By Brad Bumsted
The Pittsburgh Tribune Review
HARRISBURG, Pa. — A state mandate requiring all new homes to have fire sprinklers has touched off a heated debate in the Legislature and a high-profile lobbying effort in the halls of the Capitol.
Republicans are leading the effort in the chambers they control, but support crosses party lines.
“It’s big government — it is too extreme,” said Democratic Sen. Jim Ferlo of Highland Park, who filed a repeal bill. The mandate is “nonsensical and not needed,” he said.
House Bill 377 by Rep. Garth Everett, R-Lycoming County, which would repeal the mandate, is pending in committee. Two other bills in finishing stages — one by a Senate Republican leader — offer a more comprehensive approach by rolling back the mandate and preventing changes in national building code standards from automatically changing state law.
House Majority Leader Mike Turzai, R-Bradford Woods, said there will be a debate but stopped short of saying lawmakers would get a chance to vote on the bills.
The issue pits the home building industry, real estate agents and businesses against firefighters. It poses a tough choice for lawmakers who hear the sprinkler requirement will further depress home sales, while firefighters say unequivocally that sprinklers save lives.
Firefighters rallied at the Capitol this week to lobby against the repeals while the Pennsylvania Builders Association was drumming up support.
As of Jan. 1, new single family homes and duplexes in Pennsylvania were required to have sprinkler systems. The cost of installation varies from $5,000 to $10,000 and is much higher in rural areas, according to builders. Republican Rep. Frank Farry, a fire chief in Bucks County, said he believes those figures are inflated.
Under a 1999 state law, Pennsylvania automatically adopts the provisions of the International Construction Code Council, which set a new code in 2009 to take effect this year.
Commercial building requirements come from a separate code that also originates with the International Construction Code Council. New commercial buildings must have sprinklers depending on their square footage and occupancy. Renovations that increase occupancy can trigger a requirement for sprinklers, according to the Builders Association.
Senate Appropriations Chairman Jake Corman, R-Centre County and Rep. Donna Oberlander, R-Clarion, are about to introduce legislation that would prevent automatic adoption of the national code provisions.
The mandate “is an attack on our liberty,” Oberlander said. “Government should stay out of our lives.”
“To mandate this safety procedure is government going over the line,” he said.
But sprinklers “save lives, and they save property,” said Democratic Sen. Tim Solobay, the Canonsburg fire chief. “It just amazes me that because of a group kicking and screaming on an issue that affects their bottom line, that we’re going to risk people’s lives.”
Builders handed out a December article to legislators from Popular Mechanics saying that the fire survival rate with smoke detectors is 99.4 percent, and 99.6 percent with sprinklers.
“Is the government going to mandate that people spend thousands of dollars to be 0.19 percent safer in their homes?” said Frederick Cabell Jr., director of government affairs for the builders.
The vast majority of states don’t require sprinklers, builders say.
Opponents of the mandate say they’re all for sprinklers — based on consumer choice.
But Farry, who has been a fire chief for 11 years, said, “Smoke detectors are a warning device. Sprinklers are a protective device.”
“Would any fireman like to have sprinklers in a home? Hell, yes,” said Greensburg Fire Chief J. Edward Hutchinson.
As a Republican lawmaker, Farry said he does not like mandates. He said he hopes there is a compromise allowing municipalities to “opt out” of the mandate and decide in each locale if they need to require sprinklers in new homes.
Copyright 2011 Tribune Review Publishing Company
All Rights Reserved