Although recent fire tragedies may heat up the call for stricter sprinkler requirements, commercial building professionals should find that attractive pricing patterns extinguish a lot of the economic impact.

When three deaths and 12 injuries underscored the tragic consequences of an early morning blaze at the Indianapolis Athletic Club on February 5, one member of the club's Board of Directors told the news media he had, for some time, urged the installation of fire sprinklers throughout the building.

Jack Ryan, president of Culligan Fire-protection Inc., an Indianapolis-based sprinkler contractor, says his $750,000 bid for the sprinkler installation was rejected because "[The Board] said [it] couldn't afford them," further noting, "[Club members] were going to set up an ad hoc committee to study what they might be able to do [to afford the sprinklers]." Although the issue is moot with the families of businessman Thomas R. Mutz and Indianapolis Fire Department Cpl. Ellwood M. Gelenius and Pvt. John J. Lorenzano (the city's first fire-related firefighter deaths in 23 years), the fatal blaze could spur adoption of an ordinance requiring sprinkler retrofits in existing high rises not unlike those passed after similar experiences in Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Atlanta, and, most recently. Philadelphia.

Passage of such an ordinance won't be easy, say industry sources, explaining the city didn't adopt its first retroactive fire code until 1988 when the City-County (Marion) Council passed an ordinance requiring smoke detectors in all homes. Although nearly all the downtown Indianapolis hotels have in-place sprinkler systems, a retroactive sprinkler ordinance could apply to literally hundreds of buildings in Marion County, many of whose owners claim they lack the same resources as the Atlantic Club: money.

Installation costs pale, however, when compared to the magnitude of financial loss that ensues from fire damage. In 1990, reported structure fires drained the U.S. Economy of over $6.7 billion dollars in direct property loss alone, according to Quincy, MA-based National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Add the toll of indirect costs -- medical treatment, litigation for negligence, and soaring insurance rates, to name a few -- and the price demanded for a fire sprinkler installation becomes a relative bargain for those in a position to gain -- or lose -- the most: building owners.

The time to buy is now

Ironically, while the downside of today's soft real estate marketplace is well known to, and keenly felt by, players in the industry, one positive element does prevail: Many suppliers of building products -- fire sprinkler included -- are meeting building owners' acute bottom line sensitivities with premium systems at bargain prices. "Although [price] is contingent upon water availability, today's fire sprinklers cost approximately $1 to $1.50 per square foot for new construction -- less than the cost of carpeting," says John A. Viniello, president of Patterson, NY-based National Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc. (NFSA). "For existing construction, fire sprinklers run anywhere from $2 to $3 per square foot. [To keep costs in line,] there are ways of installing systems without disturbing asbestos: You can run [systems] below the ceiling line; you can use soffits."

Liability fears, not to mention a substantial reduction in insurance premiums, motivate some professionals to install fire sprinklers -- even before codes require compliance. "For commercial buildings, you could get a substantial [insurance] discount," says viniello. Sources indicate such a savings might result from discounting a $1 per $100 premium all the way down to ten cents per $100.

Although the difference in fire rates on property and contents in sprinklered buildings versus non-sprinklered buildings can be significant, discounts are generally controlled by the Insurance Services Organization (ISO), a New York City-based establishment that provides advisory rates to insurers for use as a benchmark. Rates on the liability side, however, are somewhat nebulous and based on building's overall risk, as analyzed by its insurer: "Is the building sprinklered? Is the building well maintained?". Insurers willing to take on a risk may grant additional discount on general liability through scheduled crediting, says Tom Tumilowicz, vice president of Marketing, National Accounts, for Hunt Valley, MD-based PDP Group, an international insurance brokerage firm that manages the sprinkler protection program for both NFSA and the Canadian Automatic Sprinkler Association. "Credits can range anywhere from 5 percent up to 40 percent (25 max ISO form; in some states, individual carriers can go up to 40 percent). And if you carry it a step beyond just the general liability, a company in the know would usually buy excess or umbrella coverage, the basis of which is really a stepping stone off the general liability premium. [As a result,] you would get a discount on the general liability, plus a discount on the umbrella, because of the way the rating mechanisms work."

The IRS helps too, adds Tumilowicz, through depreciation. "However, right now it stands at 31 1/2 years, which may be too long a time for some commercial building owners."

In addition, property taxes could be maintained -- or even reduced -- when sprinkler effectiveness benefits city budgets, i.e., fire department staffing. "In the city of Fresno where a stringent sprinkler law was enacted, [city officials] actually closed two out of three of their downtown fire departments," says Ed Miller, director of Technical Services for Dallas-based American Fire Sprinkler Association (AFSA). "By closing those departments, it has been reported [the city] realized a $2 million per year savings of tax money."

Direct savings, however, can only be realized if income surpasses expense, and savvy building owners are looking to fire sprinklers as yet another inducement to win and retain tenants, whose livelihoods depend upon the assurance of life safety and optimal property protection. Tenant interest in fire sprinklers has never been more compellingly demonstrated than at last year's fire at One Meridian Plaza, Philadelphia, which killed three firefighters and was the impetus for the city's recently passed legislation mandating fire sprinkler retrofits in every high rise over 75 feet tall. The 12-alarm blaze raged out of control for nearly 19 hours until it was extinguished by a fire sprinkler system on the 30th floor voluntarily installed by a safety-conscious tenant located there. One year later, the 756,000 square foot building -- estimated to be worth approximately $150 million before the fire -- remains empty.

Think again ... and again and again

Although automatic sprinklers are considered highly effective elements in protecting buildings and occupants from catastrophic fire, many building professionals believe offices and shopping centers are low-risk occupancies -- which they are when compared to manufacturing and storage-type facilities. Considerable combustible loading makes today's "typical" office anything but typical, however, with such potentially flammable contends and interior finishes as carpeting, draperies, furniture and furniture padding, vinyl wallcovering, plastic laminate, books, paper, small appliances, etc. Tenant churn rates and the associated space reconfigurations can add unforeseen, yet avoidable, problems to building system effectiveness when relocated partitions/furniture block sprinkler heads or compromise the balance of smoke detectors and HVAC systems.

Industrial Risk Insurers (IRI), a Hartford, CT-based association dealing with a selective niche of the property insurance business called highly protected risk (HPR), recognizes the changing dynamics of most facilities and qualifies only those companies that have their hazards well in hand: Organizations with very concerned management and well-constructed, fully protected structures. Optimal protection is an ongoing process, says Stanley J. Couvillon, IRI's vice president of Loss Prevention. "When you talk about sprinklers and the change of continuity or contents in a building, the protection that's afforded by a sprinkler system is not static; it's dynamic. We have seen a great deal of change over the years from some relatively innocuous occupancies that require one level of sprinklers to those that become very hazardous and require either revising or redoing the sprinkler system. A sprinkler system is not something you can put in and forget."

One area of great concern is the interpretation of retail warehouses, says Joseph Hankins, manager of the Protection Section of Norwood, MA-based Factory Mutual (FM) Engineering and Research's Standards Division. "Although the fire hazard is like a warehouse, code officials might base their [occupancy] evaluation on what you call it: |It's a retail store; we will use the standard for retail stores.' Fortunately for us at FM (the organization is an HPR provider in addition to its testing and research functions), all our inspections are done by engineers, so we look at what's actually there" a warehouse with peculiar modifications or differences that needs a protection scheme based on both fire test data and engineering judgement."

Reducing the fallout from potentially inadequate or ill-maintained fire sprinkler systems may well be addressed by the recently approved NFPA-25, a somewhat controversial document that ensures a reasonable degree of protection for life and property through the inspection, testing, and maintenance of water-based fire protection systems, including sprinklers, standpipes, and underground systems. Previously, sources suggest, periodic inspector and testing had been a missing component in many sprinkler programs due to lack of owner incentive. When NFPA-25 is adopted into local laws or regulations, however, compliance clearly will become the responsibility of building owners.

Since NFPA-25 stresses testing by "knowledgeable personnel," both the AFSA and NFSA promote inspection by professionals certified through the National Institute for the Certification of Engineering Technicians (NICET). Other industry sources suggest, however, that properly trained and knowledgeable building owner organizations can inspect their own fire protection systems, emphasizing that testing and repair work would still require the involvement of qualified professionals.

Fire protection sources believe NFPA-25 could increase sprinkler reliability, simply because the system will be regularly examined. "It's easy to maintain systems that are used all the time because if they don't work you know it," says Art Cote, NFPA's chief engineer. "If the air conditioning doesn't work, people complain; if plumbing doesn't work, toilets won't flush. If, however, you shut off the water for a sprinkler system and it isn't put back into service, you may not know it. An emergency situation occurs, and the system you spent all the time, money, and and energy to get in place doesn't work -- with potentially devastating consequences."

Technologies ensure effectiveness

Passage of such legislation as the Hotel and Motel Fire Safety Act (now Public Law 101-391), which steers the federal government's $1.5 billion travel business to sprinklered hotels through reimbursement policies (regulation by the U.S. Fire Administration should help overcome earlier concerns regarding compliance), not to mention a recognition of building accessibility and life safety issues as evidenced by passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), is proof that America's building infrastructure will undergo considerable alterations as a result of public demand and policy. Fortunately, today's menu of available fire sprinkler technologies can mean a first-line defense against catastrophic fire in every type of building -- high rise or low rise.

Although the potential for loss is greater in unsprinklered high rise structures since fire department aerial equipment cannot reach upper floors, the best argument for sprinklerization in every building is control: It is much easier to fight a small fire than to fight one the size of a full room. Sprinklers have performed, according to NFPA data: "When sprinklers are present, the chances of dying in a fire are cut by one-third to one-half and property loss per fire is cut by one-half."

Beyond getting water on a fire at its incipient stage, fire sprinklers reduce smoke and gas toxicity levels in fire-affected buildings. "[Sprinklers] not only cool the temperature of the fire and control or extinguish it, they also take the smoke particles floating around and absorb them into water droplets that go to the floor," says AFSA's Miller. "I've seen fire personnel in fire tests that could not walk down a corridor when the sprinkler system was not operating, even with their masks on. When the sprinkler system was activated, however, the area became tenable."

Reluctance to sprinkler buildings may be based upon fears of potential water damage. "[Owners] have yet to consider what kind of water damage they would have if the firemen walked in with a 2 1/2-inch hose spewing out 250 gallons [of water] a minute, with no control of where that stream was going other than to point it in a direction," says Miller.

NFSA's Viniello agrees, adding others fear the possibility of sprinklers falsely discharging. "The probability of sprinkler failures due to a manufacturing defect is only one in 16 million sprinklers per year that are in service," he says. "With all the R&D and quality control, it's very rare."

Although newer technologies have enabled even greater assurance against false discharge (including double innerlocks that keep water out of the sprinkler's piping system until alarms release specific valves), one type of product widely accepted for its ability to control fire in its early stages is the quick-response sprinkler, whose link sensors are more sensitive to heat. Other systems relatively new to the field include: extended coverage sprinklers, which allow a larger area to be covered by a single sprinkler to reduce the cost of installation; and early suppression fast response (ESFR) and large-drop sprinklers, both of which have been specifically developed for enhanced performance against high-challenge fires, says FM's Hankins.

Sifting through available sprinkler choices to find the optimal protection for a building goes well beyond system selection. NFPA's Cote recommends using a fire protection engineer on the design-build team for both new and retrofit projects to fully present the ramifications of codes and building occupancy and how a preferred system will or will not comply.

Is code compliance the major motivator for fire sprinkler installations among some building owners? Sadly, the answer is yes. However, cost incentives, tenant inducement strategies, and the horrific lessons learned through other owners' unfortunate experiences are prompting pro-active building professionals to commit a portion of their retrofit dollars to fire sprinklerization.

Pro-Active Manufacturers offer Responsive Technologies

Although the commercial buildings industry appreciates the life and property protection provided by today's fire sprinkler systems, Kevin Ortyl, vice president of Marketing for Hastings, MI-based Viking Corporation, indicates many owners still perceive sprinkler systems as design nightmares. "We've done a lot of work in crossing (if not eliminating) the gap between obtrusive and aesthetically pleasing fire sprinkler systems [by] combining different finishes -- white, black, chrome, and brass -- along with escutcheons to pretty much match ceiling tile. We also offer concealed sprinklers located above the ceiling which feature a flat plate that detaches when it heats up, [enabling] the sprinkler to be set off by heat. [Aesthetics] have been considered and accommodated in air duct returns, lighting fixtures, speakers, paging, etc., and our industry believes we've done the same with the fire sprinkler."

Although many newer technologies inevitably lead to increased costs, some sources say this is not necessary the case. In fact, prevailing bargain prices may prompt building owners to consider purchasing a fire sprinkler system before doing so is mandated by local law, says Jerry Boggess, executive vice president of Exeter, NH-based Grinnell Corporation. "The economics are right. Since [new] construction is down, now is an excellent time to redirect money for the installation of fire sprinklers. The price from [fire sprinkler] companies is very, very competitive; there will be a substantial savings."

These savings though, are not needed to comply with recently adopted standards. Boggess' associate, Bill Testa, Grinnell's general manager/National Accounts and chairman of the NFPA-25 Committee, discounts the myth that NFPA-25 compliance will cause building owners significant costs and effort. "With the proper training and knowledge, building owners can inspect and, with knowledgeable personnel, test their own fire protection systems in many cases. If repairs are needed, then qualified maintenance personnel must perform them."

Educating end-users about the myths and realities of fire sprinkler systems is at the core of each manufacturer's agenda. Andy Auvil, senior marketing manager for BlazeMaster CPVC at Cleveland-based BFGoodrich Company, which manufactures a UL-listed and FM-approved chlorinated polyvinyl chloride (CPVC) material used in fire sprinkler system pipe and fittings, says extensive testing and numerous successful field activations have proven the effectiveness of CPVC in fire sprinkler system applications. Although many building professionals recognize the benefits of the material's light weight and semi-rigid properties -- allowing considerable flexibility in circumventing building obstructions or ductwork -- others categorize it as "plastic," thereby believing the water-filled pipe will deteriorate rapidly during a fire's high temperatures. Not so, says Auvil, noting CPVC's limiting oxygen index of 60 and flash ignition temperature of over 900 degrees F. discount these preconceived notions. "Educating end-users about testing results and field experience ensures the materials increased viability in the fire sprinkler marketplace," says Auvil.

If reassurance is a goal of the education process, then highlighting newer technologies and information should assist building owners in re-thinking their perceptions about the false discharge of fire sprinklers, notes David Malek, vice president of Marketing for Milwaukee-based Star Sprinkler Corporation. His company, for instance, has designed a system for such sensitive areas as computer rooms, telephone switching rooms, and electrical switch gear rooms. "We have developed a special double innerlock pre-action system that only operates and flows water when it's needed. The system requires a sprinkler head actually fusing from the heat of a fire, as well as an electrical detector to release a valve from the control panel. Unless both of these functions happen, you don't get any water flow into the piping in the area. In addition, with a pre-action system, if somebody mechanically breaks off a sprinkler head all you'll get will be an alarm saying you have a low air situation."

ASCOA Fire Systems, a Cleveland-based manufacturer of water- and gas-based fire sprinkler systems, leaves nothing to chance. Since halon systems, once used extensively for protection against fire in computer rooms, are being phased out because of the CFC/ozone connection, Jim Mikkila, ASCOA product manager, says his company's current view on protecting computer rooms is to combine a pre-action sprinkler system above-floor with a carbon dioxide ([Co.sub.2]) system below (within raised floor areas). "Although water on computer room equipment is not as devastating as some people might think, the combination of under-floor [Co.sub.2] systems (which stay beneath the floor because the gas is heavier than air), above-floor pre-action systems, and an early warning detection system that senses particles of combustion prior to any evidence of real fire ensures optimal protection of computer rooms and other sensitive areas.

Extended coverage technology for commercial buildings will be unveiled this month in a product from Lansdale, PA-based Central Sprinkler Corporation. "Although it is a testimony that has existed in the annals of testing agencies for some time, nobody has been able to crack [development] of extended coverage fire sprinkler systems," says Len Schiavone, marketing coordinator. "Before, a [fire sprinkler's] spray pattern was limited to 130 square feet. Using this technology allows [an owner] to double his coverage area to 256 square feet. The number of sprinklers on a branch line is reduced, as well as the amount of pipe and system pressure necessary, resulting in cost reductions of at least one-third to one-half, depending upon the number of sprinklers used in a particular building."

Reduction in combined total installed cost for the sprinkler systems is but one incentive Greenwich, CT-based Copper Development Association (CDA) cites when promoting the use of copper in fire sprinkler system piping. "Copper's ability to be sized to smaller diameters (due to corrosion-inhibiting properties) and its ease in handling in the field to accommodate building ductwork, etc., make it very economical," says Paul Anderson, vice president of Building Construction Markets for CDA. "Because copper doesn't rust, it [requires] low maintenance. This can be a big factor for some. For instance, the Library of Congress is now in its second stage of retrofit with copper. Part of its selection was that if there was a fire, [officials] didn't want to have even the possibility of rusty or dirty water discharge on the building contents."

Creating and Managing a Successful Fire Sprinkler Program

Because commercial buildings continually evolve, facility professionals must ensure a fire sprinkler system remains adequate for a building's current use. According to Barry Waterman, secretary of the Northern Illinois Chapter of the National Fire Sprinkler Association and co-owner of Chicago-based Acme Sprinkler Service Company, following these guidelines during the construction and ongoing maintenance of a building can virtually eliminate sprinkler system failures:

* Develop an accurate profile of the company to be protected. This profile should contain such information as: type of construction used, nothing any areas including combustible construction materials; intended occupancies and total square footage; and usable height in areas between the floor and roof structure.

* Determine the applicable code, standard, or design guideline used in the sprinkler design, according to the legal jurisdiction in the property's location; property profile; and property owner's insurance company.

* Determine the required water supply and ability of the existing municipal water system.

* Conduct meetings among building/fire protection professionals to resolve questions and conditions associated with the design and execution of the building's fire protection plan.

* Develop a system for the submittal and review of fire protection design plans. calculations, and documents, including a route by which all documents can meet review, comment, and approval of all parties.

* Keep written records to insulate documented decisions from questions or changes at a later date.

* Resolve problems promptly as they arise.

* Develop a schedule for all required acceptance testing, including the notification of test witnesses, as well as the preparation and circulation of written reports.

Waterman recommends these additional steps be taken to ensure an appropriate level of fire sprinkler protection is maintained:

* Perform regular routine maintenance, testing, and inspection.

* Remain alert to changes in building ownership, occupancy, etc. that may affect the ability of the existing sprinkler system to control or extinguish a fire.

* Develop a system for properly noting any problems disclosed by building inspections, maintenance, and testing, including recordkeeping, notification of involved parties, and follow-up procedures.

* Practice ongoing training in your area of responsibility.

* Use qualified professionals, requiring evidence of competency.