Little has been done at the national level to create federal retrofitting legislation. However, such legislation passes in cities and states that have been directly affected by deadly fires. This may be because these areas feel a sense of urgency and are more determined to prevent such tragedies from happening again.

Such was the case after three students died in a January 2000 dormitory fire at Seton Hall University in South Orange, N.J. In reaction, the state legislature rushed through a mandate for the installation of automatic sprinkler systems in all college and university residence halls, ordering the installations to be completed within two years. The public didn't want to see the sprinkler installation project turn into another long-term government project; they wanted automatic sprinkler systems in every residential room and they wanted it done immediately.

At the time of the Seton Hall fire, only 37% of the Rutgers University dormitories were sprinklered. As New Jersey's state school, Rutgers has one of the nation's largest population of students living on campus; of 50,000 students, approximately 17,000 live in university housing. The mandate would be a tremendous challenge for the school.

Sprinklering boundaries

Most opposition to retrofitting student housing is to the high post-construction costs and the disruptive conditions. There's no getting around the fact that retrofitting requires much more work, money and time than an initial construction project.

However, there also is no getting over the fact that retrofitting existing buildings will save lives. A recent fire in a sprinklered Illinois dormitory, with a property valued in excess of $11 million, that only suffered a $2,000 loss and resulted in no injuries justifies the investment in sprinklers and distinguishes the consequences of a fire in a dormitory with sprinklers from dorms that don't have them.

Rutgers estimated that the retrofit project would cost approximately $40 million and take six to eight years to completely retrofit all the residential buildings during summer and winter breaks, when students were not in the dorms. This is how all earlier retrofitting projects were completed. Conducting a major construction in dormitories while they were occupied was rejected because it would inconvenience students and disrupt day-to-day academic activities.

The legislators consulted with Chief Joseph Zuccarello of Rutgers Fire and Emergency Services, who has more than 30 years of experience and has been involved in an aggressive effort to install automatic sprinklers systems in new and renovated buildings since 1989. He convinced the legislature that it would be impossible to complete the retrofit project in two years if it was to be done right.

The legislators rejected the six- to eight-year argument made by the university but agreed that the two-year goal could not be accomplished. Finally the legislature mandated completion within four years. Completely retrofitting all units within four years would be a challenging and demanding task that would require retrofitting the dorms during the school year while they were occupied.

Construction specifics

The university's Division of Public Safety played a central role in planning, coordinating and supervising the retrofit project, and it worked to immediately develop an accelerated plan to retrofit the 152 non-sprinklered residential halls.

Even before the automatic-sprinkler legislation was passed, the division began university-wide efforts to meet the difficult legislative requirements and get a head start on the construction. The school made significant progress before the bill's time clock started ticking, which was important because the legislation put the limited number of contractors in great demand.

The university's fire-safety team prioritized sprinkler installations using the following criteria:

• Number of students,
• Building height,
• Construction type,
• Number of egress points and
• Age of building.

Once it was decided in what order the buildings would be retrofitted, the challenge was to develop a plan that allowed for safe installation during the academic year. In the past, Rutgers used the design/bid/build process for retrofitting projects. The enormous size of this undertaking called for a re-evaluation of that practice. An analysis revealed that a change to a design/build process would be more efficient.

The university selected a single sprinkler contractor to perform the retrofit work. The new process reduced cost and expedited the completion of each building. Sprinklers are being installed in occupied dormitories with little disruption or complaint, which is testimony to the value of the planning that preceded the actual construction. In fact, the retrofit project will be 78% completed by July, significantly ahead of the mandate.

Student union

In addition to the life-saving benefits, the university's retrofit project is responsible for putting together great partnerships. These unions continue to evolve within and among the public safety, non-public safety, private and public organizations. What better basis can there be for a partnership?

To meet the aggressive goals set by the legislation, the public safety division had to be reorganized. The departments of police, security and emergency services had to work more closely than they had in the past. The division had to seek outside help as well, partnering with the most logical source of aid, the student population. The challenge of creating a secure environment during the project led to a new enterprise of students hired, trained, uniformed and then used to provide escort and security services.

This new group of employees, called Community Service Officers, adopted the motto of “Students serving students.” CSOS provided the ideal solution to a very complex problem. The group offered an added level of safety and security to the students who were living in the residence halls while allowing the retrofit project to proceed during the school year. Their success allowed us to meet the timetable established by the legislature while addressing the security concerns. This success created greater demand for CSO support and services, which are now viewed as a valuable public safety resource.

The university also seized the opportunity to upgrade the role of emergency services. The department became more involved in the larger operation with more responsibilities and partnership building duties rather than just being responsible for traditional fire runs and medical emergencies. They kept the retrofitting project on target by coordinating the activities that are involved in this huge undertaking.

The emergency services' new leadership role also required them to be public educators, initiators of action, coordinators, trainers and team builders. By doing so, they made themselves an even more important component of the university's problem-solving team and further improved their image as progressive and unselfish contributors to a safer community and a better organization.

No one disputes that the use of automatic sprinklers is one of the most reliable methods for controlling fires at their incipient stage. The Seton Hall tragedy serves as a reminder to all of us involved in providing public safety services that, in addition to such features as safe, lighted entryways and sidewalks leading into student housing and emergency phones placed strategically throughout campuses, fire suppression systems are essential.

The retrofitting of Rutgers University required that public safety managers embraced a greater leadership role in areas of legislation, design, construction oversight and reorganization. Public safety leadership also was required during the day-to-day activities, which included positive motivational feedback to everyone involved in the project.

The public safety team that spearheaded this effort not only influenced the passage of legislation, they developed long-term partnerships that will be better equipped to address the next university challenge.

---

Prior to accepting employment at Rutgers University as executive director for public safety, Jay Kohl spent 20 years with the Detroit Police Department, where he worked in a variety of assignments including team leader for the Special Response Team and as a legal advisor. He has also had positions as police chief and director of public safety in communities in Michigan and Iowa. Kohl is trained as a police officer and firefighter, and has a master's degree and juris doctorate. He is a graduate of the fbi National Academy and the National Fire Academy's Executive Fire Officer Program. Kohl was an adjunct professor at Michigan State University and has published many articles on public safety issues.