Top Arguments for Immediately Deleting Exception 4 from R501.3

Originally published by: SBCAJanuary 27, 2016

The following article was produced and published by the source linked to above, who is solely responsible for its content. SBC Magazine is publishing this story to raise awareness of information publicly available online and does not verify the accuracy of the author’s claims. As a consequence, SBC cannot vouch for the validity of any facts, claims or opinions made in the article.

Recent ASTM E119 testing (using 100% design load conditions as required by that standard), conducted independently by Underwriters Laboratory (UL) and NGC Testing Services (NGC), provide compelling evidence that Exception 4 in the IRC-12 R501.3 and IRC-15 R302.13 should be amended out of the code for any jurisdiction that has already adopted it, or is considering doing so.

SBCA has compiled and summarized this evidence in the article, 7 Reasons to Immediately Delete Exception 4 from R501.3which it is now sharing with decision makers and risk managers interested in this topic.  The life safety risk aspects of this issue have generated a lot of interest.

Check out this extra section in each digital issue of SBC Magazine for additional news, perspective, and advertiser content. Learn more and access 2016-2017 archives here.