authorize home-to-work transportation under § 101-6.402 (b) or (c).

(e) Each Federal agency shall consider the location of the employee's residence prior to authorizing home-towork transportation. Such transportation shall be authorized only within the usual commuting area for the locale of the employee's place of employment.

(f) An employee authorized home-towork transporation may elect to share space in a Government passenger carrier with other individuals on a space available basis, provided that the passenger carrier does not travel additional distances as a result, and provided such sharing is consistent with his/her agency's policy. When an agency establishes its space sharing policy, it should consider the effects of its potential liability for and to those individuals. If an employee is authorized transportation between his/her residence and an official duty site, this privilege does not extend to his/her spouse, other relatives, or friends unless

(1) It is consistent with the agency's policy,

(2) They are with the employee when he/she is picked up, and

(3) They are transported to the same place or event.

(g) The head of each Federal agency shall authorize the use of home-towork transportation only to the extent that such transportation will substantially increase the efficiency and economy of the Government.

§ 101-6.403 Agency responsibilities.

(a) Each Federal agency shall maintain logs or other records necessary to establish that any home-to-work transportation was used for official purposes. The agency may determine the organizational level at which the logs should be maintained and kept. The logs or other records should be easily accessible for audit and should contain the following information:

(1) Name and title of employee (or other identification, if confidential) using the passenger carrier;

(2) Name and title of person authorizing use;

(3) Passenger carrier identification; (4) Date;

(5) Location;

(6) Duration; and

(7) Circumstances requiring home-towork transportation.

(b) The head of each Federal agency shall determine which employees are eligible to use home-to-work transportation in accordance with the definition of field work in §101-6.401(g) and the guidance contained in § 101-6.405. Determinations must be in writing and must be accomplished as soon as practicable, but not later than 90 days from the effective date of the issuance of the regulations as a final rule. Determinations should be updated as necessary and must be recertified at least every 2 years thereafter. The authority to make determinations may not be delegated.

(c) When circumstances described in § 101-6.402(c) apply, the head of a Federal agency shall make a written determination, containing the following information: Name (or other identification, if confidential) and title of the . employee; the reason for authorizing home-to-work transportation; and the anticipated duration of the authorization. The authority to make a determination may not be delegated. The determination should be completed before the employee is provided with home-to-work transportation. In some cases, an agency may wish to have certain employees ready to respond immediately when those circumstances arise without warning. Το meet those events, the head of an agency may approve a contingency determination. Such a determination should include the names of authorized individuals or positions, the situation(s) upon which the provision of home-to-work transporation is contingent, and administrative controls. When it is used to provide an employee with home-towork transportation, the contingency determination must be supplemented with the following information on the specific situation if it is not already part of the contingency determination: Name (or other identification, if confidential) and title of the employee; the reason that justified using the contingency determination; and the starting date and ending date (or anticipated ending date) of the authorization.

(1) Each determination and contingency determination must be submitted to Congress in accordance with procedures set forth in § 101-6.404. When a contingency determination is exercised, supplemental information on the specific situation, as outlined in paragraph (c) of this section, must also be provided to Congress. Such documentation must be easily available within the agency for audit. Additional guidance concerning determinations is contained in § 101-6.405.

(2) The initial duration of a determination shall not exceed 15 calendar days. Should the circumstances justifying home-to-work transportation continue, the head of a Federal agency may approve a subsequent determination of not more than 90 additional calendar days. If at the end of the subsequent determination, the underlying circumstances continue to exist, the head of the Federal agency may authorize an additional extension of 90 calendar days. This process may continue as long as required by the circumstances.

§ 101-6.404 Reports.

Each initial determination and contingency determination, as well as supplemental information on each situation where a contingency determination is exercised, prepared under §1016.403(c) shall be submitted to Congress promptly, but not later than 60 calendar days after approval. An agency may consolidate any subsequent determinations into a single report and submit them quarterly. Determinations and reports shall be sent to:

Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, suite SD-340, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510.

Chairman, Committee of Governmental Operations, United States House of Representatives, suite, 2157, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.

§101–6.405 Additional guidance.

(a) House of Representatives Report No. 99-451 99th Cong., 1st Sess. (1985) clearly indicates the intent of Congress to eliminate abuse of home-to-work transportation. The report notes, on p. 7, that:

The provision for "field work" is meant to cover an employee of [a Federal] agency whose job requires the employee's presence at various locations that are at a distance from [the employee's] place of employment ***. Examples of such employees include, but are not limited to, mine inspectors, meat inspectors, and certain other law enforcement officers, whose jobs require travel to several locations during the course of a workday. However, the field work exception may not be used (1) when the [employee's] workday begins at his or her official [G]overnment duty station, or (2) when the [employee] normally commutes to a fixed location, however far removed from his or her official duty station (for example, auditors or investigators assigned to a defense contractor plant). Although their daily work station is not located in a [G]overnment office, these [employees] are not performing "field work" ***. Like all [G]overnment employees, [employees] working in a "field office" are responsible for their own commuting costs.

The report also states in the same section that the legislation is intended to allow home-to-work transportation for medical officers on outpatient service. The guidelines contained in the report, as well as the Congressional Record (daily ed. October 10, 1986, pp. S 1586515868), should provide an adequate basis for an agency to determine which of its employees may be authorized home-towork transportation.

(b) Additional examples of employees who may perform field work include, but are not limited to, quality assurance inspectors, construction inspectors, customs inspectors, dairy inspectors, revenue officers, compliance investigators, and personnel background investigators. The assignment of an employee to such a position does not, of itself, entitle an employee to receive daily home-to-work transportation. When authorized, such transportation should be provided only on days when the employee actually performs field work, and then only to the extent that such transportation will substantially increase the efficiency and economy of the Government.

(c) Instances may occur when an employee, by the nature of his/her job, is designated as being authorized hometo-work transportation under the field work provision. However, circumstances may require that field work only be performed on an intermittent basis. In those instances, the

agency shall establish procedures to ensure that a Government passenger carrier is used only when field work is actually being performed.

(d) In making field work determinations under §101-6.403(b), an agency head may elect to designate positions rather than individual names, especially in positions where rapid turnover occurs. The determination should contain sufficient information, such as the job title, number, and operational level where the work is to be performed (i.e., five recruiter personnel or positions at the Detroit Army Recruiting Battalion) to satisfy an audit, if necessary.

(e) Situations may arise where it is more cost-effective for the Government to provide an employee a vehicle for home-to-work transportation rather than have the employee travel a long distance to pick up a vehicle and then drive back toward or beyond his/her residence to perform his/her job. In those situations agencies should consider basing the vehicle at a Government facility located near the employee's job site. If such a solution is not feasible, an agency must then decide if the use of the vehicle should be approved under the compelling operational considerations definition. Home-to-work transportation in such cases may be approved only if other available alternatives would involve substantial cost to the Government or expenditure of substantial employee time.

Subpart 101-6.5-Code of Ethics

for Government Service

§ 101-6.500 Scope of subpart.

(a) In accordance with Public Law 96303, the requirements of this section shall apply to all executive agencies (as defined by section 105 of title 5, United States Code), the United States Postal Service, and the Postal Rate Commission. The heads of these agencies shall be responsible for ensuring that the requirements of this section are observed and complied with within their respective agencies.

(b) Each agency, as defined in "(a)" above, shall display in appropriate areas of buildings in which at least 20 individuals are regularly employed by

an agency as civilian employees, copies of the Code of Ethics for Government Service (Code).

(c) For Government-owned or wholly leased buildings subject to the requirements of this section, at least one copy of the Code shall be conspicuously displayed, normally in the lobby of the main entrance to the building. For other buildings subject to the requirements of this section which are owned, leased, or otherwise provided to the Federal Government for the purpose of performing official business, at least one copy of the Code shall be conspicuously displayed within the space occupied by the Government. In all cases, additional copies of the Code may be displayed in other appropriate building locations, such as auditoriums, bulletin boards, cafeterias, locker rooms, reception areas, and other high-traffic

areas.

(d) Agencies of the Federal Government shall not pay any costs for the printing, framing, or other preparation of the Code. Agencies may properly pay incidental expenses, such as the cost of hardware, other materials, and labor incurred to display the Code. Display shall be consistent with the decor and architecture of the building space. Installation shall cause no permanent damage to stonework or other surfaces which are difficult to maintain or repair.

(e) Agencies may obtain copies of the Code by submitting a requisition for National Stock Number (NSN) 7690-01099-8167 in Fedstrip format to the GSA regional office responsible for providing support to the requisitioning agency. Agencies will be charged a nominal fee to cover shipping and handling.

[58 FR 21945, Apr. 28, 1994]

Subpart 101-6.6-Fire Protection (Firesafety) Engineering

SOURCE: 59 FR 54531, Nov. 1, 1994, unless otherwise noted.

§ 101-6.600 Scope of subpart.

This subpart provides the regulations of the General Services Administration

just the hazardous areas. In the latter case, the room of origin would be the hazardous area while any room, space, or area could be a room of origin in the entire building scenarious.

(GSA) under Title I of the Fire Administration Authorization Act of 1992 concerning definition and determination of equivalent level of safety. The primary objective of this regulation is to provide a quantifiable means of determining compliance with the requirements of the Act. It is not a substitute for compliance with building and fire code requirements typically used in construction and occupancy of buildings.

§ 101-6.601 Background.

(a) The Fire Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (Pub. Law 102-522) was signed into law by the President on October 26, 1992. Section 106 Fire Safety Systems in Federally Assisted Buildings, of Title I-United States Fire Administration, is commonly referred to as the Federal Fire Safety Act of 1992. This section amends the Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.) to require sprinklers or an equivalent of safety, in certain types of Federal employee office buildings, Federal employee housing units, and federally assisted housing units.

(b) The definition of an automatic sprinkler system is unique to the Act. In addition to describing the physical characteristics of an automatic sprinkler system, the definition sets a performance objective for the system. Automatic sprinkler systems installed in compliance with the Act must protect human lives. Sprinklers would provide the level of life safety prescribed in the Act by controlling the spread of fire and its effects beyond the room of origin. A functioning sprinkler system should activate prior to the onset of flashover.

(c) This subpart establishes a general measure of building firesafety performance. To achieve the level of life safety specified in the Act, the structure under consideration must be designed, constructed, and maintained to minimize the impact of fire. As one option, building environmental conditions are specified in this subpart to ensure the life safety of building occupants outside the room of fire origin. They should be applicable independent of whether or not the evaluation is being conducted for the entire building or for

(a) Qualified fire protection engineer is defined as an individual, with a thorough knowledge and understanding of the principles of physics and chemistry governing fire growth, spread, and suppression, meeting one of the following criteria:

(1) An engineer having an undergraduate or graduate degree from a college or university offering a course of study in fire protection or firesafety engineering, plus a minimum of four (4) years work experience in fire protection engineering,

(2) A professional engineer (P.E. or similar designation) registered in Fire Protection Engineering, or

(3) A professional engineer (P.E. or similar designation) registered in a related engineering discipline and holding Member grade status in the International Society of Fire Protection Engineers.

(b) Flashover means fire conditions in a confined area where the upper gas layer temperature reaches 600 °C (1100 °F) and the heat flux at floor level exceeds 20 kW/m2 (1.8 Btu/ft2/sec).

(c) Reasonable worst case fire scenario means a combination of an ignition

source, fuel items, and a building location likely to produce a fire which would have a significant adverse impact on the building and its occupants. The development of reasonable worst case scenarios must include consideration of types and forms of fuels present (e.g., furniture, trash, paper, chemicals), potential fire ignition locations (e.g., bedroom, office, closet, corridor), occupant capabilities (e.g., awake, intoxicated, mentally or physically impaired), numbers of occupants, detection and suppression system adequacy and reliability, and fire department capabilities. A quantitative analysis of the probability of occurrence of each scenario and combination of events will be necessary.

(d) Room of origin means an area of a building where a fire can be expected to start. Typically, the size of the area will be determined by the walls, floor, and ceiling surrounding the space. However, this could lead to unacceptably large areas in the case of open plan office space or similar arrangements. Therefore, the maximum allowable fire area should be limited to 200 m2 (2000 ft2) including intervening spaces. In the case of residential units, an entire apartment occupied by one tenant could be considered as the room of origin to the extent it did not exceed the 200 m2 (2000 ft2) limitation.

§ 101-6.604 Requirements.

(a) The equivalent level of life safety evaluation is to be performed by a qualified fire protection engineer. The analysis should include a narrative discussion of the features of the building structure, function, operational support systems and occupant activities which impact fire protection and life safety. Each analysis should describe potential reasonable worst case fire scenarios and their impact on the building occupants and structure. Specific issues which must be addressed inIclude rate of fire growth, type and location of fuel items, space layout, building construction, openings and ventilation, suppression capability, detection time, occupant notification, occupant reaction time, occupant mobility, and means of egress.

(b) To be acceptable, the analysis must indicate that the existing and/or

proposed safety systems in the building provide a period of time equal to or greater than the amount of time available for escape in a similar building complying with the Act. In conducting these analyses, the capability, adequacy, and reliability of all building systems impacting fire growth, occupant knowledge of the fire, and time required to reach a safety area will have to be examined. In particular, the impact of sprinklers on the development of hazardous conditions in the area of interest will have to be assessed. Three options are provided for establishing that an equivalent level of safety exists.

(1) In the first option, the margin of safety provided by various alternatives is compared to that obtained for a code complying building with complete sprinkler protection. The margin of safety is the difference between the available safe egress time and the required safe egress time. Available safe egressd time is the time available for evacuation of occupants to an area of safety prior to the onset of untenable conditions in occupied areas or the egress pathways. The required safe egress time is the time required by occupants to move from their positions at the start of the fire to areas of safety. Available safe egress times would be developed based on analysis of a number of assumed reasonable worst case fire scenarios including assessment of a code complying fully sprinklered building. Additional analysis would be used to determine the expected required safe egress times for the various scenarios. If the margin of safety plus an appropriate safety factor is greater for an alternative than for the fully sprinklered building, then the alternative should provide an equivalent level of safety.

(2) A second alternative is applicable for typical office and residential scenarios. In these situations, complete sprinkler protection can be expected to prevent flashover in the room of fire origin, limit fire size to no more than 1 megawatt (950 Btu/sec), and prevent flames from leaving the room of origin. The times required for each of these conditions to occur in the area of interest must be determined. The shortest of these three times would become the