potential of a person getting trapped inside a closet, closet doors should be able to be unlatched from the inside.

This situation reminds me of the tragedies associated with (very) old refrigerators with doors equipped with mechanical latches
– that's most household refrigerators manufactured prior to the Federal "Refrigerator Safety Act" of 1956 which required household refrigerators to be openable from the inside with a force of no more than 15 pounds. Too many children died when trapped inside these refrigerators. Before the use of magnetic sealing of refrigerator doors, refrigerator doors were held shut by mechanical latches. These mechanical latches usually did not have a means for unlatching the door from the inside of the refrigerator.

Final Action Results

E64-15	AMPC1

Code Change No: E66-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s):	1010.1.9.7; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.7)

Proponent: James Peterkin (jpeterki@heery.com)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.7 Delayed egress. Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving any occupancy except Group A, E and H in buildings that are 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.

Exception: Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving courtrooms within a Group A occupancies that are in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.

1010.1.9.7.1 Delayed egress locking system. The delayed egress locking system shall be installed and operated in accordance with all of the following:

The delay electronics of the delayed egress locking system shall deactivate upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or automatic fire detection system, allowing immediate, free egress.
The delay electronics of the delayed egress locking system shall deactivate upon loss of power controlling the lock or lock mechanism, allowing immediate free egress.
The delayed egress locking system shall have the capability of being deactivated at the fire command center and other approved locations.
An attempt to egress shall initiate an irreversible process that shall allow such egress in not more than 15 seconds when a physical effort to exit is applied to the egress side door hardware for not more than 3 seconds. Initiation of the irreversible process shall activate an audible signal in the vicinity of the door. Once the delay electronics have been deactivated, rearming the delay electronics shall be by manual means only.

Exception: Where approved, a delay of not more than 30 seconds is permitted on a delayed egress door.

The egress path from any point shall not pass through more than one delayed egress locking system.

Exception: In Group I-2 or I-3 occupancies, the egress path from any point in the building shall pass through not more than two delayed egress locking systems provided the combined delay does not exceed 30 seconds.

A sign shall be provided on the door and shall be located above and within 12 inches (305 mm) of the door exit hardware:
For doors that swing in the direction of egress, the sign shall read: PUSH UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 [30] SECONDS.
For doors that swing in the opposite direction of egress, the sign shall read: PULL UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 [30] SECONDS.
The sign shall comply with the visual character requirements in ICC A117.1.

Exception: Where approved, in Group I occupancies, the installation of a sign is not required where care recipients who because of clinical needs require restraint or containment as part of the function of the treatment area.

Emergency lighting shall be provided on the egress side of the door.
The delayed egress locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

Reason: A courthouse is a unique building type that is designed with three separate and distinct circulation systems – one for the public, one for the judiciary/secure staff, and one for in-custody inmates. The three circulation systems are segregated and they only meet in a single location, the courtrooms. The public enter the courtroom from the public corridor, the judges and court staff enter from the rear secure staff corridor and the prisoners enter from the holding area at the side. Because these groups must be kept separate for security reasons, it is necessary to lock the doors where these groups interface to prevent intermixing.
Standard courtroom design provides free egress for the public out the back of the courtroom with enough egress capacity to handle the entire occupant load of the courtroom. Doors leading to the prisoner interface are locked and fail secure, which is allowed by code. Since the courtrooms have an occupant load greater than 50 (up to approximately 120), these rooms are considered an "assembly occupancy" and require a second means of egress.
Industry practice has been to utilize the exit in the front of the courtroom as the second means of egress. This
egress generally also serves as the entrance/egress for the judge and court staff. (Please refer to the attached functional diagram).

To maintain the security separation of occupants, it is industry practice to equip this second means of egress with a delayed egress device which prevents any unauthorized person from gaining access to the secure staff areas.
A courtroom, unlike many other assembly occupancies, is a controlled environment. A bailiff is located within the courtroom when occupied by the public and/or prisoners. The bailiff, along with other court personnel, is equipped with a security access card that can override the delay.
As a precedent, all United States Federal courthouses are designed in this manner because the General Services Administration (the federal organization responsible for federal buildings/courthouses) has ruled that the Life Safety Code takes precedence over the building code with regards to egress requirements.
Another Assembly where it is common to see the use of delayed egress, even though prohibited by code, is airport terminals. Airport terminals are considered an Assembly Occupancy like the courtrooms, but the use of delayed egress devices are common in these buildings also because of security concerns.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
It is common to see these devices used within courthouses. Allowing this will not increase the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Disapproved

Committee Reason: Since courtrooms are assembly spaces, the provisions should be revised to allow for the delayed egress locking systems only on the 2nd way out of the room, not the main exit. This would allow for the security issues for the private judge's areas without an increased risk for the public in the gallery.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
Dave Frable, representing US General Services Administration; James Peterkin, representing self (jpeterki@heery.com) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

1010.1.9.7 Delayed egress. Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving any occupancy except Group A, E and H in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section
or an approved automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907.

Exception: Delayed egress locking systems shall shall be permitted to be installed on exit or exit access doors serving courtrooms within, other than the main exit or exit access door, that serve a Group A occupancies that are courtroom in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.

Commenter's Reason: The intent of this code change proposal is to permit the use of delayed egress system on door(s) other than the main entrance/exit door(s) from a courtroom. According to Chapter 3 in the IBC, courtrooms are considered Assembly occupancies. Therefore, delayed egress locking systems would not be permitted to be installed on any doors from a courtroom.
However, courtrooms are located within courthouses which are a unique building type that is designed with three separate and distinct circulation systems – one for the public, one for the judiciary/secure staff, and one for in-custody inmates. The three circulation systems are segregated and they only meet in a single location, the courtrooms. The public enter the courtroom from the public corridor, the judges and court staff enter from the secure corridor and the prisoners enter from the secure detainee area that is typically adjacent to the courtroom. Because each of these groups must be kept separate for security reasons, it is necessary to lock the doors where these groups interface to prevent intermixing.
A standard courtroom design (Please refer to diagram) provides free egress for the public from the main entrance/exit door(s) (the same entrance the public entered the courtroom) to the public circulation area. The door serving the detainee area (prisoner interface) is locked and fail secure, which is permitted by code. As stated above, since the courtrooms are considered an "assembly occupancy" and have an occupant load of 50 or more persons they require a second means of egress.
Industry practice has been to utilize the exit(s) in the front of the courtroom as the secondary means of egress. These egress door(s) also serve as the entrance/egress for the judge and court staff. (Please refer to diagram). To maintain the security separation of occupants, it is industry practice to equip these second means of egress door(s) with a delayed egress locking system which prevents any unauthorized person from gaining access to the secure corridor areas.
A courtroom, unlike many other assembly occupancies, is a controlled environment. A bailiff is located within the courtroom when occupied by the public and/or prisoners. The bailiff, along with other court personnel, is equipped with a security access card that can override the delay.
Permitting the use of a delayed egress system on door(s) other than the main entrance/exit door(s) from a courtroom will not adversely impact occupant safety and has been permitted and recognized by the National Fire Protection Association, Life Safety

Code, for several code cycles. In addition, the U.S. General Services Administration also permits the use of delayed egress systems on door(s) other than the main entrance/exit door(s) from a courtroom.

Final Action Results

E66-15	AMPC1

Code Change No: E68-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s):	1010.1.9.7; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.7)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.7 Delayed egress. Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving any occupancy except Group A, E and H Groups B, F, I, M, R, S and U occupancies in buildings that are 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.

Exception: Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving Group E occupancies that have an occupant load of 10 or fewer and that are in buildings that are 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..

1010.1.9.7.1 Delayed egress locking system. The delayed egress locking system shall be installed and operated in accordance with all of the following:

The delay electronics of the delayed egress locking system shall deactivate upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or automatic fire detection system, allowing immediate, free egress.
The delay electronics of the delayed egress locking system shall deactivate upon loss of power controlling the lock or lock mechanism, allowing immediate free egress.
The delayed egress locking system shall have the capability of being deactivated at the fire command center and other approved locations.
An attempt to egress shall initiate an irreversible process that shall allow such egress in not more than 15 seconds when a physical effort to exit is applied to the egress side door hardware for not more than 3 seconds. Initiation of the irreversible process shall activate an audible signal in the vicinity of the door. Once the delay electronics have been deactivated, rearming the delay electronics shall be by manual means only.

Exception: Where approved, a delay of not more than 30 seconds is permitted on a delayed egress door.

The egress path from any point shall not pass through more than one delayed egress locking system.

Exception: In Group I-2 or I-3 occupancies, the egress path from any point in the building shall pass through not more than two delayed egress locking systems provided the combined delay does not exceed 30 seconds.

A sign shall be provided on the door and shall be located above and within 12 inches (305 mm) of the door exit hardware:
For doors that swing in the direction of egress, the sign shall read: PUSH UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 1530] SECONDS.
For doors that swing in the opposite direction of egress, the sign shall read: PULL UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 [30] SECONDS.
The sign shall comply with the visual character requirements in ICC A117.1.

Exception: Where approved, in Group I occupancies, the installation of a sign is not required where care recipients who because of clinical needs require restraint or containment as part of the function of the treatment area.

Emergency lighting shall be provided on the egress side of the door.
The delayed egress locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

Reason: This proposal is in response to several requests to address the needs of small educational occupancies to help prevent wandering / elopement, especially for the very young, and for special needs students.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact unless the building owner chooses to install a delayed egress locking system.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified

Modify as follows:

1010.1.9.7 Delayed egress. Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving Group B, E, F, I, M, R, S and U occupancies in buildings that are equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section
or an approved automatic smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907.

Exception: Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving Group E occupancies that have an occupant load of 10 or fewer and are 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.

Committee Reason: There were two modification to this proposal. One modification was to delete the limit of 10 occupants. The proposed text was not clear as to if this was an entire facility or just one classroom. The requirements for sprinklers or smoke or heat detection is an improvement in the level of safety that should allow for a classroom with a higher occupant load to use this option for delayed egress locking systems. The second modification was to delete the new proposed exception and include Group E in the allowances for where delayed egress locking systems can be used. The exception no longer has any additional limits for where delayed egress locking systems can be used. This could be considered editorial based on the approval of the first modification.
Splitting the section into two parts improves clarity. Changing the text to say where these types of locks are permitted is clearer than listing where it is not permitted. Allowing Group E facilities to use delayed egress locking systems helps address the security concerns associated with wandering or 'trigger events' for preschool classes or classrooms for students with special needs.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
Jonathan Siu, City of Seattle Department of Planning & Development, representing Washington Association of Building Officials Technical Code Development Committee (jon.siu@seattle.gov) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Further modify as follows:

1010.1.9.7 Delayed egress. Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving Group B, E, F, I
,M, R,S and U occupancies the following occupancies in buildings that are 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:

Groups B, F, I, M, R, S and U occupancies.
Group E classrooms with an occupant load of less than 50.
Commenter's Reason: This public comment limits the use of delayed egress devices in E occupancies to classrooms with an occupant load less than 50, as opposed to assembly spaces in E occupancies.
The code says that assembly areas in schools get classified as E occupancies (Section 303.1.3). This means that multi- purpose rooms, auditoriums, gymnasiums, and similar spaces associated with a school are E occupancies.
This code change proposal, as modified by the committee, allows delayed egress hardware on every door in an E occupancy, which would include these assembly-type spaces. However, the committee reason statement only talks about classrooms, where there are fewer occupants. We agree it would be appropriate to allow delayed egress hardware on classroom doors, but we do not think it is appropriate to have delayed egress hardware in assembly areas. The proposed change (as modified) also conflicts with the requirements in Section 1010.1.10 for panic hardware.
The modification proposed in this public comment would take care of the both issues by limiting the delayed egress hardware to classroom doors (as appears to have been the intent of the proponents of the original code change), but adds an additional limitation that the classrooms with this hardware must also have an occupant load of less than 50, in order to eliminate the conflict with the panic hardware requirements.
The editorial modification to move the list of occupancies from the main paragraph to a bullet list was necessitated when the E occupancies were separated from the list, in order to eliminate any confusion over whether the sprinklers and alarm systems are required for all the listed occupancies.

Final Action Results

E68-15	AMPC1

Code Change No: E69-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1010.1.9.7; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.7

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.7 Delayed egress. Delayed egress locking systems shall be permitted to be installed on doors serving any occupancy except Group A, E and H in buildings that are equipped throughout with
an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or an approvedautomatic
smoke or heat detection system installed in accordance with Section 907. The locking system shall be installed and operated in accordance with all of the following:

The delay electronics of the delayed egress locking system shall deactivate upon actuation of the automatic sprinkler system or automatic fire detection system, allowing immediate, free egress.
The delay electronics of the delayed egress locking system shall deactivate upon loss of power controlling the lock or lock mechanism, allowing immediate free egress.
The delayed egress locking system shall have the capability of being deactivated at the fire command center and other approved locations.
An attempt to egress shall initiate an irreversible process that shall allow such egress in not more than 15 seconds when a physical effort to exit is applied to the egress side door hardware for not more than 3 seconds. Initiation of the irreversible process shall activate an audible signal in the vicinity of the door. Once the delay electronics have been deactivated, rearming the delay electronics shall be by manual means only.

Exception: Where approved, a delay of not more than 30 seconds is permitted on a delayed egress door.

The egress path from any point shall not pass through more than one delayed egress locking system.

Exception Exceptions:

In Group I-2 or I-3 occupancies, the egress path from any point in the building shall pass through not more than two delayed egress locking systems provided the combined delay does not exceed 30 seconds.
In Group I-1 or I-4 occupancies, the egress path from any point in the building shall pass through not more than two delayed egress locking systems provided the combined delay does not exceed 30 seconds and the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.

A sign shall be provided on the door and shall be located above and within 12 inches (305 mm) of the door exit hardware:

For doors that swing in the direction of egress, the sign shall read: PUSH UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 [30] SECONDS.

For doors that swing in the opposite direction of egress, the sign shall read: PULL UNTIL ALARM SOUNDS. DOOR CAN BE OPENED IN 15 [30] SECONDS.
The sign shall comply with the visual character requirements in ICC A117.1.

Exception: Where approved, in Group I occupancies, the installation of a sign is not required where care recipients who because of clinical needs require restraint or containment as part of the function of the treatment area.

Emergency lighting shall be provided on the egress side of the door.
The delayed egress locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

Reason: In Item 5, the new exception is proposed to be revised to include Group I-1 occupancies to allow up to two delayed egress systems. As in Group I-2, Group I-1 occupancies may need more than one delayed egress system. For example, if the Group I-1 occupancy is on the 2nd floor, or higher, in a building, a delayed egress system may be needed on the door to the exit stairway on that floor. And a second delayed egress locking system may be needed at the door to the exterior on the ground floor. In Group I-1 and I-4 an additional delayed egress locking system may be highly desirable to help reduce wandering or elopement by occupants. The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction
This is a design option that would allow two delayed egress locking systems in the means of egress, which would increase costs, but it is not a requirement.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The addition of Group I-1 and I-4 to the Exceptions in Item 5 provides for consistency in all Group I occupancies where there are concerns for wandering. With the total time limit staying at 30 seconds maximum, security concerns can be addressed without an increase in the level of risk for residents.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E69-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.9.8; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.8
Proponent: John Woestman, Kellen Company, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.8 Sensor release of electrically locked egress doors. The electric locks on sensor released doors located in a means of egress in buildings with an occupancy in Group A, B, E, I-1, I-2, I-4, M, R-1 or R-2 any occupancy except Group H and entrance doors to tenant spaces in occupancies in Group A, B, E, I-1, I-2, I-4, M, R-1 or R-2 any occupancy except Group H are permitted where installed and operated in accordance with all of the following criteria:

The sensor shall be installed on the egress side, arranged to detect an occupant approaching the doors. The doors shall be arranged to unlock by a signal from or loss of power to the sensor.
Loss of power to the lock or locking system shall automatically unlock the doors.
The doors shall be arranged to unlock from a manual unlocking device located 40 inches to 48 inches (1016 mm to 1219 mm) vertically above the floor and within 5 feet (1524 mm) of the secured doors. Ready access shall be provided to the manual unlocking device and the device shall be clearly identified by a sign that reads "PUSH TO EXIT." When operated, the manual unlocking device shall result in direct interruption of power to the lock—independent of other electronics—and the doors shall remain unlocked for not less than 30 seconds.
Activation of the building fire alarm system, where provided, shall automatically unlock the doors, and the doors shall remain unlocked until the fire alarm system has been reset.
Activation of the building automatic sprinkler system or fire detection system, where provided, shall automatically unlock the doors. The doors shall remain unlocked until the fire alarm system has been reset.
The door locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

Reason: This proposal revises the occupancy groups to allow this locking arrangement to be used in all occupancies except occupancy Group H. Code officials and specifiers have asked why this door locking option is allowed in only the currently listed occupancy groups. No reason is known other than the current allowed occupancies in Section 1010.1.9.8 are consistent with those in Section 1010.1.9.9, which a separate proposal revises.
Just a reminder, this locking arrangement facilitates immediate egress by sensing the approaching occupant and unlocking the electric lock on the door. In many applications, the occupant is unaware the door is electrically locked as the electrical locks unlock prior to the occupant reaching the door.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact unless the building owner chooses to install a delayed egress locking system.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: There was not technical justification for not allowing groups that were not currently listed to use the sensor release locking systems when this system is permitted for occupancies with higher occupant loads.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E70-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.9.8; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.8

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.8 Sensor release of electrically locked egress doors. The Sensor release of electric locks locking systems shall be permitted on sensor released doors located in a the means of egress in buildings with an occupancy in Group A, B, E, I-1, I-2, I-4, M, R-1 or R-2 and entrance doors to tenant spaces in occupancies in Group A, B, E, I-1, I-2, I-4, M, R-1 or R-2 are permitted where installed and operated in accordance with all of the following criteria:

The sensor shall be installed on the egress side, arranged to detect an occupant approaching the doors, and shall cause the electric locking system to unlock.
The sensor shall be installed on the egress side, arranged to detect an occupant approaching the doors. The doors electric locks shall be arranged to unlock by a signal from or loss of power to the sensor.
Loss of power to the lock or locking system shall automatically unlock the doors electric lock.
The doors shall be arranged to unlock from a manual unlocking device located 40 inches to 48 inches (1016 mm to 1219 mm) vertically above the floor and within 5 feet (1524 mm) of the secured doors. Ready access shall be provided to the manual unlocking device and the device shall be clearly identified by a sign that reads "PUSH TO EXIT." When operated, the manual unlocking device shall result in direct interruption of power to the electric lock—independent of other electronics—and the doors electric lock shall remain unlocked for not less than 30 seconds.
Activation of the building fire alarm system, where provided, shall automatically unlock the doors electric lock, and the doors electric lock shall remain unlocked until the fire alarm system has been reset.
Activation of the building automatic sprinkler system or fire detection system, where provided, shall automatically unlock the doors electric lock. The doors electric lock shall remain unlocked until the fire alarm system has been reset.
The door locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

Reason: Update 1010.1.9.8 to improve clarity and consistency in the language. The charging language is proposed to eliminate redundancy in this section. With revisions to the first sentence, text late in that sentence is redundant as entrance doors to tenant spaces are commonly in the means of egress. It is uncommon that tenant doors are not in the means of egress.
The revisions to the numbered items is to clarify the required functions of the electric locking system. In Item 1, the added text describes what the sensor is required to do upon detecting an approaching occupant. The revisions in the other items clarify requirements for this electrical locking system.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact. No technical revisions to these shall be permitted locking systems.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposal improves consistency of the terms used for this type of locking system.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E71-15	AS

Code Change No: E72-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s): 1010.1.9.9, 1010.1.10; (IFC [BE] 1010.1.9.9, 1010.1.10)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.9 Electromagnetically Door hardware release of electrically locked egress
doors. Doors Door hardware release of electric locking systems shall be permitted on doors in the means of egress with any occupancy except in Group H in buildings with an occupancy in Group A, B, E, I-1, I-2, I-4, M, R-1 or R-2 and doors to tenant spaces in Group A, B, E, I-1, I-2, I-4, M, R-1 or R-2 shall be permitted to be locked with an electromagnetic locking system where equipped with hardware that incorporates a built-in switch and where installed and operated in accordance with all of the following:

The door hardware that is affixed to the door leaf has an obvious method of operation that is readily operated under all lighting conditions.
The door hardware is capable of being operated with one hand and shall comply with Section 1010.1.9.5.
Operation of the door hardware directly interrupts the power to the electromagnetic lock and unlocks the door immediately.
Loss of power to the electric locking system automatically unlocks the door.
Where panic or fire exit hardware is required by Section 1010.1.10, operation of the panic or fire exit hardware also releases the electromagnetic electric lock.
The locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

1010.1.10 Panic and fire exit hardware. Doors serving a Group H occupancy and doors serving rooms or spaces with an occupant load of 50 or more in a Group A or E occupancy shall not be provided with a latch or lock other than panic hardware or fire exit hardware.

Exceptions:

A main exit of a Group A occupancy shall be permitted to be locking in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.3, Item 2.
Doors serving a Group A or E occupancy shall be permitted to
be electromagnetically electronically locked in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.9.

Electrical rooms with equipment rated 1,200 amperes or more and over 6 feet (1829 mm) wide, and that contain overcurrent devices, switching devices or control devices with exit or exit access doors, shall be equipped with panic hardware or fire exit hardware. The doors shall swing in the direction of egress travel.

Reason: This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments.
Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
This "special locking arrangement" allows for immediate egress with one-handed operation of the door hardware. Code officials and specifiers have asked why this option is allowed in only these occupancies. No reason is known other than the current allowed occupancies in Section 1010.1.9.9 match those in Section 1010.1.9.8.

Further, revisions clarify this section of the code to address required functions of all types of electrical locking systems which are operated (i.e. unlocked) by operation of the door hardware such as panic hardware, fire exit hardware, or door knobs or levers (where panic or fire exit hardware is not required or not utilized). Electromagnetic locks are the most common type of electrical locks, but not the only type of electric locking hardware which may be selected by the designer, specifier, and / or building owner or occupant.
Regardless of the type of electrical locking system, this section permits and requires the door hardware to be device which causes the electrical lock to unlock immediately, allowing egress.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact unless the building owner chooses to install these shall be permitted locking systems.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify proposal as follows:

1010.1.9.9 Door hardware release of electrically locked egress doors. Door hardware release of electric locking systems shall be permitted on doors in the means of egress with any occupancy except in Group H where installed and operated in accordance with all of the following:

The door hardware that is affixed to the door leaf has an obvious method of operation that is readily operated under all lighting conditions.
The door hardware is capable of being operated with one hand and shall comply with Section 1010.1.9.5.
Operation of the door hardware directly interrupts the power to the electromagnetic electric lock and unlocks the door immediately.
Loss of power to the electric locking system automatically unlocks the door.
Where panic or fire exit hardware is required by Section 1010.1.10, operation of the panic or fire exit hardware also releases the electric lock.
The locking system units shall be listed in accordance with UL 294.

Committee Reason: The modification to Item 3 is for the terminology to be consistent throughout the section and is consistent with the main proposal.
There was no technical justification for not allowing these types of locking systems in occupancies that have a lower risk than those listed. The other changes correlate and clarifies terminology.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E72-15	AM

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.9.10; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.10

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org); Edward Kulik, Chair, Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.10 Locking arrangements in buildings within correctional facilities. In occupancies in Groups A-2, A-3, A-4, B, E, F, I-2, I-3, M and S buildings within correctional and detention facilities, doors in means of egress serving rooms or spaces occupied by persons whose movements are controlled for security reasons shall be permitted to be locked where equipped with egress control devices that shall unlock manually and by not less than one of the following means:

Activation of an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.
Activation of an approved manual fire alarm box.
A signal from a constantly attended location.

Reason: This section was brought to the attention of the CTC Care committee because Group I-1 services are provided in jails, however, they were not in this list of locking arrangements for correctional facilities. Rather than add Group I-1 to this growing list, it seems more appropriate to state that this type of locking should be allowed in all portions of a correctional facility. In addition, this list of Groups is inconsistent with how correctional facilities is defined in Section 308.5. If this system should not be allowed in certain types of jails, it should be regulated by the Condition, not a list of possible uses.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.
The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website
at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This proposal is a clarification of requirements.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: There are multiple uses within correctional and detention facilities. The current list is not all inclusive. Elimination of the lists would allow for the detention and correctional facilities to address security needs appropriately.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E73-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.9.11; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.9.11

Proponent: John Terry, State of New Jersey- DCA, representing State of New Jersey - Department of Community Affairs- Division of Codes and Standards (jterry@dca.nj.gov)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.11 Stairway doors. Interior stairway means of egress stairway means of egress doors shall be openable from both sides without the use of a key or special knowledge or effort.

Exceptions:

Stairway discharge doors shall be openable from the egress side and shall only be locked from the opposite side.
This section shall not apply to doors arranged in accordance with Section 403.5.3.
In stairways serving not more than four stories, Stairway exit doors are permitted to be locked from the side opposite the egress side, provided they are openable from the egress side and capable of being unlocked simultaneously without unlatching upon a signal from the fire command center , if present, or a signal by emergency personnel from a single location inside the main entrance to the building.
Stairway exit doors shall be openable from the egress side and shall only be locked from the opposite side in Group B, F, M and S occupancies where the only interior access to the tenant space is from a single exit stairway where permitted in Section 1006.3.2.
Stairway exit doors shall be openable from the egress side and shall only be locked from the opposite side in Group R-2 occupancies where the only interior access to the dwelling unit is from a single exit stairway where permitted in Section 1006.3.2.

Reason: As currently written, the 2015 IBC allows stairway doors to be locked from the side opposite egress on stories one through four in Exception 3 of Section 1010.1.9.11 and in high rise buildings (typically seven stories and higher) in Section 403.5.3. By deleting the limitation on the number of stories in this section, stair doors on the fifth and sixth stories would be allowed to be locked from the non-egress side consistent with doors on all other floors.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal will have no impact on the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Deletion of the four story limit would address the current hole between the lowrise and highrise provisions for locking stairway doors (i.e., between 4 stories and 75 feet)..

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E74-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.10; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.10)

Proponent: William Koffel, representing WonDoor (wkoffel@koffel.com)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.9.11 Panic and fire exit hardware. Doors Swinging doors serving a Group H occupancy and swinging doors serving rooms or spaces with an occupant load of 50 or more in a Group A or E occupancy shall not be provided with a latch or lock other than panic hardware or fire exit hardware.

Exceptions:

A main exit of a Group A occupancy shall be permitted to be locking in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.3, Item 2.
Doors serving a Group A or E occupancy shall be permitted to be electromagnetically locked in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.9.

Electrical rooms with equipment rated 1,200 amperes or more and over 6 feet (1829 mm) wide, and that contain overcurrent devices, switching devices or control devices with exit or exit access doors, shall be equipped with panic hardware or fire exit hardware. The doors shall swing in the direction of egress travel.

Reason: UL 305 is the standard by which panic and fire exit hardware is typically listed. UL 305 applies to outward-opening doors and as such does not apply to the special doors addressed in Section 1010.1.4. However, some have interpreted the current text in 1010.1.10 to require panic hardware or fire exit hardware on special doors, such as special purpose horizontal sliding, accordian or folding doors. The proposed text clarifies that panic and fire exit hardware is required for pivoted or side-hinged swinging doors.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction The proposal clarifies existing code text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: To limit the panic hardware to swinging doors is consistent with the referenced standards and application for panic hardware.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E77-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E78-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.1.10; (IFC[BE] 1010.1.10)

Proponent: John Woestman, Kellen Company, representing Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMA) (jwoestman@kellencompany.com)

Revise as follows:

1010.1.10 Panic and fire exit hardware. Doors serving a Group H occupancy and doors serving rooms or spaces with an occupant load of 50 or more in a Group A or E occupancy shall not be provided with a latch or lock other than panic hardware or fire exit hardware.

Exceptions:

A main exit of a Group A occupancy shall be permitted to be locking in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.3, Item 2.
Doors provided with panic hardware or fire exit hardware and serving a Group A or E occupancy shall be permitted to be electromagnetically electrically locked in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.8 or 1010.1.9.9.

Electrical rooms with equipment rated 1,200 amperes or more and over 6 feet (1829 mm) wide, and that contain overcurrent devices, switching devices or control devices with exit or exit access doors, shall be equipped with panic hardware or fire exit hardware. The doors shall swing in the direction of egress travel.

Reason: Revised 2nd exception allows doors in the means of egress of Group A or E occupancy with an occupant load of 50 or more to be equipped with doors complying with IBC Section 1010.1.9.8 Sensor release of electrically locked doors. These door locking systems permitted by 1010.1.9.8 are required to detect an occupant approaching the door and cause the electrical locking system to unlock the door, allowing egress.
These locking arrangements facilitate immediate egress by sensing the approaching occupant and unlocking the electric lock on the door. In many applications, the occupant is unaware the door is electrically locked as the electrical locks unlock prior to the occupant reaching the door.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
No cost impact unless the building owner chooses to install a sensor release of electrically locked doors locking system.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The revision will allow for doors with panic hardware to use the sensor release of electrically locked doors. This increases design options.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E78-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E81-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1010.3, 1010.3.2 (New), 1010.3.1, 1010.3.2; (IFC[BE] 1010.3, 1010.3.2 (New), 1010.3.1,
1010.3.2)

Proponent: Dave Frable, representing US General Services Administration

Revise as follows:

1010.3 Turnstiles and Similar Devices. Turnstiles or similar devices that restrict travel to one direction shall not be placed so as to obstruct any required means of egress, except where permitted in accordance with Sections 1010.3.1, 1010.3.2 and 1010.3.3.

Exception:1010.3.1 Capacity. Each turnstile or similar device shall be credited with a capacity based on not more than a 50-person occupant load where all of the following provisions are met:
Each device shall turn free in the direction of egress travel when primary power is lost and on the manual release by an employee in the area.
Such devices are not given credit for more than 50 percent of the required egress capacity or width.
Each device is not more than 39 inches (991 mm) high.
Each device has not less than 161/ 2 inches (419 mm) clear width at and below a height of 39 inches (991 mm) and not less than 22 inches (559 mm) clear width at heights above 39 inches (991 mm).
1010.3.1.1 Clearwidth. Where located as part of an accessible route, turnstiles shall have not less than 36 inches (914 mm) clear at and below a height of 34 inches (864 mm), not less than 32 inches (813 mm) clear width between 34 inches (864 mm) and 80 inches (2032 mm) and shall consist of a mechanism other than a revolving device.

Add new text as follows:
1010.3.2 Security access turnstiles. Security access turnstiles that inhibit travel in the direction of egress utilizing a physical barrier shall be permitted to be considered as a component of the means of egress, provided that all the following criteria are met:
The building is protectedthroughout by anapproved, supervised automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.
Each security access turnstile lane configuration has a minimum clear passage width of 22 inches (560 mm).
Any security access turnstile lane configuration providing a clear passage width of less than 32 inches (810 mm) shall be credited with a maximum egress capacity of 50 persons.
Any security access turnstile lane configuration providing a clear passage width of 32 in. (810 mm) or more shall be credited with a maximum egress capacity as calculated in accordance with Section 1005.
Each secured physical barriershall automatically retract or swing to an unobstructed open positionin the direction of egress, under each of thefollowingconditions:
Upon loss of power to the turnstile or any part of the access control system that secures the physical barrier.
Upon actuation of a readily accessible and clearly identified manual release device that results in direct interruption of power to each secured physical barrier, remains in the open position for not less than 30 seconds.
The manual release decice shall be positioned at one of the following locations:

5.2.1	The manual release device is located on the egress side of each security access turnstile lane.
5.2.2.	The manual release device is located at an approved location where it can be actuated by an employee assigned to the area at all times that the building is occupied.
Upon actuation of the building fire alarm system, if provided, the physical barrier remains in the open position until the fire alarm system is manually reset.

Exception: Actuation of a manual fire alarm boxes.

Upon actuation of the building automatic sprinkler or fire detection system, andfor which the physical barrier remains in the open position until the fire alarm system is manually reset.

Revise as follows:

1010.3.1 1010.3.3 High turnstile. Turnstiles more than 39 inches (991 mm) high shall meet the requirements for revolving doors or the requirements of Section 1010.3.2 for security access turnstiles.

1010.3.2 1010.3.4 Additional door. Where serving an occupant load greater than 300, each turnstile that is not portable shall have a side-hinged swinging door that conforms to Section 1010.1 within 50 feet (15 240 mm).

Exception: A side-hinged swinging door is not required at security access turnstiles that comply with Section 1010.3.2.

Reason: Manufacturers of turnstile devices have expanded into the security access control market and currently have products that have physical barrier leaves that restrict access into and out of buildings. These devices can vary in height and sophistication to address building security concerns that may not meet safety requirements related to the means of egress. Typically, these turnstile devices are located at building entrances and elevator lobbies. The current requirements for turnstiles apply historically to the "three arm" waist-high turnstiles for entertainment or transportation venues and do not apply to the new installations. Currently, the building official is left to evaluate these new modern turnstiles to determine compliance with the egress requirements in the IBC. The intent of the revision is to provide guidance on evaluating these new modern turnstiles. Turnstiles on the market can be as narrow as 22 inches. For turnstiles that are less than 32 inches, there are additional capacity issues that need to be considered. The fail safe provisions for overriding the turnstile access restrictions are derived from existing code provisions (e.g., delayed egress locks and forces to open doors).

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction
The intent of this code change is to provide additional requirements for new modern turnstiles used for security access in buildings. This code change will probably increase construction costs due to these new requirements; however, the new requirements will enhance overall building safety when these security access turnstiles are installed in a building.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Security is not required in many places where it was never thought of before. A new type of gate limiter is commonly used. This new proposed language would address egress concerns at those locations. This is a good update for the codes.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E81-15	AS

Code Change No: E82-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s):	1011.6; (IFC[BE] 1011.6)

Proponent: Gregory Keeler, representing Self (design_tech@windstream.net)

Revise as follows:

1011.6 Stairway landings. There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway. The width of landings shall be not less than the width of stairways served. Every landing shall have a minimum width measured perpendicular to the direction of travel equal to the width of the stairway. Where the stairway has a straight run the depth need not exceed shall be a minimum of 48 inches (1219 mm).
Doors opening onto a landing shall not reduce the landing to less than one-half the required width. When fully open, the door shall not project more than 7 inches (178 mm) into a landing. Where wheelchair spaces are required on the stairway landing in accordance with Section 1009.6.3, the wheelchair
space shall not be located in the required width of the landing and doors shall not swing over the wheelchair spaces.

Exception: Where stairways connect stepped aisles to cross aisles or concourses, stairway landings are not required at the transition between stairways and stepped aisles constructed in accordance with Section 1029.

Reason: The current code language does not establish a minimum depth/run for a landing due to the permissive language. This proposal will stipulate the minimum depth/run.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
There could be a very slight increase in construction costs if the current language isn't interpreted as establishing a minimum landing depth/run.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Disapproved
Committee Reason: The change is not needed. The current language already sets a minimum size.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
Lee Kranz, City of Bellevue, WA, representing Washington Association of Building Officials Technical Code Development Committee (lkranz@bellevuewa.gov) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

1011.6 Stairway landings. There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway. The width of landings, measured perpendicular to the direction of travel, shall be not less than the width of stairways served. Every landing shall have a minimum width depth, measured perpendicular parallel to the direction of travel, equal to the width of the stairway. Where the stairway has a straight run the depth shall be a minimum of or 48 inches (1219 mm), whichever is less. Doors opening onto a landing shall not reduce the landing to less than one-half the required width. When fully open, the door shall not project more than 7

inches (178 mm) into a landing. Where wheelchair spaces are required on the stairway landing in accordance with Section 1009.6.3, the wheelchair space shall not be located in the required width of the landing and doors shall not swing over the wheelchair spaces.

Exception: Where stairways connect stepped aisles to cross aisles or concourses, stairway landings are not required at the transition between stairways and stepped aisles constructed in accordance with Section 1029.

Commenter's Reason: Section 1011.6 does not specify the minimum depth requirement for stairway landings. This public comment modifies the original proposal to clarify the minimum depth and width for all stairway landings. The commentary text and plan view on page 10-74 of the 2012 IBC Commentary is erroneous because it says that "the minimum size (width and depth) of all landings in a stairway is determined by the actual width of the stairway". The minimum width of landings is specified but the minimum depth is not. The code currently says that landings serving a straight run stairway need not exceed 48" but does not indicate the minimum depth. This modification specifies that the minimum depth of the landing in the direction of travel shall be equal to the width of the stair or 48" whichever is less.

Final Action Results

E82-15	AMPC1

Back

Code Change No: E84-15

Original Proposal

Section(s): 1011.10; (IFC[BE] 1011.10)

Proponent: David Cooper, representing Stairbuilders and Manufacturers Association (coderep@stairways.org)

Revise as follows:

1011.10 Spiral stairways. Spiral stairways are permitted to be used as a component in the means of egress only within dwelling units or from a space not more than 250 square feet (23 m2) in area and serving not more than five occupants, or from technical production areas in accordance with Section 410.6.

2

A spiral stairway shall have a 71/ , 63/4 inch (191 171 mm) minimum clear tread depth at a point 12
inches (305 mm) from the narrow edge walkline. The risers shall be sufficient to provide a headroom of 78 inches (1981 mm) minimum, but riser height shall not be more than 91/2 inches (241 mm). The minimum stairway clear width at and below the handrail shall be 26 inches (660 mm).

Reason: We will try again in this cycle to prevent the elimination of spiral stairways!
A similar proposal was submitted in the last cycle that was misunderstood and inappropriately disapproved.
Prior to the addition of 1011.4 Walkline and related changes in 1011.5.2 Riser height and tread depth, the tread depth of both rectangular treads and winder treads was measured "square to the leading edge". This measurement method and the 7½ inch tread depth for spiral stairs predates the ICC codes. Since that time the method fo measuring spiral stair tread depth, inthe code, has changed with the definition of winder. Spiral treads are winder treads as defined in the code.

Winder. A tread with nonparallel edges
Winder tread depth is measured "...between the vertical planes of the foremost projection of adjacent treads at the interactions with the walkline...". The change in the method of measurement results in a smaller dimension, for the same tread, that is ¾ inch smaller intread depth as illustrated in figure 1. The figure also illustrates the elements of spiral stair tread geometry. What is critical to understand is that if the code is not changed, each tread in the typical spiral stairway would need to be increased by ¾ inch from the longstanding accepted practice.

Caption: This standard layout assures accommodation of the required headroom as the stair passes under the typical platform at the top of the stairway.

Why does the spiral tread depth need to be increased?
The proposed dimension change from 7½ to 6¾ inches results in no change and preserves what has been the industry standard for the manufacture of spiral stairways since the legacy codes. Not to stir the pot but the spiral stairway code survived the long debate and compromise on tread depth without change for good reason. Spiral stairways were discussed in the debate and remain unchanged, in the code because of their recognized benefit of saving space in certain limited situations. One of the limited areas is within residential dwelling units. A similar proposal changing the tread depth from 7½ inches to 6¾ inches was approved in the 2015 cycle of the IRC. Why not continue to coordinate? There is no substantiation for the action taken in the last cycle to change this long standing standard, and gravely restrict manufactures.

On what grounds should spiral stairs be eliminated?
Not approving this proposal will result in undue costs for the limited number of stairs that will comply with code when the riser height can be maximized. Please keep in mind that no substantiation was presented of the need for increased tread depth in spiral stairways. In fact spiral stairs actually have deeper treads than most stairs, adjacent to the handrail on the outside where the user walks. The currently required, additional ¾ inches of tread depth increase, inadvertently approved in the last cycle, and changed in the long accepted standard for a typical 360 degree stairway will add more than one and one third treads to to each 13 tread stairway rotation. This will increasing the rotation by more than 36 degrees or 10% making it impossible in most situations to achieve the required headroom of 78 inches. Unchanged the IBC will all but eliminate spiral stairways. Please approve this proposal.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
In fact as proven in the supporting statement above, this proposal will drastically reduce the cost of construction by not eliminating space saving spiral stairs from most applications where the intent of the code is to allow their use. Space saved = $ saved.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify proposal as follows:

1011.10 Spiral stairways. Spiral stairways are permitted to be used as a component in the means of egress only within dwelling units or from a space not more than 250 square feet (23 m2) in area and serving not more than five
occupants, or from technical production areas in accordance with Section 410.6.
A spiral stairway shall have a 6 3/4 inch (171 mm) minimum clear tread depth at a point 12 inches (305 mm) from the walkline narrow edge. The risers shall be sufficient to provide a headroom of 78 inches (1981 mm) minimum, but riser height shall not be more than 91 /2 inches (241 mm). The minimum stairway clear width at and below the handrail shall be 26 inches (660 mm).

Committee Reason: The modification is a correction for the language on what to measure too. The distance is from the narrow edge to the walk line.
The change coordinates with how spiral stairways are measured in the IRC. Since the tread depth is measured on the walk line, while the dimension is less, the overall size of the tread will not change from when the measurement was taken perpendicular to the riser.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E84-15	AM

Back

Code Change No: E85-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1011.11, 1014.1; (IFC[BE] 1011.11, 1014.1)

Proponent: David Cooper, representing Stairbuilders and Manufacturers Association (coderep@stairways.org)

Revise as follows:

1011.11 Handrails. Stairways Flights of stairways shall have handrails on each side and shall comply with Section 1014. Where glass is used to provide the handrail, the handrail shall comply with Section 2407.

Exceptions:

Stairways Flights of stairways within dwelling units and flights of spiral stairways are permitted to have a handrail on one side only.
Decks, patios and walkways that have a single change in elevation where the landing depth on each side of the change of elevation is greater than what is required for a landing do not require handrails.
In Group R-3 occupancies, a change in elevation consisting of a single riser at an entrance or egress door does not require handrails.
Changes in room elevations of three or fewer risers within dwelling units and sleeping units in Group R-2 and R-3 do not require handrails.

1014.1 Where required. Handrails serving flights of stairways, ramps, stepped aisles and ramped aisles shall be adequate in strength and attachment in accordance with Section 1607.8. Handrails required for flights of stairways by Section 1011.11 shall comply with Sections 1014.2 through 1014.9. Handrails required for ramps by Section 1012.8 shall comply with Sections 1014.2 through 1014.8. Handrails for stepped aisles and ramped aisles required by Section 1029.15 shall comply with Sections 1014.2
through 1014.8.

Reason: Other than required handrail extensions, handrails are not required at the outside periphery of landings. However long before we get to 1014.6 Handrail extensions, the use of the defined term "stairways" in sections 1011.11 and 1014.1, supports the interpretation that handrails are required at landings because by definition a stairway includes landings.

Stairway. One or more flights of stairs, either exterior or interior, with the necessary landings and platforms connecting therm, to form a continuous and uninterrupted passage from one level to another.

The problem becomes more apparent when we look at 1014.4 Continuity. Unlike continuity in the IRC there is no limit related to the flight. Confusion is created when 1014.4 is considered with the other handrail section references to stairways as revised in the proposal above. This is a particular problem when considering residential applications.
This proposal provides a simple solution by substituting the correct term "flights of stairways" for "stairways" and clarifies the intent of the code. The term flights of stairways is used throughout the code and in particular within 1014.6 Handrail extensions.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal requires no additional resources and therefore does not affect the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Using the defined term, flights of stairways, clarifies the handrail required locations. Handrails should not be required along landings.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E85-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1011.16 (IFC[BE] 1011.16)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1011.16 Ladders. Permanent ladders shall not serve as a part of the means of egress from occupied spaces within a building. Permanent ladders shall be constructed in accordance with Section 306.5 of the International Mechanical Code. Permanent ladders shall be permitted to provide access to the following areas:

Spaces frequented only by personnel for maintenance, repair or monitoring of equipment.
Nonoccupiable spaces accessed only by catwalks, crawl spaces, freight elevators or very narrow passageways.
Raised areas used primarily for purposes of security, life safety or fire safety including, but not limited to, observation galleries, prison guard towers, fire towers or lifeguard stands.
Elevated levels in Group U not open to the general public.
Nonoccupied roofs that are not required to have stairway access in accordance with Section 1011.12.1. 6.	Ladders shall be constructed Where permitted to access equipment and appliances in accordance with
Section 306.5 of the International Mechanical Code.

Reason: Section 306.5 of the IMC provides guidance on where ladders can be used to access equipment and for the technical criteria to construct the ladder (see the reason of the original change for text). The concern is the exact wording of Section 1009.18, Item 6. The list in Section 1011.6 is locations where ladders can be used. Item 6 is revised to limit the reference to where the ladders are permitted in IMC Section 306.5. How ladders are to be constructed is moved to the base paragraph so it is clear what technical requirements are to be followed where a ladder is provided in any of the 6 locations.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This proposal is a clarification of current requirements.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The construction requirements are moved to the main text. The 6 items now only list the where ladders are permitted. This improves clarity in the code..

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E86-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1013.2; (IFC[BE] 1013.2)

Proponent: Stephen DiGiovanni, Clark County Building Department, representing Southern Nevada Chapter of ICC (sdigiovanni@clarkcountynv.gov)

Revise as follows:

1013.2 Floor-level exit signs in Group R-1. Where exit signs are required in Group R-1 occupancies by Section 1013.1, additional low-level exit signs shall be provided in all areas serving guest rooms in Group R-1 occupancies and shall comply with Section 1013.5.

The bottom of the sign shall be not less than 10 inches (254 mm) nor more than 12 18 inches (305 455 mm) above the floor level. Thesignshall be flush mounted to the door or wall. Where mounted on the wall, the edge of the sign shall be within 4 inches (102 mm) of the door frame on the latch side.

Reason: The base code provides just a 2-inch tolerance for where the bottom of required low-energy exit signs must be located. This 2-inch window is often challenging for designers and property owners due to field conditions or desired interior finish and trim. For example, several high-end resort properties have installed 12-inch tall base boards in the exit access corridors of the hotels. The base code requirement that the bottom of the sign be located within 10- to 12- inches above the floor level would create issues for these facilities.
The proposed amendment is to allow the bottom of the required low-level exit signs to be located between 10- and 18- inches of the floor level. The additional 6 inches provides sufficient 'wiggle room' for designers and owners. Further, there is no impact on the level of life safety of the occupants of the Group R-1 occupancies since the low-level exit signs will still be visible below a smoke layer from a fire (in the zone in which the occupants would presumably be crawling.)
NFPA 101 (Life Safety Code), Section 7.10.1.6 permits the bottom of low-level exit signs to be installed between 6- and 18- inches above the floor level. Therefore, there is another code standard that allows the bottom of the low-level exit signs to be installed up to 18 inches above the floor level. Although NFPA 101, Section 7.10.1.6 permits the bottom of the low-level exit signs to be as low as 6-inches above the floor level, this proposal does not change the base IBC's requirement that the bottom of the low- level exit signs be within 10-inches above the floor level because ICC A117.1, Section 404.2.9 requires door surfaces within 10 inches of the floor to be a smooth surface for the full width of the door. There is no reason to have the low-level exit sign installed on the door must be at least 10 inches above the floor level in order to comply with ICC A117.1.
This proposal address unique designs or systems not anticipated in the code. Further, this proposal is consistent with the upper bounds permitted by another national code (NFPA 101 Life Safety Code).

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal provides for more flexibility in how to meet the requirements for floor level exit signs.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The additional height permitted for the bottom of the floor level exit signs improves flexibility. The height is consistent with the listing of the signs. This will reduce conflicts with accessibility requirements for bottom rails on doors. This is coordinated with the requirements for low level exit signs in NFPA 101.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E87-15	AS

Code Change No: E89-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1013.4, 1111.3; (IFC[BE] 1013.4)

Proponent: Dominic Marinelli, representing United Spinal Association (DMarinelli@accessibility- services.com)

Revise as follows:

1013.4 Raised character and braille exit signs. A sign stating EXIT in visual characters, raised characters and braille and complying with ICC A117.1 shall be provided adjacent to each door to an area of refuge providing direct access to a stairway, an exterior area for assisted rescue, an exit stairway or ramp, an exit passageway and the exit discharge.

1111.3 Other signs. Signage indicating special accessibility provisions shall be provided as shown.

Each assembly area required to comply with Section 1108.2.7 shall provide a sign notifying patrons of the availability of assistive listening systems. The sign shall comply with ICC A117.1 requirements for visual characters and include the International Symbol of Access for Hearing Loss.

Exception: Where ticket offices or windows are provided, signs are not required at each assembly area provided that signs are displayed at each ticket office or window informing patrons of the availability of assistive listening systems.

At each door to an area of refuge providing direct access to the stairway, an exterior area for assisted rescue, an egress exit stairway, exit passageway and exit discharge, signage shall be provided in accordance with Section 1013.4.
At areas of refuge, signage shall be provided in accordance with Section 1009.11.
At exterior areas for assisted rescue, signage shall be provided in accordance with Section 1009.11.
At two-way communication systems, signage shall be provided in accordance with Section 1009.8.2.
In interior exit stairways and ramps, floor level signage shall be provided in accordance with Section 1023.9.
Signs identifying the type of access provided on amusement rides required to be accessible by Section 1110.4.8 shall be provided at entries to queues and waiting lines. In addition, where accessible unload areas also serve as accessible load areas, signs indicating the location of the accessible load and unload areas shall be provided at entries to queues and waiting lines. These directional sign characters shall meet the visual character requirements in accordance with ICC A117.1.

Reason: The intent is coordination with the a revision to the next edition of the ICC A117.1 standard for tactile exit signage, Section 504.10.
The point of the tactile exit signage is to let a visually impaired person know what door they should enter to exit the building. When a stairway is accessed through an area of refuge, this signage is appropriate. Where the area of refuge is at the front of an elevator with standby power, this is not appropriate. Many lobbies have double doors with hold open devices, so there is also the question about where would be the correct location for this signage. This change in language will effectively not require the tactile exit signage at an elevator lobby.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This is a possible reduction in signage.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal will coordinate with the ICC A117.1 revision to tactile exit signage that will be in the next edition. Tactile 'exit' signage is an important part of way finding for persons with vision impairments. Therefore, providing a tactile 'exit' signage at an area of refuge in front of an elevator that does not have direct access to an exit stairway is not good direction.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E89-15	AS

Code Change No: E90-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1013.6.3; (IFC[BE] 1013.6.3)

Proponent: John Williams, CBO, Chair, representing Adhoc Health Care Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1013.6.3 Power source. Exit signs shall be illuminated at all times. To ensure continued illumination for a duration of not less than 90 minutes in case of primary power loss, the sign illumination means shall be connected to an emergency power system provided from storage batteries, unit equipment or an on-site generator. The installation of the emergency power system shall be in accordance with Chapter 27. Group I-2 Condition 2 exit sign illumination shall not be provide by unit equipment batteries only.

Exceptions Exception:

Approved exit sign illumination means that provide continuous illumination independent of external power sources for a duration of not less than 90 minutes, in case of primary power loss, are not required to be connected to an emergency electrical system.
Group I-2 Condition 2 exit sign illumination shall not be provided by unit equipment battery only.

Reason: This exception is a requirement for Group I-2 that exceeds the base paragraph requirements. It is proposed to be moved to the main paragraph to make it arequirement. As an exception itwould beachoice. This requirement was added by E103-12 AMPC.

A correlativechange isplannedfortheGroup Bcycle toIFC Chapter 11.

1104.5.1 Emergency power duration and installation. Emergency power for means of egress illumination shall be provided in accordance with Section 604. In other than Group I-2, emergency power shall be provided for not less than 60 minutes for systems requiring emergency power. In Group I-2, essential electrical systems shall comply with Sections 1105.5.1 and 1105.5.2.
Means of egress. In addition to the means of egress requirements in Section 1104, Group I-2 facilities shall meet the means of egress requirements in Section 1105.5.1 through 1105.5.8.
Exit signs and emergency illumination. The power system for exit signs and emergency illumination for the means of egress shall provide power for not less than 90 minutes and consist of storage batteries, unit equipment or an on-site generator.
Emergency power for operationalneeds. The essential electrical system shall be capable of supplying services in accordance with NFPA 99.

The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/AHC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is a movement of requirements only, therefore, there is no change in cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The power source requirements for hospital exit signs is a requirement for hospitals, therefore it is appropriate to move it to the main text. Exceptions are options, so a hospital could choose not to do this as currently written.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E90-15	AS

Code Change No: E92-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section: 1015.3 (IFC[BE] 1015.3)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1015.3 Height. Required guards shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) high, measured vertically as follows:

From the adjacent walking surfaces.
On stairways and stepped aisles , from the line connecting the leading edges of the tread nosings .
On ramps and ramped aisles , from the ramp surface at the guard .

Exceptions:

For occupancies in Group R-3 not more than three stories above grade in height and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2 not more than three stories above grade in height with separate means of egress, required guards shall be not less than 36 inches (914 mm) in height measured vertically above the adjacent walking surfaces or adjacent fixedseating.
For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R- 2, guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.
For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, where the top of the guard also serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs , the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.
The guard height in assembly seating areas shall comply with Section 1029.16 as applicable.
Along alternating tread devices and ships ladders, guards where the top rail also serves as a handrail shall have height not less than 30 inches (762 mm) and not more than 34 inches (864 mm), measured vertically from the leading edge of the device tread nosing .

Reason: The purpose of this proposal is coordination between the IBC and IRC. The phrase 'or adjacent fixed seating' was in exception 1 to coordinate with the provisions for guard height in the IRC. Previous edition of the IBC and IRC required guards to be placed adjacent to fixed seating that occurs on areas such as decks where the seat and guard are built integral with the deck. At those locations the guard height was measured from that seat. The requirement to measure from the fixed seating has been removed from the IBC and IRC.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re- assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled Climbable Guards. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction
This proposal could result in a reduction of the required guard height. This is coordination with the IRC.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Deletion of 'or adjacent fixed seating' in Exception 1 is a coordination with revisions that occurred in the IRC last cycle.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E92-15	AS

Code Change No: E94-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1015.3 (IFC[BE] 1015.3)

Proponent: Jay Wallace, The Boeing Company, representing The Boeing Company (jay.s.wallace@boeing.com)

Revise as follows:

1015.3 Height. Required guards shall be not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) high, measured vertically as follows:

From the adjacent walking surfaces.
On stairways and stepped aisles, from the line connecting the leading edges of the tread nosings.
On ramps and ramped aisles, from the ramp surface at the guard.

Exceptions:

For occupancies in Group R-3 not more than three stories above grade in height and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2 not more than three stories above grade in height with separate means of egress, required guards shall be not less than 36 inches (914 mm) in height measured vertically above the adjacent walking surfaces or adjacent fixed seating.
For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R-2, guards on the open sides of stairs shall have a height not less than 34 inches (864 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.
For occupancies in Group R-3, and within individual dwelling units in occupancies in Group R- 2, where the top of the guard also serves as a handrail on the open sides of stairs, the top of the guard shall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.
The guard height in assembly seating areas shall comply with Section 1029.16 as applicable.
Along alternating tread devices and ships ladders, guards where the top rail also serves as a handrail shall have height not less than 30 inches (762 mm) and not more than 34 inches (864 mm), measured vertically from the leading edge of the device tread nosing.
In Group F occupancies, where exit access stairways serve three stories or less and such stairs are not open to the public, wherethe top of the guardalsoserves as a handrail, the top of the guardshall be not less than 34 inches (864 mm) and not more than 38 inches (965 mm) measured vertically from a line connecting the leading edges of the treads.

Reason: Federal OSHA requirements restrict industrial stairway guard height to a maximum of 34"; it also intends that the top rail will be used as a handrail. The IBC range for handrails is 34 to 38 inches but also requires a guard at 42". This proposal attempts to find a reasonable middle ground making at least one solution acceptable to both IBC and OSHA requirements for non-egress stairways in factory type settings.
Factory workers are often required to carry out full range of motion activities and access work areas in tight spaces and sometimes maneuver into awkward positions. Their work often requires them to be more mobile and more athletic than their office sitting counterparts enabling them to negotiate a set of stairs with greater agility. They become very familiar with their workplace and like many of us, may spend more time on the job than they do at home.
The IBC recognizes that familiarity is a component of safe stairway design as reduced guard height and the use of the top guard rail as a handrail is already allowed for Group R-3 and in individual dwelling units of R-2 (see Exception 3 of this same section) where occupants normally experience extended time and acquire familiarity with stairway construction details in contrast to those in other Group R occupancies where visitors and residents are usually temporary. Granted, occupants in Group R occupancies may consume alcohol and other substances which could impair their ability to negotiate a set of stairs but such behavior is typically not allowed in Group F occupancies.
The three floor limit proposed is borrowed from Exception 3 to maintain the same level of safety as has been previously approved for use in the code. Exception 3 uses the term story stating that the exception is limited to 3 stories in height. This proposal limits floors to three instead of stories because the term floor in Group F correlates better with stories in Group R. In Group F, stairways could run between stories or within a single story to multiple levels of mezzanines or platforms located further above the ground floor than intended.
The focus of this proposal is on Factory workers on exit access stairways. These stairs are not intended nor required for emergency egress.

They are not shared with other occupancies such as Group B or Group S which may be associated with a Group F. However, there is the reality that maintenance service may be required in these factory areas and so this proposal recognizes that maintenance service personnel may use the stairs. This distinct group of users is also highly accustomed to the facility and able to negotiate such construction details with ease.
This proposed change resolves conflicting requirements between OSHA and the IBC by applying an acceptable solution already approved for other occupancies where occupants experience similar long term exposure and familiarity.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
For the condition this proposal addresses, the IBC requires a 42 inch high guard and a handrail between 34 and 38 inches high. Construction cost is inherently less when the handrail and guard are one and the same.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The new exception 6 will address a specific need regarding guard heights along stairways in factories.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E94-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E96-15

Original Proposal

Section(s): 1015.6 (IFC[BE] 1015.6), 1015.7 (IFC[BE] 1015.6), IMC [BE] 304.11

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1015.6 Mechanical equipment, systems and devices. Guards shall be provided where various components that require service are located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor, roof or grade below. The guard shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) beyond each end of such components. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a sphere 21 inches (533 mm) in diameter.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are affixed for use during the entire roof covering lifetime. The devices shall be reevaluated for possible replacement when the entire roof covering is replaced. The devices shall be placed not more than 10 feet (3048 mm) on center along hip and ridge lines and placed not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) from the roof edge or open side of the walking surface.

Exception: Guards are not required where fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.

1015.7 Roof access. Guards shall be provided where the roof hatch opening is located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor, roof or grade below. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a sphere 21 inches (533 mm) in diameter.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are affixed for use during the entire roof covering lifetime. The devices shall be reevaluated for possible replacement when the entire roof covering is replaced. The devices shall be placed not more than 10 feet (3048 mm) on center along hip and ridge lines and placed not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) from the roof edge or open side of the walking surface.

Exception: Guards are not required where fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.

2015 International Mechanical Code Revise as follows:
[BE] 304.11 Guards. Guards shall be provided where various components that require service and roof hatch openings are located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor, roof, or grade below.
The guard shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) beyond each end of components that require service. The top of the guard shall be located not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) above the elevated surface adjacent to the guard. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a 21-inch-

diameter (533 mm) sphere and shall comply with the loading requirements for guards specified in the International Building Code.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are affixed for use during the entire lifetime of the roof covering. The devices shall be re-evaluated for possible replacement when the entire roof covering is replaced. The devices shall be placed not more than 10 feet (3048 mm) on center along hip and ridge lines and placed not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) from roof edges and the open sides of walking surfaces.

Exception: Guards are not required where fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.

Reason: Section 306.5.1 of the IMC requires work platforms with guards for equipment and appliances installed on roofs with a slope 3 in 12 and greater, thus, the exception to Section 304.11 appears to apply only to roofs that are flat and up to 2 in 12 slope. The problem derives from the language referring to placement of anchors along hip or ridge lines and along roof edges. This language is not necessary for the application of the exception. Each building roof system and the equipment upon that roof system that might require access will be different and the anchors needed along with their locations will differ as well. As presently worded there has been some confusion on application and the location requirements spaced every ten feet require unnecessary expense. This proposal eliminates confusion by deleting the unnecessary language leaving the application of the referenced standard to be applied on a case by case basis to fit the specific activities that may occur on the individual roof.
There is another change from this committee to split IMC 304.11 to make it consistent with the IRC that copies this exception.
It is the intent of this committee for these changes to be coordinated.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal will decrease the cost of construction in those cases where fall arrest anchorage devices would be installed instead of guards by providing increased flexibility in locating the anchors.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify proposal as follows:

1015.6 Mechanical equipment, systems and devices. Guards shall be provided where various components that require service are located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor, roof or grade below. The guard shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) beyond each end of such components. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a sphere 21 inches (533 mm) in diameter.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.

1015.7 Roof access. Guards shall be provided where the roof hatch opening is located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm)
above the floor, roof or grade below. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a sphere 21 inches (533 mm) in diameter.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.

[BE] 304.11 Guards. Guards shall be provided where various components that require service and roof hatch openings are located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor, roof, or grade below. The guard shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) beyond each end of components that require service. The top of the guard shall be located not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) above the elevated surface adjacent to the guard. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a 21-inch-diameter (533 mm) sphere and shall comply with the loading requirements for guards specified in the International Building Code.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.
Committee Reason: The modification was to delete the requirement for ‘permanent’ for the anchors. The ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 standard dos allow for non-permanent anchors.
The proposal as a whole, with the deletion, will allow for anchor systems to be designed based what would best serve the particular project.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E96-15	AM

Back

Code Change No: E100-15

Original Proposal

Section: 202, 1017.3; (IFC[BE[ 1017.3)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS

COMMON PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL. That portion of the exit access travel distance measured from the most remote point within a story of each room, area or space to that point where the occupants have separate and distinct access to two exits or exit access doorways.

1017.3 Measurement. Exit access travel distance shall be measured from the most remote point within a story of each room, area or space along the natural and unobstructed path of horizontal and vertical egress travel to the entrance to an exit.
Exception: In open parking garages, exit access travel distance is permitted to be measured to the closest riser of an exit access stairway or the closest slope of an exit access ramp.

Reason: This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
The definition of "common path of egress travel" was modified for the 2015 Edition of the IBC. The intent of the change was to clarify the common path of egress travel and exit access travel distance are measured in the same way. The terminus of each is different, but the route is the same. This logic was based on the last sentence of the 2012 IBC definition, "Common paths of travel shall be included within the permitted travel distance." and the language in 2012 Section 1016.3, "Exit access travel distance shall be measured from the most remote point within a story…"
If applied literally, it could be interpreted such that the common path of egress travel need be considered from only one point (the most remote) on a given story. Obviously, all potential paths of egress travel need to be considered when establishing occupant remoteness for the purposes of determining multiple exit or exit access doorway requirements. Clarifying that the path of travel originating from any room, area or space should be evaluated when determining common paths of egress travel will eliminate literal interpretations of the current definition.
Additionally, the reference to a single story has been eliminated. Section 1006.3 allows for access to exits at an adjacent level. Common path of egress travel requirements could potentially apply to a multi-level design condition.
For purposes of consistency, Section 1017.3 has been modified to indicate that exit access travel distance is measured from all remote points within the means of egress system. The "story" approach is a little simplistic and does not represent the level of detail necessary to properly design or analyze a means of egress system. Additionally, when accessing an exit at an adjacent level, the exit access travel distance at both stories, to include the exit access stairways, is calculated. The single story reference could be misleading. Approval of this modification will clarify the definition of common path of egress travel for the benefit of all users.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction Provisions simply provide clarification of current requirements.

Staff note: There is a published errata to the definition for Common Path of Egress Travel. The errata is incorporated into the definition as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The change to the definition clarifies that the common path of egress travel can be measured both out of a room to a common corridor or down an exit access stairway to another floor at which point an occupant would have two options for continuing along the means of egress.
The change to Section 1017.3 clarifies that exit access travel distance can also be measured to an exit enclosure on the same level, or down an exit access stairway to an exit enclosure on another floor.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E100-15	AS

Code Change No: E104-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section: 1019.3 (IFC [BE] 1019.3)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1019.3 Occupancies other than Groups I-2 and I-3. In other than Group I-2 and I-3 occupancies, floor openings containing exit access stairways or ramps that do not comply with one of the conditions listed in this section shall be enclosed with a shaft enclosure constructed in accordance with Section 713.
Exit access stairways and ramps that serve or atmospherically communicate between only two stories. Such interconnected stories shall not be open to other stories.
In Group R-1, R-2 or R-3 occupancies, exit access stairways and ramps connecting four stories or less serving and contained within an individual dwelling unit or sleeping unit or live/work unit.
Exit access stairways serving and contained within a Group R-3 congregate residence or a Group R-4 facility are not required to be enclosed.
Exit access stairways and ramps in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, where the area of the vertical opening between stories does not exceed twice the horizontal projected area of the stairway or ramp and the opening is protected by a draft curtain and closely spaced sprinklers in accordance with NFPA
13. In other than Group B and M occupancies, this provision is limited to openings that do not connect more than four stories.
Exit access stairways and ramps within an atrium complying with the provisions of Section 404.
Exit access stairways and ramps in open parking garages that serve only the parking garage.
Exit access stairways and ramps serving open-air seating complying with the exit access travel distance requirements of Section 1029.7.
Exit access stairways and ramps serving between the balcony, gallery or press box and the main assembly floor in occupancies such as theaters, places of religious worship, auditoriums and sports facilities.

Reason: This exception previously read as follows. "Stairways are permitted to be open between the balcony, gallery or press box and the main assembly floor in occupancies such as theaters, places of religious worship, auditoriums and sports facilities." The revision last cycle had an unintended consequence. The current text can be read differently without 'between'. It could be read to allow open stairways serving the main assembly floor to be open exit access stairways.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled Unenclosed Exit Stairs. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website. http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is a clarification of provisions. There is no change in requirements.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal fixes a glitch that ended up in the code last cycle. The change will fix the misinterpretation that the exit access stairway serving the main floor are exit access stairways.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E104-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: Table 1020.2; (IFC[BE] Table 1020.2)

Proponent: John Williams, CBO, Chair, representing Adhoc Health Care Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

TABLE 1020.2 (1020.2) MINIMUM CORRIDOR WIDTH

OCCUPANCY	MINIMUM WIDTH
(inches)	
Any facilities not listed below	44	
Access to and utilization of mechanical, plumbing or electrical systems or equipment	24	
With an occupant load of less than 50	36	
Within a dwelling unit	36	
In Group E with a corridor having an occupant load of 100 or more	72	
In corridors and areas serving stretcher traffic in occupancies where patients receive outpatient medical care, that causes the patient to be incapable of self-preservation ambulatory care facilities	72	
Group I-2 in areas where required for bed movement	96	
For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm.

Reason: The intent of this proposal is coordination of this table with the defined term for ambulatory care facilities
The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/AHC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This is a clarification; therefore, there is no change in cost.

Staff note: There is a published errata to Table 1020.2. The errata has been incorporated into the table as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal fixes a glitch that ended up in the code last cycle. The change will fix the misinterpretation that the exit access stairway serving the main floor are exit access stairways.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E106-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1020.4 (IFC[BE] 1020.4)

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1020.4 Dead ends. Where more than one exit or exit access doorway is required, the exit access shall be arranged such that there are no dead ends in corridors more than 20 feet (6096 mm) in length.

Exceptions:

In occupancies in Group I-3 of Condition 2, 3 or 4, the dead end in a corridor shall not exceed 50 feet (15 240 mm).
In occupancies in Groups B, E, F, I-1, M, R-1, R-2, R-4, S and U, where the building is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, the length of the dead-end corridors shall not exceed 50 feet (15 240 mm).
A dead-end corridor shall not be limited in length where the length of the dead-end corridor is less than 2.5 times the least width of the dead-end corridor.

Reason: Single exit building do not have dead end corridors, therefore this should be removed. Group R-4 are permitted to have single exits per Section 1006.3.2 Item 4.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This is eliminating an erroneous requirement.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Group R-4 should be removed from the list for dead ends. Group R-4 facilities are permitted to be single exit buildings, so the dead end provisions would never be practical.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E107-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1023.3.1; (IFC[BE] 1023.3.1)

Proponent: Raymond Grill, Arup, representing Arup (ray.grill@arup.com)

Revise as follows:

1023.3.1 Extension. Where interior exit stairways and ramps are extended to an exit discharge or
a public way by an exit passageway, the interior exit stairway and ramp shall be separated from the exit passageway by a fire barrier constructed in accordance with Section 707 or a horizontal
assembly constructed in accordance with Section 711, or both. The fire-resistance rating shall be not less than that required for the interior exit stairway and ramp. A fire door assembly complying with Section
shall be installed in the fire barrier to provide a means of egress from the interior exit
stairway and ramp to the exit passageway. Openings in the fire barrier other than the fire door assembly are prohibited. Penetrations of the fire barrier are prohibited.

Exceptions:

Penetrations of the fire barrier in accordance with Section 1023.5 shall be permitted.
Separation between an interior exit stairway or ramp and the exit passageway extension shall not be required where there are no openings into the exit passageway extension.
Separation between an interior exit stairway or ramp and the exit passageway extension shall not be required when the interior exit stair and the exit passageway extension are pressurized in accordance with Section 909.20.5.

Reason: Pressurized stairs often discharge through an exit passageway. The exit passageway is also typically required to be pressurized since it is a continuation of the pressurized stair enclosure. The system providing pressurization of the stair and passageway is typically the same system. Technical compliance would require separate systems if a separation is required to be maintained. The introduction of a door and fire barrier between the exit passageway and the stair creates an obstruction to airflow which inhibits the pressurization of the stair and passageway. The provision of a separation does not provide any added safety and could also impede egress.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This code change will reduce the cost of construction where pressurized stairs discharge through an exit passageway extension. The door and fire barrier between the exit passageway extension and the stair would not be required.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Group R-4 should be removed from the list for dead ends. Group R-4 facilities are permitted to be single exit buildings, so the dead end provisions would never be practical.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E110-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1023.4; (IFC[BE] 1023.4)

Proponent: Homer Maiel, PE, representing ICC Tri-Chapter (Peninsula, East Bay, Monterey Bay) (hmaiel@gmail.com)

Revise as follows:

1023.4 Openings. Interior exit stairway and ramp opening protectives shall be in accordance with the requirements of Section 716.
Openings in interior exit stairways and ramps other than unprotected exterior openings shall be limited to those necessary required for exit access to the enclosure from normally occupied spaces and for egress from the enclosure.
Elevators shall not open into interior exit stairways and ramps.

Reason: The word "necessary" is subjective. However, the word "required" is more definitive and has been used throughout the code consistently.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The code change proposal does not seek to change requirements, it merely seeks to install improved regulatory language, therefore cost of construction is not at issue.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This is an editorial clean up. It replaces non-mandatory language with mandatory language.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Action Results

E111-15	AS

Code Change No: E112-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section: 1023.5; (IFC[BE] 1023.5)

Proponent: William Koffel, representing Firestop Contractors International Association (wkoffel@koffel.com)

Revise as follows:

1023.5 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through interior exit stairways and ramps are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent ventilation or pressurization, sprinkler piping, standpipes, electrical raceway for fire department communication and security systems and electrical raceway serving the interior exit stairway and ramp and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communication openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent interior exit stairways and ramps.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the interior exit stairway and ramp. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

Reason: Building security systems, including cameras in stairways, are becoming more prevalent. If properly protected, a limited number of penetrations for security systems will not result in an unacceptable level of safety. NFPA 101-2015 requires stairway video monitoring in high-rise buildings having an occupant load of 4,000 or more persons.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposed language addressed a limitation in the code regarding security systems being able to penetrate exit enclosures. If anything, the cost of construction will be decreased by allowing an acceptable way for installing such systems.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This allowance for security systems to penetrate a stairway enclosure is appropriate. Security systems are needed for occupant safety. These systems can also be used for remote assessment of a stairway during an emergency. This is coordinated with NFPA 101.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E112-15	AS

Code Change No: E113-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section(s):	1023.5, 1024.6; (IFC[BE] 1023.5, 1024.6)

Proponent: William King, City of Alexandria, representing Virginia Building Code Officials Association (william.king@alexandriava.gov)

Revise as follows:

1023.5 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through interior exit stairways interior exit stairways and ramps are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent ventilation or pressurization, sprinkler piping fire protection systems, standpipes two-way communication systems, electrical raceway for fire department communication systems and electrical raceway serving the interior exit stairway and ramp and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communication openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent interior exit stairways and ramps.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the interior exit stairway and ramp. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

1024.6 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through an exit passageway are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent pressurization, sprinkler piping fire protection systems, standpipes two-way communication systems, electrical raceway for fire department communication and electrical raceway serving the exit passageway and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communicating openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent exit passageways.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the exit passageway. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

Reason: The purpose of these two code sections are to protect the integrity of the exit enclosure and allow for safe egress for the occupants. The current exceptions, first included in the 2012 IBC, as written put the integrity of the exit enclosure at risk.
The reason statement for the creation of this exception in the 2012 code stated:
"As currently written, a pull station next to a door into the stair, fire hose cabinets, fire extinguisher cabinets, request-to-exit devices related to access control locks, notification appliances, etc., are not permitted on the outside of the exit enclosure. This exceptions needs to clarify the intent of Sections 1022.4 and 1023.6".
The commentary for this section of the code states the following:
"The intent is to maintain the integrity of the enclosure for the exit access stairway."
"The exception allows for electrical boxes, "Exit" signs or fire alarm pull stations to be installed on the outside of the enclosure provided that the boxes are installed so that the required fire-resistance rating is not reduced."
The exception as it currently exists is significantly broader than just addressing those items. Using the exception, any and all items can penetrate the membrane of an exit enclosure without limitation to size or quantity as long as they are part of a tested penetration. This puts the exit enclosure at significant risk and degrades the overall safety afforded by an exit enclosure. As the code continues to reduce the times in which a rated exit enclosure is provided, the protection of these enclosures becomes even more critical to the safety of the building's occupants.
The current proposal looks to remove the blanket allowance for any system to be placed in the exit enclosure assembly. The inclusion of additional items in the main text of the section is designed to address the items noted as the basis for the original code change, but would keep the rated exit enclosure wall from being used as a chase for plumbing, fuel gas, med gas, low voltage wiring and any of the other myriad of hazards the current exception would allow.

Cost Impact: Will increase the cost of construction
This change would not allow the rated exit enclosure wall to be used as a chase for building services. This may require an additional chase to be constructed.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify as follows:

1023.5 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through interior exit stairways and ramps are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent ventilation or pressurization, fire protection systems, two-way communication systems, electrical raceway for fire department communication systems and electrical raceway serving the interior exit stairway and ramp and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communication openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent interior exit stairways and ramps.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the interior exit stairway and ramp. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

1024.6 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through an exit passageway are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent pressurization, fire protection systems, two-way communication systems, electrical raceway for fire department communication and electrical raceway serving the exit passageway and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communicating openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent exit passageways.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the exit passageway. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

Committee Reason: The modification is to maintain the exceptions and is coordination with F49-15. The exceptions are needed to allow for outlets, light switches, fire alarm pull stations and exit signs.
In the main text, the change from 'sprinkler piping and standpipes' to 'fire protection systems' would allow for all systems used for fire fighting. The addition of the 'two-way communication system' allows for requirements associated with the fire fighters communication, the requirements in high rises for systems in the stairway every five floors, and areas of refuge.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 3:
William Koffel, representing Firestop Contractors International Association requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Further modify as follows:

1023.5 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through interior exit stairways and ramps are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent ventilation or pressurization, fire protection systems, security systems, two-way communication systems, electrical raceway for fire department communication systems and electrical raceway serving the interior exit
stairway and ramp and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communication openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent interior exit stairways and ramps.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the interior exit stairway and ramp. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

1024.6 Penetrations. Penetrations into or through an exit passageway are prohibited except for equipment and ductwork necessary for independent pressurization, fire protection systems, security systems, two-way communication systems, electrical raceway for fire department communication and electrical raceway serving the exit passageway and terminating at a steel box not exceeding 16 square inches (0.010 m2). Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714. There shall not be penetrations or communicating openings, whether protected or not, between adjacent exit passageways.

Exception: Membrane penetrations shall be permitted on the outside of the exit passageway. Such penetrations shall be protected in accordance with Section 714.3.2.

Commenter's Reason: The purpose of the Public Comment is to simply combine the Committee Action on E 112-15 (Approval As Submitted) with the Committee Action on E 113-15

Final Hearing Results

E113-15	AMPC3

Original Proposal

Section: 1023.11; (IFC[BE] 1023.11)

Proponent: Christopher Moran, Jensen Hughes, representing Airport Traffic Control Tower Technical Working Group (cmoran@jensenhughes.com); Eric Rosenbaum, Jensen Hughes, representing Airport Traffic Control Tower Fire/Life Safety Technical Working Group (erosenbaum@jensenhughes.com)

Revise as follows:

1023.11 Smokeproof enclosures. Where required by Section 403.5.4 or, 405.7.2, or 412.3.2, interior exit stairways and ramps shall be smokeproof enclosures in accordance with Section 909.20.
Reason: Section 412.3.2 requires smokeproof enclosures for air traffic control tower stairs and refers to section 1023.11 but section 1023.11 does not reference back to 412.3.2 as it does for high-rise buildings (403.5.4) and underground buildings (405.7.2). This change is proposed to reduce potential confusion from the lack of the reference statement in 1023.11. The current code requirement from 412.3.2 is included below for reference.

Stairways. Stairways in airport traffic control towers shall be in accordance with Section 1011. Stairways shall be smokeproof enclosures complying with one of the alternatives provided in Section 909.20.

Exception: Stairways in airport traffic control towers are not required to comply with Section 1011.12.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal only reduces potential confusion and clarifies the intent of the code. No cost impact is associated with this change.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Adding Section 412.3.2 to smoke proof enclosures is a correlation with air traffic control towers. This is a needed pointer since these facilities do not occur very often.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E114-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section(s):	1023.12 (New), 1024.8 (New), 1026.5 (New); (IFC[BE] 1023.12 (New), 1024.8 (New),
1026.5 (New))

Proponent: Lee Kranz, City of Bellevue, WA, representing Washington Association of Building Officials Technical Code Development Committee

Add new text as follows:

1023.12 Standpipes. Standpipes and standpipe hose connections shall be provided in accordance with Sections 905.3 and 905.4.

1024.8 Standpipes. Standpipes and standpipe hose connections shall be provided in accordance with Sections 905.3 and 905.4.

1026.5 Standpipes. Standpipes and standpipe hose connections shall be provided in accordance with Sections 905.3 and 905.4.

Reason: Placing references to Sections 905.3 and 905.4 standpipe requirements for interior exit stairways & ramps (Section 1023), exit passageways (Section 1024) and horizontal exits (Section 1026) will help designers and reviewers to include this requirement early in the building design process. During the means of egress design process, the requirement for standpipes for interior exit stairways/ramps, exit passageways and horizontal exits are frequently overlooked and may have significant cost impacts to correct later during construction. Including the standpipe references will make the design team aware of the requirement early in the design process and help insure cost impacts are considered at the appropriate time.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This code change will save money by providing a reminder to designers and plan reviewers to check for the need for standpipes when the design includes interior exit stairways or ramps, exit passageways and horizontal exits.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Disapproved
Committee Reason: These references could be read as a requirement for standpipes rather than just a pointer. This would be a problem for shorter buildings. This cross reference form Chapter 10 to Chapter 9 are unnecessary.

Assembly Action:	None

Public Comments

Public Comment 1:
Lee Kranz, City of Bellevue, representing Self (lkranz@bellevuewa.gov) requests Approve as Modified by this Public Comment.

Modify as follows:

1023.12 Standpipes. Standpipes and standpipe hose connections shall be provided in accordance with where required by Sections
905.3 and 905.4.

1024.8 Standpipes. Standpipes and standpipe hose connections shall be provided in accordance with where required by Sections
905.3 and 905.4.

1026.5 Standpipes. Standpipes and standpipe hose connections shall be provided in accordance with where required by Sections
905.3 and 905.4.

Commenter's Reason: This code change provides a reference to remind reviewers to go check Sections 905.3 and 905.4 to see if standpipes are required for interior exit stairs and ramps, exit passageways and horizontal exits. One concern expressed by the Egress Committee was that these references could be construed as requirements rather than pointers. We have changed the text to address this issue in this public comment.

Final Hearing Results

E115-15	AMPC1

Original Proposal

Section: 1025.1; (IFC[BE] 1025.1)

Proponent: John Williams, CBO, CBO, Chair, Adhoc Healthcare Committee, representing Adhoc Health Care Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org); Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1025.1 General. Approved luminous egress path markings delineating the exit path shall be provided
in high-rise buildings of Group A, B, E, II-1, I-3, I-4, M, and R-1 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1025.1 through 1025.5.

Exception: Luminous egress path markings shall not be required on the level of exit discharge in lobbies that serve as part of the exit path in accordance with Section 1028.1, Exception 1.

Reason: The intent of this proposal is to delete Group I-2 from the facilities that require luminous egress path markings. Hospitals and nursing homes have trained staff that operate with a defend-in-place strategy for fires. The emergency generators are continually monitored and maintained, so the change of the emergency egress lighting required in the means of egress (Section 1008) failing is extremely minimal. Requiring egress path marking is the stairways in high-rise hospitals and nursing homes is a redundant feature that is costly and unnecessary.
In addition, the hospitals will have the emergency lighting on their emergency generator, not just battery power. For the stripes to be utilized, both the general means of egress lighting and the emergency lighting has to have failed.
The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/AHC/Pages/default.aspx.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.
Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The deletion of luminous egress markings will be a saving in initial construction, maintenance cost of the markings and a savings in energy if the lights do not have to stay on.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Luminous egress path markings are not needed in Group I-2 facilities. A hospital and nursing home already has multiple redundancies to address emergency egress such as trained staff, defend-in-place protection for first response and emergency generators. Since these buildings are continuously occupied, the current requirements for luminous egress paths require the lights in the stairways to be on 24-7. Not having the luminous egress path markings would not reduce safety in these buildings and would be a savings both in initial installation as well as energy costs during the life of the building.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E117-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1025.1; (IFC[BE] 1025.1)

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1025.1 General. Approved luminous egress path markings delineating the exit path shall be provided
in high-rise buildings of Group A, B, E, II-1, I-2, I-3, M, and R-1 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1025.1 through 1025.5.

Exception: Luminous egress path markings shall not be required on the level of exit discharge in lobbies that serve as part of the exit path in accordance with Section 1028.1, Exception 1.

Reason: The intent of this proposal is to delete Group I-4 from the facilities that require luminous egress path markings. The current provisions appear to have been written for single occupancy buildings in mind. While there could be a day care in a high rise building, there is no justification for the presence of a small Group I-4 in a building to require photoluminescent stripes throughout.
Perhaps additional clarification is needed for mixed use buildings and when luminous egress path markings should be required, however, that is outside the scope of the CTC Care committees, so nothing is proposed at this time.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This will eliminate a requirement for luminous egress path markings in buildings that had a day care but were not one of the use groups named.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Group I-4 should be deleted from the occupancies that would result in luminous egress path markings being required. Day care facilities would not be a highrise building on their own. The fact that a day care was within a high rise building should not be a trigger for luminous egress path markings in the stairways.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E118-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1025.1; (IFC[BE] 1025.1)

Proponent: Robert Davidson, Davidson Code Concepts, LLC, representing Davidson Code Concepts, LLC (rjd@davidsoncodeconcepts.com)

Revise as follows:

1025.1 General. Approved luminous egress path markings delineating the exit path shall be provided
in high-rise buildings of Group A, B, E, I I-1, I-2, I-4, M, and R-1 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1025.1 through 1025.5.

Exception: Luminous egress path markings shall not be required on the level of exit discharge in lobbies that serve as part of the exit path in accordance with Section 1028.1, Exception 1.

Reason: The intent of this proposal is to delete Group I-3 from the facilities that require luminous egress path markings. Jails have trained staff that operate with a defend-in-place strategy for fires. The emergency generators are continually monitored and maintained, so the change of the emergency egress lighting required in the means of egress (Section 1008) failing is extremely minimal. Requiring egress path marking is the stairways in high-rise jails is a redundant feature that is costly and unnecessary.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The deletion of luminous egress markings will be a saving in initial construction, maintenance cost of the markings and a savings in energy if the lights do not have to stay on.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Luminous egress path markings are not needed in Group I-3 facilities. A jail already has multiple redundancies to address emergency egress such as trained staff, defend-in-place protection for first response and emergency generators. Since these buildings are continuously occupied, the current requirements for luminous egress paths require the lights in the stairways to be on 24-7. Not having the luminous egress path markings would not reduce safety in these buildings and would be a savings both in initial installation as well as energy costs during the life of the building.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E119-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1025.2.5; (IFC[BE] 1025.2.5)

Proponent: Manny Muniz, representing self (Mannymuniz.mm@gmail.com)

Revise as follows:

1025.2.5 Obstacles. Obstacles at or below 6 feet 6 inches (1981 mm) in height and projecting more than 4 inches (102 mm) into the egress path shall be outlined with markings not less than 1 inch (25 mm) in width comprised of a pattern of alternating equal bands, of luminous material and black, with the alternating bands not more than 2 inches (51 mm) thick and angled at 45 degrees (0.79 rad). Obstacles shall include, but are not limited to, standpipes, hose cabinets, wall projections and restricted height areas. However, such markings shall not conceal any required information or indicators including but not limited to instructions to occupants for the use of standpipes.

Exception: The minimum width of 1 inch (25 mm) shall not apply to markings listed in accordance with UL 1994.

Reason: Sections 1025.2.1 steps, 1025.2.3 handrails, and 1025.2.4 perimeter demarcation lines, all provide an exception to the minimum width of 1 inch when the step, handrail and perimeter demarcation lines are listed in accordance with UL 1994, a performance standard. This exception should also apply to Section 1025.2.5 for obstacle markings as the performance has been evaluated and validated by UL 1994.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This exception will simply provide an equivalent method of compliance similar to what is already provided for in 1025.2.1, 1025.2.3 and 1025.2.4.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The change acknowledges the allowance for the narrow stripes permitted in UL1994.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E120-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1026.4; (IFC[BE] 1026.4)

Proponent: Ronald Geren, RLGA Technical Services, LLC, representing Self (ron@specsandcodes.com)

Revise as follows:

1026.4 Refuge area. The refuge area of a horizontal exit shall be a space occupied by the same tenant or a public area and each such refuge area shall be adequate to accommodate the original occupant load of the refuge area plus the occupant load anticipated from the adjoining compartment. The anticipated occupant load from the adjoining compartment shall be based on the capacity of
the horizontal exit doors entering the refuge area, but not more than the total occupant load of the adjoining compartment.

Reason: If the total occupant load of the compartment egressing through the horizontal exit is less than the capacity of the horizontal exit door, the maximum capacity of the refuge area should not be more than the legal capacity of the compartment egressing.
For example, a standard 36-inch-wide door has a clear width of 33 inches. At 0.20" per occupant, the capacity of the door is 165 occupants. For sprinklered buildings at 0.15" per occupant, the load is even greater at 220 occupants. So, if the total occupant load on one side of the horizontal exit door is less than 165 for a nonsprinklered building, or less than 220 occupants for a sprinklered building, then the refuge area on the other side should only be required to accommodate the design occupant load and not the capacity of the door in the horizontal exit.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposed change will actually relax the requirement. Thus, building owners can maximize the use of the floor area for their buildings without having to make floor areas usuable for refuge areas in order to accommodate more occupants than the area is legally permitted to have.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposed language clarifies requirement for when the actual occupant load is less than the capacity of the exit. This reflects actual conditions. This proposal needs to be coordinated with the language approved in E6-15 as modified.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E123-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E124-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1026.4.1; (IFC[BE] 1026.4.1)

Proponent: John Williams, CBO, Chair, representing Adhoc Health Care Committee (AHC@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1026.4.1 Capacity. The capacity of the refuge area shall be computed based on a net floor
area allowance of 3 square feet (0.2787 m2) for each occupant to be accommodated therein. Where the horizontal exit also forms a smoke compartment, the capacity of the refuge area for Groups I-1, I-2 and I- 3 occupancies and Group B ambulatory care facilities shall comply with Section 407.5.1, 408.6.2, 420.4.1 and 422.3.2 as applicable.

Exceptions: The net floor area allowable per occupant shall beas follows for the indicated occupancies:

Six square feet (0.6 m2) per occupant for occupancies in Group I-3.
Fifteen square feet (1.4 m2) per occupant for ambulatory occupancies in Group I-2.
Thirty square feet (2.8 m2) per occupant for nonambulatory occupancies in Group I-2.

Reason: This proposal clarifies the capacity requirements for horizontal exit refuge areas for defend in place occupancies. Currently, the requirements for defend in place occupancies are located in the exception, rather than being located in the body of the text. Since the exception would be more restrictive than the section, we are suggesting moving the requirements by reference into the main body of the text. In addition, by a reference back to the refuge area capacities in Chapter 4, the provisions will always stay coordinated.
The ICC Ad Hoc Committee on Healthcare (AHC) has just completed its 4th year. The AHC was established by the ICC Board to evaluate and assess contemporary code issues relating to hospitals and ambulatory healthcare facilities. This is a joint effort between ICC and the American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), a subsidiary of the American Hospital Association, to eliminate duplication and conflicts in healthcare regulation. Information on the AHC, including: meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the AHC effort can be downloaded from the AHC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/AHC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is a reference to more specific requirements already in the code.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: A references instead of repeating requirements for capacity of an area of refuge would maintain consistency over time.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E124-15	AS

Code Change No: E126-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section: 1027.5, 1027.6; (IFC[BE] 1027.5, 1027.6)

Proponent: Ali Fattah, City of San Diego Development Services Department, representing City of San Diego (afattah@sandiego.gov)

Revise as follows:

1027.5 Location. Exterior exit stairways and ramps shall have a minimum fire separation distance of 10 feet (3048 mm) measured at right angles from the exterior edge of the stairway or ramps, including landings, to:
Adjacent lot lines.
Other portions of the building.
Other buildings on the same lot unless the adjacent building exterior walls and openings are protected in accordance with Section 705 based on fire separation distance.
For the purposes of this section, other portions of the building shall be treated as separate buildings.

Exception: Exterior exit stairways and ramps serving individual dwelling units of Group R-3 shall have a minimum fire separation distance of 5 feet.

1027.6 Exterior exit stairway and ramp protection. Exterior exit stairways and ramps shall be separated from the interior of the building as required in Section 1023.2. Openings shall be limited to those necessary for egress from normally occupied spaces. Where a vertical plane projecting from the edge of an exterior exit stairway or ramp and landings is exposed by other parts of the building at an angle of less than 180 degrees (3.14 rad), the exterior wall shall be rated in accordance with Section 1023.7.

Exceptions:

Separation from the interior of the building is not required for occupancies, other than those in Group R-1 or R-2, in buildings that are not more than two stories above grade plane where
a level of exit discharge serving such occupancies is the first story above grade plane.
Separation from the interior of the building is not required where the exterior exit stairway or ramp is served by an exterior exitramp or balcony that connects two
remote exterior exit stairways or other approved exits with a perimeter that is not less than 50 percent open. To be considered open, the opening shall be not less than 50 percent of the height of the enclosing wall, with the top of the openings not less than 7 feet (2134 mm) above the top of the balcony.
Separation from the open-ended corridor of the building is not required for exterior exit stairways or ramps, provided that Items 3.1 through 3.5 are met:
The building, including open-ended corridors, and stairways and ramps, shall be equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
The open-ended corridors comply with Section 1020.
The open-ended corridors are connected on each end to an exterior exit stairway or ramp complying with Section 1027.
The exterior walls and openings adjacent to the exterior exit stairway or ramp comply with Section 1023.7.

At any location in an open-ended corridor where a change of direction exceeding 45 degrees (0.79 rad) occurs, a clear opening of not less than 35 square feet (3.3 m2) or an exterior stairway or ramp shall be provided. Where clear openings are provided, they shall be located so as to minimize the accumulation of smoke or toxic gases.
In Group R-3 occupancies not more than 4 stories in height, exterior exit stairways and ramps serving individual dwelling units are not required to be separated from the interior of the building where the exterior exit stairway or ramp discharges directly to grade.

Reason: The proposed code change to Section 1027.5 adds an exception to limit the fire separation distance to 5 ft for an R-3 occupancy. The proposed exception # 4 to Section 1027.6 exempts an exterior exit stairway on up to a 4 story R-3 from being separated from the interior of a building. A four story R-3 should be the upper limit since the type of construction will have to be increased from type if more than 4 stories in height.
The IBC regulates Group R-3 occupancies, typically one dwelling or two dwellings units located within the same building when the building configuration is not within the scope of the International Residential Code. So Group R-3 occupancies more than three stories above grade plane and group R-3 occupancies with 2 units using a common means of egress are required to comply with the IBC. Additionally, Townhouses that have a height of more than three stories above grade plane, and townhouses with only one side open to a pubic way also need to comply with the IBC.
The IBC in many instances exempts R-3 occupancies from means of egress requirements more appropriate for buildings with larger occupant loads and buildings with multiple tenant spaces/units sharing a common means of egress system.

For example Section 1028.4.2 Exception # 2 exempts exit courts serving Group R-3 occupancies from exterior wall and opening protection requirements regardless of the occupant load served.
Similarly Section 1019.3 Exception 2 exempts exit access stairways and ramps in Group R-3 occupancies from requirements that include enclosure requirements. Interior exit stairways within Group R-3 and within individual units classified as R-2 are not classified as exits since they are permitted to be exit access stairways per Section 1019.
Another example is Section 1027.6 exception # 1 allows the exterior exit stairway not be protected from the interior of the buildings other than Group R1 and R2 and 2 stories in height. The exeception recognizes a lesser hazard.

As a consequence it does not make sense to require a fire separation distance of 10 ft adjacent to an exterior stairway serving an individual unit in a Group R-3 occupancy. Additionally since stairways serving Group R-3 occupancies and individual units in Group R-2 are exempt from interior stairway enclosure requirements it makes no sense to separate the exterior stairway from the interior of the unit.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This code change adds clarity to the code and codifies current practice of not requiring a separation from the dwelling unit. Additionally the reduced side yard increases buildable area.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal for exterior exit stairways serving Group R-3 occupancies is a coordination with allowances in the IRC.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E126-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1028.4.1; (IFC[BE] 1028.4.1)

Proponent: Lee Kranz, City of Bellevue, Wa, representing Washington Association of Building Officials Technical Code Development Committee

Revise as follows:

1028.4.1 Width or capacity. The required capacity of egress courts shall be determined as specified in Section 1005.1, but the minimum width shall be not less than 44 inches (1118 mm), except as specified herein. Egress courts serving Group R-3 and U occupancies shall be not less than 36 inches (914 mm) in width. The required capacity and width of egress courts shall be unobstructed to a height of 7 feet (2134 mm).

Exception: Encroachments complying with Section 1005.7.

Where an egress court exceeds the minimum required width and the width of such egress court is then reduced along the path of exit travel, the reduction in width shall be gradual. The transition in width shall be affected by a guard not less than 36 inches (914 mm) in height and shall not create an angle of more than 30 degrees (0.52 rad) with respect to the axis of the egress court along the path of egress
travel. The width of the egress court shall not be less than the required capacity.

Reason: This proposal deletes an outdated and unused code requirement for egress courts. The concept of using a 36" tall guardrail to "herd" occupants toward the exit when the egress court exceeds the minimum required width is absurd and does nothing to improve the safety of occupants. Can you imagine a building owner's response when an architect shows this on a design development plan? The guard would effectively eliminate portions of the egress court exceeding the minimum required width from use by occupants. Why would anyone ever design the court to be larger than the minimum required width only to install a guardrail to prevent it's use? This is an obsolete regulation and needs to be deleted.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This will save money by reducing the need to install a useless guardrail in oversized egress courts.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This is an unused and outdated requirement. There is no need to funnel occupants to the exit door/opening.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E130-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 202(New), 1005.3.1, 1005.3.2, 1009.3, 1009.4, 1019.3, 1029.6, 1029.6.3, 1029.7, 1029.8,
1029.8.1, 1029.9.5, 1029.12.2.1, Table 1029.12.2.1, 1029.12.2.2 (IFC[BE] 1005.3.1, 1005.3.2, 1009.3,
1009.4, 1019.3, 1029.6, 1029.6.3, 1029.7, 1029.8, 1029.8.1, 1029.9.5, 1029.12.2.1, Table 1029.12.2.1,
1029.12.2.2)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Add new definition as follows:

SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS

OPEN-AIR ASSEMBLY SEATING. Seating served by means of egress that is not subject to smoke accumulation within or under a structure and is open to the atmosphere.

Revise as follows:

SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS

SMOKE-PROTECTED ASSEMBLY SEATING. Seating served by means of egress that is not subject to smoke accumulation within or under a structure for a specified design time by means of passive design or by mechanical ventilation.

1005.3.1 Stairways. The capacity, in inches, of means of egress stairways shall be calculated by multiplying the occupant load served by such stairways by a means of egress capacity factor of 0.3 inch (7.6 mm) per occupant. Where stairways serve more than one story, only the occupant load of each story considered individually shall be used in calculating the required capacity of the stairways serving that story.

Exceptions:

For other than Group H and I-2 occupancies, the capacity, in inches, of means of egress stairways shall be calculated by multiplying the occupant load served by such stairways by a means of egress capacity factor of 0.2 inch (5.1 mm) per occupant in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and an emergency voice/alarm communication system in accordance with Section 907.5.2.2.
Facilities with smoke-protected assembly seating shall be permitted to use the capacity factors in Table 1029.6.2 indicated for stepped aisles for exit access or exit stairways where the entire path for means of egress from the seating to the exit discharge is provided with a smoke control system complying with Section 909.
Facilities with outdoor smoke-protected open-air assembly seating shall be permitted to the capacity factors in Section 1029.6.3 indicated for stepped aisles for exit access or exit stairways where the entire path for means of egress from the seating to the exit discharge is open to the outdoors.

1005.3.2 Other egress components. The capacity, in inches, of means of egress components other than stairways shall be calculated by multiplying the occupant load served by such component by a means of egress capacity factor of 0.2 inch (5.1 mm) per occupant.

Exceptions:

For other than Group H and I-2 occupancies, the capacity, in inches, of means of egress components other than stairways shall be calculated by multiplying the occupant
load served by such component by a means of egress capacity factor of 0.15 inch (3.8 mm) per occupant in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and an emergency voice/alarm communication system in accordance with Section 907.5.2.2.
Facilities with smoke-protected assembly seating shall be permitted to use the capacity factors in Table 1029.6.2 indicated for level or ramped aisles for means of
egress components other than stairways where the entire path for means of egress from the seating to the exit discharge is provided with a smoke control system complying with Section 909.
Facilities with outdoor smoke-protected open-air assembly seating shall be permitted to the capacity factors in Section 1029.6.3 indicated for level or ramped aisles for means of
egress components other than stairways where the entire path for means of egress from the seating to the exit discharge is open to the outdoors.

1009.3 Stairways. In order to be considered part of an accessible means of egress, a stairway between stories shall have a clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) minimum
between handrails and shall either incorporate an area of refuge within an enlarged floor-level landing or shall be accessed from an area of refuge complying with Section 1009.6. Exit access stairways that connect levels in the same story are not permitted as part of an accessible means of egress.

Exceptions:

Exit access stairways providing means of egress from mezzanines are permitted as part of an accessible means of egress.
The clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) between handrails is not required in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
The clear width of 48 inches (1219 mm) between handrails is not required
for stairways accessed from a refuge area in conjunction with a horizontal exit.
Areas of refuge are not required at exit access stairways where two-way communication is provided at the elevator landing in accordance with Section 1009.8.
Areas of refuge are not required at stairways in buildings equipped throughout with
an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
Areas of refuge are not required at stairways serving open parking garages.
Areas of refuge are not required for smoke-protected assembly seating or open-air assembly seating areas complying with Section Sections 1029.6.2 and 1029.6.3.
Areas of refuge are not required at stairways in Group R-2 occupancies.
Areas of refuge are not required for stairways accessed from a refuge area in conjunction with a horizontal exit.

1009.4 Elevators. In order to be considered part of an accessible means of egress, an elevator shall comply with the emergency operation and signaling device requirements of Section 2.27 of ASME A17.1. Standby power shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 27 and Section 3003. The elevator shall be accessed from an area of refuge complying with Section 1009.6.

Exceptions:

Areas of refuge are not required at the elevator in open parking garages.

Areas of refuge are not required in buildings and facilities equipped throughout with
an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
Areas of refuge are not required at elevators not required to be located in a shaft in accordance with Section 712.
Areas of refuge are not required at elevators serving smoke-protected assembly seating open-air assembly seating areas complying with Section Sections 1029.6.2 and 1029.6.3.
Areas of refuge are not required for elevators accessed from a refuge area in conjunction with a horizontal exit.

1019.3 Occupancies other than Groups I-2 and I-3. In other than Group I-2 and I-3 occupancies, floor openings containing exit access stairways or ramps that do not comply with one of the conditions listed in this section shall be enclosed with a shaft enclosure constructed in accordance with Section 713.

Exit access stairways and ramps that serve or atmospherically communicate between only two stories. Such interconnected stories shall not be open to other stories.
In Group R-1, R-2 or R-3 occupancies, exit access stairways and ramps connecting four stories or less serving and contained within an individual dwelling unit or sleeping unit or live/work unit.
Exit access stairways serving and contained within a Group R-3 congregate residence or a Group R-4 facility are not required to be enclosed.
Exit access stairways and ramps in buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, where the area of the vertical opening between stories does not exceed twice the horizontal projected area of the stairway or ramp and the opening is protected by a draft curtain and closely spaced sprinklers in accordance with NFPA
13. In other than Group B and M occupancies, this provision is limited to openings that do not connect more than four stories.
Exit access stairways and ramps within an atrium complying with the provisions of Section 404.
Exit access stairways and ramps in open parking garages that serve only the parking garage.
Exit access stairways and ramps serving smoke-protected or open-air assembly seating complying with the exit access travel distance requirements of Section 1029.7.
Exit access stairways and ramps serving the balcony, gallery or press box and the main assembly floor in occupancies such as theaters, places of religious worship, auditoriums and sports facilities.

1029.6 Capacity of aisle for assembly. The required capacity of aisles shall be not less than that determined in accordance with Section 1029.6.1 where smoke-protected assembly seating is not provided and with Section 1029.6.2 or 1029.6.3 where smoke-protected assembly seating is provided and with Section 1029.6.3 where open-air assembly seating is provided.

1029.6.3 Outdoor smoke-protected Open-air assembly seating. The In open-air assembly seating the required capacity in inches (mm) of aisles shall be not less than the total occupant load served by the
egress element multiplied by 0.08 (2.0 mm) where egress is by stepped aisle and multiplied by 0.06 (1.52 mm) where egress is by level aisles and ramped aisles.

Exception: The required capacity in inches (mm) of aisles shall be permitted to comply with Section 1029.6.2 for the number of seats in the outdoor open-air smoke-protected assembly seating where Section 1029.6.2 permits less capacity.

1029.7 Travel distance. Exits and aisles shall be so located that the The exit access travel distance to an exit door shall be not greater than 200 feet (60 960 mm) measured along the line of travel in nonsprinklered buildings. Travel distance shall be not more than 250 feet (76 200 mm) in sprinklered buildings comply with Section 1017. Where aisles are provided for seating, the distance shall be measured along the aisles and aisle accessways without travel over or on the seats.

Exceptions:

Smoke-protected assembly seating: The travel distance from each seat to the nearest entrance to a vomitory or concourse shall not exceed 200 feet (60 960 mm). The travel distance from the entrance to the vomitory or concourse to a stairway, ramp or walk on the exterior of the building shall not exceed 200 feet (60 960 mm).
Open-air seating: The travel distance from each seat to the building exterior shall not exceed 400 feet (122 m). The travel distance shall not be limited in facilities of Type I or II construction.
In facilties with smoke-protected assembly seating the total exit access travel distance shall be not greater than 400 feet (122 m). That portion of the total permitted exit access travel distance from each seat to the nearest entrance to a vomitory or concourse shall not exceed 200 feet (60 960 mm). The portion of the total permitted exit access travel distance from the entrance to the vomitory or concourse to one of the following shall not exceed 200 feet (60 960 mm):
The closest riser of an exit access stairway. 1.2 The closest slope of an exit access ramp. 1.3 An exit.
In facilities with open-air assembly seating of Type III, IV or V construction, the exit access travel distance to one of the following shall not exceed 400 feet (122 m):
The closest riser of an exit access stairway. 2.2 The closest slope of an exit access ramp. 2.3 An exit.
In facilities with open-air assembly seating of Type I or II construction, the exit access travel distance shall not be limited.

1029.8 Common path of egress travel. The common path of egress travel shall not exceed 30 feet (9144 mm) from any seat to a point where an occupant has a choice of two paths of egress travel to two exits.

Exceptions:

For areas serving less than 50 occupants, the common path of egress travel shall not exceed 75 feet (22 860 mm).
For smoke-protected or smoke-protected open-air assembly seating, the common path of egress travel shall not exceed 50 feet (15 240 mm).

1029.8.1 Path through adjacent row. Where one of the two paths of travel is across the aisle through a row of seats to another aisle, there shall be not more than 24 seats between the two aisles, and the minimum clear width between rows for the row between the two aisles shall be 12 inches (305 mm) plus
inch (15.2 mm) for each additional seat above seven in the row between aisles.

Exception: For smoke-protected orsmoke-protected open-air assembly seating there shall be not more than 40 seats between the two aisles and the minimum clear width shall be 12 inches (305 mm) plus 0.3 inch (7.6 mm) for each additional seat.

1029.9.5 Dead end aisles. Each end of an aisle shall be continuous to a cross aisle, foyer, doorway, vomitory, concourse or stairway in accordance with Section 1029.9.7 having access to an exit.

Exceptions:

Dead-end aisles shall be not greater than 20 feet (6096 mm) in length.
Dead-end aisles longer than 16 rows are permitted where seats beyond the 16th row dead- end aisle are not more than 24 seats from another aisle, measured along a row of seats having a minimum clear width of 12 inches (305 mm) plus 0.6 inch (15.2 mm) for each additional seat above seven in the row where seats have backrests or beyond 10 where seats are without backrests in the row.

For smoke-protected or smoke-protected open-air assembly seating, the dead end aisle length of vertical aisles shall not exceed a distance of 21 rows.
For smoke-protected or smoke-protected open-air assembly seating, a longer dead-
end aisle is permitted where seats beyond the 21-row dead-end aisle are not more than 40 seats from another aisle, measured along a row of seats having an aisle accessway with a minimum clear width of 12 inches (305 mm) plus 0.3 inch (7.6 mm) for each additional seat above seven in the row where seats have backrests or beyond 10 where seats are without backrests in the row.

1029.12.2.1 Dual access. For rows of seating served by aisles or doorways at both ends, there shall be not more than 100 seats per row. The minimum clear width of 12 inches (305 mm) between rows shall be increased by 0.3 inch (7.6 mm) for every additional seat beyond 14 seats where seats have backrests or beyond 21 where seats are without backrests. The minimum clear width is not required to exceed 22 inches (559 mm).

Exception: For smoke-protected or smoke-protected open-air assembly seating, the row length limits for a 12-inch-wide (305 mm) aisle accessway, beyond which the aisle accessway minimum clear width shall be increased, are in Table 1029.12.2.1.

TABLE 1029.12.2.1 (1029.12.2.1)
SMOKE-PROTECTED OR OPEN-AIR ASSEMBLY AISLE ACCESSWAYS

TOTAL NUMBER OF SEATS IN THE SMOKE-PROTECTED OR OPEN- AIR ASSEMBLY SEATING	MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SEATS PER ROW PERMITTED TO HAVE A MINIMUM 12-INCH CLEAR WIDTH AISLE ACCESSWAY	
	Aisle or doorway at both ends of row	Aisle or doorway at one end of row only	
	Seats with backrests	Seats without backrests	Seats with backrests	Seats without backrests	
Less than 4,000	14	21	7	10	
4,000	15	22	7	10	
7,000	16	23	8	11	
10,000	17	24	8	11	
13,000	18	25	9	12	
16,000	19	26	9	12	
19,000	20	27	10	13	
22,000 and greater	21	28	11	14	
For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm.

1029.12.2.2 Single access. For rows of seating served by an aisle or doorway at only one end of the row, the minimum clear width of 12 inches (305 mm) between rows shall be increased by 0.6 inch (15.2 mm) for every additional seat beyond seven seats where seats have backrests or beyond 10 where seats are without backrests. The minimum clear width is not required to exceed 22 inches (559 mm).

Exception: For smoke-protected orsmoke-protected open-air assembly seating, the row length limits for a 12-inch-wide (305 mm) aisle accessway, beyond which the aisle accessway minimum clear width shall be increased, are in Table 1029.12.2.1.

Reason: In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled Unenclosed Exit Stairs. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.

This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
The intent of this proposal is to provide terminology consistent with the rest of Chapter 10 regarding exit access travel distance (Section 1017) and open-air and outdoor smoke-protected seating. Currently the term outdoor smoke protected assembly seating and open-air assembly seating appear to be used interchangeably. Also, sometime smoke-protected assembly seating is used to mean just indoors, and sometimes indoors and outdoors.
There is no intent for any technical changes to the provisions from what was permitted in the 2012 IBC and previous editions. There are three terms being used:

Smoke protected assembly seating - Section 410.3.5, Table 903.2.11.6, 909.16, 1005.1, 1005.3.2, 1009.3, 1009.4, 1029.6,
1029.6.2, Table 1029.6.2, 1029.6.2.1, 1029.6.2.2, 1029.6.2.3, 1029.7, 1029.8, 1029.8.1, 1029.9.5, 1029.12.2.1, 1029.12.2.1
Outdoor smoke protected assembly seating - 1005.3.1, 1005.3.2, 1029.6.3
Open-air assembly seating - Sections 905.3.2, 1019.1, 1029.7
Definitions: The revisions for 'smoke-protected assembly seating' and the new definition for 'open-air assembly seating' are intended to separate the two types of systems that provide smoke protection for assembly seating. The definition and the revisions throughout the proposal will coordinate the use of the terms.

Section 1029.6: This scoping section currently used the term smoke-protected to mean both indoor and outdoor.
Sections 1029.6.3 and 1005.3.2: Change outdoor smoke-protected seating to open-air seating. In addition, Section 1029.6.3 only includes the separation in the title and not the text.
Section 1029.7: In the current text of the main paragraph, the sentence for non-sprinklered building and sprinklered building requirements are confusing and inconsistent. The 200 and 250 feet exit access travel distances are already in Table 1017.2. The current text only says how to measure the travel distance in the sentence dealing with non-sprinklered buildings, not sprinklered buildings. Measuring along the natural and unobstructed path of travel is addressed in Section 1017.3; therefore, only the specific language regarding the seating is needed. A reference back to Section 1017 will allow for consistency over time and pick up all the technical criteria for exit access travel distance.
The exceptions are reworded for consistency and correct code terminology. In addition, there is a concern over consistent interpretation. The exception's current text has terminology that could be interpreted as always measuring travel distance to the building exit at grade. Where there are provisions for smoke protection, or where there are facilities that are open to the exterior, historically these facilities have allowed for open stairway where the means of egress is open to the outside.
The 2012 IBC included an exception to Section 1016.3 (now Section 1017.3) that allowed exit access travel distance to be measured to the top of an open exit access stairway or ramp in outdoor seating. This was deleted by E7-12 with the explanation in the reason that this was more appropriately addressed in this section.
Sections 1029.8, 1029.8.1 and 1029.9.5, 1029.12.2.1, 1029.12.2.2, 1009.3, 1009.4 – add 'open-air' to clarify that both smoke protection options are viable in these code sections.
Section 1019.3 Exception 7 is revised to be consistent with the allowances in Section 1029.7, which addresses other than just open air seating.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal is a clarification of provisions. There will be no change in the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The change is a cleanup that addresses open air seating and provides consistent terminology throughout.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E132-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E134-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1029.9.1 (IFC[BE] 1029.9.1)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1029.9.1 Minimum aisle width. The minimum clear width for aisles shall comply with one of the following:

Forty-eight inches (1219 mm) for stepped aisles having seating on each side both sides.

Exception: Thirty-six inches (914 mm) where the stepped aisles serve less than 50 seats.

Thirty-six inches (914 mm) for stepped aisles having seating on only one side.

Exception: Twenty-three inches (584 mm) between a stepped aisle handrail and seating where a stepped aisle does not serve more than five rows on one side.

Twenty-three inches (584 mm) between a stepped aislehandrail or guard and seating where the stepped aisle is subdivided by a mid-aisle handrail.
Forty-two inches (1067 mm) for level or ramped aisles having seating on both sides.

Exceptions:

Thirty-six inches (914 mm) where the aisle serves less than 50 seats.
Thirty inches (762 mm) where the aisle serves less than 15 seats and does not serve more than 14 seats as part of an accessible route.

Thirty-six inches (914 mm) for level or ramped aisles having seating on only one side.

Exception: For other than ramped aisles that serve as part of an accessible route, 30 Thirsty inches (762 mm) where the ramped aisle serves less than 15 seats and does not serve more than 14 seats as part of anaccessible route.

Reason: In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled IBC Coordination with the New ADAAG. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
The intent of this proposal is consistency in language. E87-12 added the language as a reminder for the accessible route to the exception for Item 5, but missed the same concern in Item 4 exception 2. The accessible route provisions require 36" width and are required by Section 1009 and 1104 to the wheelchair spaces for ingress and egress. The reminder should be in both locations. If it is felt that this is already addressed, it should be removed from the exception in Item 5.
The strike out of 'ramped' in the exception to item 5 is because this item deals with both ramped and level aisles. The limitation of this option to 'ramped' aisles was a mistake in E87-12. Level aisles are less hazardous than ramped aisles. Changing the

language to 'serve less than 15 seats' instead 'does not serve more than 14 seats' is not a technical change. It is for consistency with the language in the other exceptions.
There will be a Group B corresponding code change proposal to IFC Section 1104.23 to provide consistency and so that existing requirements are not more restrictive than new. The ICC Fire Code Action Committee (FCAC) supports this proposal and will be submitting the Group B proposal that follows:

IFC 1104.23 Minimum aisle width. The minimum clear width of aisles shall be comply with one of the following:

Forty-two inches (1067 mm) for aisle stairs stepped aisles having seating on each both sides.

Exception: Thirty-six inches (914 mm) where the stepped aisle serves less than 50 seats.

Thirty-six inches (914 mm) for stepped aisles having seating on only one side.

Exceptions:

Thirty inches (760 mm) for catchment areas serving not more than 60 seats.
Twenty-three inches (584 mm) between a stepped aisle handrail and seating where a stepped an aisle does not serve more than five rows on one side.

Twenty inches (508 mm) between a stepped aisle handrail or guard and seating where the aisle is subdivided by the handrail.
Forty-two inches (1067 mm) for level or ramped aisles having seating on both sides.

Exceptions:

Thirty-six inches (914 mm) where the aisle serves less than 50 seats.
Thirty inches (762 mm) where the aisle serves less than 15 seats and does not serve as part of an accessible route.

Thirty-six inches (914 mm) for level or ramped aisles having seating on only one side.

Exception: Thirty inches (760 mm) for catchment areas serving not more than 60 seats and does not serve as part of an accessible route .

In Group I-2, where aisles are used for movement of patients in beds, aisles shall comply with Section 1105.5.8.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is a clarification and coordination of current requirements; therefore, there is no impact on the cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This is a coordination clean up for minimum aisle width.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E134-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E135-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1029.10.1, 1029.10.2, 1029.10.2.1, 1029.10.2.2, 1029.10.3; (IFC[BE] 1029.10.1, 1029.10.2,
1029.10.2.1, 1029.10.2.2, 1029.10.3)

Proponent: Ed Roether, representing Ed Roether Consulting (ed@edroetherconsulting.com)

Revise as follows:

1029.10 Transitions. Transitions between stairways and stepped aisles shall comply with either Section 1029.10.1 or 1029.10.2.

1029.10.1 Transitions and to stairways that maintain stepped aisle riser and tread
dimensions. Stepped aisles, transitions and stairways that maintain the stepped aisle riser and tread dimensions shall comply with Section 1029.13 as one exit access component.

1029.10.2 Transitions to stairways that do not maintain stepped aisle riser and tread dimensions. Transitions to between stairways from and stepped aisles with having different riser and
tread dimensions that differ from the stairways shall comply with Sections 1029.10.2.1 through 1029.10.3.

1029.10.2.1 Stairways and stepped aisles in a straight run. Transitions where the stairway
is Where stairwaysand stepped aisle are in a straight run from thestepped aisle the transition shall have one of the following:

A minimum depth of 22 inches (559 mm) where the treads on the descending side of the transition have greater depth and.
A minimum depth of 30 inches (762 mm) where the treads on the descending side of the transition have lesser depth.

1029.10.2.2 Stairways and stepped aisles that change direction from stepped aisles. Transitions where the stairway changes direction from the stepped aisle shall have a minimum depth of 11 inches (280 mm) or the stepped aisle tread depth, whichever is greater, between the stepped aisle and stairway.

1029.10.3 Transition marking. A distinctive marking stripe shall be provided at each nosing or leading edge adjacent to the transition. Such stripe shall be not less than a minimum of 1 inch (25 mm), and not more than a maximum of 2 inches (51 mm), wide. The edge marking stripe shall be distinctively different from the stepped aisle contrasting marking stripe.

Reason: This section was extensively revised last cycle. The intent of this proposal is to provide minor revisions to clarify the language relating to the transitions between stepped aisle and stairways.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This is a clarification only.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This is a coordination clean up for the transition provisions added to the stepped aisle last cycle.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E135-15	AS

Code Change No: E137-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section: 1029.11(New), 1029.11.1(New), 1029.11.2(New); (IFC[BE] 1029.11(New), 1029.11.1(New), 1029.11.2(New))

Proponent: Ed Roether, representing Ed Roether Consulting (ed@edroetherconsulting.com)

Add new text as follows:

1029.11 Stepped aisles at vomitories. Stepped aisles that change direction at vomitories shall comply with 1029.11.1 Transitions between a stepped aisle above a vomitory and stepped aisle to the side of vomitory shall comply with 1029.11.2.

1029.11.1 Stepped aisles that change direction at vomitories. Stepped aisle treads where the stepped aisle changes direction at a vomitory shall have a minimum depth of 11 inches (280 mm) or the stepped aisle tread depth, whichever is greater. The height of a stepped aisle tread above a transition at a vomitory shall comply with Section 1029.13.2.2.

1029.11.2 Stepped aisle transitions at the top of vomitories. Transitions between the stepped aisle above a vomitory and stepped aisles to the side of a vomitory shall have a minimum depth of 11 inches (280mm) or the stepped aisle tread depth, whichever is greater.

(Renumber subsequent sections)

Reason: The intent of this proposal is to provide language addressing the most common concerns with stepped aisles around vomitories.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction Attempting to clarifty the language.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal fills the gap when dealing with stepped aisles as they move around a vomitory.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E137-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E141-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1030.1; (IFC[BE] 1030.1)

Proponent: Jeffrey Shapiro, National Multifamily Housing Council, representing National Multifamily Housing Council

Revise as follows:

1030.1 General. In addition to the means of egress required by this chapter, provisions emergency escape and rescue openings shall be made for emergency escape and rescue openings
provided in Group R-2 the following occupancies in accordance with Tables 1006.3.2(1) and 1006.3.2(2) and Group R-3 occupancies. :

Group R-2 occupancies located in stories with only one exit or access to only one exit as permitted by Tables 1006.3.2(1) and 1006.3.2(2)
Group R-3 occupancies.

Basements and sleeping rooms below the fourth story above grade plane shall have at least one exterior emergency escape and rescue opening in accordance with this section.
Where basements contain one or more sleeping rooms, emergency escape and rescue openings shall be required in each sleeping room, but shall not be required in adjoining areas of the basement. Such openings shall open directly into a public way or to a yard or court that opens to a public way.
Exceptions:

Basements with a ceiling height of less than 80 inches (2032 mm) shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings.
Emergency escape and rescue openings are not required from basements or sleeping rooms that have an exit door or exit access door that opens directly into a public way or to
a yard, court or exterior exit balcony that opens to a public way.
Basements without habitable spaces and having not more than 200 square feet (18.6 m2) in floor area shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings.

Reason: The proposal is simply a clarification of the current requirements. As currently worded, it is unclear in Section 1030 that emergency escape and rescue openings are only required for Group R-2 occupancies that are located on stories with a single exit. That is what the references to Tables 1021.2(1) and 1021.2(2) convey, but forcing the reader to go back to 1021.2 to determine this makes interpreting and applying Section 1030 unnecessarily cumbersome, given that most R-2 occupancies have 2 exits and are not required to comply with Section 1030.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is simply a clarification of current provisions and does not increase the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This proposal fills the gap when dealing with stepped aisles as they move around a vomitory.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E141-15	AS

Code Change No: E145-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1030.1; (IFC[BE] 1030.1)

Proponent: Jeffrey Shapiro, International Code Consultants, representing International Code Consultants

Revise as follows:

1030.1 General.  In addition to the means of egress required by this chapter, provisions shall be made for emergency escape and rescue openings in Group R-2 occupancies in accordance with Tables 1006.3.2(1) and 1006.3.2(2) and Group R-3 occupancies. Basements and sleeping rooms below the fourth story above grade plane shall have at least one exterior emergency escape and rescue opening in accordance with this section. Where basements contain one or more sleeping rooms, emergency escape and rescue openings shall be required in each sleeping room, but shall not be required in adjoining areas of the basement. Such openings shall open directly into a public way or to a yard or court that opens to
a public way.

Exceptions:

Basements with a ceiling height of less than 80 inches (2032 mm) shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings.
Emergency escape and rescue openings are not required from basements or sleeping rooms that have an exit door or exit access door that opens directly into a public way or to
a yard, court or exterior exit balcony that opens to a public way.
Basements without habitable spaces and having not more than 200 square feet (18.6 m2) in floor area shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings.
Within individual dwelling and sleeping units in Groups R-2 and R-3, where the buildings is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2 or 903.3.1.3, sleeping rooms in basements shall not be required to have emergency escape and rescue openings provided that the basement has one of the following:
One means of egress and one emergency escape and rescue opening
Two means of egress.

Reason: This Section has very limited application, only applying to Group R-3 and a small number of Group R-2 occupancies that have only one exit per story. It does not apply to Group R-1 or any Group I occupancy, all of which are permitted to have sleeping rooms in basements and stories of sprinklered buildings, even those with a single exit per Tables 1006.3.2(1) and 1006.3.2(2). The reason for not applying a similar allowance to Group R-3 and single exit Group R-2 is not evident considering that other occupancies pose a more significant life-safety risk.
Nevertheless, rather than seeking full equivalency with these other occupancies when sprinklers are provided, this proposal seeks only a partial credit for basements, with the hope of finding common ground with parties who have previously argued against a general exception for means of escape in fully sprinklered buildings. This proposal maintains at least one basement escape window or door or an additional means of egress in addition to the primary means of egress. Plus, it is important to remember that both sprinklers and hard-wired interconnected smoke alarms are required to qualify for the proposed exception.
This combination of sprinklers and smoke alarms is well established by the NFPA 101 - Life Safety Code as a basis for eliminating all required means of escape openings from sprinklered one- and two-family dwellings, hotels, motels, apartments and similar uses. In addition, the states of New Hampshire and Virginia have amended their statewide code adoptions by eliminating all requirement for means of escape openings when sprinklers are provided. Minnesota adopted a similar amendment, but the allowance was limited to exempting all basement escape windows (these were IRC amendments, but the logic conveys to the IBC discussion).
There are many reasons for adding this exception to the IBC. First, 16 states have legislatively preempted adoption of residential sprinkler requirements for one- and two-family dwellings, and in some cases, townhouses. Recognizing that some homes and townhouses may be built under the IBC (perhaps where IRC height limits are exceeded or where the IRC isn't adopted),

it is important to provide code incentives to strongly encourage the installation of sprinkler systems. It is also fair to offer these incentives to builders and homebuyers in other states. Second, passing this exception in the IBC will remove the question of IBC- IRC correlation as a basis for arguing against a similar change that will be proposed to the IRC in the Group B code cycle. Third, there is less benefit to a basement means of escape because the dynamics of a basement fire differ from fires above grade. In a non-sprinklered fire event, it might be possible for an occupant to be rescued or escape using an above-grade window because the lower portion of the window may initially draw fresh air. However, a basement window well will quickly fill with smoke and heated gases if there's an uncontrolled fire in the basement, and the importance of fire sprinklers in providing extra egress time cannot be overstated. Likewise, by the time firefighters arrive, rescuing an occupant from a developed basement fire through a means of escape window or using such window as an escape route for a firefighter seems highly unlikely. Firefighter safety is far better assured by sprinklers.
Looking at the value of this incentive, the cost savings associated with eliminating even one basement escape window and the associated ladder and window well is significant. Combine that with the benefit of eliminating leakage and maintenance issues and tripping/fall hazards that may be associated with window wells, and the incentive grows. Finally, recognize the enormous benefit that this change will offer for homebuyers, who will gain the option of finishing a rough-in basement without the contsraint of laying out sleeping rooms based on existing window locations or having to add windows to an existing basement. This single incentive might be valuable enough to encourage voluntary sprinkler installations, and still, the level of safety will exceed what is required by the IBC for similar occupancies and by NFPA 101.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal adds an option to the code. There is no requirement to utilize this option; however, if it is used, the cost of construction may decrease.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This allowance would encourage people to voluntarily put in a residential sprinkler system. This proposal provides flexibility for the location of the bedrooms in the basement to not be directly attached to the emergency escape and rescue opening. Having a sprinkler system in a single family home does seem a reasonable trade off for the orientation/location of the emergency escape and rescue openings. There still needs to be two ways out of the basement.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E146-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E146-15

Original Proposal

Section: 1030.1.1(New), 1030.4; (IFC[BE] 1030.1.1(New), 1030.4)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Add new text as follows:

1030.1.1 Operational constraints and opening control devices. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys or tools. Window opening control devices complying with ASTM F 2090 shall be permitted for use on windows serving as a required emergency escape and rescue opening.

Revise as follows:

1030.4 1030.5 Operational constraints. Bars, grilles, covers and screens. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys or tools.
Bars, grilles, grates covers, screens or similar devices are permitted to be placed over emergency escape and rescue openings, bulkhead enclosures, or window wells that serve such openings, provided that the minimum net clear opening size complies with Section 1030.21030.1.1 through 1030.4 and such devices shall be releasable or removable from the inside without the use of a key, tool or force greater than that which is required for normal operation of the emergency escape and rescue opening. Where such bars, grilles, grates covers, screens or similar devices are installed in existing buildings, smoke alarms shall be installed in accordance with Section 907.2.11 regardless of the valuation of the alteration.

(Renumber the following sections:)

1030.5 1030.4 Window wells. (No change to text.)

1030.5.1 1030.4.1Minimum size. (No change to text.)

1030.5.2 1030.4.2Ladders or steps. (No change to text.)

Reason: In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled Child Window Safety. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
2015 IRC Section R310.1.1 specifically notes that devices complying with ASTM F2090 do not jeopardize compliance with the emergency escape and rescue provisions. A similar requirement is needed in the IBC.
Note that the requirements for bars, grilles, covers and screens are addressed in IRC R310.4. This proposal splits and relocates the requirements to be consistent with what is in the IRC for emergency and escape windows operational constraints. The relocation of the provisions for window wells is to allow for the window size requirements to be grouped together for reference in the same manner as the IRC.

R310.1.1 Operational constraints and opening control devices. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys, tools or special knowledge. Window opening control devices complying with ASTM F 2090 shall be permitted for use on windows serving as a required emergency escape and rescue opening.

R310.4 Bars, grilles, covers and screens. Bars, grilles, covers, screens or similar devices are permitted to be placed over emergency escape and rescue openings, bulkhead enclosures, or window wells that serve such openings, provided that the minimum net clear opening size complies with Sections R310.1.1 to R310.2.3, and such devices shall be releasable or removable from the inside without the use of a key, tool, special knowledge or force greater than that required for the normal operation of the escape and rescue opening.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is coordination with IRC allowances for emergency escape windows and allows for another design option.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This provides added clarity to the code for operation of emergency and escape openings. This is a coordination with the IRC. This proposal recognizes the window control devices in ASTM F2090.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E146-15	AS

Code Change No: E147-15 Part II

Original Proposal

Back

Section: IEBC: 406, 406.4 (New), 701.4 (New).

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

THIS IS A 2 PART CODE CHANGE. PART I WAS HEARD BY THE IBC-MEANS OF EGRESS COMMITTEE. PART II WAS HEARD BY THE IEBC COMMITTEE.
Revise as follows:

SECTION 406
GLASS REPLACEMENT WINDOWS AND REPLACEMENT WINDOWS EMERGENCY ESCAPE OPENINGS

Add new text as follows:

406.4 Emergency escape and rescue openings. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys or tools. Bars, grilles, grates or similar devices are permitted to be placed over emergency escape and rescue openings provided the minimum net clear opening size complies with the code that was in effect at the time of construction and such devices shall be releasable or removable from the inside without the use of a key, tool or force greater than that which is required for normal operation of the escape and rescue opening. Where such bars, grilles, grates or similar devices are installed, they shall not reduce the net clear opening of the emergency escape and rescue openings and smoke alarms shall be installed in accordance with Section 907.2.11 of the International Building Code regardless of the valuation of the alteration.

701.4 Emergency escape and rescue openings. Emergency escape and rescue openings shall be operational from the inside of the room without the use of keys or tools. Bars, grilles, grates or similar devices are permitted to be placed over emergency escape and rescue openings provided the minimum net clear opening size complies with the code that was in effect at the time of construction and such devices shall be releasable or removable from the inside without the use of a key, tool or force greater than that which is required for normal operation of the escape and rescue opening. Where such bars, grilles, grates or similar devices are installed, they shall not reduce the net clear opening of the emergency escape and rescue openings and smoke alarms shall be installed in accordance with Section 907.2.11 of the International Building Code regardless of the valuation of the alteration.

Staff note: Emergency escape and rescue openings provisions are also included in Sections 406.3 amd 702.5.

Reason: The emergency escape and rescue provisions within IBC section 1030.4 includes requirements that speak to installations that may take place on an existing building, yet no such provision is found within the IEBC. It is appropriate to have such a reference within the IEBC.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This provision was seen as necessary to correlate with the IBC. The IBC references existing buildings with regard to installation of security bars on emergency escape and rescue openings but the language was not found in the IEBC. The proposal provides that consistency by placing the language in both the prescriptive and work area methods with the other window related requirements.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E147-15 Part II	AS

Back

Code Change No: E148-15

Original Proposal

Section: IFC: [BE] 1031.4.

Proponent: Stephen DiGiovanni, Clark County Building Department, representing Southern Nevada Chapter of ICC (sdigiovanni@clarkcountynv.gov)

Revise as follows:

[BE] 1031.4 Exit signs. Exit signs shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the building code that applied at the time of construction and the applicable provisions in Section 10131104. Decorations, furnishings, equipment or adjacent signage that impairs the visibility of exit signs, creates confusion or prevents identification of the exit shall not be allowed.

Reason: Current language has been interpreted to require existing buildings to install new components to meet the provisions of Section 1013. In effect, the current code acts as a retroactive provision. Retroactive requirements should be contained in Chapter
This revision requires that the building have exit signs in accordance with the applicable code of record and in accordance with the applicable requirements from Section 1104. This is more appropriate for dealing with existing buildings.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction There is no increase in requirements

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This section should not require a retrofit for existing buildings when exit signage requirements are revised. This would allow for consistency in signage throughout an existing building.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E148-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section(s): 1103.2.14

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1103.2.14 Walk-in coolers and freezers. Walk-in coolers cooler and freezers intended for freezer equipment accessed from employee use only work areas are not required to comply with this chapter.

Reason: The current language could be misread to allow for giant coolers where employees work all day or where they are large enough to allow fork lifts. The revised language would be clarify that this intended to address a walk-in cooler equipment provided off a restaurant commercial kitchen. It is not intended to allow for a walk-in refrigerated room that was part of a facility such as a meat packing plant. 'Employee work area' is a defined term.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled IBC Coordination with the New ADAAG. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The proposal is a clarification of current requirements; therefore, there is no impact on the cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify proposal as follows:

1003.2.14 Walk-in coolers and freezers. Walk-in cooler and freezer equipment accessed only from employee work areas are not required to comply with this chapter.

Committee Reason: The modification to add ‘only’ would reinforce the intent of the main proposal.
This proposal will avoid the mis-interpretation that this is an exception for large cooler/freezer buildings. The term ‘work areas’ is a defined term, so this should clarify that the coolers exempted are those that are back of house, not a cooler open to the public for shopping.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E150-15	AM

Original Proposal

Section: 1104.4

Proponent: Gene Boecker, representing Code Consultants, Inc. (geneb@codeconsultants.com)

Revise as follows:

1104.4 Multistory buildings and facilities. At least one accessible route shall connect
each accessible story, and mezzanine and occupiable roof in multilevel buildings and facilities
.
Exceptions:

An accessible route is not required to stories,and mezzanines and occupiable roof that have an aggregate area of not more than 3,000 square feet (278.7 m2) and are located above and below accessible levels. This exception shall not apply to:
1.1 Multiple tenant facilities of Group M occupancies containing five or more tenant spaces used for the sales or rental of goods and where at least one such tenant space is located on a floor level above or below the accessible levels;
1.2. Stories or mezzanines containing offices of health care providers (Group B or I);
1.3 Passenger transportation facilities and airports (Group A-3 or B);or
1.4. Government buildings.
Stories, or mezzanines or occupiable roofs that do not contain accessible elements or other spaces as determined by Section 1107 or 1108 are not required to be served by
an accessible route from an accessible level.
In air traffic control towers, an accessible route is not required to serve the cab and the floor immediately below the cab.
Where a two-story building or facility has one story or mezzanine with an occupant load of five or fewer persons that does not contain public use space, that story or mezzanine shall not be required to be connected by an accessible route to the story above or below.

Reason: The added phrase "occupiable roof" is proposed. As written, the current text would exclude anything that is not a story or mezzanine. Because "story" is defined as the space between a floor and ceiling/roof above, an occupiable roof of a hotel with a large swimming pool or a roof garden for an apartment or office would not be included as requiring an accessible route. If these roof areas contain elements which must be accessible, they should be included in the requirement for access to those levels. Simply because a space does not have a roof but otherwise functions as a part of the building, it should not be excluded from access.
During the prior code cycle the term "floor" was changed to "story." consequently, the ability to easily address the occupiable roof was lost. This proposal will restore the original intent.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This is a clarification. The revised language is only addressing what should alreay be the case.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Access to occupied roofs is an important element to providing equal access for persons with disabilities. Adding roofs to the vertical access requirements is appropriate.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E151-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1106.5

Proponent: Kathleen Petrie, representing City of Seattle, Department of Planning and Development (kathleen.petrie@seattle.gov)

Revise as follows:

1106.5 Van spaces. For every six or fraction of six accessible parking spaces, at least one shall be a van-accessible parking space.

Exception: In Group U private garages that serve Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies, van-accessible spaces located within private garages shall be permitted to have vehicular routes, entrances, parking spaces and access aisles with a minimum vertical clearance of 7 feet (2134 mm).

Reason: As currently written, this section provides governs van accessible spaces within garages of R-2 or R-3 occupancy spaces. Garages are U occupancies not R occupancies, so this exception is actually directed toward the U occupancy that is accessory to the residential occupancy.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This modification does not impact how a structure is constructed, so costs are not increased or decreased

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The addition of ‘Group U’ clarifies that this exception is only applicable to small private garages, not garage levels that are limited to resident parking.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E154-15	AS

Code Change No: E159-15

Back

Original Proposal

Section: 1107.6.1, 1107.6.1.1

Proponent: Dominic Marinelli, representing United Spinal Association (nroether@accessibility- services.com)

Revise as follows:

1107.6.1 Group R-1. Accessible units and Type B units shall be provided in Group R-1 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1107.6.1.1 and 1107.6.1.2.
1107.6.1.1 Accessible units. Accessible dwelling units and sleeping units shall be provided in accordance with Table 1107.6.1.1. Where buildings On a multi-building site, where structures contain more than 50 dwelling units or sleeping units, the number of Accessible units shall bedetermined perbuilding. Where buildings structure. On a multi-buildingsite, wherestructures contain 50 or fewer dwelling units or sleeping units, all dwelling units and sleeping units on a site shall be considered to determine the total number of Accessible units. Accessible units shall be dispersed among the various classes of units.

Reason: The purpose of this proposal is to be consistent with the language used for accessible housing, and to coordinate better with the DOJ intent.
The DOJ regulations read as follows:
Places of lodging. Places of lodging subject to this part [of the title III regulation] shall comply with the provisions of the 2010 Standards applicable to transient lodging, including, but not limited to, the requirements for transient lodging guest rooms in sections 224 and 806.
Guest rooms. Guest rooms with mobility features in places of lodging subject to the transient lodging requirements of 2010 Standards shall be provided as follows--
Facilities that are subject to the same permit application on a common site that each have 50 or fewer guest rooms may be combined for the purposes of determining the required number of accessible rooms and type of accessible bathing facility in accordance with table 224.2 to section 224.2 of the 2010 Standards.
Facilities with more than 50 guest rooms shall be treated separately for the purposes of determining the required number of accessible rooms and type of accessible bathing facility in accordance with table 224.2 to section 224.2 of the 2010 Standards.
It is always difficult to match ADA intent with IBC language. IBC defines 'building area' as what is defined by fire walls and exterior walls. 'Facility' is defined in the IBC as everything on a site. It seems like the intent here is to be consistent with the FHA language for Type B units - that regardless of fire walls, this is a structure that operates together as a unit, but it is not all the detached buildings on a site.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction No additional cost. Attempting to clarify language.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The change for counting hotel rooms on a multi- building site for accessibility is a coordination with DOJ requirements.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E159-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E160-15

Original Proposal

Section(s): 1107.6.2.2, 1107.6.2.2.1, 1107.6.2.3, 1107.6.3, 1107.6.4

Proponent: Carl Baldassarra, P.E., FSFPA, P.E., FSFPE, Chair, ICC Code Technology Committee, representing Code Technology Committee (CTC@iccsafe.org); Michael O'Brian, Chair, Fire Code Action Committee (fcac@iccsafe.org); Edward Kulik, Chair, Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Revise as follows:

1107.6.2 Group R-2. Accessible units, Type A units and Type B units shall be provided in Group R-2 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1107.6.2.1 through 1107.6.2.3.

1107.6.2.1 Live/work units. In live/work units constructed in accordance with Section 419, the nonresidential portion is required to be accessible. In a structure where there are four or more live/work units intended to be occupied as a residence, the residential portion of the live/work unit shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.

1107.6.2.2 Apartment houses, monasteries and convents. Type A units and Type B units shall be provided in apartment houses, monasteries and convents in accordance with Sections 1107.6.2.2.1 and 1107.6.2.2.2.

Bedrooms in monasteries and convents shall be counted as units for the purpose of determining the number of units. Where the bedrooms are grouped in sleeping units, only one bedroom in each sleeping unit shall count towards the number of required Type A units.

1107.6.2.2.1 Type A units. In Group R-2 occupancies containing more than 20 dwelling units or sleeping units, at least 2 percent but not less than one of the units shall be a Type A unit. All Group R-2 units on
a site shall be considered to determine the total number of units and the required number of Type A units. Type A units shall be dispersed among the various classes of units. Bedrooms in monasteries and convents shall be counted as sleeping units for the purpose of determining the number of units. Where the sleeping units are grouped into suites, only one sleeping unit in each suite shall count towards the number of required Type A units.

Exceptions:

The number of Type A units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.
Existing structures on a site shall not contribute to the total number of units on a site.

1107.6.2.2.2 Type B units. Where there are four or more dwelling units or sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single structure, every dwelling unit and sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.

1107.6.2.3 Group R-2 other than live/work units, apartment houses, monasteries and convents.

In Group R-2 occupancies, other than live/work units, apartment houses, monasteries and convents falling within the scope of Sections 1107.6.2.1 and 1107.6.2.2, Accessible units and Type B units shall be provided in accordance with Sections 1107.6.2.3.1 and 1107.6.2.3.2. Bedrooms within congregate living facilities, dormitories, sororities, fraternities, and boarding houses shall be counted as sleeping units for the purpose of determining the number of units. Where the sleeping units bedrooms are grouped
into suites dwelling or sleeping units, only one sleeping unit bedroom in each suite dwelling or sleeping units shall be permitted to count towards the number of required Accessible units.

1107.6.2.3.1 Accessible units. Accessible dwelling units and sleeping units shall be provided in accordance with Table 1107.6.1.1.

1107.6.2.3.2 Type B units. Where there are four or more dwelling units or sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single structure, every dwelling unit and every sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.

1107.6.3 Group R-3. In Group R-3 occupancies where there are four or more dwelling units or sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single structure, every dwelling unit and sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Bedrooms within congregate living facilities, dormitories, sororities, fraternities, and boarding houses shall be counted as sleeping units for the purpose of determining the number of units.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.

1107.6.4 Group R-4. Accessible units and Type B units shall be provided in Group R-4 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1107.6.4.1 and 1107.6.4.2. Bedrooms in Group R-4 facilities shall be counted as sleeping units for the purpose of determining the number of units.

1107.6.4.1 Accessible units. In Group R-4 Condition 1, at least one of the sleeping units shall be
an Accessible unit. In Group R-4 Condition 2, at least two of the sleeping units shall be an Accessible unit.

1107.6.4.2 Type B units. In structures with four or more sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence, every sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.

Reason: ADA and FHA count bedrooms in dormitories and congregate residences when determining the number of units for accessibility requirements. With the recognition that suite designs can include more than one bedroom in a sleeping unit, the requirements here need to be tweaked to align with these federal regulations.
This is part of a group of proposals to address this style of design and group homes within single family residences. Changes are proposed for the definition for sleeping units, the Group classifications in Section 310.4 and 310.5, separation requirements in Section 420, and coordination with accessibility requirements in Section 1107. Proposals will be put forward as part of Group B for fire and smoke alarm systems. The proposals could work separately.
The ICC Code Technology Committee (CTC) has just completed its 10th year. The ICC Board has decided to sunset the CTC. The sunset plan includes re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). The two remaining CTC Areas of Study are Care Facilities and Elevator Lobbies/WTC Elevator issues. This proposal falls under the Care Facilities Area of Study. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx
This proposal is submitted by the ICC Fire Code Action Committee (FCAC). This ICC committee was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance assigned International Codes or portions thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the Fire-CAC has held 10 open meetings and numerous Regional Work Group and Task Group meetings

and conference calls which included members of the committees as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes. Related documentation and reports are posted on the FAC website
at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CAC/Pages/default.aspx?usertoken={token}&Site=icc
The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website
at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.
Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction This is a clarification, not a change in requirements.

Staff note: There is published errata for Section 1107.6.4, 1107.6.4.1 and 1107.6.4.2. The errata in incorporated into this proposal as existing text.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Modified
Modify proposal as follows:

1107.6.3 Group R-3. In Group R-3 occupancies where there are four or more dwelling units or sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence in a single structure, every dwelling unit and sleeping unit intended to be occupied as a residence shall be a Type B unit.

Bedrooms within congregate living facilities, dormitories, sororities, fraternities, and boarding houses shall be counted as sleeping units for the purpose of determining the number of units.

Exception: The number of Type B units is permitted to be reduced in accordance with Section 1107.7.

1107.6.4 Group R-4. Accessible units and Type B units shall be provided in Group R-4 occupancies in accordance with Sections 1107.6.4.1 and 1107.6.4.2. Bedrooms in Group R-4 facilities shall be counted as sleeping units for the purpose of determining the number of units.

Committee Reason: The modification to add ‘sleeping’ in two locations was made by the committee assuming a search and  replace error in the proposal.
The change would bring the code into alignment with the DOJ interpretation for counting units within dormitories that have bedrooms in suite configurations rather than separate bedrooms down a common hallway.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E160-15	AM

Original Proposal

Section: 1107.7.1.2

Proponent: David Collins (dcollins@preview-group.com)

Revise as follows:

1107.7.1.2 Additional stories with Type B units. On all other stories that have a building entrancewith entrances not included in proximity determining compliance with Section 1107.7.1.1, that are proximate to arrival points intended to serve units on that story, as indicated in Items 1 and 2 below, all dwelling
units and sleeping units intended to be occupied as a residence served by that entrance on that story shall be Type B units.

Where the slopes of the undisturbed site measured between the planned entrance and all vehicular or pedestrian arrival points within 50 feet (15 240 mm) of the planned entrance are 10 percent or less, and
Where the slopes of the planned finished grade measured between the entrance and all vehicular or pedestrian arrival points within 50 feet (15 240 mm) of the planned entrance are 10 percent or less.

Where no such arrival points are not within 50 feet (15 240 mm) of the entrance, the closest arrival point shall be used to determine access unless that arrival point serves the story required by Section 1107.7.1.1.

Reason: The contorted language in this section is difficult to follow and should be clarified. The code is trying to make it clear that more than one entrance may provide access, and each of those entrances may serve other stories. The criteria are then used to determine if the units that are on those other floors must have Type B units.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
The intent of the code change is to clarify how the various routes into a building are to be considered and does not change the technical requirements, and has not impact on the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: The proposal is dealing with Type B units in Group R-4 facilities. Swing up grab bars are already permitted in the ICC A117.1 for Type B units. This addition is not needed.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E163-15	AS

Original Proposal

Section: 1109.2.1.2

Proponent: Yafeng Cao, KTA Group, Peer Review Studio, representing self; Gene Boecker, representing Code Consultants, Inc. (geneb@codeconsultants.com)

Revise as follows:

1109.2.1.2 Family or assisted-use toilet rooms. Family or assisted-use toilet rooms shall include only one water closet and only one lavatory. A family or assisted-use bathing room in accordance with Section 1109.2.1.3 shall be considered a family or assisted-use toilet room.

Exception Exceptions: Additional fixtures shall be permitted by one of the following:

A urinal is permitted to be provided in addition to the water closet in a family or assisted-use toilet room.
An additional child height water closet and child height lavatory is permitted in a family/assisted use toilet room.

Reason:
CAO: ADAAG has evolved to include the building elements to cover children's dimensions. Some architects propose providing one adult water close and one children water closet in the same family or assisted-use toilet room for private use but current
IBC 1109.2.1.2 does not recognize it as "family or assisted-use toilet room" by limiting to only one water closet and only one lavatory.
Providing two types of water closets and lavatories, one type for adults and one type for children, in the same family/assisted- use toilet room is a higher level of accommodation and should be allowed and recognized.
In regard to the private use nature of the family or assisted-use toilet rooms, the multiple water closets and lavatories should be counted as one in calculating the minimum number of plumbing fixture counting as stipulated in IBC 2902.1.

BOECKER: While the family or assisted-use toilet room is required because of the benefits to persons with disabilities and caregivers, the nature of "family" is that smaller children will also be present. The purpose of the "family" toilet room is to allow the parent the ability to use the facility as well as the child. It is quite common to provide child sized fixtures in these rooms for mercantile and assembly occupancies as a benefit for patrons of the facility. The added language to the exception line makes it clear that the intent is to use only one of the two exceptions. Either a urinal can be added or the two child height fixtures can be added; but, not both.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
CAO: This is a design option.

BOECKER: The exception allows for an option which does not increase cost.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Allowing for an option for a fixtures designed for children within a family/assisted use bathroom is a common design configuration that is a benefit for families. Since the family/assisted use bathroom exceeds ADA, this would not be a conflict with harmonization.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E165-15	AS

Back

Code Change No: E167-15

Original Proposal

Section: 202 (New), 1109.15

Proponent: Stephen DiGiovanni, Clark County Building Department, representing Southern Nevada Chapter of ICC (sdigiovanni@clarkcountynv.gov)

Revise as follows:

1109.15 Gaming machines and gaming tables. Two A minimum of two percent, but not less than one, of each gaming machine type of and gaming table provided type shall be accessible and provided with a front approach. Two percent of. Where multiple gaming areas occur, accessible gaming
machines provided shall be accessible and provided with a front approach. Accessible gaming machines tables shall be distributed throughout the different types of gaming machines provided.. 

Add new definitions as follows:

SECTION 202 DEFINITIONS

GAMING To deal, operate, carry on, conduct, maintain or expose for play any game played with cards, dice, equipment or any mechanical, electromechanical or electronic device or machine for money, property, checks, credit or any representative of value except wherein occurring at private home or as operated by a charitable or educational organization.

GAMING AREA. Single or multiple areas of a building or facility where gaming machines or tables are present and gaming occurs, including but not limited to: primary casino gaming areas, VIP gaming areas, high-roller gaming areas, bar-tops, lobbies, dedicated rooms or spaces such as in retail or restaurant establishments, sports books, tournament areas.

GAMING MACHINE TYPE. Categorization of gaming machines per type of game played on them, including, but not limited to; slot machines, video poker, video keno.

GAMING TABLE TYPE. Categorization of gaming tables per the type of gamw played on them, including, but are not limited to; baccarat, bingo, blackjack/21, craps, pai-gow, poker, roulette.

Reason: Similar language, having the effect of requiring a number of gaming machines and tables to be made accessible, was added to the 2015 IBC. That language is somewhat vague, and does not take into consideration the various gaming locations, designations, and needs of the local gaming industry. Therefore, it could be interpreted as broadly or narrowly as each plan-review agency deems necessary. The result could be a vast over-application of these provisions to every differing gaming machine type (ex: monopoly vs. wheel of fortune), which was never the original intent.
This proposed amendment is designed to narrow the requirements by noting additional factors, and not penalizing casinos having numerous styles of the same gaming machine type. Although most gaming throughout the United States occurs in larger casinos, there are some States where gaming occurs at smaller "non-casino" locations. These include, but are not limited to; bars, grocery stores, convenience stores and restaurants to name a few. This verbiage allows it to be scaled for both large and small venues, and be applied regardless of the type of venue where machines are present.
Additionally, the separation of a single large casino into multiple special use/access gaming areas is also considered. This proposed amendment takes into consideration these factors and requires distribution among gaming types and gaming areas to assure a reasonable level of access to a significant variety of gaming activities for all people.
The proposed amendment also considers the unique anthropometric design of most existing gaming machines, and provides a reasonable level of access that does not require a wholesale re-design of the machine itself. Essentially, by removing the requirement for "Front Approach" at these machines, the proposed considerations allow nearly all "upright-type" gaming machines to be considered accessible so long as they do not have a fixed chair or other obstruction in front of them. Conversely, gaming tables are pretty much standard throughout the country. Thus, no special consideration was needed with respect to their approach and clearance requirements.

As a practical matter, side approach access for the disabled is neither a dignified nor comfortable way to operate gaming machines for any length of playing time. By providing a front approach or front reach requirement to them, the player is now given the same integration as given all other players. This should allow for equal play time and comfort for a wider array of gaming patrons. When gaming tables are provided (i.e., black-jack, roulette, craps, poker), at least one of each type should be accessible to allow disable players access to each unique game type. This too should increase play time and provide increased comfort for all patrons.
The proposed definitions are added to better define & clarify the terms used within Section 1109.15. They are primarily taken from Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 463 (Sections NRS 463.0152 through NRS 463.01595) which are viewed to be the pre- eminent model for gaming control and management systems used throughout the world.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
This proposal will make the accessibility requirements of gaming machines and tables easier to achieve, and therefore will not increase construction costs.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: This is an improvement for accessibility in casinos and other gaming areas. The numbers specifies minimums rather than specific numbers. The provisions allow for side and front approach to tables and machines to provide design flexibility. The provision clarifies what is meant by ‘type’ of machine. As gaming becomes more prevalent across this country this information is needed. This has been used in Los Vegas successfully.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E167-15	AS

Code Change No: E168-15

Original Proposal

Back

Section: 1110.4.13 (New)

Proponent: Edward Kulik, Chair, representing Building Code Action Committee (bcac@iccsafe.org)

Add new text as follows:

1110.4.13 Play Areas. Play areas containing play components designed and constructed for children shall be located on an accessible route.

Reason: This proposal only requires an accessible route to play areas. A similar proposal (E251-12) was submitted last cycle as part of the coordination between the ADA recreational requirements and the IBC. Part of the reason that this proposal was disapproved last cycle was that the code officials felt that they did not want to review the requirements for play components, thus this revised proposal addresses that issue by only requiring an accessible route to the play area.
In July/2014 the ICC Board decided to sunset the activities of the Code Technology Committee (CTC). This is being accomplished by re-assigning many of the CTC Areas of Study to the applicable Code Action Committee (CAC). This proposal falls under the CTC Area of Study entitled IBC Coordination with the New ADAAG. Information on the CTC, including: the sunset plan; meeting agendas; minutes; reports; resource documents; presentations; and all other materials developed in conjunction with the CTC effort can be downloaded from the CTC website.http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/CTC/Pages/default.aspx
This public proposal is submitted by the ICC Building Code Action Committee (BCAC). The BCAC was established by the ICC Board of Directors to pursue opportunities to improve and enhance an assigned International Code or portion thereof. This includes both the technical aspects of the codes as well as the code content in terms of scope and application of referenced standards. Since its inception in July, 2011, the BCAC has held 13 open meetings and numerous workgroup calls which included members of the BCAC as well as any interested party to discuss and debate the proposed changes and the public comments. Related documentation and reports are posted on the BCAC website at: http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/BCAC/Pages/default.aspx.

Cost Impact: Will not increase the cost of construction
Playgrounds are recreational facilities; therefore an accessible route to a playground is already required by code. An accessible route to playgrounds is a federal requirement under ADA. Therefore, there is no impact on the cost of construction.

Report of Committee Action Hearings

Committee Action:	Approved as Submitted

Committee Reason: Including an accessible route to play areas will be a step forward towards harmonization with the ADA and their more inclusive provisions for playgrounds.

Assembly Action:	None

Final Hearing Results

E168-15	AS

E17-15

Back

1006.2.1 Egress based on occupant load and common path of egress travel distance. Two exits or exit access doorways from any space shall be provided where the design occupant load or the common path of egress travel distance exceeds the values listed in Table 1006.2.1.
Exceptions:
In Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies, one means of egress is permitted within and from individual dwelling units with a maximum occupant load of 20 where the dwelling unit is equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2 and the common path of egress travel does not exceed 125 feet (38 100 mm). Reserved
Care suites in Group I-2 occupancies complying with Section 407.4.

Table 1006.2.1 Space with one exist or exit access doorway. Revise as follow:

Change the “Maximum occupant load of space” for both “R-2” and “R-3” from “10” to “49”.

E47-15

Back

Section 1010 – Doors, Gates and Turnstiles. Change Section 1010.1.1 to read as shown:
1010.1.1 Size of doors. (No change to main body of text)
Exceptions:
– 6. (No change)
In other than Group R-1 occupancies, the minimum widths shall not apply to interior egress doors within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit that is not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit.

 Door openings required to be accessible within Type B units shall have a minimum clear width of 31.75 inches (806 mm).Buildings that are 400 square feet or less and that are intended for use in conjunction with one- and two-family residences are not subject to the door height and width requirements of this code.
9 – 10 (No change)

E49-15

Back

Section 1010 – Doors, Gates and Turnstiles. Change Section 1010.1.1 to read as shown:
1010.1.1 Size of doors. (No change to main body of text)
Exceptions:
1. – 6. (No change)

In other than Group R-1 occupancies, the minimum widths shall not apply to interior egress doors within a dwelling unit or sleeping unit that is not required to be an Accessible unit, Type A unit or Type B unit.

 Door openings required to be accessible within Type B units shall have a minimum clear width of 31.75 inches (806 mm).Buildings that are 400 square feet or less and that are intended for use in conjunction with one- and two-family residences are not subject to the door height and width requirements of this code.
9 – 10 (No change)