IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This guide references NFPA 45, Standard on Fire Protection for Laboratories Using Chemicals; NFPA 101, Life Safety Code; NFPA 30, Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code; and NFPA 55, Compressed Gases and Cryogenic Fluids Code. These codes vary significantly by edition and are frequently amended by state and local jurisdictions. NFPA 45 editions include 2019 and 2024. NFPA 101 editions include 2018, 2021, and 2024. The most recent published editions are NFPA 45 (2024) and NFPA 101 (2024), but AHJ-adopted editions commonly lag behind by one or more cycles. Local amendments and the edition adopted by your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) always control. This guide is a starting point only—always verify the specific requirements applicable to your project with your local AHJ.

Laboratories are a unique high-hazard occupancy. They concentrate chemicals, compressed gases, precision equipment, and irreplaceable research into a space that often has low occupant density. A fire in a laboratory can escalate quickly from a small solvent flame to a multi-zone event involving incompatible chemicals.

What makes laboratory fire safety difficult is that the hazards are present in the work area, not isolated in a dedicated storage building. Researchers need daily access to flammable solvents, oxidizers, compressed gases, and reactive materials. This means the fire safety strategy must control the hazards where they are, rather than simply removing them.

This guide covers the unique fire safety challenges of laboratories and the practical solutions for protecting them, based on NFPA 45, NFPA 30, and NFPA 55. It builds on Article 46’s discussion of hazard classification and parallels Article 98’s treatment of clean agent systems.

◆ Section 1: Why Laboratories Are Different

Laboratories are not warehouses, not offices, and not typical industrial spaces. They have a distinct fire risk profile.

Key point: The most underappreciated factor in laboratory fire risk is the quantity of hazardous materials in the work area. NFPA 45 does not assume that hazards are segregated; it assumes they are where you are.

Pro Tip: Most laboratory incidents arise from routine operations, not unique events. Research published in Nature Chemistry found that 25% of researchers had received no training specific to the hazards of their work, and 27% had never conducted any risk assessment.

◆ Section 2: The Regulatory Framework

Laboratory fire safety is governed by a layered set of standards covering chemicals, gases, occupancy classification, and suppression.

Key point: NFPA 45 has a defined scope boundary. It applies to laboratory buildings, laboratory units, and laboratory work areas where chemicals with NFPA 704 hazard ratings of health 2/3/4, flammability 2/3/4, or instability 2/3/4 are handled or stored .

Exemptions: NFPA 45 does not apply to laboratories where:

• Flammable or combustible liquid quantities are less than or equal to 4 liters (1 gallon) AND flammable gas quantities are less than 2.2 standard cubic meters (75 standard cubic feet)
• Only chemicals with hazard ratings of 0 or 1 are handled

Pro Tip: The 4-liter / 75-scf threshold is a total for the laboratory unit, not a single work area. Calculate carefully, because exceeding this threshold brings the entire laboratory unit under NFPA 45’s scope.

Key Article: Article 46 — Hazard Classification (Low, Ordinary, High) and Hazardous Areas (NFPA 101)

◆ Section 3: Occupancy Classification Under NFPA 101

Laboratories do not have a single classification under NFPA 101. The AHJ determines the appropriate classification case-by-case, based on the nature and extent of the associated hazards .

The classification depends on both instructional status and hazard class — not instructional status alone.

Key point: The assumption that college and university laboratories are “Educational Occupancies” is incorrect. NFPA 101 explicitly reclassifies college/university instructional buildings as Business Occupancy and noninstructional laboratories as Industrial Occupancy .

Pro Tip: The 2024 edition of NFPA 45 has expanded its scope to cover laboratories in health care facilities where any quantity of ignitible liquid is present .

◆ Section 4: Fume Hoods and Exhaust Systems

Fume hoods are the primary engineering control in laboratories, but their fire safety role is often misunderstood.

A. Function of a Fume Hood

Chemical fume hoods protect users by diluting and exhausting hazardous substances. They are not designed to contain or convey high concentrations of flammable materials.

Common misconception: Many assume that fire or explosion in exhaust ducts is a significant risk. Practical experience shows such events are rare, because laboratory exhaust systems typically do not convey flammable materials at concentrations within explosive limits.

B. Ductless Fume Hoods

The 2024 edition of NFPA 45 added new requirements for ductless chemical fume hoods, addressing installation, operation, maintenance, and training .

Key point: Ductless hoods use filters rather than exhaust ducts. Their fire safety depends on filter maintenance and proper training. If filters are saturated, the hood will not protect the user.

C. Fume Hood Location and Second Means of Egress

NFPA 45 Chapters 5 and 7 were revised to clarify requirements for a second means of egress from a laboratory work area based on the placement of fume hoods .

Triggers for a second means of egress include :

• An explosion hazard threatens the exit access
• A Class A laboratory unit exceeds 46.5 m² (500 ft²)
• A Class B, C, or D laboratory unit exceeds 93 m² (1,000 ft²)
• A fume hood is adjacent to the primary exit access
• A cryogenic container or compressed gas cylinder larger than a lecture bottle is positioned where it could block safe escape

Pro Tip: Chemical storage in fume hoods is prohibited under NFPA 45 . Most laboratory fume hoods are not designed for continuous 24/7 operation, and volatile chemicals should not be stored in them.

◆ Section 5: Flammable Liquid Storage and Use

Flammable liquids are the primary fuel for laboratory fires. NFPA 45 and NFPA 30 limit quantities in the work area.

A. Quantity Limits

Quantity limits depend on whether the laboratory unit is instructional or research (non-instructional), not on Class A/B/C/D. NFPA 45 4.2 classifies laboratory units as Class A/B/C/D based on flammable liquid quantities, and two separate provisions modify that scheme for teaching environments:

• 4.2.2.2 (Instructional laboratory units): Instructional laboratory units shall be classified as Class C or Class D .
• 4.2.2.3 (Educational laboratory units): Educational laboratory units shall be classified as Class D or shall be limited to 50 percent of the flammable and combustible liquids quantity for Class C laboratory units .

Note on the figures: These per-100 ft² quantities are drawn from an institutional EHS reproduction of NFPA 45’s table and may carry local amendments. They are not the base NFPA 45 language. Always pull the applicable table from your AHJ-adopted edition.

Key point: “Outside cabinet” means not stored in a flammable liquid storage cabinet or safety can. Solvents in excess of the limit must be stored in an inside (bulk) storage room meeting NFPA 30.

Note on total quantities: Total-per-unit limits vary by laboratory class and by AHJ amendment. Do not rely on a single number — pull the applicable figures from NFPA 45 Table 10.1.1 in your adopted edition.

B. Storage Cabinets

Flammable liquid storage cabinets are the primary means of storage within the laboratory work area.

C. Refrigerators

Ordinary refrigerators must not be used to store flammable liquids. Only explosion-proof or flammable-safe refrigerators may be used .

Pro Tip: Modifying a domestic refrigerator for flammable storage is prohibited.

◆ Section 6: Compressed Gases and Cryogenic Fluids

Compressed gases introduce unique fire and explosion hazards.

A. Gas Rooms

NFPA 55 requires gas rooms when quantities exceed threshold limits.

B. Quantity Thresholds

NFPA 55 establishes maximum allowable quantities (MAQ) for gases requiring special provisions. Quantities may be increased:

• By 100% when stored in approved cabinets, gas cabinets, gas rooms, or exhausted enclosures
• By an additional 100% when the building is fully sprinklered in accordance with NFPA 13

Key point: The aggregate quantity in use and storage shall not exceed the quantity listed for storage .

Pro Tip: Gas rooms must be maintained at negative pressure. If the exhaust system fails, negative pressure is lost, and gas may migrate to adjacent spaces.

◆ Section 7: Suppression System Selection

Laboratories require careful selection of suppression systems, because some agents can damage equipment or react with chemicals.

A. Automatic Sprinkler Requirements

NFPA 45 requires automatic sprinklers in all new laboratories, and they must be quick-response type.

Sprinkler density:

• Class A and B laboratory units: Ordinary Hazard Group 2 (OH2)
• Class C and D laboratory units: Ordinary Hazard Group 1 (OH1)

B. Standpipes

NFPA 45 requires standpipes in laboratory buildings two or more stories above or below grade .

C. Portable Extinguishers

Fire extinguisher ratings are based on laboratory class:

• Class A = High fire hazard (minimum 4-A rating)
• Class B = Moderate fire hazard (minimum 2-A rating)
• Class C = Low fire hazard
• Class D = Minimal fire hazard

Pro Tip: Laboratory exhaust systems and chemical fume hoods do not require fire protection devices (such as fire dampers), because they are designed to quickly dilute and exhaust flammable vapors rather than contain high concentrations.

◆ Section 8: Design Checklist

◆ Section 9: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

◆ Section 10: Conclusion

Laboratory fire safety is a unique challenge: the hazards are present in the work area, not isolated. The solution is not to eliminate the hazards—that would be impossible for research—but to control them where they are.

Key Takeaways:

1. NFPA 45 has a defined scope boundary — the 4 L / 75 scf threshold determines whether it applies .
2. Occupancy classification depends on both instructional status and hazard class — noninstructional = Industrial; instructional (above grade 12) = Business; Class D = Business; K-12 = Educational; NFPA 99 labs = Health Care .
3. Quantity limits depend on instructional vs. research status, not on Class A/B/C/D directly — 4.2.2.2 covers instructional units; 4.2.2.3 covers educational units .
4. Automatic sprinklers are required in all new laboratories, with OH2 for Class A/B and OH1 for Class C/D.
5. Fume hoods are dilution devices, not containment devices — exhaust ducts typically do not require fire dampers.
6. Flammable liquid quantities are strictly limited and require proper storage cabinets.
7. Compressed gas rooms must be negative pressure and 1-hour fire rated .
8. The 2024 edition of NFPA 45 adds new ductless fume hood requirements .

Take Action Today:

1. Confirm whether your laboratory falls under NFPA 45 per its scope.
2. Determine your occupancy classification using NFPA 101 guidance.
3. Confirm your laboratory classification (A/B/C/D) and whether instructional or educational limits apply.
4. Verify sprinkler installation and density.
5. Review fume hood locations and second means of egress requirements.
6. Calculate flammable liquid quantities in your work areas using the correct table.
7. Verify gas room pressure and fire resistance.
8. Confirm the NFPA 45 and NFPA 101 editions adopted by your AHJ.

Continue Reading from Our Series:

• Related guide: Hazard Classification (Low, Ordinary, High) and Hazardous Areas (NFPA 101)
• Learn more: Fire Safety for Data Centers and IT Facilities
• Read more: Fire Safety for Parking Structures and Garages

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This guide references NFPA 101, Chapter 43 (Building Rehabilitation) and NFPA 914, Code for the Protection of Historic Structures, where applicable to existing building retrofits. NFPA 101 and NFPA 914 requirements vary significantly by edition and are frequently amended by state and local jurisdictions. NFPA 101 editions include 2018, 2021, and 2024. NFPA 914 editions include 2019 and 2023. The most recent published editions are NFPA 101 (2024) and NFPA 914 (2023), but AHJ-adopted editions commonly lag behind by one or more cycles. Local amendments and the edition adopted by your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) always control. This guide is a starting point only—always verify the specific requirements applicable to your project with your local AHJ.

Parking structures present a fire safety challenge unlike any other occupancy. They are simultaneously high-fuel-load environments — every parked vehicle carries gasoline, plastics, and increasingly lithium-ion batteries — and low-occupancy spaces that may sit largely empty for hours. They are often open to the outside for natural ventilation, yet vertically connected through ramps that can act as chimneys for smoke and fire.

The fire safety landscape for parking structures has shifted significantly in recent years. Modern vehicles contain substantially more plastics and combustible materials than their predecessors. Electric vehicles introduce lithium-ion battery hazards that behave differently from conventional vehicle fires. And in response, the 2024 editions of NFPA 101, NFPA 88A, and NFPA 5000 introduced automatic sprinkler requirements for all new parking structures — a change driven by serious garage fires and the evolving composition of the vehicle fleet.

This guide covers the unique fire safety challenges of parking structures and the practical solutions for protecting them.

◆ Section 1: Why Parking Structures Are Different

Parking structures are not warehouses, not offices, and not assembly spaces. They have a distinct fire risk profile.

Key point: The fire load in a parking structure is concentrated in the vehicles themselves. A fire that starts in one vehicle can spread to adjacent vehicles, creating a cascade that overwhelms suppression systems if not controlled early. The Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF) has documented that fires in parking structures not protected by sprinklers can become major conflagrations leading to catastrophic losses.

Pro Tip: The 2024 code changes reflect a recognition that vehicle materials have changed substantially — not enough information exists to appropriately classify parking garages under the old OH1 hazard designation. The technical committee statement noted: “Based on the increase of plastics and other challenges that modern vehicles present, a higher hazard level of protection is more appropriate. Further research in this area is needed” .

◆ Section 2: Open vs. Enclosed Parking Structures

NFPA 88A distinguishes between open and enclosed parking structures based on the fraction of wall surface that is open to the outside.

A. Definition of an Open Parking Structure

An open parking structure has uniformly distributed openings on two or more sides, with:

• At least 20% of the total area of the outside perimeter and interior walls being open
• Openings distributed over at least 40% of the length of the building perimeter, or on two opposing sides

B. Why Classification Matters

Pro Tip: A parking structure that appears open may not meet the NFPA 88A definition. The openness calculation is specific: 1.4 ft² of opening per linear foot of exterior perimeter, distributed over 40% of the building perimeter or uniformly on two opposing sides. If a structure fails these criteria, it is classified as enclosed and must meet mechanical ventilation requirements.

◆ Section 3: The Regulatory Framework

Parking structure fire safety is governed by a layered set of codes and standards.

Key point: NFPA 88A does not apply to private garages not exceeding 1,000 ft² (92.9 m²) associated with residential buildings.

Key Article: Article 23 — Commercial Building Code Requirements for Fire Sprinkler Systems

Pro Tip: For larger residential garages, verify whether NFPA 88A or NFPA 13R applies. The threshold matters.

◆ Section 4: Vehicle Fire Hazards — ICE vs. EV

The fire hazard profile of parking structures has shifted with the rise of electric vehicles.

A. Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) Vehicle Fires

ICE vehicle fires are well-understood. The primary fuel is gasoline or diesel, supplemented by plastics, rubber, and synthetic materials in the vehicle interior. These fires are typically controlled by standard water-based suppression systems.

B. Electric Vehicle (EV) Fires

EV fires involving lithium-ion traction batteries present distinct challenges:

Key point: The FPRF study (Boehmer, Klassen, and Olenick 2020) notes that “lithium-ion batteries are more difficult to extinguish than gasoline or diesel fuel vehicle fires, requiring large amounts of water to fully contain and mitigate the hazard”.

Key Article: Article 98 — Fire Safety for Data Centers and IT Facilities (lithium-ion battery parallels)

Pro Tip: The fire safety architecture for EV charging areas increasingly relies on a three-layer approach: passive (compartmentation), active (detection and suppression), and tactical (operational protocols specific to thermal runaway events).

◆ Section 5: Ventilation Requirements

Ventilation is a critical fire safety function in parking structures.

A. Enclosed Parking Structures

NFPA 88A requires mechanical ventilation for all enclosed parking structures:

B. Open Parking Structures

Mechanical ventilation is not required in open parking structures. Natural ventilation through openings is considered adequate.

C. New in NFPA 88A 2023: Mixing Fans (Jet Fans)

The 2023 edition introduced requirements for mixing fans (also known as jet fans) in certain configurations:

Mixing fan specifications:

• Must ensure no more than 10% of the space volume has air velocities below 1.3 ft/s
• Must be arranged to distribute supply air throughout the structure
• Design documentation must be provided by a registered design professional
• Must be controlled with an electronic interface to the automatic fire suppression system and fire detection and alarm system
• Control systems must turn off the fans when the fire suppression system is activated and provide post-fire override operations

Pro Tip: Mixing fans are not typically necessary for open parking garages unless the opposing openings exceed 300 ft or the distance between supply and exhaust points exceeds 300 ft.

◆ Section 6: Suppression Systems and the 2024 Code Changes

The 2024 code changes fundamentally altered suppression requirements for parking structures. This section consolidates the regulatory, technical, and historical context for those changes.

A. The 2024 NFPA 101 Change

NFPA 101 Section 42.8.3.5 “Extinguishing Requirements” was added in the 2024 edition. The new requirement states that automatic sprinkler systems shall be installed in all new parking structures.

Why this change? The AESG analysis explains: “Because of the changes in the materials used to manufacture cars, and based on several serious garage fires in the past few years, it was determined that sprinklers should be required. Similar changes were made to NFPA 88A and NFPA 5000.”

B. NFPA 88A 6.4 — Sprinkler Requirements

NFPA 88A 6.4.1 states: “Automatic sprinkler systems shall be installed in all parking structures in accordance with NFPA 13 and NFPA 13R as applicable” .

C. Hazard Classification Change

The annex to NFPA 13 was changed from OH1 to OH2 for vehicle parking areas. The 2025 edition of NFPA 13 lists a typical automotive parking garage as Ordinary Hazard Group 2 (OH2) . The technical committee statement noted: “Automobile materials have changed substantially since parking garages were considered OH1. Not enough information is currently available to appropriately classify parking garages” .

Current practice: Sprinkler protection is “typically” being designed to OH2 for standard parking structures, but it is ultimately the engineer’s responsibility to classify the hazard for a particular project.

Emerging classification conflict: Some local plan reviewers and AHJs are classifying any parking garage with electric charging stations as Extra Hazard Group 2 (EH2). The rationale is that charging stations introduce additional fuel load and ignition potential. However, the technical justification for EH2 is debated — the 2028 edition of NFPA 13 has public inputs to modify these requirements, but only minor changes were accepted in the first draft meeting without more data.

Pro Tip: The hazard classification change from OH1 to OH2 increases the required sprinkler density. For a given area, OH2 requires more water than OH1 (approximately 0.2 gpm/ft² vs. 0.15 gpm/ft²). This affects pipe sizing, water supply requirements, and potentially fire pump capacity.

Key Article: Article 23 — Commercial Building Code Requirements for Fire Sprinkler Systems

D. Why the Change Happened — Research and Testing

The Fire Protection Research Foundation (FPRF) — NFPA’s research affiliate — has conducted a multi-phase project titled “Modern Vehicle Hazards in Parking Garages and Vehicle Carriers” . The Phase I report (Boehmer, Klassen, and Olenick 2020) highlighted the persistent risk of vehicle fires in parking structures and the potential for fire spread from one vehicle to multiple neighboring vehicles.

The Phase II effort updated the 2020 analysis and identified fire safety knowledge gaps. The Phase III project, titled “Characterizing EV Hazards in Parking Structures to Inform Fire Safety Design Guidance: Full-Scale Testing,” is now underway. It involves full-scale fire and sprinkler testing to determine the optimal sprinkler design density to control vehicle fires and prevent spread to neighboring vehicles. The testing program includes:

• Three baseline unsprinklered calorimetry tests to characterize ICE and EV hazards
• Six tests in a mockup open parking garage with sprinkler densities aligned with current standards
• One test of a two-car stacker arrangement with sprinkler protection

The goal is to provide data on what hazard classification in NFPA 13 is appropriate for ICE vehicles and EVs in a parking garage.

Key limitation: The literature review identified that “more research is needed to properly design sprinkler systems to prevent vehicle-to-vehicle fire spread in parking garages”.

E. Existing Structures

The 2024 requirement applies to new structures only . However, renovations or changes of occupancy may trigger compliance requirements. Verify with your AHJ.

◆ Section 7: Detection and Alarm

Detection requirements for parking structures vary by configuration and jurisdiction.

Key point: Early detection is critical for EV charging areas. The FPRF research emphasizes that “early fire detection, which allows firefighting measures to be taken in the initial stages,” is among the most important safeguards .

Key Article: Article 21 — Fire Alarm System Requirements for Commercial Buildings

Pro Tip: For parking structures with EV charging, consider off-gas detection in charging areas. This technology detects gases released by overheated batteries before thermal runaway occurs — the same approach used in data center UPS rooms (Article 98).

◆ Section 8: EV Charging in Parking Structures

EV charging introduces new fire safety considerations that are still evolving.

Regulatory status: The FPRF Phase III project is specifically designed to address the hazard classification question for EV charging areas. The technical committee for NFPA 13 is actively reviewing the issue, but current data is insufficient to definitively classify EV charging as EH2 .

Key point: The hazard classification for EV charging areas remains unsettled. As Sprinkler Age noted: “I’m not sure EH2 is correct, but we need more data”.

Pro Tip: The three-layer architecture for EV fire safety — passive (structural compartmentation), active (detection and suppression), and tactical (operational protocols) — provides a framework for designing protection that goes beyond prescriptive code requirements.

Key Article: Article 97 — Fire Safety for Green Buildings (EV charging and PV integration)

◆ Section 9: Design Checklist for Parking Structure Fire Safety

◆ Section 10: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

◆ Section 11: Conclusion

Parking structure fire safety has entered a new era. The 2024 code changes — requiring automatic sprinklers in all new parking structures — reflect a recognition that modern vehicles pose a greater fire hazard than the OH1 classification assumed for decades. Electric vehicles add a new dimension: lithium-ion battery fires that resist conventional suppression and require early detection, compartmentation, and tactical response protocols.

Key Takeaways:

1. Openness classification matters — open vs. enclosed determines ventilation, suppression, and detection requirements.
2. Mechanical ventilation is required in enclosed structures at 1 cfm per ft².
3. Automatic sprinklers are now required in all new parking structures per 2024 NFPA 101 42.8.3.5.
4. Hazard classification has shifted to OH2 for vehicle parking areas.
5. EV fires require early detection and fire spread limitation.
6. Mixing fans may be required in certain configurations per NFPA 88A 2023.
7. EV charging hazard classification remains unsettled — some AHJs are classifying as EH2, but data is insufficient.
8. The FPRF is actively researching the optimal sprinkler design density for modern vehicle fires.

Take Action Today:

1. Verify your parking structure’s open vs. enclosed classification with a formal openness calculation.
2. Confirm sprinkler requirements for your project — especially if it is new construction.
3. Review the hazard classification used for your sprinkler design.
4. Assess EV charging areas for detection and protection adequacy.
5. Evaluate ventilation system capacity for enclosed structures.
6. Coordinate with your fire service for pre-incident planning.
7. Verify local amendments and the edition adopted by your AHJ.

Continue Reading from Our Series:

• Related guide: Fire Safety for Mixed-Occupancy Buildings
• Learn more: Fire Safety for Data Centers and IT Facilities
• Read more: What Are the Requirements for Fire Engine Access and Hardstanding

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This guide references NFPA 101, Chapter 43 (Building Rehabilitation) and NFPA 914, Code for the Protection of Historic Structures, where applicable to existing building retrofits. However, NFPA 101 and NFPA 914 requirements vary significantly by edition (2018, 2021, 2023) and are frequently amended by state and local jurisdictions. Local amendments and the edition adopted by your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) always control. This guide is a starting point only—always verify the specific requirements applicable to your project with your local AHJ.

Fire safety is at an inflection point. The systems, materials, and hazards that defined the profession for decades are being reshaped by forces that didn’t exist—or weren’t mainstream—twenty years ago. Lithium-ion batteries power everything from phones to vehicles to entire buildings. Artificial intelligence can detect fires from video feeds without ever being “trained” on fire footage. Buildings are becoming sensor-rich environments that generate data faster than traditional codes can respond to.

This article surveys the trends and technologies that will define fire safety over the coming decade. It is not a prediction piece. Every technology described here is either deployed, in pilot, or under active research—and each is anchored to real standards activity, published research, or documented deployments. Where something remains speculative, we say so.

The goal is not to tell you what the future will be, but to help you recognize the direction of travel—and prepare for it.

◆ Section 1: Why Fire Safety Is at an Inflection Point

Three converging forces are driving change:

The fire protection industry has historically moved slowly, and for good reason: life safety systems must be reliable, and reliability comes from tested, proven technology. But the pace of change in building materials, energy systems, and digital infrastructure is outpacing the code development cycle. The gap between what’s possible and what’s codified is widening.

The SFPE Foundation’s 2025 research on fire testing of resilient and sustainable materials captures this tension directly: current fire tests are often inadequate for evaluating novel materials, and bridging that gap requires new test methods and increased reliance on performance-based design .

Pro Tip: The most successful fire safety professionals in the coming decade will be those who can navigate the space between prescriptive code compliance and performance-based innovation—and who can document their reasoning for the AHJ.

◆ Section 2: AI and Machine Learning in Detection and Risk Prediction

Artificial intelligence is moving from novelty to utility in fire detection. The most significant development is zero-shot fire detection—systems that can identify fire in video feeds without being trained on labeled fire data.

A 2025 paper in Neurocomputing introduced a framework that leverages large language models and contrastive learning to detect fires without any training, outperforming established methods like ResNet, ViT, and YOLOv8 in detecting small fires in complex environments . The system uses enhanced self-attention mechanisms and dynamic threshold calculations to improve robustness across diverse scenarios.

This matters because traditional fire detection AI requires extensive labeled datasets—images of fire and non-fire—which are expensive to curate and may not generalize to new environments. Zero-shot approaches reduce that barrier.

The Security Sales & Integration industry survey notes that intelligent, connected systems can deploy “hundreds of thousands of sensors” and shift fire safety “from its react-and-respond stance toward a more proactive, predict-and-prevent approach” . One integrator reports a 30% reduction in service calls from connected systems that diagnose issues before they require emergency attention .

Pro Tip: AI in fire detection is most valuable when it augments human decision-making, not replaces it. The SFPE Foundation’s research on digital buildings and fire service operations found that incident commanders want clear, actionable information—not raw data or predictive models that lack practical grounding .

◆ Section 3: IoT and Smart Building Integration

The Internet of Things is transforming fire alarm systems from isolated panels into networked, data-generating platforms.

The industry is moving away from POTS (plain old telephone service) lines toward IP- and cellular-based communicators integrated with cloud platforms and mobile apps. This enables remote diagnostics, real-time alerts, and new recurring revenue models for service providers . Multi-carrier cellular communicators provide redundancy—if one carrier fails, the communicator switches to another to ensure life-safety signals are delivered .

The UAE Fire & Life Safety Code of Practice explicitly addresses Smart Monitoring Systems in Chapter 16, recognizing that continuous monitoring and data-driven maintenance are part of the compliance lifecycle . This regulatory recognition of IoT-enabled fire safety is a significant shift—it signals that authorities are beginning to treat connected systems as a legitimate compliance pathway, not just a convenience.

Pro Tip: Connected systems generate valuable data, but they also introduce cybersecurity risk. NFPA 72 (2025) dramatically expanded its cybersecurity requirements, introducing security levels for network-connectable equipment. Systems connected to publicly accessible networks require the highest level of protection .

◆ Section 4: Digital Twins and BIM for Fire Safety

Digital twins—virtual replicas of physical buildings that sync with real-time data—are moving from concept to practical application in fire safety.

The interface between digital buildings and fire service operations is an active research area. A 2026 SFPE Foundation study interviewed 47 incident commanders across three countries to understand how different types of information affect decision-making. The findings: real-time and well-presented static data enable quicker, more targeted fire service responses, and early access to such information—especially at dispatch—is critical .

However, the study also identified a gap: advanced predictive tools don’t always meet the practical needs of incident commanders . The lesson is that technology must translate complex data into clear, actionable information—not just generate more data.

For existing buildings, digital twins face a data problem: most buildings lack the sensor infrastructure and accurate as-built documentation to support them. Retrofitting IoT sensors into legacy buildings is possible but requires investment that many owners haven’t yet made.

Pro Tip: Start with BIM if you’re designing new construction—the data captured during design can become the foundation for a digital twin during operations. For existing buildings, focus first on digitizing fire system documentation and integrating with building management systems.

◆ Section 5: Robotics, Drones, and Autonomous Response

Robotics in fire safety remains largely in the research and pilot stage, but the trajectory is clear.

The most mature applications are inspection and monitoring rather than suppression:

For most commercial buildings, the near-term value of robotics is in reducing inspection costs and improving coverage. Drones can access roofs and high spaces faster than human inspectors. Robotic systems can test detectors on a schedule without manual intervention.

Fully autonomous firefighting robots remain confined to high-risk industrial settings—refineries, chemical plants, and similar environments where human access is dangerous. The complexity of navigating occupied buildings, identifying victims, and making suppression decisions in real time remains a significant barrier.

Pro Tip: The most practical near-term robotics investment for building owners is automated inspection technology. It reduces labor costs, improves documentation, and addresses the skilled-labor shortage that the industry consistently identifies as a top challenge .

◆ Section 6: New Hazard Classes — Lithium-Ion, Hydrogen, Energy Storage

The most significant fire safety challenge of the coming decade is energy storage.

Lithium-ion batteries are now ubiquitous—in vehicles, buildings, data centers, and grid-scale installations. Their fire behavior is fundamentally different from traditional combustibles. Thermal runaway can exceed 1,000°C, resists conventional suppression, and can reignite hours or days after apparent extinguishment.

The SFPE Foundation’s 2025 research on outdoor lithium-ion battery energy storage systems (BESS) developed a methodology to assess health and environmental impacts from thermal runaway events, establishing relationships between exposure distance and variables including wind speed, ambient temperature, event duration, cell chemistry, and toxic gas species .

NFPA 855, Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems, has been significantly revised for the 2026 edition. Key changes include consolidation of general requirements into Chapter 4, addition of new battery types, new requirements for emergency response plans, EV charging systems with energy storage, flow batteries (Chapter 16), and ESS on barges (Chapter 17) .

Pro Tip: Lithium-ion fire safety is not just a suppression problem—it’s a separation, detection, and emergency response problem. The NIRS data center fire in South Korea (Article 98) demonstrated that battery fires during maintenance can destroy critical infrastructure even when the IT halls themselves are protected.

◆ Section 7: Performance-Based Design and Fire Modeling

Performance-based design (PBD) is not new, but its importance is growing as prescriptive codes struggle to keep pace with novel materials and building types.

The 2025 research on fire testing of sustainable materials concludes that bridging the safety gap for novel materials requires increased reliance on performance-based design . The same conclusion applies to mass timber, double-skin façades, and other green building strategies where prescriptive requirements either don’t exist or would eliminate design flexibility.

For tall timber buildings, researchers note that multi-hazard PBD principles beyond current design guidelines are needed—considering not just fire, but seismic, wind, and other loads in an integrated framework .

The challenge with PBD is review capacity. Many AHJs lack the in-house expertise to evaluate complex fire models and alternative compliance arguments. This creates uncertainty for designers and can extend approval timelines.

Pro Tip: If you’re pursuing performance-based design, engage the AHJ early and document your methodology thoroughly. The most common failure mode for PBD submittals is not technical inadequacy—it’s insufficient communication with the authority who must approve it.

◆ Section 8: Regulatory and Standards Evolution

Codes and standards are evolving to address new hazards, new technologies, and new expectations.

NFPA 101 (2024) key changes include: new automatic sprinkler requirements for all new parking structures, additional carbon monoxide detection requirements, updated emergency action plan requirements addressing security features, new requirements for inflatable amusement devices and modular rooms, and guidance for alternate care sites .

NFPA 72 (2025) key changes include: a new “restricted audible mode operation” (RAMO) scheme allowing lower sound pressure levels in noise-sensitive environments (with risk analysis and AHJ approval), dramatically expanded cybersecurity requirements with defined security levels, and clarification that magnets cannot be used for smoke detector functional testing .

NFPA 855 (2026) consolidates general ESS requirements, adds battery types and emergency response planning requirements, and introduces chapters for flow batteries and ESS on barges .

Pro Tip: The regulatory landscape is fragmenting—different standards are evolving at different paces, and the coverage of lithium-ion batteries has shifted from NFPA 76 to NFPA 855. Ensure your design team is tracking which standard governs which hazard.

◆ Section 9: Workforce and Training Transformation

The fire protection industry faces a persistent and worsening talent gap. Industry surveys consistently identify skilled labor availability as a top challenge—particularly in engineering, inspection, and technical service roles .

Technology is both a cause and a potential solution. As systems become more complex, the training required to service them correctly increases. But connected systems also enable remote diagnostics, condition-based maintenance, and automated testing—reducing the need for on-site labor for routine tasks .

One integrator reports that connected systems enable one-man inspections—eliminating the need for one person to man the panel while another walks the floor—cutting inspection labor costs roughly in half .

Pro Tip: The workforce challenge is not just about hiring—it’s about retaining institutional knowledge. As experienced professionals retire, their expertise in navigating code interpretations, AHJ relationships, and practical problem-solving leaves with them. Documented procedures and digital knowledge bases are not optional.

◆ Section 10: What Won’t Change

Amid all the change, some fundamentals remain:

1. Reliability matters more than sophistication. A simpler system that works is better than a complex system that fails. This is why fire alarm systems have 20–30 year lifespans and why the industry is cautious about rapid adoption.

2. The AHJ controls. No amount of technology changes the fact that the Authority Having Jurisdiction determines compliance. Engage early, document thoroughly, and respect the process.

3. Human behavior is unpredictable. Evacuation modeling, training, and drills still matter. Technology can guide people, but it cannot replace their judgment or overcome poor planning.

4. Maintenance is the foundation. The NIRS data center fire (Article 98) was caused by maintenance failures, not technology failures. No system is better than the people who maintain it.

5. Fire safety is a system, not a product. Detection, suppression, compartmentation, egress, and management work together. Optimizing one component while neglecting others creates vulnerability.

Pro Tip: When evaluating new technology, ask: Does this make the system more reliable, or just more impressive? The best fire safety technology is the technology that works when everything else fails.

◆ Section 11: Readiness Assessment for Your Organization

◆ Section 12: Conclusion

The future of fire safety is not a single technology or trend. It is the convergence of new hazards, new capabilities, and new expectations—playing out across an industry that must balance innovation with the absolute requirement for reliability.

Key Takeaways:

1. AI is becoming practical for detection and risk assessment, with zero-shot approaches reducing the data barrier .

2. IoT and connectivity are transforming fire alarms from isolated panels to networked, data-rich systems .

3. Lithium-ion batteries are the defining hazard of the coming decade, requiring dedicated standards (NFPA 855) and new emergency response approaches .

4. Digital twins and BIM offer value for design and operations, but practical adoption lags the technology .

5. Performance-based design is increasingly necessary as prescriptive codes struggle with novel materials .

6. The workforce gap is real and technology is both a contributor and a partial solution .

7. Fundamentals don’t change—reliability, maintenance, human behavior, and AHJ authority remain central.

Take Action Today:

1. Assess your facility’s exposure to lithium-ion and energy storage hazards.

2. Evaluate whether your fire alarm system is due for connectivity upgrade—and plan cybersecurity accordingly.

3. Review your fire system documentation for digital readiness.

4. Identify the standards and editions that govern your facility.

5. Engage your AHJ before pursuing any technology-driven changes.

6. Invest in workforce training and knowledge documentation.

7. Ask whether any new technology makes your system more reliable—not just more impressive.

Continue Reading from Our Series:

• Learn more: Fire Safety for Data Centers and IT Facilities

• Related guide: Fire Safety for Green Buildings: Balancing Sustainability and Safety

• Read more: How to Integrate Fire Safety with Building Information Modeling (BIM)

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This guide references NFPA 75, Standard for the Fire Protection of Information Technology Equipment, and NFPA 76, Standard for the Fire Protection of Telecommunications Facilities. Where existing building rehabilitation is involved, NFPA 101, Chapter 43 (Building Rehabilitation) and NFPA 914, Code for the Protection of Historic Structures, may apply. However, NFPA 101 and NFPA 914 requirements vary significantly by edition (2018, 2021, 2023) and are frequently amended by state and local jurisdictions. Local amendments and the edition adopted by your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) always control. This guide is a starting point only—always verify the specific requirements applicable to your project with your local AHJ.

Data centers present one of the most complex fire safety challenges in modern commercial construction. The assets they protect—servers, storage, network equipment—are extraordinarily valuable, and the services they enable are often critical to business operations, public safety, and daily life. A fire that damages a data center doesn’t just destroy equipment; it can paralyze organizations, disrupt essential services, and cost millions in downtime.

Yet the fire safety strategy for a data center cannot simply mirror that of an office building or warehouse. Water-based suppression that works well in a warehouse can destroy the very equipment it’s meant to protect. And the unique fire risks inside a data center—from lithium-ion batteries to high-density AI compute loads—require specialized approaches.

This guide covers the fire safety requirements and best practices for data centers, based on NFPA 75 and NFPA 76, along with real-world lessons from data center fires.

◆ Section 1: Why Data Centers Are Different

Data centers are not simply rooms full of computers. They are specialized facilities with unique fire risk profiles and operational requirements.

The focus in data center fire protection has shifted from mere code compliance to business continuity—operators and investors now weigh how quickly systems can be restored after an incident and what level of collateral damage a site can accept.

Pro Tip: Fire protection now appears much earlier in the design process for data centers, taking place alongside electrical and mechanical engineering, zoning and compartmentation planning, and cooling strategy decisions. Treating it as a late-stage add-on creates expensive retrofits and compromises.

◆ Section 2: The Regulatory Framework

A. NFPA 75 — Information Technology Equipment

NFPA 75, Standard for the Fire Protection of Information Technology Equipment (2024 edition), sets forth minimum requirements for the protection of ITE equipment and ITE areas from damage by fire or its associated effects—smoke, corrosion, heat, and water.

Key chapters cover:

• Fire protection approaches and fire risk assessment (Chapter 4)
• Performance-based design (Chapter 5)
• Construction requirements (Chapter 6)
• Fire protection and detection equipment (Chapter 9)
• Utilities including HVAC, coolant systems, and UPS (Chapter 11)
• Emergency and recovery procedures (Chapter 12)
• Modular data centers (Chapter 13)

B. NFPA 76 — Telecommunications Facilities

NFPA 76 addresses fire protection for telecommunications facilities, including landline, cable, wireless, and satellite services. The 2024 edition removed lithium-ion battery requirements in favor of coverage in NFPA 855, added off-gas detection requirements, and revised cable management requirements.

C. Related Standards

Pro Tip: The 2024 editions of NFPA 75 and NFPA 76 are the current benchmarks. Ensure your design team is working from the most recent editions, as significant changes—particularly around lithium-ion batteries—have been made.

◆ Section 3: Fire Risk Profile — What Actually Burns

Understanding what burns in a data center is essential to designing effective protection.

The South Korea NIRS data center fire in September 2025 began with a lithium-ion battery explosion during routine UPS battery relocation. The fire required 170 firefighters and 63 fire trucks, took 22 hours to extinguish, destroyed 384 lithium-ion batteries and 96 critical IT systems, and disrupted 709 government systems .

Key lesson: Lithium-ion battery fires in data centers are not hypothetical. The NIRS incident followed a 2022 SK C&C data center fire that disrupted KakaoTalk, and South Korea recorded 55 UPS-related fires between 2018 and 2022.

◆ Section 4: Detection — Very Early Warning

In data centers, detecting a fire at the incipient stage is critical. By the time a traditional point detector activates, smoke may already be damaging equipment.

A. Aspirating Smoke Detection (ASD)

Aspirating smoke detection systems continuously draw air samples from protected areas through a network of pipes to a central detector. They are purpose-designed for applications where very early warning and system stability are critical, including data centers.

Modern ASD systems incorporate blue light technology to improve sensitivity to the very small smoke particles typically associated with incipient fires, providing faster response while maintaining stability in normal operating conditions.

B. Off-Gas Detection

NFPA 76 (2024) added requirements for off-gas detection. This technology detects the gases released by overheating batteries before thermal runaway occurs.

C. Detection Zoning

Pro Tip: Early detection is not just about alarm activation—it’s about initiating suppression before a fire reaches the flame stage. Clean agents act fastest when the fire is still in its incipient phase.

◆ Section 5: Suppression — Clean Agents and Alternatives

A. Clean Agent Systems

Clean agents are the preferred suppression for data halls because they are electrically non-conductive, leave no residue, and do not require equipment shutdown before discharge.

Clean agents extinguish fires primarily by absorbing heat rather than removing oxygen, allowing them to act fast—discharge within 10 seconds and fire extinguished within 30 seconds, generally before reaching the flame stage.

Agent Concentration and Safety: Any agent used under NFPA 2001 must be evaluated per EPA SNAP requirements. Manufacturer manuals contain LOAEL (Lowest Observable Adverse Effect Level) and NOAEL (No Observed Adverse Effect Level) data. Safeguards must include personnel training, warning signs, discharge alarms, SCBA, evacuation plans, and fire drills.

B. Water Mist Systems

NFPA 75 (2024) includes provisions for water mist fire protection systems. Water mist uses significantly less water than traditional sprinklers and may be suitable for certain data center areas. However, the impact on equipment must be carefully evaluated.

C. Water-Based Suppression

Traditional sprinklers are generally not the first choice for data halls due to water damage risk. Discharging water in an enclosed space can increase humidity beyond safe levels, leading to hard disk drive performance problems or failure. ASHRAE guidelines indicate equipment should be powered down when humidity exceeds 80%.

However, water-based suppression may still be required or appropriate for:

• Building areas outside the ITE space
• Generator halls and power rooms
• Storage areas
• As a backup to clean agent systems

Pro Tip: Standards compliance for suppression systems must be on three levels: component, system, and installation. Use only systems with system approval/certification, or insurance may be invalidated and the system may not work as intended.

◆ Section 6: Lithium-Ion Battery Fire Safety

Lithium-ion batteries in UPS systems represent the most significant emerging fire risk in data centers.

Regulatory Note: NFPA 76 (2024) removed lithium-ion battery requirements in favor of coverage in NFPA 855, Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems. Ensure your design team is familiar with NFPA 855 requirements for UPS battery installations.

Pro Tip: The NIRS fire occurred during routine maintenance—battery relocation intended to reduce fire risk. This underscores that battery handling procedures are as important as system design. Develop and enforce strict protocols for battery disconnection, relocation, and disposal.

◆ Section 7: Compartmentation and Construction

A. ITE Area Location

NFPA 75 addresses the location of ITE areas within buildings, interior construction materials, raised floors, and penetrations in fire-resistant-rated enclosures.

B. Modern Design Challenges

Modern data centers operate as collections of specialist rooms and zones rather than a single uniform hall. Data halls, UPS and battery rooms, medium- and low-voltage electrical rooms, generator halls, cooling plants, and storage areas each have distinct hazards and operational constraints. This segmentation increases pressure for site-specific fire protection approaches.

Pro Tip: The era of applying a single fire protection standard across an entire data center site is over. Each zone requires protection aligned with its function, hazard profile, and recovery objectives.

◆ Section 8: Operational Continuity vs. Code Compliance

The data center industry has shifted its focus from compliance as a primary driver to business continuity. Fire protection decisions are now evaluated based on their impact on uptime and recovery, not suppression performance alone.

The Almere data center fire in May 2026 demonstrated that redundancy at the data center level does not automatically mean end users are protected. The fire broke out in a utility room housing emergency power, cooling systems, and diesel backup generators. NorthC shut off power to the data halls on the fire brigade’s instructions to enable safe firefighting. The outage cascaded to every organization with platforms hosted at the site—including Transdev, whose control-center servers for the regional public transport emergency communication system had never been migrated to a backup location. Drivers lost contact with the control room, and the in-vehicle emergency button stopped functioning.

The Infrastructure That Failed — Not the IT Halls

The Almere facility spans 26,000 m² with an 11 MW electrical connection. Yet the fire did not start in the data halls. It broke out in a utility room housing the emergency power supply, cooling systems, and diesel backup generators. That separation succeeded: the servers survived. But the power, cooling, and emergency systems that made them operational were destroyed or shut down.

This is the zone-by-zone reality of modern data center design. The IT halls may be protected, but the facility is only as resilient as its weakest supporting system. When the utility infrastructure fails, the IT halls become expensive storage rooms.

Key lesson: Digital continuity begins not only with IT, but with the building itself. Investing in building automation and integrated fire safety is a prerequisite for keeping vital functions safe.

◆ Section 9: Case Study — South Korea NIRS Data Center Fire

The September 2025 fire at South Korea’s National Information Resources Service (NIRS) data center is the most instructive data center fire incident in recent years.

Timeline and Impact:

Root Causes:

1. Single point of failure: Over one-third of government systems were concentrated at the Daejeon headquarters. The NIRS had three sites but lacked active-active redundancy for real-time failover.
2. Battery proximity: Batteries were positioned just 60 cm from major servers, with inadequate partitioning between the power room and server room .
3. Battery age: The LG Energy Solution batteries were installed in August 2014, exceeding their 10-year recommended lifespan by over a year .
4. Maintenance procedure: Police investigation found that while the main power was shut down, the auxiliary power system connected to the UPS battery backup was not isolated. Workers failed to follow safety protocols, did not use required insulation materials, and failed to properly discharge the batteries before moving them . The batteries were at approximately 80% charge; guidelines require below 30% for safe relocation . Additionally, the workers involved were not qualified for the job, had no experience in battery relocation, and the contractors did not involve the battery manufacturers. The project involved illegal subcontracting with falsified employee records .

Data Loss and Human Cost

Beyond the operational disruption, the NIRS fire resulted in the permanent loss of approximately 858 TB of government data stored on G-Drive, a shared cloud storage service for central government officials . Unlike the other 95 destroyed systems, G-Drive had no backup—officials cited its massive capacity as the reason backups were deemed impractical . One official described the loss as “eight years’ worth of work materials” that had “completely disappeared” .

The human toll extended beyond data. On October 3, 2025, a 56-year-old Interior Ministry official who led the recovery effort was found dead at the government complex in Sejong . Police stated he appeared to have jumped from a 15th-floor terrace smoking area, leaving his phone behind . The Ministry of the Interior and Safety expressed condolences and canceled a scheduled briefing . The official was not a subject of the criminal investigation into the fire .

Lessons:

• Lithium-ion UPS batteries require separation from IT equipment and strict maintenance protocols
• Active-active redundancy, not just backup sites, is essential for critical infrastructure
• Battery replacement timelines must be enforced
• Firefighting challenges with lithium-ion fires require pre-incident planning
• Business continuity must include data survivability, not just uptime
• Maintenance procedures must be verified—not assumed—before work begins
• Contractor qualifications and oversight are fire safety controls

◆ Section 10: Design Checklist for Data Center Fire Safety

◆ Section 11: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

◆ Section 12: Conclusion

Data center fire protection is not a commodity—it is a specialized discipline that requires understanding of unique hazards, specialized suppression technologies, and the operational realities of continuous uptime environments.

Key Takeaways:

1. NFPA 75 and NFPA 76 are the governing standards for ITE and telecommunications facilities, with significant updates in the 2024 editions.
2. Clean agents are preferred for data halls because they are non-conductive, leave no residue, and act before the flame stage.
3. Aspirating smoke detection provides very early warning essential for protecting sensitive electronics.
4. Lithium-ion batteries are the most significant emerging risk and require NFPA 855 compliance, separation from ITE, and strict maintenance protocols.
5. Business continuity, not just code compliance, drives modern design—fire protection must be evaluated based on uptime and recovery impact.
6. Data resilience is a fire safety concern—the NIRS fire proved that systems without verified backups can lose data permanently.
7. Human error and contractor oversight are fire risk factors—the NIRS fire was ruled a man-made disaster caused by incomplete power isolation, unqualified workers, and illegal subcontracting .

Take Action Today:

1. Verify your facility complies with NFPA 75 (2024) and NFPA 76 (2024).
2. Assess lithium-ion battery installations against NFPA 855 requirements.
3. Evaluate aspirating smoke detection coverage in all ITE areas.
4. Confirm clean agent systems have system-level approval, not just component certification.
5. Develop and enforce battery handling and maintenance procedures.
6. Coordinate with your fire service for pre-incident planning.
7. Verify backup systems actually work—and test recovery.
8. Document business continuity objectives and align fire protection accordingly.

Continue Reading from Our Series:

• Learn more: Fire Safety for Green Buildings: Balancing Sustainability and Safety
• Related guide: Understanding Smoke Control Systems in Commercial Buildings
• Read more: Commercial Building Code Requirements for Fire Sprinkler Systems

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This guide is based on the base text of NFPA 101, Chapter 43 (Building Rehabilitation) and NFPA 914, Code for the Protection of Historic Structures. However, NFPA 101 and NFPA 914 requirements vary significantly by edition (2018, 2021, 2024) and are frequently amended by state and local jurisdictions. Local amendments and the edition adopted by your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) always control. This guide is a starting point only—always verify the specific requirements applicable to your project with your local AHJ.

Historic buildings present one of the most complex challenges in fire safety design. These structures are irreplaceable cultural assets, yet they were often built before modern fire codes existed—with combustible materials, open stairways, and limited egress paths that would never be permitted in new construction today.

The challenge is to protect the building and its occupants from fire while preserving the architectural character that makes it historically significant. This requires a balanced approach that respects both life safety and heritage preservation.

NFPA 101 addresses historic buildings through Chapter 43 (Building Rehabilitation), and NFPA 914 provides the specific code for the protection of historic structures.

This guide covers the unique fire safety challenges of historic buildings and the practical solutions for protecting them.

---

◆ Section 1: Why Historic Buildings Are Different

Historic buildings present fire safety challenges that are fundamentally different from new construction.

Challenge	Description
Combustible Construction	Many historic buildings use heavy timber, wood framing, and other combustible materials that are integral to their character.
Open Stairways	Grand open staircases and atriums—often the centerpiece of historic buildings—can act as chimneys for fire and smoke.
Limited Egress	Narrow corridors, single exits, and winding paths are common in historic buildings built before modern egress requirements.
Outdated Systems	Old electrical wiring, heating systems, and lack of fire suppression are common.
Preservation Constraints	Alterations that would meet modern codes may be prohibited by historic preservation regulations.
Occupant Familiarity	Historic buildings often house museums, libraries, or public spaces where occupants may be unfamiliar with the layout.

Pro Tip:
The goal is not to make a historic building comply with every new-construction requirement—that would destroy its character. The goal is to achieve an equivalent level of safety through a combination of active and passive measures.

---

◆ Section 2: The Regulatory Framework

A. NFPA 101, Chapter 43 (Building Rehabilitation)

NFPA 101, Chapter 43 establishes the requirements for work in existing buildings, including historic buildings. It provides a framework for determining which requirements apply based on the category of work being performed.

B. NFPA 914, Code for the Protection of Historic Structures

NFPA 914 is the dedicated code for historic structures. It provides a performance-based approach to fire safety that considers the unique characteristics of historic buildings.

Key Provisions of NFPA 914:

Provision	Description
Preservation Goal	The code recognizes that historic buildings should be preserved while providing an acceptable level of fire safety.
Performance-Based Approach	Designers can use alternative approaches to meet safety goals when strict code compliance would damage historic fabric.
Fire Risk Assessment	A comprehensive assessment must be conducted to identify hazards and evaluate risk.
Fire Safety Management	Ongoing management and maintenance are essential to fire safety in historic buildings.

C. The IEBC Alternative

The International Existing Building Code (IEBC) provides a similar framework for historic buildings, with specific provisions that allow alternative compliance methods. The applicant selects one compliance method as the sole basis for compliance.

IEBC Compliance Methods (2018/2021 Editions):

Compliance Method	Chapter	What It Covers
Prescriptive Compliance Method	Chapter 5	Repairs, alterations, additions, and changes of occupancy. Previously Chapter 34 of the IBC.
Repairs	Chapter 4	Standalone chapter applying across all compliance paths.
Work Area Compliance Method	Chapters 6–12	Alterations categorized by Level 1, 2, or 3; change of occupancy; additions; historic buildings.
Performance Compliance Method	Chapter 13	Numerical scoring system to demonstrate equivalent safety without full new-construction compliance.

Edition Note:
The Prescriptive Compliance Method was relocated from Chapter 4 to Chapter 5 in the 2018 IEBC, when repair provisions were pulled out of the individual compliance paths and consolidated into their own standalone Chapter 4. Always verify chapter numbers against the IEBC edition adopted by your jurisdiction.

Note on Chapter 12:
IEBC Chapter 12 (Historic Buildings) is the chapter within the Work Area Compliance Method written specifically for historic structures. It provides exceptions to the application of Chapters 7 through 11 for buildings accredited as being of historic significance by a state or local authority. Chapter 12 contains allowances for existing door swing direction, stair and corridor width, transoms, existing interior finishes, and other features that would otherwise be difficult to bring into strict compliance. If your building qualifies as historic under the IEBC definition, Chapter 12 should be your first stop.

Pro Tip:
Always engage a fire protection engineer with historic building experience. The alternative compliance paths require expert judgment to implement successfully.

---

◆ Section 3: The Fire Risk Assessment

A fire risk assessment is the foundation of any historic building fire safety strategy.

What the Assessment Should Cover:

Assessment Area	Key Questions
Construction and Materials	What is the building constructed of? Where are the combustible materials?
Occupancy and Use	Who uses the building? How many occupants? Are they familiar with the layout?
Fire Protection Systems	What systems are already in place? Are they operational?
Means of Egress	How do occupants exit? Are exits sufficient and remote?
Fire Hazards	What ignition sources exist? What fuels are present?
Compartmentation	Are there fire barriers and smoke compartments? Are they intact?
Operational Procedures	What are the procedures for fire safety? Who is responsible?

Pro Tip:
The fire risk assessment for a historic building should be conducted by a team that includes a fire protection engineer, a preservation architect, and the building’s facilities manager.

---

◆ Section 4: Fire Suppression Strategies for Historic Buildings

A. Sprinkler Systems

Sprinklers are the most effective fire protection system for historic buildings, but installation can be challenging.

Strategy	Description
Concealed Sprinklers	Use concealed heads that are flush with the ceiling and only appear when activated.
Sidewall Sprinklers	Install along walls where ceiling installation is not possible.
Flexible Piping	Use flexible connections to minimize impact on historic fabric.
Discreet Placement	Place sprinklers in areas where they are least visible (corners, behind beams).
Alternative Systems	Where sprinklers are not feasible, use water mist or gaseous systems.

Pro Tip:
Work with a sprinkler contractor who has experience with historic buildings. They will know how to minimize visual impact while maintaining protection.

B. Fire Extinguishers

Fire extinguishers should be:

• Discreetly placed in cabinets that match the historic character
• Clearly visible in critical areas (e.g., near exits, in kitchens)
• Properly maintained and inspected in accordance with NFPA 10

C. Standpipe and Hose Systems

Where standpipes are required, they should be:

• Concealed in walls or cabinets where possible
• Accessible to firefighters
• Properly maintained and tested

---

◆ Section 5: Fire Alarm and Detection Systems

A. Smoke Detection

Challenge	Solution
Visible detectors	Use concealed detectors or those that blend with the ceiling.
Historic ceiling materials	Use addressable detectors or aspirating smoke detection systems.
Large open spaces	Use beam detectors or air sampling systems.

B. Notification Appliances

Challenge	Solution
Visible strobes	Use low-profile or concealed notification appliances.
Audibility	Use voice evacuation systems where required.
Historic finishes	Mount appliances in discreet locations.

Pro Tip:
Wireless fire alarm systems can significantly reduce installation costs and minimize damage to historic fabric. They are especially useful in buildings where running new conduit is impractical.

---

◆ Section 6: Means of Egress in Historic Buildings

A. Common Egress Challenges

Challenge	Description
Single exits	Many historic buildings have only one exit.
Narrow corridors	Corridors may not meet current width requirements.
Open stairways	Grand staircases may not be enclosed.
Long travel distances	Paths to exits may exceed current limits.
Swing direction	Doors may swing inward instead of outward.

B. Egress Strategies

Challenge	Strategy
Single exits	Create new exits or use horizontal exits where possible.
Narrow corridors	Use smoke barriers to create compartments that limit smoke spread and provide areas of refuge.
Open stairways	Enclose stairways with glass or fire-rated materials that preserve visibility.
Long travel distances	Install additional exits or use smoke barriers to create refuge areas.
Swing direction	Reverse the swing direction of doors or install new doors.

Important Note on Terminology:
Do not confuse the term “smoke-protected” with a smoke barrier in a corridor. The term “smoke-protected” in the code applies specifically to smoke-protected assembly seating. A smoke barrier improves compartmentation and life safety, but it does not extend the exit access travel distance limit for the occupancy.

---

◆ Section 7: Passive Fire Protection in Historic Buildings

A. Fire Barriers and Compartmentation

Challenge	Solution
Open floor plans	Install fire barriers to create compartments.
Historic walls	Use existing masonry walls as fire barriers where possible.
Penetrations	Firestop all penetrations in fire-rated assemblies.
Concealed spaces	Install fire blocking in concealed spaces.

B. Fire Doors

Challenge	Solution
Historic doors	Retrofit existing doors with fire-rated cores and self-closing devices.
Openings	Install fire-rated glass where visibility is important.
Hardware	Use modern hardware that meets code while matching historic style.

C. Interior Finishes

Challenge	Solution
Historic wood paneling	Apply fire-retardant treatments to combustible finishes.
Draperies and curtains	Use flame-resistant materials or treat existing materials.
Floor finishes	Use Class I or II floor finishes in egress paths.

---

◆ Section 8: Fire Safety Management in Historic Buildings

Fire safety is not just about systems—it is also about management and operations.

Element	Description
Fire Safety Plan	A written plan outlining procedures for fire prevention, evacuation, and emergency response.
Staff Training	Training for all staff on fire safety procedures and use of fire extinguishers.
Fire Drills	Regular drills to ensure occupants know how to evacuate.
Maintenance	Regular inspection and maintenance of all fire protection systems.
Hot Work Permits	Permits required for welding, cutting, and other hot work.
Housekeeping	Keep exits clear, storage areas tidy, and combustible materials controlled.
Smoking Policies	Designated smoking areas with proper disposal.

Pro Tip:
A comprehensive fire safety management program is often the most cost-effective way to improve fire safety in historic buildings. It does not require physical alterations, and it can be implemented immediately.

---

◆ Section 9: Case Study: The Notre-Dame Cathedral Fire

The Notre-Dame Cathedral fire of April 2019 is a stark reminder of the vulnerability of historic buildings to fire. The fire destroyed the cathedral’s roof and spire and caused significant damage to the interior.

Key Lessons from Notre-Dame:

Lesson	Application
Early Detection is Critical	The fire burned undetected for over 30 minutes. Modern detection systems could have alerted staff earlier.
Fire Suppression Saves Buildings	There were no sprinklers in the attic—where the fire started. Sprinklers could have controlled the fire before it spread.
Compartmentation Limits Damage	The fire spread through the attic and into the cathedral. Fire barriers could have limited the damage.
Pre-Incident Planning is Essential	Firefighters had to navigate a complex, historic structure with limited access. A pre-incident plan would have helped.
Preservation and Safety Can Coexist	The restoration of Notre-Dame demonstrates that fire safety and preservation can be balanced.

Pro Tip:
The Notre-Dame fire led to a global reevaluation of fire safety in historic buildings. Many jurisdictions have since updated their codes and requirements.

---

◆ Section 10: Funding and Incentives for Historic Building Retrofits

Source	Description
Historic Preservation Tax Incentives	Federal and state tax credits for rehabilitating historic buildings.
Grants	Federal, state, and local grants for historic preservation and fire safety.
Preservation Easements	Legal agreements that protect historic buildings in exchange for tax benefits.
Local Programs	Many cities offer low-interest loans or grants for fire safety upgrades.
Insurance Discounts	Some insurers offer discounts for buildings with fire protection systems.

Pro Tip:
Always check with your State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for available funding and incentives before beginning a retrofit project.

---

◆ Section 11: Design Checklist

Item	Status	Notes
Fire Risk Assessment	☐	Completed and documented.
Regulatory Compliance	☐	NFPA 914, NFPA 101 Chapter 43, and IEBC (including Chapter 12 if applicable).
Fire Suppression Systems	☐	Sprinklers, extinguishers, standpipes.
Fire Alarm and Detection	☐	Smoke detection, notification appliances, monitoring.
Means of Egress	☐	Exits, corridors, stairways, door swing.
Passive Fire Protection	☐	Fire barriers, fire doors, firestopping, interior finishes.
Fire Safety Management	☐	Plan, training, drills, maintenance.
Funding and Incentives	☐	Tax credits, grants, insurance discounts.
Verify Local AHJ Requirements	☐	Local amendments and adopted edition control.

---

◆ Section 12: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Mistake	Why It’s a Problem	How to Fix
Applying New-Construction Code Blindly	May destroy historic character.	Use NFPA 914 and alternative compliance methods.
Ignoring the Fire Risk Assessment	Retrofit may not address the actual risks.	Conduct a thorough assessment before designing.
Concealing Fire Safety Systems Too Well	May delay response or maintenance.	Balance discretion with accessibility.
Not Involving the AHJ Early	May result in non-compliance or delays.	Engage the AHJ in the design process.
Neglecting Management and Operations	Systems may fail without proper maintenance.	Implement a comprehensive fire safety management program.
Skipping Funding Opportunities	May miss available financial incentives.	Research tax credits and grants before starting.
Using Outdated IEBC Chapter Numbers	May cite incorrect chapters.	Verify Prescriptive Method is Chapter 5 (2018/2021); Repairs is Chapter 4; Work Area is Chapters 6–12 (including Chapter 12 for Historic Buildings).

---

◆ Section 13: Conclusion

Historic buildings are irreplaceable cultural assets, but they also present unique fire safety challenges. By using the alternative compliance methods in NFPA 914 and NFPA 101 Chapter 43, engaging qualified professionals, and implementing comprehensive fire safety management, you can protect these buildings while preserving their character.

Take Action Today:

1. Conduct a fire risk assessment of your historic building.
2. Engage a fire protection engineer with historic building experience.
3. Explore alternative compliance methods under NFPA 914 and the IEBC (remember Chapter 12 for historic buildings).
4. Balance preservation and safety by using discreet, effective solutions.
5. Implement a fire safety management program (plan, training, drills, maintenance).
6. Research funding and incentives (tax credits, grants, insurance discounts).
7. Always verify local amendments and the adopted code edition with your AHJ.

---

Continue Reading from Our Series:

• Read more about: How to Design a Fire Safety Strategy for Existing Buildings (Retrofits)
  
• Learn more: How to Conduct a Fire Risk Assessment: A Step-by-Step Guide
  
• Related guide: How to Design Fire Safety for Atriums and Large Volumes
  

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  This guide is based on the base text of NFPA 101, Chapters 32 (new) and 33 (existing). However, NFPA 101 requirements vary significantly by edition (2018, 2021, 2024) and are frequently amended by state and local jurisdictions. Local amendments and the edition adopted by your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) always control.  This guide is a starting point only—always verify the specific requirements applicable to your project with your local AHJ.

Note on Facility Type: Many assisted living facilities are classified as residential board and care occupancies. However, some larger facilities may be classified as health care occupancies. Always verify the correct classification with your local AHJ.

Important Structural Note: Throughout this guide, requirements are organized by Small Facility (4-16 residents) and Large Facility (17+ residents), since most code provisions hinge on this distinction. Where requirements also differ between new and existing facilities, that is noted within each subsection.

---

Residential board and care occupancies occupy a unique and challenging space in fire safety design. These facilities provide personal care services to residents who may have limited mobility, cognitive impairments, or other conditions that affect their ability to evacuate without assistance—yet they are not full healthcare facilities. NFPA 101 defines a residential board and care occupancy as “an occupancy used for lodging and boarding of four or more residents, not related by blood or marriage to the owners or operators, for the purpose of providing personal care services”. NFPA 101 addresses residential board and care occupancies in Chapter 32 (new) and Chapter 33 (existing). This guide covers the essential fire safety requirements for these occupancies.

---

◆ Section 1: Defining Residential Board and Care Occupancies

NFPA 101 defines a residential board and care occupancy as “an occupancy used for lodging and boarding of four or more residents, not related by blood or marriage to the owners or operators, for the purpose of providing personal care services”.

Examples of Residential Board and Care Occupancies:

Type	Examples
Assisted Living	Assisted living facilities, personal care homes
Group Housing	Group homes for physically or mentally handicapped persons
Rehabilitation	Facilities for social rehabilitation, alcoholism, drug abuse, or mental health problems
Elderly Care	Group housing for the elderly that provides personal care but not nursing care

Small vs. Large Facilities:

Classification	Number of Residents
Small Facility	4 to 16 residents
Large Facility	17 or more residents

Critical Distinction: Residential board and care occupancies provide personal care services but not nursing care. Facilities that provide nursing care are typically classified as health care occupancies under Chapters 18/19.

---

◆ Section 2: Evacuation Capability

The concept of evacuation capability is central to fire safety design in residential board and care occupancies. Unlike other occupancies where full building evacuation is the goal, board and care facilities may rely on a defend-in-place strategy depending on the residents’ capabilities.

Evacuation Capability Classifications:

Classification	Definition
Prompt	Evacuation capability equivalent to that of the general population
Slow	Evacuation capability of a group to move to a point of safety in a timely manner, with some residents requiring assistance from staff
Impractical	Evacuation capability of a group that, even with staff assistance, cannot reliably move to a point of safety in a timely manner

Evacuation Capability Determination:

The facility must conduct a Fire Safety Evacuation Scoring System (FSES) evaluation as listed in NFPA 101A, Alternatives to Life Safety, to determine the clients’ needs during a fire drill. The evaluation includes:

• Mobility
• Assistance to evacuate
• Staff needed
• Risk of resistance
• Clients’ ability to evacuate on their own
• Choosing an alternate exit

Evacuation Times (Kentucky example):

Time to Evacuate	Classification
3 minutes or less	Prompt (Acceptable)
Over 3 minutes, but not in excess of 13 minutes	Slow (Acceptable)
More than 13 minutes	Impractical (Not Acceptable)

Pro Tip: The evacuation capability determination is based on the time of day or night when evacuation would be most difficult, whether because of sleeping residents or fewer staff present.

---

◆ Section 3: Means of Egress and Means of Escape

Important Distinction: Residential board and care occupancies use the concept of “means of escape” rather than the traditional “means of egress” found in other occupancies. This reflects the unique needs of residents who may require assistance and the possibility of a defend-in-place strategy.

A. Small Facilities (4-16 Residents)

For small board and care facilities, the provisions of Chapter 7 (Means of Egress) do not apply unless explicitly referenced. Instead, the facility must meet the requirements of 32.2.2 (New) or 33.2.2 (Existing).

Requirement	Details
Doors	Resident room doors must latch in their frame to resist the passage of smoke
Living Unit Doors	Doors between living units with cooking equipment and corridors must be self-closing or automatic-closing and latch to resist smoke
Stairs	If residents are housed on floors other than ground floor, at least two separate approved stairs must be provided
Stair Arrangement	Each stair must be arranged so it is not necessary to go through another room (including bedroom or bathroom) to reach the stair
Handrails	Each stair must be provided with handrails

B. Large Facilities (17+ Residents)

For large board and care facilities, the requirements are more aligned with traditional egress provisions.

Requirement	Details
Doors	Resident room doors must latch in their frame to resist the passage of smoke
Stairs	At least two separate approved stairs must be provided for floors other than ground floor
Marking	Means of egress must be marked in accordance with 32.3.2.10 (New) or 33.3.2.10 (Existing)
Emergency Lighting	Required in accordance with 32.3.2.9 (New) or 33.3.2.9 (Existing), unless each sleeping room has a direct exit to the outside at grade level

C. Lockups Prohibited (Both Facility Sizes)

The provisions of 32.3.2.11.2 (Lockups) for new facilities and 33.3.2.11.2 (Lockups) for existing facilities are not permitted in residential board and care occupancies.

---

◆ Section 4: Fire Alarm, Detection, and CO Systems

A. Fire Alarm System (Both Facility Sizes)

A fire alarm system shall be provided in accordance with Section 13.7 (for existing) or 32.3.4/33.3.4 (for new/existing as applicable).

Requirement	Details
Initiation	By manual means in accordance with 13.7.1.7.1(1) or applicable new construction provisions
Occupant Notification	Provided automatically, without delay, in accordance with 13.7.1.9 or applicable new construction provisions

B. Smoke Alarms (Both Facility Sizes)

Approved smoke alarms shall be provided in accordance with 13.7.1.8 or 32.3.4/33.3.4.

Location	Requirement
All Levels	Including basements (excluding crawl spaces and unfinished attics)
Living Areas	Additional smoke alarms in all living areas
Each Sleeping Room	Each sleeping room must have an approved smoke alarm

C. Smoke Detectors (Large Facilities Only)

In a large board and care occupancy, approved smoke detectors shall be installed:

• Powered by the house electrical service
• When activated, shall initiate an alarm audible in the sleeping areas
• Detectors shall be installed on all levels, including basements but excluding crawl spaces and attics
• Additional detectors shall be installed for living rooms and day rooms

D. Carbon Monoxide Alarms and Detection Systems

Carbon monoxide alarms or detectors shall be provided in new residential board and care occupancies where either of the following conditions exists:

Facility Size	CO Detection Trigger	Locations
Small Facilities (4-16 residents)	Facility has communicating attached garages , OR facility contains fuel-burning appliances or fuel-burning fireplaces	Outside sleeping areas; within sleeping rooms containing fuel-burning appliances; every occupiable level; adjacent to garage
Large Facilities (17+ residents)	Facility has communicating attached garages, OR individual sleeping rooms or suites contain fuel-burning appliances or fireplaces	Outside sleeping areas; within sleeping rooms containing fuel-burning appliances; every occupiable level; adjacent to garage

Exceptions to CO Detection (Both Facility Sizes):

Exception	Details
Garages	CO alarms not required in garages
Open Parking Structures	Not required where attached garages are open parking structures
Mechanically Ventilated	Not required where attached garages are mechanically ventilated in accordance with the mechanical code

Note on Existing Facilities: The 2024 edition of NFPA 101 expanded CO detection requirements to additional occupancies. Always verify whether CO detection is required for existing residential board and care facilities in your jurisdiction.

---

◆ Section 5: Hazardous Areas Protection (Both Facility Sizes)

Hazardous areas in residential board and care occupancies must be protected in accordance with NFPA 101 requirements.

Protection Options:

Condition	Requirement
Hazardous Area on Same Floor as Sleeping Room	Enclosure with 1-hour fire resistance rating with self-closing fire door (¾-hour rating) OR automatic sprinkler protection with smoke-resistant separation
Other Hazardous Areas	Enclosure with 20-minute fire resistance rating with self-closing door equivalent to 1¾-inch solid bonded wood core OR automatic sprinkler protection

Pro Tip: The intent is to protect sleeping areas from hazardous areas that are on the same floor or that abut the primary means of escape.

---

◆ Section 6: Automatic Sprinkler Systems

A. Small Facilities (4-16 Residents)

Evacuation Capability	Sprinkler Requirement	Code Reference
Prompt	NFPA 13D permitted	NFPA 101, 32.2.3.5.1 / 33.2.3.5.1
Slow or Impractical	NFPA 13D with 30-minute water supply	NFPA 101, 33.2.3.5.2, Exception No. 2
Prompt (≤8 residents, 3-min evacuation)	Sprinklers may be omitted in conversions	NFPA 101, 32.2.3.5.2

B. Large Facilities (17+ Residents)

Requirement	Details	Code Reference
New Large Facilities	Protected throughout with NFPA 13 system using quick-response or residential sprinklers	NFPA 101, 32.3.5
Existing Large Facilities (≤4 stories, prompt or slow)	NFPA 13R permitted	NFPA 101, 33.3.3.5.1
Existing Large Facilities (Impractical)	NFPA 13 required throughout	NFPA 101, 33.3.3.5

Note on NFPA 13D and 13R: These standards are permitted outside their normal scopes for board and care occupancies based on the recognition that fires in these facilities are similar to other residential occupancies. For slow and impractical evacuation capability facilities, NFPA 13D systems are supplemented with a 30-minute water supply requirement to compensate for the special needs of the board and care occupancy.

Note on Local Requirements: Sprinkler requirements vary significantly by jurisdiction. For example, the Harrisburg, PA code requires sprinklers in all new and existing board and care occupancies with a five-year compliance period for existing facilities . Always verify with your local AHJ.

---

◆ Section 7: Fire Drills and Emergency Planning (Both Facility Sizes)

A. Fire Drill Frequency

Facility Type	Requirement
General Board and Care	Fire drills shall be conducted at regular intervals
Texas Facilities (Example)	One fire drill per shift each calendar quarter (minimum of 12 drills per year)
Kentucky ALCs (Example)	6 fire drills per year, 2 at inconvenient times

B. Fire Drill Requirements

The fire drills for facilities built to the residential board and care chapter of the Life Safety Code (NFPA 101) shall be permitted to be announced, in advance, to the clients just prior to the drill .

C. Written Record of Fire Drills

Facilities shall complete a written record of fire drills that includes:

1. The date and time, including AM/PM, the drill was conducted and if the actual fire alarm system was used
2. The location of exits used
3. The number of people, including clients, personnel, and visitors, participating at the time of the drill
4. The amount of time taken to completely evacuate the facility
5. The name and title of the person conducting the drill
6. A list of problems and issues encountered during the drill
7. A list of improvements and resolution to the issues encountered during the drill
8. The names of all staff members participating in the drill

D. Staff Requirements

At no time shall a staff member who has not participated in a fire drill be the only staff member on duty within the facility.

E. Fire Safety Evacuation Scoring System (FSES)

At admission, the facility shall conduct a client Fire Safety Evacuation Scoring System (FSES) as listed in NFPA 101A, Alternatives to Life Safety, to determine the clients’ needs during a fire drill including:

• Mobility
• Assistance to evacuate
• Staff needed
• Risk of resistance
• Clients’ ability to evacuate on his or her own
• Choosing an alternate exit

---

◆ Section 8: Oxygen Cylinder Storage (Both Facility Sizes)

Storage and use of oxygen cylinders or systems shall comply with NFPA 99, Health Care Facilities Code, including but not limited to:

Requirement	Details
Separation from Combustibles	Minimum distance of 6.1 m (20 ft)
Sprinklered Storage	Minimum distance of 1.5 m (5 ft) if the entire storage location is protected by an automatic sprinkler system
Gas Cabinet	A gas cabinet constructed per NFPA 30 may be used

---

◆ Section 9: Design Checklist

Item	Status	Notes
Occupancy Classification	☐	Confirm 4+ residents receiving personal care services
Facility Size	☐	Small (4-16) or Large (17+)
Evacuation Capability	☐	Prompt, Slow, or Impractical
Means of Escape	☐	Verify doors latch to resist smoke
Two Stairs (Multi-Story)	☐	Required for floors other than ground floor
Fire Alarm System	☐	Required with automatic occupant notification
Smoke Alarms	☐	Required on all levels, living areas, and sleeping rooms
Smoke Detectors (Large)	☐	Required in large facilities
CO Alarms/Detectors	☐	Small: facility-wide trigger; Large: in-room trigger
Hazardous Area Protection	☐	1-hour or 20-minute enclosure OR sprinkler
Sprinkler System (Small)	☐	NFPA 13D (prompt); 13D + 30-min water (slow/impractical)
Sprinkler System (Large)	☐	NFPA 13 (new); 13R permitted (existing ≤4 stories, prompt/slow)
Fire Drills	☐	Documented; verify frequency with AHJ
Oxygen Storage	☐	NFPA 99 compliance
Verify Local AHJ Requirements	☐	Local amendments and adopted edition control

---

◆ Section 10: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Mistake	Why It’s a Problem	How to Fix
Misclassifying the Occupancy	Applying health care requirements instead of board and care	Confirm facility provides personal care but not nursing care
Ignoring Evacuation Capability	May design for the wrong evacuation strategy	Conduct FSES evaluation and document evacuation capability
Inadequate Door Latching	Smoke can spread into sleeping areas	Ensure resident room doors latch in frame to resist smoke passage
Missing CO Detection in Large Facilities	Residents exposed to “silent killer”	Install CO alarms where attached garage or in-room fuel-burning appliances exist
Using NFPA 13D for Large Facilities	Incorrect sprinkler standard	Use NFPA 13 for large facilities; 13D is for small facilities only
No Fire Drill Documentation	Cannot demonstrate compliance	Maintain written records of all drills
Oxygen Storage Violations	Fire hazard from oxidizing gases	Follow NFPA 99 separation requirements
Assuming Local Rules Match Base Code	May miss stricter state requirements	Always verify with local AHJ

---

◆ Section 11: Conclusion

Residential board and care occupancies require a fire safety strategy that reflects their unique characteristics—residents who may have limited mobility or cognitive impairments, and the possibility of a defend-in-place strategy depending on evacuation capability. By understanding the evacuation capability concept, providing adequate means of escape, installing appropriate fire alarm and suppression systems, and conducting regular fire drills, you can design facilities that protect residents and comply with regulatory requirements.

Take Action Today:

1. Confirm the occupancy classification (residential board and care, not health care).
2. Determine facility size (small 4-16 or large 17+).
3. Conduct an evacuation capability evaluation using NFPA 101A FSES.
4. Provide means of escape with doors that latch to resist smoke.
5. Install fire alarm, CO detection, and smoke alarms as required for your facility size.
6. Protect hazardous areas with appropriate enclosures or sprinklers.
7. Install sprinklers using the correct standard for your facility size (13D for small; 13 for large).
8. Document all fire drills and maintain records.
9. Verify oxygen storage complies with NFPA 99.
10. Always verify local amendments and the adopted NFPA 101 edition with your AHJ.

---

Continue Reading from Our Series:

• Read more about: How to Design Fire Safety for Assembly Occupancies
• Learn more: How to Design Fire Safety for Industrial Occupancies
• Related guide: How to Design Fire Safety for Healthcare Occupancies